Planspiel-Literaturdatenbank des ZMS

DOI: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33949956 

Abstract: BACKGROUND Serious games can be a powerful learning tool in higher education. However, the literature indicates that the learning outcome in a serious game depends on the facilitators' competencies. Although professional facilitators in commercial game-based training have undergone specific instruction, facilitators in higher education cannot rely on such formal instruction, as game facilitation is only an occasional part of their teaching activities. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to address the actual competencies of occasional game facilitators and their perceived competency deficits. METHODS Having many years of experience as professional and occasional facilitators, we (n=7) defined requirements for the occasional game facilitator using individual reflection and focus discussion. Based on these results, guided interviews were conducted with additional occasional game facilitators (n=4) to check and extend the requirements. Finally, a group of occasional game facilitators (n=30) answered an online questionnaire based on the results of the requirement analysis and existing competency models. RESULTS Our review produced the following questions: Which competencies are needed by facilitators and what are their training needs? What do current training courses for occasional game facilitators in higher education look like? How do the competencies of occasional game facilitators differ from other competencies required in higher education? The key findings of our analysis are that a mix of managerial and technical competencies is required for facilitating serious games in higher educational contexts. Further, there is a limited or no general competence model for game facilitators, and casual game facilitators rarely undergo any specific, formal training. CONCLUSIONS The results identified the competencies that game facilitators require and a demand for specific formal training. Thus, the study contributes to the further development of a competency model for game facilitators and enhances the efficiency of serious games. BACKGROUND Serious games can be a powerful learning tool in higher education. However, the literature indicates that the learning outcome in a serious game depends on the facilitators' competencies. Although professional facilitators in commercial game-based training have undergone specific instruction, facilitators in higher education cannot rely on such formal instruction, as game facilitation is only an occasional part of their teaching activities. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to address the actual competencies of occasional game facilitators and their perceived competency deficits. METHODS Having many years of experience as professional and occasional facilitators, we (n=7) defined requirements for the occasional game facilitator using individual reflection and focus discussion. Based on these results, guided interviews were conducted with additional occasional game facilitators (n=4) to check and extend the requirements. Finally, a group of occasional game facilitators (n=30) answered an online questionnaire based on the results of the requirement analysis and existing competency models. RESULTS Our review produced the following questions: Which competencies are needed by facilitators and what are their training needs? What do current training courses for occasional game facilitators in higher education look like? How do the competencies of occasional game facilitators differ from other competencies required in higher education? The key findings of our analysis are that a mix of managerial and technical competencies is required for facilitating serious games in higher educational contexts. Further, there is a limited or no general competence model for game facilitators, and casual game facilitators rarely undergo any specific, formal training. CONCLUSIONS The results identified the competencies that game facilitators require and a demand for specific formal training. Thus, the study contributes to the further development of a competency model for game facilitators and enhances the efficiency of serious games. // BACKGROUND Serious games can be a powerful learning tool in higher education. However, the literature indicates that the learning outcome in a serious game depends on the facilitators' competencies. Although professional facilitators in commercial game-based training have undergone specific instruction, facilitators in higher education cannot rely on such formal instruction, as game facilitation is only an occasional part of their teaching activities. OBJECTIVE This study aimed to address the actual competencies of occasional game facilitators and their perceived competency deficits. METHODS Having many years of experience as professional and occasional facilitators, we (n=7) defined requirements for the occasional game facilitator using individual reflection and focus discussion. Based on these results, guided interviews were conducted with additional occasional game facilitators (n=4) to check and extend the requirements. Finally, a group of occasional game facilitators (n=30) answered an online questionnaire based on the results of the requirement analysis and existing competency models. RESULTS Our review produced the following questions: Which competencies are needed by facilitators and what are their training needs? What do current training courses for occasional game facilitators in higher education look like? How do the competencies of occasional game facilitators differ from other competencies required in higher education? The key findings of our analysis are that a mix of managerial and technical competencies is required for facilitating serious games in higher educational contexts. Further, there is a limited or no general competence model for game facilitators, and casual game facilitators rarely undergo any specific, formal training. CONCLUSIONS The results identified the competencies that game facilitators require and a demand for specific formal training. Thus, the study contributes to the further development of a competency model for game facilitators and enhances the efficiency of serious games.

Abstract: Background. Games are designed to help participants think about, understand, sharpen their problem statement as well as the specific objectives to be achieved to escape the problem situation. When participants prepare for the game (briefing), interact in the simulated environment (gameplay), and self- or jointly reflect about the gameplay they faced in terms of intended and unintended learning experiences (debrief), they benefit or suffer from facilitating that can or cannot fully cater to their needs. To support the participants to explore and resolve the problem situation in order to achieve learning goals, we propose that facilitators can make use of role shifts during gameplay. Method. To capture the role shifts in the gameplay phase we studied game runs of the MicroTech game. The MicroTech game is a free-form game in which participants play the role of top management team or division managers in a multiunit organization. Results. We analyzed the role shifts we experienced as facilitators by elaborating on game events and how we could manage those events differently in future game runs if necessary. We show a need for facilitators to be able to embody multiple roles in the case of policy gaming that are in fit with the different phases, while there is a simultaneous need to shift within phases in order to keep participants moving and stimulating them to work towards the learning goals. Conclusion. Gaming/simulation facilitators should explore what multiplicity is required of them to make the game a success. Although this may seem normal practice to well-prepared and professionally trained facilitators, this may be particularly important for novice facilitators.

Abstract: As classroom-as-organization (CAO) simulations unfold within corporate or higher education classrooms, novice facilitators and their participants experience uncertainty in the absence of familiar and implicit sources of trust. Initial trust derived from the context, simulation, peers, and one’s self wanes as awareness dawns regarding the magnitude of difference between CAO and typical classrooms. New sources of trust arise from shared sensemaking about unfamiliar roles and interactions, growing confidence in redistributed responsibilities and authority, an environment characterized by psychological safety, feedback, and behavioral experimentation modeled upon the experiential learning cycle (Kolb, 1976).