Gamers

Gamers (generations) by K. M. Kapp, 2007

1. Gamer 1.0 (birth 1961-1970, gaming 1971-1980, game: Pong)
2. Gamer 2.0 (birth 1971-1980, gaming 1981-1990, game: Pac-Man, Spac Invaders, Battlezone, Super Mario Brothers, Tetris)
3. Gamer 3.0 (birth 1981-1990, gaming 1991-2000, Myst, Zelda, Tomb Raider, Diablo, EverQuest, Super Mario 64)
4. Gamer 4.0 (birth 1991-2000, gaming 2001-2010, SimCity, The Sims, Halo, World of Warcraft, America’s Army, Grand Theft Auto 3)
   

Traits of Gamers
(in K. M. Kapp 2007,from J Beck & M Wade)

1. Problem solvers
2. Multitasking
3. Competitive
4. Resilient
5. Confident
6. Sociable
   

Attributes of Gamers
(by K Dini, psychiatrist, 2008)

1. Gamers are more autonomous
2. Gamers believe there are various routes to success
3. Gamers attempt to work with what they have instead of waiting until situations are perfect
4. Gamers use trial-and-error methods
5. Gamers are more likely to ask for advice when needed
6. Gamers adapt
7. Gamers often feel that people can succeed with hard work
8. Gamers believe there are benefits to risks
9. Gamers recognize the benefit to following a grand strategy
10. Gamers believe in personal responsibility (e.g. in MMORPG)
11. Gamers recognize the benefits to functioning in a group (e.g. in MMORPG)
12. Gamers learn leadership skill (e.g. in MMORPG)

Digital Game Based Learning Once Removed Teaching Teachers

Becker, K. (2007). Digital game-based learning once removed: Teaching teachers. British Journal of Educational Technology, 38(3):478-488

Digital Game Based Learning Once Removed Teaching Teachers

View more presentations from oooh.

http://courseweb.unt.edu/gjones/computergameinventory.html

Computer Games Inventory (CGI)

Dr. Greg Jones
Dept. of Learning Technologies
University of North Texas

What is it?

The Computer Gaming Inventory (CGI) was created in the Spring of 2006 at the University of North Texas as a result of discussions with Educational Computing doctoral students. There was a need to measure gaming use and attitudes, but there was little success finding an existing instrument in the literature. One recent attempt to measure computer game use and attitudes in a small sample of college students was the qualitative survey performed by Pew Internet and American Life Project (Jones, 2003). However, we desired a quantifiable questionnaire that would be easy to deliver online to college students and in the future to K-12 students. Therefore, we adapted elements from the Pew study, and then added questions based on our content expertise as well as demographic questions, to create our Computer Gaming Inventory (CGI).

Version 1

The verison 1 instrument is a ninety-six question survey consisting of two sections: (1) computer gaming types and frequency (66 questions), and (2) attitudes towards computer and video games (30 questions). Although the CGI seems lengthy, we found that college students can take the survey in less than 15 minutes.

The initial pilot stuides showed that the instrument does indeed measure computer game attituides and the frequency of use. The AERA paper in the publications section has the initial details on the factor analysis.

Two full stuides at both UNT and TCU started in the fall of 2007 using the instrument with over 800 college students involved in both stuides. The initial TCU data is being presented at the 2008 AACE SITE conference. The UNT study will not be complete until the end of spring 2008, when its analysis will begin. The instrument is scheduled to be used in two Texas High Schools during 2008, which will be our first look at its use in a K-12 setting.

We are planning to complete the full analysis of version 1 by the end of 2008. When completed, this web page will be updated again to reflect the research discovered. If you want more information about the instrument, e-mail Dr. Jones (gjones@unt.edu).

Publications

Jones, J. G., Copeland, B., & Kalinowski, K. (2007). Pre-service teacher's attitudes towards computer games. In Proceedings of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago: American Educational Research Association.

Gratch, J., Maninger, R., Jones, J. G., & Kely, J. (2008, March). Video games in education: Do they have a future? Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, Las Vegas, NV.

Don't Bother me Mom – I'm Learning!

Prensky M. (2006), Don't Bother me Mom – I'm Learning, How Computer and Video Games Are Preparing Your Kids for 21st Century Success – and How You Can Help!, Paragon House, Minnesota, USA, 254 p

http://www.amazon.com/Dont-Bother-Me-Mom-Im-Learning/dp/1557788588


Prensky(2006) sees five “levels of learning” in video games:
1. learning level 1: How
2. learning level 2: What
3. learning level 3: Why
4. learning level 4: Where
5. learning level 5: Whether

As Prensky(2006) does with three actual examples teachers should try to learn to search for the positive learning elements in games. Once teachers have the skills for checking learning levels in games, the resistance against games will go down.