This is a part of the Math 2.0 Interest Group series of weekly open webinars. We will discuss a few game design books, see what game mechanics correspond to math ideas, and look at examples of favorite (or not) math games.<br>
<br>
Wednesday, February 17th 2010 we will meet in the LearnCentral public
Elluminate room at 6:30pm Pacific / 9:30pm Eastern time: <a class="wiki_link_ext" href="https://sas.elluminate.com/d.jnlp?sid=lcevents&password=Webinar_Guest" rel="nofollow">https://sas.elluminate.com/d.jnlp?sid=lcevents&password=Webinar_Guest</a><br>
<br>
The <a class="wiki_link" href="http://mathfuture.wikispaces.com/GameGroup">game subgroup</a> has
been focusing on the subject of serious games for learning mathematics
since the Fall of 2009. We are working on a conceptual framework for
evaluating and designing math games. It is based on the series of
decisions in design. Definitions of decisions come from game theory
research and gaming studies. The gameplay consequences of each decision
are analyzed based on existing games viewed through the lens of these
definitions. The mathematics education consequences of each decision are
then analyzed based on the pedagogy embodied in the gameplay, and
viewed through the lens of learning theories. A series of parallels
between gaming concepts and pedagogical notions helps mathematics
educators make sense of game theory concepts, and apply these concepts
to teaching. The resulting structure makes it clear that some types of
math games are overused, and other promising types are rarely employed
by mathematics education game developers.<br>
The decisions, as well as their mathematics and math education
parallels, are made along these dimensions that provide dichotomies,
gradients or levels:<br>
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">· </span><em>Abstraction dichotomy:</em>
narrative-based vs. abstract; situated vs. formalized<br>
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">· </span><em>Revelation gradient:</em>
full disclosure to hidden information; open-book to closed-book<br>
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">· </span><em>Strategic gradient:</em>
strategic to typed; problem-solving to exercises<br>
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">· </span><em>Resource levels:</em>
bounded rationality gameplay or not; level or stage learning theories<br>
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">· </span><em>Agency and autonomy
gradient:</em> high to none; open-ended to closed-ended tasks<br>
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">· </span><em>Planning levels:</em>
interactions, tasks, tactics, strategies; order of math tasks<br>
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">· </span><em>Depth gradient:</em>
expert to superficial knowledge; deep learning to expository learning<br>
<span style="font-family: Symbol;">· </span><em>Goal gradient:</em>
sandbox play to clear goals; conceptual learning to procedural fluency<br><br clear="all">Cheers,<br>Maria Droujkova<br><a href="http://www.naturalmath.com">http://www.naturalmath.com</a><br><br>Make math your own, to make your own math.<br>
<br> <br>