Epistemic Games get Serious
The organizers of the Serious Games Summit at the Game Developers Conference 2007 have asked David Williamson Shaffer to speak in two sessions.
The first is a talk about Epistemic Games titled Big Game, little game, and it looks in more detail at the distinction between games and simulations discussed in How Computer Games Help Children Learn:
A Game is always something more than what comes in a box. A Game is all of the things we do with, in, and around a game: the roles we play, the norms we follow, the rules we obey, the goals we set. Big Game, little game looks at how designing serious games also means designing the framework in which players make sense of what happens in the game: the serious learning systems in which serious games are played. Through vivid case studies based on a decade of research and controlled studies, Big Game, little game shows how serious ‘Epistemic Games’ can help players learn think like doctors, lawyers, engineers, urban planners, journalists, and other professionals, giving them the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in a changing world.
This talk provides a groundbreaking look at the future of education in the world of video and computer games. Game scientist David Williamson Shaffer offers a new and powerful way of looking at school, technology, and even thinking itself: a new model of education for a high-tech, digital world of global competition. Based on over a decade of research and game design, Games: The Future of Learning shows how video and computer games can help teach children and adults to think like doctors, lawyers, engineers, urban planners, journalists, and other professionals, giving them the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in a changing world.
The second is a panel discussion on assessment in games:
This panel explores challenges and solutions to measuring cognitive, emotional, health, and social values impacts of a serious game, both during the design process and once the game is released. Serious games require theoretical understanding of learning, cognition, emotion, and play. They require content and audience knowledge as well as game design and impact research. Henry Jenkins argues that serious games need to be measured in part by the same criteria we would use to measure any documentary or art film — do they make people think? do they make expressive use of the media? do they deal with the world with all of its complexity and nuance? Or are they simple minded, pedantic, and propagandistic? Five academics actively involved in serious game design and research discuss their own evolving assessment processes. How do we know, and how to we prove to others what impact our games have?
