I am squarely placing the blame for this post on Neal Manegold! Well ok, so I cannot actually blame Neal for my thinking, but he prodded, and now I am going down a whole other thought process that requires a brain dump, so be prepared if you keep reading!
It also prompts the following questions; If the artifact is in the game, and I still think feedback is important if we are looking at thinking processes, where should the feedback be? Should it be in game with the artifact, or is it OK that it is out of game and slightly removed? Is there any difference in the impact on students if the feedback is in the game and part of the artifact or out of game and slightly removed?
While stewing on those questions, and how we could try to resolve them or find some research (or do some research) to answer them, a new thought developed. When does something become a summative assessment rather than a formative assessment? Is it only when the learner is not provided with the feedback and opportunity to further develop and improve? If that is the case, then in theory, any reflection from a student on the thinking they went through, or learning they demonstrated is simply an opportunity for the teacher (and student) to go either the summative or formative path. This may well depend on the 'next task' or future opportunities and how the previous task, and any feedback impact on the path taken in the new task. Convoluted? Yup, welcome to my brain!
There are so many 'what if's' flying around in my head and yet again I feel like I am asking more questions than I am answering, but that is ok! I also know that what I am 'looking for' here is not a reality... YET! But I genuinely think it can be, I have seen what I valued from students in my own classroom, what I was using to assess them, and how I was actually assessing students all change just because I started using games in my classroom. It was not a small shift, but it was a very abrupt change, it didn't take years upon years to shift, it took possibly 1 year of really using games, and utilising them as a basis for student discussion so that I could 'hear' the students thinking and approaches, their understandings, 'aha' moments and stumbling blocks.
I am not sure I have said it in public(or writing) before, but I think Minecraft, as a 'gateway drug' for teachers (thanks go to Bron Stuckey for that simile) to using games in educational settings, has the potential to really disrupt and change the way the current education system works, at least here in Victoria. I also think it will likely be for the better. It will be far from easy, and I certainly don't think the path is clear, but the possibility is there! To shift the focus from a knowledge centric system of grading and assessment to something more relevant to the current, and possibly future, needs of our community.
Now by no means am I suggesting we throw everything out, there is a transition stage here, where we still need to look at competencies, and the current curriculum and assess 'Minecraft learning' against that. This will help grow, and support, the use of Minecraft (and hopefully other games) in classrooms, however I would hope for a gradual shift to the 'journey of learning' being the key focus, and the part we use to support and develop our students, not just the 'final product' of knowledge.
OK, enough brain dumping and rambling for now. As always, thanks for reading, and if you have any comments, leave them below, or reach out on other platforms, as Neal did!
That tweet from Neal in response to my previous post is what prompted another look at my thinking, and what it was I was trying to get out through that last post. The idea proposed by Neal is awesome, and a great way of capturing student thinking while working in Minecraft. The initial issue from the previous post is still the same; How do I as a teacher get timely, and 'easy' access to this artifact of student thinking and progression?We could chat on this all day, but what about a timer and every ~5 min crack open book & quill and answer "What am I thinking about?" Along with pics each time, would be awesome to capture building and thinking progression.— Neal Manegold (@NealManegold) June 29, 2018
It also prompts the following questions; If the artifact is in the game, and I still think feedback is important if we are looking at thinking processes, where should the feedback be? Should it be in game with the artifact, or is it OK that it is out of game and slightly removed? Is there any difference in the impact on students if the feedback is in the game and part of the artifact or out of game and slightly removed?
While stewing on those questions, and how we could try to resolve them or find some research (or do some research) to answer them, a new thought developed. When does something become a summative assessment rather than a formative assessment? Is it only when the learner is not provided with the feedback and opportunity to further develop and improve? If that is the case, then in theory, any reflection from a student on the thinking they went through, or learning they demonstrated is simply an opportunity for the teacher (and student) to go either the summative or formative path. This may well depend on the 'next task' or future opportunities and how the previous task, and any feedback impact on the path taken in the new task. Convoluted? Yup, welcome to my brain!
There are so many 'what if's' flying around in my head and yet again I feel like I am asking more questions than I am answering, but that is ok! I also know that what I am 'looking for' here is not a reality... YET! But I genuinely think it can be, I have seen what I valued from students in my own classroom, what I was using to assess them, and how I was actually assessing students all change just because I started using games in my classroom. It was not a small shift, but it was a very abrupt change, it didn't take years upon years to shift, it took possibly 1 year of really using games, and utilising them as a basis for student discussion so that I could 'hear' the students thinking and approaches, their understandings, 'aha' moments and stumbling blocks.
I am not sure I have said it in public(or writing) before, but I think Minecraft, as a 'gateway drug' for teachers (thanks go to Bron Stuckey for that simile) to using games in educational settings, has the potential to really disrupt and change the way the current education system works, at least here in Victoria. I also think it will likely be for the better. It will be far from easy, and I certainly don't think the path is clear, but the possibility is there! To shift the focus from a knowledge centric system of grading and assessment to something more relevant to the current, and possibly future, needs of our community.
Now by no means am I suggesting we throw everything out, there is a transition stage here, where we still need to look at competencies, and the current curriculum and assess 'Minecraft learning' against that. This will help grow, and support, the use of Minecraft (and hopefully other games) in classrooms, however I would hope for a gradual shift to the 'journey of learning' being the key focus, and the part we use to support and develop our students, not just the 'final product' of knowledge.
OK, enough brain dumping and rambling for now. As always, thanks for reading, and if you have any comments, leave them below, or reach out on other platforms, as Neal did!