Outfind.ca | Page 5

Concordia University

Top 10 things a library does for you

I brainstormed this a while ago about the Concordia University Libraries when tkinking about presenting the library. Maybe it is useful?

** Top 10 awsome things your library does for you **
1. We buy all your textbooks and required readings (Reserve Room)
2. Computers, laptops, tablets, print, scan and internet
3. Open 24hrs, 7 days a week
4. 15 group study rooms
5. 5 million dollars – that’s how much we spend every year on stuff
6. Get stuff from us, but also any Library in Canada and the world (Colombo/Crepuq Card)
7. Forget Google & Wikipedia, we’ll teach you how to search for real
8. Use RefWorks and avoid plagarism
9. Talk to a person – our staff cares and will help you
10. Get all this FOR FREE !

Guidelines - recommendations Inspiration Open education

Let a million Apps Bloom

A random RSS item sent me to Allan Carrington’s interesting blog post on applying Bloom’s taxonomy to Apps, called the Padagogy Wheel (as in using iPads in pedagogy).

Source: http://www.unity.net.au/allansportfolio/edublog/?p=324

Source: http://www.unity.net.au/allansportfolio/edublog/?p=324

See a high-resolution version of this image on a poster padwheelposter[1]

Also, here is a short video that explains how the Padagogy Wheel works:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAYVQlUVpK4&w=560&h=315]

As Allen writes :

During my research I saw lots of great work done by others using Bloom’s Taxonomy including the Revised Taxonomy which has now become the Bloom’s Digital Taxonomy. However when I discovered the excellent pioneer work done by Kathy Schrock with “Bloomin’ Apps” I got the idea for the Padagogy Wheel. Dare I say it but it is the next version for mobile learning of the ongoing importance of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Bloom’s is still fundamental to good teaching and learning.

I’ve visited all the links mentioned in this paragraph and they provide great information about Bloom’s taxonomy, its revisions and applicaitons to the digital world. How interesting!

Bibliographies Gamification

Reading notes: The Rise of Videogame Zinesters

I just finished reading Anna Anthropy‘s most recent book on the topic of DIY games. Here is the full reference, part of my short yet growing bibliography on the subject:

Anthropy, A. (2012). Rise of the videogame zinesters : How freaks, normals, amateurs, artists, dreamers, dropouts, queers, housewives, and people like you are taking back an art form (Seven Stories Press 1st ed.). New York: Seven Stories Press.

As far as essays go, this reads like a novel. I could hardly put it down, Anna frames making games as something anyone can (and should) do, so one feels like they are the protagonist in this story. The text as a slight self-help or therapeutic slant, but I quickly got over that (it is, after all, part of the DIY you-can-do-it-too message).

Here are some of the things that stuck as really interesting:

In writing about the problem with videogames in the first chapter, Anna asks a very astute question: “what are games good for” and posits that “non-professionals” should think about games (p. 20):

because different forms are suited to different kinds of expression, and some are more effective at communicating in certain ways than others. Broadly, films and photographs are best sited for communicating action and physical detail. Novels are best suited for communicating internal monologue and ambiguity.
What are games best suited for? Since games are composed of rules, they’re uniquely suited to exploring systems and dynamics. Games are especially good at communicating relationships; digital games are most immediately about the direct relationship between the player’s actions or choices and their consequences. Games are a kind of theatre in which the audience is an actor and takers on a role – and experiences the circumstances and consequences of that role. It’s hard to imagine a more effective way to characterize someone than to allow a player to experience life as that person (p.20)

In chapter 3 further examining what are games good for, Anna establishes that “a game is an experience created by rules” (emphasis in her text). Using the games of Tag, Tetris and chess (european and viking), Anna highlights these characteristics of games, such as creating “house rules” (on-the-fly variations to a game).

In digital games, the computer keeps the rules. The computer tracks all the numbers. Digital Games therefore have much greater control over what information the players have access to, making video games capable of much greater ambiguity than board or card games. (p. 52)

This ambiguity allows for more complexity and assists in “telling stories” (id). In fact,

the format of the videogame-which lets rules be changed and introduces over the course of the experience, and which lets the author hide the causes for events and show only the effects-lends itself more easily to an overt, sustained narrative than any physical game format.
Because the rules are kept by the machine, the rules in digital games tend to be more numerous and more subtle. (p.52)
Through playing the game, the player develops a sense of the limits and subtleties of these hidden rules. This interaction between the player and the game, dependent on the game’s hiding information, gives digital games their special capacity for subtlety and nuance. (p.53)

I like the discussion surrounding folk games (like Tag), commercial games (Anna refers mostly to high-budget commercial games, such as first-person shooter games or elaborate adventure games, as the archetype of this category), role-playing games (such as in-person dungeons and dragons) and “zine” games. But you have to wait until chapter 5 (“the new videogame”) for Anna to get to talk directly about the role of the author of a game (at p. 102).

For example, in commercial games, the producer has the most impact on the narrative structure of a game, but they are the most removed from the actual creation of it as huge teams are deployed in their creation. In folk games, the author is all but forgotten, as the game has entered into our common cultural experience. Rarely are authors of games known or remembered for their contribution.

Chapter 7 (“by your bootstraps”) gets into suggested steps involved in designing a game:

Task #1: Choose a tool (p.144)
Task #2: Introduce a Character (p. 145) [the protagonist or the player]
Task #3: Teach your Character to do something (p. 146) [using the simple “subject” (player) “verb” (action) “object” (thing) structure, such as “Mario jumps over a flame-throwing flower”]
Task #4: Introduce a second Character (p. 147) which could help or hinder the player…
Task #5: Make some Noise (p. 149) [add sound effects which could assist the player understand the consequences of their actions and help narrating the story]
Task #6: Round out the player’s vocabulary (p. 150) [add more verbs that the player can use: run, throw, sink…]
Task #7: Design a level (p. 151) “I am using level to mean the sequence of events the player has to negotiate using her vocabulary of verbs”
Task #8: Finish the story (p. 154) [end, start, screens…]
Task #9: Have someone play it, then change it (p. 156)
Task #10: Distribute your game
Task #11: Make another game [better, different, experiment]

I already covered some tools (also here, in my French blog) one could use to create videogames, but Anna adds a few others (at p. 163, appendix A):
Kilk & Play the Games Factory from ClickTeam
Inform 7
Wariorware D.I.Y. (for Nintendo DS)
Knytt Stories (level maker)
ZZT (DOS based ASCII game maker).

Copyright Lectures and conferences

Copyright a contrario – CDACI Lecture series, Université de Montréal

Here is the video of a lecture in English I gave yesterday at Université de Montréal’s Centre du droit des affaires et du commerce International. I also pasted below the abstract and the poster of the event :

[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3GBJPTcf4M&w=640&h=360]

Copyright, caught in a digital maelstrom of perpetual reform and shifting commercial practices, exacerbates tensions between cultural stakeholders. On the one hand, copyright seems to be drowned in Canada and the USA by the role reserved to exceptions by the legislature and the courts granted to certain institutions. On the other, these institutions, such as libraries, are keen to navigate digital environments by allocating their acquisitions budgets to digital works.

Beyond the paradigm shifts brought by digital technologies, one must recognize the conceptual paradox surrounding digital copyrighted works. In economic terms, they behave naturally as public goods, while copyright attempts to restore their rivalrousness and excludability. Within this paradox lies tension, between the aggregate social wealth spread by a work and its commoditized value, between network effects and reserved rights. How can markets emerge if we are not able to resolve this tension?

After discussing some theoretical aspects described above, this paper will attempt to cast new light on user rights (as posited by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004) and other emerging concepts in copyright. In particular, the making available right will be analysed from the perspective of the library community. The goal is to express how libraries can fit in a distribution chain of cultural products through the two copyright tools at their disposal: licences/limitations and exceptions.

Concordia University Critical Thinking Gamification Information literacy

Experiential Learning and the InterPLAY Model from prof. Hirumi

Prof Hirumi I learned so much from the e.SCAPE conference at Concordia – but professor Hirumi inspired me to look into grounding the curriculum I am developing for business information literacy in proven theories.

Professor wrote a book in 2010 on this model:

Call Number LB 1029 S53P53 2010
Title Playing games in school : video games and simulations for primary and secondary classroom instruction / edited by Atsusi “2c” Hirumi
Edition 1st ed
Publisher Eugene, Ore : International Society for Technology in Education, c2010

He also wrote a book chapter in 2006:
Atsusi Hirumi — Designing interaction as a dialogue game : linking social and conceptual dimensions of the learning process
Call Number LB 1044.87 I548 2006
Title Interactions in online education : implications for theory and practice / edited by Charles Juwah
Publisher London ; New York : Routledge, 2006
Prof. Hirumi’s chapter in this book is available here.

In addition, prof. Hirumi offered some great summaries of contemporary proven learning theories For example, see this 30 page summary I found on a conference website (title: Grounding e-Learning Interactions to facilitate Critical Thinking
& Problem Solving)

During the conference, he presented his InterPLAY model, as seen here from a few of his slides:


He also presents it as such in the pdf document linked above (title: Grounding e-Learning Interactions to facilitate Critical Thinking
& Problem Solving )
. On page 19, he describes it as such:

Interplay Strategy
(Stapleton & Hirumi, 2011; Hirumi, Atkinson, & Stapleton, 2011)
Based on the belief that the learning of facts, concepts and principles occurs best in context of how they will be used, the Interplay strategy evokes emotions and sparks imagination, based on cognitive neuroscience research, to enhance experiential learning theories by addressing three primary conventions of interactive entertainment and their related elements (i.e., Story – characters, events, worlds; Game – rules, tools, goals; Play – stimulus, response, consequences).
1. Expose – Exposure provides the back-story to entice empathy for the character or player, and orients the audience into the same reference point or point of view. Exposure sets up specified learning objectives in a meaningful way to invite the student to contribute, to engage and to achieve the challenges set before them.
2. Inquire – Inquiry validates Exposure. If exposure sets a desire to learn, then inquiry is automatic. Inquire provides a response to student’s curiosity with something to do that showcases different elements that will be used later.
3. Discover –Discovery provides the personal reward, achievement, and the “ah ha” moment. The consequences of discovery, whether negative or positive, provide feedback to inspire further exploration to the next level of achievement.
4. Create – Transforms the experience from being merely reactive to truly interactive. Instead of responding to cues, the learner contributes to the content by applying the elements of the subject matter in novel ways.
5. Experiment – Provides an opportunity to assess learning and provide feedback without losing or winning. The goal is less about the hypothesis being right or wrong, but rather setting up the elements of the subject matter so that new knowledge can be gained. Failure should be fun.
6. Share – The sharing of personal experiences and feelings is facilitated at the end of the lesson or unit, to seal the memory of the learning experience. Sharing compels learners to put lessons learned in their own perspective as well as others.

He presented the context of the InterPLAY model as such:


In addition to the books references above, here are some works prof. Hirumy contributed to:
Crippen, K. J., Archambault, L., & Kern, C. (in press). Using Scaffolded Vee Diagrams to Enact Inquiry-Based Learning. In A. Hirumi (Ed.). Grounded Designs for Online and Hybrid Learning: Practical Guidelines for Educators and Instructional Designers. Eugene, WA: International Society for Technology in Education.

Hirumi, A. (2002). Student-centered, technology-rich, learning environments (SCenTRLE): Operationalizing constructivist approaches to teaching and learning. Journal for Technology and Teacher Education, 10(4), 497-537.
Hirumi, A. (1998, March). The Systematic Design of Student-Centered, Technology-Rich Learning Environments. Invited guest presentation given at the first Education Graduate Students and Academic Staff Regional Meeting, Guadalajara, Mexico.
Hirumi, A. (1996, February). Student-Centered, Technology-Rich Learning environments: A cognitive-constructivist approach. Concurrent session held at the Association for Educational Communication and Technology Conference, Indianapolis, Indiana.
Hirumi, A. & Stapleton, C. (in press). Designing InterPLAY Learning Landscapes to Evoke Emotions, Spark the Imagination, and Foster Creative Problem Solving. In A. Hirumi (Ed.). Grounded Designs for Online and Hybrid Learning: Practical Guidelines for Educators and Instructional Designers. Eugene, WA: International Society for Technology in Education.
Hirumi, A., Atkinson, T., Stapleton, C. (2011). Interplay: Evoking Emotions andSparking Imagination through Story, Play and Game. Concurrent Session presented the annual Association for Educational Communication and Technology conference, Jacksonville, FL. Nov. 8-12.
Stapleton, C. & Hirumi, A. (2011). Interplay instructional strategy: Learning by engaging interactive entertainment conventions. In M. Shaughnessy & S. Fulgham (eds). Pedagogical Models: The Discipline of Online Teaching (pp. 183-211). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.