Practice Makes Perfect

I am not yet done reflecting on #UoELTConf18. (Was that a groan I heard at the back?)

There was a great presentation by @Nicolvision & @philshe about their use of Minecraft in the MSc in Digital Education. They showed some beautiful examples of building from their students, of people taking a digital space and making it their own.

I was reminded of two things. First, I have recently gone through a phase of watching the Sim Supply on YouTube. I love watching how he builds these beautiful and complex creations through trial and error. Compare James’ behaviour in the 3×3 house-build and the ‘no mistakes’ house-build and you’ll see how he relies on experimentation and development. Basically, I’m a little in love with James as a learner, because he learns through play, and creates some fabulous things because of it.

In turn, this reminded me of a story I’ve seen passed around Twitter, Tumblr, Facebook, and other blue-themed social media of your choice. Here’s my rendition.

Once upon a time, in the land of apocrypha, there was a Professor of Pottery. Because TEF was coming in, and she worked at a Russell Group university that was expected to do poorly, she wondered what the best way was to teach her students. As everyone knows, these sort of things can only be discovered through controlled trials, and so at the start of the academic year, she split her class in two. She told Class A that their final grade would be based on a single pot, but it was the only pot they’d be allowed to produce. Their exam was one of quality. She told Class 1 (because she didn’t want to bias them into thinking they were the ‘b-group’) that their final grade would be based on quantity. The more pots they produced, the higher their grade. Quality was not important. At the end of the academic year, she looked over her class’s work, and found that Class A had spent hours, days, weeks, researching and studying and had produced some very nice pots. But the best pots were found in Class 1’s batch. Though they had started misshapen and lumpy, by the end of the year no amount of reading could make up for their experience throwing clay.

The Professor intended to write this up, but was informed that pedagogical papers were rarely REFable, and anyway some noisy bint at a conference pointed out she’d never gotten ethical clearance, so the paper was never published, and the story moved into legend and myth.

Despite my retelling, I actually really enjoy this story, and I think the message is a good one.

I work a lot with fellow academics and with students, and I would say the majority of them subscribe to Yoda’s philosophy of ‘do or do not, there is no try’. Give academics three sheets of A3 and a handful of coloured markers to work with and they will hastily scribble one page just before you send someone round to gather their work. I could not tell you why.

I think these digital spaces – particularly spaces like Minecraft – can be brilliant places to practice making a thousand pots. Because you can also destroy a thousand pots.

At the presentation there were two examples where a student had pushed Minecraft to its limits, and I recognise those experiences from being a gamer. Exploring what cannot be done, and understanding why those limits exist (and where, conversely, they don’t exist), is an oft-neglected part of learning in HE. Thinking just over the last month, I’ve steered at least two undergraduates away from research methodologies that have limits unknown to the students. That’s the right thing to do, because the research project is not the place to ‘break’ something, but I still think there’s great value to finding out how to ‘break’ things. And looking at what can still be done when something doesn’t work. 

Virtual worlds are a great way to play with the boundaries of rules. The very first Halo game had a glitch in the level Assault on the Control Room (here). By exploiting the geometry of the game, you can bypass a trigger to spawn enemies later in the level. The rest of the expansive level is then accessible, devoid of enemies to shoot. Whenever I build e-learning resources, and stack triggers on the user’s interactions, I think about the hours I spent exploring this empty level.

Good learning should create something new, but I think it also incorporates some level of destruction too. Even if only at a conceptual level, you need to break down what you used to know in order to construct your new knowledge. Trial and error doesn’t mean making a thousand pots, but trying to make a pot out of straw, and felt, and all sorts of other materials. I think learning will always be at its best at the boundaries, and virtual worlds are great places to push at those boundaries. 

Games and Animals

I’ve been an avid gamer for the better part of my lifetime now and part of what I love about the hobby is how a good game can test you in situations you might not experience. This is, after all, why baby animals play – to test themselves and learn about themselves.

I think gaming can be a great tool for looking at empathy as well, and a game floated across my internet desk quite recently that I absolutely loved: Cat Petting Simulator 2014

The game’s premise is simple – interact with and stroke a cat. Through a text based interface you think about how you approach a cat, stroke the cat, and interact with it. It’s a funny game and I thought the escalation of the interactions was really clever. To that end I emailed the lovely Neongrey who made the game and asked her some questions.

What was your goal in creating the game?

I had a few, really. In part– it’s a bit of a silly extrapolation of something I do with friends online all the time. You know, if they’re feeling down or whatever, I would offer to pet [my] cat for them, and I would really go and hunt down one of my cats and pet them and tell them what happened– usually lots of purring. I hate seeing people feel badly, and I hate feeling like there’s nothing I can do about it, so this is my attempt to do that on a slightly more thorough scale. Sometimes there are people who need to pet cats that I don’t know about! Or I’m at work, and *I* need to pet a cat.

Did you think the game might be educational?

Not educational so much– more like therapeutic, really. I mean I wanted no part of the ‘aloof cat who hates you and wants to claw you’ cariacture; it would go against my intent of wanting the game to feel nice. Not that I much like that stereotype in the first place– as anyone who’s had a particularly affectionate cat will know, yes, absolutely, they can care about you beyond just where the food’s coming from.

Did you think about cat behaviour while making the game?

You know, I joke about how every pet in the game was playtested on a real cat, but it’s not a joke, really. Most of the game was written literally by petting her in the requisite manner and noting down her reactions.
There’s a bit more to it than that, too, though, insofar as measuring her reactions. From the ending score, you can see the bulk of the work is done through an affection meter. This is, you know, basically random. Every time you get a prompt there’ll be something with the potential for a better affection gain than other options, but luck plays a role. It’s not flawless but Twine isn’t the best medium to write AI in, so it was a decent kludge to represent the cat having her own ideas about what she likes.
[Ed note – LOVE this element of the game, which inadvertently alludes to the inherent random nature of decision making]
There’s not a lot of indication as to which she’ll like best– I hint at it a bit in some options, for careful readers– but again, it’s really hard sometimes to tell what a cat will like best, even when you know her, so that there’s a certain air of mystery is perfectly intentional.
I’ll also call attention to the belly pets. In the score menu, I do joke about the so-called ‘deadly belly trap’ but as I’m sure you gathered by now, it wouldn’t really further my intentions to have you clawed up by a cat– about the darkest emotion I try and convey in the game is ‘fond irritation’. So in all cases, the simulated cat does exactly what the real Cassie does– when she’s done with you petting her belly, she’ll push your hand away, and you’ll stop for the moment because you’re not a jerk.
Thing too is petting the belly is *wildly* random. Some options might give you no affection gain, if you’re unlucky, but only petting the belly can *reduce* affection. And I think that’s fair. But also too, it’s got the highest potential gain for affection. It’s quite intentional that the only way to get the elusive ending 6 is to give her cheeks and ears (the game begins with a mandatory back pet) a quick pet and then concentrate entirely on the belly. If you’re lucky– or she’s in exactly the right mood, as the case may be– you’ll get to pick her up and walk around with her a bit and she’ll cuddle right up to you.
Meanwhile the only way to get the “worst” (you still got to pet a cat, so it can’t be that bad) is if you bore her. And you bore her by entirely skipping out on petting a location entirely. You have to pet her back/sides, cheeks/chest, ears, and belly at least once each for her to not hop away up onto the cat tree and lick her butt in your general direction. I think a lot of people are getting that ending because they’re avoiding the belly entirely.

I love the game, is there anything else you’d like to say?

I mean I think it’s important to note that this is by no means an attempt to represent all cats– it doesn’t even represent both my cats. Maddie, who makes a cameo in one of the endings, certainly wouldn’t act the way Cassie does here; she’s much more aloof, except when she decides she’s not.
But, I mean, the whole game mandates two specific conceits: a) the cat loves you, and b) she wants to be petted. And everything sort of falls out from there. I’ve been kind of overwhelmed by the response; there’s a lot of people who, you know, it seems like something like this is exactly what they needed. And I’m happy, and honoured, and you know, a bit surprised, that I can be the one to give that to them.
If you join our MOOC early next year I’m thinking of a short optional exercise surrounding the game so you can get a head start by exploring it and the different options.