Fostering a Student-Centered, Collaborative Environment for Game Design

Lisa Tolentino · Cristóbal Martinez · David Birchfield · Mina Johnson-Glenberg

Wed., June 09, 2:00–3:00, Inn Wisconsin

During summer of 2009, nine students ranging in age from 11-18 years old participated in a two-week game design intensive. Students created games using a collaborative and embodied learning environment called SMALLab, the Situated Multimedia Arts Learning Lab. Our primary goal was to advance students’ design and critique skills through a student-centered learning experience focused on peer-mentoring, collaborative playtesting, and formal critique. In addition, we sought to engage student’s 21st century thinking skills by emphasizing systems thinking as a foundation of effective game design.

SMALLab is a mixed-reality learning environment where participants use physical objects to interact with digital media through full-body 3D movement. SMALLab provides a set of custom authoring tools where designers manipulate a Graphical User Interface to build games in a real time prototyping process. SMALLab is a highly collaborative space. We have documented the positive impact that SMALLab can have on student-led discourse when compared against a typical classroom environment (Birchfield & Megowan-Romanowicz, 2009). Furthermore, in contrast to many standard game platforms, the physical architecture of SMALLab necessitates a highly collaborative approach to design. Typically, some team members move in the interactive space while others program at the workstation. Designers must negotiate clear lines of communication and establish complementary roles.

We structured the game intensive around small-group mentoring and whole group critiques. Participants were drawn from across our region and represented a wide variety of socio-economic and ethnic backgrounds. On day one we administered a survey to assess students’ prior experience with game design including their exposure to multiple game platforms, experience with audio/visual production, and computer programming skill. We found a great diversity among the students and assigned them to small teams of 3–4 to establish groups with complementary skills and experience. Students were coached throughout the program to take on different roles within their teams (e.g., manager, architect, graphic designer, or evaluator). Each day of the intensive ended with a peer-driven critique of student work. The program facilitators established protocols for productive critique to promote a safe environment for creative thinking and experimentation. We encouraged students to be open to each other’s perspectives and to allow diverse ideas to emerge.

Throughout the program we collected a variety of data to document the impact of our approach. First, students created quality games that reflect the collaborative nature of the design process. We will present exemplar games and describe specific instances where students worked together to arrive at creative solutions. Second, students grew in their ability to articulate productive critiques from multiple perspectives. We will present video documentation of students effectively mentoring one another. Third, students were cognizant of the positive impact their peers could have on their own learning. We will present excerpts of videotaped interviews of students speaking about lessons learned. Finally, over the course of the program, students changed in quality of their thinking about systems. We will present a preliminary analysis of student-created concept maps that we collected at three time points during the intensive.

References

Birchfield, D., & Megowan-Romanowicz, M. C. (2009). Earth science learning in SMALLab: A design experiment for mixed-reality. Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(4), 403-421.