\documentclass[a4paper,11pt]{article}
\usepackage{ulem}
\usepackage{a4wide}
\usepackage[dvipsnames,svgnames]{xcolor}
\usepackage[pdftex]{graphicx}
\usepackage{hyperref}
% commands generated by html2latex
\begin{document}
\begin{tabular}
\subsection{Contents}
\begin{itemize}
\item \hyperlink{David_Perry_on_Game_Design:_A_Brainstorming_Toolbox_.28Book.29}{1David Perry on Game Design: A Brainstorming Toolbox (Book)}
\item \hyperlink{SETT_.28Student.2C_Environment.2C_Task.2C_Tools.29_framework_.Pdf_of_conference_handout}{2SETT (Student, Environment, Task, Tools) framework .Pdf of conference handout}
\item \hyperlink{KnowledgeContext_.28non-profit_organization_website.29}{3KnowledgeContext (non-profit organization website)}
\item \hyperlink{Comprehensive_Interpretive_Plans:_A_Framework_of_Questions}{4Comprehensive Interpretive Plans: A Framework of Questions}
\end{itemize}
\end{tabular}\hypertarget{David_Perry_on_Game_Design:_A_Brainstorming_Toolbox_.28Book.29}{}
\section{David Perry on Game Design: A Brainstorming Toolbox (Book)}
Perry offers the following method to evaluate game ideas according to questions a commercial client might want to see answered in a project pitch:
\begin{verbatim}
"If you really want to evaluate your hook concepts, try filling in the following information.
\\ These are the questions you should ask yourself to see how strong your game proposal is.
\\ If you are pitching a game, you should by all means try to be ready for these questions."
\end{verbatim}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Does the target audience already respect the developer of this game?
\item Does any aspect of this game design bring back fond memories or nostalgia for the target audience?
\item Are the graphics generally likely to be better than rival/competitive products?
\item Are your artists going to be able to make this subject matter look breathtaking?
\item Based on the story scenes, do you expect people to want to watch every minute of the cinematics? (Get a point if there are no cinematics in your game.)
\item Will the game feel new/original/fresh?
\item Will it be easier to play (easier to get into by design) than competitive games?
\item Is the functionality/depth/range of features planned for the game more impressive when compared to other games in the same genre?
\item Do you think a player would be perceived as ???cool??? by his friends if he introduced them to this game?
\item Would most people (not just hardcore gamers) be able to play your game and get into the most fun parts relatively quickly?
\item Does the game have a cool-sounding, easy to remember/easy to say/easy to spell name that suggests or reveals what the game is about?
\item Is there an exciting feature that can be saved for the Limited Edition version?
\item Does the game potentially have any collectable value? (Is it part of a series, for example?)
\item Can the owner play the game with his friends sitting on the sofa next to him?
\item Can the owner play the game with his friends through the Internet?
\item If playing through the Internet, can the player chat with his friends easily while playing?
\item Can the player share or trade his success (his spoils of war) with his friends?
\item Can the game be customized or personalized?
\item Is the game going to be presented by a respected game designer/programmer or producer?
\item Will the game star a really well-known celebrity character, actor, or actress?
\item Will the soundtrack be crafted by a very (globally) popular or famous composer or band?
\item Is the story written by a famous or respected writer?
\item Is the focus on a subject matter that the target audience is really excited about these days? (One that hasn???t already been done many times before?)
\item Will people be amazed by the visual effects?
\item Does the global gaming audience really love this game genre?
\item Is there any controversy regarding this game that the target audience will hear about?
\item Is there a way to make the price lower than that of your direct competitors?
\item Do you have any clever plans for marketing the game?
\item Will the game engine have a way to avoid long boring periods, long load times, or other elements that try a gamer???s patience?
\item Are you sure people won???t think this game is weird or strange?
\item Will gamers playing this game laugh out loud at any time while playing?
\item Would it be possible to reveal the unique hook in this game in a television commercial of 30 seconds?
\item Can you play this game without ever reading a manual (by design)?
\item Will you have movie-quality sound effects/ambiance/speech in the game?
\item Will the game offer immediate replayability?
\item If a player gets stuck, will the game detect this and help him out of this problem?
\item Will the game have interesting ???very memorable moments??? (high points), as opposed to repetitive gameplay?
\item Will the story have an exciting start?
\item Will the story have a surprising ending that will compel people to talk about it?
\item Will the game have a fun and interesting learn-as-you-play in-game tutorial?
\end{enumerate}
\begin{verbatim}
"Why do this? Say you have four ideas, and you just can???t decide which to really flesh out and start working on.
\\ Run them through this test and then go with the winner.
\\ Or, run the test, get the score, then try to add 10 more points to that score.
\\ Go back and read the questions for inspiration on how you could add those 10 more points."
\end{verbatim}\hypertarget{SETT_.28Student.2C_Environment.2C_Task.2C_Tools.29_framework_.Pdf_of_conference_handout}{}
\section{SETT (Student, Environment, Task, Tools) framework \href{http://www.spectronicsinoz.com/conference/2012/pdfs/handouts/SETT-Overview.pdf}{.Pdf of conference handout}}
\begin{verbatim}
The SETT Framework, developed by Joy Zabala, is an organisational instrument to help collaborative
teams create student-centred, environmentally useful, and tasks-focused tool systems that foster the educational
success of students with disabilities.
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
Key questions are asked in each area to in order
to guide teams in gathering data and information to support the consideration and implementation of appropriate
inclusive technologies. These questions provide a framework and not a protocol, as they guide the discussion
and provide a vehicle for the team to collaborate and form a consensus on ???where to from here???.
\end{verbatim}
\textbf{Student}
\begin{itemize}
\item What are the student???s current abilities?
\item What are the student???s special needs?
\item What are the functional areas of concern?
\item What are the other students doing that this student needs to be able to do?
\item What does the student need to be able to do that is difficult or impossible to accomplish independently at
\end{itemize}
this time?\textbf{Environment}
\begin{itemize}
\item What activities take place in the environment?
\item Where will the student participate???classroom, home, community, therapy?
\item What is the physical arrangement?
\item What activities do other students do that this student cannot currently participate in?
\item What assistive technology does the student have access to or currently use?
\end{itemize}
\textbf{Tasks}
\begin{itemize}
\item What specific tasks occur in the environment?
\item What activities is the student expected to do?
\item What does success look like?
\end{itemize}
\textbf{Tools}
\begin{verbatim}
Tools are devices and services???anything that is needed to help the student participate and benefit from.
\end{verbatim}
\begin{itemize}
\item Are the tools being considered on a continuum from no/low to high-tech?
\item Are the tools student centred and task oriented and reflect the student???s current needs?
\item Are tools being considered because of their features that are needed rather than brand names?
\item What is the cognitive load required by the student to use the tool?
\item What are the training requirements for the student, family and staff?
\end{itemize}
\begin{verbatim}
When an inclusive technology solution is identified teams need to consider a number of factors.
\end{verbatim}
\begin{itemize}
\item Does this tool address the tasks the student is experiencing difficulty with?
\item Does it reinforce least restrictive options?
\item Is it simple to use and acquire?
\item Will it be accepted by student, family, and peers?
\item Will the student require a range of strategies for an individual task?
\item Were no/low-tech options also considered?
\end{itemize}
\begin{verbatim}
Finally, a trial and evaluation of the inclusive technology selected is undertaken.
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
The SETT Framework is not a one off event but an ongoing framework
\\ for collaborative teams to gather information and ensure that the most appropriate inclusive technology tools
\\ are being utilised by the student. As a result there needs to be ongoing Re-SETTing, where teams
\\ need to return to the SETT questions at least annually.
\\ It is a matter of keeping decision-guiding information accurate, up to date,
\\ and clearly inclusive of the shared knowledge of all involved
\end{verbatim}\hypertarget{KnowledgeContext_.28non-profit_organization_website.29}{}
\section{KnowledgeContext (non-profit organization website)}
"\href{http://nanoconnections.org/}{KnowledgeContext} is an educational not-for-profit corporation that helps young people think critically about technology."They use a three-tiered evaluation framework for technology called ICE.
\begin{description}\textbf{I} is for identity:
\begin{description}
\begin{itemize}
\item 1. What is technology? 2. Why do we use it? 3. Where does it come from? 4. How does it work?
\end{itemize}
\end{description}\textbf{C} is for change:
\begin{description}
\begin{itemize}
\item 2. How does it change? 2. How does it change us? 3. How do we change it?
\end{itemize}
\end{description}\textbf{E} is for evaluation:
\begin{description}
\begin{itemize}
\item 1. What are its costs and benefits? 2. How do we evaluate it?
\end{itemize}
\end{description}
\end{description}\hypertarget{Comprehensive_Interpretive_Plans:_A_Framework_of_Questions}{}
\section{Comprehensive Interpretive Plans: A Framework of Questions}
Marianna Adams and Judy KokeThe Journal of Museum Education , Vol. 33, No. 3, Institution Wide Interpretive Planning (Fall, 2008), pp. 293-299Published by: Maney PublishingArticle Stable URL: \href{http://www.jstor.org/stable/40479684}{http://www.jstor.org/stable/40479684}
\end{document}