Paul Lindley Case Analysis 1

Paul Lindley Case Analysis

Designing a Video Game for History Education

Kristina Miller
EDCI672
Purdue University


Paul Lindley Case Analysis 2


Stakeholders
Stakeholder Role Primary Concerns
1. Paul Lindley (ISD/ CRM/
SME)
1. Professor at Walker
University who approached a
local alternative high school
principal about the
development of an
educational video game for
Social Studies classrooms

2. Specializes in Educational
Technology

1. Securing funding for game
development of an educational video
game for an alternative high school
2. Establishment of objectives/ learning
goals to drive the video game design
3. Wants to really focus on exploring
ideas and get an idea of the constraints
they are up against, so that they match
up the learning with each states
standards
Must gather information
about standards to establish
some learning goals
Get a better sense of the
players (interview students)
Figure out how the game
will be used (interview
teachers- needs analysis)
Technology accessibility
Must build background
3. Creation of teaching guides to make
the implementation of the game easy-
narrowing down the ideas to make this
game an effective educational tool
2. Bob Reckowski (client,
partner)
1. Principal and teacher at an
alternative high school
2. Used interest to develop an
instructional module for
examining the internment of
Japanese Americans during
WW2 and baseballs role in the
camps they were placed in
3. Focuses on teaching using
Project Based Learning (student
focused and real-world
learning experiences,
strategies, and methodologies)
1. The games must reflect the learning
goals and there needs to be an
interesting story with choices that are
connected to learning (standards) with
real events

2. Meeting the standards and creating
objectives

3. Creating objectives and tying down a
design revolving around baseball
Paul Lindley Case Analysis 2

Paul Lindley Case Analysis

2


3. Graduate Students
(partners)
1. Walker University students of
Paul Lindley who are
responsible for designing an
educational video game for an
alternative high school and
develop and conduct interest
surveys, needs assessments,
and Devils advocates (why do
teachers or dont teachers use
gaming in the classroom)-
investigators and barnstormers
2. Experience varies
Kevin: considered a hard-
core gamer
Linda: Library Science student
who was working on problem
solving about how to implement
games within the context of the
modern libraries
Bo: student former teacher from
China, plays games to better
understand the medium of
games. Strong interest in
motivating students
Jamie: almost no experience with
video games, except that her
children play video games

1. None of the students have ever
worked on educational game design
2. Linda was worried about violence in
the games being an issue
3. Very little experience with games in
the classroom nor the content
4. Little experience
5. Jamie wants to make sure they focus
on real events, violence needs to be
nonexistent for her to buy-in
6. Difficulty agreeing on the module
design
Paul Lindley Case Analysis 3

Paul Lindley Case Analysis

3
4. Teachers & Students
(target audiences/ clients &
teachers could be SMEs)
1. Teachers: Implementers,
planners, SMEs (excited about the
game)
2. Students: Users, beta-testers as
well
1. Concerned with the primary goals-
need to meet the standards they must
teach
2. Students have difficulty making
connections to history-interested in the
game- but they found that some were
only interested due to the baseball
3. Time constraints teaching content and
are in need of feedback (scores) to track
student progress
4. Availability of technology- limited
access
Design Challenges & Potential Solutions
B: Weak Project Charter (Implementation Phase of ADDIE)
Priority: 2
Description: There is a question as to whether or not the designers should work with commercially produced
game designers because they lack the resources to produce a high quality and engaging game at the same quality
level.
Issues: There is very little experience as far as the design of games is concerned. They also are bantering back
and forth as to what the game should look like, how to track progress as students finish, and build background
knowledge and content knowledge as they play.
Justification: Unless there is dependency and consensus between the stakeholders, the project will continue to
be out of synch with Pauls idea and the Bobs vision of the game.
Priority: 1
Description: Create objectives for learning through gaming by narrowing down the content and matching it to
state standards which are relevant across the curriculum as well as engaging.
Issues: A large inventory of interest and needs was collected and shared, but there has been no establishment of
a framework. They need to develop instructional strategies for teaching content within the game that is
historically accurate and racially sensitive.
Justification: Adapting the working methodology and framework to one more adequate to development of a
game that will allow for the group to design a game with meaningful and engaging content within timeframes
that need the parameters of the teachers schedules and
Paul Lindley Case Analysis 4

Paul Lindley Case Analysis

4
Prioroties & Recommendation

Solution 1: Create objectives to drive development.

Outline: Work with project team on defining learning goals, timelines, and tasks of remaining work to be
done. Set clear goals based on the needs and interests of those interviewed.
Pros: An integrated plan and design based on solid
learning goals will have a higher likelihood to
achieve success and gain support for
implementation.
Cons: Revisiting the planning stage might be seen as a
step backward.
Challenges: Clearly moving forward through the development of objectives / learning goals implementation
needs to occur. Following the outline above, the team can identify critical points of dependency and overlap in
content. With objectives identified, a scope of implementation can be planned ahead of time, and the games
can meet the needs of the students while building their content knowledge.



Solution 2: Discuss with commercial gaming produces to help develop the framework for developing web-based
learning that incorporates the challenges of implementation and the lack of resources and meet with teachers to
design web-based guides to accompany the game and track the increase of content knowledge.

Outline: Loop teachers into the discussion with commercial gaming designers about the overall architecture
and delivery for a new batch of teacher web-based guides to accompany the game. Highlight lessons learned
about need for more integrated project management with gaming and product
Pros: Paul and Bob will be seen as leaders taking
gaming in a new strategic direction. It will address
the need to adopt a new architecture that will
support the new content in the most engaging way.
Cons: Releasing control and opening the game up to a
new direction that might involve more provocative
liabilities.
Challenges: Simply moving knowledge dissemination into an online game does not mean it is engaging and
students are learning. The advantage of gaming is engagement and relevance, which allows for connections
to be made more easily. Furthermore, there is a larger architecture question at hand. The current game
modules are not adequate and students dont like it.

Final Recommendation
Meet with commercial designers after establishing objectives created with the assistance of classroom teachers
and Bob. Implement the game in a testing environment to provide them with feedback to drive the modifications.
Address the immediate need for project management and scope of implementation into the alternative school.
Strategy forward
Paul Lindley Case Analysis 5

Paul Lindley Case Analysis

5
Meet with Bob, other teachers interviewed, and students interviewed to explore issues and suggestions with
regards to the content. Refer to experience of staff members and execute a needs analysis for gaming methods at
for specific demographics in to producing web-based learning and guides.



Paul Lindley Case Analysis 6

Paul Lindley Case Analysis

6
References

Ertmer, P. A., & Quinn, J. (2007). The ID Casebook: Case Studies in Instructional Design (3rd ed.). Upper
Saddle River: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.