Levelling Up Your Pedagogy: Understanding Game Construction in the School Library
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a teacher and technology coach I have experienced firsthand the wonder of students playing and constructing video games, as games facilitate incredibly good learning experiences (Egenfeldt-Nielsen, Smith, & Tosca, 2012; Papert, 1980; Salen, 2007; Shaffer, 2006; Squire, 2006, 2011). Student based game construction has the potential to transform the learner and further meet the participatory demands of 21st century learning. This paper will provide teacherlibrarians with a detailed account of my own experiences with video game construction in school environments. As a guiding framework, both Miller, Shell, Khandaker and Soh’s (2010) input-process-outcome game cycle and Koehler and Mishra’s (2008; 2009) Technological, Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework will be applied to support this video game construction exploration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".