playing
Author: George Milliken
Playing games
Making games
making
Games-based learning
learning
Games development
development
Esports
Further reading and blog posts
Book 1
Book 2
Recommended reading: Critical Play; Radical Game Design by Mary Flanagan
This blog is a summary of Mary Flanagan’s book Critical Play; Radical Game Design. This was recommended by Dr Tom Brock, who is a Senior Lecturer in Sociology at Manchester Met, after he spoke at the recent Scottish Esports Conference 2024. With the book on order, it was only possible to access the first chapter on Google Scholar. This post is a summary of those initial points but are subject to change with further reading.
Flanagan starts off by identifying games as “a significant cultural medium across a wider range of social, economic, game and gender categories” that are still new and not as valuable as other forms of play. These points might be useful to consider games as art, as media and as play.
Defining games
For a definition of games, Flanagan refers to Salen and Zimmerman’s (2003) definition of games as an artificial system with player, rules and a quantifiable outcome or goal. The artificiality of games aligns with Tina Bruce’s ‘12 features of play’ (2020) as ‘possible, alternative, imagined worlds which involve ‘supposing’ and ‘as if’ situations.’
In addition to these features, Flanagan refers to Greg Costikyan (1994) who says that while ‘stories are inherently linear’ and games are ‘inherently non-linear’ the more a game is story-driven then the more linear and less of a game it becomes. This distinction on linearity would separate games from other media, such as books, film and music in most cases.
Are games play?
However, the requirement for outcomes puts games at adds with the Scottish Government’s National Play Strategy and another of Bruce’s ‘features of play’.
The Scottish Government defines play as ‘freely chosen, personally directed and intrinsically motivated. It is performed for no external goal or reward’ (2013). Bruce also makes this distinction between play and games as play does not have ‘externally imposed rules, goals, tasks or a definite direction’ (2020).
Agreeing that games and play are distinct, there are still valuable similarities worth exploring. Both play and games include their being ‘freely chosen, personally directed’ (Scottish Government, 2013) and being ‘not-work’ and ‘diversionary activities’ (Flanagan, 2009). Flanagan states that games can ‘create cognitive and epistemological environments that position the player or participant with the experiences [of play] in meaningful ways’ (2009). Similarly, Bruce identifies that play “helps children to function in advance of what they can actually do in their real lives. They can drive a car, perform a heart operation, be a shop keeper.” (2020)
Are games art?
Might games be considered art? Flanagan considers games may be ‘outlets for creative expression, conceptual thinkings or to examine or work through social issues?’ There are similarities between this and another of Bruce’s features of play: “Play is about wallowing in ideas, feelings and relationships and the prowess of the physical body. It helps the process of becoming aware of self in relation to others and the universe. It brings unity and interconnectedness” (2020).
As well as ‘playing’ games, Flanagan also explores the concept of ‘making for making’s sake’ to distinguish being creative with games from the commercial development that is traditional games design. She considers that games can be ‘a medium of expression but using elements common to games as the materials.’ In his book, The Element, Ken Robinson states that creativity can be thought of as “a conversation between what we’re trying to figure out and the media we are using” (2009). For Robinson it is impossible to separate the idea from the medium because creativity is “about making things […] it always involves using media of some sort to develop ideas” (2009).
Conclusion
In conclusion, games should be considered distinct from play. This does not devalue their cultural significance – there are many similarities between games and play and we should explore these. Indeed, we may want to explore games as a medium through which to explore ideas, of ourselves, others and the world around us. Realising the Ambition (Education Scotland, 2020) states that:
The experiences and spaces for play we facilitate for the children should reflect the children’s ideas, aspirations, curiosities and next steps in their learning. It is through play that children learn about themselves and make sense of the world around them.
In this sense we should certainly encourage games as part of their learning.
Glasgow School of Art Open House at The School of Innovation + Technology, Sat 14 Dec 2024 at 13:00
Open House at The School of Innovation + Technology – Glasgow School of Art, Sat 14 Dec 2024 at 13:00
Come and join our creative community for a taste of studio life, speak to students + staff and get an insight into your time at the GSA.
Find our more and sign up using this Eventbrite link
The School of Innovation and Technology(SIT) invite you to an open studios event at the Glasgow Campus.
Book for this event to tour the SIT facilities and studios and meet with programme staff and current students and experience just a bit of our studio culture.
Please note this event is for Undergraduate Programmes within the School of Innovation and Technology only.
Highlights include: Undergraduate Study in SIT – Sound, Games & 3D, 13:00-15:30
Come and learn more about our undergraduate programmes in sound, games, VR and 3D modelling at The Glasgow School of Art’s School of Innovation & Technology and see our new studios in Glasgow’s city centre. There will be an opportunity to meet and chat with tutors, learn about the programmes and see (and experience!) a range of student work in sound, virtual reality, and more.
• 13:00 Welcome talk – UG study
• 13:30 Talks and tours:
o Studying BDes Sound for the Moving Image
o Studying BSc Immersive Systems Design (Games & VR and 3D Modelling)
Teach the Teacher training – Scratch coding by JP Morgan
What is Teach the Teacher?
Teach the Teacher is part of the pro bono STEM program offered by JP Morgan. This runs alongside other initiatives to train primary school children to do basic coding in a ‘language’ called Scratch.
What is the learning intention of Teach the Teacher?
To upscale primary school teachers and to give them the skills (and more importantly the confidence) to be able to run Scratch code club sessions for pupils.
Are there any prerequisites?
No prior coding knowledge required.
Access to:
- A device that has internet connectivity to run Scratch and access the web resources
- A reliable internet connection for video presentation or content sharing (virtual only)
What is the structure of the program?
There are currently 2 standard offerings available:
- Virtual online (6 week block) – 6 x 1 hour sessions
- In-person (3 week block) – 3 x 2 hour sessions
Benefits
- Equips teacher with basic skills required to run code clubs and complete basic Scratch lessons independently
- Virtual or on-site
- Allows the teacher to share knowledge and train colleagues in the primary school
- No experience necessary
If you would like to register your primary school and either of the offered programs then please contact:
jpmc.stem.primary.support@jpmorgan.com
About JP Morgan
As well as being a global leader in financial services, JP Morgan is one of the world’s biggest technology-driven companies. JP Morgan offer a number of volunteer-led programs to help increase pupils’ interest and knowledge in STEM subjects through basic introduction to coding.
These sessions are offered virtually and in-person with an ultimate objective to help primary schools to continue their learning journey on these topics after the program is complete.
Recommended reading: Tackling Digital Exclusion – Audit Scotland
This blog post is a summary of key points in Audit Scotland’s report that might be useful for educational settings, such as schools, nurseries and local authorities to consider.
Read the full report with this link Tackling digital exclusion (audit.scot).
“Digital exclusion is strongly associated with poverty and people with certain protected characteristics.”
Anyone working with groups that may be at-risk of digital exclusion should consider the potential barriers in place to them accessing and using such technology. If there are analogue alternatives, these should be as effective and readily available, along with support, training and access provision for people to engage with them.
Where this is not the case, the Royal Society (2022) talk about the double loop of poverty where analogue factors are entrenched by digital ones to doubly affect those at risk of exclusion.
Some of the impacts of digital exclusion that are more likely to surface in education are:
- making it harder to access services and information
- making it more difficult for parents to engage with children’s education
- incurring debts or being unable to make payments if they lack the skills and confidence to use online payment methods.
Some of these, more than others, relate directly to rights of individuals, including:
- Right to receive and impart information
- Right to education
Many schools and local authorities already have digital leaders or champions, and I imagine that ensuring these families are not digitally excluded is high on the list of school improvement actions anywhere digital is included.
The report also calls for a Scottish minimum digital living standard (MDLS) which “includes, but is more than, having accessible internet, adequate equipment, and the skills, knowledge and support people need. It is about being able to communicate, connect and engage with opportunities safely and with confidence.”
This is an aspect we have tried to factor in our recent guidance on digital skills for learners and teachers. Ideally, this guidance will support local authorities and educational settings to develop such a set of skills and knowledge in learners with the aim of reducing digital exclusion from not having them.
The last point that really resonated for education was ‘how poorly designed digital services without useable alternatives can lead to barriers to accessing services and have a negative impact on vulnerable people.’
Where apps are used to communicate learning to families on a regular basis – how effective are the non-app alternatives? How does a paper copy compare to video or verbal media shared on apps? Does the school or nursery make this feedback more equitable for families that need it? Perhaps in-person sharing on a regular basis?
If they don’t factor and mitigate this effectively, we risk having a ‘part of the population … unseen or unheard [as] the pace of technological change continues’.