Creating Meaningful Assignments

I’m proud to be a member of the International Communication Association’s Children, Adolescents and the Media Division. Our brilliant leader, Dr. Amy Jordan, today announced that six categories of interest seem to have emerged among members’ proposals for a preconference or extended session on teaching children and media at ICA’s annual conference in London 2013. These are listed below in no particular order:

1. Structuring the Children and Media Class

2. Creating Meaningful Assignments

3. Incorporating Examples into Class Lectures

4. Teaching and Using Theory

5. Public Policy and the Child Audience

6. Supervising Research

To join my colleagues at the preconference, let alone share my knowledge directly with them, is an incredible opportunity. As I scanned the topics and considered my expertise, Topic 2, Creating Meaningful Assignments, jumped out at me. This, I realized, is my sweet spot. So I emailed the following proposal to Amy:

A meaningful assignment is grounded in a meaningful learning experience overall. We can’t just drop a gem of an assignment from on high, when the rest of the course has been stultifying, and expect stellar outcomes. No matter how well-designed the assignment, it has to be embedded in a framework of trust and energized inquiry. Then, this assignment must be sensitively evaluated or it will undermine the philosophy of the practice and value of the experience. Thus, I will begin by zooming out to the course level, then drilling down to discrete assignment creation and assessment.

In terms of information, I would explore the dynamics of participatory culture (Jenkins, Purushotma, Clinton, Weigel & Robison, 2006) in order to clarify what it takes for instructors to engage learners in and out of the classroom, as well as prepare them for 21st century demands. Then I would introduce the five characteristics of participatory learning (as identified by the USC PLAY! research group): relevance; motivation and engagement; creativity; co-learning; and ecosystemic learning. I believe that these are the constructs of “meaningfulness,” should one choose to operationalize the term. To enhance meaningfulness, instructors also should allow for their students to co-construct the assignment themselves; this helps to ensure that students derive benefit from the fruits of their labors, and boosts students’ sense of ownership in the material they explore and knowledge they create. When it comes time to assess, I would touch upon participatory action research (PAR) and help instructors and students alike to recognize cultural beacons (Dura, Felt, & Singhal, in press), which are overlooked indicators and grassroots epistemologies.

In terms of process, I would practice what I preach, modeling an interactive, participatory approach to sharing and constructing knowledge. I would utilize several Liberating Structures (McCandless & Lipmanowicz, in press), such as 1-2-4-All and Impromptu Networking, in order to facilitate the establishment of a participatory classroom culture. I would also co-construct a curriculum design assignment with learners, requesting that they post to a wiki that I had set up in advance, in order to help them get going with this project and co-create a dialogic community of practice.

I’m keeping my fingers crossed and hoping that I can share these passionately-held beliefs/evidence-based recommendations with my peers in London. Tally ho!

USC Annenberg Fellows Symposium

On Wednesday, April 11, 2012, I presented Explore Locally, Excel Digitally: A participatory learning-oriented after-school program for enriching citizenship on- and offline at the fourth annual USC Annenberg Graduate Fellowship Research and Creative Project Symposium.

I spent hours on my gorgeous Powerpoint presentation but not a soul reviewed it. If I’d remained in my booth, perhaps I would have gotten some visitors. But since the crowd was anemically thin, I opted to court professional development by engaging with colleagues. I got to know some of the first-year PhD students in my program. I caught up with Katya Ognyanova, who I’d taken a class with back in Fall 2008 and haven’t really spoken with on an academic level ever since. I embraced my friend Lori, who became DR. LOPEZ yesterday when she successfully defended her dissertation! I chatted with my colleague Rhea Vichot, who wryly observed that conferences never know how to classify her scholarship. I asked two Greek engineers about their top takeaways from their presentation on big data. Their answer: new solutions to backing up must be devised and implemented. (We also spoke about Thessaloniki, Greek islands, cheese, and yogurt.) I heard Ritesh Mehta and Tisha Dejmanee share their phenomenological take on Facebook, then sat down with Erin Kamler (and LeeAnn Sangalang) to discuss participatory action research, Theater of the Oppressed, and Erin’s recent paper that examined modes of establishing validity in interventions that combine both approaches. We discussed the power of comradeship and fantasized about forming a reading/critical feedback circle to provide each other with intellectual/practical support. I told them to set up the Doodle. We’ll see if anyone follows through… But our hearts were in the right place.

I also attended a session in which the focus was on money and conspicuous consumption. USC Annenberg PhD student Laura Alberti spoke about the EU debt crisis and the framing of Greece as a deadbeat family member, USC Annenberg PhD student Lana Swartz spoke about the rise and fall of Diner’s Club credit cards, and USC School of Cinematic Arts PhD student Katherine Wagner explored Yelp’s implications for Los Angeles segregation. USC Annenberg PhD student LeeAnn Sangalang served as moderator.

While this event wasn’t exactly what I expected, I feel nonetheless that I benefited from learning about others’ diverse scholarship. I also strengthened collegial connections that, at the end of the day, matter far more than any one project. Therefore, I thank you, USC Annenberg Graduate Fellowship Research and Creative Project Symposium. Thank you very much.

Pecha Kuchas at USC Annenberg Dean’s Forum

On October 14, 2010, USC Annenberg Innovation Lab‘s Project New Media Literacies and other USC entities/individuals presented a series of “blue sky” propositions at the USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism Dean’s Forum: Fostering Community for Robert F. Kennedy’s Legacy in Action. Attending representatives from the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), Robert F. Kennedy Community Schools, and non-profit RFK-Legacy in Action — including LAUSD School Board president Monica Garcia, several RFK Community Schools principals, and Robert F. Kennedy’s son and daughter-in law — pondered how we might spark new forms of teaching and learning while honoring the social justice philosophy that inspired these RFK institutions.

I speak Pecha Kucha-style from 1:04:30-1:08:30. That means that my 12 graphically-oriented slides advance every 20 seconds, whether I’m ready or not, for precisely four minutes. You can see me in the flesh at the beginning and the end — in the middle, you just see my slides. This is the event that paved the way for the next year and a half of PLAY! research. And the rest, as they say, is history…

MIT Tech TV

The Business of Impact Games

(from left) Laird Malamed, Laurel Felt, and George Rose grin post-panel discussion on the business of impact games

On Tuesday, February 28, 2012, I moderated a discussion with Activision executives Laird Malamed and George Rose that considered impact games in terms of business models and market prognostications (as opposed to pedagogy, assessment, design, etc). Co-hosted by USC Impact Games (a cross-campus group that I co-chair) and the USC Marshall Society & Business Lab, this event introduced undergraduate business majors to the field, as well as united like-minded scholars university-wide.

While the definition (as well as the terminology — impact game vs. serious game) is contested, one might characterize an impact game as a game that has been designed for a purpose beyond pure entertainment. While the game must entertain in order to effectively engage users’ attention, it aims to impact users’ knowledge, attitudes, and/or practices. Impact games have taught players about international conflicts (as in USC Impact Games co-chair Susana Ruiz’s Darfur is Dying), emotional regulation strategies (as in GameDesk‘s Dojo, the focus of my dissertation), and the pathways to and protocols for college access (as in USC Collegeology‘s Application Crunch and Mission: Admission). They have provided contexts for exercising (as in the Nintendo Wii and the Xbox Kinect), rehabilitating (as in the work of Marientina Gotsis with the USC Creative Media & Behavioral Health Center), accessing tailored health plans (as in My Fitness Coach 2), and building community (as in USC Annenberg Innovation Lab‘s ParTour).

A FEW TAKEAWAYS
According to Laird:
Funding — Sponsorship seems a more reliable source of funding than short-term and/or volatile grants. Find companies that support your goals, that want to support/celebrate these goals — principally for-profit businesses that would benefit from being associated with the project. If the outcome is social awareness/understanding, that’s a tougher sell…

Sustainability — Can’t think of a game in absence of a sustainability model, even going into the concept of it, even outlining/coming up with a design. It’s okay to say, in the case of an impact game, there is no business model for this, but what’s not okay is to add it in at the end (similar argument goes for assessment). When you’re evaluating design and deciding what to cut, you don’t cut the things that you’re selling/marketing/getting sponsored for. Another lens to look through that should be done in an iterative fashion. Take multiple passes to consider technology, art, and sustainability factors. No one lens is the right blanket way to do it.

Horizon — Are you making one per year or one every few years? Does it have to survive more than three years (that’s a long time for an interactive project to survive, it will look dated)? It’s more like you’re creating an event that will be online for a 1000 days vs. creating an enduring product. iPhone games being a good example to look at in terms of life-span synced with business plan and goals.)

According to George:
Product development and marketing — You’re creating a product that does something novel, or does better or more efficiently a legacy product. You must overcome built-in resistance from the idea that games and screentime are frivolous and unnecessary, reading books onscreen isn’t real reading, etc. In-fighting among entrenched, interested entities.

Future directions — Impact games are used robustly in Europe to inform citizens about corporate social responsibility. Stateside, we may see growth in this sector as well as in the areas of exergames and rehabilitation, among others.

—–

Here is our PR blurb, a better-than-nothing video of the event, our agenda, and a few pix snapped during the discussion and immediately afterwards:

PUBLICITY
The Business of Impact Games: A moderated discussion with gaming executives

From Darfur is Dying to Sim City, the field of “impact” or “serious” games is on the rise. Panelists will discuss what it takes to build up a market for these games and offer strategies for developing and selling commercial products. They will also explore these games’ tremendous potential for inspiring global change and bringing awareness to various issues, from education to public health.

Panelists:
Laird Malamed, Adjunct Faculty, USC School of Cinematic Arts and President, Creative Learning Technologies;
George Rose, former Chief Legal Officer and Chief Public Policy Officer and current Senior Consultant to Chief Executive Officer of Activision Blizzard

Moderator:
Laurel Felt, Doctoral Candidate at USC Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism

AGENDA

1. Introductions: (5:05-5:10 pm)
Tell me more about your background and experience. Chronologically, please share your titles, affiliations, and years spent in each position.

2. Definitions: (5:10-5:20 pm)
What are “serious” or “impact” games? Why the vernacular distinction? What are the potential problems as well as potential benefits of each term? Considering the interdisciplinary nature of this field, how should we move forward regarding a shared (if not, common) language? Issues of “perception” (i.e. games, in the general public’s mind, are not to be taken seriously).

3. Personal Connections: (5:20-5:35 pm)
Why do YOU care about serious or impact games? What brought you from a more purely commercial origin to working in this philanthropically-influenced domain? Was there a key moment or insight, a seminal piece of literature or game, that changed your way of thinking and/or inspired a new agenda? Why should the commercial game industry take this field seriously? How is productive collaboration fostered in a space typically (and perhaps, necessarily) inhabited by multiple cultures?

4. Business Considerations: (5:35-5:50 pm)
Let’s talk about practical strategies for developing, disseminating and selling these products/experiences commercially. How do we assemble productive diverse teams, monetize ethically and significantly, and get these games out there? How can teams and businesses plan in a sustainable way?

How can academic game programs and business programs educate students to co-experiment and innovate around new business models for projects/services that seek to make a profit as well as advance social justice and education? For example, past one grant-funded project, how can a studio/developer continue to create high-quality products and keep a roof over her head while competing (or, at least, existing in parallel with) with richly funded commercial entities?

5. Personal Insights/Advice/Lessons Learned + Future Forecasting: (5:50-6 pm)
What have you discovered as a result of your experience? What would you advise our audience members in terms of what TO do and what NOT to do? Five, 10, and 20 years down the pike: What do you see in terms of this field? Paint that picture (in terms of the culture, the technology, and the creative aspects).

6. Q&A: (6-6:20)
Let’s hear what the people have to say!


Marshall's Vertical Lead for Social Impact Careers Nicole Butler chats with USC Impact Games co-chairs Kristy Norindr and Susana Ruiz

That’s MR. Roboto…

Putting together my post-DML 2012 thoughts for a guest essay on 21st Century Scholar , the blog for USC’s Pullias Center for Higher Education.

TITLE: Digital devotees are made of people! : Leveraging our humanity to enrich digital media and learning
THEMES/CONCEPTS:

Walking the talk, Being the change we (earnestly) recommend
The most engaging, productive moments of the conference occurred when we applied our own best practice by: allowing DML attendees to pool their collective intelligence and creativity; inviting their interactivity, play, relationship-building, and reflection; offering students the opportunity to present their own work in their own words.

Enough of singing to and talking at the (albeit brilliant) choir. We need to connect, think, and make together. And that “we” needs to get blown even wider.

Tangibility
In the digital shuffle, we can’t lose the face-to-face and tactile. There’s intimacy in looking another person in the eye. There’s comfort in snuggling with a grandparent and beloved book. While time and distance may sometimes prevent corporeal communion, I think it should be the preferred option, with virtual meetings a better-than-nothing back-up. Breakthroughs in presence and haptics are exciting but there ain’t nothin like the real thing.

Portion size and frequency
A yearly grand reunion is also inadequate for making and sustaining change. So too, perhaps, are our smaller, monthly meetings. How can we harness the tech tools we love(/hate) so well in order to expand opportunities for contributions and micro- (hopefully leading to macro-) changes? Do we pipe every Impact Games member’s Tweets into a homepage feed? Do we post a daily poll to our FB site? Do we create a quick, casual game application that allows for simple service (e.g., Google Image Tagger)? And, at the same time, how do we avoid irrelevance by appearing like so much noise? In a bursting Inbox, information overload world, how much is too much and how much is just right?

BIO:
Laurel Felt is a Ph.D. candidate, researcher, and curriculum designer focused on nurturing youths’ social and emotional competence, critical thinking, and communicative capacities. She is currently investigating participatory learning with the Annenberg Innovation Lab’s PLAY! Project, and emotional regulation with GameDesk via biofeedback-enhanced impact game Dojo.

EMBEDDED LINKS:
Laurelfelt.org
http://annenberg.usc.edu/Faculty/Doctoral%20Students/Felt%20Laurel.aspx
Annenberglab.com
Playnml.wikispaces.com
Gamedesk.org
Gamedesk.org/projects/dojo

MY TWEETS:
https://twitter.com/#!/laurelfelt