I am often asked by teachers which game they should buy for their own kids or their classroom. I thought that I’d start this rebooted blog by discussing the differences between buying an educational game and creating a game based learning culture in the classroom.

Game based learning is a complex topic because every book and now every website about game based learning and gamification offer differing definitions of games and often in domains other than learning. Game scholars tend to focus on games as a phenomenon, offering theories and criticisms, whereas instructional designers tend to produce games that more resemble interactive quizzes. Something seems to get lost in translation.

Games appear to demonstrate many learning principles, though no one really agrees which are more essential than others. We know games build essential skills such as problem solving, decision making, communication, collaboration, negotiation, team work, creativity, leadership, and critical thinking. This has been covered at length in the literature for decades. If today’s commercial games didn’t still involve learning they would be un-playable and no one would buy them. Educational games are often designed by committees who hand down the requirements to instructional designers. Often they appear to forget imaginative play starts in the child’s head. It can be role-playing, creating a new game, giving toys a voice, inventing adventures or playing a word game. Through imaginative play the child begins to understand the world, investigates fact and fiction, and develops positive relationships with themselves and other people.

“people who don’t play games often don’t get games. They don’t understand the flow of games; the joy of discovery and what makes them fun; the playfulness of a well-crafted game mechanic and the learning that can come from play rather than reading stuff in a book. They don’t get the ebb and flow of risk and reward or the satisfaction of a perfectly-timed recovery or counterstrike” – acatcalledfrank.

Then there also ideas that become lost in time, especially those hidden in old letterpress books. For example, Hall in 1906 talked about recapitulation theory in relation to play, and said that in play, we relive our evolutionary past. For example, children enact the ‘animal stage’ of evolution by climbing and swinging. (Subsequent stages are savage, nomad, agricultural and tribal). Recapitulation theory also draws on the notion of instinct, claiming that play provide the means for children to express their instincts.

Games Based Learning is then much more than using an educational game to teach a subject.

It’s an approach to allowing the ebb and flow of play which fuels imagination. This also requires a very different approach to how classes are run and how students find wonder and excitement in the topic. Take for example, a recent UK example from Learning without Frontiers, after being involved in the project – and by that I mean having first hand experience of it – teachers found new benefits.

This isn’t new to game-based-learners, non-gamers or pre-gamers such as Parten (1930s), Piaget (1960s) and Vygotsky (1970s). For decades the most influential educational theorists have discussed different levels of social engagement in play, but not digital-play. Today, we have the networks and technology to deliver it at school, in the home and on the move. Parten for example described a number of number of social categories of play, including onlooker level, when a child observes play of others; solitary play or playing alone; parallel play, when children play along with one another but there is little interaction among the players. It’s remarkable that ‘play’ theories are often completely ignored in teacher training. While the names are familiar, most teacher I meet associate them with constructivism, but see play as something else, as their interest in play is often not covered in any depth, if at all.

What makes GBL different to educational games, is that it makes them redundant.

GBL can be achieved with imagination, paper, pens, dress-ups, the Xbox, Minecraft and so on. GBL covers a spectrum of possibilities. What makes it really interesting to me is that it can be very low-tech, and perhaps act as a tonic for teachers who have game-kids in their classroom, but are unconvinced by recent interest and demands around blogs, wikis, podcasts, tablets and so on which in all reality have made a disproportional dent in student achievement or attitudes compared to the rhetoric, time and money invested. GBL can be three sticks on the ground with a little imagination and the right approach.

Developing games based learning capacity doesn’t have to anything like the challenges and moral panic caused by moving from Word to WordPress in the ‘integration of ICT’ discourse. Investing time trying to make the ‘perfect’ education game - is moving in exactly the wrong direction and we do well to remember games are not subject to the same technological determinate rationales associated with “web2.0″. We have games, brilliant games that can be used for relatively low cost. De-tuning commercial games to educational-versioning often is purely to add levers and special powers for teachers. This isn’t game based learning, this is sabotage.

It really strikes me how much kids can get motivated by playing a game and then all of a sudden they discover that the subject they always thought was going to be boring is actually totally interesting – Will Wright

The games we choose for children need to be in sync with game-culture and evolution – because this is where the richest imagination occurs and holds great interest for them in digital-culture. Take music for example, games have spawned a genre called Dub Step – and making it, uses games and digital culture. This is why Jo Kay and I ensured Massively Minecraft is always the current release and no child has less power than the adult. All we need are teachers willing to believe imagination has a powerful role in learning. As teacher and broader community interest in GBL rises, it marks the beginning of the end for those experts and consultants whom for the last decade never bothered to pick up a controller and wonder why this funny device is so much more powerful than anything they’ve seen before. Don’t start now guys, it’s too late, the party is over, games based learning is alive and well – and steps well beyond the educational domain.

Will Wright is a good example of an agile game designer who often moves between between game and education culture and theory – to make better game experiences. Game based learners will know who he is, but if you don’t – he says things such as “A game is like the nucleus of the experience, but it’s not the whole experience.” He discussed games and education in the context of imagination constantly.

Somebody can take something from their imagination, create an external artifact, and then share it. They can even collaborate on larger imaginary structures. This is something that used to be confined to a small number of people that had very high skills in language. These individuals could write a book and describe some imaginary world, like Alice in Wonderland. But not many people had that skill set. Now average people are getting these tools that empower them, to create entire worlds, external to their imagination, to share with other people.

Game based learning is not learning based in or around any particular game. How children experience it and what they do with it incorporates many of the same technologies that have been talked about for the last decade. So the skill set exists. Games based learning is not fifth option – or a strange cousin – it’s something  teachers with or without technological skills can learn quickly and productively – to create a new way of learning and finally present an approach to 21st century that isn’t technologically deterministic or shrouded in commercialised dogma.

Games have been around forever and now can be delivered cheaply in any classroom – if you are willing to learn how.

There is a BIG reason to let kids play multiplayer games. Troll-management-skills. The ignorant myth about games is that they are full of people who have little self-control and are generally abusive towards others and/or that they are havens for weirdos and deviants who prey on the innocent. The reality is that game-worlds (unlike the Internet) don’t support troll-behavior, as these spaces are actually governed by rules. Social-rules – what is acceptable and game-rules, what you can and can’t do or say in the game.

The fastest way to get kicked off a game-server is to be a troll. Why? Simple, people log in to play, not to inflate their pathetic ego at the expense of others. Game servers are policed, not least by the players and the moderators. Asking a player their ages, location or gender sounds alarm bells. At the least you will be muted, or the wagons circled to point out the error.

Yes people do get into arguments, and at times the chat does get heated, but that is no more or less than happens in the ‘real world’. Gamers are highly adept at ignoring, reporting and muting trolls. Generally speaking, the higher the level you play at the less likely you are to encounter a troll. There’s work to be done, and trolling is counter-productive.

The Internet, or should I say ‘private networks’ are breeding grounds for trolls, as trolls generally love text and asyncronous communication channels. They have nothing to add or say, but genuninely believe their view/opinion is the highest of all human intellect. When pinged they will claim “it was a joke” or “we’re just messing about”. That doesn’t excuse the behaviour at all in my view.

The problem with the Internet is that it’s home to billions of trolls, and there are millions of forums, private networks etc., that provide them the ideal conditions to rip into other people. Moderating a troll, doesn’t stop a troll moving to the next space – which is one of the reasons that Facebook is such a bag space for kids who have no defence or experience of troll management – especially if when they use social media in class, there is someone moderating.

Games, in my (parental) view are great places to learn about trolls. Firstly, game space doesn’t have the footprint you might associate with Facebook for example. It’s syncronous voice and chat – with a mute, report and often ban option that can be pressed at any moment. Secondly, players are ranked. People know who’s new and older players can spot younger ones or less experienced ones easily – 99% of the time they strive to help them, not exploit them – which is the opposite of troll behaviour. I am not suggesting parents allow kids into games alone, but with some support and a watchful eye, kids learn troll-management. They learn to quit, to leave the server, to mute and to avoid getting into time-wasting arguements with people that have serious personal issues – the same people that I suspect are happy to bully in the workplace or the playground because they think they can get away with it. In game space, you can’t … you don’t have to give trolls any power over you.

That is a very important thing to learn. Spaces can be enjoyable, useful, productive and supportive – if trolls are swiftly managed. That isn’t something you learn from a policeman power pointing or doing some activity on cyber-bullying. It’s experience and feeback driven – and there is no better (or safer) place for kids to learn that than game-spaces.

Don’t believe me – Join Warcraft and see how quickly trolls are dispatched. Read a Guild forum and see if trolls post toxic messages, use Steam and see where being a moron gets you. Then repeat the experiment in a forum, private or public network that is text based … you soon see how trolls operate and how poorly equipped most adults are to deal with it. Now imagine your 12 and your friends pressure you to join Facebook.

Welcome to the world of trolls who incidentally carry on their toxic pursuits well into adult-hood – but of course, it’s all in jest. Unless of course you’re on the receiving end and have no experience of dealing with them.

Games and virtual worlds are infinitely better designed to deal with moronic comments and aggressive behavior – which is far more damaging that anyone hitting your avatar with an imaginary sword. It’s also worth noting that very little online is actually ‘private’. Just because trolls think they are in a safe-haven, is purely a reflection of their own ignorance. The best way to deal with a troll, in a text-space is NOT to reply. Never feed a troll. Screen-shot the troll-post, file it away and hang on to it. Most trolls are serial idiots, they will provide you with plenty of evidence that you can supply to the organisation, employer or network with a formal complaint. As trolls are always more interested in themselves that anyone else, saying absolutely nothing is by far the best way of dealing with them.

For me (as a parent), game-worlds are great places for kids to learn about what is often a sad, human reality – people can be total douche-bags. The problem is that education is bound by policy and won’t be effective, when the kids needs it most – out of school, and cyber-talks are, as studies have shown, largely in-effective. It’s not that different from ‘stranger danger’ – kids trust other people far too much. They have to practice managing themselves and others – and no amount of bubble-wrap will spare them – or persuade trolls to change their behavior.

1. Physical structure of the setting

Video games are not played in physical groups, where everyone sits side by side.

2. Individual schedule

Play is an emotional activity, and the type of play (solo or group), who we play with and how often is a choice that game players make.

3. Individual work system

Gamers create systems of work using a range of tools, configurations and preferences. The more complex the game, the higher the need to create an individual system. For example: playing a game also invloves interacting with forums, websites, videos and people who are external to the classroom – constantly.

4. Routines and strategies

Games require very different strategies, not least social strategies and routines to optimise play experience. These are unlilkly to co-incide with those in the ‘traditional classroom’. How that is managed – without making play ‘un-fun’ is an art.

5. Visual organisation

Games are not orgnised in visual ways that are familiar or even related to ‘the desktop’. The more complex the game, the more individual the visual organisation will be. Students may have little or not experience of doing this, and additionally teachers may have no understanding of the game UX or the game-space.

6. Parent involvement

Parents should be involved to a greater extent.

7. Assessment Practices

Schools need to have a clear guide to understanding their students as ‘players’, customising the programming for each individual student, and monitoring outcomes so that games can be used to evidence achievement, knowledge and skill. Do not rely on in in-game scores or ‘badges’ as reliable indicators.

8. Cognitive Readyness

Cognitive readiness skills such as logging-in, pre-reading, communication, social, play, fine motor, imitation and group skills are all part of game-play.

9. Games are personal

Developing an individualized person and family-centered plan for each  student, rather than using a standard curriculum. (see individual schedule)

10. Visual Supports

Make the sequence of ‘dailies’ preductable and understandable – don’t fall into the trap of thinking play is immediately productive or motivating, simply because games can be ‘fun’