Zimmerman's argument throws some light on an issue of play that I hadn't thought of previously: testing. Iterative design is "a form of research for informing and evolving a project as successive versions ... of a design" (176). That is, game testing of this nature requires makers to submit the draft through to various channels of testers. The maker's ethos is thus dependent upon how well he follows the revisions.
What stands out to me here (perhaps rather obviously) is the classroom workshop application. The presentations today in our pedagogy class revolved around the creation of technological communities; just as iterative designers create a type of community with thier testers, so writers create a network with thier peer editors.
Just some thoughts I wanted to bring to the table.
btw >We did talk about MOOs today, which up until this point I was not very familiar with. Cynthia, is there a way we could have Lingua MOO activated here?<
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I was actually thinking about iterative pedagogy too. I love the ability to refashion my class on the fly depending upon student assesments.
Dev...how interesting. We talked about MOOs in my 885 Comp Theory (and pedagogy) class yesterday. And I demo'd Texas Tech MOO, which is using our enCore MOO software. I miss Lingua MOO, and we're planning to resurrect it here at Clemson. Anyone have about $5K for a server :)?
We'll look at the MOO in more depth next week in class. I meant to tonight and the nationstate thing was such fun I lost track of time!
Didn't realize running a MOO would be so expensive. Thanks.
My writing workshops are run according to the principles of iterative design. I'd be interested to to hear observations on how we could further apply them towards the classroom, especially with what we learned with Peter Elbow this week. Speech over writing!
Post a Comment