Stage 2 - 2: Analysis of Puzzle, Quiz, and Sportsr Games

Learners' style

For the purpose of this assignment, I enlisted the cooperation of my 20-year-old, sister-in-law, Samantha, who recently finished her first year of undergraduate studies at Indiana State University (majoring in Nursing). 

1. Based on Kolb's Learning Style
• Using the provided Quick Activity Sheet (Kolb Learning Inventory), Sam scored the highest with 19 points in the Active Experimentation (AE) area and14 points in the Abstract Conceptualization (AC) area, putting her in the Converging learning style group.  This type of learner tends to approach a task or experience by doing rather than watching (AE), and transforms that experience by thinking (AC) about the task or experience to analyze it, rather than using feelings (or gut). Both qualities of this learning style made sense to me when thinking in reference of Sam; she grew up as an active member on a farm (raising and showing cattle, goats, and rabbits) and has always been one to just start "mucking" around with something new (I say mucking around but it was always done with plenty of adult supervision - actually, her dad has and is a strong supporter of this learning style). As far as analyzing her experiences, she's a smart girl and you can see the wheels turning when she's thinking about something (she scored 1's on the answers that referenced feelings, hunches, and observing - so not really big on acting based on her gut). 
2. Based on Prensky's list
• Marc Prensky believes that children born after 1970 were raised in such different environments that certain cognitive aspects are more reinforced where others are de-emphasized in comparison to generations born and raised prior to this time. The reason for this difference is in reference to the different stimuli surrounding the "Nintendo children" age group in the form of digital gaming, the Internet, and other newer technologies (Prensky, 1998).  Using the provided Likert Scale to score ten different characteristics based on Prensky's list of ten cognitive style changes, Sam scored in the mid to lower range (23 on a scale from 10-50, with a lower score being closer to this "Nintendo child" he's talking about). The two 5's she selected were in the characteristics of "twitch speed vs. Conventional speed" and "Play vs. Work." I believe these choices are very much due to her upbringing in her home environment(see the farm mentioned above). So to summarize her learning style based on this list, Sam would rather:
• Take her time on things,
• Can handle and might prefer more than one thing going on at any given time,
• Learns by seeing and finding patterns,
• Does not necessarily think or need to see things in a linear fashion for understanding,
• Can handle or prefers (perhaps accustomed to) asynchronous communication (prefers to be "connected" vs. "Stand-alone"),
• Approaches tasks actively vs. passively (acts first, then asks questions later),
• Works hard to make gains,
• Requires instant gratification to know if something is working right,
• Is more drawn to current news and discussions vs. make-believe situations, and 
• Sees technology as a friend rather than a foe.
3. Based on VAK learning styles
• Using the VAK Learning Styles Self-Assessment Questionnaire, Same scored highest (11-C's) as someone with a Kinaesthetic learning style (having a preference for the physical, practical hands-on experiences). She wasn't far behind with 9-A's, meaning she also leans toward having a visual learning style (having a preference for seen or observed things). I believe this visual learning style does not necessarily include reading the instructions prior to performing a task; for Sam, she would accept watching someone do something prior to her attempting it. But she don't need no stinking instructions:).

The results of these three self-assessments for Sam were pretty consistent with each other. 

Analysis of games

From the puzzle, quiz, and sports games provided for us to use for the analysis this week, and based on the ones I played myself, I chose a game called Planarity as the best fit and the Universal Cryptogram game as the least best fit for Sam's learning style.

1. General information of the two games
• Planarity is a simple but challenging game. You start at level one with a diagram consisting of little blue dots (vertices) that are connected by lines (edges). The goal of the game is to move the vertices around such that the edges no longer intersect. When you've moved your vertices such that none of the edges intersect, you click on a button to tell you whether you're right or not, and if you are, you are advanced to the next level (increasingly harder). 
• Universal Cryptogram is just like it sounds - you're given a set of encrypted text to unveil by figuring out by the substitution ciphers used (where each letter is replaced by a different letter). To solve the puzzle, one must recover the original lettering. I didn't play long enough to figure out how difficult the substitution ciphering progressed. This game allows one 3 hints in a game, with the game itself being timed (you are given a pause feature which was handy if you had to leave your game at all).
2. Comparison 1: Game components (consisting of a goal, conflict in obtaining that goal, rules that structure obtaining the goal and dealing with the conflict, challenging, and intensively absolving from real world responsibility).
• I felt that both games had strong game components (based on my previous definition with the components listed above which includes the added component of "challenging" I've decided should included). I struggled with calling the "rules" in Universal Cryptogram as strong, however, this was based more on the learning style of my sister-in-law and not whether or not the game had strong rules. There are rules, they're just changing with each game due to the cryptogram key changing (hence, changing the way the game is solved). Or is really that the rules are changing or just the course itself (still talking about the key for solving the puzzle)? Again, this one left me stumped, especially after re-reading something from the first weeks suggested readings. Wolfgang Kramer (2000) said that "all games which have the same course, by definition do not belong to "game with rules." for example, this would be puzzles, quiz lets, and brain teasers, which lose their attraction when they have been solved. Solitaire games which follow a different course each time belongs, for me, to "games with rules." 
3. Comparison 2: Learner's styles
• I chose Planarity as the best fit for Sam's learning styles due to the structure of the game allowing her to jump right in there and start solving the puzzle. There were no rules to really understand and follow, there were no difficult instructions on how to play the game itself. The screen was self-explanatory enough such that there wasn't a need for any of that - the GUI allowed her to jump around and click and figure out what she was supposed to do and it gave her the instant gratification as to whether or not the answer was correct (all from the same GUI the game was played on).
• I chose the Universal Cryptogram game as the least best fit for Sam's learning style mainly due to the ever changing rules inherent in the different substitution ciphers used from one game to the next. The game itself allowed her to jump in there and start figuring stuff out, however, I didn't see this knowledge as something that could necessarily be applied to the next round (maybe I haven't played this type of game enough and am missing the point??). Although many characteristics Sam chose based on Prensky's list were present in this game, she does like to take her time on things to figure them out and the automatic time limit feature of the game would be more frustrating for her rather than a challenge.