About 2 weeks ago we officially released Ludwig, a physics learning game about clean energy production. The game utilizes a play-theoretical approach based on an epistemological position I call ludic constructivism. I have not yet written extensively about it, but have talked about it at various conferences, most notably at my keynote at Clash of Realities 2010. Simply put, ludic constructivism assumes that learning in a game is an iterative process in which the player’s game and real identities are the drivers of a recursion of individual development. Utilizing concepts from second order cybernetics, the Eigenvalue of this recursion describes the knowledge being created during game play.
This rather simple idea has a couple of far reaching consequences. First and foremost, it shows that game based learning is highly individualized learning since Eigenvalues have a highly non-linier behavior and exhibit what is commonly referred to as the butterfly effect. Even the smallest changes in the learning setup, the motivation of the learners or the way the game is used didactically can have dramatic consequences for the outcome. Second, if you do not line up game and real life experiences related to the learning objectives, it is very unlikely that there even is a significant learning effect. As strange as it sounds, learning Math inside a game does not necessarily mean that you are learning Math outside the game as well.
Ludwig is different to almost any other learning game because we created a game that can enable learning in this ludic constructivist sense. We did this by following three simple rules:
- Game objective = learning objective. (Or as Gee recently put it: “You have to marry the game mechanics with the learning.”). As simple as this sounds, this is extremely difficult to achieve. But it is necessary in order to make sure that the recursion of knowledge creation can converge towards pre set learning goals.
- Create opportunities for real world spillover. (This is in line with Gee’s “Big G game” concept.) It is necessary that any learning activity within the game must be tied to real world experiences. A learning game can therefore never be just a digital game. It always needs a close connection to the real world in order to create opportunities for reflection and transfer.
- Iterative didactic design. The whole game development process needs to take into account that there is an inherent butterfly effect in game based learning that makes it impossible to plan for everything in advance. The only possibility to deal with this instability is to use development processes that utilize heuristic approaches based on user centered design methodologies. In other words, you need a lot of didactic play-testing.
In has to be noted that there are two additional characteristics in which Ludwig differs from other learning games. First we tried to create something that as AAA-appeal. While this is certainly not a requirement for a learning game to work, it seemed necessary as a door opener in terms of getting everybody interested in Ludwig. Second, Ludwig is 100% curriculum based and ready to be used in schools as a officially approved teaching aid.