MAking Games In CollaborAtion for Learning (MAGICAL) · This project has been funded with support...

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.

This publication [communication] reflects the views only of the author, and the

Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the

information contained therein.

519006-LLP-1-2011-1-IT-KA3-KA3MP

MAGICAL - MAking Games In CollaborAtion for Learning

MAking Games In CollaborAtion for Learning

(MAGICAL)

Final Report

Public Part

D1.3 PUBLIC CNR-ITD SEPT 2014 <date>

2

Deliverable number D1.3

Dissemination level public

Delivery date Sept. 2014

Status final

Lead Author(s) CNR-ITD

Contributing author(s) TUT, MMU, KUL

Contact [email protected]

Co-ordinator: CNR-ITD – Istituto per le Tecnologie Didattiche (IT)

Partners: KUL – Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (BE)

MMU – Manchester Metropolitan University (UK)

TUT – Tampere University of Technology (FI)

Project duration: 01/01/2012 - 01/04/2014

mailto:[email protected]


3

Project information

Project acronym: MAGICAL

Project title: MAking Games In CollaborAtion for Learning

Project number: 519006-LLP-1-2011-1-IT-KA3-KA3MP

Sub-programme or KA: KA3 (ICT) Multilateral projects

Project website: www.magical-project.net

Reporting period: From 01/02/2013

To 01/10/2014

Report version: V0.1

Date of preparation: 06/11/2014

Beneficiary organisation: CNR-ITD

Project coordinator: Michela Ott

Project coordinator organisation: CNR-ITD

Project coordinator telephone number: +39-0106475328

Project coordinator email address: [email protected];

This project has been funded with support from the European Commission.

This publication [communication] reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot

be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

© 2008 Copyright Education, Audiovisual & Culture Executive Agency.

The document may be freely copied and distributed provided that no modifications are made, that the source

is acknowledged and that this copyright notice is included.


4

Executive Summary

This report presents the outcomes of a multilateral European project called Making Games

in Collaboration for Learning (MAGICAL), which was co-funded under the European

Commission's Lifelong Learning Programme (KA3). The project set out to investigate the

viability and added value of Collaborative Digital Game Making (CDGM) for learning,

especially for supporting learners’ transversal skills such as collaboration, creativity, problem

solving and ICT literacy. MAGICAL partners see CDGM as an innovative, student-centred

form of ‘learning by doing’ that takes the established advantages of Game-Based Learning a

step further into territory beyond game-play. It challenges teams of young learners to

collaborate in the design and creation of their own digital games - games that they produce

for each other, for their community of schoolmates, friends and family, and for their wider

networks.

MAGICAL’s investigation of CDGM’s potential for enhancing learning processes is

accompanied by an explicit mission to support evidence-based propagation of that potential

in teacher education, practitioner training, and in classroom practice, especially in primary

and lower secondary schools. As a European initiative, the project brought together partners

from Belgium, Finland, Italy and the UK. The project unfolded over a 33-month period that

concluded on 1 October, 2014.

The final report describes MAGICAL’s objectives and the approach that the consortium has

adopted to pursue them. It gives an account of how project activities unfolded and of the

research results and outputs that were generated in the process. In addition, the report

describes how MAGICAL is positioned in relation to stakeholders and the education

community generally, with a view towards dissemination and exploitation of project results.

The report also looks briefly at the plans and prospects for furthering CDGM and for

consolidating MAGICAL’s contribution to that effort, especially in terms of EU policy.

Acknowledgment

The partners in the MAGICAL consortium wish to thank all those who participated in and contributed

to the efforts described in this report. Special thanks goes to the learners and practitioners who

collaborated in running field activities in their schools, SEN centres and universities.


5

Table of Contents

1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 7

2 Project Objectives ............................................................................................................................ 8

3 Project Approach ........................................................................................................................... 10

3.1 Preparation ............................................................................................................................ 10

3.2 Implementation ..................................................................................................................... 12

3.2.1 Implementation in Teacher Education & Training ........................................................ 15

3.2.2 Implementation in schools (pilot experiments) ............................................................ 15

4 Project Outcomes & Results .......................................................................................................... 21

4.1 Research findings .................................................................................................................. 21

4.1.1 Findings on learner Experience ..................................................................................... 21

4.1.2 Findings on practitioner experience .............................................................................. 26

4.1.3 Findings on SEN students .............................................................................................. 30

4.1.4 Findings on platform design & usability ........................................................................ 33

4.2 Game Making Products, Resources & Services ..................................................................... 33

4.2.1 Magos platform (game editor/s, games) ....................................................................... 33

4.2.2 Community Library of Digital Game Making Environments for Learners ..................... 36

4.2.3 Pedagogical Planner ...................................................................................................... 38

4.2.4 Resource Kit for Training Teachers/Practitioners ......................................................... 39

4.2.5 Game- making research knowledge base ..................................................................... 39

4.2.6 Scientific publications and project presentations ......................................................... 39

5 Partnership .................................................................................................................................... 43

5.1 Consortium ............................................................................................................................ 43

5.2 Networking and Clustering .................................................................................................... 43

6 Plans for the Future ....................................................................................................................... 46

7 Contribution to EU policies............................................................................................................ 48

8 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 49

List of figures

Fig.1 –Overview of protocol for experimental case studies .................................................................. 11

Fig.2 –MAGICAL classes at work ............................................................................................................ 16


6

Fig.3 – Aspects of group work in different organizational settings ....................................................... 16 Fig.4 – Classroom layouts for different experiments ............................................................................ 17 Fig.5 –MAGOS platform ......................................................................................................................... 34 Fig.6 –MAGOS lite .................................................................................................................................. 34 Fig.7 – Example of Magos Classic GUI ................................................................................................... 35 Fig.8 – DGM platform library ................................................................................................................. 37 Fig.9 – Pedagogical Planner ................................................................................................................... 38 Fig.10 – Magical presentations at conferences ..................................................................................... 40

Fig.11 – Magical showcase at the Athens Edupolicies 2014 Conference .............................................. 41

List of tables

Table 1 - Overview of pilot experiments performed in MAGICAL ......................................................... 17

Table 2 –Data on MAGICAL experiments per platform (Sploder vs Magos Lite) .................................. 18

Table 3 – Age of learner population ...................................................................................................... 21

Table 4 – Training activities in ITE ......................................................................................................... 27

Table 5 – Digital gaming background of trainees .................................................................................. 27

Table 6 – Trainee attitudes to GBL & CDGM ......................................................................................... 28

Table 7 – Trainee expectations about CDGM deployment ................................................................... 28

Table 8 - Trainee expectations of CDGM outcomes .............................................................................. 29

Table 9 – Comparison of DGM platforms .............................................................................................. 35

Table 10 – MAGICAL consortium partners & responsibilities ............................................................... 44

Abbreviations and Acronyms

CDGM Collaborative Digital Game Making

CPD Continuing Professional Development

D Deliverable

DGM Collaborative Digital Game Making

EC European Commission

GBL Game Based Learning

GUI Graphic User Interface

ITE Initial Teacher Education

SEN Special Education Needs

TEL Technology Enhanced Learning

WP Work Package


7

1 Introduction

This final report presents the outcomes of the MAGICAL project and describes the path that led to

their generation. This begins with a look at project objectives, which are outlined in Section 2. A

description of how these were pursued is provided in Section 3 Project Approach, which gives an

account of the activities carried out during the project and how they unfolded, together with some

reflection about the process and its management. The findings from those activities and the outputs

that were generated are described in Section 4 Project Outcomes & Results. Section 5 looks at how

MAGICAL is situated in, and linked up with, the wider education community, especially those

segments concerned with furthering educational innovation through Game Based Learning (GBL) and

Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) generally. Partners’ plans to consolidate and propagate the

outcomes from MAGICAL, and to further their investigation of CDGM issues, are outlined in Section

6. Section 7 gives an account of how MAGICAL outcomes align with and contribute to EU policy. This

is followed by bibliographic references. Supplementary documentation on MAGICAL digital game

making tools is provided separately.

Each of the main sections concludes with a brief list of MAGICAL deliverables and other references

where you can read more details about the topics covered. Links to online resources mentioned in

each section are given in the footnotes.


8

2 Project Objectives

Making Games in Collaboration for Learning (MAGICAL)1 is a multilateral European project that set

out to investigate the viability and potential added value of Collaborative Digital Game Making

(CDGM) for learning, especially for supporting learners’ transversal skills such as collaboration,

creativity, problem solving and ICT literacy. MAGICAL partners see CDGM as an innovative, student-

centred form of ‘learning by doing’ that takes the established advantages of Game-Based Learning a

step further into territory beyond game-play. It challenges teams of young learners to collaborate in

the design and creation of their own digital games - games that they produce for each other, for their

community of schoolmates, friends and family, and for their wider networks.

Co-funded under the European Commission's Lifelong Learning Programme (KA3), MAGICAL

unfolded over a 33-month period that concluded on 1 October, 2014. The project consortium is led

by the Institute for Educational Technology - CNR (Italy), and includes three other European

institutions with expertise in Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL), Game-Based Learning (GBL) and

related teacher training: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (Belgium), Manchester Metropolitan

University (UK) and Tampere University of Technology (Finland).

MAGICAL combines a research agenda - to investigate CDGM’s potential for enhancing learning

processes - with an explicit mission to support evidence-based propagation of that established

potential through support for wider uptake in teacher education, in practitioner training, and in

classroom practice, especially primary and lower secondary schools. These objectives were

approached from four different but complementary perspectives that reflect the core interests and

activities each consortium partner pursued in MAGICAL.

MAGICAL researchers set out to investigate game making as an innovative path to learning, one they

believe bring proactive, student-centred, ‘learning by doing’ characteristics to Game-Based Learning.

From the research perspective, the team was particularly interested in discovering whether and how

the approach might be adopted for activating and sustaining transversal skills such as collaboration,

creativity, problem solving and ICT literacy.

Inspired by the principles of design-based research, partners defined and implemented a CDGM

methodology that was piloted across the interconnected areas of teacher education / practitioner

training and classroom practice. These activities included theoretical and practical training for

practitioners, coupled with experimental pilots run in primary and lower secondary schools in various

European countries. The pilots were designed to examine the approach’s general impact on

teaching/learning processes, including those involving learners who have Special Education Needs

(SEN). The classroom pilots were run using different game making platforms, including tools specially

developed for the purpose within the MAGICAL project.

The aim of field activities was to shed light on a number of key aspects:

the added value digital game making (DGM) offers as a student-centred, ‘learning by doing’

approach to Game-Based Learning

1 http://www.magical-project.net


9

the potential DGM offers for activating and supporting learners’ transversal skills such as

collaboration, creativity, problem solving and ICT literacy

the viability of DGM in the framework of an inclusive approach to education

the applicability of the approach with different actors in different contexts, from Initial

Teacher Education (ITE) and Continuing Professional Development (CPD) to mainstream

schools and SEN specific settings.

MAGICAL’s ambitions do not stop at the accumulation of evidence-based research findings derived

from project experimentation and elsewhere. Indeed, a key objective is to support the consolidation

and evidence-based propagation of CDGM, from teacher education and practitioner training through

to classroom practice (especially at primary and lower secondary levels) and educational

policymaking. The objective here, then, was to distil the accumulated research knowledge and

practical know-how into outputs that are of use for advocacy, i.e. supporting wider acceptance and

adoption of CDGM as a means for innovation in educational practice. For more on this, see Sections 4

to 6.

It is generally acknowledged that effective leveraging of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL)

affordances in formal education relies to a great extent on the practitioner, the person who

(co)designs the intervention, adopts and deploys the learning environment, orchestrates and

assesses interactions and learning processes. This pivotal role calls on educators to carefully consider

their overall pedagogical intensions and strategy, ideally by designing a learning scenario that guides

them right through the process.

Hence MAGICAL seeks to shed light on the actions and support needed to encourage, consolidate

and amplify adoption. The aim is to understand:

how best to encourage practitioners to adopt DGM and to support them in implementing it

in their practice.

the knowledge and skills practitioners’ need for effective implementation of CDGM in

teaching practice

the methods for helping them acquire that know-how in the contexts of Initial Teacher

Education (ITE) and Continuing Professional Development (CPD)

the support required from adoption, through implementation, to assessment of outcomes

the steps required to gain acceptance of DGM by stakeholders (educators, families,

education authorities, policy makers, researchers)

This understanding has been sought through the successive stages of design, implementation,

piloting and assessment of the overall DGBL methodology adopted in MAGICAL, embracing the

development of key resources and tools as specified in Section 4.

Find out more:

Deliverable1.2 Progress Report


10

3 Project Approach

This section starts with a brief summary of the approach defined at the outset of MAGICAL for

pursuing the project objectives described in Section 2. This is followed by an account of project

implementation, i.e. how project activities actually unfolded and how this governed the generation

of outputs and results. The section concludes with some reflections about this process and its

management over the course of the co-funding period.

3.1 Preparation

Approaching the project’s overarching objectives from the complementary research perspectives

mentioned in Section 2, partners cooperated to identify and consolidate an appropriate strategy for

implementing the CDGM methodology in different European settings and in different education

contexts. This was to entail the deployment of pilot activities with end users (educators/trainers and

learners) within a coordinated research framework that, with the help of the required tools,

resources and research instruments, ensured generation of data useful for addressing the key

research questions.

As mentioned, these efforts were also expected to generate crucial practical know-how about (a) the

multifaceted issues entailed in CDGM implementation, (b) CDGM’s extensibility, in terms of its

potential adoption for SEN and transfer to contexts outside the project context, (c) the suitability of

MAGICAL tools and resources for supporting the uptake of CDGM in the wider education community

(see Section 5).

Research strategy

The research strategy adopted was to carry out a set of coordinated case studies in the different

operational contexts. These would be based largely, but not entirely, on qualitative methods inspired

by the principles of DBR (Design-Based Research Collective, 2003). They were to cover the

interconnected areas of teacher education / practitioner training and classroom practice. This

included theoretical and practical training for practitioners, coupled with experimental pilots run in

primary and lower secondary schools in various European countries. To carry out these field activities

and ensure that the data generated from them served the purposes of the case studies and the

overarching research concerns, the consortium assembled and deployed a set of tools, resources and

research instruments whose development is described hereafter.

Preparation of MAGICAL’s CDGM pilot experiences called for a jointly constructed plan that

combined two fundamental elements: a reference scenario, i.e. a suggested sequence of classroom

activities to deploy; and a research protocol, namely a set of research tools, instructions for use and

sequential scheduling, for gathering pertinent experimental data. Shown below in fig.1, the plan was

intended as an intervention framework that partners could adapt in accordance with the conditions

and restraints characterising their specific experimental context (DGM platform used, make up of

learner and staff populations, mainstream or SEN-specific setting, amount of available class time,

etc.)


11

Figure 1 - overview of protocol for experimental case studies

The scenario comprised three basic phases for learning activities. These were carried out within or

across lessons/sessions.

Phase 1 – Introduction: pilot intervention and CDGM are presented; editor and related games

presented; pupils play pre-prepared games to familiarise themselves with game formats and

mechanics.

Phase 2 - Game-making: teams commence game design and creation following agreed/teacher-

suggested requirements. Team/class activity carefully monitored. Authoring may continue out of

class, where agreed.

Phase 3 – Peer-review and reflection: teams play each other’s games and give peer reviews,

teams appraise received feedback and review/revise game; joint reflection on process,

performances, activities, outcomes.

The set of research tools needed to gather data for the case studies was jointly identified by project

partners, each taking responsibility for the tools required for pursuing their specific research

perspective. The process undertaken to produce those tools and the outcomes generated are

reported in Deliverable 5.2.

Requirements for CDGM pilots

A cornerstone for pursuing project objectives in MAGICAL was the availability of a suitable digital

platform for designing, making, playing and sharing digital games in field activities. This platform

needed to be usable and engaging for a target that included primary school pupils and, potentially,

young learners with disabilities of different kinds. In addition, it needed to be useable from the

educational and research perspectives as well. Accordingly, a set of requirements was defined and,

on this basis, a study was carried out to establish the state of the art in game making environments

designed (or usable) in learning contexts. As explained in D1.2 Periodic Report, the study

subsequently morphed into the MAGICAL public library of digital game-making tools for learning (see

Section 4.2.2)


12

What emerged from these early investigations was that none of the available platforms had specific

features that allowed (potentially distributed) teams of young learners to work together online in

real-time collaborative game authoring. This gap represented an opportunity to make a significant

impact in the field (both technologically and educationally). This was lent credence by the fact that

game making continues to gain momentum worldwide as an innovative learning approach. So, as

reported in the following subsection, the project consortium decided to make provision for design

and production of a new easy-to-use collaborative game-making environment called Magos.

3.2 Implementation

Overall, once made clear that no existing game-making platform was perfectly fitting with the

MAGICAL objectives, the implementation efforts involved the macro phases of:

developing a suitable digital environment for use by teachers/trainers and learners;

Producing and delivering short courses for teachers/trainers on GBL and CDGM;

Running CDGM classrooms pilots and gathering relevant research data;

Implementing MAGICAL’s CDGM method and tools outside of consortium contexts to test their transferability

Gathering and analysing experimentation results;

Using results to fine-tune project outputs for wider CDGM take-up.

The CDGM methodology developed in MAGICAL was piloted across the interconnected areas of

teacher education / practitioner training and classroom practice. These activities included theoretical

and practical training for practitioners, coupled with experimental pilots run in primary and lower

secondary schools in various European countries. The pilots were designed to examine the

approach’s general impact on teaching/learning processes, including those involving learners who

have Special Education Needs (SEN). The unfolding of these activities is described hereafter together

with the rationale and main features of two key tools: the CDGM platform and the pedagogical

planner.

CDGM platform

As explained above, investigation of project requirements and their cross-referencing with the state-

of-the-art study of game making environments led the project consortium to make provision for

design and production of a new easy-to-use collaborative game-making environment called Magos. It

was conceived as a multiuser game making tool based on simplified high-level authoring processes.

The idea was to let game authors bypass programming syntax and construct a game in an intuitive

“hands-on” manner essentially based on dragging and dropping elements into a tiled grid, which was

both work area and game space (see Section 4.2.1.). To make this a possibility in a real-time

multiuser context, implementation of the browser-based platform drew on the latest web

development technologies available for simultaneous editing and real-time UI synchronization.

Accommodating the production of Magos involved some reorganisation in the allocation of work

effort and also in the scheduling of field activities. To safeguard activities and outputs, a suitable risk

management plan was devised. Indeed, implementing real-time multiuser editing in the manner

originally envisaged, and making it sufficiently robust for use in teacher training and school pilots,

proved to be a considerable technological challenge, leading to postponements in the expected roll-

out date. Consequently, the risk management plan was implemented. Firstly, an alternative game-


13

making platform was sought for MAGICAL’s preparatory student- teacher courses in Belgium and the

UK (see Section 3.2.1), which were bound by the constraints of academic timetabling. Re-

examination of original requirements and of the earlier study of available platforms (Earp et al, 2014)

led to adoption of the Retro Arcade Game Editor on the Sploder platform. A key element in the

choice was the need to use a browser-based platform as installing external software or plugins in

schools can be extremely problematic or simply not permitted.

Field activities in the other countries – Finland, Greece and Italy – were not linked to university

courses and so would be performed with Magos as planned. In the meantime, a changeover in

software development personnel at TUT made the task of resolving the ongoing implementation

issues more complex, resulting in further delays in the completion of Magos. Consequently, it was

decided that the field activities would effectively take place over two rounds. The student-teacher

courses underway in Belgium and the UK using Sploder constituted the first round, which took place

in the 2012-2013 academic year. The remaining practitioner preparation and field experimentation

activities would constitute a second round implemented in 2013-2014 academic year. This

rescheduling was made possible by a six-month extension that the EACEA granted on MAGICAL’s

request to implement the risk management plan (this is reported within the MAGICAL final-report

Confidential part).

Indications from the first round Initial Teacher Education (ITE) courses held in Belgium and the UK

pointed to student-teachers’ particular interest in the practical module dealing with game making

tools and practice. As the participants had learned to use Sploder in that module, it was decided to

continue with that game editing platform in the Belgium and UK activities, with appropriate

adjustment made to the experiments.

In the meantime, it became clear that a back-up solution was needed in view of continuing obstacles

to the rollout of Magos. So the consortium agreed to the development process being forked into two

streams: one the one hand the original version of Magos - later renamed Magos Classic (MC) - and

on the other a lighter alternative version called Magos Lite (ML), to be rolled out in time for the

upcoming round of field experiments (for descriptions of MC and ML, (see Section 4.2.1).

Magos Lite (ML) was conceived as a simple-to-use, straightforward game editor for creating side-

scrolling games on a desktop computer or tablet. It is essentially a single-user tool to be operated by

a single game author or by a team, most probably working all together face-to-face. It offers authors

a limited choice of pre-set game types and formats, with predefined game-space and mechanics. Like

Magos Classic, it does not require programming skills: authors select the elements to include,

defining key game behaviour parameters, and package the completed game for the player/s.

However, ML game templates include a domain-based learning task, e.g. matching or grouping (user-

inserted) items. So game design also calls on the author to produce that task by providing and

structuring the related learning content, namely a set of numbers (for maths-based games) or a set

of text items. ML is fully implemented into the original Magos portal, allowing learners to produce,

play and publish games, and to share them within a community of fellow students.

These characteristics were influenced by the need to implement a platform that was technologically

simpler and more robust, and at the same time easier to deploy and integrate into classroom. The

former requirements suggested the shift to a single-user tool. This meant that the locus for pupil

collaboration would reside largely in classroom orchestration and practice, rather than in the digital

domain, and so the research strategy and tools adopted for the experiments were adjusted


14

accordingly. The ease-of-use requirements emerged from the first round experiences in Belgium and

UK with Sploder. Accordingly, ML embodies a template approach, with predefined game space and

mechanics that guide and scaffold the design process. The cost, in terms of more limited expressive

scope in authoring, is offset by:

lower entry threshold, in that ML is accessible to a younger, potentially more inclusive, and less ICT-expert target;

easier learning curve for practitioners and learners alike, leaving more net time to dedicate to the actual game making process and reducing demands for on-the-fly support during that process;

tighter focus on some key game elements, like goals and scoring mechanisms.

The other key first round indication informing ML was that, in game making, teachers sought more

immediate integration with curriculum subjects and would appreciate support for that. So ML games

centre on a “mission” that users define by choosing a mission template and then providing and

structuring the required learning content, namely a set of numbers for maths-based games or a set

of text items for other subjects and topics.

As described in D5.2, ML was deployed for classroom experiments carried out in Greece, Italy and

Finland. For these pilot experiences, partners drew on a common reference scenario that proposed

game making activities with a ‘standard’ set up and infrastructure, i.e. pupils working in dyads/triads

on desktop computers, usually in a designated ICT/computer room. However, opportunities arose to

use ML in other contexts as well, allowing the consortium to gain a broader picture of the possible

applications for the proposed game making methodology. One of these opportunities regarded

exergaming (Earp et al, 2014). Since ML had originally been optimized for use on tablet devices

(iPads), the possibility existed for ML-produced games to be controlled by physical movement, thus

opening the way for exergaming activities to be run in schools equipped with mobile technology,

such as those in Finland. The exergaming experiences carried out there generated positive reactions

and encouraging outcomes (reported in D5.2), suggesting that the combination of game making and

exergaming is worthy of further investigation and testing. In the meantime, the MAGICAL

experiences in this direction have been published in an international guide to educational innovation

in Finnish schools (Earp et al, 2014).

Pedagogical Planner2

The division of field activities into two distinct rounds over the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 academic

years, as mentioned above, opened the way for a supplementary tool development effort that was

not originally envisaged, namely iterative versioning of the Pedagogical Planner (PP) tool. User

feedback gathered from round one (and early round two) was used to implement modifications that

helped to align the tool more closely with practitioners’ practical requirements. These changes

regarded tuning of the underlying schema presented to users for structuring, describing and reading

plans, addition of some extra functions, and an overhaul of the Graphic User Interface (GUI). So, in

effect, the round one version (see D4.2 Pedagogical Planner Provision) effectively represents a beta,

while the revised version resulting from round two is, to all intents and purposes, the release version

(see Section 4.2.3 and D4.3 Pedagogical Plans - Addendum).

2 http://www.magical.itd.cnr.it/

http://www.magical.itd.cnr.it/


15

3.2.1 Implementation in Teacher Education & Training

A variety of training actions took place throughout the project, not just to prepare practitioners for

subsequent classroom experiments but also, in a much broader sense, to gain essential

understanding about the relationship between CDGM methodology and the fields of teacher

education and practitioner training. This effort largely centred around monitoring and evaluation of

teacher education initiatives carried out in Belgium and the UK to ascertain how best to approach in

CDGM Initial Teacher Education (ITE), what leads neophyte practitioners to adopt CDGM, and the

knowledge and skills they need for effective implementation in teaching practice (see Section 4.1.2).

The activities run for these specific purposes were:

Round One (2012-2013 academic year)

UK, Jan 2013 - Full day training course for all Postgraduate Secondary trainee teachers (n=~250) using version 1 of the training course

UK, Mar 2013 - Half day optional training course for all Postgraduate Primary trainee teachers (n=~50) using version 2 of the training course

Round Two (2013-2014 academic year)

Belgium, Oct-Nov 2013: Two half-day training courses for trainee secondary school teachers (n=~50) using version 2 of the training course

UK, Jan 2014 - Half day training course for all Postgraduate Secondary trainee teachers (n=~250) using version 2 of the training course, delivered by Secondary Geography trainees

These were the subject of close monitoring and evaluation, the results of which are reported in

Sections 3.1.2 and 3.2.4.

Training activities were also carried out as part of Round Two in Italy and in Greece. These had a

twofold purpose: to prepare practitioners for classroom experiments in those countries and to test

the transfer of MAGICAL training course materials in CPD initiatives implemented outside the UK

and Belgium.

Italy, Feb-Mar 2014, three one-hour training sessions for four rehabilitation professionals working at SEN support centre (visual impairment, autism, learning disabilities)

Italy, Feb-Mar 2014, three one -hour training sessions for six primary school teachers from different subject areas.

The training sessions in Italy drew on an adapted and translated versions of the version 2 training

course.

Teacher preparation in Greece

Given the special nature of activities in Greece (see Section 3.2.2 below), the training that the

teachers underwent differed in nature, structure and content from that carried out in partner

countries. Here, a blended approach was adopted that combined an initial one-day face-to-face

workshop held in Athens (08/03/2013 – 15 participants) with follow-up activities conducted online

(via Moodle, Dropbox and email).

3.2.2 Implementation in schools (pilot experiments)

As explained in Section 3.2 MAGICAL’s research strategy involved a set of coordinated case studies in

the different operational contexts


16

Figure 2 – MAGICAL classes at work

Organisational framework - research protocol

The case studies were underpinned by the principles of Design Based Research (DBR) and framed by

the combination of the above-described reference scenario with a jointly-defined and constructed

research protocol. The protocol comprises a set of research tools and instructions for their

implementation in the experiments, together with indications for data gathering. For pupils’ group

work the plan proscribed dyads or triads (self-formed or assigned) at well-spaced workstations,

possibly arranged in a U or rectangular formation. The games that pupils played in the introduction

phase were drawn from those created by (student) teachers during training courses or workshops.

Figure 3 –Aspects of group work in different organizational settings

http://magical-project.net/?q=node/77


17

Different classroom layouts were adopted in different experiments (Fig 4)

Figure 4 - Classroom layouts for different experiments

Implementation activities

As explained in the previous Section, field activities in MAGICAL (training + classroom experiments)

effectively took place over two rounds: the first in the 2012-2013 academic year and the second in

the 2013-2014 academic year. Round One experiments were run in the UK and Finland only (around

May 2013), while Round Two experiments took place in all countries, from September 2013 to May

2014. The overview of MAGICAL pilot interventions is given in the table below.

Table 1 – Overview of all experiments performed in MAGICAL

Country classroom cases

classroom

hours

Learner

population size

DGM platform used

BE 5* 11 42 (+teachers) Sploder

UK 3 6 83 (+teachers) Sploder

IT 15** 49 176 (+teachers) Magos Lite

FI 6 43 135 (+teachers) Magos Lite

GR 8 34 124 (+ teachers) Magos Lite

* Includes 4 classes in SEN-specific schools (total 28 pupils involved)

**Includes 9 mainstream classes with a total of 12 registered SEN pupils, plus six individual cases of SEN students attending

game making sessions

with a rehab assistant at a SEN centre.


18

As explained in Section 3.2.2, in the experiments two different DGM platforms were used: Sploder in

Belgium and the UK, Magos Lite in Finland, Greece and Italy. They were subdivided as follows:

Table 2 –Data on MAGICAL experiments per platform (Sploder vs Magos Lite)

platform classroom cases classroom hours Learner population size

Sploder 13 17 125

Magos Lite 24 126 430

Total 37 143 560

Belgium

The pilots in Belgium focused predominantly on issues related to SEN. Four out of the five case

studies conducted involved small SEN-specific classes. Belgian schools follow strict curriculum and

lesson planning, making it an effort to convince schools to participate in pilot experiments. As a

result, access to classes was limited, so the three scenario phases were conducted in a total time of 2

hours run in a single session with each participating class. Sploder was used as the DGM platform.

UK

The UK research mainly concerned the student teacher experience. This aspect is foregrounded in

the data collected for the key research questions on Practitioner training & professional

development . It was also central in the first of three case studies, which investigated the piloting of

the training approach and materials. In UK schools, SEN pupils are not typically segregated from

mainstream educational provision, so it was not possible to undertake cases in fully SEN

environments. In the UK, cross-curricular, or 21st century, skills are expected to be embedded in

subject disciplines. So for the UK experiments MAGICAL’s CDGM methodology had to be integrated

into a specific subject, in this case geography. A group of geography trainee-teachers was trained in

CDGM, and two case studies were selected from those who wished to apply it in their own classes,

and where the school mentors were amenable.

In each of the three case studies, the scenario was delivered over two or three lessons. In all cases

the trainee teachers were seen as co-researchers and were involved in collecting data, setting up the

case visits, and securing permissions from participants.

Italy

Experimentation in Italy was chiefly concerned with CDGM for activating and nurturing transversal

skills, calling for particular attention to the game making process. The pilots were run in mainstream

schools with student populations that include SEN pupils, and also in a SEN rehabilitation centre.

Altogether six case studies were conducted in regular classes (4 in primary and 2 in lower secondary)

and 6 individual case studies in the rehabilitation centre. Three other primary school experiences

were run to investigate CDGM integration in different settings, and also in conjunction with other

approaches for supporting learner creativity (see Finland below). Training and support activities were

performed for in-service teachers and SEN professionals; unlike the UK and Belgium, no student

teachers were involved. An Italian language version of Magos Lite was developed for the pilots; this

was used throughout, except at the lower secondary school where the official language is English.


19

The primary-level interventions were carried out in a single school (two third grades and two fifth

grades) and one lower secondary school (two first year classes). Implementation of CDGM at primary

level was facilitated by the freedom teachers have in shaping classroom activities and addressing the

curriculum. Moreover, teachers at this level have a genuine interest in fostering transversal (or 21st

century) skills, and it is widely held that the earlier these are addressed in formal education, the

better. The lower-secondary interventions took place at an International Baccalaureate School with a

positive attitude to CDGM but stricter curricular requirements and tighter time constraints. For

sessions at the rehabilitation centre, experts worked one-to-one with individual learners in the

presence of a researcher. Technology use features strongly in the centre’s rehab work, which could

well account for why the experts tended to treat CDGM as a methodology for addressing specific

rehabilitation goals.

As to scenario adoption, the primary school experiences followed the three-phase sequence as

distinct lessons. The lower secondary activities were scheduled in two two-hour sessions, since the

Magos Lite platform is simple for 12 year-olds to master. At the rehab centre, phase one become

longer, phase two reduced and phase three was not possible in most cases.

Finland

Pilots in Finland were run with teachers and pupils in mainstream education and focused on two

main aspects: teachers’ and pupils’ capacity to implement CDGM and the suitability of the Magos

platform (especially the Magos Lite editor) for CDGM in primary school. Six pilots were carried out in

six different contexts. Teachers and students were trained to use the Finnish version of Magos Lite

either through a largely self-guided hands-on experience or by following a guided tour. After this, the

teachers/students were allowed to use the tool freely and create a game of their own choosing. Six

case studies were undertaken, each in a different setting and following a slightly different adaptation

of the reference scenario. To investigate classroom implementation issues, some of the cases

extended the second, game-making phase with additional implementation strategies and elements,

as mentioned at the end of this subsection.

Greece

MAGICAL commissioned a Greek primary teachers’ association, GAPMET, to verify the applicability

of MAGICAL’s CDGM methodology, tools and resources in an educational context outside of the

partner countries. Interest also centred on the perceived educational value of game making for

learning in the Greek settings and on issues connected to integration in teaching practice and

classroom activities.

The participating teachers were responsible both for running classroom activities and for gathering

the related research data: in most cases the respective roles were carried out by a pair of teachers.

The Greek experiences began with a one-day preparation and training workshop for teachers held in

Athens, after which interaction between MAGICAL and participating teachers shifted entirely online

(mailing list, Skype, Moodle LCMS and Dropbox cloud-based file storage). The English language

version of the Magos Lite platform was used in the pilots and both the classroom deployment and

data collection activities followed the proposed scenario closely.

Special pilot activities

In addition to the experiments based on the reference scenario, classroom activities were also

performed that entailed integration and/or extension of CDGM with additional strategies and


20

elements. One of these regarded exergaming (Earp et al, 2014). Since Magos Lite (ML) was optimized

for use on tablet devices, the possibility existed for ML-produced games to be controlled by physical

movement, thus opening the way for exergaming activities to be run in schools equipped with mobile

technology, such as those in Finland. The exergaming experiences carried out there generated

positive reactions and encouraging outcomes suggesting that the combination of game making and

exergaming is worthy of further investigation and testing. In the meantime, the MAGICAL

experiences in this direction have been published in an international guide to educational innovation

in Finnish schools (Earp et al, 2014). Other supplementary pilots involved:

a purposely-designed game making activity based on the jigsaw cooperation pattern (team members integrate the different requirements each had been assigned by the researcher),

production of analogue>digital thumbnail drawings as identifiers of digital games

integration of CDGM with the design and production of a novel game control device using a Makey Makey kit3.

The last of these three was tested both in Finland and in Italy.

Find out more:

various project deliverables

3 http://www.magical-project.net/?q=node/88 ; http://www.magical-project.net/?q=node/89 ;

http://www.magical-project.net/?q=%5Cgalasummerschool;

http://www.magical-project.net/?q=node/88


http://www.magical-project.net/?q=%5Cgalasummerschool


21

4 Project Outcomes & Results

As explained in Section 1 Objectives, MAGICAL combines a research agenda - to investigate CDGM’s

potential for enhancing learning processes - with an explicit mission to support evidence-based

propagation in teacher education, in practitioner training, and in classroom practice, especially

primary and lower secondary schools. The outcomes and results of the project are reported here

with these dual objectives in mind. First we examine the research findings and then we look at the

products, resources and services that have been developed in MAGICAL with the express aim of

supporting wider take up of Collaborative Digital Game Making (CDGM) as a methodology for

enhancing learning

4.1 Research findings

The research findings below result from analysis of the data gathered via application of the research

protocol in pilot experiences implemented in Belgium, Greece Italy and the UK (Finnish pilots focused

largely on usability of editing tools): see Section 3.2. As explained in Section 3, both the

implementation scenario and the research protocol were adapted in the different each countries to

meet a variety of conditions such as the learner population involved, the setting (mainstream or SEN-

specific) and the game making platform used (Sploder in UK and Belgium, Magos Lite in Italy and

Greece).

4.1.1 Findings on learner Experience

Demographics

The age distribution of learners was fairly wide ranging.

Table 3 – Age of learner population

Age UK Belgium Italy Greece

< 10 39,7% 69,3%

10-12 41,1% 58,1% 15,8%

13-15 55,4% 14,3% 0,7% 13,1%

16-18 50,0%

> 18 16,7% (6 students*)

prefer not to say 1,5%

unknown 3,5% 19% 1,8%

*Group of undergraduates

The data on gender showed a majority of males in the overall learner population (48% vs 41,7

females) but as over 11 percent of participants did not (or wished not) to identify their gender, the

real extent of this majority is doubtful and so no firm conclusions can be drawn.

Disposition towards digital gaming

With the exception of the Belgian group, the majority of leaners were frequent players of digital

games. So, in principle, they could be expected to be keen on - or at least non-resistant to - using


22

video games in classroom activities. In all four nationality groups, males were more frequent players

than females, and this difference was also found to be cross-age. This finding is not surprising and is

in line with the research in the field (Ogletree & Drake, 2007; Winn & Heeter, 2009).

Most learners in the groups, especially the older ones in Italy, were confident they could deal with

game making environments autonomously. Once again, the Belgian population was an exception,

showing low confidence levels, but the group composition could explain this result.

Having an opportunity to engage in game-based activities in class (GBL) was viewed positively by all

national groups, the least enthusiastic being the Greek students, in particular the females. The

possibility to try game making at school was seen enthusiastically by all, with no gender differences

found. So, even though females engage in digital gaming activities less frequently, they seem to be

equally interested in having the chance to perform this kind of activity at school.

From the focus groups it also emerged that when young learners produce their own digital artefacts,

they generally make a strong emotional investment in the process, generating a strong sense of

ownership over the related output, with which they often identify personally. This can certainly “turn

up the heat” during group work and collaboration, as was often witnessed during the classroom

sessions. Peer review of classmates’ games - and subsequent assessment of that feedback by the

games’ authors - is also quite intense, both cognitively and emotionally, and this kind of peer scrutiny

and judgment is not that common in school activities.

Response to classroom pilots: General attitudes

In general the game making activity was positively received in all the four national groups and by

both males and females. A gender difference emerged only in the UK, where males expressed strong

appreciation and found the activity easier. Generally speaking, both males and females considered

the activity as motivating and engaging. This provides further support for the view expressed in the

literature that game making represents an opportunity to encourage girls to learn more not only

about contents but also about computing and design skills (Kafai, 1996).

In terms of the perceived level of challenge, differences emerged across country populations, quite

probably in relation to the different game making platforms used. The game making session was

perceived as fairly difficult in the UK and Italy; in the latter case this was more evident among the

younger learners. By contrast, it was seen as too easy in Belgium and Greece.

Most of the learners in the four countries appreciated the opportunity to work in groups and some

reported this as one of the things they liked most about the whole experience. However, views were

divided as to whether the experience affected their general ability to collaborate with schoolmates:

learners in the UK and most of those in Belgium didn’t believe it would have an effect, while pupils in

Italy and Greece tended to be more positive in this respect. In Italy, a difference linked to school level

was found: 3rd grade learners tended to express a higher level of agreement than the older ones.

Most likely, the older learners considered themselves already able to collaborate with classmates

and so a further occasion to hone this interpersonal ability was seen as less important.

Pupils/students in all four countries felt they had learnt from the game making activity.

With regard to development of ICT skills, the majority of learners in the UK, Italy and Greece

considered they had made gains, while those in Belgium tended to disagree with the statement.

Once again, the particular profile of the Belgian population may be a determining factor here,


23

although others, such as the setup of the game making activity, for example, may have contributed

as well.

Opinions were also divided as to perceived improvement in their ability to solve problems: while

most of Greek leaners felt there’d been an improvement, together with half of the UK and Italian

learners, less 30% of the Belgian students agreed. Once again, the particular composition of the

Belgian group can have played a role.

Learners in all four countries mostly considered the activity of game making in itself in a positive

light; an aspect that was particularly well received was the opportunity to test games produced by

the other teams in their class.

Suggestions for improving the experience mainly centred on the timing and duration of the activity.

Learners in all four countries suggested adding more sessions or, generally, to allocate more time to

phase two of the scenario, namely the game-making activities. Those who used Magos Lite (Italy &

Greece) suggested enhancements to the platform such as adding more game elements to use and

different types of game that can be created. Learners also recommended that they should be free to

decide team composition.

Response to classroom pilots: Motivation & engagement

Motivation and engagement emerged as two very positive aspects of game making activities. This

was evident in all the experiments, irrespective of platform used or of context (mainstream or SEN),

and from both classroom monitoring and educators’ observations.

An important driver for learner motivation proved to be the possibility to share games with

classmates for cross testing peer evaluation. This finding is very important for practitioners’ to note

when designing, orchestrating and managing game making activities: phase three of the scenario

(see Section 2) is vital and should not be squeezed. In some cases, gamification of this process (e.g.

organised at a game making competition or tournament) helped strengthen motivation.

Experiment results also highlighted that allowing learners the freedom to produce their own core

“game idea” boosts their engagement and motivation. During the field experiments many teachers

presented a preset task or theme for learners to follow, largely because they viewed the game

making experience in terms of curricular abilities rather than as support for transversal skills. For

more on these critical tensions, see D6.4 Open Issues.

It also emerged that both motivation and engagement are directly linked to factors like the ease of

use of the adopted game editor and the absence of technical obstacles. Here, we need to stress the

importance of striking the right balance: the editor needs to be simple to use but also not over-

simplistic in its expressive potential so learners quickly exhaust the possibilities and get bored (Earp

et al, 2014).

Similarly, users should not encounter technical obstacles, such as dealing with an interface in a

language they don’t have strong command of or instabilities in software functioning.

The motivation and engagement of learners in SEN-specific contexts depended to a great degree on

the level of impairment. Those with milder impairments were very interested in the activities and

motivated to repeat the experience, in part because this gave them a chance to work with peers in a

team, benefiting from their advice and help. For those with more severe impairments the situation

was rather different: in some cases (particularly autistic learners and those with severe cognitive


24

impairments) the activity was conditioned by the need for constant assistance from practitioners to

deal with difficulties and make the learner feel comfortable (if not exactly engaged and motivated)

performing the game making task.

When considering these generally positive results on engagement and motivation, we obviously need

to take the novelty factor into account, i.e. to what degree were learners captivated by game making

(and the CDGM methodology in which is was implemented) as such, and to what degree by the

chance to do something novel in the classroom – see D6.4 Open Issues for more.

Response to classroom pilots: Transversal skills - collaboration

Results indicate game-making had positive effects in triggering collaboration and collaborative

attitudes. The learners expressed strong appreciation in this respect and teachers generally noted

that it sometimes went beyond their expectations. This was noted in particular in teams that

included a learner with difficulties: in this circumstances peer support was often noted. At the same

time, imbalances were not uncommon, some team members being excessively passive in the

presence of a commanding “leader”. As noted above, the approach taken to composing groups

needs to be carefully considered before starting new experiments. This implies paying attention to

learners’ personalities and attitudes and considering the objectives to reach. It seems reasonable, as

one teacher noted, that enhancing peer collaboration should be set as a specific objective of game

making activities.

Another finding is that learner freedom in deciding the core “game idea” not only affects

engagement and motivation, it is also a driver for collaboration (i.e. identification in a shared start-

to-finish creative mission). However, this generally requires the learners to have a clear initial idea of

the game environment: the underpinning concepts, structure and game editing functionality. As a

result, phase one of the scenario - the “orientation activities” – need to grant adequate room for

initial game play before game making tasks commence.

Based on their previous SEN experience, MAGICAL researchers decided against attempting peer

collaboration situations involving learners with severe impairments and the experimental pilots

conducted confirmed this policy.

Response to classroom pilots: Transversal skills - problem solving

Practitioners identified some points in the game-making process where critical choices and decisions

are made, and these can call on problem solving abilities. For instance, game making in the Magos

Lite environment involves: selecting game type and mode; choosing and setting game space

(backgrounds), character and other game elements; constructing a mission (learning task); setting

behaviours (speeds and control sensitivity); defining scoring rules; creating instructions.

Generally, the practitioners perceived that problem solving abilities are required to complete game

making tasks and identified specific areas, such as those mentioned above, that engage problem

solving skills. Nevertheless, during their observations, the researchers gained the impression that

teachers tended to focus more on outcomes, i.e. the team’s capacity to solve emerging problems and

carry on, than on the processes involved and whether learners’ problem-solving abilities were being

activated and supported through these game-making situations. They perhaps saw these situations

more as hurdles than as problems, in the positive sense of the term. This aspect has implications for

achieving suitable practitioner preparation. It sould also be clearly acknowledged that the overall


25

time allocated to scenario phase two, and to the classroom activities as a whole, was insufficient to

permit verifiable improvements in problem solving skills.

That said, some constraints posed in game making activities appeared useful for helping learners to

abandon some excessively “rigid” strategies such as simply repeating actions over and over; they

were encouraged to try alternatives and teachers noticed more reflective overall behaviour,

particularly from learners they considered normally less inclined to act in this manner.

Generally, it is safe to assert that game making frequently presented learners with “problem”

situations that, for the most part, they managed to deal with successfully. In mainstream contexts,

learners did without major difficulties arising; they often helped one another or called for adult

assistance. By contrast, it was usually beyond the capacity of SEN learners with severe impairments

to deal with challenges like modifying previous choices, or even the more straightforward decision-

making situations such as setting a suitable number of objects on the screen or a reasonable pace for

gameplay.

Response to classroom pilots: Transversal skills - creativity

Experiment results were more clear-cut regarding support for creative abilities, at least as far as

perceptions are concerned. The participants’ were positive in this regard, although we must

acknowledge that they were probably influenced by the situation and the form of the question that

was posed to them. Practitioners’ responses were also positive but reveal doubts about how this

ability should actually be evaluated. The researchers’ impression was that teachers mostly take as a

given that game making activities are bound to have some impact on students’ creativity. However,

they struggle to identify creative attitudes and how these are manifestly demonstrated. Certainly,

this is not a simple issue, and it is constantly being debated in the scientific community as well.

We can also look at the matter from a different viewpoint: if the manifestation of creative attitudes

was a matter of uncertainty, this might be because it requires longer than the time allowed during

experiments. In addition, we must also consider that learners were very much engaged in

understanding the functionalities and features of the environment and how to use them for their

specific game-making purposes. Manifestation of creativity are more likely to emerge (and be

sustained) when learners are less concerned with “finding their way” through the task and feel

freer to experiment, take risks and “think out of the box”.

SEN practitioners advanced the idea that the concept of creativity cannot be applied to learners with

severe impairments. We wonder if this is true and rather think that during the experiments the

emerging of creativity was hindered by the operational difficulties encountered by SEN students.

Response to classroom pilots: Transversal skills - ICT literacy

The experiments highlighted that ICT-confident children were better equipped to tackle game-

making tasks. They also generated some indications that it is useful for helping learners acquire some

basic ICT skills, both operationally (e.g. managing pull-down menus and conceptually (e.g. versioning

by saving the work done and re-editing it). Learners seemed to have received some principles of

computational thinking, irrespective of their level of computer fluency; however, the general

condition for this gain is an awareness that using a game editor entails an actual design process, not

just a sequence of trial and error events (in other words, locus of control in game making lies firmly

with the learner, not the platform). It should also be noted that the gains were more noticeable


26

among more reflective learners, while those displaying restless and anxious attitudes benefitted very

little from the ICT literacy viewpoint.

General response to to classroom pilots

As a general finding we can say that most teachers observed unexpected positive outcomes from

pupils who usually demonstrate lower levels of class involvement and school achievement.

Moreover, the teachers observed that game making experiences offered particularly rich

opportunities for activating, to a different extent, transversal skills such as problem solving, creativity

and collaboration. Pupils during the final debriefing stages demonstrated awareness of how they had

benefitted from working together and from sharing critical feedback in a collaborative spirit.

4.1.2 Findings on practitioner experience

This section reports project results from the point of view of practitioners, namely those who

participated in the MAGICAL pilot experiences as:

student teachers following Initial Teacher Education (ITE) courses at university

practising teachers delivering mainstream and/or specialised SEN education (in some cases also acting as mentors)

rehabilitation staff at specialised SEN institutions

The results derive mainly from investigations carried out in two project phases. One is the second

round of practitioner training actions implemented in years two and three of the project; year one

training actions were dedicated to piloting the tools and materials for further refinement (see D4.2

Report on Training Actions). The other phase regarded transition from training into classroom

practice: adoption and implementation of CDGM in classroom pilots/experiments, with reflections on

associated practitioner concerns. The results and analysis focus on activities performed in the UK and

Belgium, the countries in which the continuum from ITE training to classroom CDGM implementation

was traced and accompanied by practising teachers in some cases acting as mentors. Analysis encompasses changes

in attitudes (and performance) before and after training, as well as reflections about practice.

Student teacher training (ITE)

This section describes research outcomes generated from the second round of training actions, and

provides analysis and reflection on the results obtained. The research has taken an approach based

on principles of design-based research for studying learning in context (Sandoval & Bell, 2004). The

aim was to develop a training course in game making and learning that was fit-for-purpose (in that it

met the needs of both the trainees and academic staff), was effective in teaching what it was

intended to teach, and could be easily picked up and adapted by colleagues in other contexts or

countries. This involved iterative evaluation of both curriculum content and teaching approach,

which involved the trainees themselves in the research process (Akker, Gravemeijer, McKenney, &

Nieveen, 2006). The purpose of this evaluation was to support the design of the best possible

training course.

A pragmatic mixed-methods approach (Greene, Caracelli, & Graham, 2009) was taken to data

collection and analysis, where we took opportunities to collect data when possible but recognized

the practical limitations of such real-world research. We assumed no philosophical incompatibility

between the qualitative and quantitative data collected, and analyzed them in combination. First,

background research was carried out to examine student needs to develop an initial version of the

course, which in the first year of the project was then run, evaluated and refined. In the second year,


27

the refined training approach and materials were adopted in partner countries (after suitable

national adaption) and their implementation in ITE was carefully monitored and evaluated.

While a variety of practitioner training actions took place through the project, the ones listed in Table

4 below are those specifically adopted for formal evaluation purposes.

Table 4 – training activities in ITE

Student teacher attitudes to games, GBL & CDGM

UK data: 19 responding geography trainees, (m=9; f=10)

Belgium data: 35 responding trainees (m=6; f=28) (25 on attitudes to games and learning)

DIGITAL GAMES

“Do you play computer games?”

Table 5 – Digital gaming background of trainees

A low number of trainees consider themselves to be game players and a considerable number in

both countries say that they never play computer games.

Note that in the following tables three denotes neutrality, with anything below signifying

disagreement and anything above signifying agreement.


28

GBL & CDGM

Table 6 – trainee attitudes to GBL & CDGM

Initial enthusiasm to use games and game making in the classroom is generally low but enthusiasm in

the UK increases after training. Nevertheless, when asked if games could be an effective tool for

learning, 79% of UK trainees responded yes (with 11% don’t knows) and in Belgium 74% said yes

(with 4% not and 22% don’t knows).

Table 7 – Trainee expectations about CDGM deployment

Following the training, participants’ confidence in their own professional capacity to implement

CDGM rises and becomes positive (response to “I would know how to handle game making software

in the classroom” and “It would be easy for me to build games with my pupils in the classroom”).

However, the perception persists that they do not have sufficient hardware, technical support or

technical skills.


29

Table 8 - Trainee expectations of CDGM outcomes

In all aspects of learning described, the trainees felt that game making would have a positive impact

on learning (with UK students generally showing greater agreement). There are also some

differences between the pre- and post-tests, indicating that the UK students appreciated the value of

game making more after the training.

Summary observations

The key points that emerge from evaluation of CDGM courses in ITE are the following:

Course Design

It is crucial that the course is flexible enough to fit with a teacher training curriculum and

programme of study, both in terms of timing and content.

A shorter length is preferable to avoid repetition and ensure trainees do not feel time is

wasted.

The focus should be primarily practical rather than theoretical, with lots of examples.

Course Delivery

The model of trainees training their peers was very successful.

Lectures are not an effective way in which to teach about games or game making.

Trainee Teacher Support

We cannot make assumptions about levels of gaming literacies or motivations to play games.

Trainees need time to develop the technical and pedagogic skills, and confidence, to

implement game-making successfully.

CDGM adoption/implementation

Trainee reflections on teaching with CDGM were also gathered as they gained classroom experience

in the experiments. The key practitioner-oriented findings were:

the trainees generally enjoyed the session and felt that they had learned something from it;

other staff at the schools were very interested in the game making process.

the session provided a good opportunity for the trainees to get to know their pupils: “I do

believe that it is a fun and effective way of getting to know a class better” (Belgium trainee);

and on CDGM in general...


30

the school pupils had become really involved in the lessons, undertaking extra work out of

school, and one trainee saw a marked improvement in behaviour;

the peer reviewing of each other’s games was a very valuable part of the learning process;

pupils appreciated “the freedom to be creative and do whatever they want with it” (UK

trainee);

the limitations of the game-development tool (in terms of graphics available, interactions,

etc.) forced the students to be creative;

students were really keen to start making games, so did not always attend to the

introduction;

it was difficult to get pupils to collaborate outside of their established friendship groups,

particularly in mixed-sex groups;

Further reflections emerging from case studies:

(trainees and class teachers) perceived learning benefits from CDGM (visual representation,

practical activity, freedom to experiment, working with different people)

constraints and challenges in adapting CDGM to fit curriculum outcomes and the

need to explore the platform well to do so;

deal with constraints posed by some game formats (avoid focus on killing)

gain understanding of effective pupil collaboration at a single computer.

Class time restrictions are limiting

Exercise Care in group forming

Technical issues can impede progress (password management, computer functioning, etc).

Non-digital game making also worth pursuing to define added value of CDGM.

Other practitioner-oriented findings are reported in D6.3 Best Practices and D6.4 Open Issues.

4.1.3 Findings on SEN students

MAGICAL aims to support an inclusive approach to learning and to this end the project’s target group

includes professionals in Special Education Needs (SEN) and the learners they work with. This called

for the consortium to build shared understanding of SEN provision in partner countries. Accordingly a

reference chart was compiled that draws on existing data from various EC sources and extends these

with data gathered “on the ground” from partners and their associates in the SEN field. MAGICAL

had publicised the chart in the hope that it can contribute towards a more complete picture of SEN

provision in Europe.

In all the four partner countries and Greece, game-making pilots were carried out in mainstream

schools where learner populations included SEN students following regular classes. Experiments

were also carried out in SEN-specific settings in Belgium and Italy, drawing on suitably adapted

versions of the implementation plan (activity scenario and research protocol. Analysis of

experimental data, especially of those derived from guided monitoring of SEN pupils at work, has

highlighted some key aspects about attitudes and behaviour towards game-making, and has also

allowed some conclusions about performance and the applicability of the CDGM methodology for

SEN. Obviously, the varied panorama of different impairments, and variation in degrees of severity,

prevents wholesale generalisations.


31

A number of specific points about SEN have been made through reporting of experimental findings

made thus far in Section 3. This section offers some reflections about overall applicability and

suitability of game-making in SEN. Considerations are also made about appropriate approaches and

educational methods to adopt for supporting SEN students’ learning and, in particular, enhancement

of transversal skills.

Provided game-making activities are carefully designed and deployed, and in a way that is mindful of

the requirements of all learners, we maintain that it can be profitably employed for SEN students’

education. We have found that, as in most cases, SEN learners basically need more time to carry out

activities and require more and closer attention from practitioners; this entails more detailed

explanations, the opportunity for more guided “hands on” experience both in preliminary game play

and introduction of the game editor.

SEN experiences in MAGICAL involved pupils with a wide variety of impairment type (cognitive,

visual, behavioural, etc.) and severity. As is generally the case, these students appeared to appreciate

the hands-on, learning-by-doing characteristics of the CGDM methodology (see DEL 6.2 section

2.2.3).

The learners that managed to benefit from those experiences were generally those who were

strongly motivated and engaged (see DEL 6.2 section 3.1.) and who enjoyed sharing games with their

peers (see DEL 6.2 section 2.1.2.2 and sections 2.2.2.2 and 2.5.2.3). This was particularly true for a

small group of children with low vision in Italy. With the help of magnification aids, they managed to

use the Magos Lite platform quite easily for playing and creating games.

CDGM, SEN and transversal skills

In this area, some positive results were achieved in particular contexts that we believe are worth

taking into more general consideration.

Collaboration: game making can favour the propensity to collaborate with (generally non-SEN) peers

(see DEL 6.2 section 2.2.3), provided the individual characteristics of all learners are taken adequately

into account. In some of the experiments, the practitioner preferred to have SEN learners work

individually (see DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.2.2). Elsewhere, when SEN children worked together with

peers (mostly in mainstream classes), they managed to collaborate fruitfully and team members felt

comfortable tackling tasks together. To achieve this, particular care is required in forming game-

making teams when SEN students are involved (see DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.2.2).

ICT literacy: pre-existing ICT fluency literacy represents significant added value for any learner

approaching CDGM. That said, CDGM provides good opportunities to support ICT skill development

in all learners, including those with SEN. The condition here is that adequate (adult/peer) support is

available. Indeed in MAGICAL experiments, learners displaying restless and anxious attitudes

benefitted very little from the ICT literacy viewpoint (see DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.2.3).

Claims regarding the relationship between CDGM and SEN two other transversal skills - creativity and

problem solving – are more contentious.

Creativity - In the Belgian experiments with (exclusively) SEN learners, it was noted that “Student

teachers, class teachers and researchers were positively surprised about the creativity and game-

building skills of the pupils throughout the experiments” (see DEL 6.2 section 2.2.3). The population

here was unique, all being over 13 years of age. By contrast, the population in the SEN-specific


32

setting in Italy was much younger and affected by more severe impairments. As a result, it was

argued that the learners would need “much more time to explore and grasp the overall concepts

behind the game making activities”. It should also be noted that, in game evaluation, the creativity

dimension was mostly ascribed to game aesthetic (see DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.3).

Problem solving – while considerable variation from team to team was noted, the overall impression

was that, for learners with mild and moderate learning difficulties, CDGM was helpful for eliciting

problem solving strategies, provided there is sufficient time-on-task. It helped some learners to

abandon excessively “rigid” strategies such as simply repeating actions over and over; more

reflective overall behaviour was noticed (see DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.2.1). Problem solving seemed to

be favoured by the constructionist dimension of CDGM methodology, which gave learners a clear

sense of the outcome of their attempted solutions (see DEL 6.2 section 2.2.3.). That said, learners

affected by severe impairments encountered more serious difficulties and relied on adult assistance

when encountering problems at or beyond their cognitive limits (see DEL 6.2 section 2.5.2.2).

Looking ahead

In the following, we outline some specific findings and ideas emerging from the MAGICAL experience

that could reasonably provide a basis for further investigation of CDGM and SEN.

Obstacles encountered in the game making process invariably have a strong impact on motivation

and engagement levels to the point of preventing SEN learners pursuing the overall goal. This

presents a number of requirements:

perfectly functioning software free of bugs or instabilities (see DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.2.3)

no language-related or reading /writing issues. Problems with the English-language GUI arose

in Greece (see DEL 6.2 section 2.5.3) and some non-productive difficulties emerged when

SEN learners in Italy tackled reading and writing tasks (see DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.2.3).

GUI design that is simple, clear and uncluttered, especially for low vision students. For

example with Magos Lite some simple corrective measures such as ensuring adequate

contrast levels for texts and between foreground vs. background elements.

Attention to the level of complexity and challenge inherent in game-making tasks is essential. The

cognitive effort required should not go push the learner to close to his or her limits. This regards

cognitively impaired subjects but also subject with other impairments such as short-term memory

deficits (see DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.2.2).

Some learners have difficulties understanding the logic behind game design and the game mechanics

underpinning the game interface. What’s more verbal explanations may not prove particularly

effective. As a result, introducing SEN students to gameplay and game-making on the platform

requires a longer time and more direct guidance. Particularly, more time is required in the phase one

playing session so that, through guided game play, the learner can grasp the underpinning logic (see

DEL 6.2 section 2.4.2.2.2). Here, special care should also be devoted to the preparation/choice of

games to be played prior to tackling any game making (see DEL 6.2 section 2.2.3). Learner progress

through these steps clearly calls for constant and careful monitoring.

Where possible, limit the number and complexity of options available. For instance, researchers in

Belgium only made available a subset of game-making formats on the Sploder website (see DEL 6.2

section 2.2.3)


33

4.1.4 Findings on platform design & usability

Six pilots were run in Finland with teachers and a total of 135 pupils in mainstream primary school

education. They mainly focused on testing the usefulness/usability of the Magos Lite (ML) platform,

particularly game editing functions and features. They also investigated integration of the digital

environment in different game-making activities (exergaming, construction of tangible game

controllers) and contexts (after school game clubs).

Although there were slight variations depending on the specific school, the structure of the

experiments followed the basic scenario: demonstration sessions, game making sessions, sharing of

games and peer evaluation.

Particular attention focused on the one-week exergaming case study carried out in Turku. Seventy-

nine fourth to six graders (10- to 13-year-olds) used Magos Lite for approximately 3-4 hours. The

gender distribution was almost equal (42 boys and 37 girls), and the average age was 11 years. As to

background, 33% of the participants declared that they frequently play games of different types.

Results

Overall, the Finnish experience proved to be positive, with almost all the pupils succeeding in the

proposed tasks and demonstrating motivation and engagement. Altogether, 146 games were

created, covering various subjects, including maths and language/s. Analysis showed that 79%

included an educational objective of some kind but 71% lacked a proper game description and

instructions. This is a key aspect of CDGM: inclusion of proper descriptions and instructions shows

that game-makers see beyond their own personal gratification and address the player/audience, i.e.

it indicates some design thinking (valuing playability and the game experience). Practitioners need to

emphasize this (seemingly marginal) aspect when deploying CDGM activities. Obviously, framing and

writing clear instructions is also meaningful from a literacy perspective.

Integration of CDGM with exergaming engaged and motivated students significantly, as well as

invigorating pupils and classroom routine. The learners were quick to master the use of tablet

computers as exergame controllers, and the intensity of physical activities generated was quite high.

The students were also adventurous in selecting the movements for controlling their games. The

simplicity of ML was well suited for introducing these activities but in the longer term more complex

tools will be needed to maintain motivation as pupils master and eventually exhaust the possible

variations they can enact. Indeed, the teachers requested functions for curriculum-based teaching

and pupils wanted the chance to create different types of games.

4.2 Game Making Products, Resources & Services

This subsection showcases the products, resources and services that have been developed in

MAGICAL with the express aim of supporting wider take up of Collaborative Digital Game Making

(CDGM) as a methodology for enhancing learning

4.2.1 Magos platform (game editor/s, games)4

4 http://magos.pori.tut.fi/


34

The development of the Magos platform and the two digital game making editors, Magos Classic

(MC) and Magos Lite (ML), is described in Section 4.2.1. This subsection compares the two game

editors to Sploder, the other game making platform deployed in MAGICAL activities.

Figure 5– Magos platform

Magos Lite5

Magos Lite (ML) can be played directly from a browser. It is optimized for Chrome but will work on

other major browsers, except Internet Explorer (not supported). ML works on desktop/notebook

computers and also on iPad tablets.

Figure 6– Magos Lite

Magos Classic

5 http://magos.pori.tut.fi/


35

Two brief video demos are available that give a general idea of the Magos Classic GUI6

Figure 7 – example of Magos Classic GUI

Comparison of some key characteristics of Graphic User Interface (GUI) in three game editors used in

MAGICAL: Magos Lite, Magos Classic and Sploder: table adapted from Earp et al (2014).

Table 9 – Comparison of DGM platforms

Magos Lite Magos Classic Sploder

Online, browser-based Online, browser-based Online, browser-based

platform with public & private areas

platform with public & private areas

social networking platform with private group function

Object-based authoring Object-based authoring Object-based authoring

2D platformer: single game type 2D platformer: single game type

2D platformer: five preset game types

Fly/ jump with collecting/avoiding

Fly/ jump with collecting/avoiding

Game-oriented behaviors: shooting, collecting, battles etc.

Pull-down editing menus (point & click)

Drag-and-drop scrolling of editing palette

Drag-and-drop scrolling of editing palette

No landscaping - preset choice of moving backgrounds

User-built gamespace (tile based) drag & drop landscape construction

User-built gamespace (tile based) drag & drop landscape construction

Fixed point-of-view Fixed point-of-view Fixed point-of-view

Automatic side scrolling (virtual) Fixed platform Automatic side scrolling

Preset mechanics with variable parameters (speed, value etc.)

User defined mechanics: palette of properties to assign to game elements

User defined mechanics: logical linking of game elements in situ (drag & drop)

6 http://www.itd.cnr.it/download/MagicalResources/


36

Pre-programmed behaviors object behaviors user assigned Some object behaviors preprogrammed

single level single level Multilevel (gameworld templates)

Closed set of graphics Closed set of graphics Editor for creating graphics and textures

No advertising No advertising Advertising on website

4.2.2 Community Library of Digital Game Making Environments for Learners7

As described in Section 2, requirements analysis for the design of Magos involved a study to establish

the state of the art in game making environments destined for (or usable) in learning contexts. This

was originally intended for internal use but its usefulness clearly became apparent as no similar

analysis was found either in the scientific literature or within online services for the education

community. So, given the goal to foster wider uptake of collaborative game making, MAGICAL

reformulated the study data into an attractive user-friendly guide to different tools. It was promoted

on social networks, blogs, etc. and made available on the MAGICAL website (800 downloads between

Dec. 2012 and Jan. 2013), receiving extremely favourable reception, including coverage in the USA8.

To capitalize on this strong opportunity to enhance the project’s dissemination and impact, MAGICAL

created a community library service dedicated to Digital Game Making Environments for Learners,

which drew on, and extended, the guide’s contents. The library currently catalogues around sixty

different game making tools that can be tried out and used for learning, teaching and research. Users

who join the community service (free of charge) can rate and comment on any of the listed tools,

share game-making experiences or add a new tool to the library catalogue.

7 http://amc.pori.tut.fi/game-building-tools/

8 http://www.magical-project.net/?q=node/34



37

Figure 8 - DGM platform library

The library adds value to the programmed project outputs by offering a source of ideas, inspiration

and exchange of game making experience and in this sense will certainly strengthen the overall

impact of the project.


38

4.2.3 Pedagogical Planner9

Figure 9 – Pedagogical Planner

As stated in Section 1, MAGICAL has an explicit mission to support evidence-based propagation of

CDGM potential throughout the education community, and naturally the formation and training of

educators is a crucial aspect of that endeavour. These efforts are directed not only towards fostering

practitioners’ theoretical understanding of CDGM, but also by facilitating effective implementation of

this method in their practice so that it yields real educational added value. A key aspect of this

support is fostering teachers’ planning and orchestration of CDGM activities, and critically, their

reflections on teaching and learning outcomes. It is withe this objective in mind that a CDGM-

oriented version of Pedagogical Planner (PP) tool has been produced in MAGICAL.

The PP is a web-based tool that has been designed by CNR-ITD to support the authoring, sharing and

reuse of pedagogical plans, intended as teacher-oriented descriptions of a learning intervention

(lesson, unit, module etc.). During MAGICAL, the PP underwent iterative redesign-development

cycles based on project requirements and user feedback. The result is a tool that has been tuned

specifically for use by practitioners intending to design classroom activities based around CDGM and

game making generally.

The PP was used by practitioners in MAGICAL as a support for their design, implementation and

reflection on classroom activities in the experimental pilots. It is now available as an online service

that all practitioners can use to generate and edit pedagogical plans. To do so, they work with a

simple form structure that contains a series of elementary fields allowing authors to provide a clear,

structured description of the proposed experience, how it is to be implemented in practice and, after

enactment, what considerations can be made about the teaching and learning outcomes achieved.

9 http://www.magical.itd.cnr.it/

http://www.magical.itd.cnr.it/


39

4.2.4 Resource Kit for Training Teachers/Practitioners10

MAGICAL’s efforts to support evidence-based propagation of CDGM potential throughout the

education community naturally encompass the formation and training of educators. Project activities

in this direction have covered both Initial Teacher Education (ITE) and Continuing Professional

Development (CPD) for practitioners in different educational contexts. Training has sought to (a)

foster practitioner understanding of CDGM in terms of pedagogical theory and current understanding

of GBL within that context and (b) facilitate take up and implementation of this method so that it

yields real educational added value. A cornerstone output for supporting these processes beyond the

project is the Training Resource Kit, which was developed over the course of the project and

informed by the research findings reported in section 4.2.4.

The kit comprises the three core modules and a generic evaluation form that can be adapted,

depending on the version of the course used, to evaluate the appropriateness for the trainee

population. The three modules are

a theoretical introduction to games and learning

a hands-on game design workshop

a computer-based practical workshop centred on the use of specific game authoring

software.

Each module contains a PowerPoint presentation, set of guidance notes, and a set of additional

resources.

4.2.5 Game- making research knowledge base11

The shared research knowledge on CDGM that partners built over the course of the project has been

leveraged for dissemination and exploitation purposes through the establishment of a group of on

the scientific social networking platform Mendeley. This group has over thirty members from all

continents and a range of different academic and education backgrounds. The group has created a

shared bibliography on digital game making for learning and the development of transversal skills.

This important knowledge base now gathers almost 120 publications, including the very latest

research. The activities of the group will continue to support dissemination and exploitation of

MAGICAL results and of the CDGM sector in general.

4.2.6 Scientific publications and project presentations

In line with MAGICAL’s aspirations (Section 1), the audience that the project addresses embraces

educational practitioners and stakeholders, as well as those involved in research into educational

innovation, especially that linked to Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL). Thus a wide range of

10 http://www.itd.cnr.it/download/MagicalResources/D6.1%20MAGICAL%20training%20toolkit.rar

11 CDGM group: http://www.mendeley.com/groups/1932391/magical-collaborative-game-design-for-learning/;

CDGM knowledge base :http://www.mendeley.com/groups/1932391/magical-collaborative-game-design-for-

learning/papers/

http://www.mendeley.com/groups/1932391/magical-collaborative-game-design-for-learning/


40

dissemination activities have been – and are being – carried out to raise awareness of CDGM in

general and MAGICAL results and outputs in particular. These efforts comprise include use of social

networking and web-based channels like Mendeley (above) and Scoop.It12, as well as presentations

and publications aimed at researchers, practitioners and stakeholders in general.

Dissemination was supported by presentations at major international conferences addressing both

the research community (e.g. ECGBL) and educators (e.g. ICERI).

Figure 10 - Magical presentations at conferences

MAGICAL and its outputs were presented, discussed and explored at the following events13:

ICALT 2012 (Advanced Learning Technologies and Technology-enhanced Learning), Rome, Italy

Media and Learning 2012, Brussels, Belgium

Association for Teacher Education in Europe - ATEE Winter Conference 2013, Genova, Italy

Games and Learning Alliance (GALA) FP7 Network of Excellence on Serious Games - Second Alignment School, Lisbon, Portugal 2013

European Conference on Games Based Learning - ECGBL 2013, Porto, Portugal

International Simulation and Gaming Association - ISAGA 2013, Stockholm, Sweden

International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications - VS Games 2013, Bournemouth, UK

European Foundation for Quality in E-Learning - EFQUEL 2013, Barcelona, Italy

Association for Learning and Technology - ALT 2013, Nottingham, UK

European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning - ECTEL 2013, Paphos, Cyprus

International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference - LAK 2013, Leuven, Belgium

Online Educa 2013, Berlin, Germany

Geography Association Annual Conference and Exhibition 2014, Surrey, UK

International Conference on Technology, Knowledge, and Society 2014, Madrid, Spain

British Education Research Association Conference - BERA 2014, London, UK

12 http://www.scoop.it/t/game-making-and-learning

13 Reported on the news pages of the MAGICAL website, chronologically from

http://www.magical-project.net/?q=node&page=12 , http://www.magical-project.net/?q=node&page=10 etc.

to http://www.magical-project.net

http://www.scoop.it/t/game-making-and-learning

http://www.magical-project.net/?q=node&page=12

http://www.magical-project.net/?q=node&page=10

http://www.magical-project.net/


41

International Human Computer Interface Conference - HCII 2014, Crete, Greece, http://2014.hci.international/

Game Happens - digital gaming stakeholders workshop, Genoa, Italy, 2014. http://gamehappens.com/index.php/en

Games and Learning Alliance (GALA) FP7 Network of Excellence on Serious Games – 2014 Summer School, Pori Finland

European Conference on Games Based Learning - ECGBL 2014, Berlin, Germany

The final outcomes from MAGICAL were showcased at the Edupolicies Conference held in Athens,

Greece in September 201414. Particpation included a keynote presentation - Games in Education:

Some Key Initiatives and Emerging Trends in Europe – by Jeffrey Earp from CNR-ITD, which set

MAGICAL’s objectives and activities in the broader context of games-driven educational innovation in

European research and practice. In addition, a special MAGICAL game-making workshop was held,

featuring hands-on experience with Magos Classic and Magos Lite.

Figure 11- Magical showcase at the Athens Edupolicies 2014 Conference

A considerable boost to dissemination efforts came from citation of MAGICAL

in the Horizon Report Europe: 2014 Schools Edition15 (Johnson et al, 2014). The

Horizon series is one of the world’s leading references for tracking developing

trends in the educational innovation and technology. Inclusion in this first

European edition among games and gamification trends (p. 43) is a great step

towards recognition of MAGICAL outcomes and of CDGM as an innovative

learning method. Valuable project coverage was also gained from inclusion in

Media & Learning News April 2013 Issue16

Research papers on CDGM published by partners during the project include the

14 http://primarymusic.gr/conference/

15 http://www.magical-project.net/?q=about/horizon

16 http://news.media-and-learning.eu/files/Media-and-Learning-News_2013-04.pdf#nameddest=magical

http://2014.hci.international/

http://gamehappens.com/index.php/en

http://primarymusic.gr/conference/

http://news.media-and-learning.eu/files/Media-and-Learning-News_2013-04.pdf#nameddest=magical


42

following:

Bottino R.M., Earp J., Ott M. MAGICAL: Collaborative game building as a means to foster reasoning abilities and creativity. Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies ICALT 2012 Rome, 4‐6 July 2O12. IEEE Computer Society. pp744‐745. ISBN 978‐0‐7695‐4702

Kiili, K. Kiili, C., Ott, M., Jönkkäri T. Towards creative pedagogy: Empowering students to develop games. Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Games Based Learning ‐ ECGBL, 4‐5 October 2012. pp250‐257. Felicia P. (ed.). Academic Publishing Limited, 2012.

Dagnino, F, Earp, J. and Ott, M. (2012) ‘Investigating the “Magical” effects of game building on the development of 21st Century Skills’, ICERI 2012 Proceedings, Available online: http://nameserver.itd.ge.cnr.it/download/Papers/INVESTIGATING_THE_MAGICAL_EFFECTS_OF_GAME_BUILDING.pdf (Last accessed on 14/07/2014)

Earp, J., Dagnino, F., Kiili, K., Kiili, C., Toumi, P., Whitton, N. (2013) ‘Learner Collaboration in Digital Game Making: An Emerging Trend’, Learning & Teaching with Media & Technology, pp. 439-447.

Caponetto, I, Earp, J. & Ott, M. (2013). Aspects of the Integration of Games into Educational Processes. International Journal of Knowledge Society Research, 4(3), 11-21, July-September 2013, 11-21. IGI Publishing.

Charlier, N., Van Der Stock, L., Bermingham, S., Cropper, D., Duggan, J., and Whitton, N. (2014) ‘Digital Game Building in the Teacher Training Programme: How is it perceived?’ INTED2014 Proceedings, pp. 2189-2195. Available online: http://library.iated.org/view/CHARLIER2014DIG (Last accessed on 14/07/2014)

Charlier N., Bermingham, S. Van Der Stock, L., Duggan, J. Whitton, N. (2014) ‘Building Games in the Classroom: Training the Teacher’, International Conference on Technology, Knowledge, and Society.

Earp, J. (2014).Games in education - some key trends and initiatives in Europe. Katerina Kasimatis, Maria Argyriou (eds.), International and European Trends in Education and their Impact on the Greek Educational System, pp 157-156. School of Pedagogical and Technological Education (ASPETE), Athens (Greece).

Earp, J. (2014). Digital game making: a MAGICAL learning experience. Katerina Kasimatis, Maria Argyriou (eds.), International and European Trends in Education and their Impact on the Greek Educational System, pp 241. School of Pedagogical and Technological Education (ASPETE), Athens (Greece).

Earp, J., Kiili, K., Koskela, M. & Tuomi, P. (2014). Learning by Creating Educational Exergames: Creative Pedagogy That Gets Students Moving. Hannele Niemi, Jari Multisilta, Lasse Lipponen, Marianna Vivitsou (eds.), Finnish Innovations and Technologies in Schools, 87-86. Sense Publishers.

Dagnino, F.M., Earp, J. & Ott, M. (2014). Learning through Game Making: an HCI Perspective. Stephanidis, C., Antona, M. (Eds.), Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Universal Access to Information and Knowledge. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 8514., 513-524. Springer International Publishing.

Caponetto I, Earp J., Ott M. (2014) Gamification and Education: a Literature Review ECGBL 2014 - The 8th European Conference on Games-Based Learning, pp. 50-57

Find out more:

Various project deliverables

http://nameserver.itd.ge.cnr.it/download/Papers/INVESTIGATING_THE_MAGICAL_EFFECTS_OF_GAME_BUILDING.pdf

http://nameserver.itd.ge.cnr.it/download/Papers/INVESTIGATING_THE_MAGICAL_EFFECTS_OF_GAME_BUILDING.pdf

http://library.iated.org/view/CHARLIER2014DIG

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=IedEBQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA50&dq=info:CpXxGKubO0cJ:scholar.google.com&ots=bEVl-P3p-_&sig=MI3DqVqXvyFat2fuZaHU4KdqwT4


43

5 Partnership

This section looks at how MAGICAL is situated in and linked up with the wider education community,

especially those segments that are concerned with furthering educational innovation supported by

GBL and TEL in general.

5.1 Consortium17

The MAGICAL consortium comprises four partners from four European countries: the Institute for

Educational Technology, CNR (CNR-ITD) (IT), the project coordinator; Tampere University of

Technology (TUT), (FI); Manchester Metropolitan University (MMU), (UK); Katholieke Universiteit

Leuven (KUL), (BE). The consortium brings European added value through the aggregation of

complementary expertise in game-based learning (GBL), Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL),

educational innovation and teacher training, gained both nationally and at European level.

Table 10 – MAGICAL consortium partners & responsibilities

partner specific responsibilities

CNR-ITD18 - project management and scientific coordination

- analysis of experimental data

TUT19 - technological development

MMU20 - teacher training

- dissemination

KUL21 - school experiments

- project impact

MAGICAL also commissioned a Greek primary teachers’ association, GAPMET22, to verify the

applicability of MAGICAL’s CDGM methodology, tools and resources in an educational context

outside of the partner countries. Interest also centred on the perceived educational value of game

making for learning in the Greek settings and on issues connected to integration in teaching practice

and classroom activities.

5.2 Networking and Clustering

17 http://www.magical-project.net/?q=about/partners

18 http://www.itd.cnr.it/

19 http://www.tut.fi/en/about-tut/index.htm

20 http://esri.mmu.ac.uk

21 http://www.kuleuven.be/about/

22 http://www.primarymusic.gr/index.php/en/

http://www.itd.cnr.it/

http://www.tut.fi/en/about-tut/index.htm

http://esri.mmu.ac.uk/

http://www.kuleuven.be/about/

http://www.primarymusic.gr/index.php/en/


44

In its efforts to propagate CDGM for learning and 21st century skills, the MAGICAL consortium has

established and consolidated links with various bodies and networks who share MAGICAL’s vision of

educational innovation. These are organisations that operate in and support the fields of GBL, TEL,

educational R&D and teacher training. Relations built with them have not only helped to raise

awareness about MAGICAL and CDGM, they also represent ideal springboards for disseminating

MAGICAL results and outcomes in communities and networks of interest.

GaLA (Games and Learning Alliance) 23 is Network of Excellence for Serious Games in FP7. The network includes 31 partner organisations from 14 countries, bringing together universities, research centres and commercial game producers. CNR-ITD and TUT are partners.

SGS (Serious Games Society) 24 is a cluster of companies, institutions, researchers and professionals involved in Serious Games R&D. Europe’s focal point for serious games and gamification. CNR-ITD is a founder member.STELLAR (Sustaining Technology Enhanced Learning at a LARge scale)25 is a Network of Excellence in TEL under FP7. The network includes 16 partner organisations from nine countries.

SEGAN (Serious Games Network)26 is an LLP project bringing together 13 partners from eight countries.

eSG (Entrepreneurship through Serious Games) An LLP program with four partners in three countries.

METIS (Meeting teachers' co-design needs by means of Integrated Learning Environments)27 LLP project supporting teachers’ 21st century competencies though design for learning.

gambaloa (Game based Learning for Older Adults)28 is an LLP project with three partners from partners countries.

Leage project (LEArning Games for older Europeans)29 is an LLP project with seven partner organisations in four countries.

Dream School30, a network in Finland bringing together 30 Finnish schools dedicated to

integration of digital tools into the learning process

Cicero Learning31, a network connecting Finnish researchers and research groups dealing in

innovation in learning and teaching

FINNABLE 202032 is a Finnish research and education initiative promoting TEL and collaborative 21st century learning

edWeb.net33 (Game Based Learning Group) - international network of education professionals devoted to innovation, professional development and GBL

23 http://www.galanoe.eu/

24 http://seriousgamessociety.org/

25 http://www.stellarnet.eu/

26 http://www.seriousgamesnet.eu/

27 http://www.metis-project.org/

28 http://gambaloa.wordpress.com/partners/

29 http://leage.exodussa.com/

30 http://dreamschool.eu/#network

31 http://www.cicero.fi/

32 http://www.finnable.fi/

33 http://home.edweb.net/

http://www.galanoe.eu/

http://seriousgamessociety.org/

http://www.stellarnet.eu/

http://www.seriousgamesnet.eu/

http://www.metis-project.org/

http://gambaloa.wordpress.com/partners/

http://leage.exodussa.com/

http://dreamschool.eu/#network

http://www.cicero.fi/

http://www.finnable.fi/

http://home.edweb.net/


45

ATEE (Association for Teacher Education in Europe)34 European organisation devoted to quality in Teacher Education and to professional development of teachers and teacher educators

Find out more:

D1.2 Progress Report public version

D7.3 Dissemination Report

D8.1 Exploitation plan

34 http://www.atee1.org/the_association

http://www.atee1.org/the_association


46

6 Plans for the Future

This section describes partners’ plans to consolidate and propagate the outcomes from MAGICAL,

and to further their investigation of CDGM issues.

Game-making for learning is a relatively new field that is steadily gaining interest both at the

scientific level and in the education sector. The experience gained in MAGICAL shows that the

activities comprising the global game-making approach can be fruitfully integrated into school

practice, as part of both mainstream and SEN-specific education. Experimentation has yielded

positive results, particularly regarding learner acceptance, motivation and engagement. Viewed

overall, these results suggest that game-making activities can be implemented in a variety of

educational contexts with the ultimate aim of enhancing and innovating teaching and learning

processes, especially where 21st Century skills are concerned.

As expected, these gains rely on providing educators with the theoretical/practical knowledge and

support they need to adopt game making and integrate it effectively in their practice. To this end,

MAGICAL has produced specific guidelines and tools designed to foster wider take-up in the future

beyond project confines. At the same time, it has highlighted some open issues for further research

investigation and specific action. One of these regards the links between game making for learning

on the one hand and computational (and design) thinking on the other. According to a recent report

of the joint Informatics Europe & ACM Europe Working Group on Informatics Education (IE & ACM,

2013), for a nation or group of nations to compete in the area of technological innovation – the

engine room of economic and social development - the general population must understand the

basics of informatics: the science behind Information and Communication Technology (ICT). And so

to be competitive in the 21st century job market, students need to master the key concepts of

informatics underpinning digital technologies.

The report also emphasizes that: (1) computational thinking is an important ability that all people

should possess; (2) informatics-based concepts, abilities and skills are teachable, and must be

included in primary and secondary school curricula.

Accordingly, the “2013 Best Practices in Education Award” (organized by Informatics Europe) was

devoted to initiatives promoting Informatics Education in Primary and Secondary Schools.

In this direction, the future plans of the MAGICAL team include investigation of how game making

can best support computational thinking; this involves building on and exploiting the potential

offered by the approach and dedicated software environments. This endeavor implies specific

actions in teacher preparation, student and teacher guidance, and also the design and

implementation of specific features in MAGICAL’s digital environments: Magos Lite and Classic. This

last aspect involves re-thinking how these applications might best support and direct learners in the

design of games, intended as an iterative process comprising conceptualization and implementation.

Our short-term future plans begin with further tuning and improvement of MAGICAL’s digital

environments. For Magos Classic, the immediate focus is on refining and optimizing the real-time

collaborative editing function so that this is sufficiently robust for use ‘in the wild’. Magos Lite, on the

other hand, requires further effort on educational data mining and learning analytics functions, so

that educators can readily access information useful for monitoring and assessing learners'

performance and outcomes.


47

The experience gained in MAGICAL field activities points to the potential advantages to be gained by

introducing adds-on that provide extra support in Magos for creative and problem-solving skills. In

the former case, the most immediate step is enriching and enhancing the scope for learners’ audio-

visual expression, e.g. with a wider choice of backgrounds, elements, characters, etc. for building and

personalizing the game space and allowing users to introduce own artifacts. As to support for

problem solving, the initial idea is to introduce more formative-type feedback based on analytics; this

would be integrated with a new preview function designed specifically to lead and and support the

learner through steps of iterative (re)design, refinement and implementation. This support is critical

computational thinking features like those mentioned above are to use effectively.

All these actions will be pursued by building on the field experiences already conducted during the

MAGICAL project and extending these to cover other school settings in Finland, Italy and Greece. As

reported in D8.1 Exploitation Plan, this process is already underway.

Find out more:





48

7 Contribution to EU policies

Europe is keenly aware that ensuring today’s students are able to play an active part as future

citizens of the Knowledge Society means supporting the development of key skills like digital literacy,

critical thinking, creativity and collaboration (UNESCO, 2005; Cachia et al, 2010). This has been

stressed since the Lisbon European Council in 2000, and also in the recent Agenda for New Skills and

New Jobs (European Commission, 2010).

MAGICAL’s core objectives, as described in Section 1, are in line with European policies and actions in

this regard. A recent EU policy initiative to gather views on education, digital technologies and open

educational resources (OER) identified key areas for action (European Commission, 2012). MAGICAL

makes a contribution in several of these, particularly in efforts to:

(support) access to quality open educational resources, for use or re-use within formal learning settings or in non-formal and informal settings;

promote the European Union as an international leader in innovative practices for education and training;

sharing of best practice, successful implementation strategies and critical success factors;

reduce costs in education by incentivising cost-free educational materials;

opening up to collaboration…collaborative peer learning, exchange of exchanging good practices…

… explore pedagogical approaches, curriculum and assessment practices (e.g. creative classrooms);

support teacher education and professional development on ICT didactics and use of OER.

Combining and orchestrating efforts from various EU countries is a positive approach to the

challenge of making tangible advances in this direction. The issues MAGICAL tackles clearly go

beyond national borders, with basic concepts and concerns that are rooted in a genuinely European

perspective. Indeed, the project idea emerged from the framework of a quintessentially European

initiative, namely GaLA, an EC Network of Excellence gathering over thirty partners from across

Europe who are deeply involved in research on the educational use of Serious Games.

Game building is increasingly being adopted in education in countries like the USA (Mikami et al.,

2010), and MAGICAL seeks to lend impetus to uptake in Europe. As described in Section 2, project

activities have been framed for implementation in different national contexts and outputs have been

tuned with the same perspective in mind (Section 3). Partnership clustering and networking (Section

5) has been carried out chiefly at European level, and both dissemination and exploitation efforts are

directed at European objectives.

Find out more:





49

8 REFERENCES

Design-Based Research Collective (2003). Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32 (1), 5-8.

Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32, 1: 9 – 13

Barab, S., & Squire, K. (2004). Design-based research: Putting a stake in the ground. The journal of the learning sciences. 13(1),1-14

Dagnino, F.M., Earp, J. & Ott, M. (2014). Learning through Game Making: an HCI Perspective. Stephanidis, C., Antona, M. (Eds.), Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Universal Access to Information and Knowledge. Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 8514. , 513-524. Springer International Publishing.

Earp, J. (2014). Games in education - some key trends and initiatives in Europe. Katerina Kasimatis, Maria Argyriou, International and European Trends in Education and their Impact on the Greek Educational System, 156-157. School of Pedagogical and Technological Education (ASPETE), Atene (Grecia).

Earp, J. (2014). Digital game making: a MAGICAL learning experience. Katerina Kasimatis, Maria Argyriou, International and European Trends in Education and their Impact on the Greek Educational System, 241. School of Pedagogical and Technological Education (ASPETE), Atene (Grecia).

Earp, J., Kiili, K., Koskela, M. & Tuomi, P. (2014). Learning by Creating Educational Exergames: Creative Pedagogy That Gets Students Moving. Hannele Niemi, Jari Multisilta, Lasse Lipponen, Marianna Vivitsou (eds.), Finnish Innovations and Technologies in Schools, 87-86. Sense Publishers.

Earp J. Catalano C.E., Mortara M. Investigating the Deployment of Serious Games in Secondary Education: a Pilot Study Inspired by Design-Based Research (in press)

Field A. & Hole G. (2003). How to design and report experiments London: Sage Publications

Heeter, C. and Winn, B. (2009). Meaningful Play. International Journal of Gaming and Computer-Mediated Simulations, Vol 1. No. 3, July-September

Hoadley C.(2004). Methodological Alignment in Design-Based Research. Educational Psychologist Vol. 39, Iss. 4. ISSN 0046-1520. 10.1207/s15326985ep3904_2. Francis & Taylor.

Informatics Europe & ACM Europe Working Group on Informatics Education (IE & ACM) (2013). http://germany.acm.org/upload/pdf/ACMandIEreport.pdf

Informatics Europe (2013).http://www.informatics-europe.org/services/curriculum-award.html

Johnson et al, 2014. Horizon Report Europe: 2014 Schools Edition. https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/default/files/2014-nmc-horizon-report-eu-en_online.pdf

Ogletree, S. M., & Drake, R. (2007). College students’video game participation and perceptions: gender differences and implications. Sex Roles, 56,537–542.

Zoltan KATAI, Laszlo TOTH, Alpar Karoly ADORJANI Multi-Sensory Informatics Education Informatics in Education, 2014, Vol. 13, No. 2, 225–240 225 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2014.04

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/default/files/2014-nmc-horizon-report-eu-en_online.pdf

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/sites/default/files/2014-nmc-horizon-report-eu-en_online.pdf

MAking Games In CollaborAtion for Learning (MAGICAL) · This project has been funded with support...

Documents

Transcript of MAking Games In CollaborAtion for Learning (MAGICAL) · This project has been funded with support...