Throughout our lives we learn many different things in many different ways. We may learn to choose a pair of shoes because they fit without hurting, or we may chose a pair based on how they look or based on where we will wear them. Most people won’t wear tennis shoes to a wedding and won’t wear dress shoes to a tennis court. People learn which foods they like through trial and error, or perhaps they try it based on a recommendation from a friend, or because it is being promoted as a new taste treat, or as something that is not only healthy but also tastes good.
All these learnings are usually much easier for us then learning an academic topic or a work related activity. We have looked for, and continue to look for, new and better ways of imparting knowledge and skills to learners. I wonder what the difference is in how we learn work or academic topics versus topics related to our avocations.
Over the years I have observed many different people learn how to play complicated board games. These games have many strategies and rules that need to be learned in order to play effectively. In thinking about how some successful gamers learn new games, I began to wonder if the methods they use might not be similar to effective learning strategies. In particular, they use iterative processes while learning and playing that also work in learning technical topics. I wonder why the game learning is usually successful but we are still looking for better ways to impart better learning outcomes in other learning environments. What am I missing?
Gamers read, listen to, or watch a presentation of a chunk of the rules. They then begin to play the game according to a portion of the rules they have just studied. They discuss what they have learned and how they applied their learning. They work to play the game as effectively as possible. They discuss all the nuances of the game, all of the complex rules, and all of the gotchas.
Looking at complex games, there are many options for how a player can interact with the situation and with other players. The game usually includes multiple rules, different outcomes; different paths to the end of the game, and of course multiple problems that can be encountered. It is very much like learning how to perform a new process or other aspect of a job role.
Most often new game learners will rely on the multi-chapter, multi-page, or audio or video guide or rulebook that comes with most of the more complicated board games. In other cases a well-versed player will teach the rules to inexperienced participants. Players often spend several hours-long sessions studying the game rules and testing parts of the game. They begin to play while often consulting the rules or notes they have taken while learning the directions. There is usually a great deal of discussion as they work their way through the game.
Even when one or more players have previously played the game, there are questions and discussions and reference to the game rules. Because this type of game is complicated, consulting the rules often results in all the players gaining more understanding and being better able to effectively play the game – even those who have previously played the game.
The game master or game instructions present the opening situation. Players are given the information about the game objectives and any other information needed to begin playing. As they begin to play, the players identify points of confusion and questions they have about the game rules and they frequently reference the rules. They continue this process until the game is completed. They then review all steps and assess changes needed for next game play session. They modify play as needed to better meet the rules. In some cases they modify the rules to meet the groups preference. They know there are no game police but rather rules that can be modified to meet their preferences.
Comparing this process to learning situations, I believe one key difference is that they use a process similar to formative evaluation of instruction to ensure the game materials meet their needs. Yes, their needs are fun where the needs of learners in business environments are to be better able to perform their job roles. I think we might try to use this game learning process in our evaluation of learning materials.
Formative evaluation techniques are rarely used in business environments for many valid reasons. The foremost is that learning products change frequently. Because the products and services being offered change constantly the training needs to also change at the same time.
I propose that if a modified formative evaluation process was used when the training is piloted, that we could produce better instructional materials. I suggest that, just like sitting down to learn a game, a team of evaluators should sit down with the training materials and follow the steps that gamers use. These techniques might produce better training events right out of the gate. I think it would mean adding a day or two to the pilot but in doing so we could end up with much better products. Let me know what you think.
Blueprints for Learning 