EditorsWitold T. BieleckiJagoda Gandziarowska-ZiołeckaAnna M. PikosMarcin WardaszkoReviewersL.J. (Rens) Kortmann, Ph.D.Mikołaj Lewicki, Ph.D.dr. ir. Sebastiaan Meijer (Ph.D.)V.A.M. Peters, Ph.D.Professor Richard TeachProfessor Witold T. BieleckiMarcin Wardaszko, MAProofreadingJustyna MarutAnna GoryńskaCover designRafał KucharczukComputer typesettingMarek Bąk

© Copyright by Poltext sp. z o.o.© Copyright by Kozminski UniversityWarsaw 2012

Publication of this book is financially supported by Kozminski University

Poltext Ltd32 Oksywska Street, 01-694 Warsawtel.: 22 832-07-07, 22 632-64-20e-mail: wydawnictwo@poltext.plinternet: www.poltext.pl

ISBN 978-83-7561-212-7

Contents

Preface (Marcin Wardaszko) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7The Idea Behind the Book (Jagoda Gandziarowska-Ziołecka) . . . . . 9Bonds and Bridges. Games and Drama – How to Get Inspired?

(Joanna Średnicka, Nel Berezowska, Ivo Wenzler) . . . . . . . . . . . 15

SECTION ONE. Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25Social Responsibility of Business Simulation Games

(Witold T. Bielecki) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Simulation Game Support for Marketing Decision Problem Solving

(Witold Wilk) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35PPC Game: Experiential Learning as a Tool to Teach Planning

and Production Control (Fernando Ramos Corrêa, Luiz Cesar Barçante, Carmelita Seno Cardeira Alves) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

New Product – An Integrated Simulation Game In Business Education (Mihail Motzev) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

Extension of Computer Business Game: Connection with Real Market (Eugenijus Bagdonas, Irena Patasiene, Martynas Patasius, Grazvidas Zaukas) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

Dealing with Challenges of a Globalised World Conclusions of a Research Project (Sebastian Schwägele, Birgit Zürn) . . . . . 85

Tools to Teach Game Design to Teachers (Martijn Koops) . . . . . . . . 99Social Studies Simulations – A Challenge for the Competences

of Not Only the Czech Students (Dana Dražilová Fialová) . . . . 107Making the Legal Education Work Beyond Codes to Israel

and Palestine. A Case Study (Jagoda Gandziarowska-Ziołecka, Wojciech Jarosiński) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115

Gender Effects in Simulations Games for Entrepreneurship Education (Willy C. Kriz, Eberhard Auchter) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127

Bankruptcy in Simulating Games (Patrycja Sznajder) . . . . . . . . . . . 141Make It Fun or Real – Design Dilemmas and Their Consequences

On the Learning Experience (Casper Harteveld, Geertje Bekebrede, Julia Lo, Albert-Jan Pomper, Bruno Jordaan) . . . . 153

6 BONDS AND BRIDGES

Choosing Between Traditional and Virtual Sim-gaming Environments for Language Learning (Douglas W. Coleman) . . 165

SECTION TWO. Business Organizations, Industry and Market . . 173Development of Personal Leadership through Simulations

(Rutger Deenen, Ivo Wenzler, Sander van Muijen) . . . . . . . . . . . 175Bridge over Coaching and Games (Joanna Chmura) . . . . . . . . . . . . 187How to Support a B2B Sales Process by Using a Business

Simulation Game (Filip Tomaszewski) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193Supervisor: A 3D Serious Game for Hazard Recognition Training

in the Oil Industry (Sebastiaan Meijer, Ronald Poelman) . . . . . 209Reflection On a Structured Game Design Approach for a Market

Model Design (Rutger Deenen, Ivo Wenzler, Sjoerd Helmer) . . . 223The Use of Risk Information by Investors: A Simulation Study

(Karol M. Klimczak, Anna M. Pikos, Marcin Wardaszko). . . . . . 235

SECTION THREE. Public Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243How to Apply “Learning by Gaming” to the Worksite: Training

Program for City Officials on Communication in Health Crises (Mieko Nakamura, Toshiko Kikkawa, Mika Shigematsu, Junkichi Sugiura, Fumitoshi Kato, Takeru Nagaoka) . . . . . . . . 245

Games for Health Professionals to Improve Crisis Communication Skills: “The Ghost Map” and “The Mystery of Wai-Wai Nursing Home” (Toshiko Kikkawa, Fumitoshi Kato, Mieko Nakamura, Mika Shigematsu, Junkichi Sugiura, Takeru Nagaoka) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

Discovering Communication Protocols for Inter-Agency Collaboration for Emergency Response (Bharath M. Palavalli, Harsha Krishna, Onkar Hoysala, Eswaran Subrahmanian) . . 263

Training Adjunct Commissionaires of Police in an Open Simulation: Methodological Challenges from a Politically Sensitive Case (Sebastiaan Meijer, Marielle den Hengst, Geertje Bekebrede) . . 273

The Development and Use of a Simulation Platform to Foster Polish-American Sister City Entrepreneurial Business Cooperation (Joseph T. Kuvshinikov) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287

Education Use of Simulation of Road Traffic Noise Reduction (Juozas Patasius, Irena Patasiene, Martynas Patasius) . . . . . . . 293

Gaming to Speed Up Energy Transition: From Experiments to Multi-actor Systems Gaming (Iman S. Mohammed, Erik Pruyt) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303

tools to teaCh game desIgn to teaChers

martijn koopsuniversity of Applied Sciences utrecht, the Netherlandsmartijn.koops@hu.nl

In educational game design different perspectives are involved, didactical aspects, game aspects, and technical aspects are all important. for a  good design designers from different disciplines must work together. This paper proposes a structure that allows teachers to create a design, main-ly from the didactical perspective. The design is realized in a prototype that can serve as an input for other disciplines to build on. Because of this modular setup we can guide our students through the process of educational game design, without actually being involved in a  multidisciplinary team. we layout the structure we have developed for the Educational Game Design course for teachers

The mainstream of educational game development is for business pur-poses. In high school environments we hardly find examples of applied serious gaming. This lack of good practice is mainly due to the lack of appropriate educational games used in school, and the unfamiliarity of teachers with educational games. At the University of Applied Sciences in Utrecht we train students to become a teacher. We offer a course on Educational Game Design to prepare students for the practice of educa-tional gaming in schools. The aim of the course is to provide the students with a theoretical background on serious gaming by guiding them through the design of a mini game. This way we develop prototypes of educational games that teachers intrinsically find necessary, and ac-quaint the students with the aspects of serious gaming.

We present the design structure for an educational mini game to be used in secondary school. It leads teachers through the process of design-ing a mini game for a specific learning goal.

ABSTRAcT

1. INTRODucTION

100 EDucATION

The main difference between this design model and other models pro-posed in literature is that we focus on the design of a playable prototype, from the teachers perspective only. It provides a clear design goal for our students. Together with the teacher manual it can serve as an input for professional game designers and programmers.

1.1. Theoretical baseIn educational game design different disciplines have to cooperate. Winn and Heeter (2006) e.g. identify the three values of: game designers, in-structional designers, and content experts. Harteveld (2010) notices Re-ality, Meaning and Play as the three perspectives to be unified in a edu-cational game. Mark McMahon (2007) describes the DODDEL model, a structure to guide beginning game designers. We adopted McMahons idea of creating a Situation Analysis and a Design Proposalconsisting of three chapters each, reflecting the different disciplines involved in an educational game design process. Since a teacher is both a didactical ex-pert and a subject matter expert in one, we focus the design model on the teachers perspective; merely triggering thoughts about the other disci-plines. The three perspectives in our design model are taken from Harteveld (2010).

The design structure results in two design documents: the Situation Analysis and the Design Proposal. The table of contents of these are derived from literature (McMahon (2007), Maja Pivec et al. (2008), Gunter et al. (2007), Myers (2009), Marsh (2010)) and personal experi-ence of the author. Based on these design documents a prototype is cre-ated and tested.

1.2. mini gameA school curriculum often leaves little room for experiments. Teachers are confronted with a tight schedule and well defined learning goals. Therefore we challenge the students to design a small mini game that aims for a well defined goal. It is accompanied by a teachers manual informing on the use of the game in the classroom and the explaining the accompanying debriefing. In addition to this we propagate a focus on games that help in resolving misconceptions. Misconceptions are known to be resistant to education and tackling these is an issue in school environments. Many other learning goals can be effectively ad-dressed by existing teaching mechanisms. In a former study we showed that conceptual change can be significantly improved by a serious game (Koops, 2010a).

101Tools To Teach game desIgn To Teachers

2.1. Two design forms and a prototype

The design structure helps the students realize two documents, by work-ing through tt the Situation Analysis Form tt the Design Proposal Form.

These forms contain leading questions and once filled in they repre-sent the design document for the prototype. Each question in the forms is accompanied by some theoretical background information and an exam-ple of an answer. Since our students are trained to be a teacher, the ap-proaches in the leading questions starts form the didactical viewpoint, asking the students how the learning goal would be approached when no game is involved. Thus identifying the required didactics for the subject in an context where the expertise is maximal. The other perspectives are filled in later, based on the didactical aspects identified.

Each design document must be finished before the next design docu-ment can be started with. After both documents are finished the students present them in a peer-group. If the quality is sufficient the students can start creating the prototype.

2.2. Situation Analysis form This first document provides an overview of the ingredients that are re-quired to meet the learning objectives. It globally describes the inten-tions and goals of the game and proves why the game will be interesting to the target Group. This is typically a document that can be used to gain a stockholders attention.

Didactical Aspects (meaning)tt Describe the learning goal: What actual issue is addressed by this

mini game lesson.tt Describe the learning outcome of the mini game. In what respect is

the player “changed” after the serious mini game lesson?tt Describe the didactical approach. Choose a learning strategy that fits

the required learning outcome?tt Describe the added value of this mini game lesson compared to other

forms of education?Content (reality)

tt Describe the domain that is addressed by the mini game. tt Describe the rule to be taught. Underlying every concept is a rule,

what is the rule in this mini game?tt What aspects from reality must remain visible in the game?

2. DESIGN STRucTuRE

102 EDucATION

tt Describe the coupling to reality. How will a teacher be able to reflect on the game experience from a scientific point of view?

tt Describe player/user of the game. What is the player like? (age, typical interest, game-experience).

tt Describe the environment in which the game will be played. Mention the setting for the game and debriefing. (at home, in school, in a 50 minute lesson, on laptop etc.). Game Aspects (play)

tt Describe the game genre that is most suitable for the didactical ap-proach described above. Classifications for genres and learning pur-poses are available in literature. See e.g. Pivec (2008, p. 61).

tt Describe the representation of the game. Every game shows a fantasy model of reality in which the concept to be treated is essential. Which representation do you chose and why is it appropriate for the target group?

tt Describe the activities and motivator. What is the driving force that keeps the player going? The activity is directed to towards achieving an objective. The motivator refers to the way the player can realize the activity (Marsh, 2010).

tt Describe how the learning content and the game are entangled. In an endogenous game the fantasy is weaved in the game. If the player is interested in the game, the player is interested in the content (Rieber, 1996).

2.3. Design proposal formDetails of the Situation Analysis are filled in. Connections are made and a structure is proposed. The didactical strategies are illustrated and the implementation in the game structure is explicated. Based on this docu-ment a reviewer should be able to take a go/no-go decision.

Didactical Aspects (meaning)tt What approach would you take as a teacher, explaining the concept in

the classroom? Explain the lesson parts and the order in which they must appear.

tt Describe the intended learning outcome of the lesson parts you identi-fied in a table. In a table list what teachers and students do, and what the intended learning outcome is. See Table 1 for an example.

tt Describe how you motivate the player. How is the player motivated to take the required actions?

tt Describe the questions you expect to rise based on the actions and operations. When a player fails in completing the actions, a need for help arises. What questions do you expect? (see: Table 2).

tt Describe the instruction to be given based on the questions that arise. When the player asks for help, the serious mini game did its job. What adequate answer do you provide?

103Tools To Teach game desIgn To Teachers

Table 1. Actions and operations for a specific lesson part

lesson part teacher student learning outcome action operation

Motion when no force exists

Show a moving object in absence of force

Observe the moving object

Awareness of the movement in absence of a force

Predict how the object will move

Place a target to be hit by the object

Table 2. Questions and instruction

operation Question in case of failure Instruction

Place a target to be hit by the object

How would I know where the object is going? How would I know where to place the target?

Explain newtons first law of unanimous motion

Content (reality)tt Elaborate on the concepts. Describe the exact concepts to be taught.

What are the exact relations that must arise from the game.tt What kind of elements are needed to represent these concepts?tt Describe the representation of the actions. The required actions that

elicit the players questions on the learning content must be designed as a logical component of the gameworld.

tt Describe the activity options. Identify the activities the player can ac-tually perform to manipulate the game world.

tt The formative feedback is provided immediate after the action. How do you realize it?

tt Describe the boundary objects. Describe how the objects to be manipu-lated in the game can be referred to from a scientific perspective. Game Aspects (play).

tt Describe the representation of the activity. The activity is the overall goal of the game.

tt Describe the rules of the game. How can the player manipulate the game elements according to the game rules?

tt How is the formative feedback coupled to the game rules? tt Describe the summative feedback. How does the game inform the

player about the progress? tt Describe how the interface is realized. To be able to perform the op-

erations the game must provide the player with an intuitive interface. If the interface is too complex, attention will be derived from the main learning goal and the game may be frustrating without adding a learn-ing profit to the game experience.

104 EDucATION

2.4. prototype

Based on the design documents a prototype is created is accompanied by a teacher manual. After the first two designs are complete the game-ele-ments are known. The difficult task is now to make a game out of these. In the course we deliver at this stage we invite a (board) game designer to present as many games as possible, all with different game mechan-ics. This inspiration lessen must enable the students to create a game out of the designed game elements.

Didactical Aspects (meaning)tt Create a game description. Describe what you would print on the back

of the game box if it were to be sold in a shop. This description ex-plains to a potential user (student or teacher) what the game can do and how it is implemented. Provide information on game-goal, learn-ing goal and target group.Content (reality)

tt Create the prototype of the game. This the step where the prototype and all its parts are realized (pawns, dices, gameboard, etc.) Game Aspects (play)

tt Design a prototype of the game using the game elements that are cre-ated. This is a very time consuming part of the design process. This is a cyclical process where you will find yourself going through the fol-lowing steps several times: setting up game rules, adjusting the ap-pearance, testing the game, balancing. Probably you might find that some earlier conditions have to be adjusted. For instance the represen-tation, physical aspects of the game elements, summative feedback, and activity options have to be changed due to demands based on the game rules.

tt Design a manual for the game master. In this manual you explain how the rules of the game must be implemented. How is game set up? What are the rules? When is the game finished? It explains how a game master must react to events, what feedback to give in certain situa-tions, how to keep scores etc.

2.5. Teacher manualWhen the prototype is finished and tested, you can write the teacher manual. In the teacher manual you provide the teacher with the infor-mation needed to use the game in a classroom setting. Ideally you pro-vide a basic lesson plan in which the mini game is placed, and justify the choices you make in setting it up. Elaborate on the following issues:tt How is the game introduced in class? Based on the SGLM (Koops,

2010) you can identify several instruction strategies. The game can be used to gain experience with a concept, before or after information and theoretical background has been provided.

105Tools To Teach game desIgn To Teachers

tt How can the teacher recognize if questions arise with students and how to react on these questions.

tt How does the teacher instruct the players? At what moments can the game play be interrupted? When can the switch from game cycle to learning cycle be made (Koops, 2010)?

tt How can the teacher tell from the game play of the player what con-cepts are grasped?

tt How can the teacher adjust or influence the game to the level of control of the players?

tt Write a lesson plan for the game to be implemented. tt In the lesson plan you incorporate the introduction of the concept, the

gaining of experience with the concept, the observation of the key fea-tures of the concepts, the elaboration on the theory behind the concept, the practice with the concept, the testing of the students control over the concept.

In courses, delivered to physics students during the past two years, we used the tools we described. Students made very different prototypes of mini games. The common feature these games have in common is their foundation in the didactics. Since the design started with identi-fying the elements a teacher would use in a normal lesson, the game automatically became an educational game. The didactics are in-grained in the game. After the game is played it is almost impossible to debrief without discussing the nature of the basic elements, and thus the learning content underlying it. One of the prototypes was Panna, which was presented at Isaga 2011. It was shown that Panna, as a prototype itself was already valuable analog game to be used in class. For distribution and other practical reasons it can be necessary to create a digital version.

Based on the tools during the past year we presented several 2 hour workshops to secondary school teachers in different schools in the Netherlands. We found that for each learning goal a game could be de-signed. Though the teacher-designer sometimes does not have a clue on the final game, we encourage to just pick a learning goal and start identifying the key elements and their coherence. In this way the teach-ers extract the rule set form their lessons. Since the rule sets we teach in school are consistent, these provide a good starting point for game design.

Since Isaga 2011 students of Delft University transformed the Panna prototype into a computer game. Since we took a physics lesson as a start-ing point, the game that emerged from the lesson showed a surprising

3. DIScuSSION

106 EDucATION

gameplay. This computer game inspired a Dutch game company to de-velop it further into a commercial version. It will be available for IPhone and IPad by the end of 2012. We see this as a proof that the approach we developed can actually result in good educational games that are fun also. Educational games that are fun can be designed by teachers.

Dempsey J.V. (2010) Elemental Learning and the Pyramid of Fidelity. In: R. Van Eck (ed.), Gaming and cognition: Theories and perspectives from the learning sciences. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 82–107.

Gunter G., Kenny R., Vick E. (2007) Taking educational games seriously: using the RETAIN model to design endogenous fantasy into standalone educational games, Education Technology Research Development, accessed from http://www.springerlink.com/content/n48153w225r37144/?p=dfd6e26ff02d428ab3f8bbc9c9e2e81e&pi=19 (20.05.2011).

Harteveld C. (2010) Triadic game design: balancing reality, meaning and play. London: Springer-Verlag.

Koops M.C. (2010) The Serious Gaming Lemniscate Model for acquiring knowl-edge through simulation games. Paper presented at the 41th Annual Conference for the International Simulation and Gaming Association, Spokane, WA.

Koops M.C., Hoevenaar M. (2010a) Conceptual Change By simulation games. Manuscript submitted for publication.

McMahon M. (2007) A Document Oriented Model for the Design of Serious Games. In: D. Ramenyi (ed.) Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning. Paisley: Academic Conferences International, pp. 197–204.

Marsh T. (2010) Activity-based Scenario Design, Development, and Assessment in Serious Games. In: R. Van Eck (ed.), Gaming and cognition: Theories and perspectives from the learning sciences. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 213–225.

Myers D. (2009) In Search of a Minimalist Game, Breaking New Ground: Innovation in Games, Play, Practice and Theory. Proceedings of DiGRA 2009, 1–4 September, Brunel University, West London, UK.

Pivec M., Moretti M. (2008) Game-based Learning Discover the pleasure of learn-ing. Lengerich: Pabst Science.

Rieber L.P. (1996) Seriously Considering Play: Designing interactive learning en-vironments based on the blending of microworlds, simulations, and games. Educational Technology Research & Development, Vol. 44, No. 2, pp. 43–58.

Winn B., Heeter C. (2006) Resolving conflicts in educational game design through playtesting. Innovate 3, at http://www.innovateonline.info/pdf/vol3_issue2/Resolving_Conflicts_in_Educational_Game_Design_ Through_ Playtesting.pdf (2.05.2011).

REfERENcES