Tag Archive: learning


Sure, there are a lot of reasons that a teacher will want to use digital games in their classrooms.  Students are motivated, there is a shared base of experience to use for discussions, the program often keeps yummy statistics for you, etc.  But we should also be aware that sometimes there are darker issues that we should think about.

Today I wish to blog about the way children celebrate. There seems to be a default, almost Pavlovian desire to celebrate when students have “won” something in a game.  I should mention that this is not restricted to just digital gaming, I have noticed this come up when students are engaged in a programming task and they figure something out.   Celebrations have quite a range, and here are some of the reoccurring celebrations, often at the completion of a level in a game.  Not a particularly hard level, just the completion of any level.

1. Polite Golf Clap

Sometimes this is followed with a quiet, “Yay”, this celebration (most frequently done by girls) involves a quiet set of claps for about 5 seconds.  Often there is a coy smile, a smile that says, “Ha, game designer.  I got that one beat.”

2.  Happy Feet Dancing

This celebration is similar to the Polite Golf Clap. The celebrator uses only their toes and rapidly touches them to the floor, in a quiet yet rhythmic pattern.  This normally goes on for about 5 seconds.

3.       “Yes” with a clenched fist punching.

Similar to what a professional sports player does when scoring a goal, this is a loud short celebration.  Mildly disruptive.

4.        The We Are the Champions Holding A Trophy Above Our Head

Miming holding a sports trophy, the player using this celebration raises their hands above their heads, nods and smiles while looking around the room.  Sometimes this celebration will include actually standing up.  Another similar celebration is the giant “Y” shape with arms raised above the head and gentle shaking of the hands.

5.     Casual Coolness

This celebration involves the player’s hands coming off of the keyboard and the player stands up and simultaneously pushes their chair back.  The player slowly raises their hands in the air, in a way that is reminiscent of stretching after a work out, the hands interlock above the head and are thrust upwards.  Occasionally, the celebrator will let out a sigh or a low whistle.

6.       Howling like a Wolf or Wounded Animal

It is amazing how disruptive a celebratory “yowl” or “howl” can be in a classroom.  Tilting their head up at a 45 degree angle and holding on to their desk, these celebrators look like a wolf that is telling the world that they just caught their dinner.

7.       The F-Bomb and Other Impolite Words

I am consistently amazed by how often playing video games in school results in swearing. This is often accompanied by one of the other physical celebrations.  This is not just in my classroom, but when I have been working in several different schools.  There are always a couple of cussers.  And I have noticed this is not necessarily gender specific.  Perhaps it is because it is a common video game celebration for the adults and older siblings? Sometimes, when the player has been engrossed, they seem to forget they are at school.  Volume has been from the quiet whisper to the out bellowing of a cuss word. Every once in awhile a player will catch themselves half way through the word and realize where they are.   Almost always, it is followed by embarrassment and sheepishness, as if they never realized they were doing it.

8.       The Studio Audience

I have only witnessed this celebration once.  I had been trying to convince some colleagues that their Grade 4 students would not only enjoy the game Crayon Physics on their new classroom Smartboards, but that they would learn something of the Science curriculum.  Having tried the game themselves, they universally declared that the game was too hard for their kids.  So I installed the software in the Kindergarten (4 and 5 year olds) classroom and used the program during center time.

At first, I just let them use the pen to draw on the first level of the program.  All manner of shapes were drawn and then allowed to fall to the virtual ground.  After four or five students had had their turn, a shy quiet boy went up.  He drew his first shape, which accidentally dropped onto the blue ball, and unexpectedly made the blue ball roll into the yellow star.  This is, in fact, the goal of each level in Crayon physics.  The game made a tinkling noise, and the startled boy looked like he had broken something.

Almost as one, the entire class stopped what they were doing and looked at the screen. “It’s a game, Mr. Martin,” one little girl whispered in awe, “he got to the next level.”  Then everyone in the class started clapping and smiling and dancing!  The boy who had made this serendipitous discovery was a hero.  Next, they all sat down watched the screen and waited for him to “do it again.” They offered helpful hints and applauded when he completed the next level.  THIS WAS DURING FREE CENTER TIME . . . 100% of the students sitting and watching the Smartboard.

It took them a week (according to their Kindergarten teacher) to finish the demo levels to the game.  They also never interacted with the game as just a “draw things and let them fall to the ground tool.” Once they knew it was a game, it changed how they interacted with the program.

_______________________________

Have you seen other video game and programming celebrations in the classroom? And why is it that beating a level on a video game brings out a celebration that is larger and more spontaneous than going up a reading level on a diagnostic test?

Over the past few years I have put a couple of classes in Gamestar Mechanic, a video game about designing video games.  It is really quite an amazing tool, if you haven’t set your kid up for a free account just stop reading this blog and go and do it.  Anyways, in the game you get to be a designer and create your own sprite based video games.

As with most online games you gain experience by completing tasks.  Gamestar has 4 areas that you gain experience in: Designing Games, Playing Other People’s Games, Reviewing Games and Being a Good Citizen.  So, basically if you want to increase in level (your title) not only will you build games, but you will also play everyone else’s game. Win, win for everybody.

Except for some reason kids ruin it.  There used to be a category on the website for the highest rated games.

I first noticed it with my awesome game:  Mt. Sierpinski.  Based on a beautiful fractal, it is a pretty fun game! Ok, it is a pretty challenging game, but I was really excited because it was my first game featured on the Gamestar website.  This started getting me quite a few good reviews, people commenting that it was great, etc.  Then, my game started showing up on the top rated games page, and this is where it got weird.  The other people on the top rated page started to give me 1 star reviews, thus dropping my average score so that I would be below their game on the top rated page.  Of course, the longer you are on the top of the list, the more plays you have and the more immune you are to this kind of “attack.”

On the flip side, I now log in and play highly rated games that are really, really lousy.  How are they getting to be highly rated? They are trading 5 star reviews.  You rate my game five stars and I will rate your game five stars.  The game can be so simple and have no challenge, take 1 second to win, and they will still be rated 5 stars as long as my also, often equally simple game also gets five stars.

Since the game engine is designed to reward reviews, and reviews are inherently subjective, here is my question: When you put students into Gamestar Mechanic, what do you tell them about the rating process?  Do you tell them to do what the Gamestar designers want: honest, critical and helpful reviews? Or do you say nothing, and let them interact with the review ecosystem the way that it has evolved?  Which one will lead to a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the user rating system (like Yelp for instance).

My favourite set of reviews, just as an aside, was a student who was mad at me (because of an incident at recess, being caught doing something naughty is never fun). As revenge against the world of authority, this student gave every one of my games the worst possible rating.  I had a chuckle over that.  Especially since that made some of my other students rate the game so that the effect was undone, because I am a cool teacher.  Meaning by rating me poorly the student had actually increased my plays and my rating.

Which makes me wonder . . are any of the ratings valid at all?

Students seem to believe that the computer can be an independent force of destruction.  By this I mean, a computer sometimes, with malice and forethought, sets out to destroy a student’s work independent of any help from the aforementioned student.

OK, I admit I have lost a word document here and there, or had a computer crash on me.  I have just never felt that this was on purpose on the part of the computer.  The universe . . . well, I have my own paranoid suspicions about the universe.  As an experienced techno-teacher (I have a loud driving bass beat), I have a good sense of when the computer or the program might be the issue or when the student might be the issue. See if you can tell which of these is probably the computer not working and which is, to use a gentle term, probably a user related problem:

Mr. Martin, every time I try to open up my story the computer freezes and this lollipop comes up and spins for 20 minutes. I think it the file is glitched.

 Mr. Martin, I swear, I didn’t print 10 copies of a Giant Letter R for my display about Robots on the library colour printer. See, my printer settings show that it is to make one copy on the classroom printer. The print log says I told it to print 10 copies to the libary? No, I never did. Honest. It must be a glitch in the computer. 

Now, I have myself printed more copies than I wanted on a printer or printed to a printer that I didn’t intend to.  Mistakes happen after all.  I cannot recall a time where I put all the right settings in, saw them on the screen, pressed print and something else happened completely.  Not that it couldn’t happen, of course, just it seems more likely to be the user, um, covering his/her tracks and blaming the all mysterious computer glitch.

Glitches and Programming Video Games with Students

I didn’t even really care about the word “glitch” that much, until, at three different schools, with three different groups of students in three different grades I encountered the term “glitch” in my Scratch computer programming workshops.

Students were designing various games. Some were mazes, some were driving games, there was one game that was a little like a cross between the game show “Jeopardy” and the classic Arcade game “Asteroids”.  The games were definitely moving forward and then, all three schools had groups that stopped working on their games and started new ones, just before they were finished. The conversations were eerily similar in each group:

Teacher:       What happened to your other game?
Student:        Scratch got “glitchy.
Teacher:      Eh? What do you mean glitchy?
Student:       It just isn’t working. Maybe it will work right in the next version of Scratch.


The students would then describe what, as a young programmer, I learned is called a “bug.” Since the vocabulary of glitch seems to be so common with the students, I sat with them and we figured out a way to define them that we could understand.

Nasty Programming Bug: Note Googly Eyes

Glitch: When the computer program does something unexpected and the user cannot fix it. This could be an exploit in a published game, or a file that doesn’t open or a failure in the hardware of the computer itself.  The key part is the user cannot fix it.

Bug: An error in your code. When you are writing a program and the computer program does something unexpected. With a bug the programmer has to figure out why their coding idea didn’t work exactly the way they thought.  A bug becomes a “glitch” if the programmer doesn’t fix it.  When they find out about a “glitch” the user is having, the programmer can go back and find the “bug” in the code and fix it. 

UITG (User is the Glitch): When a user blames a “glitchy computer” for something they did themselves. This may drive the programmer into a frustrated session with crying and perhaps angry dancing because there was no “glitch”, so there is no “bug” to find. It may also result in a young programmer abandoning their code because “I couldn’t possibly be the reason it went wrong.”

In all three groups, the “glitch” was Scratch faithfully doing exactly what the programmers had told it to, but (and we have all been there) not exactly what we had intended it to do.  Once I sat down with the groups, went through the program step by step, talked about what was happening, the mistakes the students made in the code became obvious to them (Weirdly, it was never obvious to me. They understood their own code and I hadn’t a clue.) Once found they would  happily continue merrily programming away.

Why care?

The important thing isn’t the terminology itself but the defeatist attitude that comes with it. Perhaps it is because programs, games and operating systems are so complicated and bug filled that our kids have become accustomed to things not working right.  When that happens, the best thing is to ignore it and move on to something else and hope that a future patch will fix the problem. Unfortunately, this leads them to assume that their own program is not working because the computer or the software is making the mistake.  By blaming the “glitch” they do not go back and find the error in their code, their bug. They assume the Scratch programming language was the problem and that the problem will go away on its own in a few months when Scratch 2.0 comes out.

The first thought they need in programming is really:

“Why is it doing that?  What did I put in the code that makes it do that?” 

Or as the commercial programmers I know say:

 “Why the *#*&@! is that happening??”  

It means the same thing.

In all three school cases, once we had decided that bugs should be squashed, not given up on, all three groups found their bug, all three fixed their bug and all three groups were then able to continue on their original program.  And all three made very loud noises and started dancing when they squished their bug and things started working again. And that made it seem like the universe was a little less out to get us, which is definitely a happy ending.

 Bug Squash Joy: The feeling of ecstatic happiness that occurs when a programmer kills a particularly vexing bug and the program behaves as the programmer intended it to. It is often accompanied with high fives, a cheer, and sometimes a “very happy dance on tiptoes.”