Time: 2+ WeeksLearning Principles: Co-design, Identity, Distributed Knowledge, Fish Tank, Sandbox, System Thinking, Meaning as Action Image
Gaming Methods: Gaming Discourse (and possibly Content Games or Gamification)
In their article, "Video Games and the Future of Learning," Shaffer et al. discuss Madison 2200, a game that simulates the work of a city planner in Madison, WI:
"Players get a project directive from the mayor, addressed to them as city planners, including a city budget plan and letters from concerned citizens about crime, revenue, jobs, waste, traffic, and affordable housing. A video features interviews about these issues with local residents, business people, and community leaders. Players conduct a site assessment of the street and work in teams to develop a land use plan, which they present at the end of the game to a representative of the city planning office" (109).
To work this sort of game into a composition classroom, a teacher would need to do is to expand the endgame proposal to a full report. Also, sense Madison 2200 is unavailable (or, at least, I can't find it) Land Science, a newer city planning game built by the Epistemic Games Group, might serve as an appropriate replacement. This game includes interesting features like the ability to chat directly with actual city planners. However, it is designed primarily with a middle or high school audience in mind. The ultimate difficulty with this plan would be to locate a game that has both robust interactive features and a complex enough understanding of a particular professional frame.
Lesson Plan Adapted for College Composition:
1a. Introduce students to the idea of proposal reports, giving them the necessary background to understand the typical parts and how these reports might change based on situation. Initial lessons could include brief proposal memos and revisions of faulty proposals.
1b. Simultaneously with the other instruction, students would be introduced to Land Science. The assignment might ask them to play the game, and as a group, develop both an in-game proposal, and an out of game report. Part of each class period could be spent playing the game.
2. After students submit initial proposals in-game that are judged by the "mayor," they also share their reports in a workshop. Students would be tasked not only with commenting on the various solutions to the in-game problem, but also with performing traditional workshop review for structure and mechanics. Evaluations by the mayor or in the workshop lead to one "winning" proposal (with the possibility of negligible points or publication on a blog or an achievement/badge as a reward).
3. Finally, students are also directed to write reflection essays. These essays could be directed either to analyze the process and norms inherent to city planning proposals or to analyze and compare the norms of the city planning discourse with that of a community they are more familiar with (their own academic community, a religious community, other gaming communities, sports communities, etc.)
Strengths of Lesson:
Actively situates students in a professional discourse community
High levels of engagement
Features the best aspects of gameplay
Can lead cleanly into advanced writing assignments
Weaknesses of Lesson:
Difficulty of finding appropriate game
Possibility of some students being more engaged than others due to interest in simulation topic
Cost of game might be high
Works Cited
Epistemic Games Group. "Land Science." 2012. Web.
Shaffer, David et al. “Video Games and The Future of Learning.” Phi Delta Kappan 87.2 (2005): 104–111. Print.