21st Century Skills "Start of the Lab" Project Reports
2014 Reports
Community Jidokan Project Report
(Ayae Odagi, Emi Kaneko, Kyi Phyu Tun, Marina Saegusa, Natsumi Hanaki, Saori Tosaya, Shihoko Takehara)
Introduction
We taught board and card games at a Jidokan ("childrens' center"). In Japan, a Jidokan is a city-funded place for children to play and do a wide variety of activities under the supervision of adults (Jidokan "staff"). For example, the Jidokan in Soka City, Saitama, has events and classes for playing games like Othello and Mancala (http://www.city.soka.saitama.jp/english/news/2008/Dec5/17.html). In Japan, children are not usually allowed to play at libraries. In other countries, for example, America, libraries are looking for ways to engage the community, and they often hold events and meetings for community members to come and create and play and socialize together (Nicholson, 2010). At Japanese Jidokans, children from different schools and different grades have the opportunity to meet and play and talk together. Video games and collectible card games (e.g., Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon) are much more popular than board and card games in Japan. There are numerous video game companies in Japan. Children in Japan do play board and card games, but these are usually "sugoroku" (roll and move) games like the Game of Life or traditional abstract games like Othello or Shogi (chess). Many children do not know about the modern board and card games being invented in Germany, America and even Japan (e.g., Love Letter, Shadow Hunters). We investigated the social, psychological, and cognitive effects of gameplay on children and families at our local Jidokan.
Activities
Our project goal was to research many different topics through teaching and playing games (some of us taught English, some investigated children’s psychology, some investigated cooperation, and some, creativity). We taught games to children at the Kusanagi Jidokan (http://www.chum-shizuoka.jp/tudou/jidokan-kusanagi.html) 10 times. The Jidokan continued to hold the “Game Club” and we lengthened the time from 60 minutes to 90 minutes. At first, 22 kids joined (there was a sign up sheet) but the number and members changed as we continued (sometimes increasing, sometimes including first-time Jidokan visitors).
We played dozens of different games of various genres (see our monthly notes on our project page). We chose the games before going to the Jidokan, taught the games to children, observed and discussed gameplay after the meetings, and shared notes online throughout the year. At the end of the year, we gave surveys to the Jidokan staff, the kids and their parents. The purpose of the surveys was to find out what they think of games, their purpose of playing games, their opinion of the Game Club, and to improve next year’s Game Club.
One of the Game Club teachers was able to conduct a research project and write her graduation thesis about games and English education at the Jidokan.
Results
We received completed questionnaires from 9 children, 6 parents and 3 Jidokan staff.
The reasons why students participated in Game Club
There are several reasons why students participated in Game Club. The reasons are to communicate with a lot of people, to learn new games and English, their grandparents and parents recommended to join Game Club, and children like games.
The games students like and dislike
The children preferred to play the following familiar games: (1) board games; they can change rules while playing them, (2) creating games; they can create them with their ideas, (3) battle games; they can collaborate with other players and victory makes them exciting, (4) video games; they can play them with a lot of people, (5) fishing games; they can play them with their pleasure, and (6) role playing games; they can spend their time within their imagination.
However, they dislike the following ordinary games: (1) exercising games; they do not like exercising their body, (2) Rock-paper-scissors; they win or lose soon, (3) battle games; they make students scared, and(4) English learning games; they cannot learn English.
The games students like to play in the Game Club
Children like to play the following games most among all the games they have played within this year: (1) “Survive”; they have to think deeply while playing and tactics make students excited to betray other players, (2) “Cheeky Monkey”; just exciting, (3) “Zooloretto”; they like animals, (4) battle games; victory makes students have fun, (5) games they have not played yet; they want to play various new games, and (6) strategy games; they think deeply while playing.
The games students want to play in the Game Club
We asked students what kind of games they want to play in the Game Club. The games are: (1) puzzle games; they want to think deeply, (2) strategy games; games lead students to confidence and fulfillment, (3) games in which animals appear; they like animals, (4) “Fukuwarai” (New Year's lucky face-making game); It looks fun, and (5) “Fluch der Mumie”; It looks fun and a student has not played yet and wants to play it
Whether students want to play games in English or not in the Game Club
Some children want to play games in English, others want to play games in Japanese.
The reasons why the children want to play games in English are (1) to play games in a group makes them have fun, (2) they want to communicate in English, and (3) they want to learn English more and more.
On the other hand, the reasons why they want to play games in Japanese are (1) they do not know English well and (2) they do not want to learn English outside of school.
Whether students want to make games in the Game Club or not
Some children want to make games in the Game Club, others do not want to.
The reasons why children want to make games in the Game Club are (1) making games is fun, they may come up with the new ideas of exciting game, (2) they want to recreate the games which they have played in the Game Club, (3) they make games with their own interests and ideas.
They want to make the following games (1) maze game, (2) battle game, (3) board game, and (4) Japanese history game.
On the other hand, the reasons why children do not want to make games in the Game Club are (1) they like playing games more than making games and (2) they can not come up with a new idea of games.
Whether students want to play strategy games in the Game Club or not
The reasons who answered yes were (1) they have not played the games yet and the games look exciting, (2) they want to think deeply while playing, (3) they want to play heavy strategy games more and more, (4) the more heavy games they play and win, the more pleasant they feel, (5) they like that kind of games. The reason for the person who answered no was that she does not like that kind of games.
Parents
We also sent out questionnaire to parents. We asked them about their opinion of games and Game Club. These are the questions we asked and opinions we got from them.
When their children play video games, some parents don’t make a limit, while most parent make rules or time limit for children. For example, they allow children to play video games after they study for 30 minutes or after homework or preparation have finished. The video games are limited to 25 minutes so they count the times with a timer.
We asked the parents how they think about video games and analog games. Most of the parents have bad images of video games and good images of analog games. However one parent said that video games are only bad when a child plays it just by him or herself while playing with friends. Parents are worried that video games might affect children’s eyes and that games could be too addictive while they have good images for analog games such as they make children think and children cooperate. Many parents think games can help children improve their creativity. Some parents say that if they want to win the game, they can be creative for the victory. And one parent think it would be wonderful if her children can play chess or shogi.
Since some teachers tried to teach English, we asked the parents if they think that their children are learning English while playing in the Game Club. Some of the parents think that their children are learning some English, but most of the parents said that they do not think the children are learning. However the parents thinks that the Game Club is a place for their children to get used to English.
We asked parents what kinds of game they want their children play in the Game Club. Many parents want their children to play cooperative games to communicate with many different children in the Game Club. Some parents also want their children to play strategy games.
We asked parents how they think of the Game Club. Most parents think Game Club is a very nice place to have fun by using English, playing with many people and playing many kinds of games. Some parents answered Game Club is a place where children could interact with people in different ages through the games.
We asked the parents how they think about teaching English using games. Most of the parents said that when something is being taught by games, the children can have fun while learning. However one parent said that it might be impossible to play an foreign games in English because the children usually do not know any alphabets.
We asked the parents for any request that they might have for us and we got the following response: please continue game club, teach more English, and speak English fundamentally. We also asked them if they want to borrow games from us. Half of the parents said no because they do not want to lose any pieces of the game, but the other half said yes that they would like to take the game home and play.
From Staffs
We asked several questions to the Jidokan staffs. The following is the answers from them.
First, staffs told us that children play and use games in Jidokan, not making their own games.
Secondly, staffs think Game Club as good chances to make new relationship for children. The reason is that the Jidokan invites university students and foreign professor, which other Jidokan do not do. Also, in Game Club, there are many children who belong to different schools, so Game Club works as making the children’s relationship deep.
Thirdly, the staffs do not think of the Jidokan as an education place as cram schools by playing games which players can learn English. However, English enters their ears naturally, the meaning of English also enters their ears and children can develop an ability of English.
Fourthly, as to research project by children and the university students, the children do not recognize they are doing some projects during participating Game Club. On the other hand, it is a great experience to deepen exchanges by spending time with university students and the professor and playing with them.
Lastly, children play outside when it is sunny. The reason is that the number of rooms are low and the space of rooms are small, so the number of children who play inside is limited. In addition, in Jidokan, it is banned to bring game machines, so children play the games outside.
Our Observations and Reflections
The following paragraphs are reflective statements from various teachers (teachers' names are given in parentheses after the paragraph).
1. Teaching
We noticed the following themes related to teaching games at the Jidokan: the importance and difficulty of getting kids to reflect or discuss, how to help kids be patient during other kid’s turn, teaching and playing difficult games (how kids learn), how to explain the rules, changing the rules to be creative so they would not get tired of a game, the communication between teacher and students, the relationship between teachers, parents and kids, the difficulty of explaining strategy games, attitude, how to get students’ attention, and teaching English using games. In general, children don’t listen, they just want to play; they are sometimes hard to teach.
When we play a game for a long time, more than 60min, some kids get bored.There are some reasons.Firstly, in case of games which have a system of turn-taking, some kids take a long time to grasp the situation and to make a decision.While they are thinking, other kids have to wait, and get bored or lost their concentration for example,Castle Panic, Duck Duck Go..However, in other kid’s turn, if another player’s turn is related with their piece or tactics, they can concentrate on the game in the time, such as Survive or Ticket to Ride. Secondly,dealing cards, moving pieces and counting points takes time.In Duck Duck Go, managing pieces is sometimes difficult and takes time. I also find a way of solution.It is that make game progress smoothly: I concentrate on dealing cards, increase a number of a card hand, sit in order.Another way of playing smoothly is to play games in small group even if the game can play in big group. For instance, Castle Panic can be played up to 6 people, but we should play it less than 4 people. (Emi Kaneko)
Kids like difficult games more than easy games.When we played Duck Duck Go, May 10, we played it using the simplest rules. Although it seemed they had trouble playing it, some kids wanted to play it using the advanced rules. Perhaps,there is the difference about meaning of “difficult” between the kids and me.It means that I think Catsle Panic and Duck Duck Go or Survive are a liite bit difficult for kids in the 1st and 2nd grades, but the kids who are in the 1st and 2nd grades don’t think these games are not difficult.After these difficult games,I asked kids if the game was difficult.They said it wasn’t difficult, it was normal, I wanted to play it again.(in May,September, November and December Game Club). (Emi Kaneko)
As for me, it's a problem to explain them the rules of the games in Japanese especially for some complicated rules. According to my experience, first, I explained the rules in Japanese as much as I can and then, I gave them time for discussion about the rules to make sure that they really understand the rules or not. Sometimes, the teacher needs to be flexible to teach the children the complicated strategy games because the children can't follow the rules not only because they are young but also there is a age gap between them. (Kyi Phyu Tun)
A family asked us to teach them a Spanish game (Game of the Goose). We met them at the university, and continued to meet and loan them games (they looked up rules online, or made their own rules…). Another family asked us to teach them an English “Good Cooking” game. Another mother was really happy when I told her “Your son has a good head for games.” (Jonathan deHaan)
The children want to start playing the games as soon as they see them. So, it worked better when I explained the rules as we play the game. This way I was able to get more attention from the children because they have to understand the rules to play the game. (Marina Saegusa)
When we played Ringleding, the children were bored after playing it for 10 minutes, but when we changed the rules and playing style, they were able to play the same game longer. Almost every time, after couple of rounds, some children suggested changing the rules a bit. (Marina Saegusa)
I think the most important thing for teaching games to children is that we must have a good communication between each other. The teacher has a responsibility to create a friendly and good relations between the students. All the children want to be winners and sometimes there are arguments between them so that, the teacher must give the discussion time for them to make negotiations. (Kyi Phyu Tun)
Reflection is really important (Dewey) and discussions can let students practice critical thinking or creativity or communication skills. I had a hard time getting kids to talk after Carcassonne. I had to ask very direct questions - they had trouble making general reflections. Lost Cities worked better (it was easy to see what all the players focused on, so they could compare results). (Jonathan deHaan)
I used Fuchs and fertig to teach “bigger than” “smaller than” “same size” and animals names. I pretaught and drilled (using English and Japanese) and there is a lot of repetition in the game. A month later, one girl could remember that grammar and the names of the common animals (not the uncommon animals - deer, hedgehog, snail). (Jonathan deHaan)
According to my experience , we can't teach English by using games especially the Strategy games. Therefore, whenever I teach strategy games, I examine children psychology such as their leadership skills, their creativity, their enthusiasm and so on. I only teach English by using card games or story telling games by showing them pictures or let them create the new words by using cards. (Kyi Phyu Tun)
2. Childrens’ Abilities and Relationships
We noticed the following themes related to children at the Jidokan: their surprising ability, the differences between boys and girls, improvement in strategy, their ability to teach strategy, their relationships, and cooperation.
Children were able to play difficult games, (Qwirkle, Tsuro) and they can understand rules quickly. Moreover, they can understand not only rules but also which way is the best to win. Children like strategy games (the games which players need to think more) better than easy games. They can change the rules a little to make a game funnier. (I help it.) (Ayae Odagi)
When I played a conflict game with one boy and one girl, the boy liked to challenge me. His action was provocative. However, the girl tried to help me. She gave me some advice although I was an enemy. (Ayae Odagi)
The kids help and advise each other voluntarily. In PIT, a kid who have finished helped another kid who haven’t finished yet. In Survive, kids pointed out what should we do, when a kid forget rule. (Emi Kaneko)
Why do children cooperate in a non-cooperative game? Although Animal Upon Animal is not a cooperative game, the children were cooperating after they played Forbidden Island. Also when I played Tsuro, the children cooperated to put a university student (me) out of the game. However, they never cooperated in Ringlding. (Marina Saegusa)
Conclusion and Next Steps (Ideas for Next Year)
We thought of some questions and ideas for improvement about teaching and games and points of improvement about Game Club and Game Lab.
About teaching and games: (1) Should the children teach games to each other? How much do we have to control them? (2)We need practice teaching rules to play smoothly and to know the flow of game. Although we know that, actually some of us didn’t practice. (3) Kids keep in mind the rules of game. We want to try whether kids remember the rules and play by only themselves, when we give kids games. (4) We think the teacher must be flexible and a good listener to understand the children`s situation and need to know their problems. (5) We would like to teach more games using English. (6) It might be interesting to see how the children explain the rules to each other. (7) Children have a surprising ability to play games, so they might be able to create games.
About improving the Game Club and Game Lab: (8) We need to get permission to survey and to get data for parents before Game Club starts. (9) We need to have more than 4 teachers each time. Ideally, at least 6. (10) We are wondering if it is a good space for seminar students to collect data or is another venue better. (11) We are wondering if nametags work well, we get the students to socialize well, and if we set up the group at the beginning of the year well. (12) We are interested in the differences between attitude of boys and girls in game play.(13) The Game Lab improved compared to last year. Last year, the number of children in attendance was reduced by half by the end of the year. This year, the number of children has increased. (14) We feel that our English is improved step by step through the Game Lab. (15) We are wondering if we need to make the group more “academic” to get better learning results (e.g., use worksheets during or after the game?) , perhaps like http://brooklyngamelab.com/ does.
Collaboration Project Report
(Ami Matsui, Kazuki Sasaki, Konomi Miwa, Yuka Suzuki, Yuuchi Senokuchi, Momoko Uchiyama)
Activities
From the beginning, there was already an idea of collaborating with the Game Market (gamemarket.jp). Then, some students were recruited for the Collaboration Project and we had a first meeting. At first we didn’t know what we can do for the Game Market so we decided to go to the event and discover what opportunities or demand there might be. We went on a field trip to the Spring Game Market and we interviewed designers, customers, visitors and organizers. We gave and exchanged business cards which we had prepared. Each member summarized their activities at the Game Market and brainstormed possible projects related to the game industry (https://sites.google.com/site/gamelabshizuoka/events/game-market-2014-report). Some of us also introduced games on Twitter which we had received for free at the Game Market. Since we had different ideas and aims, and we couldn’t really find someone at the Game Market who needed English support, we started to research our own projects (for example, promoting the Game Market through SNS, researching about marketing in order to sell games). After starting to do research by ourselves, we didn’t have any meetings and didn’t share progress with each other (only a few members contributed to a shared online diary). Some projects started but were not able to reach their goals; some projects did not start at all. We decided to stop our projects and started to reflect on our activities. We created a questionnaire; six (five students and the teacher) out of seven members completed it. We met to compile responses and to identify themes in the data.
Reflection
Students in the project experienced using SNS and meeting foreigners and designers at the Game Market. Students in the project learned marketing strategy, how to make a questionnaire form, good work habits (these are important: meeting, making reports, finding close and regular partners, having a target, being flexible, making deadlines, having a strong leader, having a network for SNS projects (already)). Students noticed lots of different things in the project (e.g., there are lots of organizations in the game industry, games are getting more professional and expensive, the importance of demand, the lack of opportunity). They pushed themselves by making and giving business cards, attending a seminar lesson, making a Facebook account to connect with foreign people, coming up with ideas, and getting information about marketing. One student liked to communicate with new people outside the university in the project.
Students thought that using business cards and writing a report for the Game Market were good aspects of the project, but had trouble understanding their roles, were not good at scheduling, and needed to be better at communication. They wished they had had a clear shared aim.
The members stated their agreement (4=strongly agree to 1=strongly disagree) with possible reasons for the outcome of the entire project. The highest possible score for each item was 24 points; the lowest was 6 points.
Members offered other reasons for the outcome of the project. One member stated “Our project was not clear enough from the beginning and every member’s aim was different. I think it is OK and great, but we lost the way easily and meeting became more difficult because it was hard to imagine or understand other member's goals.” Another member said “We should have had a leader who can conduct the project team otherwise meeting doesn't go ahead.” Another member reflected “It seemed to be well at first but days passed after the game market, I noticed each members had different ideas. It made us think it doesn't need to cooperate with each other and I could not figure out what I want to survey.”
Some members came up with ideas for future collaboration, such as working with foreign people (in Japan and around the world), making a new product, working with an event and teaching. These members realized that they need to meet more people, possibly have an interpreter (if working with a non-Japanese or English speaking partner), and have project management skills.
Conclusion
Based on the outcomes and reflection of this year’s project, we realized some important points about collaboration: (1) try to work with an organization that is convenient to meet or visit, (2) decide a group goal and a project system from the beginning, regardless of whether individuals work together or separately, (3) make deadlines and a schedule to do things step by step, and (4) each member needs to have responsibility (they shouldn’t rely too much on the teacher) and meet and report regularly.
Creativity Design Group Project Report
(Gustavo Fiuza Ribeiro, Momoko Uchiyama)
We were inspired by John Hunter’s World Peace Game and worked to create our own global simulation board game. We got many ideas but they didn’t combine well, so each member started to create different economic, political, environmental and current events games. We have been designing, prototyping and playtesting our games and plan to web-publish and sell our games at the Tokyo Game Market. We would like to open up the group to members of the public who would like to make games.
Critical Thinking Playtesting Project Report
(Gustavo Fiuza Ribeiro, Momoko Uchiyama, Reo Onozawa)
We spent a lot of time communicating with game companies and playtesting games for them. Through doing so, we realized that we needed to clarify our intentions as a Lab (getting experience with companies, improving our understanding of games and the game industry, developing our English abilities) and we redesigned our project website to better convey our professional goals and to better correspond with company’s purposes. We established a relationship with Conquistador Games (who make unique historical and sociopolitical games) and are currently playtesting a game for them.
Japanese Summaries (and University Report)
児童館プロジェクトでは、昨年に引き続き草薙児童館で年間10回現代的なボード/カードゲームを教え、遊んだ。教授方法などを改善し多くの児童が参加、継続した。メンバーは教育や児童の能力(協調/創造性など)様々な観点から調査研究し、うち一名は卒論を作成した。また、教える事の難しさや児童の可能性も実感した。児童と保護者、児童館職員にアンケートを行い⑴この活動やゲームを通して多様な人と交流できる⑵ゲームを通して英語を教える事については可否がある、など多くの意見を得た。今後は結果を踏まえ更に活動と研究を行っていく予定である。
コラボレーションプロジェクトでは、国内最大規模のテーブルゲームイベント(ゲームマーケット)との協力を目的に現地調査を行ったが、連携の必要性が見受けられる団体を発見できなかった。そのため、メンバーそれぞれがゲームマーケットとの関わりを模索し、購買戦略やSNS上での宣伝方法を学んだ。今回のプロジェクトから次に活かしたいことは距離、規模ともに関わり易い相手を見つけること、共通の目的を完遂すること、明確な計画を提示し実行すること、各個人が責任を持ってプロジェクトに関わり定期的な会議で意見共有することである。
デザイン・プロジェクトでは、ジョン・ハンターによる世界平和ゲームに触発され、独自のグローバル・シミュレーション・ボードゲームの制作に取り掛かった。グループ内で様々なアイディアを出し合ったがそれらをうまく結びつけるのは難しく、それゆえに、個々のメンバーが経済、政治、環境、時事に関する異なるゲームを制作し始めた。私たちはゲームのデザイン、試作、プレイテストをしており、ウェブでの発行、東京ゲームマーケットでの販売を計画している。これからは、ゲームを制作したい公衆に開かれたグループにしていきたいと考えている。
プレーテスティングでは、我々は長い時間をかけて複数のゲーム会社と話し合いながら開発中のボードゲームをプレーテストした。その過程において、我々はラボとしての意志（社会において経験を積むこと、ゲーム及びゲーム業界における理解を深めること、我々の英語能力を上達させること）を明らかにする必要に気づき、ゲーム開発会社の目標に対応するため、そして我々のプロフェッショナルな目標を伝えるため、プレーテスティング・プロジェクトのウェブページを改良した。Conquistador Games（個性あふれる歴史的及び社会・政治的なボードゲームを開発する会社）と関係を築き、現在その会社のゲームをプレーテストしている。
2013 Reports
University of Shizuoka Forum
(public presentation on 2013 activities - September 26, 2014)
(Ooi Zhi Yi, Ami Matsui, Emi Kaneko, Reo Onozawa, Jonathan deHaan)
Presentation Video (513MB)
PowerPoint Slides (3MB)
Community Jidokan Project Report
(Shiori Yoshida, Emi Kaneko)
Introduction
We taught board and card games at a Jidokan ("childrens' center"). In Japan, a Jidokan is a city-funded place for children to play and do a wide variety of activities under the supervision of adults (Jidokan "staff"). For example, the Jidokan in Soka City, Saitama, has events and classes for playing games like Othello and Mancala (http://www.city.soka.saitama.jp/english/news/2008/Dec5/17.html). In Japan, children are not usually allowed to play at libraries. In other countries, for example, America, libraries are looking for ways to engage the community, and they often hold events and meetings for community members to come and create and play and socialize together (Nicholson, 2010). At Japanese Jidokans, children from different schools and different grades have the opportunity to meet and play and talk together. Video games and collectible card games (e.g., Yu-Gi-Oh and Pokemon) are much more popular than board and card games in Japan. There are numerous video game companies in Japan. Children in Japan do play board and card games, but these are usually "sugoroku" (roll and move) games like the Game of Life or traditional abstract games like Othello or Shogi (chess). Many children do not know about the modern board and card games being invented in Germany, America and even Japan (e.g., Shadow Hunters). We investigated the social, psychological, and cognitive effects of gameplay on children and families at our local Jidokan.
Activities
Our project goal was to find ways to engage people in the community with games. We taught games to children at the Kusanagi Jidokan (http://www.chum-shizuoka.jp/tudou/jidokan-kusanagi.html) 9 times. We also held game design days 2 times. After we approached the Jidokan, they made a club called “Game Club” (we met once a month on Saturday for 1 hour) and 20 kids joined (there was a sign up sheet). The Jidokan advertised the Club and accepted up to 20 children. We played 22 different games of various genres (see Appendix A) throughout the year. At the beginning of the Game Club, we taught a lot of games, and at the end of the year, the children were more free to choose the games they wanted to play, and we joined them as players. At the end of the year, we gave surveys to the Jidokan staff, the kids and their parents to know how the games affected them. The purpose of the surveys was to find out know how the games affected the children, to find out what games are liked by children, and to improve next year’s Game Club.
Results
We received surveys back from 3 children (out of 20 who signed up for the Game Club), 3 parents, and 3 (all) Jidokan staff members.
Survey results from the children
2 of the children played games with their family; 1 did not. 2 played with their friends (usually DS); 1 did not. They liked video games (because they can communicate online) and card games (because they thought it is fun and exciting to think about who will win). They liked the Game Club because they could communicate with friends when they play games in Game Club, rather than DS (for example: "I can communicate more when playing board games than when playing DS") and it was fun to play together and talk with children they didn't know. They did not come to the Jidokan only for the Game Club.
They thought the Game Club was very good because there were many games so they are were not bored. But they said that the the time was too short and they had to end the game a little early sometimes so they felt a little regrettable. 1 person said sometimes he wanted to play DS. They wanted us to continue the Game Club; some said they wanted the Game Club 2 or 3 times a month. 1 child said that there was nothing to change about the Club, 1 left the space blank, and 1 said they wanted to use English.
They thought the teachers (we) were good because we were approachable and they got used to us, and they said we were more familiar to them than their teachers in school. They said we taught them many things; we spoke English and explained many games.
Their ideas about board games changed; they thought the games were fun and enjoyable and easy. The children did not play all of the games, and there was a lot of variation in their reactions to the games. Some games seemed to easy, some were too hard, some were too short, and some made the children wait too long for others to take their turns. The children said that with the games, they learned to share (with Coloretto and Orchard), they learned some math (Hey That's My Fish and Incan Gold), learned some English (Zooloretto) and learned the feeling of being surprised (Halli Galli).
Survey results from the parents
All 3 parents wanted their kids to join the Club (rather than the children wanting to join); they wanted their kids to have fun, they wanted their kids to meet other children and get along, and they wanted their kids to learn something. The parents said that they usually do not have time to play games with their kids. They thought it would be more fun for their children to play games with other children than to play with adults. The parents also reported that their children usually play video games (e.g., DS); they did not have the opportunity to play board games.
The parents thought that their children were happy to go to the Game Club because there were so many unique and rare games. The children talked about the Game Club in their homes, for example, what kind of games they played, who they played with, whether they won or lost, or what they did while they were playing the games.
The parents reported that they thought that games can be played by many people together, people can enjoy the games, and it is good for children to play games. The parents thought that their children can learn things by playing games that they can't learn in school, for example, concentration. The parents also thought that their children can improve their intelligence and abilities by using a child's sense of competition, develop communication abilities, and learn to control their feelings of disappointment or regret.
The children were starting to learn English in school, and the parents seemed to think that there would be a chance to listen to or speak English. Some of the parents had heard that Professor deHaan would teach English with the games. The parents seemed to want their kids to learn English in the Game Club. The parents reported that their children were looking forward to listening to Professor deHaan's English. They said that their children did not understand English completely, but they were happy when they understood a little English. The parents felt that all of the teachers were kind and polite, but they reported that when their kids were in groups with the Japanese university students, the kids seemed a little sad.
The parents wanted us to continue to hold the Game Club once a month. One parent wanted Professor deHaan to teach in English. They know that it is not the intention or the purpose of the Game Club, but she wanted her child to use English. She also suggested that the university students could also use English as well as a model for the students.
Survey results from the Jidokan staff
The staff thought that the Game Club was good because the children could play a lot of different kinds of games and they observed that the children could get along by playing games. The staff thought that games can play a role in developing children's concentration, cooperation and social skills.
The staff wanted us to continue the Game Club next year. They wanted the children to play some games that can be played in large groups and with different ages. They wanted the children to play games that they will not get tired of playing many times. The also wanted Professor deHaan to speak in English (they wanted the children to have fun, to learn English by playing games, singing songs and reading picture books).
Observations and Reflections
Attendance dropped over the year. 20 kids joined at the beginning of the year but fewer and fewer kids came each time. Attendance was usually around 10 members. Once, 6 children came, and other children saw we were playing games and wanted to join. We felt we had to ask them to talk to the Jidokan staff (because the Jidokan had created a Club). Other times, children just sat down with us to play. Once, some boys said to some girls who wanted to play "You are not in the Game Club" which we felt bad about.
The Jidokan bought some new games (Incan Gold, Halli Galli Junior, Cockroach Poker) after watching the children play them and talking to us about them.
Some games did not seem to work well with too few (Pit) or too many players (Halli Galli, Cockroach Poker). In some games, the kids enjoyed targetting the teacher (Cockroach Poker). One boy tended to cheat while playing the games.
The children created games very easily. The needed very little instruction other than "Here are a bunch of materials. You have 30 minutes to design a game and then you will try it with a friend." The children mostly created roll and move games, but they did make some creative maps and some special movement rules (e.g., walking vs driving). The boys tended to make shortcuts and punishments in their games. Some girls made "put the image together" matching card games. The children seemed to draw on their knowledge and experience of board games and other games.
We had a lot of fun, but teaching the games tended to make us very tired. We sometimes changed the rules of the games to make them simpler to teach, learn and play. We sometimes made mistakes teaching the games, and this somewhat negatively affected the gameplay experience. However, the children could understand how to play the games. We should practice teaching a game a few times before bringing the game to the Jidokan. We observed that children who had played a game before could teach the game to others.
Professor deHaan asked the children (in general, and before playing certain games) if they wanted to play games in English or in Japanese, and they nearly all wanted to play in Japanese. Sometimes during the year, the children spontaneously spoke English (e.g., "Be quiet" or "Have a nice weekend"). They wrote their names in English on their Telestrations boards without being asked to. The children seemed to have a wonderful time shouting numbers in English while playing Pit.
Conclusion
We will continue the Game Club at the Jidokan next year, and we will increase the playing time from 60 to 90 minutes. We have asked the Jidokan to let us invite any child in the room to play with us if not all of the 20 Club members attend the meetings.
We have plans to have a short discussion with the children on the first day of the Game Club next year. We plan to ask them (1) if they want to play games to learn something, (2) if they want to play games in Japanese or English, (3) if we should have a rule about absences to allow other children to join the Club, (4) if they want to have game design days, and (5) if they want to learn lots of different games or play the same games several times. Perhaps they can look at the list of games we have and choose games they are interested in. Perhaps we can organize different tables at the Game Club (e.g., "New games table," "Favorite games table," "English games table").
In our opinion, some of the best games for the Game Club were Telestrations, Cockroach Poker and Pit (there was a lot of player interaction and everyone seemed to enjoy them). We should practice teaching whatever games we will play before we go to the Game Club, and we should consider how to make the games simpler at the beginning to make teaching and playing easier and more fun. We want everyone to enjoy playing games together.
References
City.soka.saitama.jp. (2014). Soka city Jido-kan (Child House). [online] Available at: http://www.city.soka.saitama.jp/english/news/2008/Dec5/17.html [Accessed: 17 Feb 2014].
Nicholson, S. (2010). Everyone plays at the library. Medford, N.J.: Information Today.
Appendix A: Games played
Cockroach Poker
Coloretto
Creationary
Dixit
Duck Duck Go
Halli Galli
HeroScape
Hey That's My Fish
Incan Gold
Kids of Carcassonne
Labyrinth
Niagara
Orchard
Pit
Spooky Stairs
Story Cubes
Telestrations
TransAmerica
Tsuro
Ubongo
Villa Paletti
Zooloretto
Collaboration Project Report
(Takumi Matsuyoshi, Haruna Motosugi, Ami Matsui)
Introduction
Japanese entrepreneurship is one of the weakest of any country in the world. In 2012, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) team (Kelley, Singer and Herrington, 2012) administered an “Entrepreneurial Attitudes and Perceptions” survey to more than 198,000 adults (aged 18-64) in 69 economies around the world (at least 2000 adults in each economy). In addition to the survey, the GEM team also consulted with national experts in each economy (in Japan the GEM team operated out of Musashi University). The GEM views entrepreneurship as not only creating jobs and financial outcomes, but also innovation and social value in general. As McCormick (2012) writes “Entrepreneurship is risk-taking innovation activity that produces social and/or economic benefit.” In addition to starting new economic enterprises, entrepreneurship can take the form of working to bring about social change (Martin & Osberg, 2007), working to shift activities inside of an established organization (“intrapreneurship,” Swearingen, 2008) or working to improve public policy (Harris & Kinney, 2004). Entrepreneurship can and should manifest itself in various personal, economic or civic spheres of life.
In Japanese university education, it is somewhat uncommon to be active outside the classroom. Few students do fieldwork or create something new. In Japan, people are often scared of making mistakes; they do not have the chance to fail at school or in society. This might condition people to also be afraid of failure in their future jobs. Failure is not a bad experience; we can review and learn from our mistakes and not make the same mistakes the next time. We started the Collaboration Project to get experience outside of university classes. Our goal was to make a business plan for making a souvenir game for a new market. For this aim, we needed a lot of knowledge on making a game, tourism, writing documents and managing money. Every step in applying for the Shizuoka Business Plan Contest was related to entrepreneurship because these activities were very new and connected to the economy and society.
Activities
We brainstormed what kind of games or business plans we could make. We discussed project goals and searched for useful information online (e.g., we used foreign websites (Google Australia) to learn what foreigners think of Shizuoka and we learned demographic information and about Shizuoka specialty crafts). We decided to make souvenir games. We wrote various company profiles (e.g., Bandai and some design offices). We played various award-winning games and tried to re-theme them for Shizuoka. We went on a field trip to visit various toy stores; we met Mr. Sasaki, the game buyer at “100chomori,” and learned about how he selects games and what good games are. We found the board game “Stadtetour” and re-themed it with a Shizuoka map, cards and some new rules (Appendix A). We worked together to write the business plan for the Shizuoka Business Plan Contest (http://shizuoka-bizcon.com/). We went to various SOHO B-Nest events (e.g., Biz Cafe) to learn how to write a business plan and to meet people in various fields. We took our game to Professor Kokubo's Lab (“Future Center”) and playtested it. We submitted the business plan (Appendix B). We met to reflect on the project.
Results
Our business plan did not pass the first examination by the B-Nest judges. We were not able to make a presentation about our plan and game. We learned how to make a business plan, about products and markets, how to discuss the advantages of a product (we need to think about competing products), about games, about game systems, and how to meet people (e.g., professors, business people, and city officers). We did not focus on English very much; most of the research and writing and communication was done in Japanese.
Conclusion
Working on new things on our own really helps us develop and thrive. If an entrepreneurial project is being done in a short period of time, or by students for the first time (as in a class or intensive out-of-school project), students may benefit from structure and support from the school and professors. Support elements might include (1) a goal, for example a contest with specific requirements and time pressure, (2) resources such as websites, books and examples to build from, (3) experts such as business people and professors from various fields, and (4) as much time as possible for students to develop their ideas and plans. If students are doing entrepreneurial work for a second or for a longer period of time, students can be given much more freedom and they should be required to work on their own to make decisions, and to gather resources (e.g., their own survey data) and create professional networks specific to their projects. No one should be afraid of failure; students should be willing to try something new.
References
Harris, M., & Kinney, R. (Eds.). (2004). Innovation and entrepreneurship in state and local government. Lexington Books.
Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2012). The global entrepreneurship monitor. Babson College, Wellesley. www. gemconsortium. org/ docs/ download, 2409.
Martin, R. L., & Osberg, S. (2007). Social entrepreneurship: The case for definition. Stanford social innovation review, 5(2), 28-39.
McCormick, T. (2012). Entrepreneurship in the expanded field: or, explaining startups to martians | tim mccormick. [online] Retrieved from: http://tjm.org/2012/09/11/entrepreneurship-in-the-expanded-field-a-map-of-possible-goals-models/ [Accessed: 17 Feb 2014].
Swearingen, J. (2014). Great intrapreneurs in business history. [online] Retrieved from: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/great-intrapreneurs-in-business-history/ [Accessed: 17 Feb 2014].
Appendix A: Our Game
Appendix B: Our Business Plan
Creativity Project Report
(Ooi Zhi Yi, Mayumi Iwamoto)
Introduction
Many people think that creativity means something crazy, free, unarranged or unconstructed. This might be true, but if this type of creativity doesn't work, it just produces some sort of rubbish or chaos. Creativity can be defined as a new way to do something. It can happen in transportation, daily life, industrial activities. As the technologies grow further, new problems are happening, and new ways to solve these problems have to be found. These demand high levels of innovation, which comes from creativity, and ingenuity (Robinson, in Azzam, 2009). To solve problems, we need to be creative. In this project, we explored whether or not we could become more creative in a short period of time. Cutts (2011) shared his experience of trying new things for 30 days, and there are numerous websites that organize people's intensive attempts to change their lives (for example, http://www.my30dc.com/site ). We used game design as a method to improve our creativity.
Activities
We took a creativity test (the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking – TTCT) before and after a game design project in the first semester in which we managed to design or create a game everyday for 30 days. We also wrote reflective essays about our creativity before and after the project. Before we started, we evaluated various design document templates and created our own 1-page design document template (see Appendix A). We also paired 30 design mechanics with 30 design categories from boardgamegeek.com that we had to use; 1 pair for each day (see Appendix B). We had to design a game each day, and we had to choose 1 of our games from each week to develop and playtest with the group. We gave feedback to each other after playing the developed prototypes. It was a challenging project which make us work hard to use our imaginations to create games. From the 30 game ideas we each came up with, we chose a few game ideas and developed them even further in the second semester (see Appendix C).
Results
The results for the TTCT Figural Test are shown in Table 1. Most scores did not improve, but one participant seemed to significantly improve in terms of creative fluency (from 10 to 15 points). He commented that he had to do a lot of brainstorming, coming up with ideas, and choosing ideas; these seem to be related to creative fluency.
Table 1: TTCT Figural Pre (A) and Post (B) Test Results
The results for the TTCT Verbal Test are shown in Table 2. The scores for 2 of the 3 participants all improved, and the scores for 1 participant did not improve at all. The verbal fluency score also improved (from 56 to 67 points) for the participant whose figural fluency score had improved. He commented that he had tried to make a story with his games, and this may have been good fluency practice.
Table 2: TTCT Verbal Pre (A) and Post (B) Test Results
Some of the games worked very well, but some of them did not (some were even boring). We tried to create some crazy, funny and interesting games. Through the project, we learned that imagination is very important, and we experienced trying to see things with different perspectives. We gained some confidence, thought more about the idea of creativity, and we learned about many different game mechanics. We learned how to combine elements to create something new. We learned to imagine and think about how players will play our games instead of how we are going to play the games. Through this project, we learned that continuing to make games may improve our creativity and may not at the same time. It absolutely made our fluency better since we kept doing the same process for 30 times. Also, getting used to using the game document made it easier for us to express our ideas, which led to better scores on the verbal part of the creativity test. However, at the same time, some of the points on the creativity test didn’t improve, such as titles and elaboration. This may have come from hurrying during the 30 days project because of not having enough time. Perhaps having more time to think deeper about each game might have made our scores (games) better.
Conclusion
The one page design template worked well for organizing ideas (and a similar sheet might be useful for problem solving or projects or experimental activities as well), and combining different elements may be a good brainstorming tool, but there needs to be time for elaboration and development of ideas (“systematic creativity”) as well to lead to successful creations or innovations or solutions. Rules are rules (like the mechanics and categories we used), but we always have to remember to think outside of the box, asking why and how, instead of following something simply. It is important to remember that something can’t be improved or finished in just an instant. Taking the time and continuing activities might lead to the improvement of creativity. Working on something intensively for a specific period of time (for example, 30 days) may help others have a clear process and maintain their passion for what they want to think deeply about and create.
References
Azzam, A. M. (2009). Why creativity now? A conversation with Sir Ken Robinson. Educational leadership, 67(1), 22-26.
Cutts, M. (2011). Try something new for 30 days. Presentation made at 2011 Technology, Education and Design Conference. Accessed January 30, 2014. Available online: http://www.ted.com/talks/matt_cutts_try_something_new_for_30_days.html
Appendix A: One Page Design Document Template
Appendix B: Pairings of Mechanics and Categories from boardgamegeek.com
Appendix C: Examples of Design Documents
K
M
J
Critical Thinking Project Report
(Yuri Hasegawa, Gustavo Fiuza Ribeiro, Reo Onozawa)
Introduction
We need critical thinking to know what is good and what is bad. We use it naturally in life. We need the ability to make decisions, make judgments, solve problems, be creative, and be and open to new experiences. In this project, our main activity was playtesting games for game designers. We used critical thinking for evaluating what aspects of their games worked and what did not. Playtesting is a critical element of an interactive game design process (Fullerton, 2008). Game designers get an idea, create a prototype of a game, try it with players, and evaluate whether the game is ready to be sold or needs further revision. Without playtesting, the designer cannot know if the game works well or not.
In Japan, English is a required school subject, but the focus is often on the theory of the language rather than on actual use. Students often do not have the opportunity to express themselves (feelings, ideas) in English. Japanese students can also be quite shy and afraid of making mistakes in their second language. Students learn about English, but do not have the opportunities to put their knowledge into practice.
Educational projects based on “connected learning” (Ito et al., 2013) or “product/service oriented learning” (Zhao, 2012) can give students freedom to “develop life [language or critical thinking] skills through participation in a community of practice” (Shaffer, 2004, p. 1405). In this project, we used English and the Internet to contact game designers all over the world. We attempted to “learn to be” (Brown, 2006) communicators of English rather than just “learning about” English.
Activities
We took an English test (the Test of English as a Foreign Language – TOEFL) and a critical thinking test (the Watson Glaser II test) before and after a game playtesting project for two semesters in which we found prototypes of games on the Internet, playtested the games, sent feedback sheets and videos, and kept in contact with the designers. We also wrote reflective essays about our English and critical thinking before and after the project.
Before we started, we evaluated various playtesting feedback sheets (sheets from "Game Design in the Classroom" by David M. Niecikowski and and "Game Design Workshop" by Tracy Fullerton) and created our own 7-page playtesting feedback sheet (see https://sites.google.com/site/gamelabshizuoka/home/playtesting-project). We practiced using our feedback sheet using a free published print and play game and slightly revised our sheet. We also drafted an English message template to the game designers (we anticipated what we might say and how to communicate what we had done).
Over the year, we playtested 4 prototypes for designers using www.bgdf.com (Board Game Designer's Forum). We video and audio recorded the gameplay and sent the feedback sheet, video and audio to the designers (for 1 game we did not send audio and video). We corresponded with many of the designers (answering questions, giving suggestions) and playtested revisions of the games and gave further comments. In the playtesting and discussions we spoke English most of the time, and we wrote our feedback sheet and the email messages and forum messages in English (see Table 1).
Table 1: Use of English in the project
Results
Tests
The results for the TOEFL Test are shown in Table 2. Most scores did not improve, but one participant seemed to significantly improve in terms of reading (from 7 to 14 points). She commented that she had to read the rules in English. The playtesting project did not specifically focus on academic vocabulary and tasks (which the TOEFL measures).
Table 2: TOEFL Test Results Pre and Post
The results for the Watson Glaser II Test are shown in Table 3. 2 members' scores improved, but 2 did not. One person whose scores improved commented that he “used critical thinking to find bad points (bad rules which doesn’t make sense)” and another who improved commented she “could think more deeply and find some bad points or improvement points and I found the way to improve that”). It is possible that the project activities and the results of the test were not closely aligned; one member whose score did not improve still reported having a positive experience: “seeing and debating the opinions of the other playtesters and forming one’s own opinion required a lot of thinking. I believe this practice helped me to think more critically.”
Table 3: Watson Glaser II Test Results Pre and Post
Feedback from designers
Our playtesting prompted one designer to put a full print and play version up on his website. The designer put a link to our video on his materials page (http://farfromhomeboardgame.weebly.com/pnp-ready.html) and also included our comments on his development page. Several designers offered to include our names in the rulebooks are playtesters, and some offered to send us free copies of their game if or when it is published. Positive comments about our work from the designers included:
"Thanks a ton for the feed back! It's invaluable."
"Great video. I would like to put it more prominantly on my website.”
“Great job, the feedback was incredibly valuable.”
“Look like your work’s very professional.”
"Thank you so much, this is truly something incredible that I never expected to happen."
"I can't thank you enough for what you have done for me."
"By the way after having listened to the feedback I'm really very impressed with the advice I've been given. For a designer like me this kind of advice is as valuable as gold to me."
“Thanks for the love guys, it's a great motivating factor.”
"Once again thanks for all the tremendous effort on your part, you are all fantastic."
“what a great game group”
“Hd videos is great too! I am so happy and excited when see how game is played. It’s interesting to see how fun it is by my eyes. How players talk, interact with each others….”
“Moreover, as a newbie boardgame designer, It inspired me a lot, I feel that I created a game that make people have fun, no words to express my emotion, thank you so much!”
“Again, thanks for all the help, you have no idea how much I appreciate it.”
One designer rated our playtesting work “9.5/10” (not 10/10) because he said “Although I enjoy how you read and understand rules, I worried that sometime you just can’t understand a rule in playing. My advise that you should ask designer everything about game before playing, for sure that game is smooth playing! (but don’t skip part of explain rules, it’s really interesting).” Another designer had some problems downloading our videos: “The problem though is two fold: there were too many videos and they file sizes were too big. I understand that it took you an hour+ to play the game, but perhaps next time try to film it in one shot or keep the video as one file. There should also be a way to decrease the file size. The download times were loooong.” We bought 2 simple cameras (Sony HDR-MV1) and designers after the one who made this comment did not seem to have a problem with the videos we provided.
One designer wrote positive comments about our work on another board game website (in the game design forums - http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/1097670/playtest-feedback-form ), and some of our playtesting videos were uploaded to YouTube (us learning the game, and playtesting the game). The designer shared our feedback sheet with other designers (after asking us for permission, which we gave and drew his attention to the 2 books we used to make the sheet). The designer made comments to other designers such as:
“They work very pro.”
“I realize this feedback sheet is so great, It give me every detailed information I need to know about the game.”
“I think It'd help much for designers and playtester in playtest stage a game.”
Near the end of the project, we were contacted by a game design studio (with many games in development) to ask if we were able to do some playtesting work for them. We were unable to immediately because of end of semester exams and reports, but hope to do so soon.
Conclusion
This project will be continued next year. The members had very positive experiences overall. G said “It was satisfying. We made a difference in the game design. The games will be published. We got experience rather than knowledge. We don't have many opportunities to get experiences. It took the whole year. There was a a lot of communication. It was a good experience.” R said “This kind of project is so rare. On one side, we study and learn, on the other, we play games. Even when you play games, you have to understand the rules in English, so we have lots of opportunities to use English.” Y said “This project is good for me because I don't use English in my life. This is a good opportunity for me. I was happy our feedback is very useful for designers and they said this is very good wonderful work.” J said “This project made me rethink what English education can be. I want to find more ways to connect school and society.”
We realize that it is good to record us learning the game, but we should also ask questions to the designer if the rulebook is unclear. This is an additional opportunity for us to use English. We should go through the Feedback Sheet and evaluate the items again; if we simplify it we can play more games for more designers. We are also considering asking designers to rate our work more formally (perhaps we can create a simple web survey for them to fill out to evaluate our work). This reciprocity might function to help us continue to improve and also be useful to advertise our services on a website. We hope to play more games, and keep in better contact with the designers we work with.
We are thinking about how to develop the Lab and project. We would like to recruit more members (1st year students) next year in order to give them a great experience, but we need to think about their commitment and individual motivation. Ultimately, we hope to build a stable, income-generating Lab at the university. We would like to learn more about professional game design practices in order to join or do work for a big game studio in Japan and in other countries.
References
Brown, J. S. (2006). New learning environments for the 21st century: Exploring the edge. Change: The magazine of higher learning, 38(5), 18-24.
Fullerton, T., Swain, C. & Hoffman, S. (2008). Game design workshop. Amsterdam: Elsevier Morgan Kaufmann.
Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., ... & Watkins, S. C. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design. Digital Media and Learning Research Hub.
Niecikowski, D. M. (2011). Game Design in the Classroom. USA: Quality Time Resources.
Shaffer, D. (2004). Pedagogical praxis: The professions as models for postindustrial education. The Teachers College Record, 106(7), 1401-1421.
Zhao, Y. (2012). World class learners: Educating creative and entrepreneurial students. SAGE.
Appendix: Individual Member Reflections
R
How was the project and what did you learn?
The project was awesome. I mean I learned a lot of thing like how to communicate with game designers .My English ability to express how I feel became far better.
What could we have done better?
We could have played more games and given feedback if we communicated more .
Are you a more critical person after having worked on this project?
I don’t know I am always critical and love saying ironic things. But maybe I am more critical than used to be.
Did your English improve being of having worked on this project?
Of course . I used English to play game and playtest .To me this project is 100 times as useful as OC classes to learn English.
How did you use English in this project?
I used English to express my feelings and evaluate .
How did you use Critical thinking in this project ?
I used critical thing to find bad points ( bad rules which doesn’t make sense).
Do you think the English measured by the TOEFL is connected to out playtesting work?
No , how can we see our English ability and critical thinking by 2 tests? Test are just like small lights in dark.
Should we change the tests?
I have no ideas. If we have more useful test , we should use them ,but now we don’t have more suitable. TOEFL is extremely difficult for some people who don’t have basic English ability .Maybe if we hire more people , we could change TOEFL to TOEIC ?I don’t know.
Should this project continue ? Why ? Why not? What should our next step be ?
I think this project should continue , because students can have opportunity to improve their English. Out next step will be definitely getting a profit.
What might the benefits and risks of increasing the size of the group be?
If we hire more students ,more people get their better English skill ,but if we focus on making a great project, 3 or 4 people will be nice . Imagine the situation which is 8 people are in critical thinking . One talkative person could lead project and 4 people are just staying in the room but don’t try to say anything and the rest talk a little.
How can we make the project more professional?
I have no ideas. Like talk with pro playtesters? But How do we know they are pro or not?
G
How was the project?
It was very fulfilling to work in. I was able to learn a lot and help designers overseas to improve their games, so players can have a better experience.
What did you learn?
Mostly, how to use critical thinking to analyze and help developing games to improve. We also had to debate a lot (in English), which was a great opportunity to improve our skills in communicating in a foreign language. Because we had to work with foreign designers, we had to develop our abilities to exchange ideas and suggestions.
What could we have done better?
It would be nice to meet more often, making the space of time between one meeting and another smaller.
Are you a more critical person after having worked on this project?
Yes, seeing and debating the opinions of the other playtesters and forming one’s own opinion required a lot of thinking. I believe this practice helped me to think more critically.
Did your English improve being of having worked on this project?
Definitely, yes. There are many opportunities to study English, for example solving questions with a textbook or watching films, but we, students in japan, rarely have opportunities to practice speaking, or even better, debating in, English. Also, we had to solve real issues with people who did not speak Japanese (nor Portuguese), and that is a much more valuable experience than solving supposed problems proposed by teachers, even in terms of language learning.
How did you use English in this project?
We had to talk with designers about their games and the problems (and also good points) within it. We also had to debate between ourselves to have a general opinion to present, and we did it in English under the direction of Mr. DeHaan. We also took diverse tests in English.
How did you use critical thinking in this project?
Analyzing games require us to evaluate whether its rules system works well or not, and how it is possible to improve it. It is no simple task, as one rule added or removed may open breaches in the playing experience, and while the same rule can improve one aspect it can cause problems in another. We had to think clearly how to improve the game, and why such changes improved it, and whether a given change was worth considering its benefits and faults.
Do you think you will use any knowledge or skills from this project in your future?
Yes. English skills are the easiest to point out, but the debating process (not mattering the language) is also very important. But the most important skill, as I see it, is the ability to understand why a given system is not working properly, or even if it is, how can we improve it, in which situations it may stop working and how to avoid that. Changing and creating systems and rules that works are essential in our society.
Considering that I am taking the economy and politics course, this skill is essential. Understanding why an economic or governmental system does not work is the first step to figuring out how to improve it, to them figure out how to put this changes in the market, and so on.
Do you think the critical thinking measured by the Watson Glaser is connected to our playtesting work?
No. In both analyzing and criticizing games and taking the test required skills to think critically, but while Watson Glaser tested our ability to perceive fallacies, in playtesting we had to perceive what did not work in a system, rather than in its arguments. In other words, Watson Glaser is more about interpretation, and playtesting about how to supplement faults.
Which does not means that the Watson Glaser test is completely unrelated to our activities. We often discuss what is good and should be strengthened, and what is bad and how it should be solved. In those debates, it is essential that we perceive which arguments are strong and which are not, what assumptions are made, if the topic is related or even probable. Watson Glaser tested our ability to do that.
But the critical thinking abilities we had to use in this project do not, as stated before, limit to that. Analyzing the games are the main part to our project, and the critical thinking required to do that are not the same tested by Watson Glaser.
Do you think the English measured by the TOEFL is connected to our playtesting work?
Yes, I think TOEFL is a great test. It tested our abilities to read, listen, write and speak in English. Although the themes of the questions are mostly academics, the abilities required to interpret and argue are very similar to the abilities required of us in this project.
Should we change the evaluation (tests) of this project? How?
Yes. TOEFL is a great tool to evaluate our progress in the studying English, but I think we should focus the objective of this project as developing abilities to analyze games and understand what makes them work or not as a system of rules, communicate with foreign designers (maybe in the next years we could analyze games from Japanese designers as well?), and help them develop their games while developing our abilities to think critically. I believe improving English should be a secondary objective (although it is undeniable that our English improved a lot because we participated in this project!).
About the Watson Glaser test, as stated in another question, I believe it is a very good test, but limited. We should keep taking it, but also find a way to evaluate the other abilities it does not.
How did you feel about using English to communicate with designers who you haven't met?
I felt great. It was a precious opportunity to give life to my studies so far.
How did you feel about the feedback from the designers?
The feedbacks were in most of the cases very positive. The designers really seemed to appreciate our work, and since they also said why they appreciated it, we were able to improve even more. I am really glad that our analyzes helped them to develop their games systems in a way it works better for the players.
Can you think of any other ways to use English to connect with people outside the university?
Yes, the internet is a great tool for that. We can access forums to discuss things of the everyday life, or even play games together. Writing novels or making videos and posting them can also be a way to connect with other people, but as an one-way communication.
We can also go to events of interchange with exchange students.
But I personally like projects like this one, because we use English to actually help to create something. There are many projects that can use the internet as a tool to create communication between students and people even outside Japan, and this projects can vary depending on the students interests and the advising teacher’s research theme.
Should this project continue? Why/why not? What should our next steps be?
Yes. It is a great opportunity to put our studies so far to real use and acquire new abilities, mainly in communication and analyzing fields. Also, I believe our work makes a difference in making games work better (as we can infer from the designers feedback).
In the next years, we should analyze even more games, receive feedback and improve our website, giving our Game Lab a Name in the community of designing games for in the end be able to monetarily profit from it.
It would also be nice to use the abilities improved in this project to develop others projects as well, like the “World Peace Game Project”.
What might the benefits and risks of increasing the size of the group be?
If we increase the size of the group sufficiently, we would not have to worry about everyone’s schedule, because even if a few people can not attend a given day, the rest of the group can advance the project and brief the others members when necessary via email or google docs.
Also, more people would mean more variety in the opinions, and in a general sum, more hours of playtest. Playing with different people should also give playtesters a different experience for each time.
We would have a bigger liberty in our playtesting, too. For example, we could create a system that while one group analyzes one game, the other group analyzes another. When players in both groups get enough experience in the game, we mix groups, creating a situation were experienced players would play with unexperienced players. Playtesting under this situation, we would be able to better answer, for example, “Was the game difficult for new players to play with experienced players?” more precisely. There are many other situations we can create to meet the needs of each game.
As problems, it would be necessary to divide the project in small groups to playtest the games, which by itself is not a problem, but by doing it, it is possible that students stop using English. But as stated before, I do not think we should focus in the English learning, rather focusing in analyzing the games. We would still have opportunities to use English during a final general debate to give the designers a final result.
Another problem is that since not all members are required to advance the project, there could be a fall in commitment from individual members, as they are not essential and may not be present in all meetings. But as long there are more meetings than there were last year, commitment should not noticeably fall for that if a student cannot attend a meeting it may attend the next.
Whether this is a problem or an advantage, I am not sure, but we would have more videos to send and the designers more videos to watch. This would give them more material to work on, but might as well be taken as an overload of work. Maybe we could separate the videos in groups (The first played matches, the second played matches, etc) and also point out before hand what differences we noticed between our groups, to help the designers not overload and watch what is more important only (of course, if they want to, they can watch all the videos).
Overall, I am in favor of increasing the groups members in number. I believe its benefits are greater than its faults, and its problems can be solved as they appear.
How can we make the project more professional?
I think we are in the right way. At the beginning, we were searching for games and asking the designers for their games, but the other day a designer contacted us and asked for his games to be analyzed. It would be very good to improve the Lab’s games as professionals, if we could attend to his request and give a work that answers to its expectations, or even be better than.
We should keep working, raising our project’s name in the designers society and expand our project, in terms of hours playtesting and games playtested. We probably will get more experience in the process, and that experience will help us improve.
Y
How was the project?
I think it was very good for us and designer because we can learn English, connect with foreigners and design can be helped to create a good game.
What did you learn?
I learned critical thinking and new English vocabulary.
What could we have done better?
We could write good feedback sheets, and took the video was great.
Are you a more critical person after having worked on this project?
Maybe. I could think more deeply and find some bad points or improvement points and I found the way to improve that.
Did your English improve being of having worked on this project?
Reading and listening improved after this project I think because we had to read the rules and talk the member of this project.
How did you use English in this project?
I used it to explain my opinion, write feedback sheets, and discuss the game with members of the project.
How did you use critical thinking in this project?
I used it to feedback the games. I found the bad points or improvement points to use it.
Do you think you will use any knowledge or skills from this project in your future?
Yes. I think critical thinking is important for our life. Today, we get much information from TV or internet and so on, but we can't know if the information is true. So we should use critical thinking.
Do you think the critical thinking measured by the Watson Glaser is connected to our playtesting work?
I don't know, but I think it's connected to it a little.
Do you think the English measured by the TOEFL is connected to our playtesting work?
No. I think the words and vocabulary that use this project and the TOEFL are different.
Should we change the evaluation (tests) of this project? How?
No. I think it's not necessary to change it.
How did you feel about using English to communicate with designers who you haven't met?
I feel it was a little difficult for me, because sometimes I couldn't understand what they say. And it was difficult to explain my opinion or feelings in English too.
How did you feel about the feedback from the designers?
I feel very happy. Almost designers said our feedback is very useful, and one of the them said to write our name in rulebook! I heard that, I was very surprised and think it was wonderful.
Can you think of any other ways to use English to connect with people outside the university?
Going to the English conversation school.
Should this project continue? Why/why not? What should our next steps be?
Yes, because this project can help many designers. Many designers look for the people who playtest their games, and I think I want to help them, so we should continue this project.
How can we make the project more professional?
Learn about game.
J
How was the project?
Incredible. It was wonderful to connect with designers. It inspired me to think about creating a usability lab.
It was great to work with such motivated students. It was fun to play the better games.
What did you learn?
To think about the designer goals
How to record and share video using dropbox
To communicate a little – using certain forms of language.
What could we have done better?
Create a regular meeting schedule.
Include video with all playtests?
Somehow contact the designer before we playtest, to make sure we understand the rules, and see if they want anything specific playtested?
Put the feedback form in google docs (but problem with WIFI connection) to share.
Are you a more critical person after having worked on this project?
I don't think so. I might be able to pick apart games a little more, but I don't think it has affected me in general.
Did your English improve because of having worked on this project?
I had to think a little bit about how to phrase things to communicate with designers (to show interest, but not too much, because of time)
How did you use critical thinking in this project?
I am not sure if this was critical thinking, or critiquing. I need to research the difference between the 2.
Do you think you will use any knowledge or skills from this project in your future?
Managing a project with people online.
Do you think the critical thinking measured by the Watson Glaser is connected to our playtesting work?
No. It seems to be about logic, not critiquing.
Do you think the English measured by the TOEFL is connected to our playtesting work?
It the manner it measures general language skills, yes. We need to read, write, speak and listen. The language might not correspond, but the skills might. I would like to research this.
Should we change the evaluation (tests) of this project? How?
Different language test? Don't use standardized tests?
Is there a test from a game design program – "game studies, playtesting course"? MIT?
We should ask the designer to fill out a short survey to evaluate our work. We should reciprocate. We can better triangulate our skill development.
How did you feel about using English to communicate with designers who you haven't met?
Great. A little anxiety about how to present ourselves to the designer.
How did you feel about the feedback from the designers?
Incredibly encouraging. It was great to hear such great things from a few designers. It really motivated me.
Should this project continue? Why/why not? What should our next steps be?
Yes, absolutely. Students can use English for a real purpose, and gain project management and communication skills.
Increase the number of students. Get more funding.
Find a way to store videos (better server?).
Keep a database of language (read/written?)
Work with kids or families to playtest.
Create a more streamlined playtesting form.
Analyze games in Japan
Playtest for a great game publisher before accepting lesser offers
What might the benefits and risks of increasing the size of the group be?
Benefits
We can playtest more games.
We can collect more experiences.
Risks
The quality of the playtesters might vary.
It might be hard to get together to play. We might need to divide into various groups.
How can we make the project more professional?
Connect it to external funding.
Study more about usability and bring in those concepts.
Japanese Summaries (and University Report)
ゲームとコミュニティ（地域）−コラボレーション（連携）−クリエイティビティ（創作性）−クリティカルシンキング（批判的思考法）に関する研究のためのゲーム研究室の創設；集中的プロジェクトベース学習及び学生の早期キャリア開発
学生たちは21 世紀に生き、仕事をするために特別なスキルを必要とします (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001; Bloom, 1956; Bransford, Brown and Cocking, 2000; Friedman, 2007; Shaffer, 2006; The Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2011)。 それゆえに、2013年に、学生中心のゲームラボは１２人の大学1年生と2年生に早期英語、研究、チームワークやPBLの経験（就職活動前）を与えるためにつくられました。ゲームラボのプロジェクトは、ゲームの教育的な利点やどうやってゲームが大学、地域社会、企業を繋げるかということに焦点をあてています。ゲームラボで学生は様々な社会、経済、個人的な趣味を探求することが出来ます。学生は計画、実行、データの収集と分析をチームで行いプロジェクトをレポートに書きます。
1) クリエイティビティプロジェクトでは、ゲームを継続的に作成し続けることによって想像力が改善されるかどうか、Torrance Test of Creative Thinkingテストを用いて検証しました。結果、目に見えて想像力は増大することはありませんでしたが、より流暢に物事を考える力がつくことが分かりました。
2) コラボレーションプロジェクトでは、起業家をテーマに、ビジネスプランコンテストへの応募に向けて、ゲーム開発をし、学外の人とも関わりました。ビジネスプラン作成のために、さまざまな分野の起業家やおもちゃ屋さんのお話を聞き、経営情報学部のゼミ生にも協力してもらいました。私たちのビジネスプランは第一審査を通過することができませんでしたが、応募までの過程で、計画書の書き方や市場、商品について議論すること、実際に社会に出て、経験者たちの話を聞くこと、などができました。私たちは自らの経験をもとに、学生の起業に必要とされるのは、明確な目標設定、できるだけ多くの資金と時間、様々な分野における専門家との連携であると考える。経験豊かな学生企業家ほど、より自由に活動を広げていけるだろう。
3) コミュニティプロジェクトでは、草薙児童館で現代的なボード/カードゲームを教え、遊び、児童自らゲーム制作する活動を年間11回行う。参加者は年間を通して徐々に減ったもの、毎回確実に参加者がいた。児童と保護者、児童館職員にアンケートを行い(1)楽しい、今後も続けてほしい(2)遊んだゲームは交流、共有、学習などの手助けになる(3)ゲームの中で英語を使用してほしい、などの回答を得た。児童館は幾つかのゲームを備品として購入した。私達は助言や教授法を習得、最も(楽しい/親しみやすい/簡単)なゲームを3つ発見した。
4) クリティカルシンキングプロジェクトでは、私たちはネット上にある出版されていないゲームをして、その評価や問題点を書いたフィードバックをゲームデザイナーに送りました。特に曖昧で矛盾するルールを見つけるために目を光らせながらゲームをしました。その後、ゲームデザイナーから質問のメールが来てそれに随時答えました。一人のゲームデザイナーはゲームが完成したら我々の名前は載せてくれると約束してくれました。このプロジェクトは学生にとっては貴重な英語を聞いたり話したり読んだりして実践的な英語力を鍛える場であり、ゲームを通して国境線を超え、人と繋がる場でした。
一年目が無事修了し、二年目にはいくつかのプロジェクトに焦点をあて、そのプロジェクトの展望が開けるような活動を行っていきたいです。（私たちは子供病院でボランティアをしており、ゲーム業界の人とのコラボレーションを試みています。）私たちはこれからも私たちのスキルを伸ばし大学と社会に貢献する方法を見つけたいと思います。私たちの４つのリポート情報の全文やプロジェクトノートを私たちのウェブサイトで閲覧することができます。提案やコラボレーションを歓迎します。
https://sites.google.com/site/gamelabshizuoka/
平成 26年 5月 26日 提出