After reading the article, Students as Designers and Creators of Educational Computer Games:Who Else?, I have pulled out the features of "The Rules of Engagement" as described by Marc Prensky. The article is wide in its scope, so I chose to focus and reflect on those features he has deemed most vital to successfully engaging computer games. Those components are listed below. Following each component, (in red) I reflect and connect:
*Goals
Goals need to be internalized by students as their own, and not just any goals will do. Engaging goals are not the 'learn the material' variety found in our schools, but rather the 'be a hero' type of goals found in complex games.
I find this concept of "be a hero" startling in its obviousness. Virtually every piece of fiction written by elementary school boys involves vanquishing some kind of enemy, preferably in the most violent manner possible. I would add to this, an appealing option for many girls: "Be a star." For both boys and girls, being a hero means being a star--but most girls are not driven by a need for domination through physical annihilation. But they like being the best at something. Of course, splattering brains is OK, but I venture to guess that driving a schoolmate to suicide through ostracism would not be an acceptable form of vanquishing one's enemy.
*Decisions & Discussion
Decisions are engaging. For maximum engagement, decisions must be required, frequent and important to reaching the goals. Decisions are at the heart of the so-called 'learning loop' of decision-action-feedback-reflection, which is so crucial to both learning and engagement. Discussion, both during and after the experience is also important to engagement.
This reminds me of one of "The Twilight Zone" episodes of my youth where a gambling man dies and goes to heaven, only to find that every game is rigged in his favor. When he becomes agonizingly bored and begs to go to "The Other Place," the overseer laughs and says, "You are in the other place!" The need for autonomy and decision making are hard-wired into human beings. This is why you have women self-immolating in Afghanistan.
*Emotional Connection
It is widely accepted that an emotional connection makes for stronger learning. The two biggest sources of engagement through emotional connection are Story and 'SiSoMo' (advertiser shorthand for sight, sound and motion).
The ability to empathize with characters and invest in outcome are embedded in our collective consciousness. The ability to comprehend story grammar is part of the human experience. The sensory input of sight, sound and motion makes it all the more real and fosters empathy.
*Cooperation & Competition
Engagement comes from the careful balancing of these two seemingly opposite, yet related forces.
We all need an enemy to hate together.
*Personalization
Research and theory tells us that personalization, ie. creating teaching that meets the students precisely where they are, works best for engagement and learning. Students have learned outside of school to expect things to be offered to them at precisely their own level.
I have personally experienced the brilliance with which video games are constructed to balance the right amount of difficulty to keep the game interesting with the right amount of mastery to make the player feel so competent as not to quit.
*Review & Iteration
Engagement requires that students know whether what they did was wrong or right, and be able to try again. This involves both immediate feedback and what the military calls an 'after action review' (others call this 'debriefing' and still others 'reflection'.) Engagement also requires iteration; that is periodic revision based on the players' experiences and feedback.
Only in video games do you get to "die," or "fail" and come back for a chance at redemption and ultimate victory.
* Fun
Although notoriously hard to define fun is absolutely crucial for engaging the generation raised on Sesame Street. Game designer Rafe Koster defines fun in games as 'solving a problem mentally.' Whether or not they can define it, it is very clear (at least to students) when fun is missing.
(Ah, yes, the glint, as opposed to the glaze in the eye!)