On May 9th, the first ever Joan Ganz Cooney Center Symposium was kicked off at the McGraw-Hill offices located in New York City. The Joan Ganz Cooney Center is the newest addition to the Sesame Workshop enterprise. Its mission is to offer guidance, research and insight into how children can learn through emerging media. The symposium itself was an amazing event. A stellar list of speakers and influential attendees from diverse areas of education, broadcast, gaming and the toy world came together to discuss the future of learning and technology for children in the 21st century. This jam-packed event included presentations from over 34 different industry insiders. Over 150 invited guests filled the room. Included on the guest list was Congressman George Miller (D-CA) who is the chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee.

All of the presentations offered many important perspectives and voices that are shaping the learning and technology conversation today. A number of speakers served up new research and valuable insights to chew on long after the event concluded. While there was significant take-away from all of the speakers, I would like to call out two specific presentations. These include the presentations of Connie Yowell of the MacArthur Foundation and Jennifer Kotler of Sesame Workshop.

First and foremost, Connie Yowell’s presentation on new learning paradigms was simply amazing, passionately delivered, and has given many folks the most food for thought about the future of new media and learning. Connie expressed the importance of seeking out the right questions to ask at the beginning of our journey, stating that in order for us to realize the opportunity in front of us, we must be ready for a significant paradigm shift in the existing learning conversation. I heard many attendees echo the importance of Connie’s words at the conclusion of the event. In the matrix below, I have included an audio recording of Connie’s presentation. A transcription of her comments can also be found in my next blog article.

During this part of the symposium, both Ellen Wartella (of UC Riverside) and Connie Yowell’s words were offered in succession and both speakers expressed a great need for more research and a significant rethinking of our current approach to education and learning. Their comments were vital ones to be heard by policy makers, and while Representative George Miller attended the event for most of the day, sadly he left just before Ellen and Connie took the stage.

The next presentation I’d like to call attention to was that delivered by Jennifer Kotler. Jennifer presented two reports, but one in particular has an important story to be told. This report gathered information from interviews conducted with children ages 6 to 9. It asked them about their favorite games and websites. Included within this report was a very clever validity check that, when its findings were presented, calls into question any other self-reported findings from other organizations asking similar questions about kids and online preferences.

In the study, kids were asked about their technology preferences. Included within the interview question sets were six non-existent website and game names. That’s right, online products that were completely fictitious and do not exist. What this report revealed was that 56% of those surveyed claimed to have played these non-existent games and websites. How could this be?

What the research suggests is that kids may be more likely to exaggerate their actual use of technology because of the apparent “cool factor” and/or the aspirational aspect of these technologies. How does this cool/aspirational factor play out within the data? Here are just a couple of examples: When kids were asked if they have ever visited a MySpace page, the “clean” data suggests that only 19% of those surveyed have visited the popular online destination whereas the non-valid data states the number is 54%. When asked about posting video on YouTube, the numbers are 7% (valid data) vs 42% (non-valid data).

These findings suggest that similar studies conducted by other organizations would benefit greatly by the inclusion of a validity test in their research. If not, the numbers reported could be significantly skewed from what they should be. Now that we’re all armed with this information, go back and look at all the claims regarding other popular children’s destinations, like Club Penguin, Webkinz, and the like. Hmmmmm.

I would also like to call out presentations made by Bernie Trilling of Oracle Education Foundation about 21st Century Learning Skills, Allison Druin for her work with the International Children’s Digital Library project, Krista Marks of Kerpoof, James Paul Gee and his report on Getting Over the Slump, and Jim Styer of Common Sense Media for his report on how parents and educators view the educational potential of new media.

The matrix below offers audio recordings, papers, and related websites collected from the event. Friends and colleagues who know me well will tell you that I’m rarely without a camera or recording device at such events. I believe it’s important to capture and share such information with everyone so that industries can move forward together. The list below includes audio recordings from most of the speakers. However, my apologies go out to the last 8 or so speakers, mostly from Warren Buckleitner’s Dust or Magic panel, for by the end of the day my recording device lost power.

All of the audio clips can be downloaded as a single zipped file here.

Last year I wrote about a tech toy product called Hyper Dash developed by the toy company Wild Planet. Hyper Dash is an electronic game that allows one user to hide up to five hockey puck sized targets, indoors or out, and another person can search for these targets with the help of a talking controller. I thought this was a brilliant use of RFID, a technology that relies on small paper thin microchips that can be detected within short distances via the radio frequencies they emit. (So when will this technology become standard in all car keys? Imagine the time we could all save each morning trying to find them!)

This coming fall Wild Planet will release a new iteration of this technology enhanced play pattern specifically for preschoolers. The product will be called Animal Scramble and it relies uses the same technology, but will support a hide-and-seek learning play pattern using plastic animal characters. The talking controller is a giraffe and the small targets include a monkey, a parrot, an elephant and a tiger. The giraffe calls out different challenges for one or many different players to accomplish, like tag the animal that has stripes, or find the animal that begins with the letter “M”. The animals can be spread out across a living room, backyard, or even a larger space for more exercise.

While Animal Scramble and Hyper Dash are great uses of RFID technology, it feels like RFID is inching along when it comes to being used in new and original ways. I keep waiting to see breakthrough applications that rely on the technology but am surprised at how few new products take advantage of its possibilities.

The only other child-focused RFID product I’ve seen so far this year includes a child alarm system developed by Smart Target called Kiddo. This product sounds an alarm when a child or even a pet you’re watching (or maybe not watching) equipped with an RFID tag moves outside of a designated play area.

Immediately I see how this technology can be used in all the clothes I drop off at the dry cleaner, important books I wish to keep on a designated bookshelf, picking up luggage at the airport, and did I mention the part about car keys?

So today I’d like to congratulate Wild Planet for pushing the RFID envelope. Many more play patterns are yet to be discovered. I look forward to this space heating up. Thank you for leading the charge!

On August 7, 2007, Georgia Tech professor and video game designer, researcher, and critic, Dr. Ian Bogost appeared on The Colbert Report to discuss how video games can be used to influence and change social and political thinking. Bogost has a new book out called Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Video Games published by MIT Press. You can also visit Bogost’s popular website called Water Cooler Games where he discusses, reviews, and analyzes video games that have an agenda. Click video link below to see Bogost on The Colbert Report.

June has been a busy month with conferences and events. There are many newsworthy items to report. Among them is my recent visit to the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) Game Jam event held recently outside of Boston. This gathering of developers, programmers, and a few artists and teachers, was for the benefit of creating learning games to be used on the latest XO laptop (what the OLPC device is often called.) While I could only attend the opening night of this weekend long event, I finally had my chance to test out this new machine. Many details about the XO can be learned from the OLPC website and from an independent OLPC news source called OLPC News. Here are my first impressions of the B3 (Beta 3 XO laptop) device:

• The laptop is much lighter in weight and smaller in size than I expected. Opening up the folded laptop was initially hard to do. The little green network “ears” on the machine need to be rotated out of their holding position in order to unlock and open up the laptop. Once you have the monitor up and the laptop open, you also notice that the monitor pivots on the vertical axis so that the monitor can be flipped around and folded back into the computer, just like a tablet PC laptop.
  
  
• As I had heard from many others and saw for myself, the monitor is really impressive. It’s screen is very crisp and easy to read.
  
  
• Next, a closer look at the keyboard: Yes, the QWERTY keyboard was a little small, but ergonomically a great fit for young hands. These smart laptop designers have done what no other computer manufacturer has been able to do to date. They have removed the caps lock key. (Finally!) There are also a number of navigation buttons in the top row of keys. These keys allow the user to quickly move around the operating system.
  
  
• I wanted to see if it was true that an SD slot could be found on the device. (You know, one of those slots where you insert a tiny card into a digital camera, for example, in order to save your digital photos.) Well, indeed, a slot can be found just under the bottom right of the monitor. This SD slot can be used for creating backups of important files, but I’ve also learned that someday a version of Windows could be used through this slot. In an interview with an Argentina news group posted on YouTube , Nicholas Negroponte states this slot was included mostly for the benefit of Microsoft (look at section 4:20 – 4:47).
  
  
• What surprised me the most about the user interface was the gaming controls at the bottom left and right of the monitor, just below the built-in speakers. Yes! Gaming controls! (Why hadn’t I seen them earlier in the press photos?): A “D-pad” on the left side of the monitor and shape buttons (triangle, circle, square and “X”) just like those found on a Sony Playstation controller on the right. (See image below.) The development language for the laptop is an open source subset of Python called Pygame. The way in which one accesse these game controls were not specifically called out during the Game Jam event, but for an overview of how to develop games in Pygame for OLPC, see this video.)

Overall, the laptop left me very impressed. There are a number of small rough edges to smooth out, but it’s amazing to see just how far this OLPC machine has come.

Later in the day after seeing technology expert Robin Raskin speak as mentioned in my prior post, I received news that Ben Sawyer, pioneer in the Serious Games movement and founder of the company Digital Mill, would be speaking at MIT. Little did I know the presentation he was about to deliver was a preview of new material for the upcoming USC Annenberg Workshop on Games for Learning.

Ben began the presentation with a very fitting poem by John Godfrey Saxe about six blind men who went to see an elephant. Each blind man found a part of the elephant; it’s sturdy side by one, a tusk by another, an ear by yet another, and so on. Each blind man thought they had come to understand the true meaning of what an elephant is. Each person was partially right about what they thought was an elephant, yet all of them were wrong in their understanding.

I found this poem helpful in describing my early frustration with Serious Games. I consider myself part of the learning games community; Yet, as I read through the serious games online posts and meet other community members outside of my space, like in corporate training or the military, I’ve asked myself many times, are we really working towards the same common goal? Do we see the same elephant? After hearing this poem I’ve felt a sense of deja-vu, having been in the same place maybe fifteen years prior as multimedia and the interactive industry tried to define itself as a new business worth pursuing. Now that we can better classify different parts of that earlier beast, and see and understand the whole as well as its parts, we begin the process again, unfolding this new chapter in the digital domain.

Ben unveiled his taxonomy of Serious Games, a matrix that attempts to define the different parts of this industry (Click to download an Excel copy of the Serious Games Taxonomy). When speaking with Ben after his presentation, he mentioned how this taxonomy is indeed a work in progress, that this information not only had a height and width, but a depth that’s not reflected here. In discussing this early version with others, a few holes and additional serious games classifications appear to be missing. None the less, this effort is an excellent first mapping of the field.

After seeing this Serious Games Taxonomy, I can more easily see where communication breakdown occurs. I can also see the differences and similarities of my own company in context to others. I think we can now begin to see the whole elephant and are on our way to more meaningful dialog about the differences between a trunk and a tail.

My company, 360KID, watches over trends in the kids’ space very closely; it’s one of the things we do best. We know our end users, and we follow the research that helps support new trends yet to be pioneered. 360KID also keeps a close eye on technology, gaming, education, and generational trends because what happens in these additional areas also has an impact on children’s lives. What trends are we currently watching and projecting five years out? Specific trends in the technology space include: social networking, toys, video games, education, and computing.

Social networking sites are currently the biggest and hottest trend for kids today. They’re great destinations for growing virtual communities. A few of the most popular online destinations include Club Penguin, Star Doll, Barbie Girls, Webkinz, and Runescape to name a few. As social networking services and products continue to evolve, and specific kid-focused enterprises use social networking technologies as a powerful tween connector, new social networking capabilities yet discovered will be combined to create even more engaging, lasting, and sticky experiences for kids. Currently, social networking is confined to a computer/Internet experience, but it could be possible for this form of entertainment to migrate to cell phones. More than 27% of kids ages 8 – 12 have their own cell phone. That number is expected to double by 2010. However, due to a lack of cell phone technology standards within the US, social networking technologies may not become commonplace on all cell phones unless the technology landscape shifts. For example, if the FCC made analog television signals available for non-emergency network uses through wireless everywhere initiatives, this could ultimately benefit not just computer experiences, but also cell phones and other tech devices.

The toy industry within the US will continue to hover at the $22 billion mark in the years ahead, but what will change is one specific segment of the toy industry, that being the youth electronics category. This year the NPD Group, a leading research firm in the video game and toy industries, projected a 23% growth in youth electronics. (Youth electronics is just one of 11 different “supercategories” in the toy space. Other supercategories include action figures, arts & crafts, dolls, vehicles, etc.) Many experts in the toy industries, as well as the electronics world, believe the toy industry is transforming into its own unique consumer electronics industry. While it’s expected that many popular technology toy products like digital games and plug-and-play TV toy devices will continue to deliver their “toy” magic, microprocessors are finding their way into My Little Pony dolls, Hot Wheels toys and many other traditional, non-technical toy products. Those in the toy industry often refer to Moore’s Law, the idea that microprocessors double in computer processing power every 24 months, as being on steroids in the toy space. An “echo” of this law, starting with the oldest and cheapest microprocessors, is working its way into everyday technology kids use every day.

Another technology trend that will have significant impact on computing, technology toys and technology used in the classroom is the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) initiative, sometimes referred to as the $100 laptop. This has been spearheaded by Nicholas Negroponte at MIT’s Media Lab. The goal of OLPC is to put a low cost laptop in the hands of every child on the planet for educational purposes (every child that is except those found within the US.) The number of laptops OLPC wishes to give away is 150 million units. By this coming fall season, the first 3 – 5 million, low cost laptops (averaging $175 per unit) will begin shipping to early adopter countries around the globe. Even if the OLPC initiative only partially succeeds, its boldness is forcing many companies (Microsoft with the Student Innovation Suite, Intel with the Classmate PC, Dell, Gateway and others), institutions (US Department of Education and other education institutions and ministries around the globe), and even toy companies to rethink everything. For example:

• Will OLPC create consumer demand for powerful computers that cost less than $100?
• Since education within the US is in drastic need of an overhaul, how will the constructionist learning approach surrounding OLPC laptops influence the institutionalized instructivist conversation within the US?
• Since OLPC is an open platform relying primarily on an open source operating system and software, how will this influence consumer-based operating systems and consumer software as we know it?
• If a reasonably powerful computer can be created for $100, can an electronic toy manufacturers create a powerful toy computer for $50? Could there someday be such a thing as Winnie the Pooh’s first computer that’s affordable and actually works like a real networked computer?

The video games industry, and specifically momentum currently being experienced in the Learning Games or Serious Games sector of the video games industry, is an important trend to follow. Many noteworthy academics and consumer video games experts are all exploring video games as a vehicle for learning. While great strides have been achieved in the last three years, this movement is still relatively young in it’s history. What’s exciting to watch is the number of video game companies exploring new ways to deliver learning messages and educational content. What is learned in this specific video game sector has great implications about what kinds of learning material might more easily be learned in the future. And as kids young and old spend more time playing video games with every passing year, this movement suggests how future tech savvy youngsters might be spending their free time.

The education sector continues to feel accountability pressure from the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) mandate. Even if this mandate is not reauthorized this year, 33% of the teacher work force (aging baby boomers) are planning to retire within 5 years, and the attrition rate for new teachers continues at its current level of 50% within 5 years for all new teachers. If these two trends are combined with the small projected spike coming in the student population, class sizes will grow as the availability of experienced teachers shrinks significantly.

In order for teachers to help each of their own students learn according to their own individualized needs, technology in the classroom will prove to be an essential component of everyday instruction. Future products will not just provide individual, classroom, school and district wide achievement data, but it will also allow for a level of customization and individualized instruction that is badly needed in today’s education environment.

One thing becomes clear when developing innovative and creative ways to engage kids. Kids have always been the same. Throughout the years. Throughout the decades. Throughout all time. It’s the society around kids that changes constantly. Changes in communication, government, education, places of worship, healthcare all have an impact on the experience of childhood. Watching these and many other trends is one of the best ways to create products that can really make a difference in every child’s life.

As a nation we are gaining a greater awareness to the dangers of a sedentary lifestyle and unhealthy eating choices. The CDC reports that approximately 30% of kids ages 6 – 11 are overweight. Because my company is involved with the development of learning products for kids I’m noticing more businesses and schools paying closer attention to what they can do to be a cause for better eating choices and physical activity in a child’s daily life. I’m seeing makers of children’s television programs find ways to reach out to kids about the benefits of exercise. (Take a look at the show Lazy Town on Nick Jr. or have you noticed how Cookie Monster has changed his eating habits to be more balanced?). Great success is also occurring in the video game sector to get people off the couch and moving, with platforms like Nintendo’s Wii, dance pad products like Dance Dance Revolution and other products like Sony’s EyeToy and Hasbro’s iOn.

Soon you will see more toy companies offering technology products to get kids moving and active. Here are a few noteworthy items I saw at Toy Fair:

Smart Cycle by Fisher-Price
There was much buzz at Toy Fair with the announcement of this toy and rightly so. The Smart Cycle is a TV-based plug-and-play, cartridge-based platform that looks a like a cross between an exercycle for preschoolers and a Big Wheels, but it’s also a video game. Once the Smart Cycle is hooked up to your television, children begin peddling and can steer the handlebars to select objects displayed on the screen. Biking quests can include finding letters of the alphabet, shapes, and exploration of other early learning concepts. This product is destined to be a multi-award winner and influencer on the next generation of motion-based products. Children, ages 3 – 6, will love this product. Sadly adults will be challenged to fit into this bicycle seat!

Play TV MLB Baseball and Play TV Football 2 by Radica
Here are two new plug-and-play products to come out of Radica, a cool tech toy company now owned by Mattel. The first, Play TV MLB Baseball comes with a bat you can swing and a ball to throw. Each item has motion sensitive electronics inside which feeds information back to your TV set. Play TV Football 2 (not to be confused with last year’s release, Play TV Football) has the same tech in a football. Your teammate runs on a small pressure sensitive mat to control characters on screen to catch the pass. Both products appear to be targeting a tween audience.

Hyper Dash by Wild Planet Entertainment
Hyper Dash is a technology toy that could be used indoors or out and does not require a television or computer to use. To start the game, 5 colored electronic targets are placed around the house or yard. Then, holding a talking electronic “tagger”, spoken instructions are given to the child, like find the blue target, then the red, etc. There are different game settings that focus on math skills, team work, and timed-based searches. As a child successfully finds the requested target, the music, pace, and complexity of each new request increases. This toy is recommended for children ages 5 – 8.

Motion-based Music and Games by TikTokTech
The company TikTokTech was showing two different stand alone TV plug-and-play devices. A small camera unit is placed on top of your television to play either music games or a combination of music and art games, depending on which device you purchase. While motion-based products have really only been around for a short while, these are the only titles available that provide a freeform artistic or musical experience for kids. For those that follow motion-based games, I strongly recommend checking out the user testing videos posted at the IF Media Lab website. IF Media Lab appears to be the technology and research arm for TikTokTech. These two titles are recommended for kids ages 3 – 8.

In my next post, I’ll share with you a handful of surprises that caught my eye at Toy Fair. These finds may not make big headlines, but they have enough magic in ‘em to make them stand out in a crowd.

As I mentioned in my previous post, there were fewer plug-n-play toys at Toy Fair this year than last. But of the ones that made an appearance, there seemed to be a more thoughtful approach as to what would make good use of plug-and-play technology. Here are a handful of new technology toys that have learning in mind and a couple of non-learning specific toys that are worth taking a look at:

ClickStart – My First Computer by LeapFrog
The ClickStart plug-and-play toy provides young children the experience computing in a fun and safe way, without tieing-up mom or dad’s home computer. This product includes a child-friendly keyboard and mouse, which can be set up to accommodate left or right handed users. The on-screen learning is guided by a friendly puppy named Scout. Children collect food treats for Scout as they complete games using numbers, letters, shapes and colors. This toy is a cartridge-based platform which means you can expect to see a number of different titles available to use with the base unit later this year. ClickStart is intended for children ages 3 – 6.

Easy Link Internet Launchpad by Fisher-Price
The Easy Link Internet Launchpad acts like a mom-approved dashboard to preschool-safe content on the web. Say a child would like to visit their favorite Sesame Street online game. All a child needs to do is pick up one of the many miniature figurines, in this case Elmo ( or Barney, Clifford, the Wiggles, Thomas the Train, Bob the Builder, and others) and place the figurine in its designated spot… a little like placing the round peg in the correct hole. Once inserted, the device automatically will link its user to the games section of sesamestreet.com. No typing is necessary and all content locations are child-safe with no external links to undesirable content. This product works best with children ages 3 – 6.

Digital Arts & Crafts Studio by Fisher-Price
This digital art station plugs right into the USB port of your computer. The device has a drawing tablet and a stylus for kids to draw. Drawings made on the tablet will appear on the computer monitor. A number of different creative templates are available to get kids started, like custom-designed birthday cards, party materials, and other holiday and artistic treats as well. Completed artwork can be printed out on your own color printer. Parents will be happy to know the number of printed items coming from this toy can be limited so expensive color printer ink can be used sparingly if desired.

Whiz Kid Learning System by VTech
This learning platform is unique in that it can be used with or without a computer, though it is a USB plug-and-play device. It has the ability to go where the child goes, untethered to some video monitor if desired. Up to 40 different activity pages can slide into this device for use with a stylus to make interactive selections on the tablet. Each page includes three different interactive learning activities. This product is also considered a platform, which means additional titles can be purchased to extend the learning and play experience through the base unit. (Additional titles for this product are referred to as “Wizware.”) Titles provide reading-based content as well as math, phonics, logic and creativity learning activities. Children ages 3 – 6 are intended audience for thsi product.

EyeClops by Jakks Pacific
This toy is not being released as a learning product, but I think it has huge learning potential. EyeClops plugs right into your TV and acts like a 200X microscope. Wherever your child points the camera lens the result is in a giant magnified visual on your TV screen. What does the surface of your skin look like close-up? What about that bug? What exactly is in that rug of yours? Exploration and discovery is the name of the game with this toy. The target audience is described as 8 – 12, but I think this toy has the ability to expand into other ages as well.

NetJet by Hasbro
NetJet is a clever USB connected handheld device created by Tiger Electronics, a division of Hasbro. NetJet consists of a handheld game controller and a game key. Each game key inserted into the controller allows its user to access different casual game content online. Popular games using familiar characters and brands are available through this device, but not to those without the controller and keys. The NetJet environment is also free of advertising. No banner of pop-up ads here. Kids are also kicked offline once the NetJet device is removed from the USB port. By this coming fall season, 40 different casual game titles will be available for purchase. This product will appeal to casual gamers, both young and old, but Tiger is best know for their success with the tween market. This is not a learning product, but NetJet is an excellent use of plug-and-play technology.

Digi Makeover by Radica
This TV plug-and-play device first appeared at last year’s Toy Fair. It has a built in camera which allows it’s user to take a picture of oneself, then, through the controls on the tablet, modify hairstyles, add jewelry, and apply makeup. (Note: This product has brought about much discussion in our office about female stereo-typing and the kinds of messages it sends out to young girls. In our own testing of the product, we find that kids enjoyed the product greatly when we referred to it as a “stuffed animal makeover” toy. Kids couldn’t stop laughing when they gave a giant stuffed Pikachu and other fuzzy friends a new hairdo and pearls!) What’s new here is Radica has hinted it will be releasing an newer version of the device later this year but no formal announcement has been made.

In my next blog article, I’ll take a look at more technology toys that are intended to get kids moving and active!

It’s that time of year again in New York City, which means there’s either a huge snow storm brewing or the newest crop of toys can be seen at Toy Fair. After being at the American International Toy Fair for the last three days checking out the latest technology toys, I’ve seen a few noteworthy trends to watch:

• First, there are indeed more technology toys at this year’s show than last year, including technology products coming from traditional toy companies that have not yet played in the technology space
• Plug-and-play devices, which were in great abundance last year, are less noteworthy this year
• Of those few remaining plug-and-play products, the new trend is to make plug-and-play toys that connect to the USB port of your computer instead of a television set
• And finally, guitars will be big business by holiday of 2007

When I go to toy fair I look for two things: technology and learning. Toys that use technology to deliver learning opportunities is what gets me excited about the show. When you think about technology toys and learning, the usual suspects come to mind: Fisher-Price, LeapFrog, and VTech. What was unusual about this year’s toy fair is that LeapFrog was nowhere to be found. They did not exhibit at the show. None-the-less, new products were announced by all. Over the next few days I will describe some of the highlights within tech toys, as well as a few other surprises in the coming days, but today… let’s start with just the guitars:

I Can Play Guitar by Fisher-Price
Following on the success of I Can Play Piano, the TOTY (Toy of the Year) nominated product that helps kids learn to play the piano, Fisher-Price has released this new product to help kids learn to play guitar. I Can Play Piano has a wonderful method for teaching how to site read music and translate that knowledge to keyboard playing. I didn’t have the opportunity to play with the new I Can Play Guitar product first hand, but look forward to seeing it’s instructive solution. This was one of the few TV plug-and-play products at the show and the only new guitar product that uses a screen. It’s intended for kids ages 5 and up.

Power Tour Electric Guitar by Hasbro
This technology toy is not intentionally positioned as a learning product, but it’s bound to influence kids to want to play guitar. This electronic toy teaches kids how to play 12 different songs but also allows an MP3 player to be hooked up to the guitar as well to play along with your favorite tunes. Lights on the fretboard appear to let the user know where to place their fingers. The device also has audio in and out ports. Hasbro worked with the guitar maker Gibson to make this product. Hasbro believes this toy will have a strong appeal to tweens.

Learn & Groove Animal Sounds Guitar by LeapFrog
This digital guitar, complete with whammy bar and buttons on it’s fret. It not only allows for musical exploration but also introduces numbers, letters, and animals in both English or Spanish. It’s suggested use is for infants and toddlers ages 12 to 36 months.

Electric Rockerz Guitar by Zizzle
This guitar is not meant to assist with learning but joins the digital guitar bandwagon. This product is the smallest and least expensive of the bunch and promotes the sequel to the Disney Channel TV movie High School Musical. It too targets tweens and is part of a collection of electronic toy instruments that will appear on store shelves later this summer.

Jam With Me Electric Guitar by KidDesign Little information is available about this digital toy but what we do know is that it has a slot to plug in an iPod Nano.

While marketers imply these toys are inexpensive ways to introduce guitar playing to kids without the price tag of a real guitar or lessons it’s more likely they’re now appearing as a result of the smash success with the video game Guitar Hero and Guitar Hero 2. The only learning that occurs in these PS2 titles is hand-eye coordination and timing, but after 30 minutes of play with these titles, or maybe with these new guitar toys, you too will want to brush the dust off of your Mel Bay guitar instruction books!

Next up, I’ll take a look at more non-musical plug-and-play products debuted at Toy Fair.

What makes a good learning game for classroom use? This is the question I was recently asked by a coworker. It’s a good question, and one that immediately brings up other questions… What is a good learning game and what should a learning game include (or not include)? What considerations are necessary? How should it be developed? What should a developer be aware of? Each question is as important as the first. There are so many different paths you can take when building a learning game. Where do you begin?

During a recent conversation with researcher Carrie Heeter, professor at the Michigan State University GEL Lab (Games for Entertainment and Learning), she shared with me the results of a project she and her colleague, Brian Winn, had recently completed. This study was called Implications of Gender, Player Type, and Learning Strategies for the Design of Games for Learning and it proved to be an excellent resource for answering our classroom learning game question.

When you think of a good video game, what kind of experience is delivered to the end-user? Most likely one that is challenging, fun, and engaging. But what about a learning game? Certainly these experiences should also occur in a learning game, but if learning is the desired outcome, the planning process of such a game might benefit from a slightly different perspective than that of a game whose intent is not specifically learning related. With the end result in mind, this research report defines four very specific characteristics for consideration in the development of all learning games. When developing a learning game for classroom use the development effort should result in a product that:

• strongly engages both girls and boys
• accommodates diverse play style preferences
• provides support where needed for learners with limited gaming experience; and
• results in deep learning through play

Let’s consider these items as the “Essential Requirements” for developing any classroom learning game.

Next, in the gaming world there are many different game mechanics to engage a user in a game and, depending on how those game mechanics are used, can make a game more enjoyable. Game mechanics can be thought of as a kind of carrot used to drive the player’s game experience. Game mechanics can also be emphasized (or minimized) through different reward structures. Some common game mechanics include things like:

• finding or collecting items of value
• eliminating or minimizing items that are considered a threat
• beating an opponent
• beating your best performance
• achieving the highest score
• beating the clock

As interest in learning games has grown over the last few years, it’s funny to see how these and other age-old game mechanics are incorporated into classroom games without much consideration, resulting in outcomes that unintentionally put certain audience members at a disadvantage. Two different studies cited in this research bring this game mechanic mismatch to light.

The first is by Maria Klawe and her colleagues (Klawe, Inkpen, Phillips, Upitis, & Rubin, 2002). Klawe observed 10,000 children playing video and computer games at the Science World museum in Vancouver with the Electronic Games for Education in Math and Science group (E-GEMS). What these observations discovered is that boys tend to exhibit a greater interest in completing or winning a game in the shortest time possible. Girls on the other hand were much more interested in exploring through a game.

Brenda Laurel (2001) also describes similar findings. Laurel notes that boys will tend to rush through a game in an effort to beat it, whereas girls are more likely to take their time and explore. What these observations suggest is time-based games, or a “beat the clock” game mechanic, favors a masculine play style, whereas exploration favors a feminine play style.

Therefore, creating a game that rewards speedy play will benefit boys and place girls at a disadvantage. This may be fine for creating a consumer game targeting a niche audience of users, but when it comes to creating learning successes for everyone in a classroom setting, relying on speedy play results in gender inequalities (see Essential Requirements #1). One would also assume a game that relies on exploration as a main game mechanic would benefit girls over boys� or would it?

A major component of this study involved the development of a web-based learning game called Life Preserver (LP) to be played by middle and high school students. This game�s focus was to teach national science standards related to evolution. Many iterations of this game’s design were built and tested to balance out interests of creating a good game with that of making sure the game was pedagogically solid and real learning was taking place. This iteration process also tested to make sure both male and female players were equally successful in the game’s outcome. (For more information on this iteration process read the article Resolving Conflicts in Educational Game Design Through Playtesting, written by the same researchers.)

As the LP game development neared completion, three different versions of the final game were created to test with middle school students. Here I will compare only two of these versions. One version of the final LP game incorporated a reward structure that encouraged speedy play. The other rewarded users for exploration.

As one could predict based on the gender play preferences described earlier, girls took longer to play the speedy version of the LP game than boys, but girls did play faster than they naturally would. When exploration was rewarded in the other version of the game, boys slowed down and explored more content.

But how well did the students perform? Which version produced the greatest learning? In the speedy play mode both girls and boys made mistakes, but girls made more mistakes than boys. In the exploration version of the LP game girls scored better than they did in the speedy version, but boys also scored better than they did in the speedy play version of LP. This suggests that while the natural play pattern for boys is to race through a game, boys will focus more on content in an exploration mode and both girls and boys will perform better where exploration is rewarded.

Surveys were conducted after each group completed playing their assigned games and were then compared. Assumptions could be made that boys would find the speed play mode more fun than the exploration version. Similarly, girls would find the exploration version more fun that the speed play mode. However, the results of the survey showed no difference in enjoyment in one mode versus another. There were no significant differences found in how fun a game was for either boys or girls in any mode of play.

This research will appear as a chapter in the upcoming book From Barbie to Mortal Combat: New Perspectives on Gender, Games, and Computing. This book will also investigate other issues related to gender and technology and is scheduled to be released sometime in 2007 by MIT Press.