What paradigm, according to Margaret Mead, follows postfigurative and cofigurative cultures? What is its main feature in terms of learning?
Mead identifies three cultural states: post-figurative, co-figurative and pre-figurative. These states can be described in terms of their take on time, generations and change:

post-figurative: relies on past, past traditions, values and experiences. In this state, culture does not change much among generations and they are generally conservative. In terms of learning, children learn from adults.

co-figurative: It is resent-oriented. In this state, experiences of children are different from their parents, therefore it emphasizes on peer learning based on present needs and challenges.

pre-figurative: In this state of culture, adults learn from children, and the emphesis is on future and rapid change. There is no pressure to keep status quo or stick to the past traditions.


The post-figurative and co-figurative states are bound to end and be replaced by pre-figurative culture. where children are the designers of the future: "child—and not the parent and grandparent—that represents what is to come"(mead).
Mead lived in 70's and now 40 years after her book, the pre-figurative state is not a matter of prediction but it is already here. Its indication for learning is that as she suggests, we should use the co-figurative possibilities to incorporate pre-figurative practices. A good example that comes to my mind is that game where  children would come up with solution for complex global problems(i dont remember the name). In that game the element of co-working with peers leads to children to shape what to come!


Briefly explain the term “procedural knowledge”. Name several other kinds of knowledge.

Types of knowledge can be varied based on how we try to categorize them. Some types are:
-A priori and a posteriori
-explicit and tacit
-procedural(non-propositional), and propositional(also called descriptive or declarative Knowledge)
. They differ in their abstraction level, function and the way we acquire them.


Procedural knowledge is the knowledge of how to do things and perform tasks. It does not necessarily cover the theory of science of how things work but only how to operate them. For example knowing how to use computers is procedural and is different from the knowledge that a computer engineer has about how computers.

Suggest how digital learning games could help solve Bloom’s 2 sigma problem.

Based on several studies, Bloom found out that students perform 2 standard deviation better when used one to one tutoring using mastery learning technique, compared to traditional classroom setting.

So basically it emphasizes on personal tutoring and gaining mastery before moving to the next level. Both of these features are expensive and time-consuming in real world settings or as they call it, it is not scalable.

Digital educational games can help to solve this problem and make Bloom's technique accessible to many more students. Games can provide personal tutoring to each individual and students can take as much time they need with their digital tutor. Games are also a great way of practice for mastery since they supposed to make things more fun, therefore games can make sure that students get to the mastery level without getting bored.

In Bloom’s taxonomy, what learning domain is located at the top of the hierarchy? Why do you think that is?

Bloom's taxonomy identifies 3 domains:

-cognitive or knowledge or thinking

-affective or attitude or feeling

-psychomotor or skill or doing

In his taxonomy cognitive domain is on the top. Maybe the reason for this is that he originally developed this model for academic education. And traditionally academy is for acquiring knowledge and using cognitive abilities.

Within the cognitive domain, there are sub-domains of Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, Analysis, Synthesis, Evaluation.

in which evaluation is on top. The reason might be that evaluation is a very high level cognitive task that needs the knowledge and experience of previous steps to be able to evaluate something.

An Educational Game: EVE online

The first take away from this task is that not every OK looking game is entertaining enough to spend one hour with it.

In the spirit of playing some games, now that I am studying this course, I tried playing some this week. I must admit that my selection may not be the best of the educational games. But "stop disaster" and "Lure of the Labyrinth" were not interesting enough for me to keep playing. of course these games are developed for younger audiences therefore neither the entertainment nor educational part suited me.
The next stop was EVE which was suggested as an educational game in another course. I am still not sure what was the actual educational content in this game(some googling told me it helps to learn management!). This game has great graphics and nice space scenery. Large amount of text to read in each step can qualify it as a reading practice game.
The game is about a colony of humans that travel to a new galaxy thousands of years ago using a wormhole. After a while wormhole collapses and the colony starts its own path. Now after several thousand years, original some hundred humans grow in number to millions and they are technologically advanced to occupy the whole galaxy and its solar systems. The current stage is that there are several civilisations in eden and they are sometimes in conflict. There are also criminals and space pirates!
first 30 min was spent on avatar making, which was fun, although my computer was not doing its best in processing.
The game was super hard to start, complicated panels and little cryptic given directions.
After 30 minutes of clicking around I managed to get my ship destroyed and my avatar ejected in a space capsule. Then the tutor avatar told me to double click on ship-hanger to get a new ship. The next 30 min was spent on searching around to find "ship-hanger" ... after unsuccessful clicking around my husband came to rescue and since he was less afraid of messing up things, finally found a mothership to dock and enter. The ship-hanger was in there!


my experience with this game ends there!


- What kind of game is it?it is a multiplayer role playing online game.
- What are its serious goals? How are they achieved?
Based on internet you can learn management in it, however I think planning and maintaining are also part of the game.
- How did it feel to play it? (Difficult or easy? Fun or boring?)It was difficult as i mentioned before, however not boring at all, the visuals were nice, and I like space!
- How much did you actually learn?not much! I did not learn anything from the supposed educational aims, but I am getting a better feel of games by trying them.
- How could the game be improved?

I think it contained too much text, it would be nice if they included some audio guid. 

The controls and pages/maps/panels are crowded and confusing. I think they could be more user friendly, however  I am not sure if that was not a conscious design decision to give the player the feel serious environment(spaceship and stuff!).
The universe is too vast, things you can do are numerous (at least at first for a beginner)

Game analysis: Stop Disaster

link to the game.

About the game:

This game is about planning to prevent natural disasters or minimise their effect on people.
Player can choose different landscapes and then develop it into a safer place. The game is online and that is a plus, because it does not need long preparation(downloading installing, account making) before playing.

a) Which subjects can combine with the game? Name the subject/subjects.

The first subject that comes to my mind is geography. because the description of places and their natural properties are one of the main features of the game. However perhaps "civics and citizenship education" is also related. Since having a general knowledge of city/home planning and prevention is also important in being a good citizen.

b) Which skills can be developed during the game?

apart from geographic information that player gets in the game, she can learn planing, optimal use of resources, decision making(where to invest), time management and crisis management.

c) Which digital competences can be developed during the game?

Since the game is sort of simulation, children can learn that computer simulations are valuable resources to understand different phenomena. and learn how to work with them.

Games, serious Games and Pedagogy

1) Why game producers need to think about their purposes?

Because when they reflect on the purpose of a game for children, many aspects of the game becomes clear. The purpose is the seed point, that the game is based on.
"the purpose of good online content should surely include treating children as young citizens capable of learning and furthering their personal, social and intellectual development."(1) and if the producers consider this quote as their main purpose, it becomes clear to them what they need to take into account when designing and testing. They will need to obtain a good understanding of child psychological and developmental stages in each age group to developed right content for them. Also it gets more important to properly test the product on the audience to make sure that they get what is intended from the game(or anything designed for them).

2) Digital media are evolving rapidly. How does that affect your target group?

Before reading the text, I also thought that changing digital media actually affects children cognitively. For example I thought that "short attention span" is a real problem. However in the reference 1, Sonia Livingstone claims that these hypotheses about media's effect on children is not proven yet. The studies are contradicting and there is no accepted fact about it.


Still I think that media even if it doesn't directly affect children's cognitive abilities; it does affect their social and cultural surroundings and in turn at the end affects children indirectly. As mentioned in reference 1 "there is more evidence that the social and cultural circumstances of children’s lives are changing. In other words, childhood itself is changing.". I think media has a big role in this change in "childhood".

3) "Everything must be be educational " - Do you agree or not? Why?

Although in the text,  Patti M. Valkenburg’ disagrees with this phrase, I think everything is inevitably educational in one way or another. Some app(or anything for that matter) might not be developed with and educational purpose in mind, but it will have some effect on the user, specially child user.
Maybe I should rephrase my thinking: no i also don't think everything should be educational per se, however i think everything should be thought through carefully to avoid unwanted effects/or reinforce wanted effects. For instance in the example of the app for children to just have fun and laugh, designer should carefully investigate that by achieving this goal their app does not convey any wrong message to the child.

4) What are the main characteristics of good games? Do you agree? Would you add something more?

Based on the second source, a good game:
-Incorporates learning principles from education and cognitive science
-Gives information on demand and in the right time when user can apply it soon
-Gives player the opportunity to apply that knowledge to the situation she/he is in
-Tasks are challenging but doable(optimal challenge)
-Gives its player the possibility to customise the level(related to previous point)
-Allows players to be producers and not just consumers 

-Creates a cycle of experience by looping through new tasks and mastery

-Uses engagement techniques such as "action at a distance"

-Allow teamwork and cooperative work

Although some the characteristic he mentions are not at the same level of abstraction, I agree with most of them.
Some of them correspond to specific learning theories(behaviourism, cognitivism, constructivism, humanism). for example "allowing players to be producers and not just consumers" is sort of similar to the ideas in cognitivism and constructivism.

Some other came from psychological theories such as self-determination theory. as an example the "optimal challenge" above relates to "competence" in SDT, "autonomy in creating new path" to autonomy and the "possibility of teamwork" to "relatedness"(although the interpretation here was that in the games player learns the teamwork, and in SDT it is a mechanism to fulfil the social need of the player). 

Adding to this based on SDT, I can say that group and community making, even if it is not in the context of teamwork, will still make a game more appealing.

5) How do serious games engage with pedagogy?

Reference 3 concludes that serious games evolved as learning theories evolved. starting with behaviourism came games that their base was repetition and rewards.
the next generation of serious games corresponded to cognitivism and constructivism. The features were multimodal learning(by pictures, sounds ...), actively applying learned skills in new situations
and learning by making.
The third generation games are based on constructionism. Where as I understood involves real world situations and reflection.

I think although each generation came to life in different time, each of them can have its own place in educational games based on the context and learning goals. Also all of them can be combined to achieve a single learning outcome as well. One game can have both reflection and sense making, and reward and repetition system.

Chapeter 10 of edited volume "Game Research Methods" (eds. P. Lankoski & S. Bjork): Quantitative methods and analyses for the study of players and their behaviour

I choose this chapter because I was interested to see what type of quantitative data can be collected to study player's behaviour. Well turns out there is no such thing and they end up turning non-measurable constructs into operational definitions that are measurable. most of the examples were survey based, basically asking user about it.

Part 1, a short summary of the chapter:

The chapter starts with explaining why empirical studies are good: they try to minimise human judgment errors, subjectivity and they rely on data to drive conclusions.

Then comes the qualitative vs quantitative methods. It does a good job of illustrating the strength and use of each method. Each of these methods are neither good nor bad. They have their own specific place and purpose in the research world. Qualitative methods can be used to study a larger scope, new area, vague or ill-defined phenomena or simply as a first step in getting started with a research to define what might interest you for further studies; or vice versa it can be used as second step to get additional information on a previous quantitative study.  Quantitative methods are used when you are interested in a specific object of inquiry.

(as stated in this chapter)The main problem when using quantitative measures is to capture things that are not originally numeric. For example player's enjoyment of a game. Here "psychometrics" comes to rescue.
How psychometrics work:
1. Finding a "construct", which by definition is something unmeasurable such as engagement.
2. coming up with "operational definitions" , their aim is to measure effect of a construct in the form of operational definitions.

Chapter goes on with 3 main issues to consider with quantitative methods:
1. Reliability: How we ensure that operational definitions measure the same thing each time we use them? This is the consistency of the tool(scale, questions...) different practical methods of ensuring reliability is proposed in the chapter(ex: cronbach's alpha ..)
2. Construct validity : Do operational definitions actually represent the construct we are interested in?
Basically there is no 100% sure answer to this question. This validity can come from expert examinations, evidence form response process(here comes qualitative method)
3.Research design: Or how we test hypothesis so that they are reasonable tests of theory?
then it went to too much detail on different research designs and statistic analysis.
Since this text is getting too long ... I will stop here.

Part 2, application of the method on a game of choice:

I personally like experimental design. Therefore when possible, I try to design my study as experiment. However, it is generally impossible to design a perfectly experimental study without jeopardising other factors like natural occurrences of situations(we are forcing groups to one condition). And I am not even sure the thing I here came up with; is experiment.

Since I don't really play digital games myself, I just google searched for most popular games of 2016 and "pokemon go" showed up. In the case of pokemon go I would be interested to see if this game actually made people more active and if so how long lasting this effect is. Lets make the research question more concert: "Does pokemon go make people walk more during 2 month of test period and how the walking habits change after 2 month of not using pokemon go"
to answer this question
1)I would recruit a group of people according to my specific research interest(lets say uni student of age 25-30) and
2)would ask them to install a step counting app. record their walking habit in it as well as a diary report on how much they think they walked each day.
3)after a month of pre-pokemon go use, I will ask them to install pokemon go and play with it for 2 months , keeping the same reports as before.(not sure if I ask them to spend X amount of time with app)
4)after two month I will ask them to uninstall pokemon go and go back to their life without it, still keep the report for one more month.
Note:
Lets be real, this project is improbable at its current settings:
at this point the project took 6 month to just collect the data. My test group is better to be big enough because many people just fail to follow instructions and some might fall in love with pokemon go and refuse to stop using it. and lets be honest, who is going to follow these instructions for 6 months? maybe if I pay them , they would do! but then who is going to fund such a long and relatively boring study.
Perhaps more realistic measures will be a one week pre-pokemon, 2 month use and one week after 2 month. which is still not very easy to accomplish.

Interactive museum installation

The mission was to find one interactive museum installation/game/exhibit that I find interesting on youtube( and write 1-2 paragraphs what strategies/cues/features this item uses to engage users. In other words, why you think visitors should like/enjoy this item. Negative examples are also possible )


I searched for relevant videos and browsed around a bit before I find the video that I liked. At first I will talk about my favourite video which is a TED talk, then I will review some of other installations that I found in the process.

The most inspiring video for me was:
How will museums of the future look? | Sarah Kenderdine | TEDxGateway 2013

The main attraction of this talk(and the works she mentioned) for me was that technology and digital interactive interface was used to solve a real problem and served an actual purpose. As I wrote at the end of this text, I watched several videos showing interactive museum installations. In most of them interactive systems were used as an extra something that museum could still function normally without them. Which is not particularly a problem; many things in life are not vital but an added value. However in the process of making these installations, many lost the extra added value and turned to "something to make our museum look cool"!

All the projects mentioned in this talk solve problems such as off limit historical sight(virtual reality to visit remotely), showing properties of object or place that can not be seen by naked eye(extra detailed zooming in, or laser scan of objects) , recreation of original condition of the art piece(if the colors are faded, or parts broken)..

Each solution was made very carefully to enhance the experience as well as supporting points above. For example the spatial mapping of the places(e.g.: a historic cave) so that visitor feels in place while exploring walls.

The interactive systems were made in close cooperation with specialists so that the content was as strong as technology used to realise it.

Immersive features and artistic details were considered as well. For example use of music and animation in proper places.

But:At first I went into youtube and started a search for "interactive museum installation".

here are top 3 results :

1. Impossible Animals Interactive Museum Installation(2012)

the video description(as put under video): "In the summer of 2012, PO-MO Inc. and the Manitoba Children's Museum are showcasing a 3 month special exhibit featuring interactive 3D animals. Children color an egg on a piece of paper, scan it into the exhibit, and choose where their egg will hatch. A 3D robot delivers their colored egg to an interactive wall or floor (depending on where they want their animal to live), and they touch the egg to make it hatch. The animal is motion reactive (fish swim away, birds flock and drop feathers when touched, land animals follow the children and spawn hearts when they are touched). Other aspects of the environment such as the spaceship are also interactive.
One of the coolest features is the 'reset the world' button (not shown in the video) which allows museum staff to easily reset the exhibit once a day so the world is fresh in the morning."


What I found interesting about this installation was that they tried to combine digital and external world together. Children could draw on actual papers and feed it to digital world. This would give them a more personalised experience than merely playing an interactive game.

2.MOSTI - Interactive digital museum exhibit design(2013)

the video description(as put under video): "Commissioned by MTE Studios, an exhibition maker based in Dubai, Formula D interactive and partners developed 21 digital interactive media installations for a science and technology museum in Saudi Arabia. The interactive AV productions display various aspects of the technical and scientific advances of the Muslim world from 700BC to 1700BC in the fields of maths, medicine, botany, chemistry, astronomy, art and architecture besides others. The interactive AV's produced in the course of the project include touch tables, touch screens and other cutting edge interactive installations. During the 6 month design and production time, the design team worked closely with the client and researchers to conceptualize each application making sure the design of each interactive exhibit supported the exceptional visitor experience of the museum. "

It was a very comprehensive and multi modular installation, but at the same time very trivial. Trivial in the sense that not much of innovation was going on and the installation mostly consist of displays that were touch screen. Also the interactions and presentation ideas were very common. The part I like the most was calculators in different digit systems and mosaic building program, in both i liked the idea of letting people try some task by themselves.


3.Overly / Interactive museum installation(2016)

the video description(as put under video): "In cooperation with DD studio, we created a very special chandelier with hidden computer, projector, speakers, motion sensors and other equipment, so when visitors enter the place it looks just like an ordinary room. Once visitors approach the dining table, our exposition installation, it comes alive and becomes an interactive, fun game table. It is a unique experience for kids and a great way to learn more about the poet and the museum."

Well at leat it was not another screen! also the design was poetic and well in sync with the museum. Although it did not have anything specific to add to the museum or a message to convey.

Her Story

General:

It is a video game that mostly involves player watching several police interviews with a woman that is a murder suspect for her missing husband. The story happens in 1994 and the game visuals also follow same era's technological features(dialog windows and desktop that is from Microsoft Windows 3.11??) The player supposed to solve the murder case by searching a database of video clips(transcribed) and watching them. The videos are short and the interviewer and his questions are not known to player.

Platforms: 

PC, MAC, iPad, iPhone, Android

Genre:

puzzle, police procedural

Number of players:

single player, the player is solving a mystery 

Perspective and interaction model:

static, and sort of first person view because the player has no visible avatar

best described as desktop model I think

Game mechanics:

Basically main action of user is search the database, tag videos and solve the mystery 

Financing model:

Single purchase download

"Imagine and briefly describe how the game could change if one of its defining parameters (genre, platform, controller, number of players etc) were altered."

Genre change:
-The game with the same general story could turn to a action and role playing game. The player could be the detective or police officer. some 3D visuals and some chasing action could be added. The game would turn to mission type of game that a detective chases a murder suspect.

-If implemented in VR , player could still have the same role as current game, but instead of watching the interviews she could investigate the scene as well. In this case some change in the story is necessary because most of the detective work in this game is on the past events not the crime evidences.

-If number of players would increase to two, I can imagine a second player being the woman who is the suspect. To make it interesting the woman has lost her memory of the events and tries to figure out what happened herself, in order to delete videos that may show her as murderer or to help other player(detective) to prove that she is innocent.
The two roles will have different available materials and perhaps suspect character can decide on showing or hiding some pieces of evidence.


References:

1)http://www.herstorygame.com/
2)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Her_Story_(video_game)

21st Century Learner

The aim was to answer these questions:

1) Are you 21st century learner? Why? Please explain!

2) Have you met 21st century learner? Give some examples!

3) What are the main challenges or things to keep in mind when designing/developing a game for 21st century learner.

4) Who will be responsible for developing the content of games?

5) How will entertainment value be weighted against educational value?



based on:
1)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0xa98cy-Rw
2)21st Century Skills for Students and Teachers (By Pacific Policy Research Center)
3)MindShift Guide to Digital Games and Learning(BY JORDAN SHAPIRO, ET AL. )
4)Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Groff, J., & Haas, J. (2009). Using the technology of today in the classroom today: The instructional power of digital games, social networking, simulations and how teachers can leverage them. The Education Arcade, 1, 20.
5)Learning for the 21st century


1) Am I a 21st century learner? Why?

It seems to me that "21st century learner" is shaped and defined with her contextual surroundings: a)21st century job needs, life and society expectation and b)21st century tools, possibilities and mentality.
The first part (the needs and expectations) is a clearly external force that shapes a 21st century learner. We sort of "have to" confirm to 21st century job requirements or it will be hard to find and keep a job and income. Similarly if dont follow the trends and expectations of the society we live in, we will have difficulty forming social relationships.

And although in my opinion each individual is inevitably defined by its context, the second part(tools, possibilities and mentality) has a softer effect. We can(and we do have) different reactions to our environment. Although tech enthusiasts are growing in number because of 21st century opportunities; not everyone likes technology even though she might need to learn and use it for work. In this sense we are more free to be(or not to be!) a real 21st century human and learner in our private lives. However we all are affected by tools available, trends and our surroundings.
In conclusion, I think we all in some extend need to be a 21st century learner in today's world, apart from our childhood education content.

So am I a 21st century learner?
-I have to be a 21st century learner to survive in today's world!


2) Have I met 21st century learner?

Most of the today's successful people seem to be a 21st century learners. They have the 21st century skills such as tech use, communication, creativity and problem solving, management and personal development. Active learning and learning relevant skills and relating it to real world(as oppose to learning a subject as it is) is also a characteristics of them. Also in addition to practical skills mentioned above a 21st century human needs to have awareness and good grasp of environmental, political and economic conditions of the world.

Have I met a 21st century learner?
-yes plenty, if we consider the fact that being a 21st century learner is not a 0/1(binary thing) and each individual might excel in some aspects while being weaker in others. For example I think many people overlook the global awareness and focus more on other skills.


3) What are the main challenges or things to keep in mind when designing/developing a game for 21st century learner.
Based on the "Learning for the 21st century"(5)and(4) it is important to keep student and learning materials related to the real world and real problems. (situated learning)

Also social aspect of learning(collaborative learning process) is very important and should be considered when designing an educational game, as in "Power of digital games"(4) reference puts nicely, Students today should "collaboratively constructing new knowledge with their peers".

On the technical side I think learning game designers should develop their game in the quality that is comparable with commercial games that a 21st century human is used to. A game that is educative but is not engaging enough, can not survive in 21st century.

Educational games in general, should also reflect a well accepted pedagogical theories and practices. If used in classrooms, they are better to mach or complement the teachers preferred approach.

Another big challenge is how to incorporate more complex content in a learning game.


4) Who will be responsible for developing the content of games?
Since cool graphics or complex gameplay is not necessary to have a good game. Teachers(and in some cases students themselves) can make their own games based on the desired learning outcome.

In a more general setting the content of the game should be thought trough by educators, parents and psychologists to ensure a good quality learning experience.


5) How will entertainment value be weighted against educational value?
Well, as mentioned in "digital games+learning"(3), the aim of a learning game is not to entertain but to teach. Therefore the learning part can not be sacrificed for entertainment. Fun factor is important to engage the learner, however it does not mean that game designer have to sacrifice content to achieve it. In fact the art of a good game design is to present the educational content in a challenging and engaging gameplay and narrative.

The entertaining elements in game(well also depends on designer's choice on the element) should be kept within reason, because based on cognitive theories of attention, there is a limit to an individual's ability to concentrate. The fun or entertaining elements should not distract the user from the main objective and learning content of the game.

Second animation in "Motion Graphic Design" class

It was fun :D

Game Analysis: a variation of Rummy(card game)

General:
This game is a variation of card game Rummy. The game is played with 2 or more people , the aim of the game is to get rid of all the cards in hand. Cards have numeral values of their number and face cards have the value of 10.

steps:
1.from a shuffle deck of cards, player1 gets 13 cards and other players gets 11 cards. and the rest are stock deck faced down.

it it closed hand(players dont know what other person has in his hands just should see the number of cards)

2.player1 discards 2 cards by her choice into discard deck

the looping part:
3.player either can choose the last discarded card to pick or take one from the common deck

4.player CAN(dont have to) lay down a set of cards with either of these conditions:

-three or more cards from same suit are sequential(for example 2,3,4 from same suit)

-three or more cards have the same number or same face(for example 8,8,8 or three kings)

*the condition for the step4 is that the first time one does it, the lay down set should add up to at least 30 based on cards' numerical values.

**jokers are considered wildcard and can fit anywhere

5. Player CAN(dont have to) add some of her cards to the sets of cards laying on the ground if the cards goes with the suit and sequence or has the same face/number

6. Player can take a joker from the laying down cards and replace it with the fitting card

7. player should discards one card from her hand to the discard deck

8.the winner is the player that gets rid of the cards fastest. And the rest of players will count the value of their hands. the player that has not laid down any set will get 80 point automatically.




Game Analysis:
Type of game:

-Non-cooperative (it is a competitive game, no teaming up unless people want to help each other out),

-Symmetrical (rules are same for all)

-Zero-sum(there is definitely a winner)

-Sequential(players take turn in action)

-Games with imperfect information(players don't see each others hands)

-not sure if it is "Combinatorial" or "Infinitely long" although it can not go on for ever if players actually want to win. Maybe this phenomenon does not apply to this game.




Winning strategy:

If we start the game with the mind-set of perfectly logical players and no personal background information on other players:

I have not found a sure way to win but:

-Discard any card that its possible set-mates, are gone to discard already

-It is wise to lay the first +30 set ASP to avoid 80 point

-If had the choice, discard the cards with highest value first

-If laying a set with joker, place joker in place of the card that you are sure is discarded

Paper Review: Research-Based Design of Pedagogical Agent Roles: a Review, Progress, and Recommendations Yanghee Kim & Amy L. Baylor

Paper link here

Original Keywords : Pedagogical agents . Experimental research .Virtual humans.Interface design
My Keywords : Motivating learning , pedagogical digital agent, human-agent relationship


The paper caught my attention because it was in the context of educational tools and promised to have practical recommendations on designing pedagogical agents.

In summary they have designed a learning environment and in an experimental setting expose learners to 3 different artificial pedagogical agents: mentor, expert and motivator. Then they measured the students' motivation and learning outcomes plus their perception of agent's character(did they perceive them as intended by designer).


It related to the Reeves and Nass's work they found several social and human-like relation between students and agnates. For example students preferred agents with the same race as themselves, they felt motivated or hurt with agents comments.
They also discovered that agent's intelligence is not a must, for having a human-like experience with agent and improved learning outcomes: "The pre-scripted agents in our original study, however, effectively played their intended instructional roles without being particularly intelligent."(Kim & Baylor, 2016)
In addition, they found out that social and human characteristics were assigned to agent by students. for example expert was seen as more credible.


practical suggestions:
Split-persona effect: In this work they found out that two agents each with its distinct persona is more effective than one agent that has both functionalities. For example having "expert" and "motivator" works better than having only "mentor"agent that is "supposedly"(because I dont know how they actually implemented this persona) combines those two qualities. The rationale as they put it : "It seemed that it was easier for students to figuratively compartmentalize the agent information when it was delivered by two distinct sources."(Kim & Baylor, 2016)

Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. L. (2016). Research-based design of pedagogical agent roles: a review, progress, and recommendations. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(1), 160-169.

The Media Equation of Byron Reeves and Clifford Nass

The "question 3" and my general comment on this:
I might be misunderstanding their point here, but I cant really distinguish between modern media and older static media such as paintings and books. Don't we all know novels are just stories, but we get absorbed in it and sometimes worry about the characters?

1. if the equation means: people react to media in "somewhat similar way" as they react to other people:

I think this phenomena of giving a character or personality to objects/things other than human, is not a new phenomena. Also I believe that it is not a 0 or 1 thing. We do it all the time, in various levels. I have seen (moderately normal)people name things, assign them characters even talk in their behalf. When the "thing" gets more complicated(respond in some way or show signs of intelligent) or they are human-like in appearance(dolls, things with faces ..), more people tend to do this. At the end everything has a character even based on simples features such as colour and shape. A red triangle is "dangerous" and a blue circle is calm and friendly. And based on that our reaction to them is different.

2. If this equation says that people respond to media not in "similar" way but the "same" way as they do to people:
 then I don't really agree with it. We even might in some cases react exactly the same way, but it is not in all aspects. For example "do we get uncomfortable in front of tv or computer? to appear with the clothing that we wont like to be seen by other people? or when we do things that we don't want others to see?"
Then again it totally depends on the abilities of the media. Im sure if we had a judgmental tv with cameras and image recognition, to make fun of us when we are in our messy pajamas ; then we would feel uncomfortable sitting there : We react to things/people in the way they act(or the way they are). Same goes with people in coma/unconscious state; we dont react to them the same way as conscious people.

the rest is my notes on the article, the answer to question 3 ends here.
Computer skills:
-basic web design: javascript, html, css
-some old programming skills: java, shell, perl..
-some prototyping: axure



on "Old Brains Flooded by New Technologies"
I better read the original document of Reeves and Nass on this, BUT: why they brought evolution to the discussion in the first place? It was going relatively soundly before this  section jumped in, destroyed the flow of logic in the text and left me confused: " why they brought evolution to the discussion in the first place?"
So do they really mean that if evolution was faster, or technology was slower; we would have adapted to it so that we could recognise it from reality and would not respond to media as we do now?
Well, it is really hard to tell what would happen if this or that, but now that we are speculating, lets speculate!: Evolution generally serves as a mechanism for survival. living things adapt and change to improve their chance of living. The question here is what is the survival benefit of detecting media as fake?
Lets take dreams for an example. Dreams are something quite similar to media in that sense: it looks real but it is not. We are dreaming for long enough I guess that if there was a need, we would have developed an ability to realise that it is a dream. but so far we still perceive it as very real while experiencing it.
Moral: not everything that was around long enough, is worth evolutionary action!


on "Source Credibility"
lets start by saying that I don't buy the labeling computers as "news" and "entertainment" in ''source credibility" argument. I think it does not have much to do with people finding TVs or computer's person like that they are influenced by labels. Similar effects is seen when different colour of packaging is used or a nicer package makes the user feel or evaluate the product as "better quality". I bet one could see a similar result by tagging a screwdriver as "professional" and other as "household". People would start reporting all sorts of better performance from "professional" one.

"Who is the source of information" experiment under the same "source credibility" section is also a bit shaky. Experiment shows that people's evaluation of helpfulness, friendliness etc. is different when they make then think about programmer as the source. but why it is different and does that prove that people initially think of computer itself as source? Dont get me wrong I dont oppose the idea but the experiment only.

How to organise study materials?

After all these years of studying, I still don't know how to manage and sort information that I receive in different classes. And I feel stupid about it. There is more: how to keep track of deadlines, read the suggested literature, explore different ideas that came to my mind during the classwork etc.

I am having this idea of putting aside Sunday morning for going through course platforms and summarising the info in calendars for example.

Lets see how it goes!

theory informed design

while thinking(and looking around) about how to design based on SDT and how to evaluate an existing design based on SDT(Self Determination Theory), I came across the similar papers for activity theory. They seems informative and in a time-wise more relaxed state, I should read them.

However the whole thing reminded me of foundations class, where I learned about all these theories for the first time. I am not sure if it is only me or it is a general thing, but I have not actually used any of those theories in my later app designs in other courses. (ok i may have unconsciously used my knowledge in my life including design. what i mean is that I have not used them consciously )


I actually might have to revisit reading materials from foundations and see what I can use in my current state.