Analysis of Puzzle, Quiz, and Sports Games

Learners’ Styles

Based on Kolb’s Learning Styles
I work with K-2 students during a very short amount of whole group time (30 minutes), and a larger portion of the learning day devoted to small group learning (60 minutes). My students lean toward a combination of a Converging and Accommodating style of learning. During small groups they are asked to complete activates or tasks that relate to the whole group instruction or skills that they have learned. The Converging style allows them to simulate situations, and use the skills learned to apply them to real world applications. They are able to find solutions to problems by using their prior knowledge, as well as use those skills to experiment with new thoughts and ideas. My students are also very ‘hands-on’. Working together in small groups can provide many opportunities for the Accommodating learning style.
It may seem that these two types of learning style are on the opposite ends of the spectrum, they actually work cohesively in my classroom. I feel that I can reach most types of learners when there is diversity in the learning styles. My students are allowed to make choices as they move independently through their learning stations. As they are working on their list of activates they are able to work independently or in groups which allows them to choose the learning style that fits them.

Based on Prensky’s List
My recent K-2 students do not have much experience with computers in their homes. My students come from very poor families, and in many situations, computers are not accessible or very outdated. Those students who do have computers in their homes, and based on conversations I have had with them about how they are used, primarily use them for games, or the kids are not allowed to use them because they are for adult use. That said, based on Prensky’s List of cognitive style changes, I had a hard time narrowing down just one that fit the style of my students. They may not have computers in the home, but they do have video games, and most are the current gaming stations available. Here are the ones that I feel best relates to the students that I work with.

Graphics First vs. Text First is a style of learning that is based on the visual aspect of the game where the player receives most of the information from the high amount of graphics and little or no amounts of accompanying text. These games or videos use text in just the right places, to help tell the story, allow the user to make decisions that could help them to go further in the levels of the game. They feel success when they complete a level of the game, and are highly interested by the virtual connections that they make. Many of my students who come in with these types of playing backgrounds do well with computer games in the classroom and will want to go to the computer station as a first choice.

Play vs. Work is a learning style that builds in many concepts and skills into a computer game. While the player is playing a game, they are also learning skills, concepts, building comprehension, reasoning, and working on other academic areas all while they think and feel that they are just “playing” a game. This style makes learning more fun, and easier to retain, since it is a style they are used to. In my experience, many of these games can be chosen by skill, allowing the students to advance as they master the level of that skill. A very simple telling time game that comes to mind isn’t as complex as some games can be, however, it is still a two-player game that involves a skill worked on in the classroom. This game gives the players the feeling of playing a game and at the same time, they are working on skills related to whole group instruction. http://www.hbschool.com/activity/willy/willy.html

Payoff vs. Patience is a learning style that rewards gamers as they play with levels, wins, or high scores. The feedback that the gamers receive is highly rewarding as they continue to work toward the next goal and playing for extended amounts of time. Many older students will work toward “beating” a game and spend countless hours playing trying to reach that goal. If playing an internet game that may be a little slower, they will continue to wait as it loads or creeps along to try and achieve the title of the highest scorer or until they master specific levels. In my experience, these are games that may have codes or levels that can be saved and returned to later. Most of these games are not in appropriate time frames for school, but they are definitely games that are played at home and are those that kids enjoy.

Analysis of Games

Luxor 2
This game is a product of the company Big Fish Games, developed by Paul Thelen in 2002. Thelen works in the gaming industry as a way to renew his love of game design. Over the years, he has brought in other standout gamers to help develop more exciting programs and affiliates around the world (http://www.bigfishgames.com/company/bfg-story.html).

Luxor 2 takes you on a journey through Egypt. By way of map, each stopping point, or level, challenges you to master the chains of spheres by eliminating a series of three or more of the same color, or type, in a row. The long chains of spheres work their way toward you in hopes to gain control of you and your pyramid. The players must work quickly to eliminate the chains that are speeding toward them while catching coins, jewels, power-ups, and other bonuses. There are 3 difficulty levels, which have levels within levels, dozens of power-ups, and high scoring options.

Who Wants to Win $1,000,000?
The Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (Jefferson Lab), creators of Who Wants to Win $1,000,000?, is a worldwide facility for scientists, with the primary goal of conducting research of the atom’s nucleus. Through public outreach and advanced technology, the Jefferson Lab wants to help further education in science and technology by providing opportunities for discovery (http://www.jlab.org/visitors/).

This game provides challenging questions about math and science in hopes to gain a million dollars, fake money of course! As you begin at the bottom level, or easiest level, multiple-choice questions are asked. Each level completed takes you up the money ladder, questions answered incorrectly will drop you down to zero dollars or to the last insured level. If the question seems a little tough, or you just have no idea of the answer, there are three chances for the player to ask for help, poll the lab, 50/50, and ask an expert. Each of the three helps can be used at anytime, and guide the player to the correct answer.

Comparison 1: Game Components

Luxor 2 Game Components
1. Rules
2. Organization-clear goals to be obtained by playing the game.
3. Players
4. Competition/leveled play
5. Conflict/Resolution
6. Interaction
7. Amusement
8. Safety

Strong Components of Luxor 2
The rules and goals are quite clear, working to complete a chain of three or more spheres that will release jewels, bonuses, or power-ups. As the player completes chains of spheres, they move toward a new level of difficulty in hopes battle the god Set and his evil minions, thus enhancing the conflict and resolution of the game. The game is based on leveled play that gives the player 3 lives with a chance of earning more to complete this task.

The interaction between the player and the game is quite high, as the player has to move quickly and be alert of which color sphere is coming next to fire, where the possible chains to blast are, and how quickly the chains are moving. At times, as the levels increase, there are two chains to watch out for. This game is amusing and safe to play; it holds the attention of the players with colorful and strong audio-visual effects.

The educational connection of matching colors, like objects, and using strategies to complete the longest chain provide math practices through play. This game aligns with the Play vs. Work style of learning of Prensky’s List. There is only one player involved in the game, and the game goes full screen, so there are not any other online distractions which helps the game to be played in a safe environment.

Weak Components of Luxor 2
The game only allows one player, which isn’t necessarily a weak component, but if you have two or more players and only one computer, the game could potentially take some time to play. Payoff vs. Patience from Prensky’s List, states that players who like these types of games could potentially wait, and play quite a long time because as they advance in levels, time is definitely a factor. Time makes the game a weak component if using it in the classroom. Those students who master levels with ease will want to continue on. If played in a small group or station setting, there may not be time enough to complete the game to the level that they would like, and this would make it hard for the players who have the patience to cease play. There isn’t a way to save the levels previously completed, so as new players return to the game, they would have to start from the beginning.

Who Wants to Win $1,000,000? Game Components
1. Rules
2. Organization-clear goals to be obtained by playing the game.
3. Players
4. Chance
5. Competition/leveled play
6. Amusement
7. Interaction
8. Safety

Strong Components of Who Wants to Win $1,000,000?
The rules are very clear and organized. There is a separate rules page that explains to players in very understandable language how to play. The game is set up to support a single player game, however, the game could be used in small groups, or whole group settings allowing the players to work together to answer the questions and advance toward the goal of the pretend million dollar prize. Group play fosters the idea of discussion as students discuss answers, look up answers, review incorrect answers, work problems, and learn new concepts.

The opportunity for chance increases, as the questions for each money level become more difficult, and are randomly chosen by the game. Competition and amusement continue throughout the levels of play, each money level proves to be harder and visually keeps track of the money levels complete. If there is one wrong answer then the game is finished, so the stakes are high while trying to advance through the levels.

The game is played in a safe environment, and is very easy to continue throughout the game with easy clicks for the answers. If a question is answered incorrectly, the game will offer the answer and a chance to play again. There are no pop-ups or other major distractions that would alter the game play.

Weak Components of Who Wants to Win $1,000,000?
The level of interaction is not as high as games with more advanced graphics and audio. This game provides more of an intellectual challenge and becomes more intrinsic as the players move up in money levels. Players who like the very interactive components of game play, and lots of visual stimulation may play the game, but would prefer something with more interaction. Players who are considered in the Graphics First vs. Text First style of learning group would struggle a little with continuing play on this game. I believe to help enhance this style of learner, the small group play would allow for interaction that is missing with the high level of graphics and video components.

Comparison of Both Games
In comparing the two chosen games, both have a very well laid out and understandable set of clear rules and goals. Both games are organized, using leveled play, with one main player as the focus making the competition more intrinsic. Interaction is highly amusing in both games, however, created differently in each game. In the Luxor 2 game, the interaction is more visual, and in the Who Wants to Win $1,000,000? game, the interaction is more intellectual recalling prior knowledge and synthesizing it with new knowledge learned from missed question. Both games could fit into the Payoff vs. Patience style of learning. Both games take time and effort to play, and depending on which style the player likes the best, they could play both games for an extended period of time. Finally, both games are fall into the safe gaming environment. The games do not ask for personal information or passwords to complete, and there are not excessive ads that can be clicked on while navigating the games.

Learners’ Styles
The best-fit game for my K-2 students would be the Luxor 2 game. Based on Kolb’s learning styles, this game fits the Converging style because they are doing and thinking throughout this game. In a one-player style of game, they are able to work toward the goal while problem solving and finding solutions like matching the colors, or strategizing to build the longest chain of spheres. The game is not applicable for multiple players, so as the students are working alone to complete the levels of play, they feel success as they gain points and complete levels.

Compared to Prensky’s List, this game fulfills the learning styles of Graphics vs. Text First; it is highly visual and interactive much like video games that my students are used to. They would enjoy this game because they would think they are playing, and not realize they are really working, as in the Play vs. Work style of learning. My student’s would find this game a challenge and highly entertaining because it is more like an arcade game, they would show great levels of patience while completing the game. It would be very hard to pull them from this game, as it quickly becomes addicting.

The least-fit game would be Who Wants to Win $1,000,000? While it fits the descriptions Kolb’s style of learning and Prensky’s style of learning, the prior knowledge needed for the game is not age appropriate for my K-2 students.

Real Lives 2010 Analysis

Analysis of Simulation Games
Game Title: Real Lives 2010

General Information

Background Information

Bob Runyan, author of Real Lives 2010 and president of Educational Simulations, developed this game to help immerse players in the day-to-day struggles of life in other cultures. The goal is to bring awareness of cultural challenges and world living conditions to others around the world. Players are able to experience over 190 countries facing challenges and make decisions about their life journey.

Creator Runyan "wanted to create a game that generates a level of empathy" (http://www.educationalsimulations.com/). Throughout the game, he provides real world data, based on the facts of the country and cultural references, and provides an opportunity to learn how people live in other countries. In addition, 10% of the profits are contributed by Educational Simulations to help improve the lives of those in disadvantaged countries.

Play Features

The game begins on your birthday! As a newborn baby, from a pre-chosen country, you are provided with information about your family, home, country, and health. Each year you age, a diary is kept to log the events that happen in your life. During the year, you will encounter events that challenge your health, family status, education, religion, economic status, and your country's hardships and celebrations.

As you grow older, you are making more decisions on your own regarding your financial status, relationships, and recreational activities. Those choices will be based on current conditions of the country and family status. Over the course of the game, as you age, you will experience the joys and hardships of living the life of a person in your given land.

Representation

Real Lives 2010 is representative of the world in the present day. Players are provided with information of personal successes and tragedies that are current with the situations that are on going and happening around the world today. Simulations are related to decisions that one would make living their life in the different country. Each year of life, players are notified of events related to births, illnesses, financial situations, crisis in the country, and employment.

With one click, your life advances a year. Each player can relate to the game differently based on age and prior life experiences. The game provides a sense of empathy as you journey through your life with a new identity in another country. You will find yourself making connections with familiar experiences as you play the game, and if you haven't experienced some of the circumstances, then you will feel compelled to think about the differences between your home country and your new simulated country.

Analysis

Game Components

A game is an interactive situation based on conflict, resolution, use of prior knowledge, interesting storylines, simulation, and virtual environments that are all used to complete a challenging goal. Multiple or single participants work toward completion of a challenging goal governed by a fixed set of rules. The game is organized, safe, amusing, interactive, and representative of the skills the students are working on, thus providing review and practice of prior knowledge, and allowing the participants to apply new synthesized knowledge to related situations.

A Look at Real Lives 2010 Game Components

1. Rules
2. Organization-clear goals to be obtained by playing the game.
3. Players
4. Representation of reality through simulation.
5. Chance
6. Conflict
7. Resolution
8. Safety
9. Amusement
10. Interactive storylines

Strong Components of Real Lives 2010
The goal, working toward a long healthy and happy life, along with making decisions that can change the outcome, is quite clear. A single player or a possible small group of players, can work toward achieving the goal. The chance that something devastating will happen to your virtual family differs based on the encounters throughout the years. Conflict arises when there is devastation in your family, a gain, or loss of a job, an event that poses problems in the country, or a personal life experience. Choices are made by the players to resolve concerns that may arise regarding finances, love interests, and contributions to the community. These components provide for a safe learning environment building on prior knowledge; simulating the real world experiences through decision-making processes.

Weak Components of Real Lives 2010
Rules are somewhat clear and could use a more explicit approach for understanding the game better. While the players independently play the game and can click on family members to obtain more information, the virtual environment is missing. Some of the material becomes repetitive, which may be a component of the trial game. The game becomes lengthy at times, allowing for periods of needed intermission by the player. Therefore, the amusement level would be higher if there were a stronger storyline, more interactive components, and more chances to interact with the non-playing characters of the game.

Learner's Styles & Teaching/Learning Objectives
I would choose this game for late high school or a higher education level of students. Based on many components of the game, there are not many opportunities for interactions with other players or non-playing characters. The decisions are made solely by the individual player or possible partnering of no more than two players. Based on this information, I would choose the Assimilation Style of learning for the group that would enjoy this game.

The Assimilating learning preference is for a concise, logical approach. Ideas and concepts are more important than people. These people require good clear explanations rather than practical opportunity. They excel at understanding wide-ranging information and organizing it in a clear logical format. People with an Assimilating learning style are less focused on people and more interested in ideas and abstract concepts. People with this style are more attracted to logically sound theories than approaches based on practical value. This learning style person is important for effectiveness in information and science careers. In formal learning situations, people with this style prefer readings, lectures, exploring analytical models, and having time to think things through (http://www.businessballs.com/kolblearningstyles.htm).

Objectives for Real Lives 2010:
Decision-Making: analysis of knowledge based on problem solving, prediction, drawing conclusions, and choice making. During the game, choices are given over the course of a lifetime to enhance the opportunity of a healthy and happy life. Detailed situations give the game a real-life feel, and players have the chance to monitor their life choices visualized on a current graph.

Social/Cultural Awareness: understanding the social environment of others. The students take on the life of a person from a different country making decisions that will extend or end their lives based on current issues that are relative to that country. This narrative-based game provides opportunities to comprehend and reflect on decisions made related to the real world concerns. During the course of the game, reflection is necessary to continue with choices. Upon completion of the game, a death certificate is given. It reviews the major factors and decisions that were made throughout the player's lifetime.

Ability to Self-Assess: evaluation of one's own progress. Players can consistently evaluate and change their social status by looking at the assets that they have obtained through life. There are also opportunities to continually assess personal progress with a graph; however, I'm not sure how this graph plays into the game. I couldn't find much value to it, other than I could tell when I was getting close to ending my life. At the end of the game, there is an opportunity to reflect on the game process.

Implementation & Assessment

Settings
If the high school setting were set up in small group stations, as we do in the elementary level, a purchase of a Six Pack license would be needed. The cost for a Six Pack is $199; the price goes way up when looking at full lab packs of 30 or more students. The total cost can exceed $800 to complete the license requirements for a student lab. Computer labs would also require systems to have Windows 2000 or higher, 512 MB RAM, and 1024 x 768 graphics resolution.

Real Lives 2010 is aligned with the national standards. This program provides additional teacher resources in the form of lesson plans. Teacher lesson plans include cause and effect, comparing personal life to the virtual life of the game, discussion-starting questions to synthesize the knowledge learned while playing the game, journal discussions, and activity extensions.

Teachers, students, families, and community members that share this game are the primary stakeholders. To fully understand and obtain the true feeling behind the author's message, the players will need a basic knowledge of life skills. If players are lacking experiences of independent life skills, it will be difficult to gain the full simulation of empathy for the virtual characters of the game.

Procedure
One way to implement the game would be to help students to understand that an important part of geography is the cause and effect relationship between the natural environment and human beings. The environment directly impacts the ways in which people live and the ways in which people make a living. Have students work in pairs to research such topics as land use, natural resources, climate, and vegetation in their simulated birth countries.

Assessment
Ask students to present, one by one, oral summaries of the major events in their simulated lives and the related causes/effects. Help students process all of the information and relate it to their own lives with post activity discussions centered on life's events, causes, and effects --those that we can influence in a positive or negative way and those we can't. Assessment given in a rubric from would be helpful for both students and teachers to know the expectations of the final project.