Can massively multiplayer online gaming environments support team ...

Can Massively Multiplayer Online Gaming Environments Support Team Training? Debra L. O’Connor and Ellen S. Menaker

T

he U.S. military is facing the challenge raised by the need to rapidly prepare forces to respond to an ever-changing enemy. Asymmetrical warfare requires troops who are well trained to analyze patterns and change their tactics, techniques, and procedures to defeat the enemy (Adams, 2005). Nowhere is this need more profound than in preparing troops for dealing with improvised explosive devices (IEDs). The number of IED attacks has averaged about 100 a week since February 2004, with about half of the devices detonating (Atkinson, 2007). Among the skills needed to address the current adversaries’ ability to innovate and readily change their techniques, the American military must focus on the following overarching skills: ~

~

~

~

Instructional games are created when training is deliberately added to a gaming environment or when gaming aspects are deliberately incorporated into training. One type of game that is currently attracting the attention of the education and training field is the massively multiplayer online game (MMOG). Because evidence about learning outcomes from MMOGs is scant, this effort focuses on instructional games, particularly MMOGs, and the links between learning theory and the use of games and game elements for team training. Here, we address two questions: What is known about learning from games in general and MMOGs in particular? Can essential characteristics of MMOGs be designed to promote team learning and transfer?

Cultural awareness and knowledge of local language Higher-order thinking skills to analyze, synthesize, and evaluate information Knowing how to think and what to do with what you know, not what to think Adaptability and flexibility in the face of a constantly changing, decentralized adversary

While various strategies can address these skills, role playing is among those recommended for training troops to counter IEDs (Adams, 2005). Applying this strategy in online gaming environments, specifically massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs), would seem to be a logical opportunity for using this strategy, but what does the research say about the effectiveness of such training interventions? What is known about learning from games in

23 PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT QUARTERLY, 21(3) PP. 23–41 & 2008 International Society for Performance Improvement Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/piq.20029

general, and MMOGs in particular? Can essential characteristics of MMOGs be designed to promote learning and transfer? This article examines the literature on the use of MMOGs to achieve learning outcomes in teams. Our targeted focus is on what is known about the use of MMOGs for instruction and training and how MMOG environments might be used for IED training. We begin with a discussion of games in general and clarify the terminology used to describe them. Next, we focus on the instructional games and the links between learning theory and the use of games and game elements.The following section focuses on elements of MMOGs that make this environment suitable for learning and the research supporting the use of MMOGs to achieve learning outcomes. Finally, we look at how MMOG environments and the specific characteristics associated with MMOGs can be used to fill training gaps.

What We Know About Instructional Games Games Following Hays (2005) and Klabbers (2006), we define a game as a voluntary activity in the form of play that is artificially constructed and competitive. A game resembles portions of reality and involves one or more players who assume roles while trying to achieve a goal within a specific context. It provides a competitive environment for a player by challenging him or her to reach a goal. In games, rules that are freely accepted are binding and determine what the players are permitted to do or define constraints on allowable actions. Subsequently, rules have a bearing on available resources and influence the state of the game space. Recent uses of technology have moved the world of games beyond the deck of cards or board games of generations gone by. Technology has produced changes in game complexity, the number of players who can participate, and the very nature of game goal structures. For example, multiuser dungeons (MUDs) create virtual worlds with no specific goal, scoring system, or beginning or end. In MUDs, players have the ability to add new objects to the database (Curtis, 1992), but are seen by some (Bartle, 1996; Bruckman, 1992) to be more of a social learning environment than a game (Krause, 2003). Furthermore, Colella, Klopfer, and Resnick (2001) found that participatory simulations such as MUDs, where players have the ability to introduce new objects into the environment, are not consistent environments for effective instruction because changes in initial conditions can have a profound effect on how the system reacts. While this may be a shortcoming for some types of instruction, instructional goals for IED training focus on developing adaptability and problem-solving skills that may make the ability to introduce new information an advantage. Clearly games can be used for instructional purposes, but as Hays (2005) cautions, there is no empirical evidence that games are the best instructional method for all situations. In other words, converting content to a game does not ensure its viability as a learning tool. The same is true of almost any 24

DOI: 10.1002/piq

Performance Improvement Quarterly

instructional strategy, objective, subject matter, resource, intended audience, and context matter (Klabbers, 2003). Although some games may show indications of being an effective form of instruction for specified purposes, results may not generalize to other games or instructional content (Hays, 2005). Deliberate efforts to address instructional goals have been associated with the serious games movement. Serious Games The serious games movement is a trend toward designing and analyzing games to support formal training objectives and learning outcomes (de Freitas, 2006). This trend is consistent with the proposition that play is a suitable goal for training situations that require creative higher-order thinking coupled with intense personal commitment and involvement (Rieber, Smith, & Noah, 1998). Two types of games that have evolved to meet this proposition are live action role playing (LARP) games and hybrid reality games (HRGs). The core of a LARP is role playing guided by rules (Tychsen, Hitchens, Brolund, & Kavakli, 2006), where players usually have full control of decision making at the character level. LARPs are usually set in a virtual context of fictional reality, and game play is governed or supervised by a game master (the instructor or facilitator). Hybrid reality games transform physical spaces into interactive game boards (de Souza e Silva & Delacruz, 2006). They make use of the physical context by merging the physical world and digital spaces. Training that uses HRGs is usually delivered through traditional technologies such as handheld computers or personal digital assistants (Kirkley, Tomblin, & Kirkley, 2005). Massively Multiplayer Online Games Another type of game that is attracting the attention of the education and training field is the MMOG. The key distinction between MMOGs and other types of games is the fact that players interact with other players, as well as with the gaming software. MMOGs enable groups ranging in size up to hundreds of thousands of players to participate in an online game simultaneously. Following are some of the better-known games that support such large numbers of players and have been used in empirical studies of MMOGs: America’s Army

EverQuest

Madison 2200

Asheron’s Call I

Ghetto

Maple Story

Asheron’s Call II

Lineage I

Quest Atlantis

Counter-Strike

Lineage II

Second Life

MMOGs are usually set in a persistent world that continues to evolve when a player leaves the gaming environment. Players entering the MMOG environment take on a role or persona with a specific and unique identity that is represented in the gaming environment as an avatar. Thus, the latest term for such role-playing games is massively multiplayer online role playing games (MMORPGs). An MMORPG is a cooperative, distributed-access, Volume 21, Number 3 / 2008

DOI: 10.1002/piq

25

non-goal-seeking game (Klabbers, 2006). Prensky (2003b) indicates that MMORPGs are played by equally large numbers of players as MMOGs, but in smaller groups at one time. Such games include The Sims Online and America’s Army. For the purpose of this review, we will not distinguish between MMOGs and MMORPGs as we examine the opportunities they offer for team training. The interaction between players and the capacity to support various-sized groups are features that make these environments well suited for their use as instructional games.

What Makes a Game an Instructional Game When training is deliberately added to a gaming environment or when gaming aspects are deliberately incorporated into training, we create instructional games. Despite the current attention to instructional games, most of these games to date have been produced in the absence of any coherent theory of learning or underlying body of research (Shaffer, Squire, Halverson, & Gee, 2005). Instructional games do evidence principles and strategies that can be viewed as instructional elements, however. Instructional game elements are often viewed through the lenses of experiential learning, situated learning, flexibly adaptive instruction, discovery learning, activity theory, game-based learning, or a mix of symbolic and situative viewpoints. Researchers have used these theories to demonstrate the instructional potential of games. Depictions of games as evidence of experiential learning (Ricci, Salas, & Cannon-Bowers, 1996; Pivec & Dziabenko, 2004; Hays, 2005; Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2006) focus on the realworld participation aspect of the game. Supporters of experiential learning believe that understanding is derived and modified through experience and that action and reflection are necessary components of meaningful learning (Dewey, 1938; Kolb, 1984). Games can also be viewed as opportunities for social learning (Steinkuehler, 2006a). From the situated learning perspective, Lave and Wenger (1991) proposed that learning is fundamentally a social process that can be generalized to other social groups. They liken it to using mathematics in the ‘‘real world’ during a shopping trip (Lave, 1988). Choi and Hannafin (1993) expand on this by stating that the theoretical underpinnings of situated cognition center on the role of context, content, facilitation, and assessment. Further research (e.g., de Souze e Silva & Delacruz, 2006; Klabbers, 2006; Squire, 2005) has continued to support this idea. Proponents of flexibly adaptive instruction recommend that educational products be designed and developed in a way to allow easy reconfiguration by teachers or others using the product (Schwartz, Lin, Brophy, & Bransford, 1999). Giving users more control is consistent with discovery learning, a theory that supports the idea that learning is most effective when the learning process involves inquiry rather than memorization (Barab, Hay, Barnett, & Squire, 2001; Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2002). Research, however, 26

DOI: 10.1002/piq


indicates that providing some structure within the learning environment is more effective than pure exploration for achieving certain types of learning outcomes (Mayer, 2004); therefore, providing the instructor with the ability to shape instructional events would be beneficial. Interactions within games are viewed by some through the lens of activity theory, which proposes that the mechanisms underlying the influence of social context on learning and development are mutual transformations between the individual and collective activities (Bonk & Dennen, 2005; Downes, 2003; Kaptelinin & Cole, 2002; Klabbers, 2006). Through activity theory, Kaptelinin and Cole (2002) identify three distinct phases of games: external coordination of individual activities, emerging group identity, and transfer of group experience to individual activities. Similarly, according to de Freitas (2006), game-based learning theory purports that learning is often experience based or exploratory and relies on experiential, problem-based, or exploratory learning approaches. Other theoretical perspectives of learning from games include apprenticeship learning (Klabbers, 2006), user-centered learning (Belanich, Orvis, & Sibley, 2006; Gros, 2003; Ke, 2006), and cooperative learning (Unigame, 2002). In short, research suggests that the instructional potential of games can be grounded in various learning theories. The greatest impact may be, as Derry and Steinkuehler (2003) suggest, that a merging of various theories will result in a new methodological approach that will be superior to any other viewpoint standing alone. They believe that this new theory of cognition will be capable of providing a broader understanding of learning and education through the world of games.

Learning From Games A limited number of studies have provided insight into the relationship between games and learning; however, for the most part, ‘‘empirical research on the instructional effectiveness of games is fragmented, filled with ill- defined terms, and plagued with methodological flaws’’ (Hays, 2005, p. 3). One researched area has been the impact of video-gaming on perceptual and motor skills. For example, research by Green and Bavelier (cited in Bonk & Dennen, 2005) found that video-gaming increased the visual attention capacity of players. Another area ofstudy relates the motivational value ofgames. Research has shown that incorporating game features into military training enhances motivation, which leads to greater attention to training content and greater retention (Ricci et al., 1996). Other studies have shown improved learning outcomes in terms of accuracy of recall (Garris & Ahlers, 2002), better recall of procedural information than factual information (Belanich et al., 2006; Belanich, Sibley, & Orvis, 2004), and more accurate recall of images and spoken text than printed text (Belanich, Orvis, & Sibley, in press). In addition, playing video-action-based games affects cognitive skills related to visual attention (Boot, 2005; Castel, Pratt, & Drummond, 2005; Green & Bavelier, 2003; Weil, Hussain, Brunye, Sidman, & Spahr, 2005, Volume 21, Number 3 / 2008

DOI: 10.1002/piq

27

as cited in Alexander, Brunye, Sidman, & Weil, 2005). Research-based studies of multimedia learning also provide relevant findings for game design (Weil et al., 2005). Adherence to principles of split attention, spatial contiguity, temporal contiguity, modality, redundancy, and coherence can reduce cognitive overload and promote learning (Moreno & Mayer, 2000). Evidence about learning outcomes from serious games or massively multiplayer online role-playing games is scant (Bonk & Dennen, 2005; de Freitas, 2006; Fletcher & Tobias, 2006; Garris & Ahlers, 2002; Mishra & Foster, 2006; Prensky, 2003a). With limited information available in the literature, Stokes (2005) suggests that there are a variety of educational opportunities in serious games. Thus far, there is limited evidence that games provide different ways of seeing and understanding problems (Squire, 2005). MMOGs raise awareness in topics promoted by the MMOG environment, such as ‘‘Smokeout Cafe´’’ (Singularity Design, 2004) and ‘‘Becoming a UNICEF World Hero’’ (Richtel, 2005). MMOGs have also affected the behavior and attitudes of players (Brown, Lieberman, Gemeny, Fan, Wilson, & Pasta, 1997; Delwiche, 2006) such as the increase in military recruiting through the MMOG America’s Army (Schiesel, 2005). In addition to increasing public awareness and effecting attitudinal changes in players, there are indicators that MMOGs offer an opportunity to engage in long-term thinking that may be overlooked or unavailable in realworld practice (Chan, 2007; Stokes, 2005; Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 2003).

Characteristics of MMOGs That Promote Learning In today’s world of massively multiplayer online gaming, there is still little consensus regarding the essential characteristics of instructional games and how they should be implemented (Garris & Ahlers, 2002). However, many attributes of games make them pedagogically sound learning environments (Nanjappa, 2001; Oblinger, 2004; Prensky, 2001a, 2001b). According to Steinkuehler (2006b, p. 5), MMOG game play includes ‘‘all the traditional characteristics of problem-solving—problem representation, conditions, goals, procedures, strategies, and meta-strategies—as well as shared practices typically found in problem-solving contexts within formal and informal instructional contexts—debriefings, theorizing about the problem space, apprenticeship, and the valuing of seeking out challenges just beyond the current level of one’s ability (cf. zone of proximal development, Vygotsky, 1978), whether you are level 5 or 55.’’ Table 1 summarizes characteristics of MMOGs and describes how each of these characteristics has been shown to promote learning.

Using MMOGs to Fill Gaps in Existing IED Training IED and counter-IED training must be examined in terms of what soldiers must know and do and how to best train them to do it. ‘‘The ability 28

DOI: 10.1002/piq


TABLE 1 Key Characteristics of MMOGS that Promote Learning Characteristic

How Characteristic Promotes Learning

Environment

Learning is situated not only within the game but around it.

Gee, 2003; Manninen, 2001; Seay, Jerome, Sang Lee, & Kraut, 2003

Supports cooperative learning.

Childress & Braswell, 2006

Safe environment that allows learners to make mistakes and see dramatic consequences.

Delwiche, 2006; Riegle & Matejka, 2006a

Close enough to reality that learners easily see how to apply knowledge they gain from MMOG to the real world.

Riegle & Matejka, 2006b; Squire & Steinkuehler, 2006

Presents situations that stimulate senses and tap the user’s emotions.

Aldrich, 2004; Bennett & Warnock, 2006a; Hirumi & Stapleton, 2007; Pizer, 2003; Yee, 2006

Accessed remotely and simultaneously by a large number of people; location for communication among players.

Castronova, 2001; Choi & Kim, 2004; Ducheneaut & Moore, 2004; Papargyris & Poulymenakou, 2005

Multimodal presentation; communication tools.

Choi & Kim, 2004; Johnson, Spector, Huang, & Novak, 2007; Seay, Jerome, Sang Lee, & Kraut, 2003

Space with complicated dynamics of social interactions.

Ang, Zaphiris, & Mahmood, 2007; Choi & Kim, 2004; Manninen, 2001; Squire & Steinkuehler, 2006

Success requires teamwork.

Ducheneaut & Moore, 2004; Manninen, 2001

Role play

Identification with avatar, and players have a choice over characters adopted.

de Freitas, 2006; Gee, 2000–2001; Squire, 2005; Squire & Steinkuehler, 2006; Steinkuehler, 2006a

Engagement

Sense of unrestricted options.

Aldrich, 2004; Bennett & Warnock, 2006; Riegle & Matejka, 2006b

Cycle of user judgments, behavior, and feedback.

Garris, Ahlers, & Driskell, 2002

Rules

Structure for play : cause, effect, and consequence.

Bennett & Warnock, 2006; Hirumi & Stapleton, 2007; Squire & Jenkins, 2002

Persistence

Continues to run whether anyone is using it or not; it remembers the location of people and things, as well as the ownership of objects.

Aldrich, 2004; Castronova, 2001

Efficiency

More efficient than random real-world experiences.

Riegle & Matejka, 2006b

Fidelity

Psychological fidelity.

Driskell, Johnston, and Salas, 2001

Functional fidelity.

Weil et al. as cited in Alexander, Brunye, Sidman, & Weil, 2005

Reality

Interactivity

Volume 21, Number 3 / 2008

Selected References

DOI: 10.1002/piq

29

of our current adversaries to innovate and rapidly adapt their techniques continues to highlight gaps in U.S. conventional force capabilities’’ (Lovelace & Votel, 2005, p. 31). Haskamp (2007), a writer for the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, called attention for better integration of what is taught and how it is taught. Based on a review of the literature and information about IED and counter-IED training, evidence indicates a need for additional, continuous, and deliberate practice with feedback throughout training. Opportunities must enable soldiers to practice in an environment that is as close as possible to the real-world environment in which tasks will be carried out, immersion into the dynamic system of cultural and situational awareness, and further development of leadership. However, much of the initial training takes place in classrooms with too few opportunities to practice. There are several ways in which MMOGs might assist in filling the gaps in current IED and counter-IED training. The suggestions that follow are presented within the concepts of context, immersion, currency, and practice with feedback. Context Massively multiplayer online role-playing games offer a context within which cooperation is required for success. Working in a cooperative learning environment involves the ability to learn and work as a member of a team. Therefore, it is essential that the learning environment promote team interaction. Cooperative learning is an instructional approach that uses teams of learners who ‘‘work together to maximize their own and each other’s learning’’ (Johnson, Johnson, & Smith, 1991). Cooperative learning has five essential elements (Foundation Coalition, n.d.). Table 2 shows each of these elements and provides a brief explanation of them. Soldiers need to understand the environment. Although they may know the signs to look for or the procedures to follow, they need more exposure to the environment and opportunities to test their individual and team skills in TABLE 2 Essential Elements of Cooperative Learning Element

Explanation

Positive interdependence

The success of the mission depends on everyone on the team doing his or her part.

Promotive interaction

How a person thinks, talks, and acts toward other team members influences how well the team performs.

Individual accountability

Each person is accountable for doing his or her part to achieve the mission.

Teamwork skills

The team works as a team. Individual team members do not take off on their own or focus efforts on tasks that are unrelated to team objectives.

Group processing

The team reflects on its performance and thinks together about how the team can improve.

30

DOI: 10.1002/piq


the environment. If an MMOG can provide a realistic training environment in addition to the live-action role play in field exercises, soldiers can conduct virtual missions and preparations for deployment. The MMOG context also provides an opportunity for simultaneous leader training and practice within an environment that has a degree of fidelity and authenticity. Immersion MMOGs provide players with an opportunity to become immersed in a simulated environment that may more closely resemble the anticipated theater of operation than the standard qualification range, gunnery, or urban assault course. It has the potential of providing a persistent environment where soldiers could practice mental skills with less Working in a cooperative need for administrative organization and physical learning environment facilities. They also can see consequences of actions involves the ability to learn over time and can move to a third-person view in and work as a member of a which they observe the broader operation and team. Therefore, it is theater. Authentic contexts involve ‘‘practical applicaessential that the learning tion of knowledge y in a real-life situation y that environment promote allows examination of the information from multiteam interaction. ple perspectives’’ (MacDonald, 2005, p. 4). The concept of anchoring instruction in authentic contexts derives from research into knowledge acquisition and transfer issues. According to the Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (CTGV), abstract knowledge stripped of contextual clues is more difficult to learn because the learner does not see its relationship to problems encountered in real life. Abstract concepts can be memorized, but then this knowledge becomes inert or unusable because it lacks the complexity of understanding needed for application to new situations (Barab, Hay, & Duffy, 2000; Roblyer, 2004). Learning anchored in real-life experiences results in richer knowledge structures with multiple connections that enable greater understanding and transfer. Authentic contexts can be provided through scenarios, case studies, themes, problems, issues, and real-world experiences represented in massively multiplayer online gaming environments. MMOG-based IED and counter-IED training scenarios set in realistic environments will provide soldiers with complex learning experiences for developing the necessary skills associated with IED detection and defeat. Another perspective of immersion is that soldiers must become part of the environment to learn to think like the enemy and see what the enemy sees. They must experience the environment as a team and learn how to learn from each other. An MMOG provides the potential for soldiers to enter the game as their own self represented as an avatar or enter through a different role than they would perform in the actual theater of operation (e.g., as an Iraqi woman or Iraqi military police instead of a Humvee driver or checkpoint guard). By immersing oneself into a different character, the individual cognitively processes information from a different perspective, trying to reason what the character would do in the given situation (Fine, 1983). Volume 21, Number 3 / 2008

DOI: 10.1002/piq

31

MMOGs offer the opportunity for mental and emotional immersion in a sense of realism for both their own roles and responsibilities and those of their battle buddies or adversaries. Furthermore, by providing the possibility of a third-person perspective of first-person action, players can gain a better understanding the IED system (Adams, 2005) as a whole. Currency Adaptability and flexibility are key skills when it comes to defeating IEDs. Because the decentralized adversary is constantly changing and new intelligence information becomes available daily, soldiers need to be current on information. MMOGs potentially offer a way to disseminate information updates, develop new methods for effective communication, and practice adapting tactics, techniques, and procedures according to the latest intelligence. Practice With Feedback By their very nature, massively multiplayer online role-playing games involve the practice strategy of role playing. As a type of simulation activity, role playing is a dramatization of an event or situation; the situation usually represents a problem or a situation that is anxiety provoking. It differs from other simulation learning activities in that it is an unscripted scenario; the learners act out a problem in a completely spontaneous manner. Within an MMOG, players have the ability to repeat similar scenarios, incorporating lessons learned from previous trials. This is a particularly useful strategy for practicing communication skills and dealing with conflict. It is also a proven practice strategy for helping learners explore the issues involved in complex social situations in which a wide range of behaviors is possible. ‘‘Role play also provides opportunities for deep learning along with a process for confronting our existing ideas about how and why certain things happen, breaking them down, and offering a new model or set of postulates to replace the old ones’’ (Smith, 2004, p. 194). The goal of role play is to engage the learner in real-world thinking and problem solving, and this strategy has been useful for developing individual and teamcontingent competencies (Salas & Cannon-Bowers, 2000). Educational theorists consider feedback and reflection to be a critical part of active learning. Reflection deepens the quality of learning and helps learners create meaning from experience to serve as a guide for the future. It is ‘‘the vehicle for critical analysis, problem-solving, synthesis of opposing ideas, evaluation, identifying patterns and creating meaning—in short, many of the higher order thinking skills’’ (Burns, Dimock, & Martinez, 2000). Therefore, to maximize learning, reflective activities such as the army’s process for informal after-action reviews (AARs) need to be included in the MMOG scenarios. Not only do these reviews provide immediate feedback, but they also promote shared understanding and team development. Research has shown that shared knowledge and shared team understanding go through cycles. Initial understandings often break down during task performance and then build back up, usually stronger than before, when 32

DOI: 10.1002/piq


reviewed after task completion (Johnson, O’Connor, Lee, & Khalil, 2005; O’Connor, 2004). Each interaction of team performance is assumed to strengthen the team shared mental model, which improves team performance. Rather than scheduling one AAR at the end of an activity, AARs can be held in the gaming environment after each identifiable event so that each phase of practice becomes a live learning process (Army Headquarters, 1993).

Game Design The age-old question in learning is not whether one particular strategy is good or bad, but whether the strategy is designed to promote achievement of the intended outcomes. Nowhere is this clearer than in the design of games. The definitions of what constitutes a game vary, the beliefs about the ability to embed instructional elements vary, and the beliefs about unpredictability being programmable vary. We contend that the gaming vehicle can be designed to promote learning, and the key is in the intentional design. Research on transfer of learning from games is limited, but it is consistent with the general literature on promoting transfer from instruction (Clark, Nguyen, & Sweller, 2006). A cognitive task analysis of both the game and the task before games are developed is essential in promoting the transfer of learning (Fletcher & Tobias, 2006). Games should progress from basic to complex and be designed to emulate relevant features of the real context. This facilitates the transfer of learning to performance (Belanich et al., 2006; Delwiche, 2006; Egenfeldt-Nielsen, 2006; Fletcher & Tobias, 2006; Gros, 2003; Klabbers, 2006). Providing learners with debriefing, feedback, and opportunity for reflection also promotes transfer (Hays, 2005; Moreno & Mayer, 2005), as does personalization (Fletcher & Tobias, 2006; Moreno & Mayer, 2000, 2004, 2005). In 2005, Kirkley et al. developed the simulation-game instructional systems design process (SG-ISD), an integrated process that focuses on creating instructionally sound and well-designed games. The SG-ISD process embeds game design processes into the ADDIE instructional design process. Key elements of the model are analysis, concept, design, quality assurance, prototype implementation, and modification based on evaluation. The SG-ISD process serves to bridge the gap between proven simulation and other training systems, and gaming entertainment technologies. Although the SG-ISD is developed based on single-player games, McGrenere (1996) suggests that the following recommendations from Brody (1993), Kelly and O’Kelly (1994), Quinn (1994), and Reynolds and Martin (1988) are a good starting point for the design and development of multiplayer games: ~ ~ ~

Provide clearly stated objective and content. Provide prompt feedback. Provide interactions that facilitate mastery of the objective.


DOI: 10.1002/piq

33

~

~ ~ ~ ~

Provide mechanisms for correcting errors and improving performance. Provide positive reinforcement that is appropriately timed. Provide underlying pedagogical support. Map learning activities to interface actions. Map learning concepts to interface objects.

Unless designers deliberately attend to these elements, poorly designed games may result in negative training effects. MMOG design should emphasize the importance of a team approach in designing games. ‘‘In addition to including individuals with expertise in game design, cognitive task analysis, and ISD, it is also important for developers to be familiar with emerging research results about the effects of games and simulations. Since such varied expertise does not usually occur in one person, consulting with experts familiar with the areas mentioned above during game development should help maximize the positive outcomes of games and simulations, and presumably their profitability as well’’ (Fletcher & Tobias, 2006, p. 22).

Conclusion A limited number of studies have provided insight into the relationship between games and learning; however, for the most part, empirical research on the instructional effectiveness of games is fragmented and flawed (Hays, 2005). Evidence about learning outcomes from serious games or massively multiplayer online role-playing games is even more scant (Bonk & Dennen, 2005; de Freitas, 2006; Fletcher & Tobias, 2006; Garris & Ahlers, 2002; Mishra & Foster, 2006; Prensky, 2003a). Nevertheless, evidence suggests that a variety of educational opportunities exist within serious games (Stokes, 2005). In particular, limited evidence suggests the value of games in engaging learners with different ways of seeing and understanding problems (Squire, 2005). The impact of certain MMOGs has been reported in the literature. ‘‘Smokeout Cafe´’’ (Singularity Design, 2004) and ‘‘Becoming a UNICEF World Hero’’ (Richtel, 2005) raise awareness of environments. MMOGs have also affected behavior and attitudes of players (Brown et al., 1997; Delwiche, 2006), such as the increase in military recruiting through the MMOG America’s Army (Schiesel, 2005). In addition to increasing public awareness and effecting attitudinal changes in players, there are indicators that MMOGs offer an opportunity to engage in long-term thinking that may be overlooked or unavailable in real-world practice (Chan, 2007; Stokes, 2005; Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 2003). Based on these findings, we conclude that MMOGS have characteristics that can promote learning and have potential as instructional vehicles. Because they provide realistic contexts, enable the use of scenarios that can be adapted to reflect up-to-the minute information, enable players to 34

DOI: 10.1002/piq


become immersed in situations, and provide multiple opportunities for practice with feedback, MMOGs can be a viable and solid instruction grounded on multiple learning theories. MMOGs can: ~

~

~

Support consistent training for multiple people in a flexibly adaptive environment Integrate key features for training: instructors as facilitators in various roles, scenarios tailored to address learning objectives, and mechanisms for promoting reflection and MMOGs can be a viable and metacognition solid instruction grounded Address specific knowledge and skills for on multiple learning multiple purposes, including new instructheories. tion, review, remediation, and enrichment

While MMOGs offer great potential, empirical studies are needed to examine team performance and growth in MMOG environments and identify effective design strategies.

References Adams, R. (2005). New counter-IED lanes train troops in Kuwait. Army News Service. Retrieved August 10, 2007, from http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_ id_key 5 8354 Aldrich, C. (2004). Simulations and the future of learning: An innovative (and perhaps revolutionary) approach to e-learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Alexander, A. L., Brunye, T., Sidman, J., & Weil, S. A. (2005). From gaming to training: A review of studies on fidelity, immersion, presence, and buy-in and their effects on transfer in PCbased simulations and games. Woburn, MA: DARWARS Training Impact Group. Ang, C. S., Zaphiris, P., & Mahmood, S. (2007). A model of cognitive loads in massively multiplayer online role playing games. Interacting with Computers, 19(2), 167–179. Army Headquarters. (1993). A leader’s guide to after action reviews. Retrieved July 13, 2006, from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/ tc_25–20/table.htm Atkinson, R. (2007, September 30). IED problem is getting out of control: We’ve got to stop the bleeding. Washington Post, A13. Barab, S. A., Hay, K. E., Barnett, M. G., & Squire, K. (2001). Constructing virtual worlds: Tracing the historical development of learner practices/understandings. Cognition and Instruction, 19(1), 47–94. Barab, S. A., Hay, K. E., & Duffy T. M. (2000). Grounded constructions and how technology can help. Retrieved April 22, 2005, from http://crlt.indiana.edu/publications/journals/ tr1200.pdf Bartle, R. (1996). Hearts, clubs, diamonds, spades: Players who suit MUDs. Journal of MUD Research, 1(1). Retrieved May 19, 1996, from http://www.mud.co.uk/richard/ hcds.htm Belanich, J., Orvis, K. L., & Sibley, D. (2006). Maximizing training effectiveness using PC-based games. Retrieved June 14, 2007, from http://strategicleader.carlisle.army.mil/ ExperientalLearningPapers/paper_12161.pdf_fuseaction5Reader.pdf Belanich, J., Orvis, K. L., & Sibley, D. E. (in press). PC-based game features that influence instruction and learner motivation. Military Psychology. Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http://www.aptima.com/publications/2006-InPress_Belanich_Orvis_Sibley.pdf Belanich, J., Sibley, D. E., & Orvis, K. L. (2004). Instructional characteristics and motivational features of a PC-based game. Arlington, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the


DOI: 10.1002/piq

35

Behavioral and Social Sciences. Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http://www.pjb.co.uk/ armygames.pdf Bennett, J., & Warnock, M. (2006). Instructional game characteristics. In P. Berman (Ed.), E-learning concepts and techniques (pp. 121–125). Bloomsburg: Institute for Interactive Technologies, Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://iit.bloomu.edu/Spring2006_eBook_files/ebook_spring2006.doc Bonk, C. J., & Dennen, V. P. (2005). Massive multiplayer online gaming: A research framework for military training and education. Washington, DC: Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness. Retrieved May 17, 2007, from http://www .strategicleader.us/ExperientalLearningPapers/GameReport_Bonk_final.pdf Boot, W. R. (2005). Enhancing warfighter training and performance. Naval Training Principal Investigator Program Review. August 2–4, 2005. Arlington, VA. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2002). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Brody, H. (1993, November–December). Video games that teach? Technology Review, 51–57. Brown, S. J., Lieberman, D. A., Gemeny, B. A., Fan, Y. C., Wilson, D. M., & Pasta, D. J. (1997). Educational video game for juvenile diabetes: Results of a controlled trial. Medical Informatics, 22(1), 77–89. Bruckman, A. (1992). Identity workshop: Social and psychological phenomena in text-based virtual reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT. Available via anonymous ftp from ftp.media .mit.edu/pub/asb/papers/identityworkshop.{ps.Z,rtf.Z} Burns, M., Dimock, V., & Martinez, D. (2000). Action 1 reflection 5 learning. TAP into Learning, 3(2), 1–2. Retrieved July 13, 2006, from http://www.sedl.org/pubs/tapinto/ v3n2.pdf Castel, A. D., Pratt, J., & Drummond, E. (2005). The effects of action video game experience on the time course of inhibition of return and the efficiency of visual search. Acta Psychologica, 119, 217–230. Castronova, E. (2001). Virtual worlds: A first-hand account of market and society on the cyberian frontier. Fullerton: California State University, Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute for Economic Research. Chan, W. H. (2007, May 7). Serious games 5 serious training: Proponents of serious gaming say the industry has been slow to take off because it has relied mostly on limited government funding. Federal Computer Week. Retrieved July 19, 2007, from http://www.fcw.com/article102622–05–07–07-Print Childress, M., & Braswell, R. (2006). Using massively multiplayer online role playing games for online learning. Distance Education, 27(2), 187–196. Choi, J. I., & Hannafin, M. (1993). Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited. Educational Technology, 33(3), 52–70. Choi, D., & Kim, J. (2004). Why people continue to play online games: In search of critical design factors to increase customer loyalty to online contents. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 7(1), 11–24. Clark, R., Nguyen, F., & Sweller, J. (2006). Efficiency in learning: Evidence-based guidelines to manage cognitive load. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer. Colella, V., Klopfer, E., & Resnick, M. (2001). Adventures in modeling: Exploring complex, dynamic systems with StarLogo. New York: Teachers College Press. Curtis, P. (1992). Mudding: Social phenomena in text-based virtual realities. In Proceedings of the 1992 Conference on Directions and Implications of Advanced Computing. Berkeley, May 1992. Retrieved October 1, 2007, from ftp://ftp.lambda.moo .mud.org/pub/MOO/papers/DIAC92.txt de Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds: A review of game-based learning. JISC e-Learning Program. Retrieved June 26, 2007, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/ documents/programmes/elearning_innovation/gaming%20report_v3.3.pdf de Souza e Silva, A., & Delacruz, G. C. (2006). Hybrid reality games reframed. Potential uses in educational contexts. Games and Culture, 1(3), 231–251. Retrieved June 26, 2007, from http://intl-gac.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/1/3/231

36

DOI: 10.1002/piq


Delwiche, A. (2006). Massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) in the new media classroom. Educational Technology and Society, 9(3), 160–172. Derry, S. J., & Steinkuehler, C. A. (2003). Cognitive and situative theories of learning and instruction. In L. Nadel (Ed.), Encyclopedia of cognitive science (pp. 800–805). London: Nature Publishing Group. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan. Downes, S. (2003, January). Design and reusability of learning objects in an academic context: A new economy of education? Journal of the United States Distance Learning Association, 3–22. Driskell, J. E., Johnston, J. H., & Salas, E. (2001). Does stress training generalize to novel settings? Human Factors, 43(1), 99–110. Ducheneaut, N., & Moore, R. J. (2004, November). The social side of gaming: A study of interaction patterns in a massively multiplayer online game. Paper presented at the Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), Chicago, IL. Egenfeldt-Nielsen, S. (2006). Overview of research on the educational use of video games. Digital Kompetanse, 1, 184–213. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://www.serious games.dk/downloads/game-overview.pdf Fine, G. A. (1983). Shared fantasy: Role-playing games as social worlds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Fletcher, J. D., & Tobias, S. (2006). Using computer games and simulations for instruction: A research review. Paper presented at the Society for Applied Learning Technology Meeting, New Learning Technologies, Orlando, FL. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://se2.isn.ch/serviceengine/FileContent?serviceID 5 18&fileid 5 76499573–7 D40–40B7–1B54–4CBB670E4D12&lng 5 en Foundation Coalition. (n.d.). Positive interdependence, individual accountability, promotive interaction: Three pillars of cooperative learning. Retrieved June 22, 2006, from http:// www.foundationcoalition.org/publications/brochures/acl_piiapi.pdf Garris, R., & Ahlers, R. (2002). A game-based training model: Development, application, and evaluation. Paper presented at the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation & Education Conference (I/ITSEC) 2001 Conference, Orlando, FL. Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J. E. (2002). Games, motivation, and learning: A research and practice model. Simulation and Gaming, 33(4), 441–467. Gee, J. P. (2000–2001). Identity as an analytic lens for research in education. Review of Research in Education, 25, 99–125. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2003). Action video game modifies visual selective attention. Nature, 423, 534–537. Gros, B. (2003, July). The impact of digital games in education. First Monday, 8(7). Retrieved June 18, 2007, from http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue8_7/gros/ index.html Haskamp, J. (2007). Joint organization trains troops to defeat IEDS. Joint IED Defeat Organization. Retrieved July 17, 2007, from https://www.jieddo.dod.mil/jointorganization-trains-troops.htm Hays, R. T. (2005). The effectiveness of instructional games: A literature review and discussion (Tech. Rep. 2005–2004). Orlando, FL: Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division. Retrieved June 28, 2007, from http://adlcommunity.net/file.php/23/ GrooveFiles/Instr_Game_Review_Tr_2005.pdf Hirumi, A., & Stapleton, C. (2007). Applying pedagogy during game development to optimize: Game-based learning. In M. F. Shaughnessy & S. W. Veronikas (Eds.), Pedagogical implications for online instruction. Retrieved July 2, 2007, from http:// www.jointadlcolab.org/downloads/ifest/2006/presentations/Dr_Atsusi_2C_Hirumi_ Document_4.doc Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, vol. 4.


DOI: 10.1002/piq

37

Washington, DC. [Online]. Retrieved June 26, 2006, from http://www.ntlf.com/html/ lib/bib/92–2dig.htm Johnson, T. E., O’Connor, D. L., Lee, M., & Khalil, M. (2005). Measuring team shared understanding using analysis-constructed shared mental model methodology. Paper presented at the 11th biennial conference of the European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction, Nicosia, Cyprus. Johnson, T. E., Spector, J. M., Huang, W. D., & Novak, E. (2007). Instructional gaming effects on learning outcomes and instructional strategy selection: Conventional training versus game-based training project (Tech. Rep. No. 06–0050). Beavercreek, OH: JXT Applications. Kaptelinin, V., & Cole, M. (2002). Individual and collective activities in educational computer game playing. In T. Koschmann, R. Hall, & N. Miyake (Eds.), CSCL 2: Carrying forward the conversation (pp. 169–181). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://www.oise.utoronto.ca/cscl/papers/kaptelinin.pdf Ke, F. (2006). Classroom goal structures for educational math game application. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Learning Sciences (pp. 314–320). Bloomington, IN: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Kelly, A. E., & O’Kelly, J. B. (1994). Extending a tradition: Teacher designed computer-based games. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 5(2), 153–166. Kirkley, S. E., Tomblin, S., & Kirkley, J. (2005). Instructional design authoring support for the development of serious games and mixed reality training. Paper presented at the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference, Orlando, FL. Klabbers, J. H. G. (2003). The gaming landscape: A taxonomy for classifying games and simulations. Utrecht: Digital Games Research Association, Utrecht University. Retrieved June 25, 2007, from http://www.digra.org/dl/db/05163.55012.pdf Klabbers, J. H. G. (2006). The magic circle: Principles of gaming and simulations. Rotterdam: Sense Publisher. Retrieved June 29, 2007, from http://www.sensepublishers.com/ catalog/files/90–8790–006–6.pdf Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Krause, D. P. (2003). The learning potential of multi-user domains (MUDS). Unpublished master’s thesis, Chestnut Hill College. Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http:// www.medievia.com/study/thesis.pdf Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lovelace, Jr., J. J., & Votel, J. L. (2005, March). The Asymmetric Warfare Group: Closing the capability gaps. Army, 29–34. MacDonald, J. (2005). Rules of engagement: Fostering active learning for performance improvement. Paper presented at Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference, Orlando, FL. Manninen, T. (2001, May). Virtual team interactions in networked multimedia games— Case: ‘‘Counter-Strike’’—Multi-player 3D action game. In Proceedings of PRESENCE2001 Conference. Philadelphia. Temple University. Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three strike rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59(1), 14–19. Retrieved June 23, 2007, from http:// projects.ict.usc.edu/itw/gel/MayerThreeStrikesAP04.pdf McGrenere, J. L. (1996). Design: Educational electronic multi-player games—A literature review. University of the British Columbia. Retrieved June 22, 2007, from http:// www.cs.ubc.ca/nest/imager/contributions/healey/imager-tr/mcgrenere.cstr.96–12.html Mishra, P., & Foster, A. N. (2006). The claims of games: A comprehensive review and directions for future research. Unpublished manuscript, Michigan State University. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2000). A learner-centered approach to multimedia explanations: Deriving instructional design principles from cognitive theory. Interactive

38

DOI: 10.1002/piq


Multimedia Electronic Journal of Computer-Enhanced Learning, 2(2). Retrieved June 28, 2007, from http://www.imej.wfu.edu/articles/2000/2/05/index.asp Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2004). Personalized messages that promote science learning in virtual environments. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 165–173. Moreno, R., & Mayer, R. E. (2005). Role of guidance, reflection, and interactivity in an agentbased multimedia game. Journal of Educational Psychology,117–128. Nanjappa, A. (2001). Educational games: Learners as creators. Unpublished manuscript, University of Memphis. Retrieved June 28, 2007, from http://aimlab.memphis.edu/ pdfs/AlokaPap.pdf Oblinger, D. G. (2004). The next generation of educational engagement. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 8, 1–18. Retrieved June 27, 2007, from http://wwwjime.open.ac.uk/2004/8/oblinger-2004–8.pdf O’Connor, D. L. (2004). Measuring shared understanding of task-specific knowledge in slower-paced, non-emergency, decision-making teams: A case study of shared mental models in United States Navy Personnel Qualification Standards (PQS) teams. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University. Papargyris, A., & Poulymenakou, A. (2005). Learning to fly in persistent digital worlds: The case of massively multiplayer online role playing games. ACM SIGGROUP Bulletin, 25(1), 41–49. Pivec, M., & Dziabenko, O. (2004). Game-based learning in universities and lifelong learning: ‘‘UniGame: Social Skills and Knowledge Training’’ game concept. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 10(1), 14–26. Pizer, P. (2003). Social game systems: Cultivating player socialization and providing alternate routes to game rewards. In T. Alexander (Ed.), Massively multiplayer game development (pp. 427–441). Hingham, MA: Charles River Media. Prensky, M. (2001a). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill. Retrieved July 2, 2007, from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/ Prensky, M. (2001b). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon (NCB University Press), 9(5). Retrieved July 2, 2007, from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/ Prensky, M. (2003a, October). Digital game-based learning. Computers in Entertainment, 1(1), 21. Prensky, M. (2003b, June 18). Digital immigrant remedial vocabulary, Version 1.02. Retrieved July 2, 2007, from http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/ Quinn, C. N. (1994). Designing educational computer games. IFIP Transactions, A, Computer Science and Technology, A-59, 45–57. Reynolds, A., & Martin, J. V. (1988, January). Designing an educational computer game: Guidelines that work. Educational Technology, 45–47. Ricci, K. E., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (1996). Do computer-based games facilitate knowledge acquisition and retention? Military Psychology, 89(4), 295–307. Richtel, M. (2005, February 4). Is instructional video game an oxymoron? New York Times. Rieber, L. P., Smith, L., & Noah, D. (1998). The value of serious play. Educational Technology, 38(6), 29–37. Riegle, R. P., & Matejka, W. A. (2006a). Dying to learn: Instructional design and MMORPGs. Paper presented at the 21st Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, Madison, Wl. Riegle, R. P., & Matejka, W. A. (2006b). The learning guild: MMORPGs as Educational Environments. Paper presented at the 22nd Annual Conference on Distance Teaching and Learning, Madison, Wl. Roblyer, M. D. (2004). Integrating educational technology into teaching (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000). The anatomy of team training. In S. Tobias & J. D. Fletcher (Eds.), Training and retraining (pp. 312–338). New York: Macmillan. Schiesel, S. (2005, February 17). On maneuvers with the army’s game squad. New York Times.


DOI: 10.1002/piq

39

Schwartz, D., Lin, X., Brophy, S., & Bransford, J. (1999). Toward the development of flexibility adaptive instructional design. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models:Anewparadigmofinstructionaltheory (Vol.2,pp.183–214).Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum. Seay, A. F., Jerome, W. J., Sang Lee, K., & Kraut, R. (2003). Project massive 1.0: Organizational commitment, sociability and extraversion in massively multiplayer online games. Unpublished manuscript, Human Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University. Shaffer, D. W., Squire, K. R., Halverson, R., & Gee, J. P. (2005). Video games and the future of learning (Working Paper No. 2005–4). Madison: Wisconsin Center for Educational Research, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Retrieved June 28, 2007, from http:// www.wcer.wisc.edu/publications/workingPapers/Working_Paper_No_2005_4.pdf Singularity Design. (2004, November 18). Online game, Smokeout Cafe´, launches to help persuade smokers to quit. Retrieved July 26, 2007, from http://www.singularity design.com/news-20-Online-Game-Smokeout-Cafe-Launches-to-Help-PersuadeSmokers-to-Quit/ Smith, N. S. (2004). Teaching for civic participation with negotiation role plays. Social Education, 68(3), 194–197. Squire, K. (2005). Game-based learning: Present and future state of the field. Masie Center e-Learning Consortium. Retrieved June 18, 2007, from http://www.masieweb.com/ dmdocuments/Game-Based_Learning.pdf Squire, K., & Jenkins, H. (2002). The art of contested spaces. In L. King (Ed.), Game on! London: Barbican. Squire, K. D., & Steinkuehler, C. A. (2006). Generating cyberculture/s: The case of Star Wars Galaxies. In D. Gibbs & K. L. Krause (Eds.), Cyberlines: Languages and cultures of the Internet (2nd ed.). Albert Park, Australia: James Nicholas Publishers. Steinkuehler, C. A. (2006a). Situated identities as styles of play in massively multiplayer online games. Unpublished manuscript, University of Wisconsin-Madison. Steinkuehler, C. A. (2006b). Why game (culture) studies now? Games and Culture, 1(1), 1–6. Stokes, B. (2005). Videogames have changed: Time to consider serious games? Development Education Journal, 11(12). Retrieved June 16, 2007, from http://www.net aid.org/documents/DEJ_article-Games_and_Development_Education-June05.pdf Tychsen, A., Hitchens, M., Brolund, T., & Kavakli, M. (2006). Live action role-playing games control, communication, storytelling, and MMORPG similarities. Games and Culture, 1(3), 252–275. Retrieved June 19, 2007, from http://gac.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/1/3/252 Unigame. (2002). UniGame: Game-based learning in universities and lifelong learning. Minerva Project: 101288-CP-1–2002–1-AT-MINERVA-M. Bologna, Italy: European Communities, Scienter—Centro di Ricerche e Servizi Avanzati per la Formazione. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Weil, S. A., Hussain, T. S., Brunye, T. T., Diedrich, F. J., Entin, E. E., Ferguson, W., et al. (2005, November). Assessing the potential of massive multi-player games to be tools for military training. In Proceedings of the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference. I/ITSEC. Worcester Polytechnic Institute. (2003, May 24). WPI students create online game to simulate Massachusetts state budget process. Retrieved June 26, 2007, from http:// www.wpi.edu/News/Releases/20023/massbalance.html Yee, N. (2006). The demographics, motivations and derived experiences of users of massively-multiuser online graphical environments. PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 15, 309–329.

40

DOI: 10.1002/piq


DEBRA L. O’CONNOR Debra L. O’Connor, PhD, is the senior instructional designer for Intelligent Decision Systems in Williamsburg, VA. She oversees the analysis and design phases of instructional systems design projects for military, governmental, educational, and industrial clients. She earned a PhD in educational technology and has focused her research on team cognition. Her recent research efforts have addressed the use of game-based learning strategies to promote team performance. Mailing address: 263 McLaws Circle, Williamsburg, VA 23185. E-mail: [email protected]

ELLEN S. MENAKER Ellen S. Menaker, CPT, PhD, is the chief of research and evaluation for Intelligent Decision Systems in Centreville, VA. She oversees the design, data collection, and analysis phases of research and various types of analyses and evaluations. She also specializes in learning theory and instructional systems design process. She earned a PhD in research and evaluation and has over 30 years of experience in the training and education fields. Her academic and industry experiences include conducting research for various military, governmental, and educational entities. Her recent work has focused on developing a pedagogy of game-based learning, strategies for promoting experiential learning, human performance, and effectiveness evaluations. Mailing address: 5870 Trinity Parkway, Suite 200, Centreville, VA 20120. E-mail: [email protected]


DOI: 10.1002/piq

41