Collectible card games as learning tools

Collectible Card Games as Learning

Tools

Selen Turkay, Sonam Adinolf, Devayani Tirthali

Teachers College, Columbia University

OutlineO What are Collectible Card Games

(CCGs)?O Game Based LearningO Types of CCGsO Defining properties of CCGsO CCGs and learningO Study

Game Based LearningO Card games have been utilized as

learning tools O Mathematics (Rowe, 2001)O Science (Odenweller, Hsu, & DiCarlo,

1998)O Literacy (Bryne & Fielding-Barnley,

1991)

What are Collectible Card Games?

O A collectible card game (CCG), also called a trading card game (TCG) or customizable card game, is a game played using specially designed sets of playing cards.

O While trading cards have been around for longer, CCGs combine the appeal of collecting with strategic gameplay.

Types of CCGs

2 Player CCG – Example: Magic the Gathering

Multiplayer CCG type 1 Example: Shadow Fist

Multiplayer CCG type 2 Example: VTES

What is Vampire the Eternal Struggle (VTES)?

O requires a minimum of three people to play, with five being optimal;

O unlike many other multi-player CCGs, VTES is not a free-for-all, but rather functions on a predator-prey system of relationships

O as an extension of that predator-prey system, the game does not always boil down to “last player standing” or “whoever reaches the end first”.

Defining Properties of CCGs

Collection, Creation, Community

Collection

O CCGs are collectible. Most involve random collection through a “booster pack” system while some games you simply buy non–random packs to obtain cards. In the case of random boosters, the lure of rarer cards can provide incentive to collect.

The variety of strategies and the combination of clans, disciplines, sects... makes the game very interesting." – VTES, Male, 28

CreationO The possibilities are vast when

considering all the combinations of cards you can put into a deck. What avenues you choose to pursue can allow you to try many different themes. Alternately, you can often try variations on the same theme.

O This decision and creation process allows players to take ownership of the game far more than many other games.

Community

Most CCGs involve conflict of some kind. So, they require two or more players at a time. While the players may be enemies during play, they may be friends, mentors, or collaborators in the broader context of the play community.

CCGs and LearningO social and analytical skillsO analytical thinking, O empathy, O social manipulation, O iterative design, and O communication

MotivationalO FantasyO ChallengeO Curiosity (Malone, 1981)

O Using a CCG as a reward for certain performance in the learning environment might provide extrinsic motivation (Chen, Kuo, Chang, & Heh, 2009).

SocialO cognitive apprenticeship (Brown,

Collins, & Duguid, 1989), O negotiation and persuasion, O cooperation through mutual self-

interest,O creative socializing

Play dynamics and mechanics

O pithy representation of information via symbols and keywords, and

O resource management

O encourage practice of estimation skills and basic statistics,

O strategy development O increased metacognitive awareness.

Picture was retrieved from Google images.

http://phylogame.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/speciescardimage.jpg

Picture was retrieved from Google images.

Methodology and Data Collection

O Online survey O snowball sampling on public and private

VTES forums and players’ personal blogs.

O Quantitative and qualitative data O Demographic dataO Play habits O Need for Cognition scale (Cacioppo,

Petty & Kao, 1984)

Participants O N = 365 O Age range = 18 to 59 (M = 32.17, SD

= 6.4) O On average participants have been

playing VTES 9.82 years (SD = 4.95). O 57.7 % of them were from EuropeO 35.3% were from North America

(USA and Canada).

Findings – 1 O 36% of the players indicated that they

like the collection aspect of the game from a moderate to a large degree.   

O 74% indicated that they like the deck building aspect of the game from a moderate to a large extent.

O A significant correlation between players’ frequency of designing their own decks and their need for cognition scores (r = .127; p<0.05).

Findings - 2O The community aspect is the most

fun and motivating for players. O 76% responded that they like the

community aspect of the game from a moderate to a large extent.

“…I've never seen any other game, or non-religious community where you can call someone you've never met and sleep at his place in the evening.” - A Male VTES player, France

Findings - 3O VTES provides hard fun (Lazzaro,

2004)O 88% like the game-play aspect of

VTES

"Multi-player interaction requires a different skill set from just math and algorithms. But math is important too, which is why I don't win every game (hah)...“ – A Male VTES player

Finding - 4O What are your common strategies?

O 20% emphasized negotiation and social manipulation

O Desire to learn from more experienced players to develop multiple strategies

“Playing VTES is not about the deck, since bad decks win games. It's about table image, table talk and table control… Most of these things can be achieved by the social interaction within the table…” - A Male VTES player, Sweden

Finding - 5O Metacognitive skillsO What is your usual reaction when

they you mistake in a VTES game?O 55.4% selected “I better remember

this in the future”

“I do tend to remember my mistakes more than my successes.  I try to learn from them.” – A Male VTES player, USA

ConclusionO nurture students’ cognitive and

social developmentO leverage the motivational power of

deck building and social aspect of the game at the same time taking advantage of the fact that CCGs are built on analytical processes, and they require assimilation and interpretation of symbols.

Thank you!

Questions and Comments?

st2282@columbia.edusza2105@columbia.edu

ReferencesO Adinolf, S., & Turkay, S. (2011). Collection, Creation and Community: A Discussion on Collectible Card Games. In C. Steinkuehler,

C. Martin & A. Ochsner (Eds.), Proceedings of the Games, Learning, Society Conference 7.0 (pp. 3-12). Madison, WI: ETC Press.O Bisz, J. (2009). The birth of a community, the death of the win: Player production of the Middle-earth Collectible Card Game.

Transformative Works and Cultures, 2. Retrieved from http://journal.transformativeworks.org/index.php/twc/article/view/90/99O Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32-

42. O Byrne, B. and Fielding-Barnsley, R. (1991). Evaluation of a program to teach phonemic Awareness to young children. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 83(3), 451- 455.O Cacioppo, J. T. ,Petty, R. E.,& Kao, C. F. (1984).The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment,

48, 306-307.O Chen, P., Kuo, R., Chang, M., & Heh, J.-S. (2009). Designing a Trading Card Game as Educational Reward System to Improve

Students’ O Learning Motivations In Z. Pan, A. Cheok, W. Müller & M. Chang (Eds.), Transactions on Edutainment III (Vol. 5940, pp. 116-128): Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.O David-Marshall, B., Dreunen, J. v., & Wang, M. (2010). Trading Card Game Industry - From the T to the C to the G. Retrieved from http://www.superdataresearch.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/TCG2010.pdfO Ito, M. (2005). Technologies of the childhood imagination: Yugioh, media mixes, and everyday cultural production. In J. Karaganis

& N. Jeremijenko (Eds), Structures of participation in digital culture (pp.88-110). Durham, NC: Duke University Press.O Lenarcic, J. & Mackay-Scollay, J. (2005). Trading Card Games as a social learning tool. Australian Journal of Emerging

Technologies, 3, 64-76.O Land, K., Anreder, L. & Nelson, M (2005). NASA and the Pokémon Trading Card Game team to explain science to children.

Retrieved fromhttp://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2005/mar/HQ_05056_NASA_and_Pokemon.htmlO Lazzaro, N. (2004). Why do we play games? Four keys to more emotion without story. Paper presented at the Game Developer

Conference 2004. O Malone, T. W. (1981). Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science, 4, 333–369. O Odenweller C.M., Hsu C.T. & DiCarlo S.E. (1998) Educational card games for understanding gastrointestinal physiology. Advance

Physiology Education, 20, 78–84.O Phylo the Trading Card Game (n.d.). Phylo. [Collectible card game]. Retrieved from http://phylogame.org.O Rowe, J. (2001). An experiment in the use of games in the teaching of mental arithmetic. Philosophy of Mathematics Education,

14. Retrieved from http://people.exeter.ac.uk/PErnest/pome14/rowe.pdfO Schell, J. (2010). DICE 2010. Design Outside the Box Presentation. Available at: http://www.primerlabs.com/jesseschellO Steinman, R. A., & Blastos, M. T. (2002). A trading-card game teaching about host defence. Medical Education, 36, 1201-1208.O Tobin, J. (2004). Pikachu's global adventure: The rise and fall of Pokémon. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.O White Wolf (2000). Vampire the Eternal Struggle [Collectible card game]. Stone Mountain, GA: White Wolf Publishing.