WoW Learning

General:

I spent a substantial amount of time designing the first survey for the WoW Learning project. I was initially unsure what data would be useful, but I knew I wanted enough data to make statements about particular groups of people: men were more social, most women created tank characters initially, millennials were using WoW more for learning, etc. That resulted in the three-part design of the survey: in-game demographic data, the essay question about play motivations, and real-world demographic details. Privacy was important and encouraging people to complete was also important. It was reasoned that in-game demographics were details people would not be as sensitive about, so they were asked for first and real-world demographic details left until the end. It was also recognized that many people would not complete the essay section. Putting the in-game demographic details first meant that certain types of data could be collected that could also be used for other purposes, e.g. answering whether women initially choose healer characters. After use by a small test audience, the survey was modified to include sample answers or explanations of how answers should be calculated.

Where possible and sensible, permissible option lists were used to help reduce the need for data standardization after the survey. For example, I know there are only so many WoW character classes and roles. I know that players can only belong to one of several types of realms. In the case where I wanted time estimates from players, providing a list of ranges means everyone’s has the same degree of accuracy and is expressed in the same units. This was not deemed necessary for year of birth, country of residence, and nationality; they were left as free text. The birth year worked out fine, but some normalization had to be done on the countries and nationalities, e.g. English and Scottish changed to British and Belgium changed to Belgian, etc.

Read more to download the survey as a PDF and see options for specific questions.

Read the rest of this entry »

As part of this year’s Future of Technology in Education conference (#FOTE11) in London on October 7th, I participated in the 140-second challenge, where I had 140 seconds to explain how the future of technology might be gaming. The talk fit exactly into the 140 seconds and seemed to be well-received.

Someone asked in Twitter for more precise numbers on women WoW players. Unfortunately, those seem to be hard to come by. My own research survey had about 21% (in 2010). Nick Yee’s 2005/2006 surveys of 1900 players included about 16% women. M2 Research (2010) said estimates put women at 40%. I think the reality is somewhere between those, probably closer to 30%. If you know of any large-scale, precise demographic breakdowns, please let me know!

The text of my talk is below and is a much shorter version of the themes explored in Persist or Die: Learning in World of Warcraft. That version includes references.

October 28, 2011 Update: The FOTE11 team uploaded the video to iTunesU.  All five #140-second speakers are in the same video. I’m #4 and my presentation starts at around 7m 47s.

Image: Robertpupil prefers note-taking and remembering as learning strategies.

I’m Michelle A. Hoyle, an Open University course chair. My University of Sussex doctoral research examines communities and learning in World of Warcraft. I have 140 seconds to explore gaming’s influence on learning.

First, some myth busting. Popular media portrays gamers as young males who spend too much time alone in dark basements playing games. The reality? 70 to 80% of WoW’s millions of Western world players are adults, with women comprising somewhere between 20-40%. About 80% play with someone they know and they’re spending 21 hours a week playing versus the average TV-watching Brit’s 28.

Why is this relevant to higher education? It’s similar to online HE’s population. HE’s an institution that’s in crisis and I don’t mean financially. Our teaching and assessment are likely catering to the “Roberts”, an HE student archetype  typically employing remembering and understanding—low-level Bloom’s Taxonomy activities. Universities used to be full of “Susans”, operating at the much higher levels of synthesis, evaluation, and analysis—critical thinking activities I see occurring voluntarily in WoW.

Image: Susanlearner tries to integrate new material into her existing worldview, using synthesis, evaluation, and analysis.

But is there learning there?  In 2010, I invited WoW players to write an essay (yes, an essay!) about why they play. I examined 39 essays for learning behaviours. In addition to analysis, modelling, and experimentation, several reported playing to learn or to practice a foreign language. Others wanted to improve their social skills or learn more about themselves or other people. There were also real-world skills: guild leaders needed diplomacy and other leaders regularly coordinated large teams. Teamwork and collaboration were often motivating factors. That ignores other activities I know happen, such as story writing or movie making.

Much in WoW is boring and repetitive, not unlike education. Persistence and isolation are problems in online HE. Understanding what brings disparate people to form learning communities in these games could be very powerful for developing successful online environments and learning activities. Some factors we know, like allowing failure, because we often learn more from our mistakes, but there are others. Read more about the learning and background issues on my project blog. The future of education may well derive from games, even if it doesn’t involve playing games, because… there is useful learning happening there.  Thanks!