Summary: The Teaching Game - Integrating HCI and SoTL Through Video Game Research Methods

Core Thesis

This dissertation by D’Arcy Norman (University of Calgary, 2023) proposes a novel approach to understanding teaching and learning by integrating Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) and Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) through the adaptation of video game research methods. The work demonstrates that course designs and classroom activities can be meaningfully analyzed using concepts from video game design and analysis.

Key Research Findings

1. The HCI-SoTL Framework

The research produced a framework with five interconnected dimensions:

• Player (participants’ identity, roles, agency, goals)
• Performance (actions, data, feedback, guidance)
• Narrative (pedagogical design, media, sequencing, engagement)
• Environment (space design, temporal frames, fidelity)
• System (institutional rules, interfaces, constraints)

These dimensions interact through two tensions: agency vs. structure, and active vs. passive participation.

2. Major Study Outcomes

• Design Study with Award-Winning Instructors: Revealed that effective online instructors explicitly design learning environments, create narrative structures for content, establish recurring activity patterns, and conceptualize courses using game-like concepts (NPCs, points systems).
• COVID-19 Impact Analysis: Documented how the pandemic pivot revealed the importance of environment design, role flexibility, and temporal adaptability in course delivery.
• Technology Prototypes: Demonstrated potential for computer vision feedback, immersive recording, and humanoid robots in supporting teaching and reflection.

3. Practical Insights

• Instructors function as “game designers” creating structured experiences
• Students experience courses similar to role-playing games with quests and progression
• Visualization techniques from video games can reveal hidden patterns in course design
• The framework helps identify “dark patterns” - unintended negative consequences of course design decisions

Connection to Supporting Instructors

Immediate Applications:

1. Course Design Tool: The framework provides a holistic lens for designing courses that considers environment, narrative, and performance alongside traditional content and assessment.
2. Visualization Methods: The study’s timeline visualizations and activity mapping techniques offer concrete ways to help instructors see and analyze their course structures.
3. Reflection Support: The multi-modal approaches to recording and reviewing teaching (including robot performance and processed media) suggest new pathways for professional development.

Strategic Implications:

• Reframe Technology Integration: Move beyond tool selection to consider how technologies shape the entire learning environment and participant interactions
• Explicit Design Recognition: Help instructors recognize and leverage their role as designers of learning experiences, not just content deliverers
• Pattern Recognition: Use game design patterns to identify successful teaching strategies that can be adapted across disciplines

Future Opportunities:

• Develop software tools that visualize course designs using game-inspired interfaces
• Create professional development programs that teach course design through game design principles
• Build repositories of successful “game mechanics” adapted for educational contexts

Key Takeaway

This research demonstrates that modern technology-mediated teaching and learning can be better understood, designed, and evaluated by adopting conceptual frameworks and analytical methods from video game research. This approach offers instructors a richer vocabulary and toolkit for creating engaging, effective learning experiences that acknowledge the complex interplay between technology, pedagogy, and human interaction.

Imagine trying to understand how a video game works – not just the story, but how it keeps players engaged, how they learn to play, and how the design of the game world affects their experience. This research suggests we can use similar ideas to better understand and improve teaching and learning in schools and universities.

Think of a course like a game. It has goals (learning objectives), rules (course policies), and an environment (the classroom, online platforms, and materials). Students and teachers are like players, interacting with this environment and each other.

This study, by D’Arcy Norman, explores how borrowing methods used to analyze video games can help educators and course designers:

• See learning in a new way: Instead of just looking at test scores, this approach looks at what students and teachers actually do in a course – how they use materials, interact with technology, and navigate the learning “game.”
• Design more engaging courses: Just like game designers create captivating experiences, educators can use similar principles to make learning more interactive and motivating. It’s not necessarily about adding points or badges, but about thoughtfully designing the whole experience.
• Understand the impact of technology: With more learning happening online, it’s important to understand how different software and platforms affect teaching and learning. Thinking about these tools like parts of a game environment can help.
• Improve how courses are built: By analyzing courses like games, designers can spot what’s working well and what could be better, leading to more effective and enjoyable learning for everyone.

Essentially, this research offers a fresh perspective, suggesting that the way we study and design complex, engaging video games can provide valuable lessons for creating better educational experiences. It helps us look at the “game of teaching and learning” with new eyes to make it more effective and rewarding.

Using the HCI-SoTL Framework for Course Design: A Practical Guide

Framework as a Design Tool

The five-dimensional framework provides a comprehensive checklist and decision-making tool for course design that goes beyond traditional approaches focused solely on content and assessment. Here’s how each dimension translates into the design process:

1. Player Dimension - “Who Are Your Participants?”

Design Questions:

• What roles will students take throughout the course? (researcher, presenter, reviewer, collaborator)
• How much agency do students have in choosing their learning path?
• What are the diverse goals students bring to the course?
• How can the course accommodate different student personas and identities?

Design Actions:

• Create a “character sheet” template for students to document their skills, goals, and preferred roles
• Design multiple pathways through course content (like choosing different “quests”)
• Build in role rotation opportunities (students as teachers, peer reviewers, discussion leaders)
• Implement flexible assessment options where students can choose how to demonstrate learning

2. Performance Dimension - “What Will People Do?”

Design Questions:

• What specific actions will students perform during each class/module?
• How will progress and performance be tracked and visualized?
• What types of feedback loops exist (immediate vs. delayed, peer vs. instructor)?
• How do activities build upon each other?

Design Actions:

• Map out student actions for each learning outcome (like gameplay sequences)
• Create “skill trees” showing how competencies build throughout the course
• Design immediate feedback mechanisms (automated quizzes, peer responses)
• Build in “achievement systems” that recognize different types of contributions

3. Narrative Dimension - “What’s the Story?”

Design Questions:

• What overarching narrative connects the course components?
• How does content sequence create dramatic arcs (introduction → challenge → resolution)?
• What media types best convey each part of the story?
• How do weekly themes connect to the semester narrative?

Design Actions:

• Write a course “storyline” that contextualizes why students are learning this material
• Design content releases that create anticipation (like episodic games)
• Create multimedia “cutscenes” (intro videos) that set context for each module
• Develop recurring weekly patterns that students can anticipate and prepare for

4. Environment Dimension - “Where Does Learning Happen?”

Design Questions:

• What digital and physical spaces will students inhabit?
• How do different tools/platforms serve different purposes?
• What’s the “home base” and what are the “exploration zones”?
• How do synchronous and asynchronous elements balance?

Design Actions:

• Create a visual “map” of all course platforms and their purposes
• Design the LMS as a central hub with clear navigation to other tools
• Establish consistent visual themes across platforms (like game environments)
• Plan for both structured meeting times and flexible exploration periods

5. System Dimension - “What Are the Rules?”

Design Questions:

• What institutional constraints must be honored?
• What explicit and implicit rules govern participation?
• How do grading systems align with desired behaviors?
• What resources and support systems are available?

Design Actions:

• Make all “game rules” explicit in the syllabus
• Design assessment structures that reward desired behaviors
• Create clear progression indicators (like leveling systems)
• Build in “tutorial levels” for using course technologies

Practical Implementation Process

Phase 1: Initial Design (Using All Five Dimensions)

1. Start with Player & Narrative: Who are your students and what journey will they take?
2. Map Performance: What will they do to progress through this journey?
3. Design Environment: Where will these activities take place?
4. Define System Rules: What constraints and supports frame the experience?

Phase 2: Integration and Balancing

• Check Tensions:
  • Are you balancing student agency with necessary structure?
  • Are you mixing active performance with passive content consumption?
• Identify Patterns: Look for recurring cycles (weekly, modular, semester-long)
• Spot Dark Patterns: Watch for unintended negative consequences (e.g., too many small assignments creating overwhelming workload)

Phase 3: Visualization and Communication

• Create course timelines showing the rhythm of activities
• Develop visual maps of the learning environment
• Design “player guides” that help students understand their roles and options
• Build progression indicators showing how activities connect

Example Application: Redesigning a Traditional Lecture Course

Traditional Approach: Weekly lectures, readings, midterm, final exam

Framework-Informed Redesign:

• Player: Students rotate through roles - note-taker, discussion leader, skeptic, synthesizer
• Performance: Each week includes active problem-solving, peer teaching, and reflection
• Narrative: Course framed as “consulting firm tackling real-world challenges”
• Environment: Blend of synchronous problem-solving sessions and asynchronous skill-building
• System: Points-based system where students choose from menu of activities to reach threshold

Benefits of This Approach

1. Holistic Design: Considers all aspects of the learning experience, not just content delivery
2. Student Engagement: Creates multiple hooks for different student motivations
3. Flexibility: Provides structure while allowing student agency
4. Visibility: Makes the implicit explicit through visualization and clear communication
5. Transferability: Patterns identified in one course can be adapted to others

Tools and Resources Needed

• Visual design tools for creating course maps and timelines
• Templates for documenting design decisions across all five dimensions
• Repository of successful “game mechanics” adapted for education
• Peer review process using the framework as evaluation criteria
• Professional development workshops on game-informed course design

The framework essentially transforms course design from a content-organization exercise into a comprehensive experience design process, acknowledging that modern courses are complex, technology-mediated environments where learning emerges from the interplay of multiple factors.