Willis Reed vs. The Lakers

October, 1966

Socialist Attacks with Spittle

Spittle

NYC Street Musician Arrested for Obeying Law

Arrest

SEPTA Enforces Sharia Law

Philly buses

Race-baiting Michelle

Moochelle

Home Movie and Anti-Communist Educational Film

The joys of showing 8mm home movies (1957 14 #05B Sh t P1150373 xvid short drama2)

Watch an insane 1970s anti Communist educational film

http://youtu.be/JcHFEO0024A

Grant County, WA Police Violate the Law: Sentinal of Liberty Gav Seim Pulls Cop Over

Gav Seim

Pamela Geller: Home of the Brave and the Cowardly

Pamela

Mott The Hoople, Brian May Asked to Tour

Mott The Hoople

Muslim Honor Killing in Texas

Honor Killing

News Coverage about Muslims Killing for Religion

Kevlar Helmut Saves Marine

Kevlar

CIA Head Warns of Islamic Operatives in America

Islamic State, USA

White Privilege

White

Gay Government Persecuting Christians

Gay

FBI Warns of Train Derailment Threat

Bullet Train

FBI
Yameen Allworld,

Birth name	Binyameen Friedberg

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3079146/Amtrak-train-crash-video-shows-passengers-crawling-safety.html

Projectile

OBAMA RIPS FOX: ‘WE’RE GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE HOW THE MEDIA REPORTS’

I think that the effort to suggest that the poor are sponges, leeches, don’t want to work, are lazy, are undeserving, got traction. And look, it’s still being propagated. I have to say that if you watch Fox News on a regular basis, it is a constant venue. They will find folks who make me mad. I don’t know where they find them. They’re all like, “I don’t want to work. I just want a free Obama Phone, or whatever.” And that becomes an entire narrative that gets worked up. And very rarely do you hear an interview of a waitress, which is much more typical — who is raising a couple of kids and doing everything right but still can’t pay the bills.

And so, if we’re going to change how 

Rep. John Boehner (R-OH)

40%

 and

Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)

54%

 think, we’re going to have to change how our body politic thinks, which means we’re going to have to change how the media reports on these issues, and how people’s impressions of what it’s like to struggle in this economy looks like. And how budgets connect to that. And that’s a hard process because that requires a much broader conversation than typically we have on the nightly news.

Ben Shapiro: The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority

Many Muslims want to kill non-believers.

Unit 4

11.127x Unit 4 is now live! For this two week unit, we’ll focus on testing and iteration. The development of the game The Radix Endeavor will serve as a case study and we’ll talk with several team members about their experiences prototyping and testing. We’ll learn about design-based research (DBR) and take a closer look at one project applying it. You’ll work on testing your game and you’ll provide feedback to your classmates. The activity break is especially important for this unit; submit your questions for playtesting and read other posts. After a round of testing, you’ll likely iterate your game. Consider getting some help from your working group (survey-based) and/or affinity group.

Two bonus videos from 11.126x have been released to provide participants with additional background regarding prototying and playtesting. Check out Philip Tan’s video about prototyping in the Unit 3 Overview and Sara Verrilli’s video about playtesting in the Unit 4 Overview. 

Thank you for joining us for the Hangout on Air on Wednesday, April 29! We were impressed with your work and we enjoyed critiquing your prototypes. If you missed this live event, you can access the recording here. If you’d prefer to watch it on Youtube, go here. 

The course staff is looking forward to reading about your experiences testing and iterating. See you in the Forums!

After reviewing activity in the forum, course staff thought it would be helpful to include some additional content regarding prototyping. Research Scientist Philip Tan from the MIT Game Lab introduces the concept of prototyping, explains what it is, and talks about why prototyping is an important skill in developing games.

This video originally appeared in 11.126x: Introduction to Game Design.

Tan


http://youtu.be/Oqksxk56dlM

Welcome to Unit 4! Now that we have entered the later stages of game development, it's time to focus on two challenging aspects of the process - testing and iteration. Since testing and iteration is necessary to get the game "right," we'll be spending two weeks on this unit. Radix: Iterative Design: In this case study, Louisa Rosenheck and Susannah Gordon-Messer talk about their work developing and iterating The Radix Endeavor. They show us the game and offer a true behind-the-scenes perspective. Radix: Digital Prototyping: In the continuation of our look at The Radix Endeavor, Prof. Eric Klopfer and Colin Greenhill discuss the digital prototyping process from the developer's point of view. Design-Based Research: Prof. Eric Klopfer explains design-based research. Prof. Eric Klopfer, Prof. Matthew Berland and Devon Klompmaker discuss the creation of Makescape (now Oztoc) as an example. We will be reading the "11.127x Guide to Playtesting" and Louisa Rosenheck's "Six Strategies to Make the Most of Student Playtesting." Those who wish to dive deeper can read the Edutechwiki entry on design-based research. BONUS: Sara Verrilli talks about playtesting in this video from 11.126x (included in this section). The course staff thought this video would be helpful for a general overview of playtesting. Appearances by: Sara Verrilli, Louisa Rosenheck, Susannah Gordon-Messer, Colin Greenhill, Matthew Berland and Devon Klompmaker
http://youtu.be/Oqksxk56dlM
After this unit was completed, the course staff thought the addition of this video would be helpful to participants. Sara Verrilli, Development Director at the MIT Game Lab, talks about testing games, the different types of testing, and when you should use each of them. This video originally appeared in 11.126x: Introduction to Game Design.
http://youtu.be/Zkz73q4wmpI

Louisa Rosenheck, a research manager at MIT's Education Arcade, and Susannah Gordon-Messer, an education content manager at MIT's Education Arcade, discuss their work iteratively designing, prototyping, and testing The Radix Endeavor. In this segment, they reflect on how prototyping and playtesting contributed to the development of the marketplace quest. The Radix Endeavor, an online multi-player game for high school math and biology, is currently being tested in a large-scale pilot involving teachers and students.

http://youtu.be/tf5TzG79JB4

Louisa and Susannah continue their conversation, walking us through the transition from paper to digital prototypes. They explain how they realized that in-game activity could support certain learning components, but that others might be better served through complementary classroom activities and teacher support. Your learning game could also have complementary activities. We'll talk more about integration in Unit 5, but you may want to start thinking about it.

http://youtu.be/Z6Btdq2uPAk

Louisa and Susannah discuss developing the quests in the final version of the game. They consider how the protoyping and testing phases shaped the final design and influenced their thinking regarding game levels and scaffolding. Does your learning game have levels? Before you leave this section, reflect on your levels. Consider the difficulty, the flow, etc.

http://youtu.be/ZPEsLoL4YV8

When you test your game, you'll want to ask the players some questions so you can learn about their experience. For this activity break, write some questions you'd like to ask playtesters. Consider what questions should be asked and also when you should ask them (Before game play? During? After?). Here are a couple to consider incorporating into your protocol: What was the concept of the game? How did you figure out how to play? How did the game make you feel? What was fun about the game? What was hard or challenging about the game? How could the game be better? These questions may look very general to you. You'll want to follow up with additional questions regarding specifics and details. These additional questions will arise naturally out of the playtest experience itself, though you may want to consider in advance the types of questions you're likely to get. Example: If a playtester says that Level 2 was especially challenging because of the instructions, you'll want to find out more. What about the instructions was challenging? You'll notice there are no questions about learning in this list. Think about how you'd like to talk to your playtesters about educational content in the game. What questions will help you find out if playtesters are learning? The list of questions above is adapted and inspired by the Playtester Feedback Worksheet created by Gamestar Mechanic. You may also want to check out the related content.

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZWxpbmVtZWRpYS5jb218Z3NtbGVhcm5pbmdndWlkZXxneDo3YjMxNTM0OGRiZmM1NzE5

https://gamestarmechanic.com

https://sites.google.com/a/elinemedia.com/gsmlearningguide/game-design-101/lesson-5-playtest-and-iterate

Even if you don't always share your thoughts for activity breaks, please consider doing so this time. Other course participants may want to reflect on and use the questions you come up with.

What was the concept of the game? How did you figure out how to play? How did the game make you feel? What was fun about the game? What was hard or challenging about the game? How could the game be better? How does the game compare to other Humanities, history, or general education classes you have taken? Which is more engaging: standard classes or game-based classes? In which type of class–standard or game-based–are you more active? Which game would you rather participate in based on your work and family schedule?

Prof. Eric Klopfer talks with Colin Greenhill, who works as a software developer at MIT's Education Arcade, about his experience communicating with the design team and his work iteratively creating and refining digital prototypes for The Radix Endeavor.

http://youtu.be/ZPEsLoL4YV8

Eric and Colin continue their conversation and take a closer look at the geometry quest area. Colin highlights the importance of figuring out which interface elements are helpful and useful to the player. Think about your game's interface as you test and iterate this week.

http://youtu.be/UBZfoVvI8R0

http://youtu.be/z-jzwtSmFys

Unit 4 Reading PLAYTESTING 11.127x Guide to Playtesting (posted in this section) Rosenheck, Louisa. 2015. "Six Strategies to Make the Most of Student Playtesting" Gamesandlearning.org (Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop).

http://www.gamesandlearning.org/2015/02/16/six-strategies-to-make-the-most-of-student-playtesting/

DIVE DEEPER Edutechwiki. "Design-Based Research." Hosted by TECFA at the University of Geneva.

http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Design-based_research

11.127x Guide to Playtesting How do you find out if your learning game works the way you expect and gives players the experience you want? Playtesting! Use your observations and tester feedback to make your game even better. WHO DO I TEST WITH? Test your game by playing yourself. Do this before you engage any outside testers. Try to view the game from the perspective of a player rather than as a designer/developer. Make necessary changes before you engage playtesters. Allow people you know to try your game. While this audience may not be as objective, you may feel more comfortable testing your game with this group first. You can also fine-tune playtesting questions. This may mean seeking out participants who have seen your past prototypes or who are in your affinity group or survey-based working group. Test with people who do not know you or your game. This group can give you objective feedback. Maybe you can approach 11.127 participants who you have not engaged with previously. Test with your target audience. This may not be possible for all participants. Feedback from this group will be especially relevant. HOW TO CONDUCT A BASIC PLAYTEST Consider what you hope to get out of playtesting sessions. Make sure your questions for the tester will help you iterate effectively and improve the game. For in-person tests, decide if you will test one-on-one, in groups, etc. Provide the information your tester will need to access and play the game. Don’t tell the tester about all of your experiences developing the game or why you think it can help people learn. You want to get a fresh perspective. Ask the playtester any questions you’ve created for the pre-gameplay phase. It’s time to play the game! Ideally, watch your tester play the game and write down your observations. You may notice interesting body language, etc. You may also want your tester to think aloud and explain why they are making certain choices. If that’s not possible, consider asking your tester to write down some observations as they play. Ask post-game questions and discuss the overall game experience. Use the questions you developed for the activity break and also any great questions you might have noticed in the forum. Bibliography: Fullerton, Tracy. 2014. “Playtesting.” In Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 248-271. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.

http://youtu.be/z-jzwtSmFys

It's time to test your game! Get your prototypes into some stable, presentable form, and start looking for playtesters in the real world. You can ask friends and family to play, but the best feedback you can get will be from your target audience. It can be challenging to get into certain kinds learning environments to test a prototype (American schools, for instance), but if you find children of the right age through friends and family, do your best to get your game in front of them. If you can’t get into an afterschool program, perhaps you can get some time with someone who works in an afterschool program and you can ask them to play your game and/or talk to you about how they would use your game in their program. Also, try to make changes to your game based on the feedback from others and then get your game back out there! This type of iterative game design is done by game designers and developers at every level. It is extremely rare that your game is going to come out of your head perfectly. It is much more likely that it is going to take watching a lot of other people playing your game and asking them about their experience to get your game into a good place. If you are working with a team, it may be a good idea to standardize your questions somewhat if you are playtesting with groups in different towns, states, countries etc… This will make sure everyone on the team’s questions are getting answered, and it will make sure that the same type of feedback is coming back to your team. Your deliverable should be publicly viewable and include the following: A written reflection on your experiences testing your game - Did things turn out differently than you expected? Would you test your game the same way in the future? An overview of how you iterated your game based on feedback and observations A brief explanation and list of the type of testers (no names please!) you engaged with The questions you used for testing and a few comments on why you picked certain questions Guidance for Peer Feedback Provide feedback to at least three participants whose posts appear below yours. If those participants have already received feedback, look for participants who have not received any. Follow the Peer Review Feedback guidelines and consider the following: Comment on how the participant responded to lessons learned from testing. Do you have any recommendations regarding how the participant can test and iterate more effectively? How did the participant's experience testing and iterating influence your own thinking?

Unit 4 Deliverable

A written reflection on your experiences testing your game - Did things turn out differently than you expected?

Yes, things turned out differently than what I expected. My first tester was very enthusiastic, was very experienced with the game Civilization, and offered to work on a scenario. The second tester was more ambivalent and had no experience with the game but did make an attempt to learn. My third tester had no experience whatsoever with gaming but really enjoyed the testing process. The same tester had expressed a dissatisfaction with the companion course to mine that I had not taught. Their experience confirmed the idea that if a student did not like the standard pedagogical approach the game could be very stimulating. The last tester was a very experienced gamer but was unfamiliar with Civilization. As a result, it was necessary to walk them through the testing process.

In summary, the previous experience or lack of experience with gaming did not determine how the tester reacted to my iteration process. Some experienced players really embraced the idea or some still struggled with it. On the other hand, those with little to no experience did really enjoy the new approach. I would have anticipated previous to the testing that the more experienced gamers would more readily embrace the new approach and the less experienced gamers would struggle.

Would you test your game the same way in the future?

The next time around I am better prepared with the readings and experience in this course to test in a more effective manner.

An overview of how you iterated your game based on feedback and observations

I took into consideration the feedback that I received. The issue with a scenario is how accurate does it need to be based on the learning objectives of a regular course. For example, the scenario is limited because I do not have Italy in the course; does it need to account for every, or only some of the key elements of the Renaissance. Or, do I favor the realistic nature of gameplay as opposed to the actual events of the past?

A brief explanation and list of the type of testers (no names please!) you engaged with

1. Very experienced gamer

2. No experience with Civilization but a fair amount of gaming

3. No gaming experience

4. Very experienced gamer.

The questions you used for testing and a few comments on why you picked certain questions

What was the concept of the game? How did you figure out how to play? How did the game make you feel? What was fun about the game? What was hard or challenging about the game? How could the game be better? How does the game compare to other Humanities, history, or general education classes you have taken? Which is more engaging: standard classes or game-based classes? In which type of class–standard or game-based–are you more active? Which game would you rather participate in based on your work and family schedule?

Because of my particular audience I asked questions that would address the key issues that they are concerned with. How does gaming technology contribute to the students being more active and engaged? I also wanted to compare their experience with gaming as opposed to traditional pedagogy.

Boston University Against White People

Boston University