Jennifer's+Journal

Week 1's Journal

I like to play video games to relax and be entertained and the games I play the most are my cell phone games like Candy Crush, Bejeweled, Pet Rescue, etc. I have played more intensive, virtual world type games, but find that if there are too many elements like health, food, money, potions, weapons, spells, etc. then I get overwhelmed and feel like the game is nagging me too much. My favorite desktop game is JewelQuest. I like it because it is logical, follows a pattern, and has a cute back story that doesn't interfere with the game play. The game consists of multiple levels of matching jewel puzzles with varying challenges. I enjoy solving the puzzles and the problem solving that goes with it. Virtual identities are something that I'm not very experienced in or comfortable with. I prefer to stay internal, and have had minimal external experiences. The idea of interacting with characters that represent real people seems weird to me, and I don't like not knowing who the real person is. If I know who the real person is then I feel more comfortable interacting with their character, but I keep relating to the character as the person. As far as Semiotic Domains, I guess I not able to enter the domain of interacting with the characters like they are real. My inability to advance in the domains and get to the critical thinking part of role playing games, keeps me from joining the affinity groups that are based on role playing, and I really don't understand the Design Grammar of those games. The learning opportunities in role playing and other games, like discussed in the text, are very valuable and I can see how learning skills within a game could help students develop learning skills, and critical learning skills that will help them with future learning. The ability to multitask, and to manage the different elements of the game are very useful skills and should be encouraged. As a teacher, I think that I would seek out games that included goals that closely tied into what my lesson is trying to accomplish. I think that having realistic scenarios that allow for problem solving, trial and error, and developing multiple semiotic domains would be entertaining and informative, while setting up domains for future, real world experiences. Having students work together, and blending groups to include students with different abilities and strengths would help them learn from each other and build on each other's strengths. A good example is the Resilient Planet game which teaches Marine Biology to middle school students (see my review below). This type of game allows manipulation of the environment and trial and error learning. A small group could work together to identify the fish and sea life, as well as achieving the game's goals.

For this week's assignment I tried out 2 different educational games. The first was Resilient Planet. This is a marine biology centered game for middle school students. Unfortunately, I did fail at the overall goal, but had fun playing it. I thought they did well with incorporating learning into the game and then allowing for applying the learning by identifying sea life and proving assumptions about the fish. The game is fairly easy to figure out but does involve some trial and error. There are instructions and ongoing support in the form of the leaders, so I never felt like I was too lost. If I were a middle school Earth sciences teacher I think that I would encourage my students to play this game, and make fun assignments based on it. The other game I tried out was Tyrannosaurs: Meet the family. This app is from the Australian Museum. The concept is that you choose a dinosaur egg (there are 22 total), and then you go to an enclosure where you tap the egg until it hatches. A little baby tyrannosaur hatches and starts running around its enclosure, where there are also boxes, barrels, and rocks that can be moved by touching and dragging them. The boxes and barrels can be broken by tapping on them and toys, food and the fossils are released. The goal is to find 3 fossils which provide clues that ultimately lead you to identify the dinosaur. The idea is cute, but all 22 levels operate the exact same way, and there are no other levels that I could find, as well as no settings, support, or other information provided. I liked being able to play with the little dinosaurs, by rolling balls at them and having them chase them, but found the learning to be passive. Applying information wasn't required to advance so it was easy to close the information boxes and get back to playing. After about 45 minutes I grew bored with the game and most likely won't play it again. I thought this was a good idea but needs to be built on and expanded to make it really engaging.

Semiotic domains are a complex concept, but I can see how the thought process works. I thought James Paul Gee made a good point in that a person must pay attention to the domains and how they interact with each other, so that one can determine the end goal. In my job as an underwriter I have to consider many interrelated domains. I have to consider the customer themselves, figure out their "story", which we refer to as Credit - Capacity - Collateral. Credit = a person's history of managing debt and financial obligations; Capacity = a person's current ability to pay (income and assets); Collateral = the property that's being used to secure the debt. I have to consider the customer and the bank's best interests, while at the same time practicing ethical and legal lending practices. The domains include my personal production and quality goals along with my standing amongst my peers, customer service and meeting the customer's needs, the loan officer's goals and production, bank regulations and benefits, government regulations and requirements, etc. It is imperative to learn the file details, and Design Grammar of a complete mortgage application scenario, so that I can identify problems and work to resolve them in a way that works within all of the domains. When I train a new underwriter it can be confusing for them and they often make mistakes in not realizing how their decision is affecting further reaching domains. Like the physics students described in the book, a new underwriter will learn the facts and policies, but won't understand how to apply that information to multiple domains.

WEEKS 2 and 3 READING JOURNAL

Chapters 4 and 5 presented interesting and differing views of online characters and their personalities. One character is an extension of the player and takes on the player's personality to some degree, even if the player is being true to the character. Judgments will most likely be made based on the players perspectives and values, but with respect to what the character would, or wouldn't do. The other character type is an existing personality that the player takes on and works within. The character has a backstory, job, and purpose, and it's up to the player to ensure that those goals are met.

I think that having students consider how to develop characters and immerse themselves in someone else's life can be a very strong learning tool. It teaches empathy and critical thinking by having the student look at a situation through someone else's perspective. Having to make decisions that are best for the character, but not necessarily something that the student would do, is a high level of thinking that helps them see problems from different angles.

At my work I provide coaching and training to adults. One of my coworkers is a previous actor/Thespian, and has trouble fitting in with the very analytical underwriters. By the time I met him his confidence was pretty low, he had low self-esteem, and was being treated badly by other underwriters. His quality and production scores were marginal, and he was constantly being put on notice for low scores. I met him and realized that he is a very nice man, and very intelligent, but had come to believe he wasn't smart enough for the job. I started meeting with him and asking him questions about acting and what he did before underwriting. When he told those stories I could see his Actor Character come out and his self-confidence improve. I coached him into how to make peace with his acting past within the analytical world, and started helping him create an Underwriting Character. As his confidence grew, his scores improved, and he was able to connect better with his coworkers. He and I still check in, but now that he's combined his characters into a more useful persona, he's doing great!

Based on my understanding of Situated Learning, I would say that underwriting is based almost entirely on a very specific situation and domain. We review people's applications, credit profile, house, etc., purely for the purpose of deciding whether or not to lend money to them. When most people look at a house they look to see if it would be comfortable to live there, how their family would fit in, whether or not they like the colors, if the neighborhood is friendly. When an underwriter reviews a house we are considering if the bank can see it if its foreclosed upon. We also use words and acronyms that have no meaning outside of mortgage, I like to call it "mortgagese", terms like LOE (or LOX), CLTV, QAP, DOT, etc. While I am fluent in these terms I have to adjust my vocabulary when speaking with customers or non-mortgage personnel. Our language even changes between banks and other institutions.

The most recent experience I had using the probe/hypothesis/reprobe/rethink cycle was when I was learning how to play Age of Mythology. I went through the tutorial and then when I was done, it dropped me on an island and released the crackens on me. I had to explore the island for my resources, click on buildings to find out what they were, and to locate what I needed. I had some weapons that I had no idea how to operate. After bringing over multiple soldiers and trying to get them to work them, I finally figured out that they moved by themselves. Once I completed my goal for that island I was dropped on a new island and had to start over. I could see where I was using the learning principles and tried to reflect on them until the part where my troops got attacked again, or I was running low on wood.

The educational game I played was Quandary. It has a very interesting concept in that your character is the head of these town-groups and your job is to hear their problems and work to find a solution that works best for the people and the town. You listen to each person, then hear possible solutions, matchup opinions to the people, and then work to solve the problem to make everyone happy, or at the least satisfied. The game was challenging the first 2 problems that I went through. Trying to think through the townspeople's perspectives is a good learning exercise. I made a couple of missteps but was able to correct myself, re-hypothesize, and probe some more. After running a couple of problems, I did start to notice that there appears to be a pattern in the game and found myself getting bored. This game would be best played 1 problem at a time, with at least a couple of days delay in between problems. I can see how it would help students think about problems with a broader view and utilize critical thinking skills, but can be repetitive if played too long.