<?page no="1"?> Developing Video Game Literacy in the EFL Classroom <?page no="2"?> GIESSENER BEITRÄGE ZUR FREMDSPRACHENDIDAKTIK Herausgegeben von Eva Burwitz-Melzer, Wolfgang Hallet, Jürgen Kurtz, Michael Legutke, Hélène Martinez, Franz-Joseph Meißner und Dietmar Rösler Begründet von Lothar Bredella, Herbert Christ und Hans-Eberhard Piepho <?page no="3"?> Roger Dale Jones Developing Video Game Literacy in the EFL Classroom A Qualitative Analysis of 10 th Grade Classroom Game Discourse <?page no="4"?> Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http: / / dnb.dnb.de abrufbar. © 2018 · Narr Francke Attempto Verlag GmbH + Co. KG Dischingerweg 5 · D-72070 Tübingen Das Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen. Printed in Germany Internet: www.narr.de E-Mail: info@narr.de ISSN 0175-7776 ISBN 978-3-8233-8248-5 <?page no="5"?> I. 11 1 15 1.1 16 1.2 24 1.3 34 2 44 2.1 46 2.2 52 2.3 54 2.3.1 55 2.3.2 80 2.3.3 97 II. 115 3 117 3.1 118 3.2 120 3.3 128 4 131 4.1 131 4.2 143 4.2.1 151 4.2.2 158 4.2.3 165 4.3 170 Contents Video Game Literacy in the EFL Classroom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two Foundational Concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Foreign Language Discourse Ability: EFL Educational Goals . Multiliteracies: Foreign Language Discourse Ability and Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Affordances of Video Game Literacy for the EFL Classroom . Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy . . . . . . . . . . . Defining Video Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Existing Approaches to Video Game Literacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Game . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Player . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The World . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Gamer Discourse: A Possible Link? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The (Non)Fictionality of Game Comics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Comics: Narrative, Multimodality and Humor . . . . . . . . . . . . . Translating Game Experiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model Game Criticism and Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Player Criticism and Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Real World Criticism and Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implications for Gamer Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <?page no="6"?> III. 173 5 175 5.1 175 5.2 179 5.3 184 5.4 186 5.5 187 5.6 191 5.7 194 5.8 197 6 200 6.1 200 6.2 201 6.3 203 6.4 208 6.4.1 209 6.4.2 210 6.4.3 213 6.5 218 6.5.1 219 6.5.2 226 6.6 235 6.6.1 235 6.6.2 241 6.7 247 7 251 7.1 252 7.2 252 7.3 254 7.4 259 7.4.1 261 7.4.2 264 Challenges of Classroom Game Discourse. Three Case Studies . . . . . . . . Methodological Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Qualitative, Ethnographic Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Research Interests and Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case Studies and Research Design Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Access to the Research Field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Data Collection and Triangulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Perspective Triangulation: Teacher and Learner Interviews . . Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ethical Considerations and Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Institution, Students and Teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reconstructed Lesson Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenge 1: Student (Dis)Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenge 2: Game Complexity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Importance of Input and Clear Instructions . . . . . The Difficulties of Summarizing Complex Games . . . . The Multi-Dimensionality of Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Issue of Narrowcasting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Irony of Gamer Criticism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Retrospective Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher Interview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification . . . . . . . . . . . . Institution, Students and Teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reconstructed Lesson Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenge 1: The Intimacy of Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenge 2: Gamifying the Classroom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Focus on Reward Structures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Reward Paradox of Learning Games. . . . . . . . . . . . Contents 6 <?page no="7"?> 7.5 269 7.5.1 270 7.5.2 276 7.6 281 8 283 8.1 283 8.2 284 8.3 286 8.4 286 8.5 295 8.6 304 9 306 9.1 306 9.2 308 9.3 326 328 348 350 352 354 356 359 360 Retrospective Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Student Interview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Teacher Interview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . Institution, Students and Teacher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reconstructed Lesson Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Retrospective Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenge 1: Matching Interests in Classroom Game Discourse? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Challenge 2: Changing Classroom Roles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Implications of Results and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reflections on Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Beyond this Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Works Cited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix A: Transcription Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix B: Classroom Videography Transcript Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix C: Teacher Interview Transcript Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix D: Student Interview Transcript Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix E: Example Parent Letter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . List of Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Contents 7 <?page no="9"?> For Charlotte and Lilly. <?page no="11"?> I. Video Game Literacy in the EFL Classroom Digital games are a substantial part of life in the 21 st century. Most young indi‐ viduals today play games, have grown up playing games, socialize in and around games, have friends and family who play games, and even learn through games. Digital games have also invaded popular culture, as references to digital games can continually be found in pop songs, Hollywood films, popular television shows and even popular clothing. Even individuals who do not play digital games are affected by online websites, apps and programs which intentionally utilize game mechanics to introduce playfulness and engage customers. Digital games, and other forms of popular culture for that matter, are also a considerable source of English language contact for young people in Germany. Many digital games are in English and some allow players to interact with others in the game where English is commonly spoken. Online, gamer communities communicate with each other and produce media either to inform, entertain or even build friendships - also typically in English. Beyond aspects of language, games are also complex interactive systems which are, even if largely produced and con‐ sumed under the guise of entertainment, cultural carriers that not only present views on the world, but also ways of being in and interacting with it. Thus, they introduce young German players to foreign cultures as well as foreign lan‐ guages. In fact, the popularity of digital games is so great that educators have for decades now attempted to use them to increase student engagement and improve learning. Some have brought learning games into the classroom while others have even tried to model classrooms and classroom interactions after digital games. The impact and relevance of digital games poses a great challenge for the EFL classroom. On the one hand, the opportunities to connect to the cultural, lan‐ guage and media aspects of games (as well as to the motivation of students) are broad yet, on the other hand, there is little precedence in German schools. On top of this, the real dangers of digital games (or, more precisely, of their unre‐ flected use) and the general skepticism towards media in Germany in general create a shaky foundation for any game pedagogy to be built upon. A glaringly obvious starting point to deal with these challenges is to begin talking about games in the EFL classroom. Talking about games will quickly make clear that there is already a rich and lively discourse on games and that learners have rich game experiences to bring to the classroom. Engagement in this existing dis‐ <?page no="12"?> course, and connecting it to learners’ experiences, will further illuminate that games themselves are texts (albeit highly complex interactive ones) which both are parts and products of larger cultural processes. Thus, classroom discourse can connect to game discourse, which in turn holds the potential to connect to cultural discourse on games. This study takes a literacy approach to working with digital games because such an approach views participation in cultural discourse as one of the highest goals of education, and it sees critical and reflected participation in English (language) cultural discourse as one of the highest goals, if not the highest goal, of the English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom. The pedagogy of literacy, in a broad sense of the term, and as an initial and brief introduction to it, involves the targeted and systematic enabling of communication involving both the de‐ coding and encoding of information in various ‘languages’ and media. In the context of the didactics of English as a foreign language, literacy can mean em‐ phasizing and prioritizing English (and its affordances) amongst other forms of communication as a means of engaging in discourse. As an existing concept, video game literacy (VGL) is largely underdeveloped and has been completely ignored as a concept for EFL teaching and learning. While other literacy concepts, like for instance for literature and film, have al‐ ready been developed and established, this study on VGL must be seen as an initial endeavor to introduce video game literacy to foreign language didactics. The title “Developing Video Game Literacy” is not an attempt to undermine the research of this study nor the conceptual tools and concepts it offers in conclu‐ sion, but rather reflects a recognition of the incunabulate stages of a larger process which requires substantial further research at both the conceptual and empirical levels. It is an open call for further criticism, research and develop‐ ment. As such, this study invites teachers, future teachers, EFL researchers and materials developers to borrow the ‘tools’ it produces, adapt them when needed and, ultimately, engage in the overarching discourse of video game literacy in the EFL classroom. The following study exists in three parts. Part I develops the concept of VGL for the EFL classroom. It starts by addressing two foundational concepts - fremdsprachige Diskursfähigkeit and multiliteracies - before moving on to spe‐ cific affordances of VGL for the EFL context. Part I ends by presenting a tripartite discourse-based model of VGL. Part II looks at gamer discourse and its potential for linking learners to the cultural discourse on games in the classroom. Spe‐ cifically, it addresses video game fan-comics as one form of gamer-discourse which holds potential for illustrating the roles and functions of gamer discourse in general. This work is necessary since there has been little to no research done <?page no="13"?> on the discourse of gamers and the functions that their literacy practices fulfill. In this study, a conceptual look at the structures and affordances of video game fan-comics is followed by an empirical analysis of a World of Warcraft fan-comics archive. Results show potentials, not only to link gamer discourse to the class‐ room but also to link gamer discourse to the discourse-based model of video game literacy. Part III presents the results of three case studies on classroom game discourse at the 10 th grade level. As an explorative, qualitative research, the case studies reveal challenges that occur when game discourse is introduced in the classroom. Analyses of these challenges reveal not only their complexity, but also their origins and the interconnections of single challenges across mul‐ tiple if not all dimensions of game discourse. Furthermore, analyses reveal ways in which these challenges can be treated as learning opportunities to establish, encourage and develop informed game discourse and VGL in the EFL classroom. <?page no="15"?> 1 From here on, the term fremdsprachige Diskursfähigkeit will be refered to as foreign language discourse ability. 1 Two Foundational Concepts This study takes a specific approach to VGL by embedding it first and foremost within the concept of multiliteracies. The multiliteracies approach takes the concept of literacy and expands it beyond reading and writing alphabetic text and applies it to other types of modes and other types of (and especially new and digital) media. This means that VGL is largely about understanding digital games and engaging in informed productive practices within and around games. However, this study takes a more specific approach to what is potentially a very broad concept, and defines VGL in terms which are applicable to the field of teaching and learning English as a foreign language. Thus, utilizing the concept of fremdsprachige Diskursfähigkeit, 1 this study interprets video game literacy as ultimately supporting the participation in (foreign language) cultural discourse around digital games. In other words, and broadly speaking, VGL can be un‐ derstood as the ability to interpret games, game experiences, and discourse ‘ar‐ tifacts’ around games, in order to critically and constructively participate in the English language discourse on games. It is not about actually designing and coding games - though this could be included in this current conceptualization, albeit in other studies and projects. Chapter 1 begins by addressing the concept of foreign language discourse ability and how it relates to educational goals that extend beyond, yet also include the EFL classroom. Next, this chapter presents the concept of multiliteracies as a basis for this study’s conceptualization of VGL. This conceptualization sees a direct connection between multiliteracies and foreign language discourse ability, which allows an embedding of video game literacy in the EFL classroom. Finally, this chapter addresses specific affordances that such a conceptualization of VGL can offer learners, the EFL classroom and higher level educational goals. <?page no="16"?> 1.1 Foreign Language Discourse Ability: EFL Educational Goals An initial step towards conceptualizing VGL for this study is by linking it to the context of EFL didactics. This contextualization is important because, first, VGL as a multiliteracies project runs the risk of not being relevant enough for any single school subject and thus of being ignored by all. Furthermore, it also runs the risk of not being relevant enough for a subject like English as a foreign language which, at times, focuses heavily on language itself and less on the production of meaning through language and through participation in higher level cultural processes. VGL as a multiliteracies project thus focusses on the role of language as one form of literacy that is inherently and inextricably in‐ tertwined with larger processes and modalities of (foreign language) commu‐ nication. The second reason for contextualizing VGL in EFL didactics is that a subject which focuses on foreign language learning, culture, and its related skills and competencies requires that its specific interests and goals sit at the core of any didactic measure. That is to say, approaches to VGL that are interested in embedding the concept into other subject fields may not necessarily put alpha‐ betic (foreign) language and culture at its core and will naturally adapt the con‐ cept to serve the specific didactic and educational purpose(s) of that subject. This EFL-approach to VGL is therefore interested in the affordances for learning EFL, for developing relevant skills and competencies, as well as for developing (inter)cultural awareness, reflection and participation. This study takes a particular interest in cultural aspects of digital games. Such a focus treats digital games (and their attendant cultural practices) as valid forms of cultural artifacts that are inherently complex and whose complexity allows for multiple points of connection for classroom purposes. Furthermore, it targets the potentials of EFL, not only for the linguistic articulation of thought, but also for the negotiation of meaning amongst individuals and, at a higher level, for (trans)cultural participation. Thus, this study places VGL as targeting Wolfgang Hallet’s concept of fremdsprachige Diskursfähigkeit, which offers a connection between EFL didactics and larger (socio-cultural) educational goals. The fol‐ lowing passages expand on the connection between such higher level educa‐ tional goals and their implications for the EFL classroom by examining the meaning and role of discourse and the function and purpose of cultural partic‐ ipation. Finally, the role of the foreign language for discourse participation and its implications for an EFL-oriented model of VGL is presented. Because the EFL classroom is often occupied with the mechanics of foreign language learning, it is easy to overlook that the ultimate goal of the subject is 1 Two Foundational Concepts 16 <?page no="17"?> to prepare students for society as a whole as well as for their future lives. In the context of developing German national educational standards, Klieme et al. state that the overall goal of education is, dass alle Heranwachsenden einer Generation, und zwar unabhängig von Herkunft und Geschlecht, dazu befähigt werden, in der selbständigen Teilhabe an Politik, Ge‐ sellschaft und Kultur und in der Gestaltung der eigenen Lebenswelt diesem Anspruch gemäss zu leben und als mündige Bürger selbstbestimmt zu handeln. (Klieme et al. 2009: 63) Here Klieme et al. highlight two interrelated goals: the first is that education prepares students for autonomous participation in politics, society and culture, and the second is that education should enable students to create their own lifeworlds according to the challenge of cultural participation and to act as self-determined citizens. These educational goals are not, however, specific to the German context, but rather fit other cultural and national understandings of the role of education. In fact, these goals and the democratic ideology which underlie them are not just present in the German national educational standards, but are also em‐ bedded in the larger efforts of Europe, specifically in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (cf. Heyworth 2004: 12-13). In turn, these European endeavors can be seen in terms of goals that extend globally. The New London Group, consisting of literacy scholars from the U.S., Great Britain and Australia, describes an almost identical set of educational goals, If it were possible to define generally the mission of education, it could be said that its fundamental purpose is to ensure that all students benefit from learning in ways that allow them to participate fully in public, community, and economic life. Pedagogy is a teaching and learning relationship that creates the potential for building learning conditions leading to full and equitable social participation. (The New London Group 2000: 9) In this light, the EFL classroom appears to be embedded in a subject which tar‐ gets specifically all of the aforementioned goals and not merely isolated aspects. The role of the EFL classroom, in other words, is not simply to prepare students for economic life, or futures in which they will undoubtedly have to speak Eng‐ lish in work settings (also including economic transactions - like interpreting advertisements in determining which products to buy), or political lives, in which English serves as a lingua franca for both the affairs of the European Union and international, global affairs, or even community lives, in which more and more people are interacting in global online communities, or in which Eng‐ 1.1 Foreign Language Discourse Ability: EFL Educational Goals 17 <?page no="18"?> 2 Cf. also Strydom 2000 for an overview of cultural discourse and its role for the con‐ struction of reality and knowledge. Cf. Bonnet, Breidbach & Hallet 2002: 154 on (foreign) language learning and reality construction in the context of CLIL. lish language and cultural media play an increasing role in the socialization of (especially young) individuals (cf. Berns 2007; Berns et al. 2007). Rather, the goal of the EFLC is to prepare students for all such aspects of life, since they all reflect the reality of English in today’s world and especially in the lifeworlds of students in Germany. However, while it is doubtful that anyone rejects this overall educational goal, the challenge often comes from creating meaningful language learning sce‐ narios and tasks in the EFL classroom that have direct relevance for the life‐ worlds (present and future) of students. It is easy for educational institutions and especially for teachers to claim that all language learning, no matter how mechanical and repetitive, falls within the conceptualization of this goal. How‐ ever, the concept of foreign language discourse ability serves as a medium through which educators can conceptualize multiple levels of hierarchized learning goals since it hints towards methods through which to achieve an ex‐ plicit connection. According to Hallet, foreign language discourse ability is a “Bildungs- und Leitziel des Englischunterrichts” (2011: 54) and that, as such, it includes all other competency goals of educational theory (Hallet 2008b: 88). However, before an understanding of the role of this concept for EFL didactics can be reached, the meaning and function of discourse must first be addressed. The concept of discourse holds the potential to connect everyday communi‐ cation with larger cultural processes. In this regard, Hallet refers to the distinc‐ tion between discourse with a “d” and with a “D”, which relates to the different levels with which communicative acts interact with the making of meaning. While “d” discourse refers to a more bottom-up approach to interpreting and engaging in communication based on putting sentence-level utterances into larger coherent wholes (Hallet, 2008b: 29; cf. also Heyworth, 2004: 219-220 on this level as discourse competence), “D” discourse refers to a more top-down approach based on larger cultural processes - ways of being in the world, ways of acting as cultural agents, ways of accepting and/ or challenging established and created structures of power (based off of Kramsch and Foucault, cf. Hallet 2008b: 81). Integrating these two levels of discourse (“d” and “D”) in the concept of foreign language discourse ability highlights two crucial aspects of discursive commu‐ nication. First, it points out that all communicative acts involve (to various de‐ grees) the rules of social, political, and cultural power, and thus reproduce and reinstate the realities those structures of power represent (cf. Hallet 2015b: 21) 2 1 Two Foundational Concepts 18 <?page no="19"?> Second, due to the social semiotic nature of communication and especially of language, communicative acts are also an opportunity to critically reflect on, question, negate, build upon, or even redesign such rules of cultural power and, through this, ways of being in the world. Concerning all communicative acts, Hallet states, Wer eine sprachliche Äußerung tut, initiiert einen Diskurs, greift in einen Diskurs ein, hält ihn aufrecht oder entwickelt ihn weiter... Zu dieser diskursiven Partizipation ge‐ hört neben der kommunikativen auch eine metadiskursive Kompetenz, welche die Reflexion, Hinterfragung und Kritik von Diskursverläufen, -regeln oder -verhalten ermöglicht. (Hallet 2008b: 87) It follows that discursive participants are “kulturelle Aktanten” - and, in the EFL classroom, that “Die Schülerinnen und Schüler nehmen als kulturelle Subjekte - mit Wertvorstellungen, Haltungen, Meinungen, Sinnstiftungen und so weiter - am Lern- und Unterrichstprozess teil.” (Hallet 2011: 56) In other words, when students communicate in a foreign language, and especially in response to cul‐ tural artifacts and authentic communicative acts, they also engage as intercul‐ tural actors. They do so not only by learning foreign ways of being in the world (with its concomitant systems of power and social, cultural and political rules), and not only by reflecting on their own culture and its dominant discourses, but also by constructing the very reality within their own lifeworlds. Multiliteracies and foreign language discourse ability are not separate ap‐ proaches. Both are underlined by a social semiotic approach to communication, and both target the empowerment of individuals to co-construct their own life‐ worlds. The social semiotic approach views meaning-making as a contextualized social and cultural practice, instead of meaning being necessarily and statically embedded in language and reality itself. According to M.A.K. Halliday (Halliday 2014), the social semiotic approach to language focuses on communication as existing of three dimensions: the ideational, the textual, and the interpersonal. In simplified terms, this division suggests that communication starts with an idea or experience (ideational) that must be put into some material or commu‐ nicable form (textual). Furthermore, all ideas and experiences are communicated interpersonally, since all ideas and communicative acts present representations of the self in the world (social and natural), as well as in terms of the commu‐ nicative partner. Social semiotics, sharing strong similarities with Blumer’s symbolic interactionism approach (cf. Blumer 1986: 2), suggests that meaning is then co-constructed and negotiated. This idea has serious ontological and epis‐ temological implications, suggesting that social reality, or how people under‐ stand, value and interact with the natural world, themselves and others, does 1.1 Foreign Language Discourse Ability: EFL Educational Goals 19 <?page no="20"?> 3 Social semiotics does not necessarily deny the existence of a natural world that is de‐ fined by certain learnable patterns and rules. Rather, it is likely that social reality can only capture a limited understanding within a likely infinitely vast source of ‘meanings’ - and that these socially ‘captured’ understandings always start from ideas and expe‐ riences, that they must be ‘translated’ into various types of ‘texts’ to be communicated, and that they are also always tied up in the social struggle for power and ways of valuing. not exist in and of itself, but is constructed by individuals and social groups (discussed further in various sections of this study). Thus, a social semiotic ap‐ proach to literacy is based on the premise that social reality is the result of complex interactions between symbols and semiotic domains, context, and so‐ cial groupings. 3 However, the construction of reality has never been (and should not be seen as) an individual responsibility. It is most likely the first and most epic collective struggle that society and culture has ever engaged in. This means that the in‐ dividual construction of reality is reliant on ‘inherited’ collective constructions of reality and is thus indebted to culture for that (cf., for example, Rousseau's 1963 "social contract"). Furthermore, reality has never been disconnected from the natural world, meaning that it is always reliant on some type of action to ‘test’ its validity as well as its ability to solve problems (both in terms of the social and natural world). In essence, humans are social creatures reliant on their cultural and technological heritage as well as on the help (and specialized knowledge) of others within any particular context. Thus action, based on any perceived understanding of reality, is always social and always also political. If democracy is a dominant value of modern Western society, then it must find ways of balancing the freedom to create individual reality with the respon‐ sibility to respect inherited tools for reality construction as well as others who live in the world. Both are past and future oriented. In this context, freedom refers to the individual ability to construct (or co-construct) new reality. The construction of new reality is future oriented because it allows for progress and growth in society, and it is also past-oriented because past realities allow a ‘base’ understanding in which to create new ones. This is where responsibility comes in. Responsibility is past oriented since individuals inherit tools of interacting with and seeing the world through socially ‘established’ realities. This means new constructions of reality could not occur without existing ones. However, responsibility is also future oriented because individuals inherit imperfect, and often unjust, realities and have a responsibility to themselves and others to im‐ prove upon them. 1 Two Foundational Concepts 20 <?page no="21"?> Here the concept of “designing social futures” as laid out by The New London Group (2000) and Cope and Kalantzis (2000), and picked up on and extended by Cope and Kalantzis (2009) provides a useful approach because it treats design as a process. The New London Group defines this process as first “available designs”, or “the resources for design” that consist of “grammars of language” and “other semiotic systems” as well as “orders of discourse” (2000: 20). “Avail‐ able designs”, when taken up by individuals and groups, enter a process of “de‐ signing” in which “available designs” are re-presented and recontextualized (ibid.: 22). The result of “designing” is “the redesigned”, an emergent and new meaning. This new meaning (“the redesigned”), following the social semiotic approach, has also the ability to create new selves and identities (ibid.: 23), and it becomes the resources for “available designs” in the future (ibid. 23). What this approach to literacy and communication emphasizes is the political role of agency. Too little agency on the part of any one individual or group can lead to their subjugation by others, while too much can lead to their domination of others. A social semiotic approach to design that is based on democratic prin‐ ciples of equality sees agency as a socially symbiotic relationship. It allows in‐ dividuals the personal freedom of agency to improve their individual lives, but it also provides them with the agency for social responsibility to take part in collective action that produces the synergistic power to solve global problems. Thus, it can be said that action in today’s world must also be ‘designed’ through participation in discourse. Because it is and must continue to be social, designed action is based on communication that is connected to the discourse surrounding the nature and context of the action. This process of “design” describes the connection between the multiliteracies approach and foreign language discourse ability, since the ability to design meaning, and to construct reality in a socially responsible manner, begins in the participation of cultural discourse. The approach to VGL that has emerged in this discussion here recognizes that learners already have co-created realities through the construction of their own lifeworlds. It also recognizes that some students are adept at actively co-creating that reality while others, to varying degrees, are consumers of pre-fabricated lifeworlds designed by market systems. Since video games play a role in the lifeworlds of all students, a foreign language discourse ability approach to VGL looks first at connecting to the discourses that come from student lifeworlds before it attempts to reach a more complex, higher discourse level that exists in the cultural realm beyond their experience, ability and understanding. Thus, the foreign language discourse ability approach to VGL supports the idea that, in order for communication to be meaningful in the classroom, students must not only be subjects of language literacy processes and 1.1 Foreign Language Discourse Ability: EFL Educational Goals 21 <?page no="22"?> tasks, but they must also be producers. This means that they cannot be simply expected to ‘soak up’ important information delivered by the teacher and class‐ room materials, but they must also bring meaning from outside of the classroom to connect to the inherent potential for meaning that the classroom is able to provide, and this meaning must also be developed further through the emerging classroom discourse. In order for this to occur, educators and materials designers cannot simply expect students to understand the value of higher level, complex cultural dis‐ course and communicate in meaningful ways through them. Rather, they must be aware of, knowledgeable of, and also respect the various lifeworlds of their students, and the various levels of discourses which make up those lifeworlds. This should not suggest that all discourses that pertain to the lifeworlds of stu‐ dents are appropriate for the EFL classroom, but rather that within those life‐ world discourses lies a potential to connect to higher level cultural discourses. By connecting to the lifeworlds of students, EFL classrooms can connect to the complex experiences students have with English language discourses and cul‐ tural practices, and classrooms can present students with tasks that move them into their zone of proximal development, specifically targeting their ability to participate in increasingly complex levels of cultural discourse. Figure 1 illus‐ trates the embeddedness of students within their own lifeworlds and also shows how these are further embedded in a larger culture and society. By specifically targeting the influence of the surrounding culture (including global and English language culture) on the students’ lifeworlds, EFL classrooms can work to in‐ creasingly expand those lifeworlds to include an ever-increasing complexity of cultural discourse participation and democratic action. Through this connection, classroom tasks which target VGL can not only allow communication and dis‐ course participation which is meaningful within the students’ lifeworlds, but also relevant for their lifeworlds as embedded within larger cultural and social processes. 1 Two Foundational Concepts 22 <?page no="23"?> Fig. 1: Expanding Lifeworld Discourses Thus it can be claimed that an EFL classroom which accepts the underlying goals and ideology of foreign language discourse ability can more easily conceptualize (and transform! ) the more ‘typical’ and ‘traditional’ goals and practices of EFL teaching into practices that allow students to participate in foreign language (and indeed global) discourses - not as consumers of discourse, information and cultural ‘scripts,’ but also as co-producers, as fuller members of society who are capable of also co-producing democratic interactions and institutions. As such, foreign language discourse ability falls in line with a more process-oriented classroom, as defined by the CEFR and the German National Educational Stand‐ ards (Bildungsstandards) which is more interested in the procedural knowledge and attitudes of language use, communication, and problem solving than in simply developing declarative knowledge of the mechanics of a foreign language (Hallet 2008b: 88, 2011; Heyworth 2004). In summary, a foreign language discourse ability approach to VGL allows for foreign language learning in and around games to be directly connected to leading goals of education, which in turn allows for a new understanding of the role of other FLCand media-related competencies: “Fremdsprachige ‚Diskurs‐ fähigkeit‘ und kulturelle ‚Partizipation‘ erweisen sich damit als didaktische Schlüsselbegriffe, die auf die bildungstheoretische Begründung aller mit dem 1.1 Foreign Language Discourse Ability: EFL Educational Goals 23 <?page no="24"?> Lernen angestrebten Kompetenzziele verweisen.“ (Hallet 2008b: 88; cf. also Hallet 2008a: 219, 2008d: 170). In agreement with Hallet, this study places this concept in the center of its research and aligns its approach to video game lit‐ eracy directly in support. Video games are an integral part of students’ lifeworld, whether students themselves play them, whether their friends and family play them, or whether they simply come into contact with the cultural influence of games in television series, movies, popular music, or mass media. Video games are also an integral part of their contact and use of English and media and in‐ tercultural communicative related competences. Thus, teaching VGL in the EFL classroom is not concerned first and foremost with teaching technical, linguistic, and/ or strategic skills surrounding digital games. Rather, it aligns such skills (amongst many other video game related skills) to equip students with the ability to participate in the English language discourse on video games - connecting to their lifeworld discourse on games in order to move to higher, increasingly complex levels of cultural game discourse. 1.2 Multiliteracies: Foreign Language Discourse Ability and Media The Case for Multiliteracies Multiliteracies can be envisioned as a foreign language discourse ability project which allows for the integration of video games and video game related activities into the EFLC. This study is predefined within a framework of literacy and the ideologies (both cultural and educational) that accompany it. The following sec‐ tion addresses the overall cultural goals of multiliteracies and the educational problems they address. This contextualization is followed by a discussion of three important aspects of multiliteracies which help explain the literacy ap‐ proach to video games: multimodality, non-linearity, and reflection. Before VGL is contextualized as a multiliteracies project, it is necessary to place the approach alongside the more familiar (in the European and German context) concept of media competency. The following presents the similarities between literacy and media competency in order to connect more easily to the educational goals and framework presented in documents such as the CEFR and the German Educational Standards. However, such a comparison also serves the goal of showing crucial differences between the two approaches and to justify the alignment of this work with and around video games to literacy. Wolfgang Hallet notes a similarity between literacy and competency, stating “Am ehesten entspricht literacy dem deutschen Begriff der ‚Kompetenz‘ und den damit ver‐ 1 Two Foundational Concepts 24 <?page no="25"?> 4 Cf. Weinert 2001: 17 on the competency concept; cf. Moser 2010: 59 and Herzig et al. 2010: 104 on the role of action for media competency. 5 Even if involved in social processes of learning, cf. Marotzki & Jörissen 2010 on media competence and "Subjektivierungsprozessen"; Moser 2010 on media competence and "selbstorganisiertes Lernen" and Sutter 2010 on media competence and "Selbstsoziali‐ zation." 6 Cf. Herzig & Grafe 2010: 108; Marotzki & Jörissen 2010: 19; Moser 2010: 74; Sutter 2010: 42 and Tulodziecki 2010: 81-82. 7 If this is indeed a fair assessment of the differences between literacy and competency approaches, then I would prefer to simply suggest that both approaches are necessary and that a successful approach balances the individual with the social and recognizes that both are equally constituted by the other. bundenen bildungstheoretischen Konzepten“ (Hallet 2010a: 12), but he also points out their difference, stating, Stärker als der Kompetenz-Begriff hebt literacy die sprachlich-diskursive Verfasstheit allen schulisch erworbenen Wissens und damit die Notwendigkeit zur Befähigung der Lernenden hervor, dieses Wissen in der Lebenswelt sprachlich ausdrücken und kom‐ munizieren zu können. (ibid.: 12) The basic concept of literacy is simple enough to understand due to its founda‐ tion on alphabetic literacy and the literal ability to read and write. A social semiotic approach to literacy then becomes the ability to ‘decode’ and ‘encode’ using different semiotic modes and media, and the functional focus of literacy is on communication. Hallet sees this communication as largely linguistic-dis‐ cursive, aligning the use (and development) of language with the higher goals of allowing participation in (foreign language) discourse. The competency con‐ cept does not include reception and production, semantically speaking, though current conceptualizations of competency address both. Furthermore, compe‐ tency is focused less on communication and more on action-taking and problem solving. 4 Additionally, the competency approach places a much larger emphasis on the individual as the subject of education. 5 Despite the general agreement of media competency scholars on the importance of process over goal orienta‐ tion, 6 the strong focus on action and the individual as subject of education over literacy’s (from a social semiotic approach) focus on communication and dis‐ course appears to turn the individual into a product that can be evaluated in terms of learning goals, rather than a part and product of larger social processes of communication and problem solving. 7 Finally, a communications approach to literacy, and specifically video game literacy, embeds this project within the curriculum and goals of the EFL classroom. Competency, with its focus on media, 1.2 Multiliteracies: Foreign Language Discourse Ability and Media 25 <?page no="26"?> 8 Cf. Koenig & Sesink 2012 for criticism of media competency and its negligence of com‐ munication. runs up against several challenges that a communications approach does not. 8 First, it lumps many different types of media into one concept, despite consid‐ erable, fundamental differences and despite difficulties in conceptualizing media itself. Second, it is difficult to orient within a media landscape of convergence, in which digital technology integrates and even usurps nearly all other types of media (cf. Jenkins 2006 on media convergence). Thus this study prefers the (so‐ cial semiotic) literacy approach to video games, its focus on discourse (as pri‐ mary to, but which also informs, competent action), and its conceptualization in terms of everyday life (cognitive, linguistic-discursive, and interactional, cf. Hallet 2011: 89-90) communicative processes. The multiliteracies approach addresses not just the individual level of problem solving, but places this ability within the larger contexts of a changing culture and society. The New London Group identifies three domains of changing life - working, public and personal - and link those changes to larger shifts caused from diversity and the decentralization of power (The New London Group 2000: 17). If the role of education is as they claim, and as has been dis‐ cussed in 1.1, to enable students “to participate fully in public, community, and economic life” (ibid.: 9), then the question arises as to whether current education is preparing students for those changes. Multiliteracies researchers are thus in‐ terested in uncovering and addressing the potential ‘gaps’ that can occur in society if educational systems do not address literacy practices in terms of these changes. It is not surprising that digital games, as a product of today’s culture, have been the site of such multiliteracies studies. Jenkins, in his research on media education (with a strong focus on digital games), presents a comprehensive look at “three core problems,” called the “participation gap,” the “transparency problem,” and the “ethics challenge” that will occur if students are left to learn new literacies on their own. The participation gap refers to the inability of some to operate computers and popular computer programs, as well as the social stigma attached to this lack ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 14). Gee also discusses this gap, and ties it into computer game play. He states, if literacy inequity already exists in some kids between rich and poor, then gaming literacy - together with related digital literacies - will create yet another equity gap as richer children attain productive stances toward design and tech-savvy identities to a greater degree than poorer ones. (Gee 2007: 138) 1 Two Foundational Concepts 26 <?page no="27"?> 9 Cf. Marotzki & Jörissen 2010: 21; Moser 2010: 59-60; Sutter 2010: 54 and Tulodziecki 2010: 82 for similar discussions on educational gaps and the role of media competency. Gee makes a stronger connection between games and the general literacy de‐ bate, stating, “This new equity gap will involve skills and identities that may be crucially tied to success in the contemporary world.” (ibid.: 138) In terms of the transparency problem, Jenkins et al. state, “Although youth are becoming more adept at using media as resources […], they often are limited in their ability to examine the media themselves.” (2009: 14) This critical examination refers to the difficulties of assessing the quality of received information (ibid.: 15) but can also include how media can influence users’ view of the world and how they envision themselves in relation to those views (cf. Sutter 2010 on media and "Selbstsozializierung"). Finally, concerning the ethics challenge, Jenkins et al. point out that there are often “no “watchdogs” online to establish ethical stand‐ ards to instruct and protect youth” (2009: 17), meaning that students can often act, or come into contact with others acting, unethically. They state, “One im‐ portant goal of media education should be to encourage young people to become more reflective about the ethical choices they make as participants and com‐ municators and the impact they have on others.” (ibid.: 17) Thus, if education systems ignore these types of literacies, VGL included, then they not only miss out on the opportunity to prepare students with knowledge of how to operate certain types of media, but also for how they can communicate through certain types and combinations of semiotic modes, and how to critically engage with and reflect on (medial) ways of seeing and being in the world. 9 The passages below address the multiliteracies approach in greater detail by focusing on three crucial aspects: multimodality, non-linearity and reflection. These concepts are related to their particular meaning for video game literacy and relevance for its integration into the EFL classroom. This explanation func‐ tions to embed this project within attempts to prevent such ‘gaps’ from occur‐ ring and to offer ways in which foreign language education can be more mean‐ ingful and relevant to the lives of students. Multimodality As discussed, the foreign language discourse ability approach to VGL is embedded within a multiliteracies approach, and multiliteracies in turn are based on con‐ cepts of multimodality. This conceptualization is important because video game‐ play requires more than simply linguistic knowledge, and because the digital and interactive nature allows video games to ‘communicate’ with players in highly complex ways. The following looks at several aspects of multimodal communication and focuses especially on describing multimodality, investi‐ 1.2 Multiliteracies: Foreign Language Discourse Ability and Media 27 <?page no="28"?> 10 Cf. Kress 2003: 182-183, on the “increasing prominence - dominance even - of the visual” as it pertains to “’information-driven’” and “knowledge-based” society. gating the role of its affordances, and discussing the cultural use of modalities, the evaluation of language and issues of cultural and economic power. These aspects of multimodal communication have considerable implications for mul‐ tiliteracies, and in turn also have implications for integrating VGL into the EFL classroom. VGL requires more than English language literacy, but also the ability to in‐ terpret and constructively interact with digitally networked systems that con‐ tain multiple modes of representation. Kress, taking a social semiotic approach to multimodality, describes mode as “a socially shaped and culturally given semiotic resource for making meaning.” (Kress, 2010: 79) This statement moves communication beyond alphabetic language to include many other “modalities of meaning,” like audio, tactile, gestural, and spatial representation, represen‐ tation of oneself on top of visual representation (Cope & Kalantzis 2009: 178- 179). Valuing modes of communication, as Kress points out, depend largely on their material affordances (potentials and limitations) (Kress 2010: 84). Thus alphabetic language must be seen as having potentials, but also limitations which require the potentials of other modalities to create the most effective communication. Video games use the affordances of nearly every modality, and this integra‐ tion can be seen as indicative of a larger cultural shift away from purely alpha‐ betic forms of communication to more complex, interactive and multimodal forms. As previously discussed, communication in today’s world is more com‐ plex than ever. Two major reasons for this are modern communication (and representation) technologies and globalization. Globalization means not just global connection, but also diversity and pluralism, especially in terms of knowl‐ edge domains, ways of acting, and ways of being in and seeing the world - and communication technologies seem to have been a catalyst in these changes (cf. Cope & Kalantzis 2010: 93). In such a connected, and yet diverse, world, the need for an ‘information society’ arises, in which information must be produced, transmitted and interpreted at increased speeds in dense forms (cf. Kress 2003: 183). The need and concomitant availability of information increases not only the cognitive load for individual minds, but also the semantic load of any one modality of communication. As a result, effective communication today (in terms of production and reception) relies on multiple senses and “modes.” 10 Video games can be seen as not just a product of this information society, but also as a model and tool for communication and interaction with the world and 1 Two Foundational Concepts 28 <?page no="29"?> 11 Cf. also Cope & Kalantzis 2009: 179 on the multimodality of experience and its rela‐ tionship to the body and its senses of perception. with complex digital systems. One salient feature of this model is a more inte‐ grative approach to using the human body for sense making and communicative interaction. Kress states, The issue of multimodality reminds us forcefully that human semiosis rests, first and foremost, on the acts of biology and physiology. Human bodies have a wide range of means of engagement with the world; a wide and highly varied range of means of perception. (Kress 2003: 184) 11 From this perspective, communication relies on all modes of perception and sense-making in order to function effectively, and not just on language. Hallet makes this connection clear in his “mental-model” approach to interpreting lit‐ erary texts, stating that “readers must and will intuitively draw upon every pos‐ sible experience from their own real world to understand the ‘words on the page’” (Hallet 2008c: 233), and that experience is, in turn, multimodal (ibid.: 235), both perceptual and abstract (ibid.: 234). This leads Hallet to the conclusion that multimodal semiosis “accounts for the integration of virtually every resource that individuals may use to make meaning and turn any phenomenon that they encounter into something meaningful” (ibid.: 240). The mental model approach to literary texts can be applied to (multimodal-semiotic) communication in gen‐ eral, and especially to video games. Interpreting any single type or mixture of modal-semiotic expression, inside or outside of games, requires multiple if not all (to varying degrees) types of experiences, perceptual and abstract. The con‐ nection between multimodality, sense making and communication possibly ex‐ plains why video games are not just products of the digital age, but also effective learning ‘machines’ - they present lots of information multimodally and in ways that utilize many different senses of the human body. However, the use (and combination) of modes in communication is not purely predicated by potentials and limitations, but also by cultural values, as they are shaped by groups of people “in the direction of social practices and require‐ ments” (Kress 2010: 82). This understanding of multiliteracies and multimodality is crucial for VGL, especially in the EFL context, since video games must often compete against quite negative cultural evaluations. Thus, a multiliteracies ap‐ proach to no longer seeing ‘language’ as the “central and dominant” mode of making meaning, but rather as “one means among others” (ibid.: 79) is embedded within the perspective that the central and dominant role of language has been based on its affordances, but also to some extent on arbitrary cultural evalua‐ 1.2 Multiliteracies: Foreign Language Discourse Ability and Media 29 <?page no="30"?> tions. This recognition has implications for the power that has been traditionally invested in alphabetic language and the influence of that cultural value on ed‐ ucational and literacy practices. As an example of the shifting role and value of other modes of communica‐ tion, many literacy scholars identify the role of visual images in culture today. For instance, Kress points to the “increasing prominence - dominance even - of the visual in many areas of public communication” (Kress 2003: 182), while Hallet speaks of the “visual turn” and its implications for teaching culture in the EFL classroom (Hallet 2008d: 169). Cope and Kalantzis (2009, 2010) argue that recent developments in digital technologies have shifted the primacy and dom‐ inance of alphabetic language. They state that, on the one hand, the digitization of modes that were previously difficult to “capture” has reduced “the privileged place of written text in Western culture, progressively bringing the visual and other modes to a par” (Cope & Kalantzis 2010: 96), and on the other hand that the inclusion of other modes has eased “the semantic load that had been placed on written language.” (Cope & Kalantzis 2009: 182) Thus it can be claimed that the development and availability of new, digital communication technologies has allowed a shift in literacy and its cultural evaluation, and provided the means for individuals to access the affordances of other modalities that were either not previously available or impractical. However, in video games, multimodality is included in a complex, interactive digital system. This allows for new forms of communication, including ways of representing the world and allowing players to develop their own ways of being in those worlds. Gameplay in this sense can be seen as an act of multiliteracies, since players do not simply decode multimodalities within games, but also en‐ code meaning through their interactions. The multiliteracies interaction with games is also largely based on the non-linearity of their structures, and this non-linearity is based not only on the affordances of the digital system, but also, at a deeper level, on the sense-making practices of multimodal interpretation. The following addresses the non-linearity of multimodal communication in general, its affinity for digital interactive systems like video games, as well as the role that language plays as a form of non-linear sense-making. Non-linearity If the affordance of modalities is in part socially and culturally determined, then the value placed on language in the past must also be constantly re-evaluated for the specific contexts and social constellations of the present. Video games suggest strong implications for the shifting role and value of language for life, communication and interaction in the digital world today. Currently, there ap‐ pears to be an increased value on systemic, non-linear forms of communication 1 Two Foundational Concepts 30 <?page no="31"?> 12 Cope and Kalantzis discuss what they call the “paradoxical mix of parallelism and in‐ commensurability between modalities” to address the ways in which some meanings “expressed in one mode cannot be directly translated into another.” (2009: 180) Meaning-making that involves such a mixture of modalities requires a more non-linear approach, potentially involving the construction of coherent ‘wholes’ (in terms of un‐ derstanding) from ‘parts’ that do not necessarily fit together. 13 In a slightly older text, Cope and Kalantzis discuss multimedia and general issues of non-linearity. They state, “Multimedia is to be defined in terms of its inner logic, its narrative structure, and the peculiar orientation of the viewer, reader, or user. In this definition, two characteristic features of multimedia are brought into the foreground: interactivity and the logic of hypertext.” (Cope & Kalantzis 2000: 224) and sense making to deal with the complexity of today’s world - this new eval‐ uation may also be affecting the role of more ‘traditional’ linear forms, like language. This idea fits with Baker et al.’s claim that literacy has become more complex over time (Baker et al. 2010: 2). However, this complexity goes beyond expectations for reading and writing. Cope and Kalantzis state that the “intrinsic temporality” of writing “favours the genre of narrative” (2009: 180), suggesting an affordance of linear sense-making. The visual image, however, “collocates elements according to the logic of simultaneous space, and so favours the genre of display” (ibid.: 180), suggesting non-linear “reading” (cf. ibid.: 181). So what happens when communication is explicitly multimodal, involving, for instance, alphabetic text, images, and other modes - as is the case with video games? Cope and Kalantzis point out the role of synesthesia, or the “process of shifting be‐ tween modes of re-representing the same thing from one mode to another” (2010: 101), similar to the way that “our bodily sensations are holistically inte‐ grated” (Cope & Kalantzis 2009: 179). Thus it can be claimed that processing multiple modes of information (and especially involving modes that are already not linearly processed) is non-linear, establishing points of linkage for digital systems which are already adept at allowing non-linear interaction. 12 There appears to be an affinity between the non-linearity of multimodal communication and the non-linearity of interactive, digital technology which has implications for how literacy in general and multiliteracies specifically can be approached. Cope and Kalantzis also see a connection between the shift from (more-or-less) monomodal communication of the past to the multimodal of today and the rise of (interactive) computer technology (2010: 95). They state that the logic of the webpage “is more like the syntax of the visual than that of the written language.” (Cope & Kalantzis 2009: 181) The “hypertext” form of interaction with digital texts shifts “the balance of agency in meaning construc‐ tion […] in favour of the viewer”, “allowing for diverse interests and subjectiv‐ ities amongst viewers” (ibid.: 181). 13 While Koenig and Sesink state, in their call 1.2 Multiliteracies: Foreign Language Discourse Ability and Media 31 <?page no="32"?> 14 For more on interactivity and foreign language learning, cf. Jones et al. 2016 & Rösler 2016. for an update to the media competency concept, that digital technologies help individuals co-create the world (2012: 310), they also discuss how certain non-linear aspects of internet technology and media inherently undermine any attempt at communicating authority (ibid.: 319). What can be concluded from these statements is that people today are able to interact with new media in a non-linear fashion, but also that, through the shift of power from the medium (and message) to user configuration, a divergence of meanings emerges in which users become distinct parts of a system of complex meanings, perspectives and experiences, and not just consumers of information. Literacy in this context means interaction, and through interaction, and through a non-linear course that interaction takes, new meanings and relationships can emerge. This means that a multiliteracies approach to literacy, especially as applied to video games, requires learning to understand and successfully use interactive digital systems on top of multimodal forms of communication. Before digital technology like video games are championed, however, for heralding in new forms of communication, literacy and power, it is important to point out that, “The argument about the novelty of interactivity in multimedia is also dubious. Communication is, in its very nature, interactive.” (Cope & Ka‐ lantzis 2000: 228). 14 As this discussion on literacy has already pointed out, all knowledge has always been socially constructed, communication has always been multimodal, and human understanding has always involved multiple human senses. New media has, at least for the moment, done much to help shift the balance of power and the construction of meaning back to individuals from the broadcast media (like TV, radio and film) that dominated the 20 th century. This shift has provided much freedom to individuals to create their own, unique realities. However, although this freedom of divergence has immensely broad‐ ened the perspectives that society can take to solve serious challenges, it poses potential hurdles to the democratic imperative of individual responsibility by deconstructing the dominant, coherent narratives and realities of the past that provided social cohesion and allowed for collective action. As will be discussed in 2.3.1, video games are unique digital systems that combine systemic, non-linear aspects of games with linear, narrative structures of language and stories. They are a new model of sharing power, of interaction between rule-based systems that allow player creativity and sense-making of complex systems. A multiliteracies approach to video games, especially one that targets the ability to participate in (foreign language) cultural discourse, requires more 1 Two Foundational Concepts 32 <?page no="33"?> than simply understanding how such non-linear and multimodal systems work; they also require reflection on what such systems mean for individuals and how they reflect the current world and ways of being in it. Reflection Video game literacy looks at gameplay and all the activities and discourses that surround it as a social practice. As such, gameplay can be seen as not only in‐ fluencing how people understand the world around them, but also how they co-create it. As Marotzki and Jörissen state, media is a space of manifestation and articulation of world-views - they contain the moment of abandonment and relinquishment, itself a type of distancing from reality and type of reflection (Marotzki & Jörissen 2010: 20). What makes digital games special is that they give players agency, not just to express, but also to co-create the gameworlds and the experiences they have within them - but, since many games do not require other players for such worlds and experiences to emerge, player agency is often individual. As with all media consumption, and as with all literacy prac‐ tices, individuals who play games or who come into contact with games (directly or indirectly through other people or media) should reflect on video games, how they influence behavior, and how they reflect on the world, culture, and life in the 21 st century. Chapter 2 presents a model for video game literacy that targets reflection on these three different levels. The following passages, however, focus first on multiliteracies research and its focus on the role of reflection. For now, it will suffice to say that reflection should serve a dual function of enabling socially responsible autonomy - that is learners who are able to foster agency in creating their own realities, but in ways that respect the available designs provided by society and that lead to collaboration to foster the democratic, human rights of all others. Reflection, then, can be said to be a crucial component of enabling foreign language discourse participation. Learning to ‘read’ and ‘write’ in a specific mode or set of modes, and with specific media, does not necessarily include reflection at a higher level, and many literacy researchers recognize the need for reflection as an additional part of literacy learning. The New London Group, for example, presents a theory of learning as a part of a pedagogical understanding of multiliteracies to include reflection. It argues that “Critical Framing, which relates meanings to their social contexts and purposes” is an integral part of their pedagogical approach (cf. The New London Group 2000: 31). Cope and Kalantzis, in their approach to new media literacy, present metacognition (and the critical, reflective processes it entails) as the dimension of “new learning” that corresponds to the conceptu‐ alization dimension of new media, or that which is programmed into new media that allows users to design their own social and technical experiences (cf. 2010: 1.2 Multiliteracies: Foreign Language Discourse Ability and Media 33 <?page no="34"?> 96). According to them, new learning that “engages students in and through new media environments” (ibid.: 103) will seek “to engage learners in more powerful conceptualizing and metacognizing processes” and engage them “as co-con‐ structor of concepts - as definer, theory-maker, critic and analyst.” (2010: 102) Thus, it can be said that a pedagogy surrounding multiand new media literacy involves not just simply teaching young people to ‘read’ and ‘write’ in different and multiple semiotic modes and media, but also to critically reflect on their experiences. This section has taken a closer look at the concept of multiliteracies in order to better understand how VGL can be integrated into the higher level goal of foreign language discourse ability in the EFL classroom. Taking a social semiotic approach, it addressed issues of multimodality and non-linearity and its impli‐ cations for communication, sense-making and power. It also addressed the need for reflection in order to educate socially responsible individuals who are not only able to use gaming experiences for language learning, but who are also able to engage in the foreign language discourse on games in order to co-design futures. However, VGL that is too focused on media competency runs the risk of not being relevant enough for the EFL classroom. As Moser states, media pedagogy is a trans-subject based issue, but because of this it runs the serious risk of not being integrated well into any subject at all (Moser 2010: 71). While a multiliteracies approach which targets foreign language discourse ability is the first step to conceptualizing VGL for the EFL classroom, further embedding into EFL didactics, and explanations on how video game literacy can support foreign language discourse ability, is necessary. This is provided in the following section. 1.3 Affordances of Video Game Literacy for the EFL Classroom A multiliteracies approach to VGL which aims for foreign language discourse ability offers multiple other potentials for the EFL classroom. The first potential stems from the fact that cultural discourses are always multivocal and complex (Hallet 2008b: 89). This means that in order for students to be taken seriously as cultural actors, the discourses introduced through classroom tasks must be meaningful and relevant to the students’ lives, and cannot simply be the dis‐ courses that teachers align themselves most with. In the case of video games, teachers must be willing to integrate the voice of gamers, through gamer (or fan) discourse, and not only or simply the discourse of those who are unfamiliar with or critical towards the medium. This approach to discourse must be seen 1 Two Foundational Concepts 34 <?page no="35"?> as having a strong potential to connect and network, not just to discourse itself, but also to people, places, and cultural artifacts, on multiple levels. By integrating gamer discourse (cf. part II) into the classroom, classroom discourse is net‐ worked to real-life discourse, fan-discourse to other cultural discourses, and students are networked to real-life discursive ‘texts’, to other people (text pro‐ ducers), and even to other places (contexts of production and communication). And through this, teachers are networked more closely to their students’ lives and the foreign language discursive practices and places they are involved in. This requires that teachers recognize the multivocality of the cultural discourse on games to include gamer discourse, and see such discourse as adding to the complexity of problem solving, world building, socialization and learning that is involved in VGL. Opening up the classroom to the complexity and multivocality of the cultural discourse on games offers potentials which extend beyond enabling students to participate in the foreign language discourse on games. Grau and Legutke’s use of the linking language learning approach points out that tapping into the English used outside the classroom can support language learning in several ways: while contributing to learners’ language competencies by giving them opportunities to communicate in the foreign language with other users of English, it can also increase the learners’ motivation for language learning by showing them the relevance of the English language in society. (Grau & Legutke 2014) This argument is also based on the idea that English learners today have an unparalleled exposure to the English language through popular and digital media (cf. Berns 2007; Berns et al. 2007; Grau & Legutke 2014: 2; Grau 2009: 163). However, integrating Hallet’s Diskursfähigkeit into this argument not only al‐ lows for classrooms to ‘tap’ into the English language contact and learning that students have outside of schools, but can also ensure that learners do not become “reinen Reproduzenten vorgefertigter Sprachinhalte und -formen, kurz gesagt: zu fremdsprachlichen Funktionen […]” (Hallet 2008b: 76). Rather, students can learn to become cultural actors who participate in (and co-create) real life Eng‐ lish language discourse on video games and also who autonomously seek out and manage their English language learning to serve this higher-level, discursive purpose. Linking language learning in this way does come with its own set of chal‐ lenges, however. As Grau and Legutke point out, such linking changes the role 1.3 Affordances of Video Game Literacy for the EFL Classroom 35 <?page no="36"?> 15 The challenges of this role-change are presented further in the case studies, specfically case study 1 and 3. 16 Cf. Rösler 2012: 52 & 56 on formal and informal foreign language learning and media. 17 Cf. case study 1. of both students and teachers. 15 Classrooms (through teacher design) become “the location where access and approaches to the out-of-class world are pre‐ pared, where systematic support is provided, and where the experience is as‐ sessed in terms of language gains and discourse related issues” (Grau & Legutke 2014: 10). This reconceptualization of classroom design, in turn, relies on stu‐ dents understanding that the classroom is “an arena for learner contributions to the process of learning and its contents, as a location where learners are not only invited, but also expected to contribute topics and tests they come across in the out-of-class world” (ibid.: 10). Such linking can reverse the roles of stu‐ dents and teachers in the classroom, since students, by bringing in their own informal contact with English and competency development, can in some sit‐ uations become the teachers and the teacher the learner. 16 This reversal of roles may lead to general reluctance to bring such topics, materials and discourses into the classroom, and not just on the side of teachers. 17 Grau’s empirical research on popular culture and English contact amongst German youth points out that students are sometimes hesitant to bring their out-of-class, free-time activities into the classroom (Grau 2009: 169). She suggests a slew of reasons, ranging from student bias against “low culture” in the classroom, distrust of teachers’ opinions, fear of their affinities being “ex‐ ploited” for pedagogical purposes, belief in incommensurable generation gap, or uncertainty of the use value of that English for the real world (ibid.: 169-170). Much of these reasons can be overcome with proper didactic planning and with an open mind on the part of educators. Grau notes that students’ fears are often justified, stating that, many teachers do not seem to take their students’ free-time involvement with English language texts seriously, neither as a potential context for learning English nor as a relevant activity they could contribute to by providing students with listening and viewing strategies in class, [pointing to a possible] lack of dialogue between students and teachers (ibid.: 171). Thus it can be concluded that the reconceptualization of the EFL classroom to support fremdsprachige Diskursfähigkeit and connect the classroom to out-of-class learning spaces and contexts will also have to deal with at least some resistance on the part of both teachers and students. However, such resistance can be avoided and, furthermore, must be overcome in order for foreign language 1 Two Foundational Concepts 36 <?page no="37"?> 18 For a critical look at tasks in foreign language teaching, cf. Rösler 2013. For tasks in Web 2.0, cf. Biebighauser et al. 2012. discourse ability to be fostered effectively. Linking language learning in this way can meet the twin didactic (lower level) goals of teaching language skills with larger pedagogic goals of allowing full cultural and societal (discursive) partic‐ ipation. This linking language approach shares many similarities with Hallet’s con‐ cept of the komplexe Kompetenzaufgabe, as it offers a practical framework for linking the classroom to both language and multimodal discourse learning. It is first and foremost founded on foreign language discourse ability (Hallet 2012: 9), encourages multiliteracies learning (ibid.: 8), focuses on the students’ lifeworlds and the importance of meaning and relevance (ibid.: 12), and like true discourse, remains open by neither determining the path to the task solution nor the sol‐ ution itself (but rather determines the generic form of the learner outcome) (ibid.: 13). However, classroom immersion into complex, real-life target tasks, 18 into real-life target discourses, and real-life target spaces of English learning and use does not necessarily recognize the further language learning potential that the EFL classroom can offer. In other words, it is not enough for teachers to provide life-world relevant tasks and discourses around games. Instead, teachers can apply their competence of developing cognitive, linguistic-discursive, and in‐ teractional processes through English as a foreign language tasks (cf. Hallet 2013: 14). As already mentioned, much video gameplay is not scaffolded by lan‐ guage, but rather by other modalities of representation. The challenge, then, of communicating experiences with and around video games through language becomes an opportunity for the EFL classroom. Some of these opportunities are language general, meaning that they would just as easily apply to the native language, German for instance, while other opportunities are specific to foreign language learning. The following lists and explains language general potentials before moving on to EFL specific ones. Participation in video game discourse is unthinkable without the ability to articulate experiences with and around games in language. Although such dis‐ course is multimodal, language still remains the dominant modality of complex and abstract thought expression and negotiation of meaning, and is the cheapest, easiest, and most democratic form of discourse participation. Below are three potentials that articulating game experiences into language have for the EFL classroom. Articulation into language… - secures the direct learning outcome of game experience. By putting game experiences, especially ones relevant to a particular discourse on games, 1.3 Affordances of Video Game Literacy for the EFL Classroom 37 <?page no="38"?> into linguistic form, learners recall both their experiences, the contextu‐ alization of those experiences at the time they were made, and the lear‐ ners’ views, opinions, and conclusions that were made at and around the time of those experiences. Through such remembering, learners are able reinforce and secure the learning outcome of those experiences and in‐ crease the chance that they are available for present and future action and discourse participation. - allows for reflection through the re-presentation (semiotic translation) of and distancing from game experience and related learning outcomes. Marotzki & Jörissen describe articulation as a reflexive process (2010: 28) which contain the moment of relinquishment and thus distancing (ibid.: 20). Furthermore, articulations are medial productions, or stagings, which are performed in social spaces and provoke a reaction from the audience (ibid.: 28), meaning that they are, in a hermeneutic sense, recontextualized through language within a new situation, communicative need, and problem solving scenario. As a translation of one mode (or from multi‐ modality) to a linguistic one, articulation allows for a further reflection on the affordances (limitations and potentials) of the modes of commu‐ nication, both in terms of source modalities as well as of the target mo‐ dality of language. - enables the connection of experience and learning outcomes to (and fur‐ ther developing of) complex cognitive processes and higher level thinking skills. Many researchers point out the connection between thought and language (cf. Blumer 1986; Bruner 1986: 8; Vygotsky 1978). Hallet states, “dass inhaltliches ohne sprachliches Lernen schwer vorstellbar ist.” (Hallet 2005: 5) This idea suggests that all thought, then, is related in some way to language. Although, as Hallet discusses in another context, sense-making is always multimodal (Hallet 2008c: 240), there is evidence that suggests that complex thinking processes are indeed best scaffolded by language. Thus, linguistic articulation is not only crucial for especially higher level thinking skills (cf. Bloom’s taxonomy, adapted by Anderson & Krathwohl 2001), like analyzing, evaluating and creating (cf. Coyle, Hood & Marsh 2010: 31), but also to their application in cognitive and linguistic-discursive processes of discourse functions, like deciding, ex‐ plaining classifying, forming hypotheses, concluding, expressing se‐ quences of events, evaluating, etc. (cf. Hallet 2005: 6 and Hallet 2016: 148). Thus the articulation of experiences with and around games can be conceptual‐ ized as the foundation for the ability to participate in the cultural discourse on 1 Two Foundational Concepts 38 <?page no="39"?> games, and as such it allows the EFL classroom to reach crucial language and learning goals. Participation in the English language allows the most opportunity to achieve discourse aims since English is the lingua franca for gamer culture, and since English language gamer culture represents the largest, most diverse and com‐ plex discourse (with largest community) on video games that exists. However, the act of articulating game experiences in a foreign language brings with it other potentials than foreign language discourse ability. Below is a list and ex‐ planation of seven potentials that articulating game experience into English as a foreign language has for the EFL classroom. Articulation into English as a foreign language… - enables access to foreign language learning through games and attendant discourses. Games and the gamer practices, especially those recorded on and through game-related websites and other media, are substantial sources for English language contact and use. When students practice articulation of game experiences in the classroom in order to participate in the discourse on games, they gain important skills that allow them to turn the contact they have with English outside of class into learning opportunities. Furthermore, from a literacy and discourse perspective, students gain the ability to not simply passively learn (content and lan‐ guage), but to produce their own meanings through actively engaging in foreign language negotiations of meaning. - allows for new cultural perspectives and expressions, new ways of seeing and being in the world. This is based on the idea that cognition, language and culture are interconnected, and that the use of a foreign language carries inherent cultural meaning, allowing in turn for new ways of thinking. “[C]ulture determines the way we interpret the world,” and “we use language to express this interpretation,” so that, when learners artic‐ ulate an experience in a foreign language, “learners can have experiences which they could not have had in a monolingual setting” (Coyle et al. 2010: 39; cf. also Nünning & Nünning 2000: 8). Thus an articulation of a game experience in a foreign language allows learners the opportunity to re-experience it through a different cultural perspective. This in turn al‐ lows for intercultural multiperspectivity, which not only provides the learner with the ability to reflect on the contingency of cultural experi‐ ence in general, but also helps enable intercultural communicative com‐ petence necessary for participation in the foreign language discourse on games. 1.3 Affordances of Video Game Literacy for the EFL Classroom 39 <?page no="40"?> 19 This was exhibited to varying degrees in all teachers involved in the case studies. - provides the ability for learners to develop intercultural communicative competence. When learners actively participate in gamer culture and (es‐ pecially online) communities in English, they interact in global commun‐ ities in which English serves as a lingua franca. While the chances are considerable that they will interact with native speakers of English from the U.S., Great Britain, etc., there is also a chance they will interact with other players and fans from countries around the world. Intercultural communicative competence, in the greatest sense of the word, is needed since learners are likely to interact with people with unknown/ indeter‐ minable cultural backgrounds. Furthermore, gamer culture can be con‐ sidered a culture in its own right, meaning that learners must interact in multiple layers of cultural significance. - allows students to escape the biases of their own native language. The culturally different perspective that articulation (and participation) al‐ lows is not simply a shift towards another way of being, but it can also be a shift away from negative aspects of the learner’s own cultural so‐ cialization. In Germany, as in many societies, there are many negative biases against video games - that they are all violent, addicting, childish, etc. This is especially the case in school settings, where video games are deemed ‘pop’ or ‘low’ culture, simply a form of entertainment, and are pitted against traditionally more ‘accepted’ forms of high culture, which, in the eyes of many educators, is the source of ‘high’ learning. 19 The problem that stems from such biases, in both society and in schools, is that students learn to internalize them, even if these internalizations do not necessarily effect their consumption of and behavior through and around games. The articulation of experiences with and around games in English, by allowing different cultural perspectives, opens up the oppor‐ tunity for learners to relinquish some of the unwarranted biases that they have been socialized into believing, and take a new look at video games as complex interactive systems which not only are products, but also car‐ riers of culture. It also gives them the opportunity to reevaluate their biases in terms of their own experiences and their own conclusions. - allows for deep learning. When learners articulate their game experiences in English and connect to ideas, knowledge and concepts they are already familiar with, in English or in German, then deep learning can occur. This is especially true when such articulation is connected to higher level thinking skills. Coyle et al. state, “Deep learning involves the critical 1 Two Foundational Concepts 40 <?page no="41"?> 20 Cf. case study 1 on the complexity of communication between learners and teachers when teachers lack background knowledge on games. 21 Cf. specifically case study 2 on games and learner identity. analysis of new ideas, connecting them to already-known concepts, and leads to understanding and long-term retention of those concepts so that they can be used for problem solving in unfamiliar contexts.” (2010: 39) When learners articulate game experiences, they undoubtedly rely on their native language to conceptualize their ideas and structure their thoughts. English articulation will strengthen and build concepts, ideas and knowledge already scaffolded by language, and helps ensure that those concepts can transfer to solving problems in novel contexts. - holds potential for reflection on first language and on language in general for articulating experiences. Articulating experience effectively, espe‐ cially when it is complex, is always challenging. Effective communication is reliant not just on the individual’s ability to articulate, but also on the availability of relevant linguistic structures and concepts as well as on the ability of the audience to understand and interpret the articulation. 20 As already mentioned, video games only scaffold game experience linguis‐ tically to a limited degree, and rely mostly on other modalities, especially interactive images. This allows for players to develop complex proce‐ dures, sets of actions, behaviors - in other words experiences - which are difficult to articulate in language, native or second/ foreign. Articulating experiences in English provides the opportunity to reveal to learners that communication and articulation is a complex cognitive construction and not necessarily a one-to-one translation of experience. Furthermore, it can also provide the opportunity to show limitations in the native lan‐ guage to express certain ideas and experiences and the opportunities that other languages, like English, pose for such articulation. In this sense, understanding the world is not a project of any one language, but of all languages. The more knowledge of multiple languages, the more per‐ spectives, skills and strategies a learner has for understanding and inter‐ acting with the world. - allows for the expansion of the learner’s intercultural and multilingual identity. 21 In the age of globalization, and in a Europe which is interested in the ideological principles of multiculturalism, plurilingualism and global citizenship (cf. Morrow 2004: 4-6; Vogt 2004: 48), learners must grow to see themselves, not just as German, but also as European and 1.3 Affordances of Video Game Literacy for the EFL Classroom 41 <?page no="42"?> 22 Cf. Rösler 2010: 220 on media, globalization and individualization of learning German as a foreign language today. global citizens. 22 Through the ability to participate in foreign language discourses, learners can develop a “symbolic self ” (Kramsch 2011: 356) which is capable of acting as an “interculturally competent speaker” (ibid.: 359). Such a self, and speaker, can present the attitudes, motivations and skills necessary to actively participate in foreign language cultural dis‐ courses and fulfill the roles of democratic, European and global citizen‐ ship. These seven potentials for the foreign language articulation of video game ex‐ perience shows the complex processes involved in pursuing a VGL that targets foreign language discourse ability. Foreign language articulation of game experiences can be seen as the foun‐ dation for successfully enabling the foreign language participation in the cul‐ tural discourse on games. Such an articulation links the classroom to other spaces of language contact, learning, and use, and influences the roles that stu‐ dents and teachers take in the classroom. In such situations, students provide their personal game-related experiences and language contact, while teachers, through the development of complex tasks, scaffold learner articulation by pro‐ viding task assignments, social interactional forms, overarching concepts and goals, and linguistic, discursive and textual patterns (cf. Hallet 2005: 6 on scaf‐ folding in language tasks). Such scaffolding should be further structured to in‐ clude the potentials of linguistic articulation, both language-general and EFL-specific. In conclusion, section 1.3 contextualizes video game literacy as a multiliter‐ acies project which targets foreign language participation in the cultural dis‐ course on games. The conceptualization of VGL in this study is intrinsically involved in allowing learners to actively participate in the creation of society and culture as a political and social goal of democratic citizenship, and it is also intrinsically involved in the affordances of games to communicate in multiple modalities, including language. The goal of embedding VGL in the EFL class‐ room is to support the articulation of game-related experiences from its multi‐ modal and -medial embeddedness, and from a context which is not necessarily focused on transfer of (linguistic, medial, cultural) learning outcomes into a classroom context focused on developing cognitive, linguistic-discursive and interactional competencies. In the next chapter (2), the media specificities of video game literacy are further explored to suggest a model for how the EFL 1 Two Foundational Concepts 42 <?page no="43"?> classroom can conceptualize and scaffold learner participation in the English language discourse on games. 1.3 Affordances of Video Game Literacy for the EFL Classroom 43 <?page no="44"?> 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy VGL takes a serious approach to video games and considers what they have to teach us about the world, about complex interactive systems, and about learning today. Although video games are often marketed and sold as entertainment and relegated to forms of popular, ‘low’ culture, a discourse oriented VGL looks at their potentials for fostering real life linguistic, cognitive, cultural and techno‐ logical skills. The EFL classroom should not simply be interested in bringing video game discourse into the classroom to motivate students, or to simply ‘pi‐ geonhole’ video games as insipid, violent or addicting (even if some games are). Rather, it should approach video games and their attendant discourses with re‐ spect for their complexity, for their cultural and societal origins, and for the influence they are having on how people think, learn and interact with each other and the world. Video games, as complex computer systems, scaffold thought, communica‐ tion and action in ways historically impossible before. Three reasons support this claim. First, video games have an encyclopedic capacity (Murray 1998: 87) that greatly extends the memory of individuals. Second, they offer powerful processing tools (algorithms and artificial intelligence) that ‘think’ by inte‐ grating user input in complex ways and into complex new forms of output. Third, video games distribute user cognition across computers (as systems of memory and processing capabilities) and other individuals in online “commun‐ ities of practice” (cf. Lave & Wenger 1991). Returning to the design approach to literacy (and reality construction), games as new media present multimodal and multimedial “available designs,” allow for complex “design” through scaffolding new configurations of interrelated and interconnected semiotic domains (often also socially through networking individuals with others) beyond the capacity of individual and social/ collective thought, and lead to “new designs” (ideational, textual and interrelational) that can feed back to users, be communicated to others, and even influence the future design of games and reality itself. VGL that aligns itself with the ability to participate in cultural discourse is interested in transferring such cognitive and social potentials to other settings and for real-life problem solving. As games based on computing power, digital games not only scaffold thought, communication and action, but also present series of overcome-able challenges. <?page no="45"?> They support users in overcoming challenges by instigating play as a mode of interaction (encouraging explorative learning), and they contextualize them within recognizable schemata by presenting virtual ‘worlds’ that rely on ‘users’ real-world knowledge, and by embodying user action in in-game characters. These aspects, combined with the multimodal and multimedial communicative and representative affordances, allow complex digital systems to be masterable within relatively short periods of time. Following the 21 st century skills approach to understanding literacy, games allow a viable method for learning skills rele‐ vant for the information society (Galarneau & Zibit 2007, cf. also 1.2). Thus, VGL in this study is conceptualized as serving a double purpose. First, it can serve to inform competent use of games by enabling their critically re‐ flective handling. Second, it can serve as a proxy for communication, interaction, and knowledge production in the 21 st century that allows the transfer of skills to other information society tools and discourses. The role of reflection and metacognition is crucial for both purposes of VGL, as it can not only enable foreign language discourse participation but also help allow transfer of skills and competencies acquired through and around gameplay to other technolog‐ ical, social and cultural domains. This transfer can extend across literacy levels. This critical reflective metacognition relies on an awareness of the socially semiotic constructive nature of discourse for understanding reality, self and others, as it pertains to the political and democratic nature of action within specific contexts. Furthermore, such an approach helps prevent potential “gaps” (cf. 1.2) that can occur when school curricula do not provide systematic and reflective learning opportunities to out-of-school learning. The purpose of this chapter is two-fold. The first purpose is to present a model of VGL for foreign language teaching and learning. The second purpose is to reveal and highlight the relevance of games (and their multiple dimensions) for cultural and foreign language discourse. The three dimensions of the model exist in a dynamic interaction with each other and are co-dependent. This means that changes or interventions in any one dimension have the potential to change the others. Figure 2 illustrates the model of games as consisting of these three di‐ mensions, as well as how each level influences the other. The core approach of this dissertation is that by intervening in the cultural discourse on games, or specifically in the outer layer of the model, classroom tasks have the potential to change the way learners play video games, how they interact with complex digital media (that even networks people with and through technology), and how they manage and design their own systems in life. Furthermore, by creating informed, active participants, this intervention has the potential to influence how video games are designed in the future. 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 45 <?page no="46"?> 1 For a more extensive description of play, cf. 2.3.2. Fig. 2: Video Games as Multilayered Dynamic Discourse However, the concept of video games encompasses a broad spectrum of types and purposes of games. Not all video games offer the same potential for devel‐ oping the type of literacy proposed here. The following subsection defines the types of video games included in this literacy model by looking specifically at popular, non-serious, commercial video games, by explaining their underlying characteristics and purpose, and by addressing their cultural impact. 2.1 Defining Video Games This study focuses on commercial digital games. The following section defines commercial digital games and presents reasons for this focus. First, it addresses games in general and then differentiates between serious and commercial games. Finally, reasons for focusing on commercial digital games are presented. Games are based on, and extend from, play. 1 While Thomas Malaby points out that games are dependent on the disposition of participants to play (2009), there are characterizable features of play which can help elucidate all games 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 46 <?page no="47"?> 2 Caillois believes that not all play has rules. While he may be correct that much play has no explicit rules, there are often implicit rules, especially those that determine the social roles of the performative aspects of play (cf. Hallet 2015 on the performativity of cultural action). 3 ‘Text’ here must be understood under broad terms since many games, especially sports games, do not require a physical ‘text’ for the game to take place. ‘Text’ in these contexts must be understood as ‘scripts’ of rules, communicated through media and learned through social performance. 4 Eric Zimmerman defines games similarly, stating that they are voluntary interactive activity in which one or more players follow rules that constrain their behavior, enacting an artificial conflict that ends in a quantifiable outcome (Zimmerman 2004: 160). McGo‐ nigal modifies this definition providing four defining traits: games have goals, rules, a feedback system, and require voluntary participation (McGonigal 2011: 20). 5 Juul defines games differently through his perspective on failure. He differentiates be‐ tween games of skill, chance and labor, cf. Juul 2013: 47-79. (and particularly video games), regardless of players’ disposition. French soci‐ ologist, Roger Caillois, differentiates between paidia and ludus, defining the former as similar to the free play of children and the latter as more or less a rule based play that is often associated with games (2006: 130, 141). 2 Although lacking a clear differentiation (Caillois admits they are scalar, cf. ibid.: 130) as opposed to play, games can be seen as explicit, sometimes material (or digital, interactive) texts and objects that control and dictate to various degrees the actions of par‐ ticipants. 3 Caillois provides six defining characteristics of play that can help define games: Play 1) is free, meaning that it stems from voluntary actions of partici‐ pants, 2) is separate in terms of space and time, 3) is uncertain in the indeter‐ minable course and outcome, 4) is unproductive by creating neither goods nor wealth, 5) is governed by rules, and 6) includes aspects of “make-believe” (ibid.: 128). These characteristics are often used by game studies scholars to define games. 4 Caillois provides a further four categories of games that explain the different motives players have for engaging with them. He differentiates be‐ tween agon (competitive games), alea (games requiring luck), mimicry (games involving a simulation of some kind) and ilinx (games that pursue vertigo or some sort of instability of the mind and perception) (ibid.: 130). 5 Most complex digital games today involve multiple features of games and play. Because play and games are multifaceted and complex, video games can be hard to define and can come in many forms. This study takes a broad approach to video games as a popular cultural phenomenon, focusing on games that can be played on different platforms like Nintendo and Playstation, on the computer or even on mobile devices. Digital games can have different player configura‐ tions, like single, multiplayer and massively multiplayer, and can be seen as 2.1 Defining Video Games 47 <?page no="48"?> 6 Categorizing games into types and genres is so complex that Espen Aarseth states, “To simply talk about “games,” or even “digital games,” seems irresponsible.” (2004: 362) 7 Sykes & Reinhardt refer to this differentiation as game-based and game-enhanced learning (Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 4-5). Although labelling games as serious or com‐ mercial overlooks player agency, context and purpose, the differentiation describes well the intention of games to either teach or entertain. 8 The concept of play and games are not foreign to FL didactics. Non-digital ‘Spieldidak‐ tik’ emerged in the 1980’s and from the beginning underlined both the FL learning as well as social goals of games (Kleppin 1995: 221; Klippel 1980: 128-129). However, while it recognized the potential of games for creative language use, it focused largely on games for language practice (Klippel 1980; Löffler & Klippel 1983; Wegener & Krumm 1982). Cf. also Jones 2016: 145. different types, like traditional, casual or social. They also can consist of many different genres, like action, role play, strategy, simulation, etc. Furthermore, they exhibit various payment models (which can influence gameplay), like free, free to play, purchased, and subscription (cf. Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 143-151 for a guide to game types and genres). 6 Video games have a potential to connect players within games as well as in online fan communities, and they typically provide instantaneous and individualized feedback in ways other game formats cannot offer (cf. Schmidt 2016). Video games can be categorized as serious or commercial games. 7 Serious games are games which have been developed with a serious learning purpose in mind, often directly created for schools or marketed to complement formal educational objectives. 8 They are also sometimes called “edutainment” games, marking a desired union of education and entertainment (Arnseth 2006). Com‐ mercial games, on the other hand, are games without a serious learning intent and commercially marketed as entertainment. This study does not focus on serious games for several reasons. The first reason is because they lack the complexity and cultural impact of commercial games (more on this is presented later in this section). The second reason is that serious games subordinate play to learning goals. Arnseth distinguishes be‐ tween playing to learn and learning to play, and states, “playing to learn is per‐ haps more in line with a cognitive approach to thinking and reasoning” where “cognition is conceived as something that happens in the mind. Learning, then, is about the development of mental structures and processes” (Arnseth 2006: n.p.). He explains the weakness of this approach, stating, “The point is that context and cognition are treated as separable entities. Literacy from this per‐ spective is about the individual’s skills in reading, writing and comprehending oral, textual and other sign systems” (ibid.: n.p.). Furthermore, for Arnseth, learning to play means that “to learn is to gradually master various forms of 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 48 <?page no="49"?> 9 The distinction between serious and commercial games is admittedly problematic. Not all serious games are poorly designed (and good games are sure to come), not all value content over fun, and serious games have not had the investment that commercial games receive. Furthermore, not all commercial games bear no connection to reality and present insipid content not worth learning. For an overview on serious digital games for EFL, cf. Schmidt et al. 2016. For a look at serious games and global education for the EFL classroom, cf. Müller 2017. 10 John Storey’s definition of popular culture challenges the distinction between high and popular culture as well as their evaluation (cf. Storey 2009: 1-12). His approach would suggest that biases against digital games are based on fear and/ or existing socioeco‐ nomic power structures internalized by individuals. tools and signs through the activity of using them for various purposes, and literacy is conceived as the ability to act in socially recognisable ways” (ibid.: n.p.). Thus, serious games use the playfulness of games (and player expectations for games) for learning purposes, while non-serious games encourage players to learn to interact with a game system playfully. While it can be argued that neither approach to learning (and literacy) is, on its own, a better model (cf. Shaffer 2012: 404), Arnseth points out several weak‐ nesses of the playing to learn approach that serious games take. Not only do serious games overemphasize the cognitivist model of learning, but they are also often over-simplistic, with repetitive tasks and poorly designed activities limited to isolated skills and content and that neither encourage nor allow active ex‐ ploration (Arnseth 2006: n.p.; cf. also Gee 2007: 123; Schmidt 2016). Due in part to these shortcomings, this study is not interested in serious games. 9 This study focuses on commercial games, not only because they are often more complex, have more game industry competence integrated into their de‐ sign, and because they focus on play, but also because of the impact commercial games have on culture, the social structure, and even individual development. Commercial games are a part of learners’ free-time engagement with popular culture. While there may be value in maintaining clear distinctions between school work and free time, between work and play, and between high culture and popular culture, 10 digital games represent a medium that is relevant and meaningful to the students’ lives and that offers a potential source for intensive and extensive English language contact and learning outside of school (cf. 1.3). This is true of American culture as well as German. For example, as of 2014, 59% of U.S. citizens play digital games with nearly equal distribution between male and female (52% male, 48% female), and age groups (29% under 18, 32% 18-35 and 39% over 36 according to Entertainment Software Association 2014). More‐ over, casual and social gaming is on the rise with a 55% increase between 2012 and 2013 (ibid.), reflected in part in the rise in ownership of mobile devices. The 2.1 Defining Video Games 49 <?page no="50"?> 11 However, it must be noted here that frequency does not reflect intensity in terms of time. Especially since the JIM Studie combines gameplay across platforms, it does not reflect the differences in terms of time investment involved in different types and plat‐ forms of gaming. For instance, the often short and quick gameplay on smart phones may increase the frequency in which individuals play, but not necessarily reflect an intensity an overall time investment that may be common with other platforms, like computers and game consoles. 12 Such games often have aggressive marketing schemes to advertise and “push” other, potentially more intensive and extensive digital games, forcing players to at the very least become aware of their existence. total games industry sales for 2013 is $21.53 billion, showing not only its pop‐ ularity amongst consumers but also the economic power of the game industry (ibid.). Lastly, there are over 183 million active American gamers (spending at least thirteen hours per week, cf. McGonigal 2011: 3), 5 million of which are extreme gamers (spending on average 45 hours per week, cf. ibid.: 4). However, digital gaming is not simply an American phenomenon. As of 2011, there were over 10 million hardcore gamers in UK, France and Germany alone who spend at least twenty hours a week playing (ibid.: 3-4) and, globally, the planet now spends more than 3 billion hours a week gaming (ibid.: 6). According to the JIM Studie (which focuses on individuals ages 12-19), the trends for Germany are not that different. Figure 3 represents data that compare three JIM studies between 2012 and 2014 studies and shows the increase in fre‐ quency of digital gameplay (cf. Feierabend et al. 2012; Feierabend et al. 2013: 45; Feierabend et al. 2014: 41). It shows first of all that digital games play a role in nearly all young people’s lives (even daily), and this role has increased over the past years. This increase is likely explained by two phenomena: the increase in smart phone ownership (from 47% in 2012 to 88% in 2014, cf. Feierabend et al. 2014: 45) and the rise in availability and role of social network sites (and the integration of games into social network sites, and the integration of social net‐ work sites in smart phones in turn). Smart phone ownership will likely increase to nearly 100%, and gaming formats like casual and social network games are likely to increase with it. As the JIM Studie 2013 shows, smart phones were the most popular platform for digital gaming in terms of frequency (Feierabend et al. 2013: 46), and further increase in the ownership and their intensified role in everyday life may lead to a further increase in gameplay frequency. 11 It is likely that smart phone games will have a pull effect, drawing players into other, more intensive and extensive forms of digital games, and may also have the general effect of desensitizing users for other digital game formats. 12 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 50 <?page no="51"?> Fig. 3: Increase in Digital Gaming Frequency amongst Germans Aged 12-19 ( JIM Studie 2012, 2013 and 2014) Further findings from the JIM Studie not presented in this graph include gender, age and school form differences in gameplay behavior. Interesting to note is that many females play digital games too. The 2013 and 2014 studies show an increase in frequency of female gameplay from 19% daily/ several times a week gameplay in 2013 to 53% in 2014 (cf. Feierabend et al. 2013: 45, 2014: 41 respectively). And in 2014, only 13% of females claim to never play games. While frequency dif‐ ferences concerning school forms are present (i.e. Gymnasium vs. Haupt/ Real‐ schule), they appear to be relatively minor (Feierabend et al. 2013: 45, 2014: 41). Though there may be some socio-cultural as well as school-form influence on digital gameplay behavior of students, the differences appear relatively negli‐ gible. Students also come into contact with games indirectly through other media. Because games are popular culture, it makes little sense to see games as com‐ pletely separate from other forms of popular media. Colin Harvey’s concept of transmedia storytelling explains that many different types of media are used to tell and expand certain stories that are often centered around an “urtext.” (2014: 284). For instance, How to Train Your Dragon is not just a popular animated film, but also a T.V. series, a book series, board and card games, and multiple digital games, not to mention other merchandising items like toys, clothing etc. Media franchising is a common practice today, and a majority of popular culture stories appear in different medial, representational and interactive forms. This is the phenomenon of transmediality. This is true for stories like Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter and Star Wars, just to name a few. Thus, for many digital games it makes sense to understand their role in a larger context of media production as 2.1 Defining Video Games 51 <?page no="52"?> well as the specific ways that a particular media represent, create, develop or even contest the larger storyworld created and managed by the franchise. Thus for many gamers, playing games is connected to other forms of media interac‐ tion, like watching T.V. and movies, reading novels and comics, etc., and can fulfill certain functions that other medial forms of storytelling cannot (cf. 2.3.3 for more on the influence of games on culture). This study focuses on commercial digital games, viewing them as a part of the larger (popular) media landscape. Commercial video games are an integral part of the media as well as English (as a foreign) language socialization of students. They are popular, complex and relevant for students’ lives. The model for video game literacy in this study is informed by, and targets, commercial video games. 2.2 Existing Approaches to Video Game Literacy This study builds upon existing approaches to video game literacy. These various approaches can be categorized within the tripartite structure taken here. This study looks at game literacy as consisting of three dimensions: the game, the player, and the world. This category is directly borrowed from and expands Jesper Juul’s “classic game model” which establishes the exact same dimensions (though for different purposes, cf. Juul 2003). These three dimensions lend themselves well for this study because they allow the categorization of previous conceptualizations of video game literacy as well as for their expansion within a unified, overarching model. The literal approach to video game literacy focuses on the game as a ‘text’ that can be decoded and encoded (Hall 2008), much like an alphabetic text can be read and written. This literal approach to literacy makes sense for some lit‐ eracy practices, but not necessarily for all. For instance, it makes sense for reading and writing because this form of literacy offers relatively low boundaries for participation (boundaries that traditional schooling and market production, for the most part, have been able to overcome). Some researchers have pointed out the value of learning to ‘write’ games by designing them, noting that such learning exceeds any understanding that would emerge through simply learning how to play them (cf. Buckingham & Burn 2007; Partington 2010; Patton 2013; Salen, 2007). Thus, teaching students how to design digital games can be seen as both a logical and literal approach to video game literacy. However, the types of digital games that have a noticeable impact on cultural discourse are usually created by large teams of experts who have considerable game design knowl‐ 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 52 <?page no="53"?> 13 Of course reading is a constructive process, cf. Hallet 2009. However, the construction is more implicit and controlled than that which occurs in games. edge, and by companies with large budgets and access to powerful and expensive computer and design programs. Furthermore, digital game design often takes up large quantities of time, often comparable to that of blockbuster movies. While such a literal approach to game literacy would undoubtedly produce pos‐ itive learning outcomes, there are many hurdles which hinder this type of in‐ tegration into school curricula and EFL classrooms. Furthermore, such an ap‐ proach has a stronger focus on learning the technical aspects of game design and does not necessarily target games as discursive, cultural artifacts. Other approaches focus on literacy as the interaction between players and games. Games are a highly complex interactive media that require player par‐ ticipation. This means that the game only exists through player interaction, and that players co-design ‘the game’ with the game software through play (Gee 2007: 8; Squire 2008: 643-644). Many game scholars point out that this co-design truly involves the player in the meaning-making process since the ‘stories’ and ‘play’ emerge out of the interaction and can never be fully predicted by the game system. Thus, gameplay is not really the same as ‘reading’ since interaction is a co-creative process of both decoding and encoding information. 13 Therefore, some see gameplay itself as an act of video game literacy. However, this approach is problematic because literacy (as a ‘designing’ process) in this interactive sense does not necessarily lead to critical awareness of the game, of the player, nor of the cultural context of games - and it does not necessarily lead to the ability to participate in the foreign language discourse on games. A ‘design’ approach to literacy should include this meta-level of awareness and reflection during gameplay. Compared to the literal approach to game literacy, this approach makes sense, though, since knowing how to com‐ petently use a program, say Microsoft Word, for work purposes, and to possibly even solve larger social and global problems, does not necessarily mean that one must also be able to ‘write’ by actually coding the program (though this ability would undoubtedly be useful). This study builds upon the concept of video game literacy as “designing rewarding experiences” (Squire 2008: 644) to include not just game experiences but also rewarding experiences of foreign language dis‐ course participation. The third dimension looks at the external and cultural context of video games and gameplay, and video game literacy approaches in this dimension focus on the literacy practices surrounding games as players interact with other players and non-players. Researchers typically focus on fan-communities and the prod‐ 2.2 Existing Approaches to Video Game Literacy 53 <?page no="54"?> ucts of their interactions, especially on game-related websites. More on this dimension of literacy is presented in 2.3.3, so no further detail is provided here. This approach to video game literacy alone is problematic, not only because the relation to the video games is vague and unspecified, but also because it typically involves other literacy practices that only thematize games. Furthermore, fo‐ cusing on the practices of game players in this dimension limits discourse to those who play, value, and (implicitly or explicitly) support games and who therefore are less invested in critical engagement. While game discourse should be informed in terms of the first and second dimension, it does not necessarily need to take the standpoint that games and gameplay is ‘good’ or that individuals must play in order to participate. Furthermore, this fan-approach to video game literacy ignores larger cultural trends like gamification (cf. 2.3.3), which ad‐ dresses how games and game structures are influencing institutions in all do‐ mains of life. This study takes a discourse approach to literacy (or multiliteracies, cf. 1.2) and focuses on ‘reading’ or decoding video games as a phenomenon of all three dimensions, and encoding or ‘writing’ through linguistic, foreign language ar‐ ticulation. Furthermore, this study envisions games, in all its dimensions, as products and producers of cultural discourse, and thus views the aims of video game literacy broadly as enabling the foreign language discourse on games. Thus, the discourse approach to VGL supports Hallet’s foreign language discourse ability and its connection to the higher level goals of education (cf. 1.1). It targets enabling learners to participate in and co-construct their lifeworlds as pertains to political-, community-, work-life and education. Furthermore, the discourse approach to VGL does not target informed discourse on games simply to allow learners to learn more through games, gameplay and gameplay practices, but also to understand games as products and producers of culture and ways of seeing and being in the world. Therefore, it targets the ability of informed game discourse to transfer to all domains of life to increase the perspective taking ability of learners and their ability to solve socially embedded life-world prob‐ lems. 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy The following subsections present a discourse model for VGL that is based on three dimensions: the game, the player and the world. At the base of the model is the game itself as a designed system. For informed foreign language game discourse to occur, a solid understanding of the game, the fictional world it 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 54 <?page no="55"?> 14 To support this potential, case study 2 shows how a gamification activity led to a class‐ room discussion on how schools motivate learners at the structural level. presents and the rules that determine players actions should exist. Due to the foundational role of this dimension, as well as to the sheer complexity of digital games, subsection 2.3.1 is the most extensive. Subsection 2.3.2 discusses the game as an interaction between what are fundamentally two very complex sys‐ tems - the game itself and the player. Games, though highly structured, are not deterministic, and allow much agency for players to make decisions. An in‐ formed discourse approach to VGL should also include aspects of game inter‐ action and the types of experiences players typically have. The final subsection, 2.3.3 addresses the dimension of the world, and how games influence reality external to games, and especially how they influence culture, literacy and learning. Informed game discourse should include these influences as well, and the ways in which the game as a system and players’ interaction with games influence these cultural changes. Here it is important to remember that this discourse model of video game literacy does not simply target informed gameplay, though that would be a de‐ sirable result. More importantly, it targets cultural and English language dis‐ course on video games as products and producers of culture. From this per‐ spective, discourse on games allows transfer to other domains of life external from games and game topics, as video games can serve as a lens with which to view life. In the following three subsections, the connections to didactic and pedagogic principles behind aspects of games at all levels are often made to show the relevance behind the model for the EFL classroom. 14 Thus, game discourse can easily connect to classroom discourse and principles and approaches to learning. Furthermore, connections are also made to point out the relevance of discourse on games at all levels for lifeworld discourses relating to all domains of life. This ensures that an integration of the model into the EFL classroom does not simply serve the promotion of informed gameplay, but also the expansion of analytical perspective on life. 2.3.1 The Game VGL that aims for foreign language discourse ability conceptualizes video games as designed texts and allows for flexible modes of discourse participation. From a literacy perspective that is invested in production as much as it is in the in‐ terpretation, literacy can be interpreted to mean the actual creation of digital games based on game analysis. This game-design approach is based on tradi‐ 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 55 <?page no="56"?> tional concepts of literacy that view learning as the process of communicating and negotiating meaning within one and the same medium, and it focuses largely on the power of the medium to shape social reality. If learning to read is important in order to gain information about socially constructed reality, then learning to write is the ability to participate in the informationand meaning-making process using that same medium. Video game literacy which aims for foreign language discourse ability is not bound to this literal understanding of literacy. Its goal is to understand video games, not in order to produce them but rather in order to enable a more com‐ petent, autonomous and creative participation in the cultural (foreign language) discourse on games, in multiple media and genres. The following section (2.2.2) addresses the foundational dimension of video game literacy by focusing on video games as designed ‘texts.’ This dimension is foundational because an in‐ formed discourse on games, and especially their social and cultural impact and potential, must be founded on scientific knowledge of how games are con‐ structed and how they function, rather than on fears, hype, and institutional neglect. The scientific study of popular video games reveals that games are quite complex. Figure 4 presents a model that illustrates (and organizes) the com‐ plexity of video games, and also structures the discussion of the first dimension of VGL presented in this section. This model, and structure, will serve as the basis for VGL which aims for a foreign language discourse ability that is not bound to any one medium of communication. Fig. 4: Two Approaches to Games as Interactive Texts 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 56 <?page no="57"?> Popular video games are arguably some of the most complex media that exist. One reason for their complexity stems from the idea that games are both systems and works of fiction - they both represent fictional worlds, and sometimes even narratives, but also allow players to interact within those worlds, choosing their own paths, following their own interests, and creating their own stories -yet in specifically designed ways. This differentiation serves the basis of the model of games as interactive texts. The following will address two approaches, the sys‐ temic and fictional - the former focusing on games as providing goals, feedback, tools and simulation, and the latter focusing on fictionality in the gameworld, in rules, in interaction, and in game narratives. Systems Approach This section provides a systems analysis of video games, separating not only the system and its design from the cultural and individual reception and from the emergent aspects of interaction, but from the fictional and representative ele‐ ments of the game as well. The following thus focuses on how games structure and motivate interaction and play by setting (and allowing certain types of) goals, by providing different types of feedback, by supplying various tools for players to utilize, and by creating models that allow for specific types of simu‐ lations. Goals: Video games provide, and are structured around, goals; therefore, in‐ formed discourse on games should be aware of the function of goals in games. Games integrate goals with an astounding complexity and offer a delicate bal‐ ance between structure and agency. The following explores the variability of progressive and open-styled design, the differentiation between narrative and game goals, open-ended goals like exploration, identity development, play and flow, and finally it addresses how games structure problems. In conclusion, this study proposes an ecological approach to understanding goals in digital games that is based on diversity, agency and context sensitivity that supports informed discourse participation. Goals are essential in foreign language pedagogy, and a glance into the di‐ dactic discourse on goals provides a backdrop for understanding how goals in games are structured and function. In foreign language learning settings, goals allow teachers to plan for desired outcomes and to organize discrete (language didactic) teaching goals with overarching educational goals. However, the amount of control tasks have over setting goals is debated. Martinez points out the potential discrepancy between task intention and task reception (Martinez 2013: 110; cf. also Ellis 2003), suggesting an unavoidable gap between teacher determined and learner realized goals. Sykes and Reinhardt point out that “Au‐ 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 57 <?page no="58"?> thentic tasks are not always authenticated” (Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 17), sug‐ gesting that task designers can control the material input but not learner expe‐ rience. Discrepancies involving interpretation and authentication have led to the differentiation between learnerand learning-driven tasks (Sykes & Rein‐ hardt 2013: 18), with learning-driven tasks predefining goals and learner-driven allowing learners to set goals. In reality, tasks balance both structure with learner agency. For instance, Hallet’s complex task concept calls for openness as one of its defining charac‐ teristics (Hallet 2012: 13). However, this openness includes structure, since tasks should define the generic form of the outcome (ibid.: 13). Hallet and Legutke also note that integrating structure and learner agency requires planning and improvising skills, claiming that teachers “need to plan and keep in mind short-term and long-terms goals and manage the learning processes accordingly. At the same time, however, they have to be open to learner contributions and thus make spontaneous decisions.” (Hallet & Legutke 2013: 7) The description of tasks in terms of “”openly-framed, learner centered tasks”” (Legutke & Thomas 1991: 61 as cited in Hallet 2012: 13) illustrates well how games balance structure with player agency. Goals in games can be categorized as game-, player-, and context-driven (cf. Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 20; cf. also Thorne & Black 2011: 7-8). This differen‐ tiation, like the distinction made in task design, recognizes that games cannot always predict the goals players take on (player-driven goals) as well as goals that emerge from player-game interaction (context-driven). Despite this lack of control, games integrate design patterns that accommodate goal categories by varying forms of closedand open-ended game design. Open-ended game design can be compared to ‘theme parks’ where players choose their own tasks, or to ‘sandboxes’ where players invent their own goals (cf. Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 22). Progression style games are designed in a linear fashion, with consecutive task progression (common to adventure games and interactive fiction, cf. ibid.: 22). However, despite this theoretical differentiation, most games “are hybrids of both styles, or offer various designs in a single game” (ibid.: 22). In conclusion, games structure tasks by employing open-ended or progressive style game de‐ sign (or both) to attain game goals. Through this, games allow for diverse, flex‐ ible and dynamic goal setting between player and game. Games also offer ‘narrative’ goals. Calleja suggests games are a complex system of both rule based “game” goals that can be separate from, and interre‐ lated with, goals presented in the explicit narrative of the game (Calleja 2011: 121). This differentiation points to an interesting paradox of games and play (more in section 2.2.3); namely, that they are concomitantly teleological and 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 58 <?page no="59"?> open-ended. Play as a mode of interaction is a state and possibly goal in and of itself, disinterested in particular narrative goals or outcomes. However, since games separate play from real life and bound them by rules, end-states are de‐ termined and upheld. Thus narrative goals provide clear and comprehensible end-states to frame play. Furthermore, game goals, even if not integrated into the “scripted narrative,” can be conceptualized narratively as the presentation of problems or conflicts that structure progress. Some games present open worlds where players choose their own tasks. Games like World of Warcraft have no clear end-states in which a single, system-determined goal can be reached. Such games are often based on princi‐ ples of world exploration and identity development (cf. Gee’s “horizontal learning experiences,” 2007: 49). Goals integrated into gameworld exploration allow for game ‘worlding’ (cf. chapter 4) while character development (gaining in-game skills, collecting items, unlocking rewards, etc.) allow for continual identification with the character and world. Play, world exploration as well as identity development can all be conceptualized as non-teleological goals in many commercial games. Games structure tasks and goals to challenge players to progress. They do so through rules, well-ordered problems, cycles of expertise and designed failure. Rules are crucial for presenting and structuring goals. McGonigal addresses game rules and their functions for goal attainment. In real life, goals can be attained in an arguably infinite number of ways, often with an indefinite amount of time and effort. This indeterminate nature can make success difficult, de‐ creasing motivation. McGonigal, however, claims that game rules create “un‐ necessary obstacles” which “unleash creativity and foster strategic thinking” - specifically by limiting obvious ways of achieving goals (McGonigal 2011: 23). Unlike in life and in school, games often make obstacles more obviously un‐ necessary to create a greater sense of fun. Rules motivate goal attainment by fostering creative energy and scaffold goals by establishing “actionable steps” (McGonigal 2011: 55-56), ensuring at‐ tainability and providing reward for player investment (ibid.: 55). Gee refers to this scaffolding as “well-ordered problems,” referring to a good learning prin‐ ciple of allowing players to create hypotheses built up methodically over a large amount of problems (Gee 2007: 35, cf. Hallet 2002 for a didactic discussion on language, cognitive modelling and abstraction). Well-ordered problems lead to what Gee calls “pleasant frustration,” which motivates players into the zone of proximal development (Gee 2007: 36). Instead of equally increasing challenges, games often cycle challenges to give players time to practice skills. Gee calls this pattern “cycles of expertise” - players practice skills until they become auto‐ 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 59 <?page no="60"?> 15 Cf. “cascading information theory“ (Schonfeld 2010) on how games deliver information to players that is “just in time” and “on demand” (Gee 2007: 37). Cf. Squire 2008 for cycles of expertise and the “chainsaw” model. 16 Cf. Kniffka 2016: 393 on summative testing as feedback, Grimm et al. 2015: 268 on the informational function of feedback. matic, then these skills are later challenged until players gain new skills (ibid.: 37). Thus, game goals can be seen as presenting challenges that are well-struc‐ tured, that integrate failure as a part of the learning process, and that cultivate a sense of expertise in players by allowing cycles of practice and mastery. 15 The digital game research presented here offers perspectives on the concep‐ tualization and structuring of goals and illuminates potential for cultural dis‐ course on games. Commercial digital games offer a large variety of interpreta‐ tions on how structured learning systems can accommodate player agency. In summary, video games offer open-ended and/ or linear-progressive structures, usually with both narrative and game goals, and extend current conceptualiza‐ tions of goals by inducing play and encouraging exploration and identity de‐ velopment. Commercial games also structure goals and motivate engagement through limiting, and well-ordered, rules. An ecological approach to game goals suggests there is no single ideal game design and looks at the ecology of games and how they present and structure goals. The potential of discourse oriented VGL not only enables competent gameplay, but also allows for the reflection on real life goals (and rules), their embeddedness in life-relevant systems, and ways in which games can serve as complex models for designing goals and goal pro‐ gression. The following addresses the role of feedback for game goals. Feedback: Feedback plays a crucial role in foreign language teaching and argu‐ ably all learning settings. In non-educational learning settings, feedback comes from other participants in communicative settings or from the material world in ‘natural’ settings. In the classroom, however, feedback takes on a new role with new challenges. Sykes and Reinhardt state that “feedback as instruction” should be provided at the appropriate level, time and amount for each learner. This type of feedback serves learning rather than evaluative purposes, meaning it should be integrated into learning development (Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 54). 16 However, there are challenges to instructive feedback which hinder its integration in the classroom: the institutional necessity for grades (cf. Grimm et al. 2015: 266 on grades and the “performance principle”), the difficulty of individual feedback considering the teacher student ratio, difficulties giving feedback on issues with multiple appropriate responses (culture and language pragmatics), and lack of learner feedback-integration into future learning ex‐ 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 60 <?page no="61"?> 17 Winning often gives the player the impression that learning is complete. periences (Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 55). Though feedback in games is limited, they do exhibit advantages over other learning settings. Feedback in digital games serves two major functions of teaching and moti‐ vating. Although feedback is treated here as a separate and distinct entity in games, it is in reality inseparable from game rules and goals, often integrated into game fiction and narrative, and foundational for establishing interactivity. To connect to the previous discussion on goals and problems, feedback helps order problems into manageable chunks and helps players form valid, testable hypotheses about the game and their actions which can then lead to improve‐ ment and learning. Feedback in video games, however, is quite different than feedback in real-life, since video games and the computer technology they are based on are able to constantly provide individualized and problem-oriented feedback when needed. Through its efficiency, feedback in video games is de‐ signed to teach effectively and be highly motivating. The following differenti‐ ates between three fundamental categories of feedback - ultimate, evaluative and dramatic - to further illustrate how feedback functions in games. Ultimate feedback describes the binary states that all games create through providing opportunities to win and lose. A win-state is largely determined by the goal of the game and usually ends the game. McGonigal claims that both quitting and winning are interruptive to flow (McGonigal 2011: 24), suggesting that winning is, in some respects, undesirable from the perspective of the game system. From an economical point of view, games balance the reward of a win-state with the challenge of reaching it. If a game is perceived as too difficult and unrewarding, then players will not play it. If it is too easy, the same will occur (cf. Juul 2013). However, games can measure success through time and energy investment of players because this translates well into emotional in‐ vestment and ultimately sales. For these reasons, games often dangle win-states like a carrot, motivating players to play as long as possible without actually winning. By setting clear, continually out-of-reach goals (and win-states), games place players in continual “cycles of expertise” and development. In terms of learning, such deferral can increase the value players place on skill development and knowledge accrual over winning. Fail-states are another type of ultimate feedback. Although fail-states and win-states can be said to interrupt the flow of the game, fail-states often play a motivating role to encourage players to learn from their mistakes and play more. 17 According to McGonigal, some failure feedback can be a reward that leads to more engagement and even optimism (McGonigal 2011: 67). Digital 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 61 <?page no="62"?> 18 Educational systems arguably cannot allow infinite ‘saves’ and ‘do-overs,’ though modern digital technology may change this in the future. games have many strategies for easing the ‘pain’ of failure and ensuring re-en‐ gagement by the player. Most games can be saved and/ or be played over and over again. Sometimes, like in World of Warcraft, character death is mostly sym‐ bolic and entails nearly no penalty. Due to the treatment of failure in games, players are encouraged to use the feedback that comes with fail-states to further develop skills, improve or rethink strategies, or even search for help in online forums or from friends (cf. previous discussion on “cycles of expertise” and failure). Failure then often only embodies a temporary end-state. Furthermore, according to Juul, players actually expect to fail and will judge a game poorly, and even stop playing if the game is too easy ( Juul 2013). Games, in conclusion, not only often allow infinite failure as an integral part of learning, players also expect it as a defining trait of games and as a sign of a challenge worth accepting. Failand win-states as a form of feedback in games can be compared to formal learning and teaching settings. In such situations, a win-state can be seen as successful task completion, a good grade on an exam, or positive performance over a year. Such feedback is not limited to schools, but is also found in many other domains, especially work. However, when win-states are coupled with a structurally supported fear of failure, the process-function of failure shifts and becomes an end-state that reflects both the abilities of the learner and his/ her future chances. An educational institution that places a higher value on educa‐ tion rather than selection may see the potential of failure as an integral part of the learning processes. As some studies have shown in games, failure leads to an increased appetite for risk and a greater comfort with failure in players (cf. Squire 2008: 658). Certainly this result sounds desirable for formal education settings. 18 Alongside ultimate feedback-forms like winand fail-states is evaluative feedback that consists of positive and negative feedback. These types guide players to the game goal and help players decode implicit or under-defined rules (cf. McGonigal 2011: 27). According to Sykes & Reinhardt, positive feedback makes the game system unstable by providing the player with certain advan‐ tages while negative feedback reestablish stability by taking advantages away (Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 57). However, this approach over-emphasizes rewards as positive feedback and neglects to explicitly address the types of positive feed‐ back, through the form of noises, text, or from non-controllable characters, that only show the positive desired effects of players’ actions. This study sees positive and negative feedback as evaluative feedback because they often help players 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 62 <?page no="63"?> make assessments on the results of their actions without interrupting the im‐ mersive flow-state of the game. They guide players to assess their situation as they progress towards failor win-states, and they help ensure that in-game problems are well-ordered and within the zone of proximal development. The feedback types presented so far are often considered “in time” and “in‐ dividualized” since they reflect the immediate outcome of player actions and are fitted to match player abilities (cf. Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 56). This form of feedback provided in most digital games stands in stark contrast to types of feedback provided in other life-settings, like formal teaching and learning sit‐ uations, in which one teacher serves a large number of students and, for practical reasons, must treat them as a group. In this situation, individual feedback usually occurs through after-the-fact assessment of student products, homework, etc. The final category, dramatic feedback, refers to feedback without any obvious value at the time of delivery. This type of feedback can mimic arbitrary aspects of real-life (like clicking on a non-playing character in some games may provoke an emotive reaction with absolutely no impact on the game) or can be inten‐ tionally used to build up dramatic tension as the player hopes to discover at a later point its value. Dramatic feedback can also be an explicit reward, skill or achievement which has an undetermined value to be later ‘unlocked.’ Thus, dramatic feedback can either serve the construction of the fictional world not related to the rules of the game, or it can serve to build up dramatic tension and suspense by providing players with experience, items or achievements with a yet unknown value and use. Dramatic feedback goes against the prevalent, pedagogic view that immediate, individualized feedback is ideal, showing that other feedback functions can also be productive. Dramatic feedback can thus be seen as motivating further engagement and future planning, hypothesis forma‐ tion and testing, cultivating curiosity and exploration, and promoting skills of dealing with chaotic environments in which players select context specific feed‐ back. Feedback is crucial for learning and teaching because it affects and defines how teachers (and teaching materials and media) interact with students, but also how students interact with teachers and learning material. According to Prensky, young students today expect interactivity in schools due to their en‐ gagement with interactive media and digital games outside of schools ( Prensky 2010: 12; cf. also McGonigal 2011: 127). This expectation, combined with what Prensky labels “slowly changing schools” (ibid.: 13), has led to “boring” and under-stimulating learning environments that are outcompeted for the learning that occurs outside of school (ibid.: 14). 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 63 <?page no="64"?> 19 More traditional cognitive artifacts store information, while digital cognitive artifacts have the potential to actually transform information. Tools: Tools are a necessary part of everyday life. Digital tools have done much to expand both human cognitive power and communication abilities. The fol‐ lowing passages take a look at tools as a broader system of information and computer abilities. In this sense, tools can be seen as “cognitive artifacts,” or objects (mental, physical or cultural) that scaffold sense making activities (Herman 2013: 272). Cognitive artifacts allow for distributed cognition, or the “presence of artifacts or information appliances […] that expand and augment human’s cognitive capacities.” ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 37) Such artifacts are not just technologies, but also social institutions, practices, as well as experts (ibid.: 37-38). The following distinguishes between distributed intelligence that in‐ volves digital tools in games from that which involves other players in game settings, even if in reality, interactions within and around digital games often involve complex combinations of both. VGL focuses on enabling participation in cultural discourse and raises awareness of the role that digital tools and ar‐ tifacts play. It also connects to the analogies between game and real world tool use as digital technologies expand the cognitive abilities of individuals and in‐ stitutions. Gee calls game-tools “smart tools” because they perform functions for the player without the player having to understand how that function is performed (Gee 2007: 27). 19 Such smart tools have an ‘artificial intelligence’ that expands the player’s performance and skills. Smart tools can be conceptualized as those available through the game’s interface and those available within the game’s representational world. Pushing keys or moving a joystick to cause a character to fight, to harvest a plant, build a structure, etc., is one example of a smart tool available through the game’s interface. There are also, however, smart tools available within the fictional game world with which the playable character can interact directly. These can be weapons, tools, spells, etc. that the player uses (through the avatar) to affect the gameworld. Both types of smart tools make it easier for players to have a high impact on the game world with little time and effort, allowing the player to focus attention on processing large amounts of input relatively quickly, planning and executing strategies as they pertain to a series of hierarchized goals, or to react to other characters in the game - in other words, such smart tools lighten the cognitive load of the player to achieve more, faster. Another type of smart tool and form of distributed cognition commonly available in games is the playable character/ avatar. Avatars allow for an im‐ 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 64 <?page no="65"?> 20 Cf. Gibbons 2012 on “image schema,” an embodied mental representation for idealized cognitive models or a mental representation linked to bodily experience. This image schema allows for a process called cognitive deixis, which accounts for the human imaginative capacity to cognitively relocate into another projected deictic stance (30). mersion within the gameworld through the affordance of cultivating player identity (Schäfer 2013: 42, more on immersion and player identity in section 2.3.2). This identification and immersion allow for an experience that is condu‐ cive to learning. According to Gee, thought and language are embodied, situated, and action-oriented - aspects which many games offer players (Gee 2007: 12). By slipping into the digital bodies of avatars, players understand problems and challenges in the context of the game much in the way individuals in real life settings understand through their own bodies. 20 This embodiment within the game allows for information to be processed as it pertains to a specific problem the player (through the body of the avatar) is trying to solve. As modern digital working and communication technologies collapse time and space, the ability for this deictic shifting through digitally mediated “worlds” takes on new real-world relevance. Enabling the EFL participation in the discourse on games should allow learners to connect to the discourse on digitally mediated problem representation and solving. Narratives (cf. this section below) can also be seen as a type of ‘tool,’ as dis‐ tributed cognition supported by smart tools and the embodiment within avatars. David Herman sees narratives as cognitive artifacts and tools that organize in‐ formation and structure thinking. They offer five affordances, or strategies, for solving problems: namely 1) chunking experience, 2) imputing causal relation‐ ships, 3) managing typification problems, 4) sequencing behaviors and 5) dis‐ tributing intelligence (Herman 2003: 172). All five affordances can be seen as ways of ordering and distributing cognition by offering generic forms and pat‐ terns which minds are either trained, programmed, or both to receive, process, and present information (Gottschall 2012; Herman 2013). Games present two types of narratival distributed cognition: the narrative presented by the game and the narrative that emerges from the player’s inter‐ action with the game (cf. this section below). This means the game narrative is a tool that distributes cognition (in the ways Herman presents above) by effi‐ ciently presenting complex forms of information in a manner easily recognized and processed by players. This narrative is, in turn, taken up by the player and integrated into game interactions. Through a narrative interpretation of the game, players reinterpret the game through their own actions and experience, redistributing their knowledge, experiences, skills, and hypotheses back into the gameworld, their avatar, and the game’s narrative structure. 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 65 <?page no="66"?> However, cognition is distributed across technology as well as through indi‐ viduals. Multiplayer and social network games allow individual information and game experience to be stored in and accessed through other players. They also allow individuals to access the expertise and processing power of other indi‐ viduals in-game. Gee calls this “cross functional affiliation,” referring to collab‐ orative settings in which participants of different expertise solve a common problem (Gee 2007: 26). Jenkins et al. calls this “a community that knows ev‐ erything and individuals who know how to tap the community to acquire knowledge on a just-in-time basis” ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 42). Here, leadership “requires the ability to identify specific functions for each member of the team based on his or her expertise and to interact with the team members in an ap‐ propriate fashion” and being a team member “involves a high degree of inter‐ discipline - the ability to reconfigure knowledge across traditional categories of expertise.” (ibid.: 42) The “cross functional affiliation” available in many mul‐ tiplayer games offers new perspectives on how individuals can work in teams, as both leaders and team members, in ways that often closely resemble work-place team and project management as well as informal learning spaces in the real-world. Distributed cognition and smart tools have been at the center of a debate on how digital media in general affects collective and individual cognition. On the one hand there are the claims of digital dementia (Spitzer 2012). On the other hand, there are also claims that these technologies increase mankind’s ability to overcome problems that were previously too difficult. Game studies research suggests that such tools unburden the cognitive load, allowing quicker action in the game, faster processing of large amounts of incoming multimodal infor‐ mation, and more focus on the strategic development needed to manage game‐ play (cf. Jenkins et al. 2009: 37). However, it seems that individuals today need to be able to both perform many of the skills that smart tools can, at least at a basic level, but they also need to know when, how and why to use smart tools for their situated purpose (cf. 1.2). Fears and dangers of collective amnesia and digital dementia are no reason to abandon the complex tools that make solving problems in today’s world pos‐ sible, but rather a reason to learn their critical, reflexive, and constructive use. Schools are often criticized for not teaching such tool use and not preparing students for their future lives. Jenkins et al. state, Minimally, schools should be teaching students to thrive in both worlds: having a broad background on a range of topics, but also knowing when they should turn to a larger community for relevant expertise. They must know how to solve problems on 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 66 <?page no="67"?> their own but also how to expand their intellectual capacity by working on problems within a social community. ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 42) This quote can be expanded to include the use of smart tools, like the ones integrated in digital games. In conclusion, this section focused on smart tools, avatars, narratives and communities of experts. Informed discourse on games recognizes not only how games implement tools to support learning processes, but also how tool use in games reflect larger cultural value and function of tool use for cognition, communication, and problem solving in today’s digital world. Simulations and Systems: Digital games are often compared to or described as simulations. First, digital games and digital simulations share a similar techno‐ logical history and timeline, and indeed many digital simulations have game-like qualities and vice versa. Second, labelling video games as simulations borrows social and cultural capital that simulations have as scientific models for pro‐ moting scientific knowledge (cf. Jones 2017: 42). From a systemic perspective, working with simulations allows for discrete knowledge and abstract under‐ standing that can transfer to real world applications. The following presents two different approaches to understanding games as simulations and systems. The first looks at games simulating external systems that exist in the real world, and the second looks at games simulating the internal systems of cognition. Today’s world consists of innumerable complex and interconnected systems. The complexity can be so great that individuals choose disengagement or pas‐ sive consumption over active participation and construction of society. Jenkins et al. believe that complex digital games have the potential to teach individuals how to deal with complex networks in real life. They believe that gameplay develops the skill of simulation, or “the ability to interpret and construct dy‐ namic models of real world processes” ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 25). Contextualizing games as new media, they state, New media provides powerful new ways of representing and manipulating informa‐ tion. New forms of simulation expand our cognitive capacity, allowing us to deal with larger bodies of information, to experiment with more complex configurations of data, to form hypotheses quickly and test them against different variables in real time. (ibid.: 25) Furthermore, they view “system-based thinking” as the direct result of learning through and with new media and digital games (ibid.: 25). In terms of systems thinking, gameplay is an abstract form of learning within digital systems (of well-structured and yet often highly complex networks of problems, rules, tools, affordances, feedback, often times other players embedded within a semiotic 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 67 <?page no="68"?> 21 See Kühn & Gallinat 2014; Kühn et al. 2011; Kühn et al. 2014 on a cognitive neuroscience approach on how playing digital games affects the growth and processing power of the brain. 22 For a discussion on the pitfalls of constructivist minimal guidance, cf. Kirschner et al. 2006: 78-79. Games can be seen as an externalization of the mind which provides direct instructional guidance through game-scaffolding. world and overarching narrative structure). The learning outcome of sys‐ tems-thinking through games is not necessarily the mastery of a specific system, but rather the reorganization of the brain to see the world within a certain sys‐ temic approach. While Jenkins claims this reorganization leads to “an intuitive understanding of how we might use simulations to test our assumptions about the way the world works” ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 25), Prensky believes (due to neuroplasticity) that gameplay effects the physical and chemical make-up of the brain (Prensky 2001: n.p.). This suggests that intensive and extensive gameplay develops sys‐ tems thinking that affects both players’ behavioral patterns as well as their cog‐ nitive ‘wiring.’ However, neuroscience research on games is still in its in‐ fancy. 21 Systems thinking is often compared to the scientific method since it requires the discovery of complex sets of rules and underlying patterns. As previously presented, Jenkins et al. compare systems thinking to hypothesis formation and testing (cf. also Gee 2007: 81). This idea is reflected by Steinkuehler and Duncan, who see successful interaction within digital games as similar to the scientific method (Steinkuehler & Duncan 2008). The idea that certain games cultivate scientific thinking can be related to Gee’s approach that good games present well-ordered problems that are scaffolded by feedback provided in time and on demand (cf. passages on goals in games). Gee takes this idea a step further, claiming that good games externalize how the mind works optimally. Thus scientific thinking as an external process of forming, testing and revising hypotheses in a systematic manner against the world becomes comparable to a constructivist view of learning. 22 Gee, who views ideal learning as embodied, situated and action-oriented, compares thinking to a process of constructing and running mental simulations (Gee 2007: 24). Com‐ plex actions require complex thought, and mental simulations are ways of scaf‐ folding this. For Gee, video games are like externalized mental simulators. They both pro‐ vide a general framework for action that surrounds solving problems, often em‐ bodied through avatars, and allow players to run the simulations as they play the game. Gee states, “Since fruitful thinking involves building simulations in 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 68 <?page no="69"?> 23 Cf. below on game fiction. Fiction as a label can be misleading since all stories are based to varying extent on real life (persons, settings, problems etc.) and thus always contain non-fictional elements (cf. Juul 2014: 178; Ryan 2010: 3). our heads that prepare us for action, thinking is itself somewhat like a video game, given that video games are external simulations.” (Gee 2007: 80) Gee claims that thinking is comparable to digital game-scenarios in which individ‐ uals imagine themselves in situations, face certain problems, and develop, test and revise hypothesis on how to solve those problems. This is more effective than “forming abstract generalizations cut off from experiential realities.” (Gee 2007: 157) Thus, from a cognitive standpoint, games as simulations scaffold thinking processes through their semiotic representations, rules, etc., and define the playful, explorative mode in which players are meant to think and act. Through this combination they create mind-like simulations in which players are encouraged and cognitively unburdened to actively explore and play with the problems presented by the game-task. However, digital games are in some ways unlike simulations. First, games target states of play and flow and not necessarily the modelling of real life sit‐ uations and problem solving. As commercial products, many games delay grat‐ ification of goal attainment to increase player investment. Second, digital games often present fictional settings. While simulations within fictional settings can reveal much about human behavior, perspectives on the external social and nat‐ ural world, and even about solving problems, they may offer little value in terms of transfer. 23 Third, it makes sense to differentiate within games aspects which simulate real life systems and processes more realistically, which as fiction, and which serve the purposes of play. Competent discourse on games should involve this differentiation. Despite these caveats, video games contain potential to simulate the natural world, social life and culture, other systems and cultural institutions, technology use and social interaction, other games (analog or digital), cognition and the fictional simulation that leads to cognitive flexibility of systems thinking dis‐ cussed above. However, like all simulations, digital games are artificial con‐ structs that can only simulate real-life processes to a certain extent. Digital sim‐ ulations can never mimic the complexity of real life and can only lead to limited understandings and discoveries. While all models within the physical world isolate and limit aspects in order to increase their focusing power, unlike digital models, they are still subjected to the innumerous variables and unpredictability of real life (cf. Jones 2013). Walsh uses the concept of emergence to explain the difference between simulations and digital games, and defines emergence as a “feature of complex systems; the term refers to phenomena or behavior pro‐ 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 69 <?page no="70"?> 24 Complex computer simulations may only allow a low-level emergence of knowledge beyond the basic principles of its design (cf. Walsh 2011). 25 or as Murray puts it, as „liminal objects, located on the threshold between external reality and our own minds.” (Murray 1998: 99) duced by a system but not apparent from an inspection of the elements of the system and the laws governing it.” (Walsh 2011: 73) Digital simulations can be quite useful for teaching the laws that govern its design (and those already de‐ termined by the science that were integrated into its design) but less useful for developing those underlying laws and discovering further aspects that influence them. 24 Perhaps it is more useful to conceptualize digital games somewhere between mental simulation and highly complex digital simulations. 25 Basic experience teaches that mental simulations can model complexity to a limited degree and can thus have limited predictive power. Mental simulations more appropriately model simplistic, embodied and situated action, and especially the emotional and reflexive-critical responses of individuals, but less so at running multiple, and multi-action based processes. Complex digital games very likely extend this mental ability by pairing it with relatively complex digital systems, yet are not to be mistaken for having the knowledge producing power of scientific simu‐ lations. Gee compares complex digital games to fishtanks which offer simplified sys‐ tems that stress a few key variables and interactions. These fishtanks are useful for learning because they do not overwhelm players with the complexity of the real systems they model (cf. Gee 2007: 39). He also compares them to sandboxes that provide a sense of authenticity while reducing the risks and dangers (ibid.: 39). Thus, games can be appreciated for their ability to simulate some aspects of the real world, but also for their ability to prepare player’s minds for interaction with complex systems. A discourse oriented game literacy targets such critical reflection on both digital and real-life systems and systems thinking. This section presents a systems approach to games as interactive texts by focusing on goals, feedback, tools, simulations and systems. Its main focus is on the description and investigation of how games as systems can inform a dis‐ course-oriented VGL. However, game systems also have elements of narrative and fiction. Digital Fiction As interactive texts, games are not just systems which enable play, but also fictional worlds in which unique types of narrative experiences can occur. As discussed in sections 2.1 and 2.3.2, all play involves fictional elements. Video 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 70 <?page no="71"?> games support the fictional elements of play through their system design. A closer look into fictional aspects of video game design requires addressing the question of fictionality. This question is crucial due to the potential that video games have to shape the world-view and identity of players. The common view may be that, if games do not represent the outside world accurately, then they serve as an escape from the real world, or even manipulate players into believing a false version of the world (a more violent world, for instance). While the previous section discussed the concept of systems learning, it did so with the perspective that players abstract an understanding of systems while playing, and that this understanding could be transferred to real life systems. According to David Shaffer, this assumption is problematic. While he raises no doubts that games, even non-serious ones, are good for learning, he points out that players may just be learning how to play the game (Shaffer 2012: 403). However, such an approach ignores the story-world building potential of games and the potential (and dangers) that fiction has for learning. This section takes a closer look at these issues by investigating the concept of fictionality. From a communicative-cognitive standpoint, addressing the fictionality of a ‘text’ is important because it determines to a large extent how the ‘audience’ receives it (cf. Herman 2013: 104; Ryan 2010: n.p.; Zipfel 2014: 104). ‘Real’ in‐ formation has relevance for ‘real’ life and may directly affect the way individuals behave in the world. Fictional stories, on the other hand, may also affect the audience’s behavior, but require the playful mode of make-believe from the au‐ dience (Zipfel 2014: 104). However, as section 2.3.2 points out, the non-serious perspective on play and make-believe is often an etic view. The play of fiction‐ ality, in terms of ‘player’ reception, exists as a quite serious endeavor of sepa‐ rating fact from fiction within fictional representations, as well as of investi‐ gating the possible abstract (poetic/ aesthetic) truths from non-realistic representations. As is often pointed out, fictional representations within a text exist more as a scale than a binary phenomenon, as a text always relies on the real world for an understanding and representation of a fictional one (Ryan 2010: n.p.; Zipfel 2014: 105; Herman 2013: 193). This approach to fiction has also been applied to games, as Juul points out that game interpretation relies in part on non-fictional expectations ( Juul 2014: 178). The following passages argue that questions of fictionality are relevant for commercial video games because of the cognitive work players must perform in sorting out the fiction from the non-fiction, and to continually explore and develop the world of the game as it compares to the real world of the players. 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 71 <?page no="72"?> Drama-pedagogy and -didactics serve as a useful organizing concept to un‐ derstand the potential of digital game fiction for EFL teaching and learning for several reasons. First, play exists as a fundamental, underlying concept for both drama and games. A dramatic performance is a form of make-believe, just as dramatic fictional texts require the make-believe of the reader for immersion into the storyworld. In games, players also engage in make-believe. Second, both acting within drama (and the drama as a medium to be acted out) and gameplay can be understood as a performance. While the drama serves as the foundational ‘script’ of the play, the game (as a designed system) serves as an ‘interactive script’ of gameplay. And just as drama ‘comes to life’ through the actors’ per‐ formance, a game emerges through the player actions. Lastly, both medial forms can be understood through the concept of narrative. Even though drama and plays have a linear, narrative structure with predetermined conclusions, games use fictional worlds and explicit narratives within their systems to motivate and frame gameplay. Comparing drama-pedagogy and -didactics to video game literacy allows for conceptual transfer of fictional aspects inherent in digital games. As a form of narrative sense-making, dramatic texts and performances exhibit a potential for learning. They present processes of creating ‘coherent’ wholes out of distinct events, individuals and actions They also exhibit a potential for perspec‐ tive-taking and presenting (and making sense out of) foreign life worlds, which can foster intercultural communicative competence (cf. Freitag-Hild 2015; Küp‐ pers 2015; Lütge 2015). As a form of performance, dramatic texts can teach ways of being in the world and language as a performance. The can also emphasize the reflective potential they have for students’ life worlds and the generic forms that often co-construct their action (cf. Hallet 2015 on performative compe‐ tence). In this sense, gameplay can be concomitantly seen as both a dramatic reading and performance. Video game literacy which aims for foreign language discourse ability benefits from a performative approach to fictional texts and especially their affordances for multiperspectivity and intercultural communi‐ cative competence. The following passages address fictionality in the game‐ world, fictionality and rules, fictionality and player interaction, and fictional game narratives to connect to the didactic and pedagogic potential they have for developing foreign language discourse skills in the EFL classroom. Fictionality and Gameworld: Addressing fictionality in gameworlds allows learners to engage in deeper cultural discourses on reality, not just on how re‐ ality (and fiction) is presented in various media like video games, but also on how individuals construct reality through their limited perceptions, through engagement in cultural discourses, and through the ‘consumption’ of media. 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 72 <?page no="73"?> 26 Cf. 3.1 on fictionality in video game fan-comics and 4.2 on fictionality as function in possible world theory. Although some gameworlds are purely fictional, and therefore have arguably little real-life cultural relevance (though all fictional gameworlds include cul‐ tural “subscripts”), the processes of interpreting fiction and levels of fictionality are comparable to processes involved in developing intercultural communica‐ tive competence (ICC). From an ICC perspective, the ability to understand for‐ eign realities, or Fremdverstehen, also develops individuals’ abilities to take on the perspective of others and their ways of seeing and being in the world (cf. Nünning & Nünning 2000: 5) Furthermore, Fremdverstehen also allows for critical, reflective engagement with one’s own culture. While the fictional game worlds may appear to have little obvious cultural relevance, interacting with them can still foster self-re‐ flective processes, and open up a “third space” in which the player’s culture (and beliefs, values, and world views) are negotiated (cf. Freitag-Hild 2010: 127; Müller-Hartmann & Schocker-v. Ditfurth 2004: 115). Nünning & Nünning refer to the relativization of perspective that results from such ICC processes in‐ volving cultural texts (Nünning & Nünning 2000: 7). This idea applies well to the relativization of reality, and an understanding that reality is in part con‐ structed by individuals and thus never complete. Analyzing the fictionality of games can enable students to enter into cultural discourses on ‘reality’ presen‐ tation in media and culture, and the relativization of reality that is necessary in order to critically reflect and constructively expand one’s own understanding of the world. 26 Any fictional world must be understood in terms of the actual world of the author and the audience. This premise can be connected to constructivist theory, founded on the idea that individuals construe the world in new situations using knowledge and experience of the world from past situations (cf. Bonnet 2004: 108-11; Bruner 1961; Piaget 2005). This approach can be applied to engagements with fictional worlds, except that engagement in the latter requires the further work of separating fact from fiction, determining which aspects are analogue, and which aspects are representational. According to Frank Zipfel, “in order to be fictional, a world must present some degree of deviation when compared to the real world or, more precisely, when compared to what we usually regard as the real world.” (Zipfel 2014: 105) Fictional worlds are always reliant on the world of the author for construction and the audience for interpretation, meaning that fiction is a relationship between the real world and something new, as well as a process of implementing certain known and knowable elements of the real 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 73 <?page no="74"?> 27 Cf. Grabes 2008 on cognition and the representation and interpretation of fictional characters. 28 It could also be argued that more complex games and gameworlds enable easier systems transfer and thus, world view. This would mean that complexity, and not world-veri‐ similitude, could serve as a more meaningful criterion for learning. world to establish divergent, not yet known and/ or incredible fictional aspects. As Zipfel states, fictional worlds are always “parasitic” upon the real world (2014: 105). Yet Zipfel’s reference to “degree of deviation,” similar to Ryan’s “distances from the actual world” (Ryan 2010: n.p.), suggests the possibility of assessing aspects of the fictional world that deviate from the real world and then deter‐ mining their degree of deviation. It is likely that learning in/ with games occurs from this type of interaction, even if in an automatic, unreflected and intuitive manner. One example is fictional characters, both in literature as well as in commercial games. Ryan, using an example from John Searle, points out that Sherlock Holmes may be a fictional character, but the assertions made by Conan Doyle about London are serious (Ryan 2010: n.p.). Thus, the deviation between Doyle’s fictional London (with Sherlock Holmes) could be measured as minor when compared to the actual London (without Sherlock Holmes). David Herman points out that characters, fictional or non-fictional, are based on “textually grounded models of individuals-in-a-world” that rely on generic markers for identity (Herman 2013: 193). The construction and reception of fictional char‐ acters, then, are based on individuals’ experiences with non-fictional characters in the real world. The audience of fictional works interprets the minds of fic‐ tional characters similar to those of real people. 27 It make sense to consider the truth and representational value of video games since games that represent the real world and real world processes likely have more potential for direct transfer. 28 However, this approach runs the risk of ig‐ noring the potential that fiction poses for learning and would also be an implicit ‘slap in the face’ to attempts to bring fictional literature and media into the foreign language classroom. The point of fiction, “the game of make-believe” that applies to both games and literature (Ryan 2010: n.p.), making what Ryan calls the textual actual world coincide with as many as possible of the private worlds of the reader (Herman 2013: 128), is its ability to engage readers in re‐ flective thought, to provide multiple perspectives to events, and to allow readers to experience novel situations- regardless, or perhaps partially because of, the fictionality of its representation. The process of interpreting a textual world exists as a complex interplay between the ‘real’ world, the interpreter’s under‐ standing of and experience with the ‘real’ world, the ‘fictional’ world, and the 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 74 <?page no="75"?> relationship between the fictional and non-fictional aspects within the ‘fictional’ world. This complex interaction simulates what occurs in real life as individuals create models of the world (either to describe or to project desirable outcomes of action). These models are always to an extent fictional, and must be constantly tested and modified socially and in interaction with the physical world. Fictional texts, then, are abstractions of that process that quite possibly rely less on the verity of their content and more on highlighting the process of reality con‐ struction and interpretation. This complex process can evoke reflection on the processes of thinking and experiencing the real world, both foreign and familiar. Video games, by presenting fictional foreign worlds, can also foster this type of thinking - if their potential is not ignored. VGL which is interested in enabling participation in foreign language discourse should address the fictionality of game worlds, and their potential for reflecting the cultural and individual con‐ structedness of reality necessary for real-life intercultural communication and interaction with cultural artifacts. Fictionality and Rules: In games, rules and fiction share a complex interrela‐ tionship. Although rules separate games from pure narrative forms, rules and make-believe are inextricably intertwined, as rules can generate a make-believe world and a make-believe world can generate rules. Jesper Juul provides a useful conceptualization of rules and their relationship to the gameworld in his analysis of abstraction in games. Juul differentiates between three categories of fic‐ tion-rule relationships: 1) fiction implemented in rules, 2) fiction not imple‐ mented in game rules and 3) rules not explained by fiction (cf. Juul 2014: 175). This category highlights the idea that not all game rules are implicated directly in the fictional world of the game. Furthermore, Juul discusses the idea of ab‐ straction and the level of interaction that rules allow with the fictional elements of the gameworld (ibid.: 176). He concludes that rules allow player interaction with the fiction of the gameworld, but only to varying degrees (for example pushing a button that makes a playable character attack an opponent or climb a wall, etc.). However, Juul’s investigation on rules, abstraction, and fiction leads him to the real-life comparison that “a level of abstraction is a general trait of how we perceive actions, since any action that we take will always entail muscle movements or other biological processes to which we have no conscious access.” (ibid.: 177) Though Juul’s distinction between fiction and rules in a game is mostly true, rules and fiction cannot be separated completely and rules inherently contain fictional elements. Rules that are made simply for a game are fictional in the sense that they have no bearing on real life action, and rules in games that are 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 75 <?page no="76"?> 29 Cf. Hallet’s concept of performative competency, which claims that performance is more than a fictional world, but also the “Inszenierung und Einübung von sprachlichen und sozialen Interaktionen, auf kulturelle Handlungen und auf die jeweiligen Anteile und Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten der Individuen.” (Hallet 2015a: 53) Such cultural, ev‐ eryday action is based on learned interactional patterns (ibid.: 55), which in their more complex forms can be understood as “scripts” (ibid.: 60) that even follow generic forms (i.e. social dramas, ibid.: 61). borrowed from and reflected in real life are often socially constructed (barring rules of nature represented in games), and in this sense also fictional. 29 However, taking a closer look at rules in games, the actions they allow, and the role of abstraction (comparable to Ryan’s distance of the fictional world to the world of the reader) offers a unique perspective on considering fiction and rules in games. According to Juul, games will likely never offer the same actions possible in real life, and will never have rules without abstraction. Games are fundamentally about reducing the number of possibilities available to the player ( Juul 2014: 189), and according to Juul, games will never offer “a game-like experience without a level of abstraction, or a game where anything was possible and ev‐ erything was simulated to arbitrary detail.” (ibid.: 182) Games make the amount of action more manageable, make the game easier to learn, and allow elaborate visuals that do not interfere with the abstract rules (ibid.: 184). In this light, it is interesting to compare Juul’s claims on rules and games to the role of rules in real-life social, cultural interaction. If interaction with fictional aspects of media (in games, dramatic performances or literature) has a potential for reflection on ‘real’ life, then game rules offer a unique opportunity to reflect on the implicit rules that form everyday social and cultural interaction. Video game literacy that focuses on foreign language discourse considers the fictionality of rules in games and looks towards connecting to larger cultural discourses on the cultural construction, and the possible pragmatic functions, of rules in real-life settings. Fictionality and Player Interaction: One aspect marginally treated so far is the characteristics that define how players interact with the fictional elements of the game. The paradox of play, as discussed in section 2.3.2, states that players engage in a simultaneous belief and non-belief during gameplay. This paradox is comparable to the paradox of fiction, in which the audience has real emotional responses to fictional characters, despite the fact that the audience is usually not affected by events and people who do not really exist (cf. Juul 2013: 36). Zipfel discusses Walton’s “double attitude” towards games of make-believe, in which “players take the game seriously to participate and follow the rules yet at same time retain an awareness that the game is a game and not real” (Zipfel 2014: 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 76 <?page no="77"?> 30 Cf. also Juul’s concept of games as half real. Games have real rule-based activities that participants perform in the actual world, and fictional worlds in which participants imagine when playing ( Juul 2014: 173-4, cf. also Juul 2005). 31 Connectionism states that intelligent behavior emerges from large numbers of neuron-like processing units connected as networks that allow parallel processing (Harris 2006: . 3). Cf. also Iain McGilchrist (McGilchrist 2011) and Daniel Kahnemann (Kahnemann 2010). 106). Juul makes a similar claim about failure in games to explain how and why players take games seriously despite their arbitrary nature. Juul’s “paradox of failure” in games is that, 1) people generally avoid failure, 2) people experience failure when playing games, and 3) people seek out games, even though they will experience something they normally avoid ( Juul 2013: 2). 30 While these paradoxes are valid, treating the mind as a singular, unified object ignores its inherent and processual complexity. The “willing suspension of dis‐ belief ” as Coleridge put it may be partially due to the minds division into sep‐ arate parts that can process information independently before delivering it to conscious use. 31 However, it seems likely that a mind that can parallel process fictional and non-fictional elements of both games and literature has an ad‐ vantage over minds that cannot, since this parallel processing allows for hypo‐ thetical thinking in which mental models are subjected to mental simulations to predict and control future events. An informed discourse on games that fo‐ cuses on fictional elements recognizes the inherent paradoxes of gameplay, and understands the similarities to engagement to many different types of fiction and real-life discourse. Fictional Game Narratives: Can an interactive system be a narrative, and can it be understood in narrative terms? The medium of games has offered fertile ground for debate on these questions, especially since games offer complex sys‐ tems that have strong narrative components. The attempt to understand games in narrative terms (cf. Murray 1998, 2004; Pearce 2004; Ryan 2006, among others) seems to coincide with attempts to understand cognition and forms of human sense-making in narrative terms (cf. Bruner 2002, 2004; Gottschall 2012; Herman 2003, 2013). However, narrative approaches to understanding both games and real life have their limitations. Games are not the same as narratives, since their domi‐ nant functions are, as Aarseth states, configurative and not interpretive (quoted in Eskelinin 2004: 38). Furthermore, play as a mode of interaction is often not teleological like narratives and takes place in the moment and is not a repre‐ sentation of past events. For these reasons, many ludologists warn against con‐ fusing digital games with after-the-fact narratives (Aarseth 2004: 168; Calleja 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 77 <?page no="78"?> 32 Aarseth 2004a discusses quest/ adventure games as prime examples for games mistaken for narratives. Quest games offer quest-like challenges but are not telling stories (this only occurs after-the-fact in retelling). According to Aarseth, players tell the stories in the decisions they make and the outcomes they achieve. 33 Jenkins 2003 refers to “evoked narratives” created by the spatial and symbolic design of the game world as “narrative architecture.” This is similar to Juul’s 2014 description of fictional world. 2011: 113; Ryan 2006: XXii). 32 Also (and similarly), while storytelling may be a dominant form of sense-making, Herman warns that not all person-level expe‐ riences are scaffolded by narrative processes, though they may well be narra‐ tivized after the fact (Herman 2013: 86-87). Participation in games may be a type of experience not supported predomi‐ nantly by narrative sense-making processes. This idea is supported by Merlin Donald’s theory of human cognitive evolution, which sees today’s society as dominated by what he calls “hybrid theoretic systems,” consisting of networks of “exographic” records (external symbolic storage systems). This stage of evo‐ lution is built upon what he calls “mythic culture” which is in turn based on the powerful representations of storytelling and narrative (Donald 2010). Thus, in‐ teraction with symbolic external memory systems represents a new develop‐ ment in the evolution of human cognition which is built upon the storytelling cognitive ability of “mythic culture” but also presents a new form of being in and interacting with the world. This theory suggests that narrative expression and sense-making still plays a role in society and individual cognition, yet that it is also limited in its ability to deal with complex systems of distributed cog‐ nition. Games may model modern society well in their combination of external distributed cognitive systems with embodied, situated and action-oriented nar‐ rative structure. This critical understanding of games (as both systems and as narratives or storytelling machines) will serve as a backdrop to look at narratives and narra‐ tive aspects in games. While these narrative elements have several names, like Jenkin’s “embedded narrative” ( Jenkins 2003: 119) or Pearce’s “metastory” (Pearce 2004: 145), Calleja’s “scripted narrative” explains well the different ways that stories and story elements are narrated by games. It is also important here to conceptually differentiate between explicit story-elements within games and the fictional world presented within (cf. passages above on fictional game‐ world). 33 Calleja differentiates between what he calls scripted narrative, the “pre-scripted story events written into the game” and alterbiography, the “story generated by the individual player as she takes action in the game” (Calleja 2011: 115). Because alterbiography will be discussed at a later point (cf. section 2.3.2), 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 78 <?page no="79"?> it suffices here to point out that both the game narrative and the narrative player experience interrelate. Calleja further points out that the scripted narrative ranges in complexity and can be presented at both the macro level (in the progression structure of the game) as well as at the micro level (through cut scenes, quick-time events, ob‐ jects in the world, dialogue, and straightforward streams of verbal text) (ibid.: 120-121). The scripted narrative can have different relationships to game goals: narrative goals can drive game goals, while at other times game goals are in‐ vested with narrative elements. (ibid.: 121). Furthermore, narrative elements can be understood as push elements, describing situations like cut-scenes where the player is a captive audience and cannot interact, and pull elements, which are embedded in the gameworld by the designers and require the players to “pull the narrative to them” (cf. ibid.: 122-123). There are also different types of nar‐ rative paths, as games can present overarching narratives, narratives that branch, or they can present worlds with only “side quests” (mini-stories within a gameworld that drive and structure player involvement with game problems and events) or allow players to roam freely within a storied gameworld (ibid.: 121-122). In conclusion, game narratives serve a range of functions, from initiating interaction, aiding narrative understanding, providing coherence to game‐ worlds, and supporting player performance. These narrative aspects can be subject to the same didactic principles developed for literature and multimodal and multimedial forms of storytelling. VGL that enables participation in foreign language discourse addresses the role of narrative in games, the dynamic inter‐ play of narrative structure and playful interaction, and can connect the discourse on the conflict between narrative and systems with larger cultural discourses on the role of narrative sense-making in a networked world of highly complex systems. Although this conceptualization of VGL could have taken a literal approach to literacy by focusing on learners designing games, such an approach would miss out on the potentials that an informed approach to video games as inter‐ active texts can offer participation in the foreign language game discourse. This approach connects to these potentials and sees the game program as the foun‐ dation of VGL. This section addressed video games as interactive texts through two approaches, the systems and the fictional, with an understanding of their complex interconnected relationship. In both approaches, opportunities to con‐ nect game discourse to other real-life cultural discourses were provided to il‐ lustrate the larger relevance of video game literacy for intercultural learning and participation. In the next dimension, this foundation is applied to illustrate 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 79 <?page no="80"?> how gameplay emerges out of the complex interactions between players and game programs. VGL that aims for foreign language discourse ability recognizes that games only ‘come to life’ when played. Therefore, considerations of game‐ play and player behavior are keys to understanding discourse on and around games. 2.3.2 The Player The second dimension of a discourse model of VGL focuses on the game as an interaction between the player and the game system and includes aspects of the player’s experiences. This second dimension extends from the first dimension, since aspects of the game as a system and fictional world largely influence the ways in which players experience a game. Fig. 5: The Dimension of Player and Player Experience This section, 2.3.2, thus focuses on concepts of play, flow, immersion and iden‐ tification to explain the experience of digital gameplay (cf. fig. 5). They are seen as a link between the game and the third dimension of the world, which is the dimension in which all game discourse takes place. Play: VGL which aims for foreign language discourse ability should address the particular mode of interaction which characterizes games - play. Although play is also important for learning, social and cultural development, and work, it is often relegated to either ‘childishness’ or to free-time. If a free-time activity, play is often associated with sports and justified as stress-relief or physical training. However, play is crucial for learning in many life contexts, and devaluating it is likely based on a misunderstanding of its function and complexity. The fol‐ 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 80 <?page no="81"?> 34 Contrary to Juul (2014: 175), this claim suggests that rules not implemented in game-fic‐ tion still evoke an imaginary situation in the player’s mind. It is possible that players relate such rules to the fictional gameworld. 35 Compare to Juul’s claim that games are “half-real” ( Juul 2005, 2014: 173-4). 36 C.f. Hallet’s discourse on performance and the “make-believe,” playful aspects involved in cultural action (Hallet 2015a). lowing passages delve deeper into the concept of play, viewing it as a crucial part of gameplay experience and connecting it with larger cultural processes of development and learning. A deeper understanding of play is crucial for the discourse around games and is necessary for video game literacy. Presented below are several paradoxes surrounding play that often inhibit it from entering into serious cultural discourse (cf. also Jones 2016 on play and foreign language learning). The first salient paradox of play is that it contains ‘real’ and ‘make-believe’ components. During play, participants create an alternate fictional world shared in the minds of the participants, as well as rules (in child’s play often implicit) that govern participant behavior. Vygotsky states that in play, imaginary situa‐ tions and rules go hand-in-hand, that rules can both stem from imaginary sit‐ uations, but that imaginary situations can also develop out of sets of rules (1978: 95-6). 34 Huizinga also points out that rules are one of the fundamental charac‐ teristics of all play (1980: 11), as well as that “play is not “ordinary” or “real” life” (ibid.: 8), and that play forms a type of illusion (illusion stemming from inludere - “in play”) (ibid.: 11). Thus, play occurs in the real world through the creation of an imaginary world where rules determine the observable behavior of the participants as how they should act in that imaginary world. 35 However, this paradox might lead some to assume a misleading dichotomy between the ‘real’ and the ‘imagined,’ since the imaginary situation is often representational of real life situations. 36 The rules that accompany imaginary situations are often representational of the real rules that govern social inter‐ actions and activities of the representational situation. Without further concep‐ tualization, the label, ‘fiction,’ loses its analytical power. Another salient paradox involves the seriousness of play. Huizinga states, “The contrast between play and seriousness is always fluid. The inferiority of play is continually being offset by the corresponding superiority of its serious‐ ness.” (1980: 8) Within this view, play becomes both fun, frivolous, make believe, and yet at the same time, serious and real work. Furthermore, Huizinga claims that the engagement in play requires an internalization of this paradox through concomitant belief and disbelief. He states, “the unity and indivisibility of belief and unbelief, the indissoluble connection between sacred earnest and “make-be‐ 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 81 <?page no="82"?> 37 Interestingly, players require an internalized etic view to balance their belief. This in‐ ternalization is a meta-cognitive awareness of the artificiality of a play situation that at the same time requires large amounts of attention and focus in order to make realistic and to elicit belief. lieve” or “fun”, are best understood in the concept of play itself.” (1980: 24; cf. also Vygotsky 1978: 99) A person at play, then, is in a state of both not believing and believing in the play situation. Thus, this paradox can be connected to the mode of disbelief and belief in both the make-believe, illusory, imaginary world and the real concomitant set of rules surrounding that belief. While the polar characteristics are most likely scalar and fluid, they also rely on each other for their very existence. With an etic perspective, play may appear trivial; an emic perspective, however, will also contain both a belief and a seriousness that make play meaningful for the participants. 37 While Vygotsky examines play for child development and language, Huizinga addresses play for the constitution of culture. Yet Adorno points out the para‐ doxical nature of play and its potential for reflection on ontological assumptions, “The unreality of games gives notice that reality is not yet real.” (quoted in Hills 2002: 32) Adorno inverts the ontological dichotomy of make-believe and reality, stating that in play, one is presented with the constructiveness of reality. In his economic approach to play, Adorno notes the differentiation between exchangeand use-value in children (Hills 2002: 32-33). In this type of playful value re-ap‐ propriation, a power exists to reinterpret, possibly reinvent, world perception and construction. Thus, Adorno’s approach provides a seriousness to play through its ability to point out the arbitrary nature of social reality. This paradoxical nature of play opens up a ‘third space’ between individuals and the world for the construction of new meaning. This potential can serve as an entry point into larger cultural discourses on the construction of reality. As Huizinga states, “In play there is something “at play” which transcends the im‐ mediate needs of life and imparts meaning to the action. All play means some‐ thing.” (Huizinga 1980: 1) Play thus functions to represent meaning and obtains a power to signify. While Huizinga discusses myths and rituals as play to es‐ tablish a causal link to culture (cf. Huizinga 1980: 5), Vygotsky establishes a cognitive and psychological development link between the minds of very young children and adults’ minds which operate within a complex network of signified meaning in culture. Vygotsky sees a psychological function in play, stating that “play seems to be invented at the point when the child begins to experience unrealizable tendencies.” (1978: 93) For children, play develops as a substitute to achieve what the child cannot achieve in reality. This transferal of desires leads processes of signification for objects and actions. Vygotsky states, “In play 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 82 <?page no="83"?> thought is separated from objects and action arises from ideas rather than from things” (1978: 97). Thus, play becomes a pivotal point in a child’s cognitive de‐ velopment through which (s)he learns meaning (through ideas) and abstract thought (1978: 103). This process of abstracting meaning has implications for language development, “Thus, through play the child achieves a functional def‐ inition of concepts or objects, and words become parts of a thing.” (1978: 99) Through play, young children learn to abstract information and meaning from direct, embodied, action oriented and extra-symbolic experience and experiment with them in various ‘imaginative’ situations. Play can also explain how individuals develop their sense of self which is, in turn, necessary for the interpretation of the perspectives of others. This is crucial not only for the conceptual development of objects in the world (i.e. symboli‐ cally), but also for negotiating meaning in social settings. David Herman de‐ scribes cognitive development and storytelling, stating, learning to recognize and engage with perspectives anchored in the subjectivity of persons enables modes of symbol use and symbolic play: iterable symbolic represen‐ tations must by definition be tailored to accommodate different contexts of use, and forms of pretense also require being able to oscillate between or among different person-anchored perspectives. (Herman 2013: 90) Herman describes play in cognitive terms as a function that allows learning through a form of make-believe or pretense, to view situations and objects in the world from external, multiple “person-anchored” perspectives. While this ability to ‘see’ the world through the perspectives of others is crucial for the conceptualization of both the self and other, it is also crucial in communicative settings when individuals are engaged in modes of cooperation. Once this initial perspective-taking ability is internalized, individuals can uti‐ lize/ expand upon it in further interactions with the world, Thanks to this distillation of the idea or rather the experience of person-anchored perspectives from embodied, preconceptual engagement with other persons, objects in the world can be taken for what they are but also grasped as they might be taken under conditions of pretense, where they are (in effect) imagined as they might be viewed by another… (Herman 2013: 90) Symbolic play enables not only multiperspectivity but also empathy. This sug‐ gests that play allows for both language development as well as communication as a cooperative act of negotiating meaning - and also thus for discourse itself. Since social and cultural negotiation is indelibly complex, and individuals are constantly striving to interpret multiple, even unknowable perspectives in con‐ 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 83 <?page no="84"?> 38 According to Cope & Kalantzis, technologies are symptoms of social change. Social conditions make technologies imaginable and then useable. In turn, technologies pro‐ vide the affordances for new social forms (2009: 89). tinually novel and increasingly complex contexts, the cognitive ability of sym‐ bolic play is continually developed throughout life. Thus play becomes a serious matter even beyond childhood. Play reveals implications for human cognition and even the development of culture. However, human thought and even culture are often described in con‐ trast to, or in conflict with, the universe in which they exist. Huizinga states that play “creates order, is order. Into an imperfect world and into the confusion of life it brings a temporary, a limited perfection.” (1980: 10) Csikszentmihalyi makes a similar claim when he states that culture serves as a shield against the “random, crushing forces of the universe” (2008: 11). And Geertz notes on play that “the imposition of meaning on life is the major end and primary condition of human existence” (1973: 424). More recently, Thomas Malaby addresses the function of play and its role in dealing with an indifferent universe, viewing games as a metaphor for the indeterminacy of life (2009). In light of this view, play (with its inherent paradoxes and ambiguities) ap‐ pears to serve as arbiter between an indelibly complex world and the need to learn from the world for context-specific action. Or in other words, if play as a disposition for dealing with the indeterminacy of life is to ‘square up’ with the function of play for signifying practices, at either the macrolevel of culture or at the microlevel of individual development and cognition, then those signifying practices have to deal with the indeterminacy if not arbitrary nature of their meaning-making process and outcomes. This approach to play ties in well with Blumer’s conception of symbolic interaction, in which meaning, arising out of social interaction, is “handled in, and modified through, an interpretative process used by the person in dealing with the things he encounters” (Blumer 1986: 2). If learning can be understood as creating patterns of thought (like epistemic frames, or models of situated action, cf. Shaffer 2012: 423), or developing infer‐ encing power (as popular in Bayesian statistics, cf. Perfors et al. 2011), then these patterns, models, or inferences must be continually tested on an incomprehen‐ sibly complex, indifferent, indeterminate world. In this light, it is possible that learning is not necessarily/ solely the superimposition of an existing logic onto the world, but rather a playful mode of interacting with a sublime complexity of environment and people. Furthermore, if today’s world is becoming more complex, and if the complexity of that world is either reflected in, or even driven by interactive media like video games, 38 then a serious approach to, and better 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 84 <?page no="85"?> understanding of, play can allow a more fruitful analysis of games and a greater ability to participate in the cultural discourse on games. Flow and Immersion: Not all learning experiences are created equal. One of the functions of formal education is to initiate deep learning in order to maximize input (in several different subject domains) in the set time that learners are present. Coyle, Hood and Marsh define deep learning as the critical analysis of new ideas, connecting them to already-known concepts, and leads to understanding and long-term retention of those concepts so that they can be used for problem solving in unfamiliar contexts. Surface learning is the acceptance of information as isolated and unlinked facts. It leads to superficial retention only. (Coyle et al. 2010: 39) In order for deep learning to occur, learners must be faced with challenges which can be overcome yet require the full attention, focus and skill set of the learner (cf. Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development). Learners must also be motivated and, if possible, actually enjoy the learning experience. Video games in general are good at initiating deep learning (Gee 2007: 10), largely because they fulfill these requirements. Games achieve this by designing systems (cf. 2.3.2) which initiate play, flow and immersion. The latter two concepts will be discussed in the following passages. Flow describes experiences which often emerge from the player interaction with video games, experiences in which complex skill use and deep learning occur. Csikszentmihalyi describes flow as “optimal experience.” Not just related to happiness, flow also leads to a more complex self (Csikszentmihalyi 2008: 41) with a higher state of consciousness (ibid: 74) - or to learning and growth (ibid: 84). According to Csikszentmihalyi, growth through flow states stem from two broader processes, differentiation and integration (ibid.: 41). Flow is related to a specific type of happiness (“enjoyment” cf. ibid.: 45) that is autotelic, or a “self-contained activity, one that is done not with the expectation of some future benefit, but simply because the doing itself is the reward.” (ibid.: 67) Thus, flow experiences are process oriented and intrinsically motivated. Much flow research comes from studying gameplay. In fact, Csikszentmihalyi uses games and gameplay as an analogy for understanding flow experiences (2008: 72-74), and develops eight components to flow that are useful for un‐ derstanding interaction with digital games. These components are that flow activities provide challenging tasks that can be overcome, that they require high levels of concentration, they have clear goals and provide immediate feedback, that involvement is deep and yet seemingly effortless, that they allow people to exercise a sense of agency over their actions, that the concern for the self dis‐ 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 85 <?page no="86"?> 39 Costikyan points out that many games benefit precisely from jarring the player out of any sense of flow (2013: 25). 40 McGonigal points out that too much fiero and flow hinder the game industry’s goal of creating lifelong gamers (McGonigal 2011: 43). For this reason, some games implement “fatigue systems” to avoid “gamer’s regret” (ibid.: 43-44). appears and that the sense of the duration of time is altered (cf. ibid.: 49). This connection of flow to games illustrates the potentials of video game discourse for understanding player experience. Flow has been particularly affective at describing popular digital games. Ac‐ cording to McGonigal, digital games allow flow to occur almost immediately because they have faster cycles of learning and reward (2011: 42). 39 Indeed, most games have clear goals and win states and their feedback is typically immediate. Furthermore, digital games often present challenges that can be overcome by presenting what Gee calls well-ordered problems (discussed earlier in this sec‐ tion) and by adjusting difficulty and complexity levels in order to match player ability (cf. Squire 2008: 651 for this adjustment in games and its effect on the flow state). By ordering problems and adjusting them as the player advances, the game can be described as keeping the player in the zone of flow by matching the player’s zone of proximal development (Prensky 2010). Prensky connects the learning principles of games to those of pedagogy by describing digital games and flow in terms of learning theory. However, some scholars point out the more problematic side of flow. Csiks‐ zentmihalyi states that flow-producing activities can be addicting (2008: 61) and that flow is only “good” in its “potential to make life more rich, intense and meaningful; it is good because it increases the strength and complexity of the self ” (ibid.: 70). McGonigal too discusses the problematic side of flow, claiming that “fiero” experiences, describing the player’s elated pride after triumph over adversity make games addictive (2011: 33, 43). However, McGonigal claims that too much flow in games can lead to “burnout” since the player’s physical and mental resources are not indefinite (ibid.: 42). 40 This analysis shows that flow is important for many games and that, while it is a crucial part of the learning experience of gameplay, it is also not always desirable. A video game literacy that includes the concept of flow can allow learner participation in the discourse on games as well as other, more ‘serious’ flow-inducing activities. Such dis‐ course participation can raise awareness of both the potential as well as the risks of flow states, and can even help students develop strategies for designing pos‐ itive flow experiences to overcome certain life challenges. Flow experiences in digital games are often attributed to immersion. Immer‐ sion is a positive trait for learning in virtual environments since it convinces 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 86 <?page no="87"?> 41 It is difficult to claim that digital environments are not authentic, especially considering players’ motives and that social interactions occur within them. 42 This presents one aspect of optimal learning. Games are not necessarily good at in‐ ducing players to critically reflect on in-game experiences and learning. participants (to varying degrees) that the environment is demanding of full focus. While immersive digital game environments may not be ‘authentic’ com‐ pared to the non-digital world, they are often authenticated by the players’ ‘suspension of disbelief.’ 41 Thus, players are immersed in digital games in situ‐ ated and embodied worlds and faced with problems which require them to act. Immersion can thus support optimal learning. 42 However, immersion in digital games is a complex and often contested subject. The following presents different conceptualizations of immersion and difficulties that arise in applying the con‐ cept to games. Immersion in games can be differentiated into two categories: immersion based on explicit interaction with the game system and immersion in the sem‐ iotic representation of the game. Before details into these two categories are provided, other approaches that see immersion as distinct from interaction are presented. For instance, Mosel refers to immersion as simply “das Eintauchen in eine fremde Welt” (Mosel 2013: 238). Both Mosel and Lankoski do not call explicit interaction with the game immersion but rather “engagement” (Lan‐ koski 2011: 35; Mosel 2013: 238). They justify this semantic differentiation as due to the lack of aesthetic distance and the passivity that supposedly accom‐ panies immersion. However, this justification is weak because labelling repre‐ sentational immersion (like in TV/ film and narratives) as inherently passive is reductivist, ignores the agency of participants, and leaves out the cognitive work of interpretation, and because distinguishing engagement as a form of non-im‐ mersion assumes that engagement naturally includes aesthetic and critical dis‐ tance and ignores the world-evocation in participants’ minds. However, it does make sense to point out that engagement (narrative/ semiotic or rule/ system based) might not necessarily lead to immersion, and that immersion is more likely experienced in scalar form. Some scholars differentiate between fictional/ narrative/ semiotic immersion in games and action-based immersion. This approach to immersion can be un‐ derstood to see even flow states as immersive states, even without an explicit fictional world. Adams differentiates between three types of immersion in games: tactical, strategic and narrative (Adams 2004: n.p.). While tactical im‐ mersion describes the “moment-by-moment act of playing the game”, strategic immersion refers to the “cerebral kind of involvement with the game” and nar‐ rative immersion occurs when the player “starts to care about the characters 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 87 <?page no="88"?> and wants to know how the story is going to end” (ibid.: n.p.). Ackermann takes a similar tripartite approach referring to sensory immersion (audiovisual rep‐ resentation), challenge-based immersion (balancing game-challenges with in‐ dividual skill), and imaginative immersion (absorption in the stories, world and characters) (2013: 366). However, though these tripartite approaches capture aspects of immersion in games, a simpler division between the semiotic and action-based immersion makes more sense. In this approach, semiotic contains both the audiovisual representation and (scripted) narrative aspects of the game. The action-based immersion pertains to the concepts of the game as a system, the player’s mode of play and the emerging state of flow. Insight into flow and immersion reveals the types of learning experiences that game design can evoke. Immersion, flow, and play are intense player ex‐ periences that provide meaning to game systems and authenticate player learning. A VGL focused on discourse participation has the potential to connect to such in-game learning and experiences, and through meta-cognitive reflec‐ tion and collaborative negotiation of meaning, can help students develop life strategies that transfer to other relevant systems. The following passages focus on how game interaction influence players’ perception of identity, and how VGL can connect to this discourse. Player Identity: Research on learner identity in foreign language learning takes a double focus. On the one hand, foreign language learners are encouraged to develop a sense of identity in terms of skills and competences (cf. Kramsch 2011) in order to develop the confidence and even motivation to participate in foreign language discourse. As Hallet points out, these skills and competences are bound to more complex patterns of thinking and action comparable to roles in a play that follow generic scripts that define course of action (Hallet 2015: 59-60). For‐ eign language discourse participation, then, is a performance based on existing (and newly acquired) identities that allow for the negotiation and even emer‐ gence of new identities (ibid.: 64-65). This follows the logic that self-presenta‐ tion and interaction with others requires a sense of self and identity. However, on the other hand, learner identity is also conceptualized in terms of its fluidity, performance, and multidimensionality. Welsch, discussing iden‐ tity in today’s globalized society, refers to the inner plurality of individuals, stating, Man sollte nicht nur davon sprechen, dass heutige Gesellschaften unterschiedliche kulturelle Modelle in sich befassen (“cultural diversity”), sondern das Augenmerk darauf richten, dass die Individuen heute durch mehrere kulturelle Muster geprägt 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 88 <?page no="89"?> sind, unterschiedliche kulturelle Elemente in sich tragen. (Welsch 2009: 6; cf. also Freitag-Hild 2010) It appears, then, that the more complex understanding of identity provided by the double focus is not just founded on developing skills and competences that allow cultural action and performance, but also on developing a critical, self-re‐ flective competence focused on the plurality, complexity, constructedness and malleability of the learner’s identity. As Hallet states, Kulturelles Lernen im Fremdsprachenunterricht heißt demzufolge auch, die Formen der Interaktion und der theatralen (Selbst-)Inszenierung in anglophonen Kulturen kennen zu lernen, sie zu verstehen und sie im Hinblick auf die Verwendung in der eigenen Lebenswelt kritisch zu reflektieren. (Hallet 2015a: 64) In other words, foreign language and cultural learning offers a unique oppor‐ tunity to become aware of and reflect on the social and cultural construction of reality, interaction, and identity in both target and source culture. This foreign language didactic approach to (inter/ trans)cultural identity provides a crucial backdrop for the role and potential of identity development in video games. The following connects foreign language didactic discourse and the discourse on games with a narrative approach to sense making and identity construction. A dominant belief surrounding narratives, sense making and the self is that understanding is constructed by stories and for stories (Gottschall 2012: 31). Bruner claims that humans “cling to narrative models of reality” (Bruner 2002: 7) and that “narrative, including fictional narrative, gives shape to things in the real world and often bestows on them a title to reality” (ibid.: 8). Understanding reality through narrative structures and genres enables individuals to commu‐ nicate experience within comprehensible structures. Bruner states that “story is the coin and currency of culture” (ibid.: 16) because “the conventionalization of narrative […] converts individual experience into collective coin which can be circulated, as it were, on a base wider than a merely interpersonal one” (ibid.: 16). Since narrative is a powerful mode of understanding and communicating within the world, it also becomes a powerful way of understanding and com‐ municating one’s own self within that world. Because “there is no such thing as an intuitively obvious and essential self to know […] we constantly construct and reconstruct ourselves to meet the needs of the situations we encounter.” (ibid.: 64) This constant self-reconstruction is patterned on conventional genres in what Bruner calls a “narrative art” which is guided both by the individual (through memories, feelings, ideas, beliefs, desires, etc.) as well as by the external social world, its expectations and how it views a specific individual (cf. ibid.: 65; see also Gottschall 2012: 161 on life stories as personal myths). 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 89 <?page no="90"?> 43 Bergerson et al. trace this narrative to western civilization (enlightenment and roman‐ ticism) and its view of the self that justified the power structures of patriarchy, capi‐ talism, nation states, classes and race in search of utopia (2011: 16-17). However, narrative sense-making can be problematic if it leads to an over-re‐ duction of life’s complexity. A major dialectic inherent in narratives is their attempt to create coherent wholes out of complex, sometimes contradictory parts (cf. Bruner 2002: 90; Herman 2013: 337). While a sense of coherence is useful, especially for context specific action, it can be harmful if taken for ob‐ jective truth. Bergerson et al. warn of the dangers of master narratives (grand myths placed on individuals, often by dominant cultural and social institutions) and narratives of mastery which promote the ideal of self-autonomy (2011: 11). 43 They point out two fundamental problems that stem from this approach to self-construction; namely, that it leads to the assumption that the self is static and singular (ibid.: 22-23, cf. also Welsch's concept of transculturality in dis‐ cussion above) and that a sense of coherence disguises the responsibility indi‐ viduals take in their self-construction (ibid.: 38). While narrative sense-making is imperative, sense-making is ineffective if it excludes other more complex forms. Merlin Donald presents three “leaps” in human cognitive development which highlight the uses and limitations of nar‐ rative in sense-making and connects well to player interaction with games. The first development, “mimetic culture,” describes the general expressive ability of humans (stemming from the ability to practice and develop skill sets). The second development builds off the first one and is labelled “mythic” culture to describe the development of speech and language and their power to express through narratives and storytelling. The third development is labelled “hybrid theoretic system” and describes the development of technology which trans‐ poses thought and memory to “non-neural media” (Donald 2010). There are two relevant aspects of his approach. First, the last stage of cogni‐ tive development does not replace but is rather superimposed on earlier stages of mimetic and mythic culture. This means that narrative forms of senseand self-making are still crucial to everyday life, learning, and social interaction. Second, a newer form of sense making is emerging - that of systems thinking. As Donald states, the third stage of cognitive development includes an “en‐ trainment” of the brain into networks (ibid.: n.p.), suggesting that both forms are necessary for today’s life, that narrative sense-making may be a cognitive precursor (and fundamental to) the development of systems thinking, and that selfconstruction is dependent upon both. Narratives are good at creating co‐ herent wholes with clear conclusions and understanding of self. Systems, on the other hand, are good at networking the self within an ecology of others- their 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 90 <?page no="91"?> wants, needs beliefs, etc. Systems thinking also relativizes the individual-driven self within the socially-networked self. Supporting the idea that systems and narrative thinking are not mutually exclusive, David Herman approaches narratives as a complex system of “tools for thinking,” of scaffolding for cognitive behavior, and of cognitive artifacts (cf. Herman 2003: 231; 2013: 272). Herman shows that narrative structures embed complex systems of understanding by chunking experience into events, se‐ quencing them in time and place, imputing causal relations, and by distributing intelligence across multiple characters and perspectives by embedding narra‐ tives within narratives (Herman 2013: 231-232). Herman states, “Narrative em‐ bedding thus increases the distributional reach of a frame tale, enhancing the overall power of the intelligence-generating system to which it contributes.” (ibid.: 274) It can achieve this, for instance, by bringing resources to the challenge of negotiating experience through interpreting the past based on “fragmentary” and “diminishing” information available in the present, and by “making sense of one’s own and other’s actions in terms of reasons for acting.” (ibid.: 274). This systems approach to narratives leads Herman to conclude that “the more dis‐ tributed the structure of framing, the “smarter” the entire system” (ibid.: 276). Thus, sense-making not only involves single narratives, but also entire systems of narratives that “intervene in a field of discourses, […] a constellation of ways of seeing” (ibid.: 13). Comparable to Donald’s approach to systems thinking as based on narrative thinking, Herman states narratives operate within a “a so‐ ciety of mind […], a socially coordinated (and materially scaffolded) effort to negotiate a complex, ever-changing and sometimes threatening environment.” (ibid.: 281) However, the typical self today is arguably different than the selves of the past. The stories and myths passed down by cultures and nation states seem to have lost much of their influence, just as the models of selfhood that worked in the past have yielded to either new models or despair and apathy. Bergerson et al. present such a new model for self-construction by pairing grand and self-nar‐ ratives with a conviction to know more and remain curious (2011: 205). Though a fragmented self may appear weak, they claim it “must always remain frag‐ mentary and open to the possibility of rupture if it is to assume responsibility for its self-deceptions.” (ibid.: 79) This means that the continual construction and deconstruction of the self becomes a ceaseless task of ‘Sisyphean’ proportions. Some schools of thought take a less linear model of selfhood for identity today. Welsch (on transculturality) believes the “outdated” Kugel (globe) model of in‐ dividual cultural identity should be replaced by an understanding of selfhood as a “patchwork” consisting of a network of patterns (2009: 5-6). The New 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 91 <?page no="92"?> London Group describes the multiple layers of identity, just as there are multiple discourses of identity and multiple discourses of recognition in today’s world (2000: 17). Kramsch sees the self as largely symbolic and fluid as it is positioned “both inside and outside the discourse of others.” (2011: 359) This vision of self-construction is not seen as the continual construction and deconstruction of the self but rather also as the selection, presentation and negotiation of iden‐ tities within specific contexts and social settings. Both models reveal the com‐ plex set of responsibilities and processes that is expected of individuals today. Identity and selfhood are both a construction site of being and a tool for action in a complex, multicultural, multi-selfed world. There are correlations between digital games, sense-making processes and identity. Murray sees digital games as an example of “multiform story,” con‐ sisting of both a system and narratives. She states, “Part of the impetus behind the growth of the multiform story is the dizzying physics of the twentieth cen‐ tury, which has told us that our common perceptions of time and space are not the absolute truths we had been assuming them to be.” (Murray 1998: 34) Fur‐ thermore, addressing the shift of sense-making from narratives to systems, she elucidates the social and cultural role digital games play, “The more we see life in terms of systems, the more we need a system-modeling medium to represent it - and the less we can dismiss such organized rule systems as mere games.” (ibid.: 93) In a later work, Murray states, “The digital medium is the appropriate locus for enacting and exploring the contests and puzzles of the new global community and the postmodern inner life.” (Murray 2004: 3) Comparing the “multistory” capability of games to a “kaleidoscopic” view and understanding of life, Murray explains how games combine coherence with the hypertext ca‐ pabilities of interactive systems, “By experiencing such interwoven stories as one unit, we can enhance the kaleidoscopic capacity of our minds, our capacity to imagine life from multiple points of view.” (Murray 1998: 161) This “kaleido‐ scopic” view can be external, extending outwards into interaction with the world, or internal, describing how individuals see themselves and their place in the world. More recently, discussion of narrative potential of game systems have shifted from hypertext analogy to that of emergence, where the player’s game experi‐ ence is an unpredictable result of the interaction between two highly complex systems: the player and the game (cf. Jenkins 2003; Juul 2005; Murray 2004; Nitsche 2008; Pearce 2004; Walsh 2011 for discussions on narrative, play and emergence). Calleja’s “alterbiography” describes the emergent narrative and the self-construction in games by conceptualizing how players make sense of their gameplay experiences during interaction with the system. According to Calleja, 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 92 <?page no="93"?> 44 Cf. Raessens discussion of the ludification of culture in the Western world (Raessens 2014), also discussed in section 2.3.3. a story emerges during gameplay that is not only dependent on the player’s disposition (2011: 127) but also on the player’s interaction with the game’s en‐ vironment, its affordances for actions (ibid.: 119), as well as with its scripted narrative (ibid.: 132). Biography refers to specific player experiences (and thus sense of self and identity), and alter refers to both the avatar’s biography and the biography altered by the game. However, several issues concerning this conceptualization of gameplay ex‐ perience require further clarification. First, narrative sense-making, while pos‐ sibly one of the dominant sense-making forms, is not necessarily dominant during gameplay. As Herman points out, “not all person-level experiences are scaffolded by narrative practices, though they may well lend themselves to nar‐ rativization after the fact” (2013: 86-87). Thus, just because a game experience is narratable, does not mean that it is narrative in nature. Second, the underlying principle that alterbiography describes players’ attempt to “make sense of the whole” (Herman 2013: 124) by integrating individual game experiences into a higher-order understanding is problematic. This assumes players actively reflect on their experiences during gameplay, which is possibly difficult to achieve during game-states of flow where the player’s psychic energy is invested in game-tasks. Finally, the term “alterbiography” may imply that one dominant narrative-understanding is developed by the player to form an overarching story that subsumes all other experiences. It is more likely that digital games provide fictional worlds in which certain types of narrative and biographical experiences are supported. This study supports Murray’s approach to games as systems that allow a kaleidoscopic view within a coherent “unit.” It makes more sense to understand gameplay and player interaction as a process and less as a (narrative) product. There may be sense-making processes similar to those required for narrative interpretation, especially since there are narrative components to games, and there may be narrative understandings that accompany game in‐ terpretation. Thus player experience, including the identity construction of the player in-game, can possibly be best understood in terms of play where narrative coherence, definitive closures and singular representations of self are not always necessary. This study proposes play as a new valid and serious form of interacting with and making sense out of today’s complex systems, and offers digital games as a model of how systems encourage and accommodate novel experiences, concep‐ tualizations of self, and identity constructions. 44 From this perspective, real life 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 93 <?page no="94"?> systems do not simply enforce established power structures (and ways of being in the world) but rather are a springboard for motivating and cultivating revo‐ lutionary experiences, of futures codesigned by individuals and the technolog‐ ical tools they have developed. This view leads to a reevaluation of older forms and institutions of sense-making. Narrative sense-making, while fundamental, is a system with expandable potential for instigating and modelling human thought in today’s complex world. And identity is imagined in terms of a con‐ tinual construction and deconstruction that exists alongside multiple identities, but it is also imagined as requiring individual reflection on the affordances of specific identities for action within communities and contexts, and reflection on how those multiple identities can be sensibly/ ethically networked within the singularity of individual minds and bodies. Digital games allow for identity play. On the one hand they enable players to become more familiar with complex digital systems and develop a sense of ex‐ pertise. On the other hand, they offer playable characters in specific worlds and specific contexts that allow players the chance to take on new identities within those worlds. Embodied in such situations, players develop identities that are either personal (by playing characters of different gender, racial, ethnic or even age groups) professional (like those of a scientist, a political, community or military leader, a survivalist, a boxer, or even historical figures, etc.), or animal (in games where players control animal, animaloid or even humanoid creatures), non-animal (like ships, cars, planes, etc.) or even what Calleja calls entities (groups of people or objects) (2011: 124-125). Sometimes, players even control entire societies or even worlds (cf. Civilization). Thus, a model of VGL that aims for foreign language discourse ability can understand the identity play in video games in terms of multiple identities, and ways of being in the world today. Despite disagreements, the link between game identity and real-world iden‐ tity is tenable. First, the concept of alterbiography suggests that the player is emotionally and psychologically invested in the identities developed in in‐ habited gameworlds. There is a chance that this investment can transfer into the real world. Second, the reality of game identities depends largely on the social validation players receive inside and outside of games. Within game worlds, players often interact with other characters that validate their in-game identities, skills, abilities and behaviors. This can have a carry-over affect to real life. Also, since many games are a form of popular media with considerable fan-communities, players can receive social validation from other players out‐ side of the game. Another reason is that even fictitious identities offered by games are based to varying degrees on real life, cultural ‘scripts’ of ways of being. Thus even fictitious characters are modeled off of real-life character types. 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 94 <?page no="95"?> 45 Cf. Yee et al. on the “proteus effect” which describes how the physical representation and abilities of the avatar effect player behavior (2009). Finally, play, even identity play, always entails aspects of seriousness (cf. pas‐ sages above on play), which allows a connection to real-world value and use. Identity learning plays an important role for education. Gee discusses the role of identity learning through games, and its bearing on learning in school and for future life, stating, deep learning requires an extended commitment and such a commitment is powerfully recruited when people take on a new identity they value and in which they become heavily invested - whether this be a child “being a scientist doing science” in a class‐ room or an adult taking on a new role at work. (2007: 32) He believes games offer identity-learning through extensive and intensive en‐ gagement players have with them. Jenkins also sees a similar educational po‐ tential for games, stating that “game play also is one of a range of contemporary forms of youth popular culture that encourages young people to assume fictive identities and through this process develop a richer understanding of themselves and their social roles.” ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 28) Furthermore, in agreement with Gee (2003), he sees a process of double projection that supports identity learning in games, “This projected identity allows the player to strongly identify with the character and thus have an immersive experience within the game, and at the same times to use the character as a mirror to reflect his or her own values and choices.” (ibid.: 28) Thus identity construction in games can teach new iden‐ tities and lead to the critical reflection of existing ones. Identification in many games can be seen as a process of negotiation amongst the player, the game system, and the playable character. 45 Jenkins et al. see an opportunity in this process to develop performance skills (crucial, for example, for science and design, ibid.: 30). Furthermore, they point out an overarching potential this skill offers problem solving and interaction in today’s world, “Per‐ formance brings with it capacities to understand problems from multiple view‐ points, to assimilate information, to exert mastery over core cultural materials, and to improvise in response to a changing environment.” (ibid.: 31) This ap‐ proach falls in line with Hallet’s performative competence and its role for foreign language didactics. Hallet states that performance should not be understood only in terms of a fictional world, but also as the “Inszenierung und Einübung von sprachlichen und sozialen Interaktionen, auf kulturelle Handlungen und auf die jeweiligen Anteile und Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten der Individuen.” (2015a: 53) This approach holds true not only to the performance involved in 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 95 <?page no="96"?> 46 Cf. Sykes & Reinhardt 2013 on language play in games and identity development; Thorne & Black 2011: 19 on identity play in multiplayer game settings. 47 Due to the scope and focus of this dissertation, much research on the specific mechanics of player-avatar identification is left out. Cf. Fritz (2013) on immersion, synchronization and identity in games, Mosel (2013) on the dispositive of games and identity, Ackermann (2013) on avatar death and player identification, Schäfer (2013) on ethnicity and gender identification, Baier & Schreiber (2013) on gender, sexuality and identification, Inderst & Just (2013) on pain and identification, and Beil (2013) on perspective in games, im‐ mersion and identity. professional institutions but also in the ‘social dramas’ of everyday interaction (ibid.: 58). For these reasons, performance in everyday life plays a strong role in both the development and representation of personal identities (ibid.: 62). Games are staging grounds that offer scripts, but allow players the freedom to both play around with those scripted identities and, at the same time, invest them with their own agency, desires and values. 46 Thorne et al.’s research on identity for second language socialization in digital games notes that identity experimentation is one way learners begin to deal with the complexities of so‐ ciocultural contexts related to the target language (2009: 810). Their conclusion is based on studies that show gameplay can complexify students’ understanding of diversity (by providing multiple perspectives associated with different social identities) and that show players are able to understand the impact of their identity choices based on experiences in gameworld settings (ibid.: 809). 47 The points presented thus far suggest that playing digital games can fulfill the double focus of identity that didactic discourse calls for. On the one hand, players often take on various identities in games, learning to play the roles of different types of people, professions, and even entities. Through this, they learn not only the skills and possibly world-views associated with their characters, but also a sense of expertise within certain roles. On the other hand, the trans‐ feral and investment of identity to a fictitious, digital character in a gameworld does much to highlight the socially and contextually constructed nature of self and identity, presenting a unique opportunity for the player to reflect on ‘real-world’ identity. This section addressed the second dimension of VGL as describing a player’s ability to design rewarding experiences (cf. Gee 2007; Squire 2008). It focused on four major (intricately interrelated) conceptual pillars - play, flow, immersion and identity - that illuminate the types of experiences that emerge from game‐ play. However, the work presented here expands this previous concept of VGL to focus not so much (or simply) on designing rewarding gameplay experiences, but rather on designing rewarding discourse participation on games and that draw on games and transfer to other life settings. This literacy dimension un‐ 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 96 <?page no="97"?> 48 Cf. Jones & Schmidt 2014 on games, culture and the EFL classroom. derstands the role of play, flow, immersion and identity for life and learning, how they function within many popular video games, and how game discourse can inform other life contexts. 2.3.3 The World VGL which aims at foreign language discourse ability has cultural implications at all dimensions. It views the first dimension of game systems as cultural arti‐ facts and the second dimension of gameplay as cultural practice. 48 The third dimension is complex because it involves a cultural understanding of the first two dimensions and applies it to the larger cultural discourse surrounding games, as well as to the larger cultural changes that video games are bringing about. It involves not only the discourse on games, but a level of meta-discourse on how meaning of games and gameplay is inscribed, how game structures and experiences are transferred to other life domains, and how games influence the ways social groups form and interact. Although video games occupy a specific cultural and medial niche, video game discourse participation can allow for a cultural participation at a much broader level for several reasons. First, as has been discussed at greater extent in 2.3.1 and 2.3.2, video games are complex, multimodal, interactive, digital sys‐ tems that model complex systems that exist in other domains of life. Zim‐ merman, who defines systems literacy as a subcategory of “gaming literacy,” believes that “More than other kinds of culture and media which have been the focus of literacy in the past, then, games are uniquely well-suited to teach sys‐ tems literacy.” (2009: 26) He understands systems literacy, in turn, as having strong implications for real world settings. He states, “Having a systems point of view (being systems literate) means understanding the world as dynamic sets of parts with complex, constantly changing interrelationships - seeing the structures that underlie our world, and comprehending how these structures function.” (ibid.: 25) Because this idea has been discussed at length in other sec‐ tions, I will not dwell further on it here and focus instead on the second reason why video game literacy can allow for a fuller participation in cultural discourse in other domains of life. There are (at least) two major perspectives on how games are affecting cul‐ ture, and how an informed approach, provided by the video game literacy model in this dissertation, can enable cultural discursive participation. The first ap‐ proach looks to video games and moves outwards, and describes how they are 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 97 <?page no="98"?> affecting non-game settings, institutions and systems. The first portion of this section will thus focus on the phenomenon of gamification and the ways in which video games are affecting personal, economic and public domains of ev‐ eryday life. The second approach looks to video games and moves inwards, and describes how communities of players gather and engage in sets of literacy practices to communicate about games. These fan communities are referred to here as gamer culture and will be the focus of the second portion of this section. Figure 6 illustrates these two approaches to the cultural context of video games as addressed in this section. Here it is important to note that these two ap‐ proaches are not exhaustive, but serve as illustrative of the cultural influence of games. One particular aspect of influence that will not be discussed here is the storyworlds approach, which looks at storytelling across media which often occurs today through media franchising. One example of this is that most block‐ busters today are not simply films, but also TV series, novels, comics and video games. Many media companies are aware of the potential of developing story‐ worlds through different media and thus plan “media packages” from the very beginning (cf. Harvey 2014 for a taxonomy of transmedial storytelling). The inclusion of video games into such media “packaging” illustrates their cultural importance, and this importance is in turn reflected in more traditional media, like television and film, which take up various aspects of video games and gamer culture within their stories. However, the following will not focus on this ap‐ proach to the cultural influence of games on culture in any more detail, and instead will focus on gamification and gamer culture. Fig. 6: Two Dimensions of the Cultural Context of Video Games Gamification: The impact of games and the video game industry on society and culture is difficult to grasp. The relatively recent trend of gamification offers a particularly unique perspective into such influences because it presents ex‐ plicit attempts to make non-game systems in many sectors of society more game-like. Mathias Fuchs points out the impact of gamification, defining it as 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 98 <?page no="99"?> 49 Cf. case study 2 for results of gamification in the EFL classroom. “The process of total permeation of our society with methods, metaphors, values, and attributes of games” and stating that, according to renowned US-American market analysts, gamification more than anything else will have the strongest impact on our lives today (2014: 119). Fuchs also notes that digital games are “a reference without which gamification could not be conceived” (ibid.: 121). Joost Raessens also discusses the cultural change brought about by games, referring to gamification as an integral part of the “ludification of culture” (2014). The following passages address changes brought about by gamification to show the educational (and EFL) relevance of VGL for today’s quickly changing world. 49 The New London Group offers three domains of changing life today (2000: 17), and these three domains offer a structure to address how video games are in‐ fluencing non-game systems through gamification. Those three domains are working, public and personal lives. The passages below address the infiltration of gamification in the economic, public and personal lives of people today. They also address a fourth domain of education due to its specific relevance to the topic at hand, as well as to the extensive influence of gamification on this do‐ main. The ultimate purpose is to highlight the cultural relevance of VGL. Economic Life: Economic life is greatly affected by gamification, and changes are occurring at two levels. First, workplaces are being gamified in order to restructure how employees interact with each other as well with the objects and processes involved in their work. Gamification expert Adam Penenberg, when asked in an interview about gamification in fortune 500 companies, states, The list is practically endless. Google, Microsoft, Cisco, Deloitte, Sun Microsystems, IBM, L’Oreal, Canon, Lexus, FedEx, UPS, Wells Fargo and countless others have em‐ braced games to make workers more satisfied, better-trained and focused on their jobs, as well as to improve products and services. (Schawbel 2013) To this list can also be added Disney (Deterding 2014: 308), SAP, a German mul‐ tinational software corporation which provides services for managing business operations (with 282,000 business customers in 190 countries), as well as As‐ traZeneca, a multinational pharmaceutical and biologics company, which has developed and used games for training their business partners in over 100 coun‐ tries (Orendorff 2015). The US military has a long history of using digital games as simulations for training, but has also over the past several decades used pop‐ ular and commercial video games for the recruitment and training of recruits (cf. Turse 2008). Furthermore, the strict hierarchical structure of military insti‐ tutions worldwide, with badges, tests, trainings, and focus on strategy, etc. 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 99 <?page no="100"?> points to strong similarities of gamification, and most likely shows the much longer tradition of the ‘art of war’ and games (cf. Fuchs 2014: 133; Gilbert 1986; Holborn 1986). This is just one connection between gamification and economic life. Not only are workplaces being restructured, but also the interface between companies and customers. Game structures have been used for several decades to engage and motivate customers. Point schemes and status levels like those used by air‐ line and credit card companies have long understood the benefits of games me‐ chanics for business (Zichermann & Cunningham 2011: 7-8). However, espe‐ cially with the rise of digital technology and the Internet (and online business transactions, marketing and other services) and with several generations so‐ cialized on video games, businesses and companies have been gamifying their websites and mobile apps with fervor. Fuchs presents studies that predict the growth of the gamification market to 5.5 billion US dollars by 2018 and that at least half of all organizations that manage innovation processes will gamify by 2015 (2014: 119). Publications like Gamification by Design reveal the impact of gamification on web and mobile apps, and how such interfaces use game me‐ chanics to market brands, sell products, and handle customers (Zichermann & Cunningham 2011). The pervasiveness of gamification in digital online apps suggests that people today (especially those with smart phones and tablets) in‐ teract daily with gamified commercial systems. The gamification of work or‐ ganization and customer interface illustrate the larger cultural influence of games. Public Life: Besides the US Army, local and national governments around the world utilize gamification to promote civic engagement. One example comes from games developed by governments to support citizenry. For instance, the US government hosts a series of four serious games called Mission US that cover different aspects of US American history, like the American Revolution, slavery, Native American history, and immigration (accompanied by classroom guides and materials) (Media 2015). Trace Effects is another game created by the U.S. Department of State to help teach American English and culture to students learning English as a foreign language (U.S. Department of State 2012). The Australian Bureau of Statistics also made a game, Run That Town, to inform citizens on the functions of their census (Australia 2013). England’s Department of Work and Pensions utilizes a gamified app, Idea Street, to crowdsource inno‐ vation ideas from its 120,000 employees, and has reported notable success (Ev‐ erett 2011). However, like in the economic sector, many governments are using gamifi‐ cation to influence the ways in which their agencies interact with citizens. In 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 100 <?page no="101"?> 50 For an in-depth look at how libraries benefit from gamification, cf. Deeg 2014. 2014, the U.S. state of Hawaii gamified its entire online service (Kanowitz 2014), and the U.S. state of Massachusetts offers several gamified apps (like Bos: 311 and Commonwealth Connect) for citizens to report emergencies and service requests (Boston 2014). Public utilities like energy companies are also gamifying services to reduce energy costs of users as well as to meet energy reduction goals set by governing bodies. The IDC predicts that in 2016, utility companies worldwide will spend $65 million on gamification (IDC Corporate USA 2015). National Grid, a multi-state energy company in the U.S. and in Great Britain, is gamifying its utility app to meet such governmental goals (Brousell 2014; Nerd 2014). Any Internet search will show that these are not isolated cases. Lastly, games and gamification have also been effecting cultural institutions like museums and public libraries. In 2012, the Museum of Modern Art explicitly accepted video games as an art form and established an exhibit with and on video games (Antonelli 2012), and the Museum of Computer Games (Computer‐ spielemuseum) in Berlin has recognized the artistic and cultural value of video games since 2011 (Computerspielemuseum 2015). But museums not only the‐ matize video games, they also gamify their services to increase engagement with visitors. This has been done at museums like The Museum of Science in Boston, The Tate Gallery and the Smithsonian in the U.S. (Digital Meets Heritage 2015). Public libraries have also implemented gamification, in New York (Library n.d.) as well as in Bücherhallen Hamburg and the Stadtbibliothek Wolfsburg (Nie‐ dersachsen 2015). 50 The examples provided here serve to illustrate a larger trend of how gamification is changing public life worldwide, and especially how gov‐ ernments organize employment and interact with citizens, how public services are offered, and how cultural institutions engage with and educate visitors. Private Life: An obvious place to find gamification is in social media sites like Facebook and Twitter. Dragona points out that social media is “part of a new gameful reality” (Dragona 2014: 227) that introduces not only playful elements through “voluntary participation, encouraging sociability, allowing users to play with their identities and providing a particular context of action” (ibid.: 231), but also gamification elements through structuring and manipulating users’ pro‐ files, the network of friends and interactions with urban environments (Dragona 2014: 232). The Jim Studie 2014 shows that approximately 72% of young people between 14-19 in Germany use online communities like Facebook at least several times a week (Feierabend et al. 2014: 27). In fact, as more and more life ‘migrates’ to online spaces, more people will be influenced by gamified apps and systems. Fizek refers to this phenomenon as “gamified everyday practices” and lists apps 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 101 <?page no="102"?> 51 For a broad overview of health apps and gamification, cf. Dadaczynski, Schiemann & Paulus: 2016. that range from participation in events, managing emails, reading books, and even brushing teeth (Fizek 2014: 277). Health apps are not uncommon, and some, like Nike Plus, are directly connected to market commodities (Zichermann & Cunningham 2011: 96), while others, like Zombies, Run! (Start & Alderman n.d.) and mapmyfitness (Mapmyfitness 2015) offer marketable gamified services. Games like Re-Mission are used in hospitals as forms of treatment, like fighting cancer (HopeLab 2015). 51 As with other domains, the examples shown here only illustrate some of the many ways in which games affect the social and personal lives of individuals. Education: The impact of gamification on education is unclear since there is little empirical research on the topic. Most research comes from the United States. It is possible that, especially since gamification largely targets behavior, many educational institutions do not wish to publicly announce such efforts. It is also important to mention that gamification can be integrated at multiple levels of education, and some institutions may not feel that their gamification measures are worth publicizing. The passages below present examples of some educational systems that have integrated games and gamification into their curriculum and administration to improve performance and increase teaching relevance. These examples represent a larger trend that is undoubtedly affecting educational systems as a whole. On the one hand, many universities are influenced by games and gamifica‐ tion. This occurs on four levels (and for four different reasons): first it occurs on the administrative level to influence how faculty works as well as how students interact with university administrations. For instance, Webster University and Dartmouth College in the U.S. have gamified student orientation (cf. The NMC Horizon Project 2013: 20-22). The second level occurs in the classroom, as ga‐ mification influences how lecturers and professors structure their syllabi, class content and grading methods to increase learner engagement. The University of Michigan has been reported to systematically apply gamification principles to classroom design (cf. The NMC Horizon Project 2013: 20-22). The third level refers to online learning platforms that supplement or even replace classroom work. Kaplan University gamified their IT degree program (NMC Horizon Report 2014: 43) and universities like UC Berkley, Harvard, MIT, the entire University of Texas system, Wellesley College, and Georgetown (just to name a few) utilize EdX, a 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 102 <?page no="103"?> 52 Not addressed here are informal gamified learning apps, like Duolingo (Falk & Götz 2016). gamified online platform for courses and university degrees. EdX has also part‐ nered with institutions in Canada, Australia, Europe, China and Japan. 52 The fourth level concerns degree programs that teach games studies and de‐ sign. In 2013 there were at least 385 U.S. universities and colleges offering courses or degrees on games (NMC Horizon Report 2014: 43). While Freyermuth points out that games studies programs (programs that focus on digital and non-digital games) developed mostly out of the Anglo-Saxon and Scandinavian educational systems (2013: 440, cf also Jones, 2017a), many games studies pro‐ grams have since developed around the globe. These examples show society recognizes the increasing role of games. Raessens refers to this recognition as the “ludic turn” in media theory, which not only allows for a perspective on media systems, but also for the serious treatment and study of games (cf. Raes‐ sens 2014: 110). The increasing role of gamification for education has led the NMC Horizon Report to name gamification as one of the two most important trends educa‐ tional institutions should adopt within the next couple of years (higher educa‐ tion and K-12) (Horizon Report 2014 K-12 Edition, The NMC Horizon Project 2013; ). This report also noted the impact of gamification on school systems, citing cases of usage of games and gamification in schools in the U.S., Canada, Sweden, and the U.K. They also note that alone 150 schools in the U.K. are using the game, Minecraft, for serious learning purposes (Horizon Report: 2014 K-12 Edition: 39). One stark example of a school embracing games and gamification is Quest to Learn, a public school in New York City which is structured around game design principles (cf. Horizon Report: 2014 K-12 Edition: 39; McGonigal 2011: 127-128). This general interest in game-based learning as an educational principle is leading to large public investment in the development of serious games for use in classroom settings (cf. Schmidt et al. 2016). Challenges and Future Development of Gamification: Gamification is not without its criticisms. First, the exact role that video games play for gamification is difficult to pinpoint. Though there are some obvious and strong connections between the two, Fuchs notes that there are “predigital predecessors of gamifi‐ cation long before digital computers became popular.” (2014: 121) His research points to a strong “ludicity” of culture that extends back to the 18 th century, suggesting that the “games craze” is not necessarily a direct result of digital games (ibid.: 135), but rather that it may result from larger cultural and social changes feeding a gamification of global culture, both through games and game‐ 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 103 <?page no="104"?> play, as well as through the playful approach to designing and interacting with non-game systems. This point is taken up by Raessens, who believes society is currently undergoing a “ludification of culture,” for which gamification is a re‐ sulting subset (2014: 97). He points out that, since the 1960s, “playfulness has gradually become a central category of our culture.” (ibid.: 94) From these per‐ spectives, gamification is at least partially a result of cultural changes and in‐ fluences beyond digital games. Placing the origin of gamification in playfulness stands to some degree in contrast to approaches that use gamification to manipulate and control behavior (Deterding 2014: 306; Fizek 2014: 275). An approach that focuses too heavily on points, badges, levels and competition misses out on the opportunities of posi‐ tive design that can actively support “human flourishing” (Deterding 2014: 321), as well as on the revolutionary potentials of systems to create new ways of seeing and being in the world (through what Fizek calls “emergent playfulness,” cf. Fizek 2014: 279). Such criticisms of gamification point to the underlying complexity of games, the motivation which players have for interaction and the cultural trends behind them (cf. 2.1 and the differentiation between learning to play and playing to learn). Gamification as a popular, global phenomenon is still developing and will undoubtedly continue to impact life domains, like the eco‐ nomic, public and private. As has already been shown, it is also impacting the education sector, but not necessarily in ways that allow for students to partici‐ pate in these cultural changes. VGL that aims for foreign language discourse ability can allow such a participation in all domains, and can address the general changes involved in the gamification and ludification of culture. Gamer Culture: The following focuses on the potential of gamer culture to mediate video games and gameplay to the larger social and cultural discourses on games. This focus is based on the belief that gamer culture, or the practices, products, and ways of being in, seeing and communicating with the world of gamers, offer not only discursive practices that are meaningful and relevant to learners’ everyday lives, but also a unique opportunity for educational institu‐ tions (and school subjects, like EFL) to intervene in and support often initial processes of articulation and conceptualization of meaningful gameplay expe‐ riences. If video games continue to have an influence on culture, society and the way people learn and think about real-life systems, then it makes sense to look to where video game experiences are articulated and negotiated. Such an in‐ vestigation leads not only to a better understanding of the potentials of such cultural processes, but also to the systematic support of learning. This third dimension of video game literacy is viewed here as extending from the other two levels discussed in section 2.3.1 and 2.3.2. This means that in order to fully 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 104 <?page no="105"?> 53 Teachers’ biases are addressed in all three case studies. participate in gamer culture, and to transfer learning into classroom settings (and for this transfer to be connected to systematic forms of learning), the di‐ mension of gamer discourse requires knowledge about the discourse on games as systems as well as player interaction and behaviors. VGL informed on gamer discourse serves the larger purpose of participating in cultural game discourse today. Like the other two levels of VGL, the cultural level focuses on the socio-cultural practices that surround games, what some call “metagame” (Gee & Hayes 2012: 130; Jenkins et al. 2009: 24) and Sykes and Reinhardt call “attendant discourse” practices (Sykes & Reinhardt 2013: 3-4). As a social semiotic design approach, VGL looks closer at “available designs” by focusing on the game itself as a de‐ signed system. It approaches “design” by focusing on the interaction between the player and the game. It also includes “the redesigned” by focusing on the discourse participation at the cultural level. Here, design is also understood as an iterative approach, where “the redesigned” always provides new material, or “available designs” for future game development and discourse participation. The Cultural Evaluation of Games: Gamer culture involves communicating and learning about games and game experiences. As a form of discourse, it is also embedded in struggles of power and meaning, both within larger systems of cultural production as well as internally amongst gamers. Within these power struggles exist biases which offer two risks. The first risk is that individuals remain unaware or uncritical of the existence of such power struggles and their potential to determine and shape decisions and behavior. The second risk is that individuals are intentionally influenced to maintain existing structures of power or to create over-simplified and rigid schemata and world ‘order.’ For instance, biasing games as addictive and mindless consumption seriously neglects the learning potentials of games and their cultural role. If a major goal of the foreign language classroom is to enable students to actively participate in foreign lan‐ guage discourse, then teachers should be critically aware of the cultural validity and complexity of gamer discourse, the surrounding cultural discourse, as well as their own biases on games. 53 Teachers should meet this prerequisite to culti‐ vate a (critical) awareness in students and allow more fruitful discourse partic‐ ipation and support autonomous (foreign language) learning outside the class‐ room. This section is structured on four approaches to understanding gamer culture. The first approach places gamer culture within the larger discourse of popular culture, and focuses on non-serious commercial games as material expressions. 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 105 <?page no="106"?> 54 Cf. Hugger & Tillmann 2015: 45 for more on the two extremes as the are presented in public discussions and mass media in Germany. The second approach follows this strand but focuses on what it means to be a ‘fan’ of popular culture, looking at fandom as a type of participation in the discourse on popular ‘texts.’ The third approach looks at Jenkins’ “participatory culture,” focusing less on what fans are and more on what types of socio-cultural, ‘productive’ practices they engage in. The final approach focuses on the spatial and (digital) architectural aspects of gamer communities which communicate, interact and ‘publish’ online. These approaches are focal points and not mutually exclusive. They are lenses that, through overlaps, allow for a greater under‐ standing of gamer culture. Video Games as Popular Culture: One approach to gamer culture comes from viewing the extremes to which games are viewed in cultural discourse in gen‐ eral, and particularly questions concerning the cultural value of video games. 54 One popular narrative surrounding video games involves a power struggle that overemphasizes games’ cultivation of violent and addictive behavior in players. This approach fits the discourse on popular culture as inferior ‘low’ culture. John Storey offers three discourse-strains that shed insight into a more complex re‐ ality of video games as popular culture. The first discourse-strain is that popular culture is “hopelessly commercial” and mass-produced for an audience of “non-discriminating consumers” (2009: 6-8). If culture can be seen in terms of communication and interaction, then a literacy approach to understanding cul‐ tural participation values both the ability to interpret as well as to produce cul‐ tural and medial artifacts. Video games present high technical and medial bar‐ riers to participation, so typically only commercial ventures can produce commercial quality games. While games are made to be played by most anyone, very few people possess the technical knowledge and resources to produce them. However, there may be points against this view. First, video games are a new medium that compete with other traditional media. This competition can be seen as a threat, and treating games as inferior could be a reaction to this. Second, games are an interactive medium that require the active engagement of players. Thus, games are not simply consumed, but also actively produced. Third, the fact that popular video games are designed by entire teams of individuals (thus challenging the high cultural idea of an ‘artist’ or ‘author’) may point out that all cultural participation is networked and social. It may be more important that individuals can participate in the design of complex, networked systems that involve both humans and computers - like video games, than produce games. The view that games as popular culture are “hopelessly commercial” allows the 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 106 <?page no="107"?> pathologization of games that blocks critical reflective engagement with games and in cultural discourse. The second discourse-strain is that popular culture originates “of the people for the people” (Storey 2009: 9). Games can be viewed as largely inclusive be‐ cause their ‘audience’ must actively engage with them for games to function. Furthermore, because games are interactive, players share agency in deter‐ mining how the game is played. In this sense, games can be seen as sharing power with players as both ‘man and machine’ create the game experience. However, video games and video game culture is not always inclusive, since some games are meant for exclusive audiences, some massively multiplayer games involve players who may exclude others, and game communities may privilege some types of knowledge and practices over others. The third discourse-strain is that in postmodernity there is no distinction between popular and ‘high’ culture. This idea stems from the “postmodern blur‐ ring of the distinction between ‘authentic’ and ‘commercial’ culture” where culture is seen as a commodity that can be bought and sold (Storey 2009: 12). This shares similarity to Jenkin’s concept of convergence, described as “the flow of content across multiple media platforms, the cooperation between multiple media industries, and the migratory behavior of media audiences who would go almost anywhere in search of the kinds of entertainment experiences they wanted.” ( Jenkins 2006: 3) In postmodernity, convergence may occur also be‐ tween ‘low’ and ‘high’ culture. While critical understanding of commercialization and commodification of culture in today’s world is important, it makes sense to highlight that commer‐ cial markets are sensitive to the needs and desires of their customers and that customers are not always uninformed consumers. Viewing commercial medial products in simplistic economic terms overlooks their embeddedness in cultural discursive practices. This embeddedness holds true for games as popular culture. In conclusion, while value considerations are important, any consideration of cultural value today requires a closer inspection that cannot rely on clear cut, hierarchical lines of commercial-non-commercial, highand popular culture, traditional-new media, etc., binaries. Video Games as Participatory Culture: Fans of popular media, and especially video games, do not just ‘consume’ media, but are often inspired to create their own media products as they participate in fan communities. Jenkins’ concept of participatory culture attempts to explain and promote the productive, creative practices that emerge out of game communities. Jenkins et al. define participa‐ tory culture as 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 107 <?page no="108"?> a culture with relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement, strong support for creating and sharing one’s creations, and some type of informal mentorship whereby what is known by the most experienced is passed along to novices. A participatory culture is also one in which members believe their contribu‐ tions matter, and feel some degree of social connection with one another ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 3). Participatory culture describes the productive practices of popular culture com‐ munities, like cosplay (costume play), fan-fiction, -comics, -videos, -zines, and -websites. For popular digital games, these practices also include more practical aspects like “modding” (modifying the game’s code, cf. Durga 2012), the creation of in-game maps, the discussion of game strategy, and ‘let’s play’ and instruc‐ tional tutorial videos (often on YouTube). Jenkins et al. see these practices as foundational for new literacy skills that are embedded in the use of media sys‐ tems as communication technologies “and the social, cultural, legal, political, and economic institutions, practices, and protocols that shape and surround them” ( Jenkins et al. 2009: 8). Viewing video games as popular “commercial” culture and as participatory culture reveals two polarities present in the discourse on games. While these two poles may serve rhetorical functions that allow for the comprehension of and research into certain facets of games, gameplay, and cultural influence, nei‐ ther side presents the reality of games and culture. Hills opposes what he calls “decisionist narratives” which attack (industrial complicity) or defend (creative expression of audience agency) sections of fandom, claiming that such argu‐ ments carve culture into good and bad objects (Hills 2002: xii). While Hills rec‐ ognizes the complexity of fan cultures and their ability to produce, he criticizes an “all out” approach to production and the valuation of production over con‐ sumption (ibid.: 30). For example, Hills (2013), drawing off the research on video gamers by Garry Crawford, notes the difference “between gamer’s textual productivity which predominantly focuses on game mechanisms (walkthroughs, hacks, modifica‐ tions) and video game narratives (fan fiction, fan art). Though this line may be somewhat blurred (Crawford 2012: 129, 132), it is nevertheless apparent that writing fan fiction or creating fan art draws on a rather different skillset than ‘modding’ the code of a game.” (Hills 2013: 133). Hills warns not only of valuing productivity without differentiating competences involved, but also of con‐ flating online posts, reviews and comments with other practices (ibid.: 136). Even if academics do not want to value some practices over others, many fans do (Hills 2013: 149). Drawing on research by Ito, Hill notes that fan cultures are 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 108 <?page no="109"?> 55 Cf. case study 1 on the narrowcasting of game-comics and the effects of its integration in the EFL classroom. often quite exclusive (ibid.: 147). 55 Thus, though Jenkins’ concept of participatory culture identifies the active role many popular culture fans play in the ‘con‐ sumption’ of media, Hills points out that any integration of participatory culture in learning scenarios must be tempered by competence differentiation and ques‐ tions of type, quality and value of products and practices. Looking at the commercialization of popular culture, participatory culture can be heralded as reclaiming and re-appropriating both the content (the nar‐ ratives and cultural discourses) as well as the representational forms (the media and modalities) of popular culture in attempts to de-commercialize popular commercial ‘products.’ Thus, supporting fan practices (i.e. in a school setting) could be seen from the democratic perspective as ‘the people’ borrowing, taking, and/ or building upon the power of commercial popular culture to communicate and to shape the way individuals see and interact with the world. This view might sacrifice overall quality, type and competence differentiation in order to justify the ends of reclaiming power. However, as Hill points out, even fan prac‐ tices do not escape commodification (Hills 2002: 36). Game community discursive practices are likely recovered and integrated back into game design. However, the sharp distinction between everyday culture and discourse is misleading. Though ‘extrinsic’ monetary gain may ‘corrupt’ popular media, that does not mean that it cannot contain inherent cultural and learning value, and that it does not reflect, participate and even re-design pop‐ ular cultural discourse. Gamer Culture and Discursive Spaces: Gamer cultures are represented and pro‐ duced largely digitally and online. Many fan-practices occur on game websites that can either be official (i.e. hosted by the game company) or fan-sites (created, hosted and maintained by fans). Such websites offer unique perspectives into how game communities negotiate game experiences, how they learn about the game, how they present and negotiate their status within the community, and how they even develop their identities as gamers and producers of other forms of game-related media. Gee’s concept of affinity space offers insight into such online websites on games. He states that the Internet is a suitable space for such communities, since “modern technologies allow the creation of more and more spaces where people can enter and interact with others (and with objects and tools) at a distance.” (Gee 2007: 90) Unlike many physical spaces, online affinity spaces are highly designed in terms of the content they present as well as the types of interactions they allow (cf. ibid.: 94). Table 1 presents eleven defining 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 109 <?page no="110"?> features of affinity space, according to Gee, that point to multiple affordances of online, participatory game culture. Eleven Defining Features of Affinity Spaces: Affinity Spaces… - are based on common endeavor, not race, class, gender or disability, - are shared by newbies and masters and everyone else, - offer “portals” that can also become strong “generators,” - transform content organization by interactional organization, - encourage intensive and extensive knowledge, - encourage individual and distributed knowledge, - encourage dispersed knowledge, - use and honor tacit knowledge, - offer many different forms and routes to participation, - offer lots of different routes to status, and - are defined by porous leadership, where leaders are resources. Table 1: Eleven Features of Affinity Spaces (cf. Gee 2007: 98-101) This list offers insight into why and how online game-communities cultivate participatory culture and discursive participation, and it provides a framework for the research of such communities. Research on affinity spaces and online gamer communities have largely focused on the literacy practices involved in such participation. The following presents a short overview of some of the most popular research. Black and Magnifico have researched the development of written literacy through the practice of fan-fiction writing on video games in fan websites (cf. Black 2008; Magnifico 2012). Duncan has focused on design literacies in general (2012; cf. also Gee & Hayes 2012: 131) and Durga has focused specifically on game design through “modding” (2012), or modifying the game by tapping into existing, and writing new code. Jones has discussed the devel‐ opment of multimodal literacies in fan-videos, -fiction and -comics as sup‐ porting foreign language discourse ability ( Jones 2015b), while Thorne and Black (2011) and Thorne et al. (2009) have explored L2 literacy and identity develop‐ ment in online gaming communities. Black discusses specifically English lan‐ guage learning in online fan communities in reference to what she calls 21 st century skills, which consist of bundles of literacies based on print, but also multimodal and technological literacies (visual literacy, technological literacy, information literacy and social literacies, cf. Black 2009). Such online spaces of game-related literacy development are unique because they capture interactions between participants, processes of literacy and media development, as well as knowledge and ideas about the games. These are presented online to members 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 110 <?page no="111"?> 56 Gee & Hayes later admit weaknesses (cf. Gee & Hayes 2012: 133). 57 Cf. also Duncan 2012; Durga 2012 and Magnifico 2012 on reconsidering motivation in online game affinity spaces. of the community and to researchers interested in better understanding literacy development in such contexts. However, video game affinity spaces are not utopic sites for learning and literacy development. Research on online affinity spaces of games, while mostly supporting Gee’s framework and approach, reveals that some features are overly optimistic. While Duncan & Hayes’ research on video game affinity spaces is driven by an interest “to develop a fuller understanding of how learning and literacy are already embedded within the informal use of digital media” (Duncan & Hayes 2012: 3), they point out that “online cultures are rarely solely suppor‐ tive, productive, and generative.” (ibid.: 11) 56 Lammers’ research on a Sims fan‐ fiction website concludes that there are two genres of participation: friendship driven and interest driven, leading her to warn that “Gee’s theory of affinity space does little to address aspects of socializing and its roles as a motivating factor for participation in online communities” (Lammers 2012: 29). 57 Lammers also points out the role of moderators for “policing” the behaviors and activities of participants (ibid.: 43), noting that external forces are needed to help regulate such communities on their behaviors and productive activities. Like any literacy community, learning in affinity spaces requires active and extensive engage‐ ment as well as social skills to navigate sometimes unfriendly and unsupportive environments. It also requires the construction of social relationships based on friendship and the sharing of similar interests and goals, and not just simply on expression, discourse participation, and literacies acquisition. The Game Program The Game: What are the goals of the game, and how much choice do they allow players? How does the game inform players about their progress? What tools does the game offer players and their characters, and how do they enable players to accomplish tasks? What sort of system does the game simulate, and how does it compare to real-life systems? The Story: How similar is the gameworld to the real world? How do the rules allow players access to the gameworld? What types of story (and genre) does the game present, and how do players relate to it? How much freedom do players have to create their own story? Playing the Game Play: How is playing the game real? Not real? What part of playing the game is mean‐ ingful to players? What do players learn through play? 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 111 <?page no="112"?> Time and Space: How does playing the game affect players’ sense of time? Of space? What aspects of the game are responsible for this? What other life experiences have similar affects? Identity: How do accomplishments in the game affect how players perceive them‐ selves? To what degree do players identify with the characters in the game? How can game characters allow players to experience things they cannot in real life? What the Game Means to the World Outside Perspective: How do people who don’t play games perceive them? How do they value them? When and where do they think games are appropriate? What do they think people learn or gain by playing games? How do they relate the game to other life activities? Inside Perspective: How do people who do play games perceive and value them? How do they view people who do not play games? When and where do they think games are appropriate? What can be learned by playing games? How do they relate the game to other life activities? How do games represent the real world? How are games rep‐ resented in other media? Table 2: Interpreting Video Game Experiences - Questions Supporting Discourse Table 2 presents a model for video game literacy which aims for foreign language discourse ability that summarizes the three dimensions of section 2.3. It consists of questions that can be utilized in didactic contexts to initiate classroom game discourse and critical reflection. While these three dimensions are presented as distinct parts of the model, it is important to keep in mind that they are inex‐ tricably intertwined, and, arguably, no dimension could exist without the others. Competent cultural discourse on games requires a complex understanding of all three dimensions. The questions that belong to this model contextualize specific aspects of the game along dimensional lines in questions that allow for articu‐ lation of game experience and engagement in game discourse. They also en‐ courage reflection in order to connect student experiences with games to real-life contexts, and to understand the potential that VGL holds for the foreign language discourse, not just on games. The questions also offer a first step to‐ wards linking the language contact and learning of learners from informal game-related settings to the language learning in the EFL classroom. This section on the cultural context of games looked at two specific aspects: at how games affect culture (specifically the four domains of life: personal, eco‐ nomic, public and educational) and at the gamer culture that emerges from game-fan communities, as it is embedded in other cultural discourses on the cultural value of games, of popular culture, of participatory culture and of online discursive spaces. Gamer culture and cultural practices will play a crucial role 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 112 <?page no="113"?> in the rest of the study for three reasons. First, gamer culture is integrally in‐ terconnected to the other two dimensions of video game literacy: the game as a system and gameplay, and these dimensions are typically included in gamer discourse. Second, gamer culture is expressed external to video games and gameplay and holds potential for developing meta-cognitive abilities and re‐ flection of all three dimensions to connect to higher levels of cultural discourses on games. Third, gamer culture provides spaces, topics, and literacy practices meaningful and relevant to the lives of many young learners and can be inte‐ grated into EFL classroom literacy tasks. Figure 7 shows the potential gamer-dis‐ course has for connecting game experiences to other cultural discourses on games. The model presented therein is based on the idea that players bring with them a wealth of experiences that, in discourse with other fans, enable a more informed cultural discourse on games. Fig. 7: Gamer Discourse as Mediator between Gameplay and Cultural Discourse The model of VGL shows not only the complexity of video game discourse but also the interrelatedness of its different levels. This study puts forth the claim that informed game discourse is aware and knowledgable of this complexity and interrelatedness. Furthermore, informed discourse is able to engage in critical reflection on all three levels - on the game as a complex system, on the player 2.3 The Discourse Model of Video Game Literacy 113 <?page no="114"?> experience of games and gameplay, and the meanings that different groups give to games and the ways in which games are influencing different sectors of so‐ ciety. Connecting foreign language discourse ability to this model poses a con‐ siderable challenge to educators and materials developers with little background knowledge on and experience with games. On the one hand, the VGL model connects to the knowledge, experiences, and English language that students potentially have outside of schools, yet, on the other hand, it also challenges students to move beyond into increasingly complex levels of cultural discourse. However, the model suggests that educators do not necessarily need specific game knowledge and experience if they have a basic understanding of games and game discourse, if they know what types of questions to ask, goals to set, and tasks to develop. The VGL model is thus a first step in the direction of helping teachers overcome this challenge. Part II presents a further step towards closing the gap by investigating gamer discourse further to see if it can serve as a pos‐ sible link to higher level cultural discourse on games. 2 Towards a Discourse-Based Model of Video Game Literacy 114 <?page no="115"?> II. Gamer Discourse: A Possible Link? A possible link to connect students to informed English language discourse on games is gamer discourse. Gamer discourse hold several affordances: 1) it de‐ scribes the discourse as it emerges from game players and game communities, 2) it presents the knowledge and experiences of gamers, and 3) it holds potential for reflecting on games at all three dimensions of the VGL model. For these three reasons, gamer discourse may serve as a logical link and starting point for scaf‐ folding foreign language classroom game discourse that students find mean‐ ingful, relevant and motivating. Furthermore, the embeddedness of gamer dis‐ course in language, and specifically in English, holds the potential of linking the language contact of students in and around games to higher level thinking and reflective processes inherent in discourse participation. However, and unfortu‐ nately, there has up to date been little research on gamer culture and the dis‐ course which emerges from their practices. While ultimate claims on gamer culture discourse cannot be made here and would extend beyond the scope of this study, this study does provide an initial look into the cultural discursive practices of gamer culture by investigating video game fan-comics. The fol‐ lowing investigation thus begins with a look into the particular affordances of fan-comics for gamer discourse before continuing on to an analysis of the dis‐ course functions of World of Warcraft comics found in an online archive. What becomes clear through this analysis is that gamers are aware of the cultural value discourse on games, that gamer discourse is indeed informed according to the VGL model, and that video game fan-comics present opportunities for linking EFL students to critically reflected informed discourse on games. <?page no="117"?> 3 Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse Video game fan-comics are a literacy practice common to many gamer com‐ munities that offer affordances to the development of VGL. Although video game fan-comics may offer different types of affordances, like for instance the expression and creation of certain gamer identities as well as the establishment of roles within those communities, this study is interested in the affordances that encourage sense-making processes that relate to the game dimensions pre‐ sented in part 2 as a part of the video game literacy model. As a starting point, video game fan-comics fulfill three very broad functions. These functions are 1) to present game experiences, 2) to comment and reflect on game experiences, and 3) to participate in discourse on games (through engagement with other comics and comic readers). Using this starting point, this chapter looks more closely at the types of game experiences and reflection to better understand how fan-comics create and participate in game discourse. These findings, in turn, serve to illuminate how game players make sense of games. This chapter focuses first on the role of fictionality in video game fan-comics for conceptualizing their function in cognitive and communicative terms. Fic‐ tionality is a key concept because video game fan-comics use fictive and non-fic‐ tive elements in complex ways crucial for understanding the different sense-making processes they are involved in. The chapter then addresses the specific affordances of comics, focusing on narrative, multimodality and humor. The affordances of comics are key for not only conceptualizing their potential for initiating crucial sense-making processes, but also for the analysis of a set of video game fan-comics provided in the next chapter. Next, the chapter ad‐ dresses the affordances of translating experiences from the situatedness of gameplay to that of fan-comics. This translation is important, not only for the production of fan-comics, but also for their reception. The goal of this chapter is to illuminate the sense-making functions of video game fan-comics in order to 1) gain insight into gamer sense-making and discursive practices and 2) offer potentials for the integration of such real-world gamer tasks into the EFL class‐ room. <?page no="118"?> 1 Herman claims that the process of narrative understanding involves strategic, only partial mapping of textual cues onto storyworld dimensions (Herman 2013: 48). Fan-fic‐ tion writing can be seen as expanding the work of interpretation that occurs during initial interpretation. 3.1 The (Non)Fictionality of Game Comics Addressing the fictionality of video game fan-comics provides insight into pro‐ cesses of making sense of video game experiences. It moves beyond the idea of fiction as entertainment and looks at ways the comics communicate game ex‐ periences (both real and desired). To address this, the following passages look at the established concept of fan-fiction to distinguish fan-comics as a unique genre. Like fan-fiction, fan-comics are strongly related to the original work being thematized (cf. Harvey 2014: 284; Klastrup & Tosca 2014: 297 on "urtext"). Leav‐ enworth refers to the original work as “canon text,” and notes its role in the meaning constructed by fans, “Fan fiction, as one expression, illustrates the au‐ thor’s desire to interact with the canon texts, and it is not the material affor‐ dances of the medium that enable interaction but the excess of meaning.” (Leav‐ enworth 2014: 319) Leavenworth looks at fan-fiction as a form of transmedial narration that surrounds storyworlds. It may be that it is not so much (or simply) the popular narratives themselves which capture the creative imagination of fans, but rather the worlds that they imply. 1 Because narratives only partially create storyworlds, much room is left to further create further narratives within those storyworlds. Leavenworth notes that the canon text links to possible other worlds through gaps and discrepancies (Leavenworth 2014: 320) and provides three major types of interaction with the urtext (and storyworld building): changing the plotline, the conditions, and/ or the characterization (ibid.: 315, cf. also Black 2008). Leavenworth also notes that fan-fiction has an inherent critical component, stating, “Adding the variations, alternative, and sometimes critical commentary found in fan fiction further suggest the possibility of a collapse of any inherent logical narrative consistency.” (Leavenworth 2014: 316) Fan-fiction can be labeled as fiction for two possible reasons. First of all, fan-fiction typically involves works of fiction, like Star Trek, Harry Potter, etc. Second, fan-fiction involves narratives that emerge out of ideas that fan-authors have either while reading/ watching the original narratives, while discussing the original and other’s ideas with friends or in fan-communities, or through simple contemplation. However, video game fan-comics diverge from fan-fiction. While they do contain fictional elements, they also often contain non-fictional elements that refer to direct experiences the author/ players have while playing 3 Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse 118 <?page no="119"?> 2 This of course describes ideal reading and not necessarily all cases. or experiences players have in non-game settings that relate to the game. Thus it can be claimed that video game fan-comics are not necessarily fan-fiction, or if so, then a very unique type. They can tell fictional stories about the game, but they can (and often do) also contain player experiences in and around games. Addressing fictionality is not only crucial to distinguish them from fan-fiction but also to conceptualize their sense-making potential. Marie-Laure Ryan dis‐ cusses the relevance of fictionality in cognitive and communicative terms by stating “the judgment “is it a fiction” must influence the use of a text for the interpretation of a behavior.” (Ryan 2010: 1) Non-fictional stories relate directly to “real life” and their information has direct relevance for “real life” actions. Fictional works, however, have less direct claim to reality, and according to Zipfel, will “present some degree of deviation when compared to the real world or, more precisely, when compared to what we usually regard as the real world.” (Zipfel 2014: 105). The degree of deviation between the fictional and non-fic‐ tional aspects points to the complex processes of interpretation involved in in‐ terpreting fictional texts. Zipfel describes this process as a “game of make-be‐ lieve” (Zipfel 2014: 106, cf. also Herman 2013: 104), allowing this project to connect questions of fictionality in video game fan-comics to previous discus‐ sions of play (cf. 2.3.2). Reading a fictional text, then, can be regarded as the complex interplay of fictional and non-fictional elements, where readers con‐ stantly have to judge the degree of deviation as well as consider the implications of those elements for the real world. 2 In light of this interplay of fictional and non-fictional elements, questions of truth or falsehood play a role, but are in‐ volved more in a complex process of sense-making that exists beyond the simple binary ‘truth’ or ‘non-truth’ interpretation of non-fiction. Although fictionality cannot answer questions of function of video game fan-comics, it can provide an initial step. Importantly, it allows an initial branching to further understand functions and roles. On the one hand, non-fic‐ tional video game fan-comics (representing actual player experiences) are sub‐ ject to truth-testing - meaning readers must recognize references to actual ex‐ periences in order to interpret the communicative intention. Such comics thus deliver truthful information about the game, including authorcommentary and opinion. Fictional video game fan-comics, on the other hand, must first be rec‐ ognized as fictional and then undergo a different process involving the critical engagement of both what “reality” might actually be (for this context, in terms of a game) as well as what it could be under certain conditions. In this sense, 3.1 The (Non)Fictionality of Game Comics 119 <?page no="120"?> 3 More on the role of fictionality and its functions in video game fan-comics will be presented in the next chapter discussing the results of a study on WoW fan-comics. fictional works are equally about critically engaging reality as they are about presenting ‘non-reality.’ 3 As representational art, video game fan-comics, whether fictional or non-fic‐ tional, contain the potential for engaging elements of the game and game ex‐ perience. The next subsection focuses specifically on the affordances of comics by addressing issues of narrative, multimodality and comic humor, and considers the implications of these affordances specifically for video game fan-comics. 3.2 Comics: Narrative, Multimodality and Humor The comic genre offers additional affordances for making sense of video game experiences. This subsection looks specifically at the interplay of narrative, multimodality and humor - all characteristics that are shared by the genre of comics and which are necessary in order to understand the sense-making func‐ tion of video game fan-comics. Narrative: Addressing the narrative affordances of comics must include criti‐ cisms that comics are not necessarily narrative media. This debate, in turn, is reliant on the definition of what constitutes a comic. Addressing the definitions of comics, Ian Hague presents three categories: elemental, knowingly incom‐ plete, and social. For Hague, elemental definitions refer to those that focus on “empirically observable characteristics” (Hague 2014: 75), but he points out that such definitions can exclude contradictory examples of comics and that they are susceptible to personal and political bias (ibid.: 76-77). Knowingly incomplete definitions, on the other hand, present observable characteristics of comics, yet lay no claim to completeness - and also set the stage for incomplete studies (ibid.: 77-80). Social definitions are those established by producers and con‐ sumers of comics, and while being useful, they are susceptible to historical in‐ fluences and change (ibid: 80-81). This definitional approach is useful for analyzing fan-made game-comics be‐ cause, on the one hand, there are obvious, observable characteristics in most that fit elemental definitions of comics and, on the other hand, it helps identify and analyze fan-made game comics, their characteristics and respective func‐ tions. Yet there are also often fan-made game-comics which would be excluded from dominant comic definitions. For instance, Scott McCloud claims comics must contain “Juxtaposed pictorial and other images in deliberate sequence” 3 Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse 120 <?page no="121"?> 4 Most fan-made game comics consist of a limited number of panels. This is likely due to comic-strip generic conventions and to practical reasons (most comics can fit on screen without scrolling or navigating to next page). 5 Here it is important to note that nearly all video game fan-comics are in English, possibly due to the fact that English reaches the largest global audience. (McCloud 1993: 20). This definition explicitly excludes single panel examples. It is exactly the sequentiality of images which provide comics with their narrative potential. However, the concept of “pregnant moment” taken up by Marie-Laure Ryan points out that some images (and single panels) “suggests both a past and a future” (Ryan 2010: 9). This feature provides some single panel comics with narrative potential left out by elemental definitions. In online communities and websites, where fan-made game comics are uploaded, published, read, and com‐ mented on by readers, single panel works are labeled and categorized as comics without question. 4 Discussing comics as narrative allows their connection to the narrative af‐ fordances of games as well as to the narrative potential of making sense out of game-related experiences and player identity (cf. 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 respectively). Fan-made game comics are unique because they present narratives about play‐ ers’ game experiences. 5 On the one hand, the comics integrate narrative poten‐ tials of games, like the scripted narrative, the fictional world and characters, and the narrative sense-making process involved during gameplay (cf. 2.3.2 on al‐ terbiography and emergent narrative). However, such comics expand narrative potentials in at least two ways. First, unlike alterbiographies (or emergent nar‐ ratives), fan-made game comics are narrated after-the-fact, and are not a sense-making process that competes with other sense-making processes during gameplay. As such, they are subject to further reflective processing and further construction. Furthermore, video game fan-comics are able to network to other more complex contexts and experiences that exist within the specific game they thematize, but also other games and non-game settings. This means that they contain stories, or elements of stories, that move beyond their alterbiography and beyond the games and direct experiences with them and hold a potential to transfer and connect game-experiences to other contexts. In these two ways, game experiences and reflective thought are translated from in-game to out-of-game contexts. The narrative sense-making potential of fan-made game comics are undoubt‐ edly influenced by the number of panels they typically contain. Though it is impossible to definitively delineate the exact extent of their storytelling poten‐ tial, the relatively limited number of panels exerts a limiting influence on the depth and breadth of their stories. Much like a short story or even a poem may 3.2 Comics: Narrative, Multimodality and Humor 121 <?page no="122"?> require a certain perspective on life and events, a short comic typically takes a sharp focus on discrete aspects of the game and the player’s experience. This sharp focus means that they often also provide sharp criticism and commentary. If narrative can be understood as a lens to understand life and life experiences, then video game fan-comics are like a microscope to investigate discrete aspects of games and player experiences. Multimodality: Like video games, fan-made game comics are multimodal. While games rely mostly on interactive images, supported by sounds and written and verbal language, fan-made game comics rely on images and written language (despite some online interactive comics). The following addresses the affordances of the modes used in comics. Specifically, the focus lies on the af‐ fordances of images, of language, and of their combination which, through in‐ tegration into narrative form, allows for a specific type of ‘worlding’ and sense-making processes. Images: Video game fan-comics utilize modalities that are popular and common amongst young English learners today (cf. Hallet 2010b: 27). Comic images con‐ tain further affordances other than familiarity and popularity. First, the images allow the representation and commentary of game experience in a relatively short amount of space and time. This allows not only effective communication, but it also fits the logic of internet communication where the competition for user attention is high and where users are accustomed to exhibiting short bursts of attention. Second, the images allow comic creators to communicate aspects difficult to explain in language. Furthermore, comics scaffold information vis‐ ually much like video games. Third, the visual aspects of fan-comics allow cre‐ ators to populate the gameworld with their visual imagination - especially the physical reactions of characters (like body language, gestures, facial expres‐ sions) as well as perspective taking that is not allowed by the game (cf. 1.2). This visual augmentation of game experience representation, from the game’s inter‐ face to the comic panel, allows comic creators to represent internal experiences and reactions to game experiences that would normally be invisible to external observers. In this sense, it allows players to combine their internal reality of gameplay experience with the external one which is mediated by the game’s interface. It also allows the inclusion of novel, creative aspects, allowing the creation of fictional stories that mimic the game as it might actually be experi‐ enced. Language: Nearly all video game fan-comics combine visual images with written language. On the one hand, the written language may represent linguistic com‐ munication which actually occurs in the game, but on the other hand, it often 3 Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse 122 <?page no="123"?> 6 Note the similarities between graphic autobiography and video game fan-comics as a form of relating different types of game experiences. Video game fan-comics are thus a type of graphic autobiography. times serves as a modality of representation and reflection which extends be‐ yond experience represented on the interface. Much like the visual aspects of game experience is complemented in game-comics by the visual representation of player (not character) reactions, the addition of language allows game expe‐ rience to be complemented by players’ thoughts, reactions, and reflections. Be‐ cause of this addition of language, fan-comics nearly always expand game ex‐ periences from visual into linguistically communicable forms, and from the pure representation of experience as mediated by the game’s interface into the merged experience of external and internal reflection and commentary. The introduction of more language into game experiences represent a further step in abstraction, since language can connect to abstract thought processes in‐ cluding storytelling and discursive genres it commonly includes. Worlding: The combination of visual and linguistic representation of game ex‐ perience in video game fan-comics allows for unique affordances for storytelling and communication. David Herman sees the benefits of multimodal communi‐ cation for “worlding” the story - or creating an image of the world that is com‐ municable to others. For video game fan-comics, both images and language col‐ laborate to present, not just the gameworld as presented by the game’s programing but also as experienced by players. By adding to the game repre‐ sentation mediated on the screen the internal player experience, fan-comics “world” the gameworld with lived experiences. Thus, creating and reading video game fan-comics allow players to communicate such lived experiences and create personally and socially meaningful places outside of gameworlds. However, the narrative unfolding of a story on two tracks of modality allows not just for “worlding” but also for what Herman calls “unworlding the story,” or the design of a narrative “to call attention to the structures and functions of storytelling itself ” (Herman 2013: 144). Such “unworlding” calls into question the very world being evoked. Figure 8 illustrates how multimodal narratives, like comics, can simultaneously “world” and “unworld” a story through what Herman calls “semiotic channels” that evoke and reference multiple “reference worlds” of a single storyworld (ibid.: 111). Herman uses this model to explain how “graphic life writing” can call into question assumptions made about the world in general, about life and especially about the construction of identity (ibid.: 136); 6 however, while much of this can be applied to how game players construct and present their experiences through comics, there is the additional 3.2 Comics: Narrative, Multimodality and Humor 123 <?page no="124"?> dimension of “unworlding” the gameworld, of creating a critically reflective distance between the immersive nature of the game and “reality” that exists external to it. Fig. 8: Herman’s Model of Multimodal Narration (Source: Herman 2013: 111. Reprinted courtesy of David Herman and The MIT Press.) Video game fan-comics can create different reference worlds through multiple semiotic channels. More often than not, however, these modalities are mixed so that language and images that are “fictional” or that represent the internal ex‐ perience of the player is overlaid upon what is actually visible and doable in the game. What Herman’s model and conceptualization of “worlding” and “un‐ worlding” allows is a look into the ways that different modalities embed conflicts in narrative form. However, the narrative of video game fan-comics are very specific, in terms of how they present conflicts and especially in terms of how they resolve them (or not), due to the generic form and conventions of comic humor. Comic Genre and Humor: Video game fan-comics can be categorized as car‐ toons, or comic strips, much like which can be found in newspapers in the U.S. and in some magazines. Because they are available on the Internet, they can also be considered a type of webcomic. The following focuses on one characteristic of video game fan-comics that connect them to the genre of comic strips, namely humor. Humor is underlined by many of the same principles that underline play. One shared principle is that, although humor is often viewed as non-serious, there are serious and complex processes involved. Here the function of humor in comics will be addressed along three dimensions - cognitive, linguistic-dis‐ cursive, and interactional - in order to lay out its potential for reflective thought and video game literacy development in the EFL classroom. 3 Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse 124 <?page no="125"?> 7 For example, Koestler provides the joke, “Chamfort tells a story of a Marquis at the court of Louis XIV who, on entering his wife’s boudoir and finding her in the arms of a Bishop, walked calmly to the window and went through the motions of blessing the people in the street. ‘What are you doing? ’ cried the anguished wife. ‘Monseigneur is performing my functions,’ replied the Marquis, ‘so I am performing his.’” (Koestler 1964: 33) The collision of two logic matrices interrupts the initial logical outcome (the Marquis becoming angry) with the insertion of another frame of logic (the exchange of respon‐ sibilities). Cognitive: Although humor is often interpreted as entertainment and thus dis‐ tinguished from more serious intellectual activities, there are complex processes involved in both creating and interpreting humor which can serve learning goals. Arthur Koestler sees humor as a highly creative act that involves the “collision” of two “matrices of thought” - or two patterns of logic and action that make sense as separate entities, but become humorous when they are brought about in sharp comparison (Koestler 1964: 35). 7 For Koestler, the colli‐ sion of these two matrices is what “sparks” the act of creation, in this sense of complex cognitive thought. More recently, Morreal comes to a similar conclu‐ sion when he states that humor involves a “cognitive shift” (Morreall 2009: 254) which is partially due to a disruption of mental patterns of thought (ibid.: 251). Noting that humor is a form of play (ibid.: 251), he claims that humor can be viewed as cognitive play [which] fosters mental agility and versatility […] It boosts our tolerance for novelty and disorder, and helps us cope with failure. Most of all, it helps us look at things from a disengaged perspective that transmutes what would have scared, angered, disgusted, or saddened us into a source of delight. (ibid.: 258) Bergerson et al. take a similar approach to humor (focusing on irony), claiming that it safeguards individuals and collective groups from accepting coherent selfhood and the master narratives (and narratives of mastery) that accompany it without taking into consideration the construction of both selves and social and cultural narratives (cf. Bergerson et al. 2011: 11, 78, 158). In cognitive terms, humor is a highly reflexive sense-making process which is aware of ambiguity, of different and conflicting ways of seeing and being in the world, and con‐ comitantly of ways of constructing identity. Furthermore, it is as a creative act allowing for novel thought patterns. Linguistic-discursive: Humor is not simply a cognitive phenomenon but also always a linguistic-discursive one. This means that whatever cognitive pro‐ cesses involved in humor exist must be put into linguistic and discursively rec‐ ognizable forms in order to be communicated. First, this is true for comics, and 3.2 Comics: Narrative, Multimodality and Humor 125 <?page no="126"?> especially video game fan-comics, since they involve the narration of events with the help of language (narrative boxes, dialogue in speech bubbles, thought in thought bubbles, etc.). Second, they combine linguistic modes of communi‐ cation with visual, thus making comics a multimodal form of communication (cf. 1.2). Third, they communicate within the generic bounds of comic strips, attending to generic conventions like humor. As previously discussed, comics can achieve humor through multimodal con‐ struction. Just as Herman noted that the verbal and visual track of a comic can be implemented to establish different reference worlds within a single story‐ world, humor can be understood in much the function as “worlding” and “un‐ worlding” - and the conflict, or “collision,” can be understood in part through the interplay of communicative modes and ways of representing experience. This means that the two modes of communication can be used in complex ways in order to construct different logical patterns of thinking only to disrupt them at a later point. This will happen, as a very simple example, when a character makes a statement which is completely incongruent with his/ her visually rep‐ resented situation, gestures, facial expression, etc. Furthermore, what the hu‐ morous construction of comics points out is that there is often a conflict between language (and thought) and the world presented through our bodily senses (es‐ pecially visually). Viewing humor as play, and then embedding it within lin‐ guistic-discursive dimension, allows for video game fan-comics to engage in higher level and complex discourses. Through humor, comics become “reflexive fiction” (Herman 2013: 153) with a potential to “intervene in a field of discourses, constellation of ways of seeing” (ibid.: 13). Video game fan-comics often achieve this reflexive ability by narratively embedding different modes of representation into conflicts. These conflicts often remain unresolved in the comics, creating a ‘punch line.’ Yet the genre of comic humor can fulfill further, more serious linguistic-discursive functions. Genre fulfills multiple functions. From the cognitive standpoint, genre is a complex pattern of thought and (sometimes narrative) sense-making that enable stories, the world and individual identities to be understandable (Bruner 2002: 31, 65, cf. also 2004). As patterns of thought, genres allow differing access to the world - and experiences with different genres can expand the perspec‐ tive-taking capacity of individuals (cf. Herman 2013: 104). From the storyteller viewpoint, genre allows creators to use known and accepted elements as shorthand for less creative elements in a story. This frees mental energy and storytelling space to concentrate on the original elements of the narrative that the creators want to introduce. (Duncan & Smith 2009: 198). 3 Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse 126 <?page no="127"?> 8 Cf. Duncan and Smith on their reference to funny animal comics and their “juxtaposi‐ tion of talking animals interacting with the idiosyncrasies of human society” (2009: 208). The passages below focus on one particular genre, the comic strip, since it is one of the most common comic-genre that game-fans design (and view) to enter into game-discourse, and since it is the focus of the empirical fan-comic research presented in this section as well as of the classroom research in part III. This focus will thus connect the linguistic-discursive affordances of comics and video game fan-comics with their interactional affordances. Interactional: Language and communication allow for complex interaction and the formation of social structures. Humor is one form through which individuals initiate collaboration, since it requires the interpretation of the “cognitive shift,” as Morreall calls it, but also since it evokes a specific physical response (like laughing or smiling) that denotes a playful mode of interaction, a non-serious‐ ness which can be seen as assuaging possible aggressive responses in human interactions (cf. Morreall 2009: 253). Examples of the general social nature of humor can be seen in the typical presence of an audience (like stand-up comedy) as well as in the contagiousness of laughter (even when individuals do not un‐ derstand a joke). Video game fan-comics should be viewed in such interactional terms, especially since they are embedded in social communities of game-fans. However, broad claims about the prosocial nature of humor should be avoided, since humor can also be used to ridicule and belittle others, and since the for‐ mation of social groups through humor can come at the cost of marginalizing and exploiting others. Humor may hold much potential for learning; however, careful consideration should be made in terms of the effects on all those involved. The comic strip’s generic affordance of ambiguation through humor (as well as through the worlding/ unworlding potential of synaesthesia through the two modalities) lends itself well for questioning socially and politically established structures of power. Comics have a long history of involvement in politics in this sense (cf. Packard 2014), so much so that Ann Miller refers to the “Komik‐ kunst als Dissens,” as “eine „Reframing“ was gesagt werden kann, wer sprechen kann, und wer Anteil hat“ (Miller 2014: 31; cf. also Backe 2014 and Frenzel 2014). However, comics also have a long history of serving propagandistic purposes and not just instigating reflective thought (cf. Cortsen et al.: 2014; Gerstenberg 2014; Kupczynska 2014). The subversive quality of comics is not limited to pol‐ itics, however, since especially comic strips are often also used to criticize and question human individual and social behavior. 8 Fan-comics also serve a social function since they are a part of video game fan communities. They are uploaded onto fan-websites which may cover many 3.2 Comics: Narrative, Multimodality and Humor 127 <?page no="128"?> different topics and media (not just comics), and they are also available to view with no cost (unlike comics published through official channels and that require a fee or paid membership). As a form of communication, video game fan-comics are one part of a larger community, and as one form of communication which can influence and initiate further communication in other forms (i.e. amongst friends in person, in online forums and chat rooms, in comment threads that typically accompany fan-comics, etc.). In this sense, humor in these comics fulfill a double function of initiating complex thought and reflection while at the same time establishing social bonds and communities of shared experience. This is achieved through their cognitive, linguistic-discursive and interactional affor‐ dances. Thus far the different affordances of comics have been discussed to the func‐ tions and potentials of video game fan-comics. These affordances have been categorized in terms of fiction, narrative, multimodality and genre and humor. The next subsection looks not so much at the affordances inherent in the genre, but rather at those that emerge from translating game experiences into comic form. Thus it is more focused on the process of construction and sense-making rather than on the results. 3.3 Translating Game Experiences This study takes the perspective that the cultural practice of video game fan-comic creation, reading and discussion is a part of a larger collective en‐ deavor to conceptualize game experiences and to turn them into “collective coin” that can enter into cultural game discourse. As such, video game fan-comics are a translation of experience embedded in action and in a specific medium, into a more reflective, abstract and communicable form. There are many reasons to explain the need and purpose of this translation, as well as to explain the com‐ plexity of the process and the general difficulty that many players have in con‐ ceptualizing and communicating their experiences. The following presents a non-exhaustive list of some of the major reasons before presenting the specific potentials that the specific mode of translation has for VGL in the EFL classroom. Here it is important to remember that the affordances of translation relate highly to those of comics discussed in the previous subsection. However, they are here applied more concretely to the specifics of game comics and to the ideas, theories and models of video games presented in chapter 2. First, games allow agency and choice, which means that no two game expe‐ riences are exactly the same. Even though a specific game program may be the 3 Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse 128 <?page no="129"?> same to all players, players can experience that game quite differently. Second, not all games are social (in terms of other players being physically present or digitally present on the screen). This means that many experiences are not ac‐ tually shared first hand by others, making it even more difficult for players to put into linguistic-discursive form. Third, games are not primarily scaffolded by language, but by interactive images. This means that there are more barriers to translating game experience into language. Fourth, there is a general difficulty in communicating game experiences since the medium of digital games have a shorter history, and society has had less time to develop first the cultural value and second the language to allow informed discourse on games. Fifth, there is difficulty in conceptualizing the complex interactions between people, semiotic spaces, narrative worlds, gamified systems with complex technical capabilities and limitations. Digital games are a complex medium with little precedence. Finally, there is difficulty in understanding the relation and meaning of such experiences for life (both digital and non-digital) outside of digital games. Digital games are both a product of culture and life in the 21 st century, and they at the same time also represent and reflect culture and life today. However, the exact role of the interplay of the two often remains unclear. The larger collective endeavor of translating experiences into fan-comic forms can be seen as a reduction of complexity into short, linear, recognizable narrative form that uses images and language (this is not, however, meant to neglect the surprising complexity of these comics). This simplification is in itself a type of translation where players take a closer look at the smaller units which make up games and game experience. However, focusing on the ‘parts’ without contextualizing within the ‘whole’ is problematic. For this reason, it is necessary to understand fan-comics within their larger cultural context of communities, of networks of other fan-comics, of other fan-products, and most of all to the game itself to which it refers. Thus video game fan-comics can be seen as a translation of a certain kind - from one media, genre, and communicative form into another, but also as a process of ‘breaking the game down’ into smaller experiences, putting them into communicable forms that (through their multi‐ modality and generic convention of humor and play open up a space for critical engagement, reflection, and revision) can then be reintegrated into larger sys‐ tems of fan-and cultural-discourse, where single meanings can be negotiated and linked to other meanings and to other higher level meaning-making pro‐ cesses. This translation process offers a unique opportunity for reflection. While scholars who research games and learning recognize the importance of re‐ flecting game experiences (cf. Betrus & Botturi 2010: 44; Buckingham & Burn 3.3 Translating Game Experiences 129 <?page no="130"?> 2007: 329; Gee 2007: 8), others note that this reflection is often missing amongst young players (cf. Jenkins et al. 2009: 12; Prensky 2001). From the theoretical perspective provided thus far, fan-comics (creation and interpretation) hold af‐ fordances for such reflection due to their play of fiction, narrative, multimodality and humor, and to the translation of game experiences into comic form. They are a VGL practice which offers potential for the participation in English lan‐ guage game discourse. 3 Affordances of Fan-Comics for Gamer Discourse 130 <?page no="131"?> 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis The previous chapter presented the affordances of video game fan-comics from a theoretical perspective by looking at various aspects of fictionality, of the comic genre and of translation. However, video game fan-practices are an under-researched field, and up to date there has been no research on the function of video game fan-comics in terms of literacy, of sense-making processes, and of cultural discourse. In order to take a first step in filling this gap, in order to test the theoretical potentials of video game fan-comics, and in order to better integrate existing video game literacy (and discursive) practices into the EFL classroom, this chapter provides an empirical study of fan-comics that focuses on the popular game, World of Warcraft (WoW). This chapter first addresses the purpose of the study in greater detail before moving on to present the sampling method. Here the context of the sample will be explained, including the opportunities as well as the limitations. Next, the specific analytical tools developed to analyze the sample are presented, with a special focus on how WoW fan-comics represent video game experiences. This is followed by a discussion of the methodology and of the categorization and coding of the comics. Next, the results are presented in terms of functions, the categories, and their relationship to the model of VGL that was presented in chapter 2. Finally, the implications of the results are presented to elaborate on both video game fan-comics as sense-making, literacy practices as well as ex‐ amples of informed gamer discourse. 4.1 Research Design Purpose: In order to be literate in video games in today’s globalized world, students must be able to participate in English language cultural discourse on games. This means learners must be able to understand the complexity of games and their existence along various dimensions of discourse. Learners must be able to conceptualize the systemic structures of games as designed programs, they must be able to conceptualize how players interact with game systems (and with each other through them), and they must be able to conceptualize how games influence their view of the world, as well as how games influence multiple life‐ world domains. While this conceptualization is not necessarily a pre-requisite <?page no="132"?> for participation in English language discourse on games, it is a pre-requisite for participation in the higher-level meaning making processes of informed dis‐ course. While chapter 3 presented affordances of video game fan-comics for cognition and communication at a theoretical level, this chapter looks to test these affordances by analyzing a sample of video game fan-comics. Research on the functions of video game fan-comics is inadequate if not non-ex‐ istent to date (cf. Jones 2015). Therefore, this project presents initial research on video game fan-comics to suggest the general relevance of gamer discourse (and discursive literacy practices) for the EFL classroom. The following section thus addresses three questions: 1) What are the functions of fan-comics? Why are they constructed, in terms of cognitive as well as social/ discursive sense-making? 2) What dimensions of the game do they focus on? Is it just on the game itself as a program, is it on the player experience, or is it on the meaning of the game for the world that exists externally to it? Furthermore, do multiple dimensions play a role in the individual comics, and if so which ones? 3) How do video game fan-comics present player experience and different dimensions of the game? What are strategies for presenting and commenting on player experience? The following section presents the sampling method that was chosen, focusing on their context, on their potentials and their limitations for representing gamer discourse. Sampling - Context and Limitations: As previously presented, video game fan-comics offer unique potentials for developing video game literacy in the EFL classroom. However, this study is not simply interested in the potentials of this specific genre of discourse, but also in identifying their role within the actual communities of game players. Are the potentials of video game fan-comics being realized in the communities of practice which create, share and discuss video game fan-comics? This simple question, however, should not cover up the com‐ plexity of functions of games, and should not assume that all games are the same, and that all communities, and individuals within communities, produce and use comics for the same purposes. As discussed in section 2.3.1, games are a very complex medium. They are complex because of their internal, systemic design (where games consist of game mechanics/ rules and fictional worlds), but also due to their interactive nature, and the idea that games are not simply artifacts but also emergent performances. Games are also complex because of their broad divergence (cf. Appelgren 2004; Jenkins 2006), which can pertain to the number of games, game genres, platforms, and narrative storyworlds. Due to this com‐ plexity, Aarseth claims that “To simply talk about “games,” or even “digital games,” seems irresponsible” (Aarseth 2004: 362). This serves as a valid caveat that accompanies the findings that this research projects targets and should set 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 132 <?page no="133"?> the stage for further research on video game fan-comics and other narrative/ discursive fan-practices. Because of this complexity, or possibly even despite it, one specific game, World of Warcraft, and one specific “community” on the official WoW website (http: / / eu.battle.net/ wow/ de/ ) have been chosen. Furthermore, the German version of the website has been chosen because it more closely represents the German context of this study. Here it is important to note that although the community is for the German speaking world, the German website mirrors the English one and the fan-comics are exactly the same. Furthermore, all fan-comics are in English, suggesting that they are both products of and for an international WoW community. WoW is a complex game and focusing on its fan-comics can serve as repre‐ sentative of the potential for other games and game communities. Although WoW is normally considered a MMORPG (massively multiplayer online role playing game), in reality it is a combination of many different game genres (Corneliussen & Rettberg 2008: 5). Thus, WoW fan-comics can potentially rep‐ resent a plethora of game genres. Beyond this, WoW has one of the largest gameworlds and thus offers much room for player interaction - and player nar‐ rative development to be represented in comic form. WoW is also historically one of the most popular games with over 100 million accounts in 2014 (Guinness 2014). This means that one of the most complex games with one of the largest worlds is also one of the most populated by players. Although it is difficult to claim that WoW is the most complex game and best representative for all games along this set of criteria, it is certainly one of the most complex and still holds representative potential. Beyond this, Internet research shows that WoW has one of the largest fan-bases, which is partly represented by its number of players. However, not all players of games can be considered fans, at least active ones, especially if they do not participate in fan-communities. There are substantially large WoW fan-communities, as can be determined by the number of fan-web‐ sites, the number and size of wiki projects, and the amount of fan-products (like videos, maps, etc.). It also has one of the largest and most active fan-comic com‐ munities. Additionally, WoW is one of the most recognized games, since it has received much media attention and has been thematized by many popular nar‐ ratives. There are also more practical reasons for selecting WoW fan-comics on the official website. The website offers the largest single archive that focuses on one particular medium and game. Video game fan-comics can be found on many different types of websites, and most websites that host them do not focus on only games, but host fan-comics from many different types of popular media. 4.1 Research Design 133 <?page no="134"?> Thus the fan-comic archive on the WoW website is concentrated on one medium (games) and one specific game. Furthermore, this concentration makes it easier to research both the comics and the community response and resulting dis‐ course. Another practical reason for focusing on WoW fan-comics is that, due to the complexity and broad number of games, it can be quite difficult to un‐ derstand and analyze video game fan-comics that deal with specifics of a game. A research approach that considers a broad range of games would require an enormous amount of further research into the games themselves - this would extend beyond the ultimate goals and aspirations of this study. The sampling method chosen here allows for a more intensive, qualitative research of video game fan-comics embedded within a community of literacy practice. The World of Warcraft website not only allows for the publication of fan-comics but also offers fans the opportunity to react to the comics in comment threads. This archive provides concrete examples of fan-discourse, offering po‐ tential as a microcosm of fan-discourse on games in general. In short, this method focuses on a single game, allowing for a more focused research that allows a comprehensive overview. At the initial data collection of fan-comics (latter half of 2013), the website contained 405 comics total. In order to reduce this amount of data, four further criteria were applied that was based on the cultural and social situatedness and context of the comics. First, only comics uploaded between November 2010 and November 2012 were chosen. Second, comics with only one comment were ex‐ cluded. Third, comments that were purely motivational were also excluded. Fourth, at least two comments that referred to each other in terms of content were selected. Excluded were not only motivational comments, but also com‐ ments that parroted other comments. While such comments reinforce certain aspects of the discussion, the study was interested in comment contributions that led to a development of discourse. These criteria narrowed the set of 405 comics down to 122. There are limitations to the sampling method. The official WoW website is closely connected to the game and serves as an interface between fans and Bliz‐ zard Corporation. Thus, the website implements gatekeeping practices that in‐ fluence the archive, the comments and thus the overall discourse. Table 3 presents a summary of rules for submitting comics taken directly from the web‐ site. More importantly, it reveals the gatekeeping practices of the archive. Submitted comics must be: interesting, humorous, entertaining in English or without text void of offensive, sexual or vulgar content and language 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 134 <?page no="135"?> short, funny and less than one page preferably with original art not too critical of or hostile towards the game Comics should avoid frequent topics already posted, like Getting loot out of monsters. Tauren too heavy for mounts. Arthas and his FROZEN THRONE Illidan and "You are not prepared" jokes. They are very old now... The art of World of Warcraft, including the art style and art direction, particularly when given treatment that is deemed unduly mean-spirited. Any reference to or depiction of (in the vernacular) "poop," or variants thereof, in‐ cluding any quests that may feature it. Bag space issues (aka "Look at all the stuff I have in my bag! ") Server Lag Tuesday Maintenance Queues References / depictions of disproportionate armor size as it may appear on female characters (e.g. plate bikinis) The ease of upgrading equipment in Wrath of the Lich King or Cataclysm Un'Goro Crater Dinosaurs stepping on players Table 3: Rules for WoW Comic Submission (http: / / eu.blizzard.com/ de-de/ community/ comics/ 06.04.2016) Analyzing the website’s criteria suggests that the gatekeeping practices serve several purposes. First, the website is interested in protecting and maintaining the image of the company and game. For instance, they do not accept comics that are too critical of the game. Next, the website is interested in upholding a socially positive atmosphere. This becomes apparent in the rejection of comics with offensive and/ or sexual content and obscene language. Third, the website is interested in limiting redundancy, and provides a list of comic-themes that will be rejected. The research on the archive shows that the themes presented on the list are indeed already common. Finally, the website is interested in cer‐ tain practicalities concerning the comics. According to the website, they should be in English - most likely in order to reach the broadest audience with the minimum amount of work for the website-managers -, and of a certain length and complexity so that visitors and fans can read and interpret them quickly with little web-page navigation. Although these rules influence the represen‐ tativeness of WoW fan-comics in terms of experiences and player commentary that are presented - and thus the discourse that emerges - it is likely that most communities (and especially online) implement some form of gatekeeping prac‐ tices. However, it is important to point out the context from which the selected fan-comics stem from and the ways in which that context influences the rep‐ resentativeness of the emergent game discourse. 4.1 Research Design 135 <?page no="136"?> Analytical Tools: The WoW fan-comics chosen for analysis were considerably complex and required several methods for interpretation and analysis. On the one hand, the analysis was performed with a theoretical approach that combined basic understanding of games with that of comics. More specifically, the model of video games as consisting of three dimensions proved quite useful (cf. 2.3). Additionally, the affordances of comics discussed in chapter 3 was also critical for understanding how the different types of video game experiences were nar‐ ratively structured in comics that utilized humor for critical engagement. On the other hand, the analysis was also performed with more practical, game spe‐ cific research, consisting of playing WoW (approximately 200 hours) for general background information, as well as of performing online research (fan-websites, forums, World of Warcraft wiki’s) for specific information on the fan-comics. Also helpful were the comment threads accompanying the fan-comics, as they often also provided further interpretational clues. Table 4 provides an overview of the research in paradigmatic form. Theoretical Practical Game Video Game Literacy Model: Game Program, Player, the World Gameplay (+200 hours), World of Warcraft Wikipedias and Forum, Comment Threads Comic Multimodal Narrative, Comic con‐ ventions, Humor, Fictionality and Representation of Game Experi‐ ence Comment Threads Table 4: Theoretical and Practical Tools for the Analysis of World of Warcraft Fan-Comics The theoretical potentials of comics (cf. chapter 3) are crucial for understanding the narrative and comic conflicts within WoW fan-comics. In 4.2, the conflicts are used to analyze and present the findings. In order for an analysis to occur and to understand which aspects of the game are involved in the narrative con‐ flict, the conflict must be embedded within the game. However, a further analytical tool must be addressed. Due to the interactive nature of digital games, it is largely impossible to present aspects of the game without presenting one’s own (unique) experience with the game. This means that to analyze digital game fan-comics, it must be determined whether player experience is being utilized as the focus of the comic or the focalizer, or a strategy for presenting and framing some other aspect of the game. Thus, the following passages present strategies in which digital game (or at least World of War‐ 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 136 <?page no="137"?> 1 This analytical framework is adapted from Jan-Noël Thon’s (2014) subjective repre‐ sentational strategies of films, graphic novels and computer games. craft) fan-comics utilize player experience to present various aspects of the game. In order to interpret the WoW fan-comics, on top of general theoretical and practical knowledge of games and comics, and specific knowledge of the game itself from WoW and fan-community research, it is necessary to understand strategies of the comics’ representation of player-perspective, of perceptual overlay, and referencing the game through interface markers. 1 The following passages describe these strategies in further detail, explain their specific rele‐ vance for WoW fan-comic analyses, and provide worked examples for illustra‐ tion. Perspective plays an important role in both experiential presentation and processing in WoW fan-comics. In the game, players are by default provided a third person, high angle posterior perspective of their character (cf. figure 9). However, despite this distanced perspective, players exhibit a high rate of iden‐ tification with their characters due to the interactive and immersive nature of the game (cf. Fritz 2013: 101). This means that the controllable game characters become extensions of the players, and in the game comics, the characters often represent the players themselves. Thus a third person character in a game comic can be used to represent the first person perspective of the player on the char‐ acter (despite the disconnect in spatial point of view, which is opposed to how first-person games mediate perspective to players through the game’s interface), and the comic becomes a form of self-telling by showing. This form of perspec‐ tive-taking is considered here as subjective perspective. Though this perspective is the foundation for understanding perspective taking in WoW comics in gen‐ eral because it most directly represents gameplay and player experience, there are also two other forms: multiperspective and objective. Multiperspective per‐ spective refers to comics which present multiple playable characters, where dif‐ ferent panels foreground and center different characters. Comics that use this perspectival strategy are either presenting experiences from multiple charac‐ ters, and/ or experiences from one player taken from multiple contexts (since in the game many actions are repetitive, and since players often play different characters in multiplayer settings). Objective perspective occurs when no play‐ able character is centered, so that it is not clear with whom exactly the comic reader should identify. This is often the case when multiple characters are present in the same panel, and more so prevalent when presenting a group of characters collaborating together. In this case, it could also be claimed that the 4.1 Research Design 137 <?page no="138"?> perspective is no longer objective, but rather that it looks at presenting the group as a unified entity. In this case, the ‘objective’ refers mostly to the perspective of the comic as compared to the perspective provided by the game. Fig. 9: Typical Elements of WoW Perspective The WoW fan-comic, “Warsong Woes” (figure 10), provides an example of per‐ spective taking typical for many comics. In the first panel it appears as if one character is centered, and thus may represent the player, but this centeredness is questioned in the second panel and altogether lost in the third panel. Thus the focus on one player, and possibly the leader who is giving instructions, pre‐ sented in the first panel, is spread amongst a group of players (an entity) who are accepting those orders in the second panel, and is dispersed in the third panel as all players pursue their own goals. This lack of centeredness and focus, which would more closely represent the view the player would have of his character, reflects not only the lack of unity of the collaborating group, but also the inability of the player and/ or comic reader to identify with any single character, or pos‐ sibly the ability to identify with all at the same time. 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 138 <?page no="139"?> 2 All WoW fan-comics presented in this study were taken from the website, http: / / eu.battle.net/ wow/ de/ , which unfortunately no longer hosts the fan-comics. Fig. 10: Perspective Taking in “Warsong Woes” 2 Perceptual overlay builds on the idea of a strong connection between players and their characters, though it can also describe other representational and inter‐ pretational processes. Here perceptual overlay is defined as strategies of pro‐ viding in-game characters with the perceptive-communicative abilities of the player. Through perceptual overlay, players interpret game characters (their 4.1 Research Design 139 <?page no="140"?> 3 Cf. Grabes 2008: pp. 129-130 on "encountering people" in literature, which provides useful insights to the interpretation of game characters. own and others) by attributing to them a consciousness and personality, com‐ plete with wishes, desires, dreams and fears, to explain their behavior in specific game contexts. 3 Perceptual overlay can include dramatic facial expressions, ges‐ tures and posturing, but also character speech and thought which are not ac‐ tually possible in the game. In game comics, there appears to be two types of perceptual overlay, direct and indirect. Direct refers to placing the perception of the player directly onto his or her controlled character, while indirect refers to placing interpreted or assumed perception onto characters not controlled by the player. Due to this ambivalent use, perceptual overlay is challenging for questions of fictionality of game experience. For now, it suffices to say that perceptual overlay influences the representation of game characters in comics. It not only provides player-specific information but also requires a change in the view of the character to present an anterior instead of a posterior view (the default game perspective). Furthermore, perceptual overlay can serve the func‐ tion of presenting perception during the moment of gameplay, but it can also present a type of commentary from the comic creator that comes from the after-the-fact processing of game experiences. The WoW fan-comic, “Do as I Say, Not as I Do” (figure 11), provides a clear example of perceptual overlay use in game fan-comics. The five panels of the comic present anterior view of two characters, and in each panel, the intricate use of facial expressions to represent the emotional state and intentions of the characters can be found. The fifth panel shows the most dramatic example of perceptual overlay as the elf character bites his lip and cries in frustration. Panel five provides another example of perceptual overlay through the elf ’s speech bubble, which through its irregular and jagged shape and through the font type of its text serves as a further indication of the elf ’s frustration. It is important to note that the perceptual overlay in this comic is not how the game is repre‐ sented to the player (since the game program can neither predict nor interpret the emotional reactions of the players) but rather how the player and/ or comic creator feels in certain game-situations, and how (s)he interprets the reactions and feelings of others. Thus, even though perceptual overlay may be fictitious in terms of how the game is presented on screen, it can be utilized to add further actual elements of the game experience that otherwise cannot be mediated. 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 140 <?page no="141"?> 4 Interface markers are extradiegetic communication of vital information directly to the player that exists separate from the gameworld (cf. Mosel 2013). They refer to game information and the character’s status presented on the screen. Fig. 11: Perceptual Overlay in “Do as I Say, Not as I Do” Another strategy of representing game experience in WoW fan-comics is the use of interface markers. 4 Examples are identifying tags or names, progress bars, text boxes, etc. (cf. figure 12 for examples of interface data). While the WoW 4.1 Research Design 141 <?page no="142"?> gameworld is viewed as highly immersive, the foregrounding of interface markers in comics can be interpreted as a de-immersive reminder that under‐ lines the cognitive/ affective and physical/ spatial disconnect between the player and the gameworld. Although the interface in WoW is always visible on the screen during gameplay, not all comics use interface markers, and when they do, they often employ them selectively. Their typical absence and selective em‐ ployment can influence how game experiences are framed and commented upon. “Adventures in Herbalism” (figure 12) serves as a prime example of the se‐ lective use of interface markers. The first panel presents an identification box found in the game to help players identify certain herbs which can be harvested. The following five panels then present another interface marker, the progress bar, which is implemented to stand in stark contrast to the more realistic rep‐ resentation of the player’s character (note the perceptual overlay in the facial expressions, dress, and actions) as she tries to harvest a flower. A comparison of this comic to the screenshot in figure 10 reveals that most of the interface data of the game screen has been left out of the comic, foregrounding the use of interface markers and its role in the comic’s narrative plot and humorous con‐ flict. Fig. 12: Interface Markers in “Adventures in Herbalism” 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 142 <?page no="143"?> All WoW fan-comics utilize at least one of these strategies of representing game experience, and oftentimes they implement several if not all three. These strat‐ egies are a crucial addition to the analytical tools of game theory (especially the VGL model) and comic theory. They help identify representational divergences from the actual game-interface and offer concrete functions that explain these divergences as intentional strategies rather than arbitrary decisions, careless oversights, or simply the dominance of comic-representational rather than game-representational conventions. They also allow for the analytical distinc‐ tion between experience represented by the game and the internal player ex‐ perience, as well as for the distinction between experience-representation and the commentary on that experience by the player - either during gameplay or as the result of reflective, after-the-fact processing of experience. Methodology: The analysis of the 122 selected WoW fan-comics was carried out using the analytical tools described in the previous sections of this chapter. This means that elements of narrative, comic and multimodal theory were ap‐ plied, as well as the specific aspects of perspective presentation presented here. The goal of the analysis was to identify the single core conflict of each comic in order to find patterns, create categories and compare to the discourse model of VGL described in chapter 2. The conflicts were interpreted in terms of cognitive and discursive functions in order to interpret them as attempts to make sense of, and communicate about, the game. Thus, the entire set of comics was inter‐ preted and their conflicts were coded and categorized. This coding and catego‐ rizing process underwent six iterations due to the complexity of the comics. This allowed multiple reinterpretations of the comics and refining of codes and cat‐ egories. This coding process was performed on MaxQDA. The results of this analysis, as well as worked examples of how the comics were analyzed, cate‐ gorized and coded, are presented in the following subsection. 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model As discussed in 3.3, video game fan-comics represent different types of game experiences and can thus be conceptualized as a type of translation from one genre (gameplay) to another (fan-comic). As a translation, the comics offer po‐ tential for further constructing meaning through processes of reflection. This section presents the results of the WoW archive analysis and starts by addressing the major research question concerning the functions they serve. All comics fell under the two functional categories of either criticizing or extending the game, 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 143 <?page no="144"?> and these two functional categories, as sense-making functions, are explained in greater detail. As a part of this explanation, the full category and coding tree is presented to show the specific ways in which the comics either criticized or extended the game. However, as mentioned in the previous section, this category and coding tree is the result of a bottom-up analysis and it is difficult to compare the results directly to the theoretical framework on games, and on VGL, pre‐ sented in the first section of this study. Thus, the category and coding tree is translated into a new form to more closely match the three dimensions of video games: the program, the player, and the world, as the comics either criticize or extend those dimensions of the game. This ‘translation’ in turn is then used to present six worked examples that illustrate the different ways that the WoW comics thematize game experiences and how they function in terms of cognitive and social/ discursive processes of sense-making. Criticism: Figure 13 represents the coding tree developed to organize and ana‐ lyze selected WoW comics. The first coding category refers to the overall func‐ tion of the comic as well as to its referent. Criticism makes up a slight majority with 58% of the total 122 comics, yet the other category extension is relatively as frequent with 42%. Both categories reveal relatively similar levels of com‐ plexity. Both contain two subcategories. Criticism can be subcategorized into criticism of the game itself (referring to its program) or to player behavior. Criticism of the game makes up a slight majority with approximately 55% and contains seven final categories. The category of behavioral criticism reveals slightly more categorical complexity, as it can be further subcategorized into comics that refer to behavior within the game and those that compare behavior in the game to players’ and people’s behavior outside of the game. However, comics which refer to behavior in the game represent the majority with ap‐ proximately 84%. This category contains further subcategories showing a com‐ plexity of different types of behavioral issues thematized. Because WoW is a multiplayer online game (or more exact, an MMORPG), many comics refer to behavioral aspects and to the interpersonal relationships of players within the game. Furthermore, due to the diverse types of player interaction structured by the game, several categorical types emerged through the coding process. For instance, some comics thematized competition between individuals - either di‐ rect through combat or indirect over game resources - while others dealt with issues of collaboration. Those that dealt with collaboration thematized cooper‐ ation between players in ‘party’ mode and in single player mode. A final cate‐ gory for player in-game behavior refers to comics that thematized player be‐ havior towards non-player characters, both those considered allies and those considered opponents. 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 144 <?page no="145"?> 5 Cf. Betrus & Botturi 2010: 44; Breitlauch 2013: 179; Buckingham & Burn 2007: 329; Busch, Conrad, & Steinicke 2013: 284; Gee 2007: 8; Jenkins et al. 2009: 12; Jones 2015b for the role of reflection of game experiences in educational terms. Function of Criticism and Implications of Categorization: The overall purpose of comics that criticize is to take up specific dimensions of the game (game program, player behavior or the game and the world) and provide critical com‐ mentary through parody. In this respect, they can be categorized as non-fic‐ tional, though they may contain fictional elements to represent or even provide critical commentary. Criticism plays a crucial role in the fan-discourse on games and holds potential for the integration of that discourse (and literacy practices) into learning settings. On the one hand, representing non-fictional game aspects allows fans to relate to actual experiences shared by a community of players. The critical construction of commentary, on the other hand, allows for comic-creators to present unique perspectives on their experiences and evoke deeper-level thought processes in their audience. This fits well with the concept of genre, in which, according to Duncan and Smith, standardization and differ‐ entiation work together. Standardization allows for certain works to be recog‐ nized, while differentiation allows for the individuality and innovation of nar‐ rative: From the artistic or creative viewpoint, tapping into a genre allows creators to use known and accepted elements as shorthand for less creative elements in a story. This frees mental energy and storytelling space to concentrate on the original elements of the narrative that the creators want to introduce. (Duncan & Smith 2009: 198) WoW fan-comics that criticize represent recognizable experiences, yet differen‐ tiate themselves by providing individual perspectives and critical commentary, engaging readers beyond the level of simple recognition. However, criticism could be interpreted as an implicit extension, since criticism suggests a problem to be corrected and thus an alternate version to reality. However, comics that criticize do not take this extra step of presenting alternate versions, unlike the comics under the functional category of extension. On the other hand, criticism taps deeper-level thought processes which are useful for learning purposes. The criticism found in WoW fan-comics can be conceptualized as a reflection on often quite specific experiences concerning various game dimensions - experiences which undergo complex processes of construction according to narrative and comic conventions in order to become communicable. Since a common complaint is that players of digital games do not reflect on their gameplay experiences enough, and since reflection is seen as a crucial process for processing game experience in educational terms, 5 WoW 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 145 <?page no="146"?> fan-comic production and reception can be viewed as a highly complex, reflec‐ tive practice with strong value for learning. Furthermore, the comics stem from the community of players (and thus can be conceptualized as a target/ real-world task, cf. Jones 2015b) and, as non-pedagogical tasks, offer the potential for mo‐ tivating students in the EFL classroom when embedded into didactic contexts. Fig. 13: Coding Tree from WoW Fan-Comic Analysis Extension: The function-category of extension holds 42% of the 122 comics and shows slightly less subcategorical complexity than the function-category of criticism. Like for criticism, the function-category of extension is subdivided into two categories, possible rules and possible stories. Possible rules category is a relatively minor category with only approximately 14% of the comics that fall in the category of extension, and it offers no further subcategories. The category of possible stories, however, contains 86% of the comics categorized under extension and offers two further subcategories: possible scripted narrative and possible alterbiographies. Possible scripted narrative refers to comics that either project or explain aspects of the game’s scripted narrative (cf. 2.3.1 on scripted narrative). Comics that ‘project’ take aspects of the scripted narrative and develop it into the future, usually underlining some humorous aspects, while those that explain provide ‘backstories’ which explain the existence of certain aspects of the scripted narrative. The category of possible alterbiogra‐ phies contains the largest percentage of comics in the function of extension with approximately 65%. This category contains comics which use the game-setting as a narrative backdrop for further storytelling involving playable characters. In this category emerged four subcategories, containing comics that narrated 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 146 <?page no="147"?> stories about the unexpected consequences of certain actions, about intervening in the actions and affairs of non-player characters, about players bantering each other and playing tricks, and about mixing real world aspects into the game‐ world, and gameworld aspects into the real world. Function of Extension: The label of extension was provided to this category field because of the creative ways in which the comics take up aspects of the game, WoW, and the gaming experience, and develop it further. Of course there are overlaps with the category of criticism, since an implicit criticism can be inter‐ preted in some of the comics that fall under extension, and since in the comics that are explicitly critical, there are some aspects of the comic (and its story) which extend beyond the game. However, for the most part there appears to be a fundamental difference between comics which have a strong reference to the game, and a strong critical perspective on various aspects of the game that ac‐ tually exist, and comics which use the game as a platform to present novel ideas and to tell new stories. Thus there is a strong and explicit connection to this discussion on the function of extension and the subsection in 3.1 on the question and function of fictionality. As works of fiction, WoW comics which extend the gameworld in some way are fulfilling functions of creating storyworlds, filling the world with lived experiences, filling in gaps and discrepancies left by the original, identifying and constructing a sense of reality upon which is extended, and playfully opening up that sense of reality to further re-construction. It is upon this base understanding of the role and function of fictionality that this discussion of the role of extension is built. To conceptualize the function of extension, as well as to introduce a further analytical tool for this section, possible world theory (PWT) is applied. However, applying PWT to WoW fan-comics (and likely to video game fan-comics in gen‐ eral) is tricky for several reasons. First, PWT has been developed in multiple academic fields, including philosophy (Divers 2002; Goodman 1984), psychology (Bruner 1986) and literature (Ryan 1991; Surkamp 2002), with also strong con‐ nections to the hypothesis of the multiverse in theoretical physics. No single approach is adapted to the medium of digital games, and whatever a PWT for digital games might look like, it certainly cannot simply be blindly applied to the PWT of games from another field. This stems from the ideas presented in section 2.3.2 that games are both a product of the game system, as well as of the player, as the two engage in a complex set of interactions. If gameplay can be conceptualized in terms of narrative, as some scholars have done, then it must take into account the emergent properties of narrative and the idea that it evolves from a complex ‘hypertext.’ Therefore, WoW fan-comics which present and build upon players’ game-experiences refer to neither the ‘real world’ out‐ 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 147 <?page no="148"?> 6 For Daiute (2015: 161), possibility always has a “future gaze.” side of the game, nor simply a narrative-‘textual world’ presented to the player. However, because PWT for digital games does not exist, this study relies on a mixture of PWT ideas from various fields. PWT plays a role at the individual as well as the social level. At the individual level, PWT conceptualizes reality in a temporal sense, and this in turn can also be further broken down into positivist and antipositivist approaches. Starting at the present, for PWT from an antipositivist approach, there is no present reality external to perception (Bruner 1986: 95; Goodman 1984). Therefore, pos‐ sible worlds is not a question of ontology but rather epistemology, of making sense of the world(s) (Bruner 1986: 45). Thus, sense-making is “trafficking in possibilities rather than in settled certainties” (ibid.: 26). However, from a posi‐ tivist approach, reality exists even if we do not have direct access to it. Addi‐ tionally, other worlds may exist in the ‘multiverse,’ and considering possibilities in this world may be a way of understanding the realities of other (possibly) real worlds. These approaches to the present have implications for the under‐ standing and interpretation of the past. From an antipositivist approach, ex‐ ploring alternate interpretations of the past, as well as alternate courses of his‐ tory allows a greater awareness of other ‘realities’ of the present. From a positivist approach, PWT hypothesizing about past experiences can serve as a useful rhetorical device to better understand the historically influenced reality of the present (Surkamp 2002: 154). Regardless of the underlying motives and beliefs of positivist and antipositivist perspectives, PWT has a more unified base in both when it comes to approaching the future. 6 The future is the realm of action, which relies on several fundamental aspects. First, it relies on the ability to understand patterns in the world and to form inferences concerning action based on those patterns (Chase 2015: 212; Griffiths et al. 2008). On top of this, future realm of action relies on the availability of choice. According to Luca Tateo, “the very dilemmatic and ambivalent nature of experiencing provides the necessary degree of uncertainty that makes possible to people to find different courses of action” (Tateo 2015: 64). This choice creates agency to exercise pref‐ erence and realize goals, wishes, desires etc. (Ryan 1991: 117; Valsiner 2015: 84). At the individual level, PWT allows for different approaches to reality as well as to action at different temporal levels. However, PWT is also useful for explaining human social interaction. When one considers not only the large gap between ‘objective’ reality and the grasp any one individual may have on it, but also the considerable differences between individual perceptions of the worlds and events, as well as the limitations of any 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 148 <?page no="149"?> 7 This statement ignores any influence of the website’s selection process. communicative medium to transfer thoughts and ideas, then it is amazing that humans can communicate with any modicum of effectiveness. For Luca Tateo, communication is based on the ability of individuals to imagine the intentions behind the messages and actions of others, Imagining thoughts, deeds and as-if possibilities is thus the way we can work com‐ promises between our needs, will, dreams, fears, and those of the others within a cultural framework that provides us with a range of guidelines and examples of ne‐ gotiations. (Tateo 2015: 61). David Herman’s approach expands the idea of imagination through the appli‐ cation of narrative imagination, stating, “narratives arise from and facilitate more deliberative, reasoned efforts to make sense of person’s reasons for action, when those reasons - or constellation of beliefs, desires, intentions and values - remain underspecified and potentially indeterminate given the available prag‐ matic contexts” (Herman 2013: 92). Narratives that deal with possible worlds help individuals increase their competence for multiperspectivity (cf. Surkamp 2002: 175), as “a constellation of meanings in social relation [that enable] the possibility of human connection sought and human connection possibly ach‐ ieved.” (Daiute 2015: 170) For Jerome Bruner, it is exactly this ability to construct other worlds which allows human interaction and society (Bruner 1986: 64). All WoW comics were categorized as criticism or extension. The relative sim‐ ilar frequency (58% criticism to 42% extension) suggests that each function con‐ tains approximately similar value within the fan-community. 7 Both functions suggest a rich and complex variety of sense-making processes that involve crit‐ ically constructing what the game is as well as imagining what the game could be like under different conditions. This, in turn, implies that WoW fan-comic production and reception involve complex active processes that hold pedagog‐ ical potential for critical reflection and creation. In order to further process the results of the coding tree, and all the categories that fell under these two func‐ tions, and in order to present them in a manner fitting the needs and context of this study, the next section presents the results in terms closer to the model of VGL presented in chapter 2. This model serves to structure the six worked ex‐ amples that follow. Connecting the Findings to the Model of Video Game Literacy: The category tree presented in figure 13 is the result of multiple bottom-up analyses of the selected 122 comics and does not reflect the model of video game literacy pre‐ sented in chapter 2. Table 5 presents this categorical analysis in terms that allow 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 149 <?page no="150"?> the model to serve a further process of analysis. More specifically, it correlates the three different dimensions of VGL (the game, the player and the world) with the two major functions of criticism and extension. In the following sections, the table serves as a guideline to present the findings as well as their implica‐ tions. Criticize Extend Total Game Clash: game-rules vs. game-fiction (coherency be‐ tween the two? ) Player Experience: critically frames game and conflict (i.e. how the conflict interrupts gameplay) Comic Code: game program (39) Clash: game reality vs. fictional ex‐ tension (game-rules or -fiction) Player Experience: critically frames game and presents extension (i.e. how the extensions effect game‐ play) Comic Code: possible rules (7) & possible scripted narrative (11) 57 Player Clash: social norms vs. game supported individual action Player Experience: focuses on behavioral and social aspects (self and other) in game Comic Code: in-game behavior (player-player & player-NPC) (27) Clash: possible experiences vs. ac‐ tual experiences Player Experience: establishes con‐ text for desires (behavior and social interactions) Comic Code: possible alterbiogra‐ phies → NPC interventions, player banter & unexpected consequences (19) 46 World Clash: behavior in-game vs. out-of-game (players & non-players) Player Experience: compares/ contrasts real life situations/ behavior of players and non-players. Compares game ‘reality’ to social ‘reality’ of real world Comic Code: in & out of game behavior (5) Clash: reality of game vs. reality of real world Player Experience: either introduces real-world elements into game or game elements into real world. Ex‐ periential frame offers commentary to extensions. Comic Code: possible alterbiogra‐ phies → game-world reflection (14) 19 Total 71 51 Table 5: WoW Fan-Comics and the Video Game Literacy Model Table 5 illuminates the types of WoW comics and their distribution within var‐ ious categories of the discourse based VGL model. First and foremost it reveals that a majority (47%) of comics focus on the game itself, and that most function to criticize the game (cf. 4.2.1). This majority may suggest that the discourse on WoW is largely focused on the game, and that the game serves as a basis for 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 150 <?page no="151"?> other discourse levels. Comics that thematize the player (and gameplay) are the second most common (38%) and again reveal that most comics focus on the function of criticism (though the difference between criticism and extension is smaller for this dimension than for the game dimension). This shows that WoW players reflect not only on the structure of the game, but also on their experi‐ ences within the game, their own behavior while playing as well as the behavior of others in multiplayer settings (cf. 4.2.2). Comics that thematize the world, while the least common (15%) are still well represented and reveal that players and their discourse on WoW (as represented through the comics) reflect on how the real world influences the game (and reception thereof) as well as on how the game influences the perception/ reception of the real world (cf. 4.2.3). Inter‐ esting to note for this dimension is that a majority (14 out of 19) of comics fall under the category of extension, indicating a strong focus on and desire for reflexivity between the gameworld and the real world. Flipped around, the findings show that at the base of WoW fan-comic dis‐ course is the game, above that is player experience and then at the top is the world. The decreasing number of examples in each consecutive dimension may suggest an imperative of an understanding of the game itself for all other dis‐ course levels. Player experience comes in at a close second, suggesting a close connection between player experience and the game, as well as a strong focus on player-related issues in the game. The world appears to be less relevant (though relevant nonetheless). This is probably due to the strong focus of players on the game and gameplay (as well as the focus of the website and maybe even its selective process), as well as to the distance between this third game dimen‐ sion from the base dimension, the game. The following subsections go into more detail on comics that fell into each of the three video game dimension, on how the comics present certain conflicts and how player experience is used to focus and frame either the function of criticism or extension. 4.2.1 Game Criticism and Extension As previously stated, comics which focus on the dimension of the game are the most common, representing approximately 47%. Of the comics that fell into this dimension, those that criticized the game were the most common. Worked ex‐ amples are provided below for each function to give an idea of the types of comics, conflicts, and themes that the WoW fan-comic discourse of this dimen‐ sion deals with. Game Criticism: 68% (39/ 50) of the comics that thematize the dimension of the game are critical. Crucial for understanding comics that fall into this category 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 151 <?page no="152"?> is the narrative conflict and humorous ‘clash’ (cf. 3.2). For all of the comics that criticize the game, the conflict consists of two ‘worlds’ of the game program clashing (cf. 2.3.1 and table 5) - the world of the game as a system of rules and the world of the game’s fictional space. This conflict is further explained by the idea that 1) there are generic conventions of games that do not always allow a direct translation or transfer into the fictional world aspects, 2) games can only offer certain levels of access to the fictional world, (cf. 2.3.1) and 3) the game program is so complex that some discrepancies have been overlooked or ignored by programmers. Although the two aspects of the game program (rules and fiction) should complement each other, upon closer inspection and deeper anal‐ ysis they often do not. For the most part, players overlook small logical dis‐ crepancies or possibly even do not notice them. WoW fan-comics that criticize the game take up specific aspects of these conflicts and discrepancies and further reflect on them. WoW comics often use player experience with and immersion in the fictional ‘world’ to point out aspects of game rules that are ‘disruptive’ and illogical. For instance, a closer look at the category tree in figure 14 reveals that these comics cover a broad variety of topics. The following presents two of the major subca‐ tegories and provides one worked example. The most populated subcategory is labeled “questionable motivation and reward” and refers to how WoW incenti‐ vizes certain player actions and how they embed such actions narratively within quests. For instance, one common theme considers the fairness of reward in terms of the monetary or use-value compared to the amount of work the quest requires or compared to the value of the quest items to be turned in. For these comics, the narratively embedded ‘game quest’ and its symbolic potential for real-life referentiality conflicts with the logic of the game rules based on repe‐ tition of actions, rewards, and skill and character development - and which at times overlooks their logical (in terms of real-life referentiality) symbolic inter‐ pretation. In such subcategories, the player’s immersion in the fictional world presents and frames the disruption caused by the game’s underlying rule struc‐ ture. Although the criticism of game rules in these comics is embedded in comic ambiguity (cf. 3.2), such comics may point out such discrepancies and critical points in order to suggest (to other players/ game designers) possible changes. While player experience plays a large role in such comics, they are not the focus of the comic conflict, but rather the frame through which the conflict is pre‐ sented and commented on. However, some comics utilize the game’s rule system to criticize aspects of the fictional world. Comics that fall under the subcategory of “scripted narra‐ tive” use aspects of the game’s rule system to thematize aspects of the scripted 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 152 <?page no="153"?> narrative that do not make sense. This stands in contrast to the previously dis‐ cussed subcategory which relied on player experience and narrative/ fictional immersion to frame illogical game rules. Comics that focus on the scripted nar‐ rative focus on non-player characters (NPCs) and their embeddedness in various narrative structures of the game. The NPCs are used in the comic stories to present further logical conflicts between the fictional world and the game rules, with the focus on (implicitly) suggesting changes to the scripted narrative in‐ stead of in the game rules. The first worked example comes from the subcategory, “questionable moti‐ vation and reward,” largely since it contains the largest number of comics in the category of game-program criticism. Figure 14 presents an untitled comic that thematizes ‘quest drops,’ rewards provided to characters for killing certain crea‐ tures. The rewards from quest drops do not typically serve the direct needs of the player, but rather are items that must be collected and turned into a ‘quest giver,’ typically a NPC who provides quests that players can accept or decline. In return for collected items, the player is often provided with some other reward which does have a direct value to the player, like in-game currency or valuable items (tools, armor or weaponry) - on top of experience points which help players level-up. Thus, while quest drops can be rewarding in themselves, the motivation often comes through the quest giver’s reward and the affordances that reward provides. There are more or less two different types of reward systems provided in games and especially in WoW: fixed and interval reward systems. For instance, quest items come from certain monsters, like in figure 14, but not all monsters have them. This interval reward system is considered a game mechanic, or a type of game rule which has a strong influence over player behavior and moti‐ vation. However, often times a conflict arises in terms of the coherence of the quest drops, their interval scheduling, and the fictional, symbolic representation in the game. Figure 14 illustrates this well. It consists of three panels, and the first one focuses on the player’s character (avatar), and sets the stage for the plot by presenting the player reading a ‘quest sheet’ describing the quest drops (s)he should collect. Here the quest drops are parts of the creature’s body, which in their narrative embeddedness serve as proof to the quest givers that the creature was killed. The second panel shows the player’s character again with enthusiasm for the quest due to abundance of creatures in the area. The third and final panel reveals the conflict and humorous clash of the two logical systems (game rules and fictional world). While it makes sense from a game perspective to introduce interval rewards systems to introduce an element of chance to increase player 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 153 <?page no="154"?> motivation, it does not make sense from the perspective of the fictional world. Indeed in the game, in order to maintain this fictional world coherence, creatures are presented as whole and intact, and although they visibly do contain the body parts that the quest requires, they are not always available as a reward. (The final panel presents creatures as lacking body parts, highlighting this incoher‐ ency and also providing a humorous contrast to the game which does not present the creatures in this way.) External to the story of the player’s semi-fictional experience within the game is a type of narratorial commentary after the final panel, existing in the actual frame. It presents a suggestion for changing the rule system of the game, even if the suggestion is questionably serious. Its suggestion is that, “Some quest drops just need to be 100%.” Fig. 14: Game Criticism Comic: “Some Quest Drops…” 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 154 <?page no="155"?> 8 Some of the comics are “narrowcast,” meant for a select audience. This comic uses the player’s direct experience to present a problem (and even suggest corrective action) involving the game’s rule system. The player’s im‐ mersion in the fictional world and its quest-narrative structure functions to highlight the inconsistency which may go unnoticed or receive only momentary attention by many game players during gameplay. It serves as one example of how WoW fan-comics construct and participate in a discourse of thematizing and criticizing problems inherent to the game itself. Game Extension: Approximately one-fourth (11/ 50) of the comics that focus on the game program extend the game by constructing and exploring possible worlds. They do so by either presenting possible rules that are not actually present in the game, or by presenting possible scripted narrative. In order to understand the narrative function and the humorous clash, it is cru‐ cial to differentiate in the comic between non-fiction (i.e. what is available or possible in the game) and fiction (what is not). In this respect, the colliding ‘worlds’ within these comics are the ‘real’ gameworlds and the ‘possible’ worlds of the comic. Because some comics contain quite specific and sometimes arcane game information, interpreting the comic (separating ‘fact’ from ‘fiction’) can be challenging. Furthermore, it is unclear whether the presented extensions are serious suggestions for change or simply a playful interaction with other fans (and their knowledge of the game). 8 The two subcategories of comics that extend the game, possible rules and possible scripted narrative, ‘world’ their stories and present player experience and knowledge in different ways. Possible rule comics use direct player expe‐ rience to frame imagined changes to the game’s rule systems, presenting play‐ able characters taking actions, achieving goals, and receiving rewards that are not actually possible in the game. The anterior perspective and the perceptual overlay allow the comic creator to express pleasure or excitement over these new rules. Possible scripted narrative, on the other hand, presents player knowl‐ edge of the scripted narrative of the game but does not present player experience. This means that there is no player perspective taken in the comics at all, and the focus is rather on non-playable characters. Possible scripted narrative comics fall into to further subcategories: explan‐ ations and projections. Explanation comics take under-defined and under-ex‐ plained, possibly even conflicting elements of the game’s story and provide new narratives to fill in those blanks. Comics categorized under projections take aspects of the game’s scripted narrative and create stories that project into the future, as what-if scenarios. Possibly due to the convention of comic strips, these 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 155 <?page no="156"?> scripted narrative interventions are not necessarily to be taken seriously. For possible scripted narrative as well as for possible rules, the proposed changes do not appear to be actual ‘wish worlds,’ but rather ‘fantasy worlds’ in which players playfully create and inhabit novel scenarios. These creative scenarios can serve a social function within the community of gamers to engage in the creative, fantasy play of expanding the world of World of Warcraft (cf. Ryan 1991: 117, 119 on wish worlds and fantasy worlds respectively). This fits with what David Herman calls “making places,” or the “narrative saturation of space with lived experience” (Herman 2013: 283). Since the world is shared through its multiplayer setting, it makes sense that individual attempts to create meaning and make the gameworld more real involves the social sharing and communi‐ cating of such narrative saturation through fan-comics. The following passages present a worked example taken from the category of “possible scripted narrative, explanations.” The reasons for choosing this sub‐ category is that 1) more comics fell into this category than “possible rules,” and 2) more comics fell into the subcategory of “explanation” than “projection.” Fur‐ thermore, the previous worked example focused on rules, and a comic that fo‐ cuses on scripted narrative (and thus on the fictional world) provides further perspective to the variety WoW fan-discourse. The comic (cf. figure 15) consists of one panel and mixes actual game with fictional aspects. The actual world of the game can be seen in the setting (note the difference in visual style), since the setting is taken from an actual screen‐ shot. Furthermore, the game is further referenced by items that the players are betting on, denoted by the different colored font and the brackets (how items are referenced within the game). In this respect, the item-referencing can be seen as interface markers. However, the plot and setting of action is fictional and is not actually a part of the game. 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 156 <?page no="157"?> Fig. 15: Game Extension Comic: “What bosses do…” The comic presents five non-player characters called “bosses,” typically high level characters players have to combat as a part of quests and/ or as ‘raids’ (collaborative gameplay in which players form ‘parties’ and complete chal‐ lenging quests in ‘dungeons’). All the characters represent bosses that are ac‐ tually in the game, and the items they are betting also exist (and are drop items often rewarded after defeating them). However, in the game, bosses do not ac‐ tually meet each other ‘after work’ to play poker. Although most players familiar with the game would recognize the difference between what is actual in the game and what is extended through the comic, interpretation still relies largely on the differentiation between what is actual and what is fictional. As a form of ‘making places,’ the comic gives a life to the non-player characters beyond the actual game (cf. Jones 2015a). For the first comic in this subsection, player experience provided a focalizer to the comic’s story and conflict. Here, player experience is less applicable since the player’s character is absent, and since the setting and plot takes place outside the player’s experiential realm - indeed outside of the ‘reality’ of the game itself. The characters in this comic are more easily categorized as scripted narrative because they are controlled by the game system and are semiotically loaded with the practice of ‘raiding’ which frames the player’s experience with the bosses. 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 157 <?page no="158"?> This focus on the scripted narrative of the game could lead the reader to believe that the focus of the comic is on the rules of the game, but this would ignore the fictional elements of the comic and the creative role it plays for sense-making of game experience. The comic’s conflict appears to be explicitly absent due to the single panel. However, the conflict likely exists outside of the comic and in the mind of the reader, and emerges from the clash between two reference worlds that deal with fictional and non-fictional aspects of the game, as well as logical systems of thinking that underline them. On the one hand, the reference world of the game is represented non-fictionally within the comic. This world consists of actual bosses with actual loot, placed in the actual setting of a room in the game. This reference world presents a logical coherence between characters and items found within The Burning Crusade edition. On the other hand, the reference world of the player as comic creator presents the bosses in the fictional activity of a poker game. Furthermore, the bosses take on a fictional life that continues beyond player observance and that takes on a role beyond being simply an ‘en‐ emy’. This reference world presents a logical coherence with the player’s un‐ derstanding of the real world, and the social lives of people as well as the multiple roles they play beyond observable experience of them. However, these two ref‐ erence worlds exist in harmony in the single panel of the comic. The ‘pregnant moment’ it presents, the conflict of its representation, emerges in the mind of the reader and the work (s)he must do in separating ‘fact’ from ‘fiction.’ This comic thus presents an alternate world that extends beyond the experienceable gameworld. Furthermore, it ‘unworlds’ the game by presenting a possible world that follows a real-world logic. As a function, this unworlding exploits “the in‐ trinsic revisability” of the game’s story (Herman 2013: 159). Thus, the revision of the game’s scripted narrative comes through the player’s creative extension of the gameworld and its characters beyond player observation and interaction. These two worked examples provide examples of WoW comics which the‐ matized the WoW game program (fictional world or game rules). They present common examples from subcategories to illustrate the different aspects of the games that the fan-discourse either criticizes or extends. The next subsection addresses WoW comics which focused on the player and gameplay experience. 4.2.2 Player Criticism and Extension Comics that focus on the dimension of the player are the second most common with approximately 38%. Of these comics, most (27/ 46) are critical, yet a rela‐ tively close amount (19/ 46) focuses on extending experience. This stands in 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 158 <?page no="159"?> contrast to the comics categorized within the first domain, where the difference in number of comics that criticized and extended was substantially greater. Player Criticism: 59% of comics that focus on the player are critical. These focus specifically on the behavior of the player, and can be categorized into two further subcategories. The first consists of comics that thematize player behavior in interactions with non-player characters. However, this category has a rela‐ tively small number of comics. Most of the comics that thematize player be‐ havior focus on the multiplayer setting of the game (and players’ behavior in interaction with each other within the game). This thematization of behavior reveals further diversity due to the different options the game allows players to interact with each other. This study presents three types of social interaction which, in turn, are represented by three further subcategories of player-player interaction. The first is individual competition and refers to the fact that players join a ‘faction’ called the ‘Horde’ or the ‘Allies,’ and that these two factions are programmed by the game to be in conflict with each other. Comics that thematize individual competition present scenarios in which a player’s character interacts with another player’s character from another fac‐ tion, highlighting aspects of their behavior. The second form of social interaction is individual collaboration that refers to the interactions between players of the same faction, but who are not necessarily working in a direct state of collabo‐ ration. This form of interaction is unique because, although players may be in the same faction and thus, in terms of the game’s rule structure and in terms of its fictional narrative, not in direct competition with each other, issues of com‐ petition and problems of collaboration still arise. The final form of social inter‐ action in the game concerns party collaboration, settings in which characters of the same faction join ‘parties’ which interact together in a highly organized collaboration towards a shared goal. The conflict of the comics in this category stem from the difference between the social norms/ conventions governing real-life interactions and the altered behaviors allowed in/ fostered by the game. As discussed in section 2.3.2, games and play contain paradoxes of time, space and rules which allow individuals to act in ways not acceptable in other contexts. For instance, comics that thematize the behavior of players’ interaction with non-player characters present a con‐ flict of players ‘mistreating’ non-player characters by focusing on their utili‐ tarian affordances and ignoring their symbolic referencing to ‘real’ creatures and people. Some comics present their playable characters as feeling sad or em‐ barrassed for using their ‘pets,’ or small creatures that players can use to compete with other pets for rewards, or which can be used to protect their character or even as ‘bait’ to lure opponents in. Thus, the conflict exists in using their pets 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 159 <?page no="160"?> for utilitarian purposes of the game and disregarding their symbolic reference to living creatures which may have emotions. On the other hand, comics which focus on the interactions between players often represent individual needs in conflict with others or with group needs. Here, the fictional world serves as a backdrop for expectations that players would act within the fictional world as if it were the real world (as if ‘real’ world norms, values and customs were carried over into the gameworld and expected by players). Thus, though it may be ex‐ pected that players act in their own self-interests, for example, in the game, the comics often present such player behavior as standing in stark contrast to the game’s fictional world and its narrative of war, of factions, etc. Player experience plays an important role in these comics since it is through the player’s character that comics present different types of player behavior, and through the use of perceptual overlay that the comics highlight the emotional reactions. These emotional reactions are crucial since they are not typically communicated in the game, and since they also provide a type of narrative commentary to frame how the audience should interpret the behavior. For comics that focus on interactions with non-player characters, player experience is used in a self-reflexive manner to present the player’s own behavior, doubts over its appropriacy or internal conflicts between game-interests and symbolic normative responses. Comics that present the behavior of multiple players in‐ teracting typically do not focus on a single player (taking an intersubjective/ group perspective) and present and critically frame the behavior of single, mul‐ tiple, or all players in the setting. The following worked example (cf. figure 16) is chosen due to the complexity of the situation depicted, the conflicting interests that arise from it, as well as for the particular critical behavioral framing provided by the narrative. It presents players’ characters from the same faction interacting, representing the category “individual collaboration.” The players are ‘on the same side,’ so to speak, and both the game structure and its narrative framing allow for the char‐ acters to collaborate. However, there is no expectation that players must col‐ laborate, and often situations of conflict arise as players compete over the same, and by the game limited, resources. The comic presents two players with two different perspectives on gameplay competing over limited resources. The protagonist is represented by the cloaked character who is first present on the scene and who is trying to sneak up on his enemies. The antagonist is represented by the over-enthusiastic paladin who not only ruins the protagonist’s sneaking attack, but who also appears as his opposite - loud, shiny, and overly extroverted. The newcomer antagonist would like to collaborate with the protagonist - an ability allowed by the game where 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 160 <?page no="161"?> ‘kills’ are thus shared - yet the protagonist has no desire to do so. Furthermore, while the protagonist tries to ignore the paladin, the paladin ends up killing the ‘boss’ (non-player character, most likely the goal of a quest), ruining the pro‐ tagonist’s quest-plans and profiting from the protagonist’s hard work. This comic presents two opposing perspectives on gameplay in WoW. The first is represented by the protagonist and depicts single gameplay mode, where players are immersed in solving challenges and quests the game presents and in improving their characters. This mode also possibly represents more intro‐ verted players who prefer to play alone. The other perspective, represented by the antagonist, depicts the mode of collaborative gameplay, in which players can engage in more social forms of interaction and reap the in-game benefits and rewards of tackling challenges together. This mode also possibly represents the more extroverted players who are not just interested in the game but also in interacting with other players. However, although the structure of the game allows both forms of gameplay, it is the responsibility of the players to establish the norms and rules of interaction, to monitor their own behavior, and to ne‐ gotiate the terms of their collaboration. In the comic, the antagonist fails to abide by these social norms, and to consider the differing perspective and wishes of the protagonist. The antagonist clumsily enters the scene and fails to pay at‐ tention to the delicacy of the context. It is the antagonist who asks for permission to collaborate, indeed in a friendly manner, yet ignores the protagonist’s reply. Lastly, it is the antagonist who benefits from the protagonist, who diverts the minor non-player opponents, killing them, and leaving the ‘boss’ vulnerable. Thus, it is the antagonist who successfully completes the quest, ruining the play for the protagonist. In this sense, the issue of gameplay, of player preference, of social norms and expectations, becomes a matter of competition for limited re‐ sources. Although players of the same faction do not compete with each other directly, they can at times compete indirectly. 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 161 <?page no="162"?> Fig. 16: Player Criticism Comic: “The Chief is up” This comic thematizes the conflicts of a gameworld which allows multiple forms of gameplay, interaction with other players, and collaboration. Moreover, it the‐ matizes the intricacies of social behavior required in successfully co-habiting the gameworld. Also, as a game it is obvious that players act according to the rules of the game and that, ultimately, they serve their own interests. However, the social nature of the game and its embeddedness in an immersive, fictional world invites the expectation that players voluntarily abide by the social norms of the real world by respecting the wishes, desires and autonomy of other players. 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 162 <?page no="163"?> Player Extension: 41% (19/ 46) of comics that focus on the player are creative extensions. As such they are not so much focused on the behavior of players but rather on developing and presenting storied experiences that are not possible in the game. In the original coding and categorization of the WoW comics, these were categorized as presenting possible alterbiographies and specifically in‐ volving interventions with NPC’s, presenting unexpected and humorous con‐ sequences, and player banter (excluding the fourth subcategory of possible al‐ terbiographies, game-world reflection, which will be discussed later). Unlike comics that extend the gameworld by thematizing possible rules or possible scripted narrative, comics in this section focus on the complex interactions of players with the games, where players are given more freedom to narrate cre‐ ative stories about themselves rather than focus explicitly on certain aspects of the game’s program. Such comics are characterized by their light, non-serious nature, and in presenting humorous desires and wishes of players in terms of interactions with and responses to NPC’s, in terms of playing jokes or picking fun at certain in-game playable characters and their programmed traits, as well as in terms of reflecting on player’s expectations and interpretations of aspects of the game by presenting alternative and creative consequences to in-game actions. Comics that fall into this category are characterized by a specific type of nar‐ rative conflict and humorous clash that relies on the differentiation on the part of readers of which experiences are actually possible in the game (as well as what aspects of the game really exist), and which aspects are fictional wish-de‐ sires imagined by the comic creator. Much like comics that fall into the category of game extensions, these comics extend the game, yet their creative ideas have a much less serious intention. Rather, extensions are used in this category to frame certain types of player experiences and interactions, even behaviors, rather than being framed by character reactions. This focusing on player expe‐ riences and interactions, and use of creative extensions to drive it, allows for the game to serve as a backdrop for the creative storytelling through comics, and allows comic creators to narrate wishes and desires in terms of behavior and social interactions. The example provided by figure 17 provides an example of one of the most common types of comic in the category of player extension - player banter. This category is characterized by stories in which players trick one another, play jokes, make fun, etc. While they reflect many realities of the game, the stories contain considerable fictional portions which form the plot and purpose of the comic. The example provided here consists of two characters in a total of three panels. Though the background of the comic appears to have been taken from 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 163 <?page no="164"?> screenshots from the actual game, the characters and their dialog are stylized in comic form. Furthermore, the first two panels present decentralized focali‐ zation point, indicating a greater variation in terms of perspective from that of the actual game. The third panel provides an anterior centralized perspective, not necessarily in order to imitate the game but rather to highlight the punch line of the comic. Fig. 17: Player Extension Comic: “Chin Up” 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 164 <?page no="165"?> The plot of the story and comic consists of one player-character (from the race of ‘undead’ both are from the Horde faction) complaining to another player-character (an ‘orc’) about losing an important battle. The second panel provides a closer perspective on the orc, who offers consolation, stating “We’ll win the next one, chin up.” The bold-print “chin up” underline the even closer anterior perspective of the first character, the undead, who, presenting nothing but a blank expression, has no chin to keep “up.” The orc, realizing the social awkwardness and ill-fittingness of his expression, replies in a speech bubble coming outside of the panel, “Oh, right…” The humorous clash comes from two sources - first the attempt to console and uplift inadvertently turns into an insult, and second, the common idiom of ‘Keep your chin up,’ encouraging op‐ timism, loses its metaphorical meaning in the face of the undead character who literally has no chin. On the one level, this comic represents the common experience of a failed attempt at establishing a bond at an emotional level through interaction. A common idiom becomes inappropriate in the specific context where its literal translation fails to fit the condition of the partner. On the other hand, this comic represents banter between players who comment on each other’s characters and their physical appearances, inherent abilities and symbolic meanings. Comics like this, and that fall into the category of “player extension,” appear to focus on introducing lived experiences into the gameworld that are not actually possible in the game. Moreover, many in this category focus on the interrelationships between players (and player characters) and the role of friendship and banter. 4.2.3 Real World Criticism and Extension Comics categorized in this game dimension constitute the minority with 15% (19/ 122). Nonetheless, their existence points to a notable presence of this di‐ mension within the WoW fan-comic discourse on games. Of these 19 comics, 26% (5/ 19) focus on criticizing aspects of the world and its relation to games, while 74% (14/ 19) focus on extending the gameworld with the real-world or vice versa. The obvious dominance of the function of extension stands in stark con‐ trast to the results of the other dimensions (game and player), where the function of criticism exhibits greater frequency. Although the comics in this category have strong references to the game and to player experience and gameplay, there are also strong references to situations and settings external to the game - to real life. These references set the stage for reflection within the comics, on both how real life affects the games as well as on how the games affect real life. Thus, typical for comics in this category are narrative conflicts in which some aspect 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 165 <?page no="166"?> of the game or gameplay are compared and contrasted to some aspect of real life. The following passages present the results of the analysis, an overview of the categories and codes, and a worked example for each function. World Criticism: Unlike for the category of game and of player, fewer comics that focus on the world are critical (approximately 26%). For this category there is only one type of conflict - that which compares in-game behavior of players to players in out-of-game settings. Such comics exhibit high levels of reflection on individual behavior, usually with a focus on how behavior which is acceptable in-games does not match behavior acceptable in real life. These comics typically use the frames of comics to present both in-game and out-of-game settings, where player characters are presented in one frame and the behavior of the actual player is presented in another. Furthermore, the comparison of behavior in the two settings also often allows for a comparison of the two realities - that of the game with social reality of the real world. Figure 18 presents a typical comic from this category which compares the in-game behavior of a player with the out-of-game behavior. The first two panels present a player character who is eager to accept seemingly arbitrary quests (note their kitschy wording) from NPC quest givers. These first two panels, both content and number, are used to stand in sharp contrast to the third (by estab‐ lishing an asymmetry), in which the actual player of the character is shown in a real-life setting in front of the computer playing the game. A request is pro‐ vided in a speech bubble from a character outside of the panel, likely a parent, asking the player in front of the computer to take out the garbage. This real-life request provides a consistency to the first two panels, setting up the expectation that the player accepts the quest with the same eagerness as within the game. However, the change of setting is not the only divergence from the first two panels. Unlike in the first two panels, the request in the third is not arbitrary, since taking out the garbage not only fulfills a useful household task, but also expectations associated with the social and familial bonds between parent and child/ young adult. Furthermore, the response of the actual player does not match the eagerness within the first two panels, as the player responds flatly, “Do it yourself.” 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 166 <?page no="167"?> Fig. 18: World Criticism Comic: “Do it yourself ” Thus this comic uses player perspective within the game to establish a setting familiar to the game. Players of WoW take on large amounts of quests to progress in the game, and are willing to spend large portions of their (even daily) lives playing the game. The first two panels, however, present the quests as if they are work that the player character is willing to accept. This player perspective and representation of common experience allows for an identification by the audience. This identification is disrupted in the third panel, as the player exhibits in real-life socially and familially irresponsible and illogical behavior. Why 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 167 <?page no="168"?> should a player be so willing to do arbitrary work in a game, where there are no positive real-life consequences and where no actual bonds to other individ‐ uals are established? Why, in stark contrast, should those same players be un‐ willing to perform simple tasks that serve an important, real life function and that establish and maintain important social and familial bonds? There are two possible answers to these questions which are not addressed by the comic. Typical of such WoW fan-comics, conflicts are presented without solutions being offered. Herein lays the critical reflective potential of the comics and their role as agents of game discourse. Conflicts are presented and the au‐ dience is responsible for figuring out the answers. Either the fault of the conflict lies with the player who is unable to differentiate between meaningless game activity and fulfilling important real-life tasks, or the fault lies with reality (and society/ culture) and its inability to make real-life tasks as engaging and moti‐ vating as games. The conflict presented in the comic, then, and its focus on in-game and out-of-game behavior, leads to reflection on both player behavior in both settings as well as to the organization of reality and social interaction. As this example illustrates, comics that fall into the category of “world criticism” establish a reflexive relation between game and real life behavior that not only questions player behavior in both settings but also to the actual construction of gameworlds as well as reality. The ambiguity created by the lacking resolutions intensifies this reflection as comic readers are forced to create their own con‐ clusions. World Extension: Unlike the other two game dimensions, the comics that ex‐ tend the world (with 74%) are more common than those that criticize it. The five comics that fell into this category typically present settings in which there are strong crossovers between the real and the gameworld. These crossovers are sometimes so strong that it is unclear whether the setting is supposed to be in the real world or the gameworld. In these comics, player experience is used to frame commentary to the extensions in ways that either offer the player’s ac‐ ceptance or rejection of the extension, or that established ambiguity, encour‐ aging the audience to consider for itself. The high level of reflexivity of these comics (by mixing game elements and real-life elements) leads to not only re‐ flection on the gameworld (and possibilities concerning its reality and devel‐ opment) but also of the real world and ways in which the gameworld can ques‐ tion or influences its reality. Figure 19 illustrates this reflexivity by presenting a scene which combines multiple elements of the game with elements of real life. For example, this single panel comic presents WoW characters competing, yet not as they would in the game of WoW. Instead, the characters compete in a game taken from real-life, 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 168 <?page no="169"?> as the characters participate in an Olympic swimming event. The humor of the comic not only comes from this shift in game competition, but also from the fact that one character is able to walk on water, providing him with an unfair ad‐ vantage and a strong likelihood of winning. Fig. 19: World Extension Comic: “World of Warcraft Olympics” This comic, though relatively low in complexity, supports the questioning of the ontological nature of both the game and reality through the ambiguity of both setting and action caused by mixing game and real-life elements. The comics coded within this category exhibited a range of this mixing of elements. Some presented more recognizably gameworld settings and introduced elements of real life, while others presented more recognizably real-world settings and in‐ troduced elements of the game. In both situations, the mixing of elements and worlds established a reflection on the actuality and possibility within both set‐ tings. These comics can thus be categorized as world extension and, as literacy practices, they intervene in game discourses surrounding the construction of 4.2 Results: Criticism, Extension, and the Game-Discourse Model 169 <?page no="170"?> gameworlds as well as real-worlds, and the reflexive relationships between them. 4.3 Implications for Gamer Discourse The analysis of the 122 fan-comics selected from the WoW archive reveal much about the way that game fan-comics construct meaning and constitute and en‐ gage in gamer discourse. The comics utilize different perspectival techniques, perceptual overlay and interface markers to not only represent game experi‐ ences, but also to compliment those experiences with player perception and commentary and to diverge from the game representation in order to establish narrative conflicts. Multimodal narratives are utilized in the comics to embed recognizable experiences into relevant conflicts, and humorous ‘clashes’ (often created by lacking conclusions) lead to reflection on the various game dimen‐ sions involved in the construction of the game (consisting of rules and game‐ world), in player experience and behavior, and on the real world (as both a model for experiencing the game as well as a site of reality construction itself). The analysis of these fan-comics hold potential for claims about video game fan-comics in general, and one step further removed, about gamer discourse in whole. As such, this analysis reveals that gamer discourse is highly reflective, exhibiting complex integrated functions of criticism and extension that focus on all three dimensions of games discourse. The analysis also revealed through the categorization and coding process that the greatest amount and thematic diversity of comics are exhibited in the first two dimensions of the game (the game and the player) with approximately 85% (103/ 122). This is possibly due to at least two reasons. The first deals with the context of the comics, as they are not only presented on a website that focuses on the game, WoW, and is created for players of the game, but the comics are also created by players and for players who are highly invested in, and fans of, the game. The second reason is that the game is only experienceable through play, and thus by the player, which means that the dimensions of the game and the player are indelibly intertwined and reliant upon each other. However, the substantial presence of comics within the dimension of the world reveal that WoW players are not simply ‘trapped’ in the game but are also reflective of how reality influences their perception of the game as well as how the game influences their perception of reality. Further research on game fan-comics, as well as on gamer discourse, is needed to show the transferability of these findings to general gamer discourse. Nonetheless, these findings suggest 4 World of Warcraft Fan-Comic Archive Analysis 170 <?page no="171"?> that those who play games are capable of reflective thought on their game ex‐ periences and that those thoughts are involved in complex processes of game criticism and extension. Furthermore, they suggest that players are capable of engaging in such processes if they are provided with suitable (literacy) tasks (especially ones that mimic real-world gamer tasks, like fan-comics) and if they are allowed to come to their own conclusions about games and their experiences with them without top-down, reductive, and binary judgements being applied from the onset. Such an approach to integrating game discourse into the EFL classroom would allow the linking of the literacy and language learning that occurs outside of the classroom with games to the classroom, and would not only support the development of English related literacy practices, but also en‐ able students to participate in the informed cultural discourse on games. Additionally, the integration of such discursive and literacy practices on games into the EFL classroom can also provide learners with the possibility of influencing the media and video games they consume. For instance, it is likely that the WoW website is a space for game programmers to study the likes, dis‐ likes and ideas of players to integrate into further changes of the game. In a sense, fan-comics, comments, forum and other forms of fan-participation serve as market research for game producers. As Leavenworth states, “The links be‐ tween storyworld and fan fiction go in both directions, and when seen as parts of the archive, each text holds the possibility of influencing how others are interpreted.” (2014: 328) When game players are enabled and encouraged to participate in literacy practices like fan-fiction, they participate in the interpre‐ tation of the ‘storyworlds’ of their fandom and thus possibly also in their future creation. As a conclusionary remark, this WoW fan-comic study reveals a cul‐ tural value discourse inherent in game comic discourse. In game comic dis‐ course, players are allowed to value the games they play and love, and so are thus also free to engage with it creatively and critically. 4.3 Implications for Gamer Discourse 171 <?page no="173"?> III. Challenges of Classroom Game Discourse. Three Case Studies Part III focuses on the analysis of three case studies as game discourse was introduced into 10 th grade EFL classrooms. The analysis of the case studies fo‐ cuses on ‘critical incidences’ that arose, largely as challenges or problems con‐ cerning various aspects of game discourse. Furthermore, part III presents ap‐ proaches for systematically addressing these challenges as learning opportunities. The challenges discussed in each case study are posed as provocative ques‐ tions. They stand at the intersection between the academic field of research and the need for practical classroom solutions. The analysis does not deliver straight‐ forward, binary (yes/ no) answers to these questions, but rather uses the ques‐ tions to organize and open up larger areas of discourse on the educational and didactic potential of game discourse for the EFL classroom. Furthermore, the challenges are not meant to serve as justification to avoid connecting classroom discourse to the discourse on games. On the contrary, they are more guidelines to help educators and researchers avoid certain pitfalls, and even integrate cer‐ tain conflicts as potentials for reflection, differentiation, perspective building and especially for a discourse oriented video game literacy. <?page no="175"?> 5 Methodological Framework This chapter presents both the methodological framework as it was operation‐ alized in this study as well as the theoretical underpinnings as they pertain to both the specific approaches and methods implemented as well as the reasons for selecting certain approaches from a large range of others. The following subsections focus first on describing the philosophical background to qualita‐ tive, ethnographic research which lays the foundations for all the subsequent research decisions made and methods chosen. Second, the research interests and questions of this study are presented in three iterations to address the general public, the general field of foreign language pedagogy, and the specific branch of foreign language pedagogy and digital games. After that, the overall research design process is revealed and case study approach addressed. Next, the access to the research field is described, followed by an explanation of the method of data collection and the principle of data triangulation which underlies it. This concerns both the data collected inside and outside the classroom. Then, a de‐ scription of the data analysis as well as the theoretical methods needed to sup‐ port it is provided, and finally, a list of ethical guidelines is laid out with an explanation of how those guidelines were carried out during the project. This chapter is thus meant to provide an overview of the methodological framework applied, and the reasons for its construction, before presenting the findings of the study starting in chapter 6. 5.1 Qualitative, Ethnographic Research This study envisions itself as embedded in a long history of (social) research which has attempted to crystallize perspectives of ontology and epistemology into stable and systematic approaches for learning about the world (Cohen et al. 2007: 9; Denzin & Lincoln 2005: 2; Dörnyei 2007: 25; Flick 2009: 12). Cohen et al. present social science research as existing in a binary opposition between “objectivist” and “subjectivist” approaches (2007: 9). On the one hand, the ob‐ jectivist approach views the world as ‘real’ and knowable, human nature as predictable and therefor dictated by discoverable ‘laws.’ The subjectivist view, on the other hand, sees reality as existing in name only and as therefore never fully knowable. Human nature, as derived from this approach, is thus highly <?page no="176"?> unpredictable and subject to complex processes and contextual influences (ibid.: 9). Similarly, Uwe Flick sees qualitative social research as derivative of the “fact of the pluralization of life worlds.” (2009: 12) The views behind this study tend towards the subjectivist approach. Such an approach underlies qualitative re‐ search, and is thus reflected in the research interest and questions, the type of data collected as well as the methods of analysis applied here in this study. Furthermore, this approach is also reflected in the types of conclusions drawn from the following data, and without a doubt also in the extent to which its conclusions are generalizable to the general subject matter of games and foreign language pedagogy in schools. However, the ideological distinctions between the qualitative and quantita‐ tive methods are sometimes difficult to maintain, especially since the ultimate nature of reality and knowledge are difficult to definitively pin down (Dörnyei 2007a: 25-26). In the face of this uncertainty, it makes sense that both qualitative and quantitative, subjective and objective approaches to social research are uti‐ lized to complement, to question, and to drive research on social phenomena, especially foreign language teaching and learning, and to gain a fuller under‐ standing of the complex social world we live in. Thus, in the ideal case, the qualitative research presented in this study will be integrated into a discourse of other, both qualitative and quantitative research which can complement, fur‐ ther develop, support or even challenge findings and claims reported herein. Qualitative research focuses on both individuals and the dialectic of meaning making that emerges out of social interactions (Caspari & Schmelter 2016: 128; Flick 2009: 12). Thus, with a Blumerian approach to the social construction of meaning (cf. section 1.1 on meaning making, Blumer and symbolic interac‐ tionism), qualitative research is a highly interpretive process which requires high levels of involvement of the researcher. Ethnography and naturalistic ap‐ proaches (cf. Cohen et al. 2007: 167) thus describe ways in which qualitative researchers collect data and, to a large degree, begin the long process of inter‐ preting individuals, social interaction, and the meanings (and ‘life worlds’) which emerge. These approaches are also founded on the idea that meaning-making is largely influenced, if not determined, by the context of in‐ teraction; therefore, in order to minimize the influence of the researcher and the purpose of the research, data collection should occur in ‘naturally’ occurring settings instead of artificial ‘labs’ (Cohen et al. 2007: 167; Heigham & Sakui 2009: 96). Through an ethnographic approach, the researcher is given opportunity to gather enough data to create what Geertz calls a “thick description” of contex‐ tualized behavior (1973: 3). Since the interest of this study concerns the inte‐ gration of foreign language game discourse (and the development of video game 5 Methodological Framework 176 <?page no="177"?> literacy) in the EFL classroom, this study is limited to classroom research, which will be addressed further in passages further below. The explorative and interpretive nature of ethnographic, qualitative research of meanings and their social embeddedness can lead to the formation of hy‐ potheses, rather than simply the validation of pre-existing ones. Allowing hy‐ potheses to emerge from social interactions and data collected surrounding them not only supports a sense of validity of the findings (i.e. because interpretations are subject to a lesser degree to preconceived beliefs and perspectives) but also allows for the surfacing of new hypotheses which could not have been predicted at the onset and design of the study (Caspari & Schmelter 2016: 583). The ex‐ plorative/ interpretive approach is particularly useful for this project since very little research has been done on the introduction of foreign language game dis‐ course in the EFL classroom, especially in Germany. The initial and incunabulate findings and ‘hypotheses’ of this study will hopefully serve as the foundation of other projects which focus on validating or simply expanding these findings. One particular challenge to qualitative and ethnographic research is the gen‐ eralizability of the research findings. An ontological and epistemological per‐ spective which sees social reality grounded only in subjective perspective runs the risk of relativizing any research findings to only the context from which findings stem and the individuals involved. This appears to negate the point of research, and for the search for knowledge and meaning in general, since find‐ ings need to be relatable to other contexts and individuals in order to serve a purpose to society. As Clifford Geertz states, I have never been impressed by the argument that, as complete objectivity is impos‐ sible in these matters (as of course it is), one might as well let one’s sentiments run loose. As Robert Solow has remarked, that is like saying that as a perfectly aseptic environment is impossible, one might as well conduct surgery in a sewer. (1973: 30) Geertz’ point suggests that just because a qualitative approach to research pro‐ duces results which are always limited and embedded in subjective realities, this does not mean that there cannot be intersubjective connecting points which make the findings relatable. Denscombe would agree when he bluntly states, in the context of qualitative research, “Research should produce findings from which generalizations can be made” (2010: 181). He admits, however, to limita‐ tions, stating “Generalizations need to be made cautiously and with careful at‐ tention being paid to the inherent limitations of making generalizations about phenomena that are extremely complex.” (ibid.: 195) Of course, addressing the issues of researcher influence on the study and the generalizability of findings 5.1 Qualitative, Ethnographic Research 177 <?page no="178"?> 1 despite the fact that these two concepts have been mostly associated in practice with quantitative methods and are not without difficulties when applied to qualitative re‐ search, cf. Dörnyei 2007: 54. 2 Cf. also Benitt on “The Notion of Quality in Qualitative Research” (2015: 97). is tied up in the more general research quality criteria of validity and relia‐ bility. 1 Amidst this backdrop of the complexities and ideologies behind qualitative research, it helps to have a clear guideline of what qualitative research is and the criteria for defining the features of quality qualitative research. Dörnyei presents a clear and comprehensible set of three quality fields within which a total of nine quality features of qualitative research exist. 2 The three fields con‐ sists of “building up an image of researcher reliability,” “validity/ reliability checks” and “research design-based strategies” (Dörnyei 2007: 59-61). The pas‐ sages below present the specific quality features of qualitative research that fit under each field, as well as the measures that this study undertook in order to ensure that these quality features were met. The first field concerns “building up an image of researcher reliability” and consists of four individual quality criteria. “Leaving an audit trail” consists of “offering a detailed and reflective account of the steps taken to achieve the re‐ sults” (ibid.: 60). This criterion is not only reflected in the steps taken in this chapter to outline the procedure and structure of the study, but also in the anal‐ yses which provide examples of data from which ideas are drawn and conclusion are made. This also includes reflective passages on the limitations and affor‐ dances of specific methods and procedures. “Contextualization and thick de‐ scription” consists of “presenting the findings in rich contextualized detail” (ibid.: 60) and is illustrated in this study through data collection methods which ensure context is recorded (like for example field notes, cf. 5.5) as well as sum‐ maries of individual case studies and the particular classroom events which were analyzed. “Identifying potential researcher bias” reflects the “important role of the researcher in every stage of a qualitative study” (ibid.: 60). This quality feature can especially be maintained through autoethnography. Autoethnography requires “the person undertaking it to question their self-ac‐ count constantly, opening the ‘subjective’ and the intimately personal up to the cultural contexts in which it is formed and experienced” (Hills 2002: 72). Due to the important role of the processes underlying autoethnography, it is a common practice in social research, and especially fields like fan research (cf. Hills 2002), general social sciences (cf. Patton 2002: 84), and even foreign language pedagogy (Choi 2010; Nunan & Choi 2011; Pennycook 2010). In order to increase the val‐ idity of this study and decrease subjective biases surrounding digital games, this 5 Methodological Framework 178 <?page no="179"?> study is founded on research of the concept of autoethnography, on constant reflection on the beliefs and biases of the researcher, and even further on eth‐ nographic research on games (cf. Jones 2017a). The final quality criteria for the first field consists of “examining outlier, extreme or negative cases and alterna‐ tive explanations” (Dörnyei 2007: 60) and is maintained in this study by frequent consideration and thematization of weaknesses of the study, as well as an ad‐ dressing of situations and cases which make general claims and arguments dif‐ ficult to make. Dörnyei names the second field “validity/ reliability checks” and includes “re‐ spondent feedback” and “peer checking” (Dörnyei 2007: 60) as specific criteria. Respondent feedback is obtained in this study through the student and teacher interviews (cf. 5.5) and peer checking was established through collaborating with colleagues on data analysis and presenting and discussing analysis and results in colloquia. The third field, “research design-based strategies,” contains “method and data triangulation” (maintained in this study and discussed in 5.4 and 5.5), “prolonged engagement and persistent observation” and “longitudinal research design” (Dörnyei 2007: 60-61). These final two criteria, though subjec‐ tive to a degree, reveal possible weak points in this study since observation of each class took place only over a two-week period and, though it included mul‐ tiple temporal points of data collection and observation, are at the low end of longitudinal design spectrum. At the base of any quality research study are the research questions (or re‐ search interests). The following subsection presents the research questions of this study and is followed by several subsections describing the methods utilized in order to search for and provide answers. 5.2 Research Interests and Questions For foreign language learning research, David Nunan lays out two simple yet poignant criteria for developing research questions which, concomitantly, can also serve as quality criteria for how research questions are embedded in qual‐ itative research. First, he states that the question needs to be “worth asking in the first place,” and secondly, “capable of being answered.” (Nunan 2005: 213) A question worth asking is not only important because the question largely frames the type of data collection, but also the perspective through which data is ana‐ lyzed and interpreted. As Dörnyei states while discussing the dangers of insipid data in qualitative research, “the quality of the analysis is dependent on the quality of the original data” (Dörnyei 2007: 55). Thus, it can be concluded that 5.2 Research Interests and Questions 179 <?page no="180"?> an uninteresting question can lead to insipid data which, in a (likely obvious) ‘snowball’ effect, can to lead to uninteresting findings. However, the concept of ‘interest’ is susceptible to issues of subjectivity which more likely exist on a continuum rather than as a binary. This means that it can be difficult to definitively determine whether or not some questions are indeed interesting, or indeed interesting enough, to warrant academic research. Fur‐ thermore, a research question that is ‘interesting’ is subjective to more than simply the researcher, but also to the research community within which the research is embedded. Thus, general claims of relevance (or lack thereof) may assume that the research field exists as a ‘monolithic block’ rather than as a complex discourse of often conflicting, and complex interweaving ideas and approaches. Furthermore, the relevance of the research question may also be accountable to the general society to which the specific research institution, field and communities are accountable. Many researchers are aware of the dan‐ gers of following esoteric or even hermetic pursuits which require copious amounts of research and effort only to reveal results that appear completely irrelevant to those outside the field. Therefore, a further differentiation of the challenge of relevance is embedding the research question in multiple layers of discourse, involving the general public, the general field and then the specific community which surrounds the specific interests of the study. The ability to ‘answer’ a research question is also subject to individual inter‐ pretation, especially for qualitative research. When issues of generalizations are involved, there will always be a gap between the specific interpretations of con‐ textualized interactions and the ability to transfer those findings to other re‐ search contexts in another place and time. Therefore, a research question which is interested in general findings that can support a certain research field must always be larger than what the data can actually support. Thus, it seems more correct to say that a good research question is not evaluated in terms of its answerability per se, but rather by the distance between the interpretation of the data and its applicability to the research question (or questions as they per‐ tain to different layers of academic and societal discourse). This means that on the one hand a question needs to be interesting and relevant to different levels of discourse, but also, on the other hand, specific enough to be acceptable in terms of answerability to a rigorous scientific research community. Rather than there existing a specific guideline for answering such difficult questions in qual‐ itative research, it appears that research success is undoubtedly a complex in‐ terplay of personal and social/ institutional responsibility. Based on this more fully differentiated approach to research questions, the research questions of this study are presented below as they relate to three levels 5 Methodological Framework 180 <?page no="181"?> of discourse. Following such an approach reflects the attempt to create relevant questions which are both interesting (and comprehensible) to a general public and specific enough to not only meet the needs of the scientific field within which it is embedded but also to allow a data collection and analysis that can bridge the gap between specific findings and generalizable results. The three question sets presented in this section not only represent three levels of specif‐ icity, but also have slightly different focal points. Thus, at the most general level, the empirical portion of the study asks: 1) What types of problems arise when the topic of video games is dis‐ cussed in the EFL classroom? How can these problems help identify typ‐ ical features of classroom game discourse? How can the problems be turned into learning opportunities? The concept of ‘problem’ should be addressed more closely, since there are in‐ numerable types of problems which can occur in the classroom and since this study focuses on specific types of problems. Thus more concretely, this study is interested in problems that are not only involving the topic of games, but also that stem from interactions amongst students, between students and teachers, and/ or between students and tasks/ materials. Furthermore, this study is inter‐ ested in ‘larger’ scale problems which are noticeable to students and/ or teachers, like problems which interrupt the intended course of the lesson or which can lead to confusion that is addressed by multiple students towards the teacher, or by the teacher towards multiple students. The identification of problems serves the practical function of problem solving, since identifying problems can be seen as the first step towards finding solutions. By moving from problems to typical features of classroom game dis‐ course, this study attempts to make generalizable claims about problems which are likely to arise in other EFL classroom settings. By investigating how the problems that arise can be turned into learning opportunities, this study reveals its interest, not in proving that games and game discourse does or does not belong in the classroom, but rather that if problems are identified and their origins understood, they can serve the development of activities, tasks and re‐ flective questions which can support a more informed and productive classroom game discourse. The second level redefines the previous questions more closely within the field of foreign language pedagogy (Fremdsprachendidaktik) here in Germany. Referring to section I, chapter 1 in this work, the questions are embedded in a framework of media competency, multiliteracies and foreign language discourse ability (foreign language discourse ability), concepts which are to varying degrees 5.2 Research Interests and Questions 181 <?page no="182"?> already established, accepted and recognizable within the field. These concepts link the EFL classroom to the higher level goals of education as well as to the specific, communicative and cultural competencies and skills involved in pro‐ cesses of foreign language teaching and learning. Moreover, such an embedding allows a connection to the CEFR, a document which currently serves as the standard and foundation for conceptualizing the goals and principles of foreign language pedagogy in Germany (and many European countries) today. There‐ fore, at this more specific second level, this study asks the question: 2) How can the conceptual lenses of foreign language discourse ability and multiliteracies allow insight into the classroom learning potentials of these problems? A foreign language discourse ability approach suggests that there is a tenable relation between the EFL classroom and foreign language cultural discourse. Therefore, solving problems which arise in classroom discourse offers potential for providing learners with strategies and methods for solving problems which arise in foreign language cultural discourse outside of schools and formal learning settings. Therefore, solving problems that arise in classroom game dis‐ course can lead to learners developing the ability to solve ‘real-life’ problems in cultural game discourse. A multiliteracies approach suggests that discourse al‐ ways occurs through various modes, ‘texts’ and even genres. Discourse is not related simply to one form of communication, for instance the linguistic. Thus classroom game discourse, like the cultural discourse on games, can occur through many types of media. Furthermore, as the literacy approach suggests, the ability to participate in discourse consists not only reception, or compre‐ hending the message of a form of communication, but also producing messages through various media and genres. This summarizes the theoretic approach (described in section I, chapter 1) which provides the general framework within which discourse related classroom problems are treated. Classroom discourse problems are cultural discourse problems, and with an informed approach, solving the former inside the classroom can help learners solve the latter outside of the classroom. In the third level, the questions are presented in a form which more closely addresses current and up-to-date research (and research standards) within the field of foreign language pedagogy in Germany (which includes the theoretical findings and developments presented in the first two sections of this work) and which is presented in a form with an acceptable gap between what findings and conclusions the data and analysis can deliver and the generalizability of those findings to transfer to other contexts. Therefore, the following research question 5 Methodological Framework 182 <?page no="183"?> is not only embedded in the concepts of competency and literacy as they pertain to EFL teaching and learning, but also within a specific concept of video game literacy which is informed (as section I chapter 2 shows) by research on video games (game studies) as well as by my own empirical research on gamer fan-dis‐ course (through video game fan-comics, see section II). Thus, at the third and final level, this research project asks the question: 3) How can the model of game discourse (section 2.3) help discover the complexities of classroom game discourse? This includes identifying typical problems and developing strategies for turning them into learning opportunities. Presented at this level, the quality of the research question relies heavily on validity of the model of video game literacy. Looking at this third level alone, the question might appear weak since the video game discourse model is largely a product of this research project (and only at the theoretical level) and since there was no previous model existing upon which to build. Thus, there are un‐ doubtedly weaknesses inherent in the model which requires further research (and development by the research community). However, the model in its cur‐ rent state will have to suffice since this is the first research project of its kind and since the research findings of the case studies can to varying degree allow for a critical reflection on the limitations of the model itself, and therefore to its subsequent improvement. And finally, the specificity of this third level of the research question must be contextualized within the other two previously pre‐ sented levels in order to understand the relevance and validity of the question to address not only the demands of Fremdsprachendidaktik in Germany but also of a society (and educational institutions) largely uncertain in how to deal with the topic of video games in education. As embedded in a qualitative study which is explorative, interpretive, and aimed largely at developing rather than testing hypotheses, the research ques‐ tions presented in this section (in all three forms) are only as good as the data collected, the analyses performed, and the conclusions they set forth. Therefore, the questions serve as lenses, not to validate preconceived ideas, nor to supple‐ ment previous research with additional findings, but rather to open up and begin the initial exploration of a largely under-researched topic and field. 5.2 Research Interests and Questions 183 <?page no="184"?> 5.3 Case Studies and Research Design Overview This research project takes a case study approach to operationalizing the re‐ search questions. That is, it looks at specific groups (classes) over a specified amount of time in order to perform an in-depth qualitative analysis of the rel‐ evant events and aspects that emerge. Cohen et al. define case study as a “specific instance” that is “designed to illustrate a more general principle.” Moreover, a case study is bounded in terms of individuals and time, providing “a unique example of real people in real situations” (Cohen et al. 2007: 253). Dörnyei states that a case study is “an excellent method for obtaining a thick description” and, if done well, can be “effective in generating new hypotheses, models, and un‐ derstandings about the target phenomena.” (Dörnyei 2007: 155) However, de‐ spite the advantages of a case study, there are some weaknesses, particularly issues concerning the generalizability of the cases (and the results of its analysis) and the role of the researcher (cf. 5.1). Nonetheless, this study utilizes case studies as a method for conceptualizing and organizing classroom research, data collection and analysis. Although case studies can be defined broadly (cf. Dör‐ nyei 2007: 151), this study will define case studies as individual classes within individual schools, and will provide analysis of the salient features of the case studies as they pertain to the research questions. This study is focused on game literacy in secondary education and focuses on 10 th grade. This grade level was chosen for several reasons: First, the topic fits the curricula for integrated comprehensive schools (integrierte Gesamt‐ schule) for Hessen for both basic and advanced level courses (G-Kurs and E-Kurs respectively), both in terms of skill level as well as thematically. For example, the topic of “changing world” is offered for basic English courses, and “young people’s problems” and “media and communication” for advanced level courses (Kultusministerium 2017: 16). The digital game literacy can be interpreted under all these topics, as all participating teachers agreed. Furthermore, the commu‐ nicative skills of students in this school form and grade level are, according to the curriculum, developed enough to engage in classroom game discourse, as students were required to “establish and manage social contacts,” “request and express emotions and opinions,” “inform/ report,” and especially utilize “dis‐ course- / repair strategies” (Kultusministerium 2017: 17-18). The situation was similar for secondary school (Gymnasium). According to the state curriculum, grade 10 deals with the topic, “growing up” which can also be related to digital games (Kultusministerium 2010: 52). Furthermore, the competency area of “han‐ dling texts and media” is a requirement of grade ten, and includes specific skills and abilities like understanding the linguistic and content design of media, re‐ 5 Methodological Framework 184 <?page no="185"?> lating media to lifeworlds (including the that of the students) and developing personal opinions (ibid.: 53). This relates well to the educational standards for Germany (Bildungsstandards), specifically for upper level (Oberschule), which includes “text and media competence” as one of the five major competency areas. The educational standards define text and media competency as die Fähigkeit, Texte selbstständig, zielbezogen sowie in ihren historischen und so‐ zialen Kontexten zu verstehen, zu deuten und eine Interpretation zu begründen. Text- und Medienkompetenz schließt überdies die Fähigkeit mit ein, die gewonnenen Er‐ kenntnisse über die Bedingungen und Techniken der Erstellung von Texten zur Produktion eigener Texte unterschiedlicher Textsorten zu nutzen. (Kultusminister‐ konferenz 2012: 22) These documents supply the reasons in which 10th grade classes in integrated comprehensive and secondary schools were selected for the study. The partici‐ pating teachers all agreed that the topic of the study fit well both with the topics they were to cover as well as with the general competency and maturity level of their students. Case Study Duration School Form Grade Students 1 2 Weeks/ 4 Double Lessons Gymnasium 10 21 2 2 Weeks/ 4 Double Lessons Gesamtschule (Leis‐ tungskurs) 10 19 3 2 Weeks/ 4 Double Lessons Gesamtschule 10 15 Table 6: Overview of Case Studies Table 6 presents an overview of the case studies. It includes the duration of the case study, the school form and grade, as well as the number of students within each class. The following section describes how the researcher acquired access to these case studies before addressing the details of how the case study, and the data collection and analysis involved, was carried out. 5.3 Case Studies and Research Design Overview 185 <?page no="186"?> 5.4 Access to the Research Field Access to EFL classrooms in Germany are guarded by three different levels of gatekeepers (Legutke & Schramm 2016). At the highest level is the Ministry of Education for the various federal states. Since all the empirical classroom re‐ search involved in this project occurred within the state of Hessian, permission from the Hessian Ministry of Education had to be obtained before data collection at any participating school could begin. Permission required a proposal con‐ sisting of a project description, including the goals of the project, the method‐ ology and types of data collection methods. It also included a description of the ethical guidelines to be followed as well as example documents, like interview questions and parent/ student information letters and permission forms. Once the application was submitted, the permission process took approximately two months before permission was granted. Before permission from schools was gained (typically consisting of a combi‐ nation of permission from the school director and the school council) teachers who were willing to participate were sought after. Criteria for teacher partici‐ pation were an interest in the topic of games (though no experience with games was required) as well as at least four double-lessons available for a project. To gain access to teachers, the researcher executed a strategy of contacting English teachers via school websites, contacting school directors, and looking for con‐ tacts through colleagues in the English department at the Justus Liebig Univer‐ sität Gießen. Secondary schools (and teachers) that were within relative prox‐ imity to Gießen and which were easily accessible by public transportation were contacted. In the end, two willing participant teachers were found through school directors and three participant teachers through contacts through col‐ leagues. After obtaining willingness from the five above-mentioned teachers to par‐ ticipate in the study, permission was sought from both the school director and school council. One director (and school council) rejected the project due to the suspicion of digital games and belief that any introduction of game discourse into the school, which was not solely focused on the dangers of violence and addiction, would ‘send the wrong message’ to students that playing digital games was acceptable. Permission was received, however, from the schools of the other four teachers without any problem. Though the project was carried out with four different classes, only three case studies are presented here (cf. table 5 in 5.3). Since this study is exploratory in nature, the three classes which exhibit the most interesting incidences (moments of problems and/ or opportunities) were chosen. Furthermore, there was enough 5 Methodological Framework 186 <?page no="187"?> overlap in incidences to exclude the fourth one since it mostly repeated issues and events that occurred in the other classes. Table 7 provides an overview of the entire research process, including not only of the access to the field described in this section, but also the steps which immediately followed. Research Process Description Access to Field • Application for permission from the Ministry of Education in Hesse • Contact possible participant schools and teachers • Permission from school director, school council, parents and students • Result: 4 classes in 3 schools participated Case Study Prepara‐ tion • Meeting with teacher to discuss overall goals of project and possible tasks and lesson plans • Introduction to class, explain project and goals Case Study: Data Collection • In-Class Data Collection: observer notes, videography and classroom texts • Retrospective Interviews: teacher interviews, student group interviews Data Analysis • sampling of relevant problems, transcription, data trian‐ gulation • Qualitative content and thematic analysis Table 7: Classroom Research Process Moving from the access to the specific case studies, the following sections look more closely at various aspects of this research process to provide a clearer understanding of the research design as well as the methods and standards ap‐ plied in the study. This includes data collection and analysis, which will be ad‐ dressed in the following section. 5.5 Data Collection and Triangulation Because qualitative research views social reality as constituted by complex in‐ teractions of individuals in specific contexts, investigating the meanings that emerge out of those interactions can be difficult. Some reasons for this can be that participants are not fully aware, not willing to be honest, misinterpret or fickle when it comes to certain ideas, beliefs and values attached to emergent meanings. This is exacerbated by the fact that multiple individuals are often involved in social interaction and themselves must interpret the intentions of 5.5 Data Collection and Triangulation 187 <?page no="188"?> their communicative partners correctly in order for interaction to be considered successful. This means that interpreting interactions, communication, and dis‐ course requires moving beyond what was simply said within a certain context, and investigating what individuals also meant. This, in turn, requires inter‐ preting other forms of non-verbal communication, as well as the sequence of actions that co-establish the context. Furthermore, investigating meanings also require understanding the beliefs of participants, how those beliefs are em‐ bedded in experiences, operationalized in speech acts, and negotiated in social settings. Though full and complete knowledge of all such previously listed aspects is impossible, qualitative research attempts to gain depth through multiperspec‐ tivity. Multiperspectivity can come through different means, and one particu‐ larly common mean is through triangulation of data collection methods (cf. Cohen et al. 2007: 141 and Flick 2009: 448 on different types of triangulation). Particularly for classroom research, triangulation of data collection offers a way to better understand the complex interactions which occur in the classroom as students, teachers and materials interact with each other in complex combina‐ tions and in complex sequences. Thus, data collection triangulation can allow a multiperspectival analysis of events that are relevant to the research questions of this study. Three particular methods of data collection are common for re‐ search of the language learning classroom and form what could be called the ‘holy trinity’ of data collection: observer notes, videography and learner texts (cf. Burwitz-Melzer 2003; Kimes-Link 2013; Legutke et al. 2016). Of course there are other types and combinations of data collection techniques, and they do not always have to be implemented in three’s. For instance, videography can be supplemented with audio recordings, especially during group work in the class when the microphone of the video recorder cannot effectively record the speech of multiple individuals speaking at the same time. In some situations, an audio recorder could even replace the need for a video recorder. The decisions, how‐ ever, are largely dependent on the specific research question, as well as on how much information the researcher needs to collect to establish a quality analysis. This study relied on the collection of observer notes, videography and learner texts consistently throughout all case studies. During the empirical data collec‐ tion, non-participant observations were performed at all points with unstruc‐ tured, qualitative field notes (cf. Cohen et al. 2007: 396 on classroom observation and field notes). This means that the researcher as observer remained outside of any occurrences in the class and was largely ignored by both teachers and students. In order to fulfill this role, the researcher was seated in the back of the class in a corner, outside of any classroom interaction. Of course, both students 5 Methodological Framework 188 <?page no="189"?> and teachers were aware of the researcher’s presence, and there were indeed times when both teachers and students tried to involve the researcher by asking questions, typically relating to grammar and vocabulary (especially since the researcher is a native speaker of English). Teachers sometimes approached the researcher during class to comment on the progress of the project. Nonetheless, the researcher attempted to remain as non-participant as possible. The field notes were unstructured, meaning that events or occurrences were not marked within a schema of predetermined criteria; rather, thoughts and contextual in‐ formation that were related to the research question and that would later help navigate the other collected data, especially the video recordings, were written down. The observation notes provided a special type of data which ultimately served two major functions. First, the notes allowed the documentation of information which was not or could not be captured via other means. For instance, they allowed the recording of relevant contextual information that occurred outside of filming temporally, like possibly what the teacher said before class, the general mood of the students and how this may affect the class period, and even the personal thoughts of the researcher and reactions to events that occurred in the class. Second, the notes allowed an initial ‘reduction’ of the immensity of data collected by marking events which appeared relevant to the research question. This allowed, with more precision, the location and focus on events that dealt with the problems and opportunities of game discourse in the classroom, without requiring a complete review, for example, of all the videotaped material. This leads to the second type of data collected, specifically video recordings of the classroom events. Each session of the classroom project was recorded with a single video that was typically placed in the back corner of the classroom facing toward the front. In order to collect a variety of information, the camera was placed at an angle to record not only the teacher at the front and the chalkboard, but also at least the front of at least one side of class to better record their re‐ actions. Unfortunately, the typical u-shape set-up of table and chairs meant that capturing the front of all students would have required more cameras and would have also meant more data to process. Due to limited access to recording ma‐ terial, and in order to reduce recording material, only one camera was used. This choice undoubtedly limited to some degree the perspective in some cases on important and relevant events. Videography provides multiple affordances for qualitative classroom re‐ search (Flick 2010: 249; Schramm 2016; Schramm & Aguado 2010). For this re‐ search project, it allowed two categories of data. On the one hand, combined with observer notes, videography enables a return to relevant classroom events 5.5 Data Collection and Triangulation 189 <?page no="190"?> 3 “Simple” transcripts were created using rules laid out by Dresing, Pehl & Schmieder 2015: 27. Cf. appendices A-D for the rules and example transcriptions. and interactions. Through the ability to forward and rewind the video, other relevant events which either went unnoticed in the observer notes or which were able to help explain the causes or effects of those events could be identified. On the other hand, the video allowed a more detailed analysis of the relevant events through the production of transcriptions. The video recording allowed, with the help of F4 Analyse, the translation of video sequences into ‘texts’ with which a more in-depth analysis could be performed. 3 The transcriptions allowed multiple viewings of classroom interaction and communication and the dis‐ covery of relations and meaning that would have otherwise gone unnoticed. Of course there were further limitations to the video recordings. Though modern cameras have relatively good quality microphones, it is difficult to understand (and transcribe) moments when multiple people are talking or when there is considerable background noise. This was typically the case during group work, but would also occasionally occur during regular classroom discussions. Finally, classroom texts were also collected to complement both observer notes and video recordings. Classroom texts included written work that the students completed, often relating to either tasks or actual worksheets that the teacher administered. Sometimes these were texts like short essays, sometimes they were completed worksheets, and sometimes they were posters that stu‐ dents created in groups. Classroom texts also included information sheets handed out by the teacher (along with the aforementioned teacher worksheets), but also overhead projections and information written or collected on the chalk/ whiteboard (documented through photographs). Such texts often have consid‐ erable impact on classroom interactions and events, and this impact would have been largely ignored if data was only collected via videography and observer notes. Thus, classroom texts allowed a more in-depth and complete analysis of the different communications and interactions that occurred. In conclusion, collecting these three types of data allowed for a triangulation which led to an increase in perspectivity and insight into not just what was explicitly said and done in class, but also what was meant, intended, felt and valued. It also allowed for a more practical approach to dealing with large amounts of data and enabled a more in-depth recreation of context and the establishment of linear cause-and-effect progressions. The unstructured, non-participant field notes allowed the establishment of general context, to identify thematic focal points and methods, and most importantly, to identify key moments in the classroom events that appeared significant to the research 5 Methodological Framework 190 <?page no="191"?> questions. In relation to these moments, the field notes also allowed the re‐ cording of general impressions and explanations for these events which would have been difficult to reconstruct using only the other collected data retrospec‐ tively. The video recordings allowed the documentation of complex classroom interactions (both verbal and physical), repeated review, and in-depth analysis to discover related events (again that could either support or be integrated into cause-and-effect relationships) and to create transcriptions through which more in-depth analyses could be performed. The classroom texts that were collected supplemented the video recordings and were able to capture information (and interactions) that the video often could not. All of these data sources were con‐ sidered in and were a part of the analysis. Their triangulation allowed for an insight and “thick description” of complex classroom interactions and events that could not have been captured by any single data collection method. There are of course general limitations to these three types of data collection methods. One particular limitation is described by the Hawthorne effect, or simply ‘reactivity,’ which states that “the presence of the researcher alters the situation as participants may wish to avoid, impress, direct, deny, or influence the researcher” (Cohen et al. 2007: 189). This effect was observed in every case of data collection. Students and teachers were aware of the researcher’s presence and would often try to interact with the researcher, both outside of and during the class period. Both students and teachers were aware they were being re‐ corded, as comments that were made and occasional awkward glances at the camera suggest. This awareness undoubtedly influenced the data collection and analyses in complex and subtle ways. Nonetheless, the data collection methods and process allowed for an insight and analysis that far outweigh any of the risks and limitations. 5.6 Perspective Triangulation: Teacher and Learner Interviews Another method for validating findings, for gaining further depth into class‐ room interactions and discourse, and for gaining a greater multiperspectivity into matters concerning the research question is interviews. As Cohen et al. point out, interviews give the researcher the opportunity to capture not only what the interview subjects know, but also the values, attitudes and beliefs which underlie the meaning they supply their knowledge (2007: 351). Student and teacher interviews provide a further point of triangulating events and find‐ ings derived from direct observations and documents (either recorded in video, 5.6 Perspective Triangulation: Teacher and Learner Interviews 191 <?page no="192"?> researcher notes or on worksheets). Furthermore, in order to dig deeper into the complex interactions during the class project that occurred not only amongst students, but also between students and teachers, interviews with students and teachers allowed a further point of comparison as individuals were given the opportunity to not only state their own ideas, intentions and beliefs, but also their perspectives on those of others in the class (e.g. teachers on students, and students on teachers). To gain further insight into relevant events and interactions that occurred in the classroom, retrospective interviews were performed. Because the interviews took place after the classroom project was concluded (within one week’s time for all groups), participants were given the opportunity to reflect on the project, often at a higher level of abstraction than would have been the case if partici‐ pants had been interviewed during the project. Thus, processes of memory, with their organization, networking, and hierarchization of events with values and perspectives, played a role in the types and quality of responses given. Per‐ forming the interviews within a week’s timeframe allowed participants to easily recall events, though the amount of cognitive ‘processing’ may have been limited. The retrospective nature of the interviews also allowed the review of collected data in order to design semi-structured interviews. This means that the inter‐ views were performed with a set of topics, points, and sometimes even explicit questions which were based on an initial analysis of collected classroom data. However, due to the dynamic and emergent nature of qualitative and explorative interviews, interview partners were provided the opportunity to expand or vary on issues which were raised, or even address emergent issues which were not foreseen by the researcher. Furthermore, the semi-structured interview did not determine the order of the questions or the extent to which participants were expected to answer. This approach tried to strike a balance between issues which were relevant to the classroom project, as the researcher’s own perspective could determine, and issues which the participants thought were important and meaningful. Furthermore, this balance also included the fact that the interviews were meant to be a conversation based on the negotiation of meaning, where meanings which were foreseeable to neither the participants nor the researcher could emerge. The interviews were conducted using largely open questions and discourse function terms like describe, define, explain, conclude and evaluate in order to increase participant response in terms of quantity and quality. Such questions were typically followed up with more discrete questions to evoke explicit re‐ sponses on certain matters and to reduce the amount of inductive reasoning 5 Methodological Framework 192 <?page no="193"?> required from the researcher in the analysis phase. Questions would typically build up in terms of specificity, starting out with more simple questions con‐ cerning overall response to the project and the topic, continuing through the course of the interview to more specific issues. Typical topics covered general perspective of the topic of games, language learning and school, then specified towards the actual project, materials, activities and discussions, and also in‐ cluded perspectives on the teachers for student interviews and on students for teacher interviews. The teacher interviews were performed with just the teacher and the re‐ searcher, while the student interviews were performed as groups. The group interview format was chosen for practical reasons as well as to create a com‐ fortable environment for the students and to induce a higher response rate. For each class, a group of students was selected for a single group interview. In order to increase the voluntary nature of researching with young people, six students per class were allowed to volunteer with the request that there be an approxi‐ mate symmetry between male and female students. The researcher strongly emphasized during the selection process that all students, regardless of whether they enjoyed the project or not and whether they had previous experience with games, were encouraged to participate. Although the group interviews did not necessarily allow the direct and in-depth questioning of specific individuals, they did allow for a less stressful, more conversation-style interview in which participants were free to not only choose the questions to answer, but also to respond to other participants with agreement, disagreement, expansion, diver‐ gence and even alternate experiences. While individual participants were cer‐ tainly influenced by the responses of others, the interview allowed the analysis of generalizable ‘group’ perceptions and, as numerous accounts suggest, par‐ ticipants were not afraid to challenge other participants with differing views. Both teacher and student interviews lasted around forty-five minutes. Two of the three teacher interviews were performed completely in English. For one teacher interview, the questions were posed in English and the teacher re‐ sponded in German. For the student interviews, students were asked whether they wanted the interview to pursue in English or German. One class chose English (so both interview questions and responses were in English) while the two other classes chose German. While the student group interview that was performed in English may have been limiting in terms of English language ability, students appeared to be eager to answer in English and were constantly reminded by the interviewer that they could answer in German if needed. All interviews were video recorded and transcribed in their entirety for thorough analysis. 5.6 Perspective Triangulation: Teacher and Learner Interviews 193 <?page no="194"?> In conclusion, the interviews allowed the addition of another layer of trian‐ gulation to the data collected from the classroom projects. The availability of both teacher and student interviews allowed a comparison to differing views on the project and topic in general, as well as on how each group perceived each other (and their respective beliefs, values and roles). Furthermore, the specific‐ ities of data taken directly from the classroom project were compared to the more generalized perspectives derived from the retrospective interviews. How‐ ever, the direct results of the interviews must be considered in terms of the Hawthorne effect as well, since both teachers and students were aware of their role in the research project, since both groups may have been inclined to give socially acceptable answers, and especially since the student group interviews were subject to the influence of group-think. This means that, although the interviews allowed unique access to information not available from the class‐ room data, the interview responses were still subject to researcher interpretation and must also be understood and contextualized with the actions and statements of students and teachers during the class project. 5.7 Data Analysis There appears to be a double goal of qualitative data analysis in terms of quan‐ tity. On the one hand, analyzing data with interpretive methods means to expand distinct bits of data with inferred meaning. However, and on the other hand, since qualitative research is not interested in meaning which can be observed on the ‘surface’ of what can be initially observed, it can handle the reduction of data and focus on specific, contextualized aspects which appear pertinent to the research questions at hand. This ‘reflexive’ process of both increasing and re‐ ducing data during the analysis process is combined with a more hermeneutic interpretation process of continually relating specific interpretations, and the analytic ‘unpacking’ of continually discrete units of meaning, with general in‐ terpretations of the meaning of the ‘events’ they occur in, and especially as they relate to the ‘whole’ of the study. The following presents the process of analysis that this study utilized and the methods implemented. First, as mentioned in 5.5, field notes as well as the recorded video material were used to locate and select particular moments or events during the class project for problems that arose which were related to the introduction of game topics and discourse into the classroom (cf. the research questions presented in 5.1). Second, the problems identified on the video were further reviewed, and a manageable number of instances were selected which warranted, and appeared 5 Methodological Framework 194 <?page no="195"?> able to sustain, a “thick description.” Such instances were sampled as critical events within each individual case study, and which exhibited maximal variation among the three case studies (cf. Grum & Legutke 2016: 86 on different methods of sampling in qualitative research). Next, these relevant instances were tran‐ scribed and analyzed to identify and investigate conflicts of interaction between students, teachers and materials, and their relation to game discourse. This analysis included categorizing and coding individual statements within tran‐ scribed discussions and ‘conversations’ in order to reduce event and transcript complexity and to focus on aspects which were pertinent to the research ques‐ tion. Then, other relevant material (like other classroom instances from the video recording or classroom documents like student work or teacher handouts) were located, transcribed, analyzed and related back to the central event in order to support inferences and conclusions, or to establish cause-and-effect links. Finally, correlation between central and peripheral classroom events and mate‐ rials were established in order to create not only a greater context but also a more complex understanding of problems, conflicts, and their relationship to introducing the discourse of games in the classroom. Central to the analysis were the transcription of relevant classroom events. A transcription not only “detaches the events from their transience” but also leads to “a reconstruction of the reality” (Flick 2010: 302-303). Thus, transcrip‐ tion translates the ‘reality’ recorded by the camera into a ‘textual’ reality, making it easier to review, reflect, comment on and categorize specific and relevant aspects. Furthermore, by extracting the (largely verbal) interactions from the rest of the context of the video, transcriptions establish a ‘new’ construction of reality that allows the researcher to focus only on those interactions. This, in turn, makes it easier to establish similarities and differences to other transcribed events. Thus, a transcription can be seen as an expansion of data which, through its analysis, leads to a reduction of relevant events into more abstractable and relatable synopses and conclusions. The analyses of transcriptions had characteristics of both qualitative content analysis as well as thematic analysis. On the one hand, qualitative content anal‐ ysis holds certain affordances for this study. According to Cohen et al., “Content analysis takes texts and analyses, reduces and interrogates them into summary form through the use of both pre-existing categories and emergent themes in order to generate or test a theory.” (2007: 476) Since this study is interested in understanding classroom events (and discourse) in terms of their relation to the discourse on games, the model of game discourse presented in section 1, chapter 2, served as an initial categorizational system that was applied to the transcrip‐ tions. Thus, this study targeted both a reduction of data and an application of 5.7 Data Analysis 195 <?page no="196"?> pre-existing categories. However, the application of the categories was not to simply prove their appearance in the classroom, but rather to allow “emergent themes” to develop in order to generate hypotheses and generalizable ideas about game discourse in the EFL classroom. However, qualitative content analysis has a strong quantitative component (Aguado 2013: 122; Mayring 2014: 6) that can involve the statistical preparation of the occurrence of codes. This study is more interested in the different themes that arose in classroom discourse and in relating those themes at a qualitative level to game discourse. Moreover, the uncovering of themes targeted the iden‐ tification and general understanding of the problems in which the themes arose (cf. 5.2). This focus on problems, in turn, is geared towards providing practical advice (in terms of the development of methods and materials) for the future integration of game discourse into the EFL classroom. Thematic analysis, as opposed to qualitative content analysis, is interested in identifying themes as they apply to individual cases (cf. Flick 2009: 476). Cohen et al. define a case study as “a specific instance that is frequently designed to illustrate a more general principle,” which can refer to individuals, groups or situations, and can generate cause-and-effect relationships (2007: 253). Additionally, this study was not so much interested in looking for similarities between class projects, but rather in presenting a range of problems that arose, along with qualitative anal‐ yses of those problems. This focus seemed less appropriate for qualitative con‐ tent analysis with a quantitative component. Furthermore, according to Guest et al., thematic analysis is a suitable method to “find solutions to real-world problems” (2012: 17), which related well to the goal of this study to locate prob‐ lems for which solutions can be offered. Thus, in several respects, thematic analysis was more suitable for the aims of this study. Therefore, principles and procedures of both qualitative content and thematic analysis were applied. Individual cases of classroom situations in which prob‐ lems arose were identified and a series of top-down categorization and bottom-up coding were applied to the transcriptions. This required multiple re-reading of the transcription and refining of the coding system. Here, there was particular focus on the discourse of individual participants and analysis of their verbal contributions as it pertained to the larger discourse of the problem. Because the analysis and coding followed a hermeneutic process and involved inference, it required multiple ‘re-readings’ in order to refine the labeling of categories, the development of codes and the relationship of both to the entire case at hand. However, the problems as they arose in the classroom were never analyzed using a single transcript alone, but rather by combining the central transcriptions with the peripheral transcriptions which were needed to either 5 Methodological Framework 196 <?page no="197"?> 4 Cf. also Viebrock 2015 on ethics in foreign language research. create cause-and-effect relationships or to provide further support for inferences and conclusions. The analyses of the student and teacher interviews were performed using the same method; however, their focus was centered more on uncovering relevant information for the case studies from the classroom project, especially since this was the purpose that defined the interactions within the interviews from the onset. Unlike for the classroom videos, the interviews were transcribed in their entirety since important themes and perspectives which emerged were not al‐ ways obvious before the analysis took place. Due to the implicit relationships between themes, individuals and their respective perspectives, a pre-selection of specific instances within the interviews to transcribe was not possible. Fur‐ thermore, the interviews and their analyses were not triangulated directly with the transcriptions, documents and data collected from the classroom project, but were rather treated separately. Relationships to the findings from the classroom were established in the interview analyses, but the retrospective, reflective na‐ ture of the interviews, as well as their often broader coverage of topics and issues, warranted separate analyses. 5.8 Ethical Considerations and Measures Ethics play an important role in qualitative social and classroom research, not merely because ethical considerations tend to adhere to general standards of successful social and community life in a democratic society, but also because history teaches that there have been terrible precedents in which, despite the even sometimes good intentions of researchers, great harm has been dealt to participants (cf. Resnik 2017 for a list of atrocities committed in the name of research). While today there are numerous guidelines for ethical research in the social sciences and education (Aeppli et al. 2010; Cohen et al. 2007; Flick 2009) 4 , Ingrid Miethe provides a clear and comprehensible list of three topic fields for the discussion of ethics in research which all follow the principle of ‘do no harm’ concerning research participants (cf. Miethe 2010: 928). The first is informed consent, which in itself contains multiple ethical guidelines. On the one hand, informed consent requires that participants are informed of aspects of the re‐ search project they are to be involved in. Such aspects typically involve the goals, the duration, the type of participation, the handling of data, and also the risks 5.8 Ethical Considerations and Measures 197 <?page no="198"?> 5 Cf. appendix E for an example parental permission letter and form. associated. On the other hand, informed consent implies that the participants are involved voluntarily and are in no way tricked or coerced to participate. This research project underwent several layers of informed consent, which was necessary in order to protect both the well-being of underage participants as well as the reputation (and responsibility) of educational institutions. Thus, the first layer of informed consent was from the Ministry of Education, the particulars of which are discussed in 5.4. The application for permission con‐ tained not only information about the project (its goals and processes) but also about the ethical procedures that would take place to protect individual partic‐ ipants. The second layer of consent involved the individual school institutions, which comprised of the school director, school council and the individual teacher involved. All three institutional parties were provided with the permission from the Culture of Education, as well as the original application, and even a further information document streamlined for the school, which also covered ethical procedures to be taken. Finally, individual informed consent was obtained from the participants. Because the participants were all underage, written consent was collected from both parents and individual students. 5 This means that both parents and students received an information sheet informing them of the project, as well as a form for them to provide their consent. In the end, only students who turned in parent permission forms, as well as their own, partici‐ pated in the data collection of the study. The second topic field of ethical research provided by Miethe refers to the anonymity of participants (2010: 930). Also following the code of ‘cause no harm,’ anonymity ensures that there are no risks to participating individuals and institutions that can come from the collected, and later published, data. Since some data can be quite sensitive, since some of the conclusions can be considered personal, and since general information can be used by third parties to cause harm, it is important that no one other than the researcher can trace back data to participating individuals and institutions. For this study, all data that was collected is safely stored, all transcribed ma‐ terial has been fully anonymized, and no references to specific identities and institutions are made in the publication of the results. After five years’ time, all collected data will be destroyed, as promised in the project application, to ensure that sensitive data will not be released to the general public. The third topic field of ethical research refers to publication and feedback of results. This field follows the rule of ‘cause no harm’ by ensuring that the results of the study also benefit the participants and not just simply a certain portion 5 Methodological Framework 198 <?page no="199"?> of the population. It also increases the likelihood that the researcher will be held accountable for any harm that may be caused, and breach to the ethical stand‐ ards, and to the responsibility of correctly representing and analyzing informa‐ tion (as in the case that a participant recognizes that his/ her case has been falsely presented in order to reach certain aims or support certain arguments made by the research). However, as Miethe rightly admits, providing participants with findings can in some cases cause harm, especially if participants misinterpret findings (by taking them out of the larger context of the study) or if they use the findings in reckless attempts of self-therapy (Miethe 2010: 932). As is espe‐ cially the case for qualitative research, hypotheses can be developed within a study, but these hypotheses nearly always require further research before con‐ clusive claims can be made. All participating teachers have been promised a copy of the results of this study once published. While this was not promised to all participating students, all were provided with my contact information and were offered information on the study upon request. By following these three basic guidelines of ethical research, this study at‐ tempts to follow the fundamental rule of ‘cause no harm.’ It has to the fullest extent possible provided informed consent to various levels of involved parties, it has adhered to strict guidelines of anonymity to both individuals and institu‐ tions, and it will offer feedback to those involved and, of course, will be publicly available once published. This framework largely defines the methods used in the classroom research and the reasons behind those methods. Following a qualitative approach of un‐ covering the complexity of classroom reality and the richness of social interac‐ tion and meaning making, various sorts of data were collected, triangulated and analyzed. The following chapters present the results of these analyses and are based on the aforementioned ethical guidelines. All identities have been pro‐ vided pseudonyms and all references to specific institutions and places have been removed. They present the results of the ideological approaches to quali‐ tative research and the methodological operationalization of the research ques‐ tions in order to better understand classroom game discourse and to suggest future methods for integrating games into the EFL classroom and, ultimately, to support the development of video game literacy. 5.8 Ethical Considerations and Measures 199 <?page no="200"?> 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse The following case study addresses classroom game discourse as it emerged from the interactions between the teacher, the students and the tasks. In an attempt to gain a critical understanding of the complex dynamics that both en‐ able as well as hinder the emergence (and transfer) of game discourse in the EFL classroom, the focus is placed largely on challenges that occurred in the class‐ room, investigating their influence on the course of the project and especially on the types and complexity of game discourse that emerged. The general goal of the empirical portion of this study was to initiate, connect to and develop English language discourse on digital games in the classroom to promote VGL. The method for this goal was ultimately through the student production of a game comic (created by groups). Working backwards, the process of game comic creation was preceded by the analysis of an authentic game fan-comic, which involved a summary of the game. This analysis, in turn, was preceded and initiated by a general introduction to the discourse on games in mass media (particularly in popular magazine articles). In this case study, three major challenges arose which stood in the way of successful student par‐ ticipation in game discourse: students presented themselves in the classroom as largely disinterested in the topic of games, the complexity of games posed a considerable challenge for both teachers and students, and the gamer discourse (through the medium of video game fan-comics) proved difficult to integrate into classroom tasks because of its often narrow target audience and its altered context. This case study investigates how these challenges emerged and their overarching meanings for VGL literacy in the EFL classroom. 6.1 Institution, Students and Teacher This teaching unit of the first case study was carried out in a 10 th grade Gym‐ nasium settled in a mid-size university city in Hessen. The school places an emphasis on music, foreign languages, science and sport and has a strong rep‐ utation within the city. The school has approximately 1,500 students and, ac‐ cording to the teacher involved in the study, the students and the general school’s reputation, there is much pressure on students to perform well. The <?page no="201"?> 10 th grade class that the teaching unit was conducted in consisted of nineteen students, with eight male and eleven female students. The teacher claimed that the class was, as a whole, a good class with a positive learning atmosphere, mature personalities and overall good learning performance. The teacher is fe‐ male with over ten years teaching experience. She exhibits a strong focus on language learning (vocabulary, grammatical rules and pronunciation) and views popular and authentic media as methods of raising student motivation to learn English. Her interest in the topic, and reason for agreeing to participate in the study, consisted of two points. First, the teacher (here referred to as Frau Schneider) wanted to motivate the students with a topic she felt was interesting for the students, and second, she noticed over the past few years through con‐ versations with several of her students that they were improving their English through video games. She thus hoped to connect to this learning through the teaching unit. The teaching unit that is described and analyzed in this case study was carried out in a two-week period in the middle of February, 2015. 6.2 Reconstructed Lesson Plans The teaching unit took place in two weeks with four double lessons. The first lesson was designed to introduce the topic and connect both to the students’ background knowledge of games and game discourse as well as to connect to the public discourse on games presented in American popular mass media. The activities thus focused on students’ personal video game playing habits and on newspaper and magazine articles on video games. Finally, students were given time to choose a video game fan-comic of their own choice to analyze and a task to summarize the game that the fan-comic thematized for the next class period. In the second lesson, students were given time to work on their analyses in their groups and were provided with several handouts from the teacher to scaffold the analysis process (cf. table 8). Lesson 1 (7: 45-9: 20) 1 Class Poster 1: Students write own personal habits and opinions on digital games on cards. These are then placed on poster and presented to class. 2 Class Poster 2: Students read newspaper articles that present various discourses on digital games and answer questions on worksheet. Teacher discusses articles with students and collects answers and responses on poster. This leads to a discussion on a question posed by the teacher: Are games a blessing or a curse? 6.2 Reconstructed Lesson Plans 201 <?page no="202"?> 3 Preparation for game comic analysis: group formation according to popular game, group selection of comic (several provided by teacher), student justifi‐ cation of selection. 4 Task: Game summary. Groups are asked to write a summary of the game. These are collected at the end of the period. Lesson 2 (11: 25-13: 00) 1 Task: Game Comic Analysis. Groups are provided with handouts on comic analysis and narrative analysis and given time to analyze chosen game comics. Table 8: Case Study 1, Lesson 1 & 2 Overview The third lesson involved the students revising their game summaries, which the teacher found unsatisfactory. After that, students were given time to create a poster on which students presented their game summary as well as their video game fan-comic analysis. These posters were presented in a gallery walk which extended into the next lesson (cf. table 9). Lesson 3 (7: 45-9: 20) 1 Game Summary Revision: groups provided with time to rework game summa‐ ries. 2 Poster Creation: Groups design a poster to present both their game summaries and game comic analysis. 3 Gallery Walk: Groups present their posters in a gallery walk. Table 9: Case Study 1, Lesson 3 Overview In the fourth and final lesson, students completed the gallery walk that began in the previous lesson, then were provided time to create their own fan-comics on the same game in their respective groups. These student comics were pre‐ sented in another gallery walk, where students were allowed to vote on their favorite comic using stickers. The lesson and teaching unit was concluded with a discussion of the favorite comic. Lesson 4 (11: 25-13: 00) 1 Gallery Walk: Gallery walk activity is completed. 2 Game Comic Creation: Groups are asked to design their own game comic. This task preceded by an activity to help students generate ideas. 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 202 <?page no="203"?> 3 Game Comic Presentation: Groups present comics on poster in gallery walk. Students vote on favorite comics using stickers. 4 Discussion: Teacher discusses with class student justification for vote. Table 10: Case Study 1, Lesson 4 Overview The following subsections present three challenges that occurred throughout the phases of the teaching unit. The first challenge concerns an incident in class where the students exhibit little interest in a task on game discourse. The second challenge involves the complexity of games and difficulties that arise for both the teacher and students in dealing with the complexity in classroom tasks. The final challenge deals with the suitability of gamer discourse for the EFL class‐ room as the students analyze and present their own game fan-comics. These challenges are then reflected on and expanded in the student and teacher in‐ terviews performed a week after the teaching unit was concluded. 6.3 Challenge 1: Student (Dis)Interest The first challenge of the project occurred on the first day during a class dis‐ cussion of the “public debate” on games. In this activity, students analyzed American newspaper and online news articles that present various perspectives and scientific findings on video games. As a conclusion to this activity, Frau Schneider posed the provocative question whether games are a “blessing or a curse” and collected student answers on a poster. It is in this discussion that the critical incident occurred where many students expressed lacking interest in the topic of games. First the critical incident is presented, student reasons analyzed, and then preceding activities and classroom discourse leading up to the incident are investigated to provide further explanations for the incident. Here the leading question is: What factors relating to the tasks and the teacher’s actions and statements may have influenced the students’ reactions towards the topic of video games? The purpose of introducing the ‘public debate’ on games was to engage stu‐ dents in a public discourse on games which typically manifests itself into two perspectives: one perspective that games are problematic due to violence and addiction, and the other that games support learning and train the brain. As a conclusion to the student work with the articles, Frau Schneider posed a ques‐ tion to the plenum, “What do you think about digital games? Blessing, or curse? ” 6.3 Challenge 1: Student (Dis)Interest 203 <?page no="204"?> Five minutes into the discussion, the teacher noticed that the students did not appear to be interested in the topic, and addressed the issue to the class, Ok, um, […] while you were discussing I realized that your discussion was, um, on […] uh, or was on a level or in a way, that you didn’t seem to be affected by the topic at all. Um, so you discussed it, um, in a very theoretical way, um […], and my impres‐ sion was, um, that it’s no real topic for you. Am I right? [Several students answer, quietly, “Yes.”] Why is that? The teacher noticed the students are not “affected,” or that the topic of games was either not interesting or possibly not meaningful enough for learners to engage with on a more critical/ reflective level. An analysis of the student re‐ sponses to the blessing/ curse question reveals that all the seven student re‐ sponses that preceded the teacher’s comment focused on negative aspects of the game, like addiction, violence, the need for parental or self-control, and age appropriacy of games, without making any specific reference to the articles read in preparation. In other words, their responses appeared superficial, ‘socially desirable’ within the context of school, and not based on the preceding task. While some students mentioned that games can be “good,” they provided no evidence (neither from their own experience/ beliefs nor from the texts) to sup‐ port or explain. It is likely that these aspects of the students’ responses alarmed Frau Schneider and led to her conclusion that students were not interested in the topic. A discussion between students and the teacher ensued, consisting of seven responses and lasting about five minutes. One student stated in response, “I think most of us, uh, don’t really play much, many [laughs] video games.” This is then questioned by Frau Schneider who referred to the game survey students took before the project began, in which all students provided considerable lists of games they play. Then, four students respond offering different reasons - two stated that they do not play much anymore and that they associate playing digital games with their childhood, one learner agrees and adds that digital games were already thematized in their German class, and the fourth that those learners who play do not take games so seriously and that they are just for entertainment. Two interesting points come from a further analysis. First, sev‐ eral students speak in a collective voice, answering the teacher’s question in first person, plural. This suggests a collective mind frame that groups the stu‐ dents together and at the same time separates them from the teacher. Second, several responses point to temporal aspects of games - students played when they were younger, games are for children, games are not relevant anymore. It is possible that students see themselves, as a group, threatened, and use the 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 204 <?page no="205"?> collective voice to defend them as a whole. Furthermore, it is also possible that students are intentionally distancing themselves from games to provide more ‘socially biased’ answers that fit the school context. The one student who men‐ tioned that games were discussed in German class simply pointed out the stu‐ dents’ awareness of the school discourse on games (as if to say that if the topic was covered in another class, then there is nothing more to say about it in this one). These possibilities suggest that the students were not truthful in their answers and that other factors may have influenced their desire to not deal with the topic. An analysis of the tasks that preceded the critical incident provides two fac‐ tors that likely influenced student interest. The first factor is a considerable focus on the personal game behaviors of students, and the second factor is a ‘binary’ approach to games which allowed students and teachers to place games into categories of ‘good’ and ‘bad.’ For example, the first activity was a survey on game habits intended to introduce the topic of games by connecting to the stu‐ dents’ personal lives and establishing a thematic connection to the upcoming activities. A game discourse analysis of this survey reveals that it focused largely on the dimension of the player and the meaning of the game for the world. Clues that explain the students’ display of disinterest that occurred later can be found in both the task title as well as in the task description. The title, “Digital Games: Your Habits” places the focus on the students and their behaviors surrounding games. Specifically, the use of the word habit may elicit focus on ‘bad’ habits as well as good ones. The task instructions which follow request student honesty and assure anonymity. The reassurance of this ‘safe space’ may have primed students to view the questions as dealing with uncomfortable or embarrassing topics. In fact, the second question asked students how much time they spend playing games per day and per week, which is likely a sensitive topic discussed at home and thematized in schools and in general public discourse. Two of the five total questions of this initial task focused on the meaning of the game - one simply asking why students play and the other asking students to explain what life would be like without games. Both questions, by focusing on the general meaning of games for the player, extend beyond the specifics of player behavior and into the realm of the meaning of the game for the world. The final question continues along this line, asking students to complete the sentence “Digital games are…” - the answers to this question form the basis of the poster which followed. By placing the focus on a sensitive subject like habits, by asking specific questions about time spent playing, and then following this with general questions about the meaning of games for students, it is possible that this activity could have been interpreted by students as questioning their 6.3 Challenge 1: Student (Dis)Interest 205 <?page no="206"?> habits and the values that underlie them, even if this was not the intention of the teacher. Therefore, it is likely that this focus influenced student approach to the topic and affected their general interest. Another factor which likely influenced student interest in the topic was the binary approach taken by the tasks which followed the survey. For instance, the answers to the final question of the survey were collected by the teacher on a poster. The poster titled “Your opinion,” consisted of three columns labeled “+,” “in-between” and “-” indicating a structure focused on the positive and negative opinions on games (the in-between opinions were not neutral but rather pro‐ vided both positive and negative aspects or views on games within a single comment). Remarkably, although the task question was open (and not explicitly focused on positive or negative opinions) the teacher structured the answers on the poster to fall into these categories, and the student answers indeed were easily categorizable. An analysis of the student answers reveals that a majority (both positive and negative) were so general that they were difficult to analyze with any depth. Seven of the thirteen positive comments simply stated that games are fun, nice, good or entertaining while seven of the ten negative com‐ ments stated that games were not important or needed. These comments appear to have been directed at the general value of games. Three positive comments noted that games were good at ending boredom and for passing time, while two negative comments noted that games can control time and players’ lives. The remaining three positive comments made general statements about games and their relation to the world (games are art, games improve lives, and games are a good social activity), while the remaining negative comment stated that they lead to social isolation. While such general, placative statements may be ex‐ pected from such an introductory activity, it is possible that the focus of the survey questions on the students’ game habits convinced students that their personal habits would be questioned and/ or ‘attacked,’ and that this demotivated them to discuss the topic. Instead of attracting students to the topic and con‐ necting to their personal experiences, the student responses seem to distance the students from the topic. It can be interpreted that students predicted the direction the task was going and reacted by giving expected, non-differentiated answers. For this task, the binary category of positive and negative aspects pro‐ vided students with a simple and predictable schema in which to place what they considered socially and institutionally acceptable answers without leading to any further differentiation and critical reflection. In fact, the next task utilized a same binary approach to the topics of games, and the discussion which followed led to the initial critical incident presented at the beginning of this section. In order to expand the classroom (and student) 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 206 <?page no="207"?> discourse on games, the activity which followed the survey and poster presen‐ tation introduced newspaper and online news articles on games. In small groups, students were given contemporary news articles to summarize. Their presen‐ tation of the summaries was recorded by the teacher on a poster titled “Public Debate.” Similar to the poster on the students’ opinions on games which pre‐ ceded, this poster divided the debate on games into the two categories of “+” and “-.” This division, however, can be largely attributed to the discourse on games represented in the articles, since they all tended to focus on either sup‐ porting or defending games. The summary points provided by the students re‐ lated largely to the effects of games on individuals. Five out of seven positive aspects focused largely on games as learning tools (to teach abilities or increase intelligence), while the other two points mentioned the social benefits of games. The negative aspects focused on typical themes, like addiction, health risks, violence and, ironically, social isolation. This poster activity on the “public discourse” on games was concluded by a task that meant to gather the students’ personal opinion on games after they had been introduced to the two common discourse threads on games. In this task, Frau Schneider asked if students felt games were a “blessing or a curse,” which brings this analysis back to the critical situation that this section began with. Like the concluding task of the survey and the “public debate,” this task was also based on a binary approach to games. As provided at the beginning of the section, the results of the blessing/ curse discussion were relatively superfi‐ cial - they were statements without serious explanations or justifications, they did not draw on any specific information from the texts the students read, and they fit easily into the binary approach to games. The analysis of the tasks preceding the critical incident suggests that there are other factors influencing the lack of student desire to deal with the topic of games than the ones offered by the students. While it may be the case that some or many of the students do not play digital games as much as they did in their past, and that some play very little if at all any more, it is likely that the specific topic and structure of the tasks discussed in this section focused the students attention on certain negative aspects of games and that they influenced them into giving socially/ institutionally acceptable answers. Specifically, by focusing on player habits and by structuring tasks with a binary approach to games (‘good’ and ‘bad’), students distanced themselves from the topic. Some students distanced themselves linguistically, as seen in the critical incident, by using the first person plural (“we” or “us”), and temporally, by claiming that games were mostly a part of their childhood. Students also distanced themselves themati‐ cally, by focusing on largely negative aspects of games (providing socially/ insti‐ 6.3 Challenge 1: Student (Dis)Interest 207 <?page no="208"?> tutionally acceptable answers). Finally, the binary approach structured by the tasks possibly discouraged students from critically reflecting on their ‘beliefs’ and stated opinions. Even if the students truly held negative beliefs on games, critical reflection could have led to specific differentiation of their beliefs, and may have also led to the recognition and addressing of ‘cognitive dissonance’ of those who play games regularly and yet have negative views of games in general. In the end, a binary structure offered a relatively ‘illusory’ choice to both the teacher and the students. It is therefore possible that a different ap‐ proach to games taken at the beginning of the project, one that led to a more complex, diverse and differentiated classroom discourse on games, may have avoided the problem of low student interest in the topic. 6.4 Challenge 2: Game Complexity One of the major tasks of the teaching unit was for students to analyze a game comic, and the teacher felt it was necessary to include a summary of the game that the game comic thematized to provide background knowledge to the class‐ mates and teacher who did not know the game. The difficulty summarizing the games can be seen from two events. The first comes from the teacher who ad‐ dressed the class on her dissatisfaction of the summaries. The second event comes from the summary revisions which, although led to improvements, still exhibited certain deficiencies. Addressing the initial summary, Frau Schneider listed three major complaints: The summaries failed to explain the game, were too short, and too complex and/ or in complex language. From these complaints the teacher drew two conclu‐ sions that focused on student deficits. Either students did not feel it was neces‐ sary to go into detail because the game was too obvious to them, or they lacked knowledge and awareness of the games they play. Both conclusions can be in‐ terpreted as having serious implications in terms of student’s Diskursfähigkeit on games. The first indicates an inability to effectively communicate about games since students cannot take the perspective of a novice audience. The second indicates that students react to stimuli in games without properly re‐ flecting on game-actions and the meaning of those actions within the context of the game. In either case, the teacher saw sufficient reason to require all the groups to rewrite their summaries. Beyond the possible reasons offered by the teacher, there are three other rea‐ sons that rise to the surface through an analysis of the critical classroom situa‐ tion. The first reason is that game tasks need explicit and differentiated instruc‐ 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 208 <?page no="209"?> 1 The guidelines were written on the chalkboard and accompanied by a verbal explana‐ tion. tions. The student summaries lacked any clear instruction and, due to this, were likely influenced by the preceding tasks on game habits and public game dis‐ course. The second reason is that digital games are complex. Summarizing games are not like summarizing other types of ‘linear’ media and require specific preparation and focus. The third reason is that games are ‘more’ than their pro‐ grams. Relying only on the 1 st dimension of game discourse to summarize a game ignores the other factors which play an important part in summarizing games. These three issues are addressed in the following subsections. 6.4.1 The Importance of Input and Clear Instructions One cause for the unsatisfactory summaries was that the original summary task had no explicit and differentiated instructions. Frau Schneider gave the students instructions to write a short game summary without providing any guidelines or further input on either how to write a summary or what aspects of games should be included. Furthermore, students were unprepared by the tasks that preceded the summary, especially since the preceding tasks focused on the 2 nd and 3 rd dimension of game discourse (cf. section 2.3), and game summaries rely largely on the 1 st dimension. Instead, the teacher assumed the students could rely on their background knowledge of games to effectively summarize their games. To address this problem, and to help the students with their summary revi‐ sions, Frau Schneider later provided a differentiated set of guidelines that fo‐ cused on the 1 st dimension of game discourse: world, characters, story behind the game, aim, possibilities as player and special features. 1 Analyzing the explanation of these criteria reveals that the first three refer to the gameworld level of game discourse. The world refers to the spatial semiotic aspect of the game (cf. 2.3.1), which exists in varying degrees of relation to the real world. Characters in games can vary from humans and creatures and even extending simply to manipulable game objects, and can also exist on various coordinates on the fiction/ non-fiction spectrum. Characters can also be player and non-player. The story behind the game refers to the scripted narrative. The narrative fits within the gameworld and influences player interpretation of the spatial elements and characters of the game. These three criteria are crucial constituents of the game‐ world, which in and of itself can exhibit high levels of complexity in some com‐ mercial games. 6.4 Challenge 2: Game Complexity 209 <?page no="210"?> The final three criteria relate to the game system as opposed to the game‐ world. The aim of the game is, however, not only described as the end of the game problem but also typically the end of the game’s story. However, in games, and as opposed to narratives, the aim of the game is strongly connected to game rules, or how the game allows the player to reach the goal (cf. 2.3.1). Thus the aim of the game can be seen as the interface between the gameworld and the game system (cf. figure 4). The fifth criterion addresses the “possibilities as player,” which refers more closely to the rules of the game and how the player can solve the game’s problem(s). Specifically, the rules are the ways in which the game program allows the player access to the gameworld and belongs under the category of game system. Finally, the sixth criterion addresses “special fea‐ tures” of the game. From the teacher’s verbal description, this criterion is an‐ other category of rules, referring specifically to the affordances the game offers players to overcome game challenges and reach its aim. This criterion, as well, belongs under the category of game system, since it describes the available ac‐ tions of the player and reactions of the game program. Frau Schneider spent about 3 minutes explaining each of the six criteria. This differentiation of the game program into six criteria and the time spent ad‐ dressing them suggests a more serious intervention by the teacher meant to address the original deficiency of the task instructions and necessary input. This intervention suggests that the teacher’s original assumptions on the reasons for the unsatisfactory summaries were not completely true. A part of the problem was that the original task was not scaffolded and that the expectations for game explanation were not differentiated enough to put the knowledge of the students into the generically recognizable form of a game summary. Providing clearer instructions and guidelines, and focusing on the 1 st dimension of game discourse, was one way in which the teacher attempted to help improve the student game summaries. However, there are other factors influencing the difficulty of sum‐ marizing games. 6.4.2 The Difficulties of Summarizing Complex Games Digital games are also difficult to summarize because they are a complex me‐ dium (cf. 2.3.1). This complexity was implicit in the revision criteria since it focused on the fictional aspects of the game (the gameworld) as well as the systemic game-rules. However, despite this, Frau Schneider underestimated the complexity of games and became aware of this during the revision phase in which the teacher assisted individual groups. 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 210 <?page no="211"?> 2 Interestingly, Frau Schneider gave the Portal group permission to explain the game in German, and she also conversed with the group for several minutes in German. From observation, the group members’ English abilities were no weaker than the others, if not even stronger. It is possible that switching to German was meant to reduce subject complexity for both teacher and group. The groups worked on the task of revising game summaries approximately 12 minutes before the teacher began to check the groups’ work. In approximately 16 minutes, the teacher visited four groups and discussed the process of their summary revision. The analysis of these interactions is based largely on the video and is supplemented with observer notes. Due to the fact that the only the video (and its built-in microphone) was used to capture the discussions, and that there was a considerable amount of background noise due to the group work phase, not all of the discussions could be captured in their entirety. As a result of these 16 minutes of revision help, Frau Schneider concluded that some games are complex and others simple. For example, while discussing with the Assassin’s Creed group, the teacher noted complexity in terms of the gameworld (specifically the scripted narrative and the role of the character) as well as the game system (in terms of the quest system that becomes more com‐ plex as the game, and player, progresses). For Portal (another game and group), the teacher noted that the game consisted of complex puzzles that the player must solve, referring to the game’s system. 2 Mario Kart and Candy Crush (two other groups), on the other hand, were both noted as simple games. The teacher also noted a correlation between game complexity and difficulty in summarizing. While Frau Schneider tried to help all groups by asking ques‐ tions about each game, and by trying to paraphrase the game in her own words, she also expressed uncertainty in and difficulty with her attempts to guide the summaries of groups with complex games. For example, for the Assassin’s Creed group, Frau Schneider expressed uncertainty in how to capture complex aspects (both gameworld and game-system) in the summary with phrases like, “I think you need to find a way to say that, um […]”, “Probably, if you just write one more sentence about the (…)” and “(formulate in a way) that the reach of the summary can see just how complex it is.” After learning about the complex strategies required to play Portal, the teacher replied in terms of the summary, “I’m afraid you have to describe it.” Frau Schneider stated slightly later that the group might need to go into more detail, yet also adds, “Don’t make it too com‐ plicated! ” To conclude the discussion with the Portal Group, and to address its frustration for summarizing the complex game, Frau Schneider stated, 6.4 Challenge 2: Game Complexity 211 <?page no="212"?> I understand that it’s important. I just now understand that it’s still quite, uhm, diffi‐ cult, uhm, if the game is very complex. [Teacher points to Assassin’s Creed group.] I saw that, uh, with the Assassin’s Creed, that seems to be really complex, whereas Mario Kart [gestures to Mario Kart group] is pretty simple and straightforward. For Assassin’s Creed, the teacher expressed uncertainty how to summarize the game, and by the time she reached the Portal group, she was expressing sym‐ pathy for the students. However, besides reformulating what the students told her about the game, Frau Schneider offered little concrete help in reducing the games’ complexity to short summary form. As expressed above, one of the major results of helping the groups with their summary revisions was the creation of the dichotomy of simple vs. complex games in class. This dichotomy, while it may provide initial help in categorizing and con‐ ceptualizing different types of games, creates several problems. First, most games do not fit into one category but exist somewhere along a continuum between the two. Categorizing a game as complex might allow overlooking ways in which it might be simple (like the fact that Portal lacks a complex scripted narrative, and thus possibly has a simple gameworld, though the game system is quite complex), and labelling a game as simple might overlook ways it is complex (like how a “simple” game like Candy Crush or Mario Kart can be so popular, and evoke such intensive and extensive engagement). However, there is at least one further problem in creating this dichotomy - it sets the stage for valuing one over the other. While Frau Schneider seemed impressed with the complexity of both Assassin’s Creed and Portal, the two “simple” games received less attention. The teacher compared Mario Kart to the complexity of Assassin’s Creed, concluding, “So basically it’s very very simple”, “So there’s no, complex world around it? ” and “Yeah, and then just ending. There’s no real ending. You can just go on driving.” Thus the criteria of “world” and “aims” fail to reveal complexity for Mario Kart, making it look overly simple. For Candy Crush the lesser value of ‘simple’ games becomes more obvious. After asking the group a few questions, Frau Schneider concludes that the game is simple and there is no “real” story. Then, as the teacher leaves the group, she presents a question (sounding almost like a statement), “So there’s no reason to play the game? [Group: No (laughing)] So you just collect candy, basically? [Group: Yeah.]” The “reason” of the game could refer to the “story” of the game - which is indeed quite simple in Candy Crush - or to the “aim” of the game - which indeed consists largely of matching candies in rows (completing in‐ creasing puzzle challenges) and collecting points. On the surface, one could conclude that the game is indeed simple to the point of being silly and pointless. Yet, leaving the conclusion about the game simply at this does not address the 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 212 <?page no="213"?> large popularity and effectiveness (in terms of its business model) of the game. If the game has no meaning, then simply calling it simple does not explain the complex reasons for why so many people love spending so much time (and some even money) playing it. Though Mario Kart and Candy Crush are quite different games, and are popular for quite different reasons, the evaluative label of “simple” is, in these examples, problematic because it leads to ignoring the sub‐ tler ways in which they are actually quite complex. Games are difficult to summarize because they are complex. As the analysis shows, some games, like Assassin’s Creed and Portal, are largely complex due to the 1 st dimension of game discourse. For these games, this complexity compli‐ cates the task of summary - to the extent that both the teachers and students working together exhibit difficulty, uncertainty, and even frustration. Other games like Mario Kart and Candy Crush, however, are not necessarily complex in terms of the 1 st dimension of games, at least not in a way easily captured by the criteria set forth by the teacher. As a result of their apparent simplicity, the teacher creates yet a further binary - this time between complex and simple games. This binary is problematic because it allows for the application of general labels, thus reducing the complexity of even ‘simple’ games, and second because it allows for the devaluation of ‘simple’ games - this can inhibit further critical engagement and questioning. Another problem is that ‘simple’ games can be complex in ways not captured by focusing on the 1 st dimension of game dis‐ course alone, as will be illustrated in the following subsection. 6.4.3 The Multi-Dimensionality of Games Games are more than just their programs, and because of this, all discourse on games will include (implicitly or explicitly) other dimensions of game discourse. The analyses of the summary revisions show that games with complex programs are indeed difficult to summarize, especially in a short text. However, a focus on the details of the 1 st dimension of game discourse can neglect the other di‐ mensions and fail to show why the game is engaging and why it may have an impact on the world. Games with more simple programs, however, are easier to summarize in terms of the 1 st dimension, but focusing on this dimension alone fails to explain why such games often lead to intensive and extensive player engagement worldwide. The following presents an analysis of two game summaries: Assassin’s Creed (a “complex” game) and Candy Crush (a “simple” game). Table 11 presents a set of quality features used in this study to assess the summaries and to determine how they present their respective games. 6.4 Challenge 2: Game Complexity 213 <?page no="214"?> Poster Task Quality Features for Analysis Summary Does it: • fulfill criteria set by teacher (Do students correctly interpret cri‐ teria? ), • highlight important features of game (Do students correctly identify and select important info? ), • elaborate on important aspects (Do students deviate from teacher criteria when necessary? ), • involve different cognitive/ discursive processes (Do students utilize multiple presentation strategies? ), • present game in understandable language (Do students adapt to novice audience? ) Table 11: Quality Features for Game Summary Analysis Assassin’s Creed is a complex game, if for no other reason than that it is not one but rather a series of 10 main games (with multiple extended versions), with the first game released in 2007. As became clear in the classroom discourse discussed in 6.4.2 and the conversation that emerged between the teacher and the Assas‐ sin’s Creed group, the complexity of the game became a challenge for the sum‐ mary task - a challenge for which the teacher could only offer limited help. Table 12 presents the analysis of the Assassin’s Creed summary. Student Group Poster Summary of Assassin’s Creed Analysis Summary (ACI): Task title/ discourse function and game title Assassin (e.g. Altaïr) Identifies playable character (gameworld) Israel (3rd Crusade) Identifies world (gameworld) “Travel back in time” Explains frame story (gameworld) blank plans of the Templar society find a relic (Eden’s apple) eliminate enemies Explains aims 3X (2X elaborations) - (game system and world) can’t swim (first game) Identifies negative possibility of player (game system) you get weapons/ more health as ex‐ change for side quests/ main quests Explains possibility of player (elaboration) (game system) parkour skills Identifies special feature - game system Table 12: Assassin’s Creed Student Summary 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 214 <?page no="215"?> The analysis of the summary reveals that it fulfills the minimum task-require‐ ments by addressing, in strict chronological order, the list of criteria presented by the teacher. It highlights some of the important features of the game, selecting several major aspects to include in the summary. The group elaborated in several instances - while addressing the aim of the game by listing three of the major quests and activities that comprise the game, and while addressing the player possibilities by criticizing the inability to swim and by explaining the game’s reward system. The first elaboration is justified, since the open world structure of the game allows for multiple aims at any given moment of gameplay. The second elaboration, however, is likely a reference to the topic being criticized by the comic that the group analyzes in another task. Despite its simplicity, the summary not only identifies important aspects of the game (four of the points are identifications) but also explains various aspects of the game (five of the aspects are explanations). These points indicate that the group contains the necessary (basic) conceptual understanding of the game to fulfill the first set of criteria set forth by the teacher by presenting the game program of Assassin’s Creed. Despite these positive points, the summary does not substantially deviate or go beyond the task requirements. Its reduction of complexity only minimally explains the game, its ‘bullet point’ form excludes much needed information, and the language (terms and concepts) makes little sense without further context or previous background knowledge. This suggests that a novice audience would not likely understand the summary without further explanation. While the group has shown through its work a basic conceptual understanding of the game by successfully completing the task and presenting some of the complex aspects of Assassin’s Creed, the summary can be considered only a partial success. Based on the analysis, it is likely that the complexity of the game program led to difficulty describing it in linguistic-discursive form of a summary. The group fulfilled the requirements of the task, and yet the game is far from being summarized. Furthermore, there appeared to be difficulties putting the game into language that can be understood by a novice audience. Finally, the focus on the 1 st dimension of game discourse, as prescribed by the task criteria, ignored other relevant aspects of the game. As already mentioned, Assassin’s Creed consists of 10 main games in the less than ten years since its initial release. The game has been needless to say both popular and successful, yet there is little to nothing in the game summary to suggest why the game is successful and why so many people enjoy playing the game. It almost appears as if the group did not enjoy the task, and did not see in it the opportunity to address or express 6.4 Challenge 2: Game Complexity 215 <?page no="216"?> their affinity towards the game. This is likely due in part to the task criteria and its focus on the game program. As determined by the classroom discourse presented in 6.4.2, Candy Crush is a simple game - at least on the level of the game’s program. The Candy Crush world is not open but rather based on a linear progression. Most of the time spent in the game is not moving through the world but rather solving “match three” puzzles. This is where the game as a system of rules becomes relevant. The goal is relatively simple (even if the puzzles can be quite difficult) - match same color and type candy pieces (at least three) and solve the mini-challenges that each puzzle provides to reach a certain point level. However, despite the relatively simple game program, the game has a highly addicting character and can require large amounts of intensive and extensive engagement. This, com‐ bined with the fact that the game is ‘free to play,’ comes pre-loaded onto many Windows packages, and can be played on mobile devices, has led to large success of the game. Table 13 provides an analysis of the Candy Crush summary. Student Group Summary of Candy Crush Coding Summary: Task title It’s a strategy game Identifies game genre (game system) where you go on a path Explains player character progression (gameworld) through different worlds. Identifies world (gameworld) The different worlds contain a lot of levels, Explains world (elaboration) (game‐ world) where you are accompanied by a man. Explains NPC character (elaboration) (gameworld) There are many candies in a square in every level Explains world (elaboration) (game‐ world) and you have to put three or more candies from one sort in a row Explains aim (game world and system) to get points. Explains possibilities as player (game system) There are also different exercises. Identifies special features (game system) 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 216 <?page no="217"?> 3 This label is only partially correct. The game is more precisely a puzzle game, though strategies do play an important role in most puzzle games. The aim of the game is to pass all levels. Explains aim (elaboration) (gameworld and system) Table 13: Candy Crush Student Summary The analysis shows that the Candy Crush group fulfilled the summary require‐ ments set forth by Frau Schneider, though not in the chronological order that the Assassin’s Creed group so closely adhered to. In doing so, the group largely highlighted the most crucial features of the game in order to illustrate their knowledge of the game and correctly provide information to an unfamiliar au‐ dience. Furthermore, the group elaborated when necessary, providing multiple points of information about the gameworld, characters, and the aim of the game. Though Candy Crush consists most predominantly of a game system (while the gameworld plays a marginal role), the group elaborates on both the gameworld and system in a way that adequately summarizes the game. On top of this, the group provides additional information (exceeding the task requirements) of the game genre, identifying as a strategy game, 3 which helps explain to the reader the focus on the (rather) simple aims of the game. The group also exhibited multiple cognitive/ discursive functions, not only identifying points of informa‐ tion but also explaining others. The number of explanations present in the sum‐ mary may be due in part to the form of the summary, since it is a text with complete sentences and in paragraph form. This form, and the great(er) number of explanations, lends the summary a greater sense of coherency. This coher‐ ency, combined with simpler language, produces a summary which is most likely comprehensible to a more novice audience. Admittedly, Candy Crush is a simpler game than Assassin’s Creed, and is therefore most likely easier to summarize coherently in short form. In several respects, the Candy Crush group more thoroughly presented the game in sum‐ mary form. However, the group failed to address the complex issue of what makes the game so compelling despite its rather simplistic game structure. After all, the popularity of the game, and its ‘addictive’ qualities, lies largely in the structure of the game program itself. The group’s negligence of this aspect is in part due to the task assignment, since it focused on aspects of the game program (the game world and system) without integrating questions involving the player (the 2 nd level of game discourse). Therefore, like the Assassin’s Creed group, this group summarizes the game without really capturing or expressing what makes 6.4 Challenge 2: Game Complexity 217 <?page no="218"?> the game engaging and popular. In conclusion, popular digital games are more than their programs. Any discursive-linguistic form, like a game summary, which focuses only on the 1 st dimension neglects other dimensions of the game that help explain the game to uninformed audiences. The analysis of the critical situation surrounding the summary writing task shows that difficulties can arise due to the complexity of digital games. First, game tasks need explicit and differentiated instructions and input in order for students to put their game-knowledge into specific linguistic-discursive forms. Game summaries, for instance, do require input on the 1 st dimension of game discourse that focuses on game programs. Even with such support, the com‐ plexity of games can be overwhelming for both teachers and students. While an initial categorization of games as simple and complex may be useful, it can lead to problems if not followed up with a more differentiated, critical investigation. For instance, labeling both games with complex and simple programs might lead to ignoring aspects of player experience and game popularity. To add to the complications that the complexity of games bring, it is possible that a lack of desire to deal with the topic can lead to quicker frustration, lower motivation, and less creativity when students perform game discourse tasks. In this case study, it is possible that the critical situation discussed in 6.3 influenced the student summaries and summary revisions presented here. If students felt that their game experiences and values were not appreciated, or are even ‘under attack,’ by game tasks that are structured around a binary approach to games (positive/ negative, blessing/ curse, complex/ simple) then it is possible that stu‐ dents not only lose their desire to engage in further work with the topic, but are also likely to rely on socially desirable answers that undermine the purpose of developing the fremdsprachige Diskursfähigkeit of students on games. 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse The dominant method taken in this teaching unit was the introduction of game discourse through video game fan-comics. Taking a literacy approach, students were asked to both interpret existing video game fan-comics and at a later point produce their own. This approach was conceived as a literacy practice in which learners participate in game discourse through fan-comics. As presented in part II, chapters 3 and 4, gamer discourse, or the discourse on games that emerge from those who play games, can be conceptualized as a link between individual game experiences and higher level cultural discourse threads on video games. Thus, introducing the existing practice of video game fan-comics was seen as 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 218 <?page no="219"?> an intermediary step to connect students to an informed discourse on games that involved the three dimension presented in chapter 2. However, introducing gamer discourse into the EFL classroom is not without its difficulties. The following subsections present two particularly salient diffi‐ culties which emerged during the case study concerning the production and presentation of game comics. Particularly, they address the fact that much gamer discourse is quite specific which results in excluding many students from par‐ ticipating (even those who are familiar with the game). Sometimes this specif‐ icity is due to comics simply addressing specific aspects of a game, while at others times it is intended to exclude non-experts (so-called narrowcasting). While narrowcasting can make it difficult for even gamers to participate in a specific game-discourse, it poses a particular challenge when it is brought into the EFL classroom where not everyone has extensive game experience. Another subsection addresses what is called here as the ‘irony’ of gamer criticism, which refers to the idea that the critical reflection which stems from game-fans is dif‐ ferent from that which comes from non-gamers. Thus, the EFL classroom con‐ text can pose challenges for how students handle gamer discourse (and its in‐ herent critical reflection) when it is integrated in classroom tasks. 6.5.1 The Issue of Narrowcasting Game comics are a part of gamer culture, and as such they are often created for distinct audiences. Thus they can be placed on a spectrum of understandability: some are made for game players in general, some are made for players of specific games, and some are made for specific types of players of specific games (i.e. for players with specific skills, abilities, and experience levels). As opposed to broadcast media that is produced for nearly everyone, game comics often fall in the category of narrowcast media. And some game comics are so narrow that they only target certain players. For game discourse, this presents opportunities and challenges. One opportunity is that they often reflect specialized knowledge and discrete experiences with the game - in other words, they provide very close readings of the games they thematize. The challenge in this, however, is that they are often exclusive, making their content difficult to put into linguistic discursive form that others can/ want to relate to. This issue became apparent in the classroom discourse of the teaching unit since the teacher had little experience with games. The teacher was thus typi‐ cally excluded from the game discourse of the comics, and some knowledgeable students were even excluded from some specific comics. The challenge of each group was to articulate the game comics so that all in the class could understand. 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse 219 <?page no="220"?> In the words of the teacher, the students were supposed to “try to explain it to your grandmother, or me, who don’t play any games.” Some comics were easy to understand and articulate, since more students had experiences with them, and since their experiences were relatable to real life experiences. This was the case for the Mario Kart comic. However, the Assassin’s Creed comic was an ex‐ ample of a narrowcast comic which provided challenges for analysis and artic‐ ulation. This challenge was first observed in the Assassin’s Creed group’s summary of the game. Due to the game’s complexity, the group had difficulty summarizing the game in a short space, selecting its salient features and presenting the game in terms that others without experience of the game could easily understand. The complexity of the game, in turn, was reflected in the comic the group ana‐ lyzed as well as in the comic that the group created. The challenge that arose was the conflict of narrowcast communication - the thematization of very spe‐ cific information allows on the one hand a very close reading of (and critical reflection on) the game, yet it also hinders explanation to others. For instance, the Assassin’s Creed group successfully analyzed their comic (cf. table 13). In the panel-by-panel analysis, the group identified the characters of the comic and related them to their respective games, analyzed the characters in relation to the comic’s fictional plot, identified the ‘clash’ of logical perspectives by iden‐ tifying and explaining the punch-line, and related the comic’s criticism to the game, Assassin’s Creed. The comic presented a story of playable characters at a pool learning how to swim. All characters fail, however, and drown by the end of the comic. The joke is a criticism of the games from which the characters are from, because the playable characters all drown if they enter water in their respective games. The comic relies on a conflict between the semiotic representation of the game and the game’s rules - or that which the player is allowed to do in the game. From the semiotic perspective, it makes no sense that the characters cannot swim, especially considering that within the game they are quite skilled in their re‐ spective professions, and it is more than ironic that they would drown in ½ meter of water - the depth of the pool in the comic. However, for some unknown reason, this is the case for the playable characters in the games that the comic thematizes. Thus the comic required specialized and specific knowledge, and not just of Assassin’s Creed but of three other popular games. It required knowledge of their playable characters, their specific roles within the gameworlds, the rules that governed the games and the specific consequences of certain actions (like en‐ tering water in the game). Furthermore, it required the ability to differentiate 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 220 <?page no="221"?> aspects of the comic that were true to the game and aspects which where fic‐ tionally added by the ‘world’ of the comic overlaid on the game. As the group wrote on their poster as a reflection on the comic, it was “difficult to get the joke, because you’ve to know all the games and think about it for a while” (cf. table 13). In other words, it was difficult for the group members who play As‐ sassin’s Creed to understand the comic, meaning that even for them it was nar‐ rowcast. Because the comic focused on the game program, and specifically on the conflict between game rules and gameworld, there is a relatively direct con‐ nection between the comic analysis and the summary work. Thus the comic analysis can be seen as an extension of that work, and of focusing on the game program of Assassin’s Creed. However, this focus creates a larger gap between the other students (at least those who have not played the game) and the teacher, since there is no focus on the player and/ or the connection of the game to the real world in the comic, and since the game summary does not prepare the group to connect the game to the other dimensions of game discourse. It thus creates a larger challenge to communicate issues about the game to the rest of the classroom in a way that it can understand and relate to without personal expe‐ rience with the game. Comic Panel Poster Text Analysis Main Characters of Dif‐ ferent (first) Games (Tomb Raider, Halo, AC1, RDR) Unusual Clothing (boots, swimming suit) Identifies playable characters by source games (visual) and role in comic Identifies comic device of char‐ acters (uncharacteristic clothing - visual) 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse 221 <?page no="222"?> afraid of water (gun for “safety”) Interprets character’s reaction to situation, identifies comic device of character (gun - visual), inter‐ prets/ relates meaning Swimming aids (can’t swim) Identifies comic devices of char‐ acters (swimming aids - visual), interprets meaning Joke (they die → can’t swim, have to respawn) water depth 0,5 M → (could be able to stand) Identifies character speech bubble as comic “joke,” interprets results of characters’ actions and reason for results using visual and verbal information Identifies comic device (verbal/ visual) and interprets role in cre‐ ating comic conflict → Tomb Raider is the only game whose main char‐ acter is able to swim since the beginning Recognizes in comic what differ‐ entiates one player character from rest in relation to source games and character ability. Table 14: Student Analysis of Assassin’s Creed Comic As a part of the comic analysis, the groups are encouraged to relate the comic to the game by commenting on the game’s strengths and weaknesses. The As‐ sassin’s Creed group makes two points of criticism while pointing out no positive aspects about the game. Both critical points focus on the game program, one 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 222 <?page no="223"?> referring to the inflexibility of the quest structure of the game and the other to difficulties controlling the playable character (cf. table 15). While these critical points are more general than the criticism made by the comic, they still focus on the first dimension of game discourse and may be difficult to understand for those with little to no experience with the game or with games in general. Poster Text Coding weaknesses: Task title/ discourse function - list of further eval‐ uations (weaknesses) of game itself no changing quests (same main/ side quests) criticizes game-system (linearity of game, lack of player goal/ quest choice) difficult character controlling criticizes game system (player-playable character interface) Strengths: (marked over with white correction fluid. Reasons why? ) Table 15: Students Address Challenges and Weaknesses of Assassin’s Creed As a part of the project, groups were given the opportunity to create their own game comics. The Assassin’s Creed group designed a comic which focused on the game program and thus, like the summary and the game comic analysis, also on the 1 st dimension of game discourse. Furthermore, much like the game comic the group analyzed, the comic the group designed focused on presenting a con‐ flict between the rules of the game and the semiotic representation of a game‐ world following rules of logic similar to the real world. The comic consists of four panels. The first panel sets the plot scene, where the playable character (assassin) is identified by two guards. When this occurs in the game, the player must attempt to escape and/ or hide from the guards. The next panel provides a close-up of the playable character’s face and eyes, indi‐ cating that the player sees something which might help him/ her escape. The next panel presents an unlikely hiding place - a bench with two individuals sitting on it, one character apparently even waving to the player. The fourth and final panel shows a guard asking the now three individuals on the bench (this includes now the playable character) if they have seen the assassin, and the three answer with question marks indicating that they have not (cf. table 16 for a more detailed analysis). 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse 223 <?page no="224"?> Panel Analysis Setting is in the game. The two non-player character guards have spotted the assassin (player-character) and will now try to catch him. The assassin attempts to escape. In this panel the perspective of the comic has changed to an extreme close-up of the assassin’s face. The assassin’s eyes are highlighted by drawing detail, lines, and other marks. This highlighting underlines the assassin’s active visual search for a place to hide. The third panel presents a bench with two non-player characters and an empty space between them. Highlighted markings in the space between the characters match the highlighted marks around the assassin’s eyes in the second panel, indicating that the assassin views the open space as a place to hide. In the fourth and final panel, a guard stands in front of the bench and asks its occupants if they have seen the assassin. Question marks above the characters’ heads indicate they have not. It can be assumed that the guard does not rec‐ ognize the assassin. Table 16: Student Assassin’s Creed Comic The humorous irony of the comic is that the assassin’s hiding place is obvious and illogical. A trained assassin should be able to choose a better hiding place 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 224 <?page no="225"?> than a public bench, especially considering the obvious clothing which differ‐ entiates the assassin from the other characters and which marks him in terms of his role. To add to the humor, however, the seemingly illogical tactic of the assassin is effective, since, as the final panel shows, the guard is unable to rec‐ ognize him. The comic, much like the comic that the group analyzed, criticizes the game, Assassin’s Creed, and the illogical conflict between the rules of the game and its semiotic world which, in some ways, is expected to reflect real-world logic. While in the game, the playable character can ‘blend in’ to a crowd and thus escape detection, sometimes the ‘blending in’ appears too obvious, and yet the NPC guards will not find the assassin even if they are in close proximity. While this ability for the playable character to blend in is programed so that the player can escape more easily, it can create a de-immersive moment in which the ex‐ perience within the game differentiates greatly from the expectation the player might have from a gameworld that largely reflects the real world. On the one hand, the group narrates a story in the comic that is easy to understand. The plot is simple - the player chooses a poor and obvious hiding place to avoid detection. The humor is obvious - the nonplayable characters still fail to detect the player, and the hiding place turns out to be a good choice. On the other hand, however, the relation between the story in the comic and the real game may be difficult to make for those not familiar with the game. Fur‐ thermore, the critical point may be humorous to those who have played the game and experience similar situations, but it may seem absurd for those who have neither played the game nor been in similar situations in other games. In fact, the criticism may be taken incorrectly by non-players as an aspect which makes the game not worth playing - an intention that the group (and the original game comic that the group analyzed) likely did not have. In these two ways the comic that the Assassin’s Creed group designed is narrowcast, making it difficult to relate to others in the class and to connect to a classroom discourse of mixed game experiences. As the example of Assassin’s Creed illustrates, the narrowcasting of gamer discourse in game comics presents challenges for the classroom. The opportu‐ nity narrowcasting provides and enables is a very close reading of, in this case, the game program that is supported by the previous game summary. On the other hand, the risk that narrowcasting presents is the difficulty to understand and relate to class discourse in situations where students and teachers have little to no experience with the game. As the next example on Candy Crush shows, the criticism can be misinterpreted as a reason to not play the game rather than a critical reflection on one of its weaknesses. 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse 225 <?page no="226"?> 4 For more on emic and etic perspectives, cf. Kottak 2010: 53-54. 6.5.2 The Irony of Gamer Criticism What is the irony of gamer criticism? It is important to not forget the specific context in which game comics are created and shared, and that bringing them into the classroom context can bring its own set of challenges. While this is true for the narrowcasting presented in the previous section, it is also true for the gamer criticism present in game comics. The perspective on game criticism can be categorized into emic and etic perspective. The etic, or perspective coming from an ‘outside’ group, can in this context refer to either non-gamers or even those not familiar with a specific game (like Assassin’s Creed or Candy Crush). The emic, or perspective coming from inside a group, can in this context refer to not only gamers, but also those who play and/ or are familiar with a specific game. 4 While fan-comics often criticize games (cf. 4.2.1), their criticism is often different because it comes from fans of the game. They may want to affect change, or simply ‘poke fun’ at the game, but they do not make binary, blanket statements about the game being ‘good’ or ‘bad.’ Game-comics by fans can the‐ matize multiple games and may value one game over another, but they typically are not overly critical. Introducing game comics that criticize certain games to a classroom context can lead to challenges that involve this delicate balance between criticism and the emic and etic perspectives involved, as the example of the Candy Crush group reveals. The comic that the Candy Crush group analyzed was challenging for several reasons. First, it did not focus on the game program of Candy Crush but rather on the 2nd and 3rd dimension of game discourse, meaning that the sum‐ mary activity was not directly connected to the comic analysis. The second challenge was that the comic thematized addiction and the value of the game for gamers, and this criticism aligned with many of the critical statements made by students at the beginning of the project (cf. 6.3). For the most part, the Candy Crush group was able to successfully interpret the comic. The group identified the major theme of the comic as dealing with addiction, it identified the story of the comic taking place external to the game, thus representing real life people in a real-life interaction, and it interpreted the conflict between the two characters as symbolic of a larger conflict dealing with game addiction and value (cf. table 17). The comic presents the story of two individuals interacting with each other. One character likely represents the younger generation while the other, the older. In the first three panels, the younger character asks the older one whether he has Facebook, Twitter or WhatsApp, to which the older characters replies that 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 226 <?page no="227"?> 5 In Candy Crush, players run out of ‘lives’ if they fail to solve the game puzzles after a certain number of tries. These lives are replenished automatically over time. The game uses social network sites like Facebook and allows players to donate lives to players who are impatient to wait. Due to the ‘addictive’ nature of the game, many social network users ‘annoy’ their contacts for donated lives. he does not. In the fourth panel, the younger character asks, “Then, what DO you have? ” and to which the other character replies, “A LIFE! ” In these panels, the stage of the conflict has been set. The older character has none of the things the younger character values. The older character, however, has a ‘life,’ which implies that a valuable life does not require these things, and also that the other character is missing this valuable life. The ‘clash’ of the joke, however, comes in the fifth panel, in which the younger character misinterprets the insult, be‐ lieving that the older character has a ‘life’ to give on the game, Candy Crush. 5 The joke is not so much that the younger character misinterprets what the older character meant, but rather that his response simply bolsters the point that the older character is trying to make. The two characters value different things in life and, as the comic makes clear, their communication is ineffective. Comic Panels Group Comic Anal‐ ysis Analysis results of the most im‐ portant aspects of the analysis: Task title/ discourse functions - selection, hierarchy, analysis → it’s about the addic‐ tion of candy crush Identifies major theme of comic (player behavior criticism - ad‐ diction) → two people aren’t able to have a normal conversation Explains comic plot (problem - real life behavior criticism) → there is a young boy and an older man (the youth is more addicted) Identifies character traits and re‐ lates to comic theme 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse 227 <?page no="228"?> → the colours of the game are different to the colours of the comic Identifies comic device (visual) and compares to game (system) → the face expressions change during the con‐ versation Identifies comic device (visual) and progression in comic The message: Task title/ discourse function (bold, large print) - interpret comic message Digital games play a big role in our lives and normal conversations get less. Creates cause and effect relation between increasing role of digital games in real-life and decreasing social (verbal) interaction. Table 17: Student Analysis of Candy Crush Comic The Candy Crush group identifies the role of the communication for the conflict. Though the comic makes no explicit reference to addiction to Candy Crush, the group interprets the conflict as stemming from the younger character and his addiction to the game, and states that because of it the two characters are not “able to have a normal conversation.” However, the criticism of the comic is embedded within a double meaning. Indeed, the comic implicitly deals with an issue closely related to Candy Crush addiction and to the value of the game (and games in general) for life (the 3 rd dimension of game discourse). However, the comic deals with these issues in a playful manner, as can be concluded from its soft colors and drawing style. Furthermore, the comic presents no explicit com‐ mentary on the conflict by excluding any panel that offers a conclusion. In the style of the comic humor, it presents a ‘clash’ without presenting its resolution. This suggests that the comic is more focused on problem raising, or on posing a question about a conflict on the value of games, without necessarily taking sides on the issue. This falls in line with the logic of fan-criticism. Even if the 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 228 <?page no="229"?> comic author is not a fan of Candy Crush itself, the author is likely not making blanket judgements on the insipid value of games compared to traditional un‐ derstanding of the ‘good life.’ This form of criticism may conflict with criticism from an etic perspective, from either students who do not play games, or from teachers and institutions that make blanket statements about them. As discussed in 6.3, the teacher and tasks often established a binary approach to games which led to blanket state‐ ments of games being either ‘good’ or ‘bad.’ This approach was linked as a pos‐ sible explanation for the first critical incident in which a considerable number of students expressed their apathy towards the subject of games. This sets the stage for a conflict of gamer criticism interpretation and perspective, especially if students are encouraged to assume an etic perspective, misinterpret gamer criticism as a blanket criticism, and use the criticism to justify games as harmful. The Candy Crush group comments on the comic with a blanket statement about games, their influence in our lives and, as a result, the decrease in “normal conversations.” The exact relationship of games, ‘life’ and normalcy, however, is open for speculation. Since there is a focus on addiction in the group’s analysis of the comic, it can be surmised that addiction plays a qualitative role in ex‐ plaining how games influence human interaction and communication. How‐ ever, while the word choice of the analysis, and specifically the normative ref‐ erence to ‘non-game’ communication (i.e. “normal”), suggests that digital gaming has negative effects, neither the analysis nor the “message” attempt to address or explain the cause. If the comic is “about the addiction of candy crush” in general, then is it specifically about people who are addicted to the game, or about the game which is addicting? Are there certain people (like ‘youth’) who exhibit addictive behavior, which is annoying to others (the ‘older man’), or are there certain aspects about this seemingly simple game program which make it irresistible for so many people? Furthermore, the comic thematizes, and plays on, the word “life.” The comic analysis seems to focus largely on the difficulty of communication between the two, without looking at the specific problem that arises from the different meaning of the word for both characters. How are digital games imbued with different meanings for players and non-players and for ‘young’ and ‘old,’ and how do those different meanings influence the concept of what it means to ‘have a life? ’ It seems that, while the group may have been aware of the word play, and its function in the conflict of the comic, it provides no explicit evidence that its analysis addresses the verbal track of the comic. This lacking reflection appears to arise from a misinterpretation (possibly intentional) of gamer criticism and an alignment with perceived dominant ‘bi‐ nary’ discourse on games. The focus on the 2 nd and 3 rd dimension of game dis‐ 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse 229 <?page no="230"?> course allows an ignoring of their relation to the 1 st dimension of the game program. Furthermore, it also enables the ignoring of deeper questions on why the game is addicting and why some individuals or groups value games while others do not, and also on what exactly the traditional understanding of ‘good life’ is and how it might conflict with new technology like digital games, and how it might influence communication, interaction, and social cohesion. These issues become more salient as the group moves from commenting on the comic to commenting on the game. The group’s overall opinion on the game possibly reflects some of these questions (cf. table 18). On the one hand, its commentary mirrors issues thema‐ tized in the comic. The group writes, “The game doesn’t have a sense and it’s artificial,” implying a dichotomy between games and ‘real life’ and the hier‐ archical ordering of games as subordinate. Life has a sense (presumably in the sense of ‘meaning’) and is real, while Candy Crush has no meaning and is not real, but rather ‘fake’ or ‘misleading.’ Unfortunately, the creation of this di‐ chotomy, and seeing games as separate from real life, often leads to ignoring questions of how, why, and in what contexts games are meaningless or even meaningful. The idea that Candy Crush is meaningless and fake can be seen as exacerbated by its addictive qualities - a possible view the Candy Crush group is taking. The group describes in their second point that “you easily get addicted,” implying first of all a general property of the game program, instead of a general disposition of people who play it, and second of all that the group members are speaking from personal experience with the game. The use of “you” here can be interpreted as addressing a general audience which also includes the speaker. Poster Text Analysis own opinion: Task title/ discourse function - evaluates game with opinion The game doesn’t have a sense and it’s ar‐ tificial. Critiques the game (real-life relevance) as meaningless The weaknesses of candy crush is that you easily get addicted and pay for it. Critiques the game in terms of player be‐ havior in-game (addiction) and out-of-game consequence (monetary cost) Nevertheless, the advantage is that it kills boredom. Supports the game in terms of player out-of-game need (combats boredom) Table 18: Students Address Challenges and Weaknesses of Candy Crush 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 230 <?page no="231"?> However, on the other hand, the group addresses issues not presented (or if so then indirectly) in the comic. For instance, the group criticizes that a result of the addiction of the game is that players “pay for it.” Candy Crush, as previously mentioned, is based on the free-to-play business model, where basic services are free, but special or exclusive services cost. The competitive nature of Candy Crush comes through its in-game leader board (involving other players online) and through the player’s advertisement of achievements through the game’s integration into social network sites. This is the case presented in the comic as the younger character asks the older one for a ‘life’ to continue playing. Thus, to add to the criticism pointed out by the group, the addiction to Candy Crush can lead players to annoy friends for ‘lives’ (which can have a negative effect on how they communicate - as is the case through Facebook) or to buy ‘lives’ with real money. Finally, the group provides one comment on the advantages of the game that go beyond themes presented in the comic. Pointing out one role the game plays for ‘real’ life, the group states that “it kills boredom.” Iron‐ ically, the binary between real life and games, and the superficial valuing of the former over the latter, provides little to explain the ‘boredom’ of real life and the ways that digital games like Candy Crush provide meaningful activity. Pos‐ sibly, the ability for games to ‘kill’ time which is perceived as boring may allow a new perception on life consisting of ‘interesting’ events and ‘time killing’ activities which bridge them. Since the group consists of students who play Candy Crush, their criticism, and lacking critical reflection, seems to align with a more etic perspective on games. This alignment is reflected further in the Candy Crush game comic that the group creates. Similar to the Assassin’s Creed group, the Candy Crush group created a comic which in some ways closely modeled the fan-comic they analyzed, and which also found a creative way to tell a new story. The group’s comic consisted of five panels, just like the comic it analyzed, and it also focused on the 3 rd level of game discourse that the original fan-comic focused on. Table 19 presents an analysis of the comic. 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse 231 <?page no="232"?> Panel Analysis The first panel shows two young children receiving money, possibly from their mother. The depicted scene takes place outside of the game. In the second panel, one of the children explains to the other that (s)he is looking forward to spending the money on the new book. The other child reacts in sur‐ prise. The third panel depicts the child who was surprised in the second panel spending 5 Euros for 5 lives on Candy Crush. This panel serves in stark contrast to the desire of the other child, in panel two, who wants to buy a new book. In the fourth panel, the child who wants a new book asks the other child what (s)he is doing - this child then explains (s)he is buying lives on Candy Crush. 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 232 <?page no="233"?> In the final panel, a close-up of the first child is given, underlying his/ her reaction and surprise, and disap‐ proval of the other child spending money on the game. Table 19: Student Candy Crush Comic Similar to the original fan-comic that the group analyzed, the new comic the‐ matized the aspect of ‘lives’ that can be bought in Candy Crush. Instead of ad‐ dressing the dual meaning of the word ‘life’ as the original comic did, the new comic addresses the cultural and social value of different forms of media. Here, one child wants to buy lives on Candy Crush while the other wants to buy a book. The reaction of the child who wants to buy the book in the final panel likely presents a lens through which the audience should view the comic and story. Through this lens, print media hold value over digital media, and a book may last while the lives in Candy Crush are soon used up. The thematization of ‘life’ in this comic, then, raises the question of what a valuable life is, and what type of media contributes to a valuable life. Possibly, it suggests that the ephem‐ eral ‘life’ provided by Candy Crush contains an insipid quality compared to the more ‘enduring’ life enabled by print books. Also similar to the original comic is the social aspect of the new comic. The digital divide, at least in terms of value (both cultural and monetary) leads not to mutual understanding but rather to disunity and division. However, the school context of the comic production (and its thematic choice) should be taken into consideration. It is possible that the valuing of books over digital games may be a reflection of what the group believes is expected of them as the peda‐ gogically acceptable answer. The group’s criticism of the game may seem harsh when considered that the members chose the game because they play it. Their point could be interpreted as such: the game has value - as long as it is free. Once a player invests money in it, then it is expected to have a value which is then comparable to other medial forms (like books). What the comic overlooks, in light of their story, is the value of time considering the ‘addictive’ nature of Candy Crush. Why would a discourse on Candy Crush criticize spending money on the game, but not enormous amounts of time (the students in the class ad‐ mitted to playing the game, but all denied ever paying more for lives suggesting that it is not necessarily common in and relevant to their lives)? In any case, the 6.5 Challenge 3: Suitability of Gamer Discourse 233 <?page no="234"?> group appears to be engaging in a discourse on player behavior and the meaning of the game for the world that does not coincide with their own game behaviors. Instead of seeing this task as an opportunity to, for instance, investigate and reflect on the conflict between their own behavior with the game and its appa‐ rent low social (and educational) value, the group largely presented a one-sided view that questions the value of the game. However, the comic that the group analyzed as a previous task also questioned the value of the game (in terms of the meaning of ‘life’), so it is possible that the group was following in its lead. However, a more critically reflective stance could have questioned why a player of the game would criticize the game, or why players may criticize some games over others. As was suggested earlier, it is possible that the group chose what they considered a socially acceptable approach - one that was primed by the initial activities of the project and propagated by an unreflected analysis of the original fan-comic. As this section illustrates, gamer criticism presents a challenge for classroom discourse. Gamer criticism can be seen on the one hand as more complex because it inherently contains a binary approach to games. As fans, gamers accept the games they play. However, this does not mean that they simply consume games without critical reflection. Their criticism thus navigates this paradox of criti‐ cizing an affinity. However, in some contexts, the criticism can be misinterpreted and can lead to a one-sided alignment with the criticism without further ques‐ tioning and reflecting how the game can still be successful despite weak points. In the classroom and other cultural/ educational institutions, the game criticism can align itself with the perceived value that the institution has of games in an attempt to provide socially and institutionally acceptable perspectives. This alignment, however acceptable, may not lead to deeper critical engagement that may question, evaluate, or even further explain that value being taken. Similar to narrowcasting, gamer criticism can present a challenge for artic‐ ulation in the classroom. Both are interrelated with issues of value and a binary approach to games which can create problems when integrated into the class‐ room. Furthermore, this one-sidedness appears to be supported by a one-di‐ mensional approach to analysis. The Assassin’s Creed comic focused largely on the dimension of the game program, and may have appeared unrelatable and incomprehensible to those outside the group. The Candy Crush comic focused on the 2 nd and 3 rd dimensions of player behavior and the relation of the game to the real world, yet, by neglecting the first dimension, the group failed to show how the game program creates the conditions for the conflicts (that the comic thematized) to arise. 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 234 <?page no="235"?> This case study presents three challenges that arose in the classroom during the teaching unit. These challenges are analyzed using observer notes, video recordings and learner products. However, these data sources fail to capture the internal perspectives and reflections of both the teacher and the students (unless explicitly expressed during the teaching unit). Thus, teacher and student inter‐ views were performed to obtain a closer look at the thoughts and reflections of classroom participants. 6.6 Retrospective Interviews Semi-structured interviews were performed with both the students and the teacher a week after the teaching unit was concluded. The student interview was a group interview while the teacher interview was performed one-on-one. The interview questions covered a range of both general and specific topics; however, the focus for analysis is on aspects relevant to the topic of complexity and the difficulties and potentials students and the teacher see in engaging in the complex discourse on digital games. All names are pseudonyms. 6.6.1 Student Interviews In order to maintain the voluntary principle of ethical research, students were allowed to volunteer for the interviews. Though the class was told that a member from each group would be ideal (meaning a total of seven students), only six students volunteered. As previously mentioned, the interview was semi-struc‐ tured: a list of questions that served as a guideline was utilized, yet, in order to establish a natural flow to the interview, and to allow the emergence of unfore‐ seen topics, information, and further questions, the order was changed and fur‐ ther interview questions appeared. Furthermore, in order to ease the flow of communication as much as possible, the interview was performed in the native language of the students - German. The interview was transcribed and analyzed with a focus on the topics (and questions raised) in 6.3 through 6.5. Therefore, the focus of the analysis is on student interest in the topic of games, complexity of games and its effects on communication, and challenges of gamer discourse. These three topics and their relevance to the study are addressed in the following passages. Are students interested in the topic of games? On the one hand, the students exhibited discomfort discussing games in school, and specifically how they were put into general categories of ‘good’ and ‘bad.’ 6.6 Retrospective Interviews 235 <?page no="236"?> In response to the initial question on how students felt about the topic of games in general, one student, Holger, stated, “ich finde das immer sehr schwierig dass es immer in der Schule immer so ausgewalzt wird und die Frage halt gestellt wie gut oder wie schlecht das ist.” Another student, Joanna, expresses a similar opinion, stating, “Es ist auch irgendwann ausgelutscht wenn man das immer in der Schule irgendwie bespricht und das sagt, und sagt es nicht gut wenn also man viel spielt, irgendwann ist es dann ausgelutscht.” Students name topics like violence and addiction as examples of typical negative perspectives on games while the topic of games and their ability to increase intelligence of players as a positive aspect. Holger responds to this binary treatment, stating, “Ja genau, ich würde das auch nicht so abgrenzen und verallgemeinern.” This student sees the binary treatment as a generalization, and possibly even as a reduction of what games are and can be for the students. In the first critical incident in which the students present their lack of desire to discuss the topic of games, the fact that games have already been discussed in other subjects was raised by the students. In the interview, the students go into further detail, stating that the topic of games was discussed in Deutsch as well as Politik und Wirtschaft. When asked how the topic was handled in those subjects, Thorsten replied, Die selben Themen, also im Sinne von, das Paro, das Paradebeispiel ist sozusagen immer Counter Strike eigentlich, das ist worüber denn alle dann sprechen, da das so, mit der populärste Ego-Shooter ist, den man so kennt, also jeder kennt. [Studenten lachen] Uh, [lacht] uhm, und das immer gesagt wird, ja dieses uh Spiel das stellt re‐ alistische Tötung von Menschen dar, und dass die meisten Leute, uhm, dazu führt dass sie selbst solche, zum Beispiel, Gewalttaten begehen. Und dass immer dann dieser Zusammenhang genommen wird zwischen, jetzt als Beispiel von vor einigen Jahren gabs in Stuttgart, wie das in Winnenden, da ein Ort in der Nähe, gab es einen Amoklauf in der Schule und dann wurde, wurden dann die Materialien des Amokläufers analy‐ siert und, ja, der hat exzessive gewalttätige Spiele sozusagen gespielt, und dass man da dann direkten Bezug herstellt. Also das ist eine Sache, die von den Medien ziemlich verallgemeinert wird. Here, Thorsten underlined an apparent student perception that school discourse typically focuses on negative aspects of games like violence. Furthermore, the student linked school discourse on games to discourse in mass media on games - an aspect addressed shortly. Students were then asked about their perspective on discussing games in schools in general and on bringing their personal game experiences into the 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 236 <?page no="237"?> classroom. Thomas addressed the role of the teacher in terms of the topic, stating, Es kommt darauf an mit wem, weil ich denk mit Lehrern darüber zu sprechen, das ist nochmal etwas anders als mit Mitschüler zu sprechen, weil, uhm, ich weiß noch am Anfang des Schuljahres in Deutsch hatten wir das auch, mit der Leitfrage, uh, ob Killerspiele Amok Läufe machen. Und da, uh, hatten wir zwei Gruppen gebildet, und sowas finde ich doch ziemlich gut, aber wenn dann so ein Lehrer direkt kommt, nee das ist so, und sich an der Position festhält, das finde ich dann ein bisschen schwierig. Thomas differentiated, expressing a general interest in discussing games with other students, while noting discomfort discussing with teachers who have strong or firm opinions and who focus on only negative aspects like violence. In reply to Thomas, Hermina points out that the perspective and purpose of discussing games plays a role in student interest in discussing games and game experience. Hermina states, Und ich denk mal, es kommt darauf an wie das Thema angesprochen wird, weil wenn es so wieder dieses, ja Killerspiele machen Amok Läufe, dass ich natürlich klar, dass man das nicht unbedingt besprechen möchte, aber wenn man dann, zum Beispiel, den Lernfaktor, oder andere positive Aspekte [ Joanna: Ja] nehmen würde, dann denke ich mal, wäre es auch besser, oder schöner, darüber in der Schule zu reden. Hermina believed that discussing positive aspects and avoiding what the student likely sees as ‘cliché’ topics of games and violence would make the topic easier and more fun to deal with in the classroom. Joanna picked up on the themati‐ zation of negative aspects of games in schools, and used the opportunity to make a general statement about game discourse in schools, stating, “Es wird auch hauptsächlich über die Suchtgefahr und die Amok Läufe geredet, und das finde ich jetzt nicht so spannend, also man hat schon oft genug darüber geredet.” What this consecutive set of student comments suggests is that the teacher plays a role in bringing the topic of games into the classroom. To use the generalizations made by the comments, students do not like teachers expressing strong and firm opinions on games, and they do not like it when teachers bring up the topic of games and violence. However, despite these reservations, students express an interest in discussing games and their experience with them, but as the com‐ ments show, only under certain conditions. In the student interview, a link was established between the ‘typical’ school discourse on games and the discourse on games made in external contexts. When asked explicitly how media covers games, Holger stated, “sehr sehr selten in so [..] in so öffentlich-rechtliche Medien kann man auch ganz selten Beiträge wo 6.6 Retrospective Interviews 237 <?page no="238"?> die positiven Seiten von Videospielen, aber [.] überwiegend negativ wird da berichtet.” This statement is followed by two further comments, „Es wird ja immer so zusammengebracht mit Amokläufer“ (Amanda) and “Und dass es süchtig macht. (Hermina: Und aggressiv) Ja.” ( Joanna) Thus, students create a link between school discourse on games and discourse on games in mass media. This link is topical (violence, addiction) and also explicit as commented on by Thorsten in how teachers deal with the topic. In fact, the original interview question on what students thought of dealing with the topic of games in school led to another general response on the media’s treatment, “das ist eben grad das Problem in den Medien, dass sie das immer da so aufpuschen auch [Holger, Thorsten und Amanda nicken zustimmend]” (Thomas) School discourse on games, according to student perceptions, consists of teachers and subjects, and specifically how they present the topics and what they focus on. Students perceive an overwhelming focus on negative aspects of games, like violence and addiction, and express discomfort communicating with teachers about the topic. Even discussing negative and positive aspects of games is perceived as tiresome. Moreover, they express dislike over what they perceive as overgeneralization of games to these negative aspects and they bring up the value of entertainment. School discourse on games is related to the mass media discourse, according to several students, which largely presents game discourse much in the way that the school and teachers do, by focusing on negative as‐ pects. However, students do exhibit interest in the topic of games in the EFL class‐ room. When asked whether digital games belong in the EFL classroom, all stu‐ dents who replied (four out of seven) were in support. Hermina claimed that games are a part of everyday life that can help relate to others in English speaking countries. This claim is supported by Holger and Thorsten who explain how they interact with foreign speakers of English and native English speakers when they play multiplayer games online - and that because of this they develop their English vocabulary and speaking skills. Hermina comments that the game branch is large in English speaking countries, and that is why so many are pro‐ duced in English. These comments suggest that students are aware of the FL learning benefits of digital games and are not necessarily opposed to discussing and working with games in the EFL classroom. It is possible that the sentiments of the students that appear in the interview are reasons for the critical incident discussed in 6.3 where the students expressed disinterest in the topic of games. The focus on student behavior in the initial activity and then the binary treatment of games and game discourse into ‘good’ and ‘bad’ was likely seen as a focus on the negative aspects despite presentation 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 238 <?page no="239"?> of the positive. In this treatment, there is little room for the value of the enter‐ tainment aspects of games, and of a critical engagement which does not stig‐ matize a media that is a part of many students’ everyday lives. Are games too complex for EFL classroom discourse? The interview also provides insight into how students perceive the complexity of games and how this complexity affects classroom game discourse. When asked about the difficulties the students had writing game summaries, Hermina from the Assassin’s Creed group and Thorsten from the Portal group explained that the game was too complex to put into a short summary form. More specif‐ ically, Hermina stated that Assassin’s Creed has a narrative that is too complex and that she would have to write a text that was “meterlang.” Thorsten provides a similar complaint, stating, “Es ist [...] in einer halben Seiten Text, oder auch in zwei Seiten Text, ist es wirklich schwer zu erklären, uh [...] dann hat man dann erst das, uh, sozusagen das, den Kern.” For Thorsten, it is not so much the nar‐ rative of Portal which is difficult to capture in the summary, but rather “wirklich schwer, das zu, uh, zu vermitteln, wie genau dieses Spiel im Grunde auf einen wirkt”. Here Thorsten refers implicitly to the 2 nd dimension of games - player experience - an aspect which was not addressed by the game summary task description. Indeed, describing the basic actions and conflicts of a game is one thing, but explaining how the player becomes immersed in the world and chal‐ lenges over long periods of time is another. Both Thorsten and Hermina explain that having an inexperienced audience (i.e. the teacher) makes the game difficult to explain in a short space. For Holger, who summarized the comparatively simple game of Mario Kart, the complexity lies not so much in the game itself, but rather in differentiating between basic and specific game knowledge. When he explained how the teacher corrected his summary, he stated, “als sie es dann durchgelesen hat, hat sie auch so ein paar Sachen wo ich mir gedacht habe, dass es selbstverständlich wären, uh, und, die standen halt da einfach nicht.” Thus, the problems surrounding the summary writing exposes three complicating problems: game complexity, player experience, and selecting relevant informa‐ tion based on audience. However, as the interview shows, the problem also lies in putting a largely visual experience into linguistic-communicative form. This is not necessarily due to the foreign language, English. As Amanda stated, “Also ich denke das ist auch auf Deutsch schwierig”. Reasons provided for this difficulty lie in the fact that games are largely based on action and are visual (Amanda), and that visual images are complex (Thomas). This is possibly why several students stated that, even though friends explain games to them outside of school, they have to see the game (Holger) or even play it (Hermina) before they can form an opinion. 6.6 Retrospective Interviews 239 <?page no="240"?> Thus, a fourth complexity factor is simply putting game experience into lin‐ guistic form - an activity which is certainly a skill developed over time, but which is difficult if learners have had little or unsupported opportunity. What are the challenges of gamer discourse for classroom discourse? In the interviews, students present several challenges that come with bringing gamer discourse into the classroom. The first deals with gamer discourse in general, and surfaces in the interview as a comparison to the representation of games in mainstream media. When asked whether there were positive repre‐ sentations of games in the media, several students named media channels like Game One, magazines for gamers, and especially Let’s Play videos on YouTube. Unlike traditional mass media, these channels target gamers and not the general public, and are thus examples of media that address gamer discourse. However, because these channels do not represent mainstream media, and are often cate‐ gorized as entertainment, it is likely that they are not considered by students as informing ‘serious’ discourse on games. This exclusion, however, is unfortunate since, when asked, all students in the interview admitted knowing about and having ‘consumed’ such gamer media. While it is possible that forms of enter‐ tainment, like digital games, may not be taken serious in mainstream media (except when related to addiction or violence), several students expressed the opinion that entertainment is a meaningful reason to play games. When asked about what students thought about the positive aspects of games that were ad‐ dressed in class, Thomas replied, Ja, ich persönlich denke, dass es doch auch unterhaltsam sein kann, weil grad die Plattform YouTube, die da auch positive Seiten hervorbringt von dem Spielergenre, uhm, es gibt so diese sogenannten Let’s Play Videos und die so unterhaltsam zuzu‐ schauen. Interesting is the implicit binary created in the categorization of entertainment versus mainstream media. Entertainment, as well, appears to be placed as op‐ posite to educational value, and yet, Thomas appears to be questioning this by stating that entertainment can also be used to discuss positive aspects of games. Thus gamer discourse is excluded from mainstream media, is relegated to en‐ tertainment, is liked and consumed by all the interview participants, and is sug‐ gested to have positive learning value by bringing out positive aspects of games. Gamer discourse was also an explicit part of class, as students were asked to both analyze and create their own game comics. One intention of introducing the comics was to connect learner game experience with higher levels of dis‐ course by moving through the gamer discourse in the comics. In the interview, three students expressed that they like the comics because the comics repre‐ 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 240 <?page no="241"?> sented game experiences that the students could easily relate to. As Joanna put it, “ich habe auch bemerkt bei meinem Comic, dass man, uhm sich selbst sozu‐ sagen so als Spieler gesehen hat [Hermina: Ja] und sich so, hineinversetzen könnte”. Thorsten and Thomas found that the comics allowed for easy commu‐ nication, and that the language of the images in the comics allowed for the communication of more complex game actions, processes and experiences than other non-visual media would allow. This is likely linked to the first point that the comics allowed students to identify with their represented situations more easily. However, most students (four out of six participants) complained about the ‘narrowcast’ aspect of their comics. This was particularly the case for the complex games like Assassin’s Creed, Portal and Minecraft, though the complaint even appeared for the more ‘simple’ Candy Crush. The reasoning given by stu‐ dents was that the comic was difficult to explain to those who have not played it and that a certain amount of preknowledge was needed. As Thorsten put it, the comics that the group looked at were all “insider-mäßig.” What becomes clear through an analysis of the interview is that gamer dis‐ course presents problems of access. On the one hand, gamer discourse (like in YouTube Let’s Play, in gamer magazines, in Game One, and in game comics) offers potentials by presenting positive aspects of games that learners claim to be in‐ terested in and that they can relate to with personal experiences. However, this discourse has little access to more general audiences. Game discourse appears to be partially excluded from mainstream media, according to the students in‐ terviewed, and their content is difficult to communicate to people unfamiliar with the games and without experience playing them. This became particularly clear when students tried to summarize their games and when they attempted to explain their chosen game comics to the rest of the class. On the one hand, this was likely caused by the complexity of games and the difficulty in putting them into linguistic-discursive forms. On the other hand, it was also likely due to the experiential gap between those who play and those who do not, as well as to the stigma against gaming present in mainstream media. This problem is combined with the student perspective that school discourse on games reflects mainstream media, which largely focuses on negative aspects like addiction and violence. 6.6.2 Teacher Interview The teacher interview provided unique insights into the problems that occurred while integrating game discourse into the EFL classroom (an example of the interview transcript is provided in appendix C). Following a similar structure of 6.6 Retrospective Interviews 241 <?page no="242"?> focus present in previous sections of this case study, the following interview looks at problems involving the teacher’s (Frau Schneider’s) interest in the topic, the complexity of games, and especially gamer discourse as present within a school context. What are the teacher’s interests in the topic of games? The following looks at the teacher’s interest in the topic of the study as a basis for understanding issues surrounding student interest (or the lack thereof ex‐ hibited in the classroom), especially since teacher interest influences the ways in which learners interact with the topic of games. When asked about the teach‐ er’s general interest in the topic in retrospect, Frau Schneider responded with a general interest in learning about a new topic that was not a part of her “Leb‐ ensfeld” as well as in learning about the behavior of her students with games: “am interessantesten fand ich glaube ich zu gucken, was spielen sie, wie oft spielen sie, wie spielen sie.” According to this response, the teacher was largely interested in the gaming behavior of the students. When discussing the quality criteria of the students’ game comics, the teacher praised the Candy Crush comic and the Sims comic on how they thematize the real-life implications of digital games. Referring to the Sims comic, the teacher states, “Ich glaub, ich fand ähm wie gesagt diese erste was sich ähm kritisch mit, mit der Erwartung dieses Spiels, ähm, und diesen Suchtpotenzial vielleicht auseinandersetzen, das fand ich, ähm, beeindruckendsten.“ The comic she found the most interesting was the one that thematized player behavior, and particularly the problem of game addiction. In general, and as appeared throughout the interview, Frau Schneider viewed crit‐ ical engagement with games as a quality criteria of student work. It seems, however, that critical engagement for the teacher was defined by negative as‐ pects of games and specifically aspects that influence or effect player behavior. More evidence of the teacher’s view on games, and what the learners should gain from the project, is provided in following passages. In conclusion, however, conflict can arise when student interests in a topic (which may be present before the topic is introduced in class) diverge from teacher interest in the topic. An analysis of the teacher interview suggests that such a divergence and conflict indeed existed in this case study. Are games too complex for EFL classroom discourse? Although the teacher was interested in game behavior, game complexity became an occurring issue in both the project itself as well as in the interview. As became clear in classroom discourse (cf. 6.4) and in the student interviews (cf. 6.6.1), many digital games are quite complex, and the teacher addressed this as a major complicating factor, both in general terms and especially during the task of 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 242 <?page no="243"?> 6 Cf. case study 3 in chapter 8 for more on issues surrounding switching roles in the classroom. summary writing. Although the teacher originally placed much of the blame on the students for the unsatisfactory summaries, she admitted in the interview that the problem lies largely in the medium of games, “Das, ähm, schien mir auch schwierig, die wollte ich für hier bei einer Summary eine gewisse Formal‐ ität haben. Und das scheint diesem Genre Videospiele zu widersprechen.” How‐ ever, the teacher felt that this problem also contained a potential for raising student awareness of the complexity of games (which she felt was missing - a conclusion she made due to the unsatisfactory initial summaries). She stated, “ich fand's auch interessant, dass Schüler das gar nicht so wahrgenommen haben. Dass es ihnen erst aufgefallen ist beim Summary schreiben, was da ei‐ gentlich auch ganz gut ist.” Though Frau Schneider expected more reflection from the students in the game summaries, she admitted that the summary re‐ writing was an opportunity to raise awareness on the complexity of games. However, the teacher also admitted that part of the problem arose from the lack of preparation and from the teacher’s underestimation of the complexity of games. When asked whether the task of game-summary writing was still beneficial, despite the complexity of games, Frau Schneider stated, “Weil ich das nicht antizipiert hab, ähm, habe ich es vielleicht auch nicht so vorbereitet, wie man es hätte vorbereiten müssen, sondern ich dachte: Ok, das ist jetzt einfach”. Shortly thereafter she adds, “mir waren die Stolpersteinen nicht klar.” Thus the complexity of games created problems in the project for both students and the teacher. What are the challenges of gamer discourse for classroom discourse? The challenges of gamer discourse which became most prevalent in the inter‐ view came largely from the fact that game discourse was brought into a school context. Digital games are a medium largely prevalent in students’ free time, and certain conflicts can arise when they are brought into formal school con‐ texts. These conflicts include aspects discussed in the above passages, and are expanded in further detail below. The first conflict deals with the teacher’s perspective on larger developments in the field of pedagogy and didactics. When asked about informal English lan‐ guage learning through forms of popular media (Internet, television and games), Frau Schneider expressed concern over the change in classroom roles this would bring, as well as over the responsibility this would require from the students for their own learning. 6 She stated, 6.6 Retrospective Interviews 243 <?page no="244"?> Es wird auch bei uns viel diskutiert und mit viel uns angetragen, und ähm, heißt immer mal, Lehrer werden zunehmend zu Lernberatern, und es soll mehr Eigenverantwor‐ tlichkeit in die Schule kommen, ähm. Ich sehe das für mich auch noch nicht richtig kommen. Also ich weiß nicht genau, wie meine Rolle definiert sein wird. This statement makes clear the teacher’s larger pedagogical concerns sur‐ rounding autonomous learning. While Frau Schneider expressed doubt con‐ cerning the new role of teacher as “Lernberater,” this doubt was related to the ability of students to take responsibility for their own learning. Shortly there‐ after, the teacher stated, “ich halte auch diesen Ansatz, ähm, von wir bringen uns alle selber bei, ähm, für fragwürdig. Ich weiß nicht, wie es funktionieren soll.” This concern over learner autonomy in the classroom can be related to tech‐ nological media changes in the lives of the students and the effects these changes have on media education. When asked about what the teacher became aware of through the project, and the difficulties teaching the concept of media compe‐ tence in general to students, she states, Das was für uns jetzt gerade erst angekommen ist quasi, nah? Fortbildung zu machen, nah? Das ist bei denen schon durch. Und das demonstriert natürlich auch die Schnell‐ lebigkeit dieser, dieser ähm Geschichte und auch die Schnelllebigkeit, ähm, dieser Generation. Ständig mit was Neuem konfrontiert wird und wo man immer eher quasi drei Schritte hinterher sind. Das fand ich so oft auf der Medienebene ganz interessant. This statement exhibits the frustration and problem the teacher perceived with the rate of change in media and the difficulty teachers have in staying updated. The teacher believed on the one hand that the students cannot be responsible for their own learning and on the other hand that media technology is devel‐ oping so quickly that teachers cannot keep up. There are similarities between the statements the teacher made on media and school learning in general and the teacher’s experience in the project with game discourse tasks. The teacher found it difficult to allow learners to deal with the topics in class on their own. As she stated, “ich habe aber bei der Einheit selber gemerkt, [...] wie schwierig das ist, den didaktischen Zeigefinger wegzulassen. Und man kriegt ihn nicht raus, das ist das Problem.” Here the role of the teacher as a figure of ‘didactic’ authority was viewed as a problem, one that the teacher presented as unavoidable even if undesirable. At a later point in the interview, the teacher addressed this issue once again, offering a possible effect of the school context on the subject of games, as well as a reason why students are not interested in bringing the topic into a school context, 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 244 <?page no="245"?> Ich glaube wir werden immer an diesem, in diesem (.) Konfliktfeld, ich als Lehrer will mit Methoden vermitteln, mit Kompetenzen vermitteln. Will eine Awareness, ja, und ähm ihr wollt es vielleicht auch gar nicht, ja? Also ich hatte auch den Eindruck, sie wollen zum Teil auch gar nicht kritisch an Spielen dran gehen, wollen ihre Freizeit damit verdödeln. Aber ähm wenn sie darüber reflektieren ist ihnen natürlich klar, es ist eine Zeitverschwendung. Here it becomes clear what the “didactic pointer finger” refers to, namely that games are a waste of time and critical engagement with the topic would only make that painfully clear to the learners. This statement suggests that the di‐ dactic pointer finger is the teacher’s belief that games have little (educational/ social) value. To complicate the perceived ‘inevitable’ didactic pointer finger is the teacher’s admitted lack of knowledge about digital games. In this study, the teacher ad‐ mitted that her lack of background (and content) knowledge on games - com‐ pared to the students’ knowledge on the subject - posed one of the largest problems: als Lehrerleiter müsste ich mich eben auch eigentlich in der Welt besser auskennen. Das ist glaube ich so die, die Haupt, die Hauptschwierigkeit die ich damit gehabt habe. Und eben die Verschulung, dieses Inhalt des, der mir sehr fremd ist, denen sehr ver‐ traut. This lack of content-knowledge changed the relationship between teacher and learners - a change which was recognized by the teacher as a further problem. How can the teacher have both a strong didactic role and not know the content of the material to be taught? This conflict relates well to Frau Schneider’s previously expressed uncer‐ tainty over the role of learner autonomy. A shift in the teacher’s role would mean at the same time a shift in the learner’s role. When asked about this shift, the teacher addressed the problem of learner responsibility. Referring to the project and the teacher’s lacking game knowledge, the teacher stated, “[ich] musste mich dann voll auf die Schüler verlassen, ja? Und hab eben gemerkt, dass sie das zum Teil nicht leisten können.“ Switching roles by bringing digital games from the students’ personal lives into the classroom brings with it the respon‐ sibility that students actively contribute with their knowledge on games and game discourse. According to the teacher, in this project, students failed to fulfill this responsibility. This failure in responsibility raises the question whether students were not able or did not want to contribute. As the teacher pointed out several times in the interview, the students are aware that they are in an evaluation setting and 6.6 Retrospective Interviews 245 <?page no="246"?> their responses are influenced by this context. At one point, Frau Schneider stated, Ja, das ist wieder Schulkontext, nah? Warum sollen sie sich an irgendwas abarbeiten, was schwierig ist, wenn sie genau wissen, sie sind in einer Bewertungssituation. Und sie wollen was gut machen. Und dann so, sie machen so den Weg des Schülers. Das ist Schülermentalität. Here the teacher stated that the school context reduced student motivation to discuss and work with game discourse because students knew they were in an evaluation setting. They avoided difficult situations and took the “path of the student.” According to the teacher, this path revealed itself in socially biased responses, “Die wissen was wir von ihnen erwarten in ihrer Antwort, ja? Ähm, die sind nicht mehr naiv genug die Wahrheit zu sagen.” This effect of socially biased response means that it is difficult to encourage student reflection on behaviors and pastimes that occur outside of the classroom. As suggested by the teacher’s responses, students knew from school routines what types of values and responses were expected of them, and instead of reflecting on their own beliefs and behaviors, and developing their own values, they simply ‘parroted’ what they believed was expected of them. An earlier part of the interview, however, revealed largely what the school context, and especially the teacher, expected to hear - which correlates well to ideas already presented in the teacher interview. Frau Schneider revealed what the socially biased response was when she stated, Schüler sind ja Profis in dem Alter, das heißt die wissen ganz genau was wir von ihnen erwarten, und sie wissen natürlich auch dass es ein Suchtgefahr gibt, sie wissen auch, dass sie nicht so lange spielen sollen, sie wissen genau wie sie sich zu verhalten haben, und was dann eben passiert ist dass sie genau das Abrufen was wir hören wollen. According to this response, the school context desired a focus on mostly negative aspects of digital gaming, and especially a focus on player behavior. This high‐ lights the didactic pointer finger mentioned earlier by the teacher that was ‘im‐ possible’ to remove. Because learners knew what was expected of them, and because this expectation reflected values and behaviors that differ from those exhibited in their free time, the teacher concluded that students will not let teachers and school into this domain of their lives, “das ist ein Lebensbereich […], in dem sie uns auch nicht reinlassen wollen.” This led later to the conclusion, “ich glaube wir kommen da nicht dran.” The focus on game discourse and its integration into classroom discourse reveals, from the teacher’s perspective, a double-bind. On the one hand, the 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 246 <?page no="247"?> teacher felt it was difficult for teachers to remain updated on topics surrounding quickly changing media technology and, in the project, felt incapable of teaching the topic due to lacking content knowledge. On the other hand, the teacher felt it was impossible to handle the topic as if external to school context. This was in part due to the critical, evaluative framework of school education, as well as to the focus on difficult topics surrounding game behavior, which led to lack of student interest and institutionally biased responses throughout the project. Though not explicitly stated, these factors may have created the student con‐ ditions which the teacher deemed irresponsible. The teacher interview revealed the complex interplay of factors which can create problems bringing game discourse into classroom discourse. The teach‐ er’s interest was largely on game behavior and negative aspects like addiction. Although Frau Schneider saw potential in the complexity of games, at least in terms of reflecting on that complexity through summary writing, that com‐ plexity posed a problem for the teacher with little background experience with digital games. This complexity led to problems surrounding task development because the teacher underestimated that complexity. Some of the most crucial problems, however, emerged from bringing the discourse of games, as a medium popular in learners’ free time, into the classroom and school context. Here, the teacher focus on game behavior and criticism, combined with her lack of content knowledge on games, led to students’ unwillingness to contribute to the class with their game experiences and reflections, responding instead with institu‐ tionally expected answers. 6.7 Summary This summary picks up on three major questions that arose from the critical situations of the project (cf. 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5). The following does not summarize all of the aspects and factors that came from the analyses of the different sets of data (i.e. data collected from the classroom as well as from the interviews), but rather picks up on the aspects that provide the most salient points of intersec‐ tion. The first question is: Are students interested in the topic of games in the EFL classroom? While the critical event (cf. 6.3) might suggest at a superficial level that students are not interested in the topic, a closer analysis raised the question whether students were simply not interested in discussing aspects of their behavior and related issues like violence and addiction. An analysis of the student interview revealed that all respondents expressed interest in the topic in general, but disliked discussing topics like violence and addiction. In student 6.7 Summary 247 <?page no="248"?> opinion, these topics are thoroughly discussed in other classes as well as in mass media like the news and, according to the students, focusing on them falsely generalizes problems which do not affect them to a serious degree. This per‐ spective was largely supported by the teacher interview, in which questions surrounding the teacher interest in games (as well as surrounding the teacher’s pedagogical/ didactic responsibilities) revealed a focus on game behavior, cou‐ pled with strong views on negative aspects like addiction and time-management. These views, according to the teacher, are shared views common within the school context. Drawing from these conclusions, it may be the case that the focus educators and institutions have on game behavior stems at least in part from the com‐ plexity of games, and the problem that many educators have little content and structural knowledge about the media of games (specifically the first dimension of games). This leads to the second question addressed by this summary: How does the complexity of games affect classroom discourse and tasks on the topic? The analysis of the critical situation revealed that game tasks need explicit and differentiated instructions so that learners understand which dimension of game discourse is being targeted. The analysis also revealed that complex games are difficult to put into some traditional tasks, like summaries, especially when they consist of complex rule-systems and expansive narrative worlds and stories. Finally, the analysis showed that games are more than their programs, meaning that player experience largely influences how games are understood, reflected and communicated by learners. The student interview largely supported these findings, stressing the difficulties summarizing games in short form, putting them into language, addressing an inexperienced audience, and capturing the experience of the game in addition to a description of the game program itself. The teacher admitted underestimating the game and thus not preparing the summary task instructions as well as she could have, but saw nonetheless a potential in game summary writing to make students aware of the complexity of games. The first two problem areas feed into the third issue, namely that gamer dis‐ course can cause conflicts when brought into a classroom setting. This leads to the third question: How does gamer discourse conflict with classroom discourse on games? The analysis of the critical incident highlighted two specific problems -first the narrowcast characteristic of gamer discourse and second the irony of gamer criticism. Both the student and the teacher interviews picked up on these issues and presented various perspectives on them. In the student interviews, several students praised gamer media (like certain channels on YouTube and Game One on MTV) as addressing positive aspects of games, and highlighted the 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 248 <?page no="249"?> relatability specifically of the fan-comics they analyzed in class. As game players, students felt as if these types of media outlets were addressing them. However, several students also complained that the comics were quite specific and too complex to explain to an audience lacking experience with and knowl‐ edge on games. The teacher also complained of the complexity and narrow au‐ dience of especially the fan-comics, and that she lacked the background knowl‐ edge to structure student critical reflection. As a response to these complexities, she claimed that students resorted to institutionally acceptable responses with little substantial reflection. Although the irony of gamer criticism was not ad‐ dressed explicitly in the interviews, it appears that gamers form a close-knit community that has developed ways of excluding non-gamers, possibly as a way of avoiding criticism of outsiders. The irony is that gamers are often critical of the exact same issues concerning behavior that non-gamers are critical of, but the difference is that gamers do not criticize games in order to stigmatize and control players and games. This fine line of criticism is difficult to maintain in the classroom, especially in settings in which the dominant discourse is con‐ trolled and informed by those who do not play games. In conclusion to this case study it can be stated that, while educators certainly have a responsibility to enable critical reflection on game behavior, this could be complimented with an awareness and critical discussion of the positive roles and potentials games have as well as of the (apparent) fact that games will re‐ main a large part of young people’s lives for some time to come. Furthermore, critical reflection on game behavior could be combined with informed and sys‐ tematic instruction and critical reflection on other dimensions of game dis‐ course, like on games as systems of rules and fictional worlds (the 1 st dimension) as well as on games and their relation to and meaning for the rest of the world (3 rd dimension). These suggested solutions most likely take both time and edu‐ cation. Game literacy cannot be developed in the course of one short project, and an open prolonged dialogue between students and educators through tasks that are centered on curiosity and exploration may be a better approach than tasks that attempt to place games within a simple binary of good or bad. Fur‐ thermore, teachers cannot rely on learners to provide all the knowledge of game content and structure that is required for reflective development in class. It ap‐ pears that learners may be not only incapable of taking on this responsibility for themselves, but they may also be at times unwilling. Teachers may require at least some structural background knowledge in order to address games as a specific media form. This can be achieved through teacher education that presents game analysis as well as methods for teaching game literacy (like in 6.7 Summary 249 <?page no="250"?> university courses and in workshops), as well as through informational docu‐ ments and materials that address teachers already working in the field. 6 Case Study 1: Student (Dis)Interest, Game Complexity and Gamer Discourse 250 <?page no="251"?> 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification The second case study is different from the first for several reasons. First of all, it followed a different structure as the teacher desired more freedom to design the teaching unit and determine suitable tasks for his students. Second, and partly due to the first reason, the second case study revealed different problem‐ atic issues that arose in the course of the teaching unit, which in turn led to a different analysis and to different conclusions. Thus, the second case study fo‐ cuses on different aspects than the first. The second case study revealed largely two different important features of game discourse in the EFL classroom. The first feature is that video games con‐ stitute a part of the students’ lives, their biographies and their social and familial relationships. On the one hand, this intimacy of games provides a large source of relevance, motivation and background knowledge for the classroom to con‐ nect to. On the other hand, it makes video games a sensitive topic for many students who view generalized, negative responses to the value of games in the classroom as threatening to their identities. The second feature that appeared as a challenge is that gamifying the classroom can lead to the surfacing of certain problems. In this case study, the class decided to gamify a specific aspect of in-class verbal interaction. The analysis of this task revealed that learners focus largely on reward structures and exhibit either difficulty in or unwillingness to focus on intrinsic motivating factors for games as well as for learning scenarios. The analysis also revealed what is labelled here as the paradox of game rewards - that the ‘extrinsic’ rewards of games (even often learning games) have no relevance or use for real life. While the class found an interesting way of dealing with this paradox, it missed the opportunity of reflecting on the role of extrinsic roles for motivation and learning. The following case study addresses these is‐ sues to highlight ways that such conflicts and themes can become opportunities for reflection on both games and on structures and institutions in real life, even on schools and the EFL classroom. <?page no="252"?> 7.1 Institution, Students and Teacher The second case study was carried out with a 10 th grade class in a comprehensive school in a two-week period in February 2016. The school is in a mid-size city in central Hesse and has a little over 700 students. The class was an advanced level class with twenty-two students in total. Eleven of the students were male and eleven were female. The teacher (male) had approximately five years’ ex‐ perience as a school teacher and holds a PhD in teaching English as a foreign language. The teacher, Dr. Müller, not only had excellent command over the students, but also ensured a caring and positive learning atmosphere for the students. From the observer’s perspective, most if not all of the students liked the teacher. As was the situation for the first case study, this teacher was also interested in the study and topic because he believed it would be motivating for the students. Dr. Müller also was aware of students learning English through games and was committed to the development of media competence. 7.2 Reconstructed Lesson Plans The overall course of the teaching unit was centered on students presenting in groups on a game of their choice. The students were encouraged to perform Internet research for their presentations and use game fan-comics, YouTube videos or other online material in their presentation. Presentations were sup‐ posed to be approximately 10-15 minutes in length. The first lesson was designed to introduce the topic of games to the classroom. In this lesson, the teacher transferred from the previous teaching unit in which students read and discussed the graphic novel, American Born Chinese. In this unit, there was a focus on the formation of identity and the effects of individual and personal experiences on identity. The teacher transitioned to the new topic on video games using a fan-comic he found online which thematized games and their role on the perception of reality. After a discussion of the comic’s meaning, students performed a ‘cocktail party’ activity in which they interviewed a number of their classmates on their gaming experiences and preferences. After a short discussion phase in which students discussed their findings, the students watched and discussed a short online video clip of a popular TV star on her experiences with games growing up and their meaning for her life. Following this, students received the task instructions for their presentation assignment, formed groups and began their work. This concluded the first lesson of the 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 252 <?page no="253"?> teaching unit. In the second lesson, students continued to work on their pre‐ sentations in their groups with little guidance from the teacher (cf. table 20). Lesson 1 (8: 00-9: 35) 1 Teacher transitions from graphic novel (previous teaching unit) to game topic with a game fan-comic. 2 Students perform a ‘cocktail party’ to gather information about gaming expe‐ riences. 3 Students watch video clip on game experiences of TV star, then answer com‐ prehension questions and engage in discussion. 4 Teacher gives presentation instructions, students form groups. Lesson 2 (11: 35-12: 55) 1 Students engage in self-directed project work. Table 20: Case Study 2, Lesson 1 & 2 Overview The third lesson was dedicated solely to group presentations. Each presentation lasted between 10-20 minutes and was followed by a short discussion led by questions from the teacher. Because not all groups could present in the third lesson, the remaining groups were given time at the beginning of the fourth lesson. However, a majority of the fourth lesson was dedicated to students working with the concept of gamification. Students watched a short video and received a short text on gamification, then worked in groups on an idea how to gamify either the school or their EFL classroom. The groups then presented their ideas and engaged in a discussion (cf. table 21). Lesson 3 (8: 00-9: 35) 1 Student presentations plus mini-discussions Lesson 4 (11: 35-12: 55) 1 Student presentations continued, plus mini-discussions 2 Class performs conceptual work on gamification. 3 Students watch video on gamification, followed by discussion. 7.2 Reconstructed Lesson Plans 253 <?page no="254"?> 4 Students receive text with tips for gamification, receive task to develop idea to gamify class or school. This is followed by a presentation of ideas and discus‐ sion. Table 21: Case Study 2, Lesson 3 & 4 Overview The following subsections deal with two salient themes that arose from the teaching unit. These themes are presented as challenges which could become problems if left ignored, but could also become potential learning opportunities if handled thoughtfully. The first challenge deals with the intimacy of games and the role games play for student identity and social structure. The second challenge deals with the topic of gamification and the focus students have on explicit reward structures. 7.3 Challenge 1: The Intimacy of Games Digital games are a part of many learners’ identity, not only because many young people today play digital games but also because digital games are a substantial part of current popular culture. Games are thematized directly and indirectly in popular music, film, television, online videos (like on YouTube) and merchandise. On the first day of the project, the teacher introduced a short video called “My Life in Video Games” and told students that the person being interviewed, Alison Haislip, is a celebrity from the American casting show, The Voice. The video clip (approximately 3 minutes long) is hosted by the video sharing website, Daily Motion, and produced by the entertainment company, Complex Media, Inc. Be‐ sides being a correspondent on The Voice, Haislip is also active in many popular media channels that target gamer communities, like television shows, movies and even YouTube channels. The video clip shown in class is an interview which, as the title of the video suggests, focuses on aspects of video games which have played an important role in the actress’ life. The interview questions range from general early game console and game memories to more specific questions, like “Who is your biggest game crush? ” and “In what video game universe would you live? ” The information provided by Haislip includes not just facts about the role of games in her life, as well as specific memories of game experiences, but also the value and meaning of those games and experiences for her life. This video is important for the case study because it initiated student reflec‐ tion on the role of digital games for their identity. On the one hand, this reflection was personal since students related their own experiences with and values on digital games for their own lives and to each other. On the other hand, the re‐ 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 254 <?page no="255"?> flection was general since it led to students reflecting on stereotypes of both those who play games, as well as characters represented within games. These two identity-related student reflections are presented in the following passages. Following the video was a class discussion of, according to the teacher’s task, “interesting” aspects of the interview (cf. appendix B for an example transcript excerpt from this discussion). Before presenting the salient results and analysis of the discussion in terms of games and identity, it is important to point out that students were likely reacting to explicit as well as implicit information presented in the video. On the one hand, the video presents explicit information both graphically as well as verbally about Alison Haislip and her game experiences. On the other hand, it also presents implicit information that may be less obvious than the topic being presented - like that Haislip is a relatively young, attractive, professionally successful and popular woman on a professionally-designed media channel, and she is speaking positively about the role of games in her life. The video thus intervenes in a network of discourses on games, largely from a perspective supportive of the medium, and it is re-contextualized within a school context with a different network of discourses and perspectives on games. The following analysis thus takes into consideration not only the ways that students identify with games through people, but also how the classroom discourse in‐ fluences the discourse presented by the video. Based on the analysis, there are two fundamental ways students related to the video and the topic. The first was through personal experience and shared values. Alfred, who replied to what he thought was interesting, stated, “I thought it was interesting that she played a lot of games, like, Left for Dead, GTA, and Mario, but that's ähm, games I, I personally, I really like. I really like them. Yeah. For example, she also mentions The Legend of Zelda, Link.” Here, Alfred relates to Haislip through the games that he likes (and likely also plays). It is not clear whether he was surprised because Haislip mentioned games he also happened to like (though these games are generally popular) or whether he was surprised by the fact that a woman plays all these games. Whatever the reason, Alfred was able to identify with the games he liked through Haislip, and was also able to identify with Haislip through the games that have been meaningful in her life. Two other students took part in this same identification process in ways which were surprising. Julia and Melanie replied to what was interesting by pointing out the statement Haislip made about wanting to live in the GTA (Grand Theft Auto) universe. Julia mentioned that she played the game, and Melanie explained that she played the game and would also like to live in the GTA world. When asked why, Melanie simply explained, “It is better. Yeah, so.” Unfortu‐ nately, no further detail was given and no further reflection was initiated by the 7.3 Challenge 1: The Intimacy of Games 255 <?page no="256"?> teacher. Possible reasons why will be given later. However, relevant here is that students also related to not just GTA, but also to the value Haislip applied to the game and the world it presents. This identification and valuation might seem a bit unusual since GTA is not a game which explicitly targets a female audience, as it allows players to commit violent illegal acts, and since it is a game often accused of propagating violence in general. Despite this incongruency, as well as the teacher’s reaction to Mel‐ anie wanting to also live in the gameworld (“Really! ? ”), the class discussion did not go into further detail on how and why Julia and Melanie identified with the game, its value, and why they would like to live in the GTA world. However, it likely influenced the thematization of games, players and stereotypes that will be addressed shortly. First, it is important to note that the teacher, Dr. Müller, also identified with the game through people, though differently than his students. When Julia mentioned that she liked GTA, Dr. Müller related to the game with a humorous anecdote of his fifth graders. He states, “Yeah, I know the little ones, when I took over the fifth grade, […] they used to tell their parents, oh it's just a car racing game. (Students laugh) But it's not. I know the game (laughs).” When Stefan replies that players can race in the game, the teacher states further, “Yeah you can but it's not a race car game […] I know what you do, I know what you do.” Here the teacher relates to the game, and information about its gameworld and the activities that players can simulate, through his fifth graders who were mis‐ leading their parents so they could play the game. GTA is not a racing simulation game, and not suitable for fifth graders. However, the relation here is not so much of identification with the game, but rather of disidentification as a teacher who is aware of the unsuitability and controversiality of the game for young students. Nonetheless, these examples show several ways in which classroom participants relate to digital games through people. This supports the claim that games (and the values assigned to them) are socially embedded in individuals’ lives. However, personal experience is not the only way through which classroom participants related to the game and other individuals. Some related through stereotypes of those who play games. At an implicit level, Alfred, Julia and Mel‐ anie may have reacted to the fact that the Haislip video presented a female and her game experiences and values. Alfred, on the one hand, expressed surprise at the similarity of games they both like, while Julia and Melanie admitted that they would live in the same “game universe” despite the game’s largely male-au‐ dience. Soon afterwards, Frieda admitted that she found an anecdote that Haislip explained about one particular game interesting because Haislip stated that she 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 256 <?page no="257"?> “doesn't go out with friends and just stayed at home. And, just played the game.” Frieda explained why she found this interesting, stating, “Because, I think, she don't look like ähm, (gestures with hands) a player girl.” In reaction, the teacher brings up the topic of stereotypes (which was discussed in a previous teaching unit on the graphic novel, American Born Chinese) and asked Frieda to explain. Frieda provided an answer, but appeared to become nervous about the difficulty of dealing with stereotypes and decided not to explain. She stated, “Yeah, she looks like so pretty (laughs) and (teacher laughs) ähm, I don't know. I don't think I should say anything. Yes.” Her neighbor, Daniela, then helped out, and ex‐ plained that a “player girl” looks “Kind of (.) tired (.) and lazy. You know, like ähm, when you are too lazy to search for, whatever (shaking head). Ähm, friends come and you are just wearing, ähm Jogginghosen? ” Frieda and Daniella thus identify with the character, Haislip, through a stereotype of what a gamer girl looks like. This stereotype reveals the negative values they have for games and those who play them. Especially for females, where there may be an expectation to be ‘pretty’ and well-dressed, Haislip looks neither “tired” nor “lazy.” Melanie, a student who identified with Haislip and her desire to live in the GTA world, provided a more differentiated view of female gamers with a per‐ sonal anecdote about her own sister. Once again, Melanie implemented personal experiences and her relationship with other individuals to identify with games. She stated, My sister plays, ähm, she's older than me, she plays ähm, a time, really really often Laura Croft, or some video games and she looks as so lazy when she plays video games, but when we go to the city or she, I don't know, maybe she was just getting ready for the video because (Teacher laughs) normally she looks ähm bad (laughs) or nerdy at home. Here Melanie differentiated between what a gamer may look like at home and what she looks like when she wishes to present herself in public through the example of her own sister. This anecdote may have even questioned the validity of the stereotype entirely, since many individuals do not have to be gamers to look “lazy,” “bad” or “nerdy” at home and present themselves differently in public. What becomes apparent through the analysis of this classroom sequence is the divergent values towards games and how that influences the relationships of students to other individuals. Several students identified with Haislip, pos‐ sibly as simply gamers who share the same tastes in games, and for at least two students ( Julia and Melanie), possibly also as females who like to play games typically played by males. Haislip may be seen as a role model who can play any 7.3 Challenge 1: The Intimacy of Games 257 <?page no="258"?> game and still maintain her femininity. The teacher also identified with the game through his younger students; though his identification appeared largely de‐ fined by his position as a teacher, and he did not appear to share the same values as his students. For these individuals, experience plays a substantial role for the type of identification and value. Other students appear to identify with Haislip as a female, but exhibit negative stereotypes towards people who play video games often. This suggests that they either do not value games and/ or they do not have much experience playing. Interesting is that these divergent values (and the stereotypes they lead to) have implications for student identity as well as the network of relationships students have through the games. Negative stereotypes of gamers as lazy and tired, and possibly even of “player girls” as non-feminine, which were brought into this classroom discourse from a general cultural discourse on games outside of school by the students, have implications not just for fellow students but also for their social and familial relationships. Discourse is, after all, not just a system of ideas and topics, but also of relation‐ ships and identities. For the female students, it may have been the identity as females, and for the teacher, that of an adult and of a teacher. And for some, the identification reasserted bonds and relationships, for others it created tension and divergence. The analysis of this classroom sequence reveals multiple potentials that emerged from bringing the gamer discourse of the video into the classroom. The relatively short (6 minute) discussion that emerged after watching the video, initiated by the question of what the students found interesting, revealed the complex network of experiences, identity, relationships, values and stereotypes. Brought into the classroom, this has the potential to both establish new rela‐ tionships amongst students and teachers and possibly create conflict amongst others. Besides this, there exists the potential for both students and teachers to critically reflect their own roles, identities, values and stereotypes and what these mean for their relationships both inside and outside the classroom. Un‐ fortunately, the teacher did not support these reflective processes. While this may have been due to external influences, like maybe a time limit set by the teacher, a desire to move on to other planned activities, or by the call-and-re‐ sponse interaction sequence established by the teacher, it may have also been due to the teacher’s lack of anticipating these potentials (and thus an inability to adapt cognitively and respond accordingly) or possibly to a lack of value towards games and their relation to cultural discourse, identities and social re‐ lations. 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 258 <?page no="259"?> 7.4 Challenge 2: Gamifying the Classroom Games can operationalize multiple types of motivation to engage players. At a macro level, it can be claimed that some players are motivated by the gameworld, while others are motivated by the challenges set forth by the system of rules (cf. 2.3.1). But while digital games have consequences which are largely contained within the fictional gameworld, gamification attempts to create real-world, meaningful consequences by overlaying so-called game mechanics onto extra-game activities (cf. 2.3.3). That is, gamification puts game rules into the real world. This shift of consequences influences the dynamic interaction be‐ tween players and the game. While the following neither tries to defend nor refute the role of gamification for educational and classroom purposes, it does reveal some of the problems that can arise when students and teachers attempt to gamify their learning processes. As is the case with the other problems pre‐ sented in this and the other case studies, these problems can easily be turned into potential learning opportunities. On the one hand, gamification offers potentials for increasing student moti‐ vation and engagement. It can be implemented to aid the practice of tedious topics (like grammar and vocabulary) as well as to establish communicative settings for meaningful student interaction. However, on the other hand, gami‐ fication can be implemented as a superficial ‘gimmick’ to distract learners from the labor of learning (cf. Schmidt 2016). In the classroom sequence analyzed in this section, the teacher showed a video on YouTube titled, “Gamification - The Future is Fun - Your whole life can be a game! ” This short clip (approx. 2.5 minutes) shows an individual from the moment of waking up in the morning until he reaches work. What makes the typically mundane routine of the char‐ acter unique is the game ‘overlay’ the viewer sees on the screen of the video - everything the individual does is transformed into a game in which the indi‐ vidual is given small challenges and rewarded with points for every action which brings him closer to completing his morning routine and getting to work. This video highlights two important aspects which are relevant for the anal‐ ysis of the classroom sequences. First, the lives of many people are already ga‐ mified, since many integrate small challenges and rewards into their everyday routines in order to motivate, among other reasons. Second, this gamification can be built upon by pretending that life is a digital game in which all desirable actions are structured and rewarded. While motivation and engagement, how‐ ever, may be desirable outcomes, there are the risks of focusing on the rewards (in the behavioralist sense) as well as of not reflecting on the objectives and desired outcomes of engagement. For the gamification of classroom learning, 7.4 Challenge 2: Gamifying the Classroom 259 <?page no="260"?> this can mean that learners focus on extrinsic rewards rather than on the joy or challenge of learning, and that they also may lose sight of higher-order reasons (either selfor socially imposed) for learning. The learner question, ‘Why should I learn this? ’ should not be answered with the reason ‘Because I get points! ’ Thus it can be claimed that effective gamification should balance motivation and re‐ ward with learner reflection and co-creation. Of course any consideration of institutional learning and gamification must recognize the similarities between games and schools (cf. 2.3.3). Both have chal‐ lenges, levels, points, etc. Both implement punishment and reward systems to influence behavior and promote engagement. However, one major (possibly in‐ surmountable) difference is the fact that the rewards and punishments of schools are real while those of games are not. Even if games rely mostly on extrinsic rewards like points and levels, those rewards have little to no significance for real life. This means that game rewards are extrinsic in a fictional sense, while school rewards are not. After watching the gamification video, students were asked if they under‐ stood the term gamification. After a short discussion, the students were given a handout which offered six game mechanics and a short task. The six game mechanics covered the objective of the gamified system, the value individuals obtain through interaction, the context in which it is integrated, the simplicity of the system, the social nature of the system, and the speed at which feedback and rewards are delivered. The concluding task was then to “Come up with a plan to use gamification in school! Could we make use of it in the English class? Talk about positive and negative aspects.” The students were then provided eleven minutes to complete the task in small groups. The following analysis looks closer at the approximately ten minute discus‐ sions in which the students present their gamification ideas. Section 7.4.1 ad‐ dresses specifically the conflict between superficial game mechanics and deeper-level learning objectives. Here, students expressed interest in integrating points, levels and rewards into their gamification ideas while the teacher ques‐ tioned the underlying objectives and reasons of their ideas for learning. Section 7.4.2 addresses the realization by the teacher and students that they had already gamified one aspect of classroom interaction. This gamification involved an ex‐ isting rule which dictated that any student caught speaking German three times in English class must bring a cake for the entire class as a punishment. In the discussion, class participants discussed not only how to adapt the rule, but also whether the changes to the rule were desirable for the class and learning. In both subsections, the conflict between basic game mechanics, reward and learning becomes salient. This conflict offers further potential for not only un‐ 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 260 <?page no="261"?> derstanding games as a metaphor for real life (and real-life institutions), but also for reflecting on their fundamental differences. 7.4.1 The Focus on Reward Structures. In an approximately five-minute classroom sequence, students presented three gamification ideas. Dr. Müller responded to each idea with further clarification questions, and occasionally other students responded as well with additional ideas. It is difficult if not impossible to determine whether the second and third ideas were developed as a result of the initial group work or whether (or to what extent) they were responses to the previous idea, since the following analysis relies only on the transcription of the classroom video. All ideas presented share similar aspects, as well as do the types of questions the teacher posed in response. On the one hand, the students repeatedly con‐ nected basic and typical classroom actions to basic and typical game rewards. On the other hand, Dr. Müller repeatedly posed questions concerning the meaning of the students’ ideas and the learning goals of the class. For instance, the first idea (from Alfred) connected the typical game reward of getting “ex‐ perience” to the classroom action of “doing homework” and “say[ing] something good.” Alfred then suggested making the game reward of “experience” into a reward with real consequences for the classroom by suggesting two further ideas. Alfred stated, “And after the day, you can ähm, there's a ranking. Who is the best of the school, maybe, or the class? And, ähm, maybe if you get ähm the best five times in a row, you can ähm get a reward or something.” Thus, typical classroom practices like completing homework and quality oral classroom par‐ ticipation, according to this gamification idea, translated into “experience” points which could be ordered into what is called in gamification terms a ‘lead‐ erboard.’ Repeatedly being at the top of the leaderboard could then result in some kind of reward, presumably something tangible or with school meaning, like an improved grade. An implicit reward could also be seen in the leaderboard, as individual students would be able to compare themselves to their classand schoolmates, creating a competitive structure amongst students for social status. The teacher, however, questioned the learning goal of this idea by asking, “What's the objective? Why should we do that? ” This question suggests either that the teacher felt that experience points, status and a reward are insufficient reasons for implementing a new classroom policy, or that the teacher was in‐ terested in evoking further reflection from the students on the meaning of such obviously behavioristic motivational structures. In reply, Alfred repeated the reasons of social status and reward, and the teacher asked again for further 7.4 Challenge 2: Gamifying the Classroom 261 <?page no="262"?> clarification that goes beyond the basic reward structure, “Yeah, yeah, that's why people do it. But why should we (.) thinking about applying gamification in school. Why should we, what do we want to achieve with that? ” This question from the teacher shifted the focus from the perspective of the learner who was also a ‘player’ of this game to a ‘designer’ responsible for creating meaningful learning scenarios, interactions and rules. This question shifted the perspective from a participant who was focused on reward structures to a designer who was responsible for creating meaningful experiences in the classroom. Alfred replied that the goal is to be “better students,” which the teacher again questioned, Ah! That might be true. But what is the best school then? (.) What would be the objective? What makes the school the best school? The scoring grades on the Ab‐ schlußprüfung? Ähm, how often people smile in the school (laughs). Ähm, how good their English is, maybe? Here we see the teacher attempting to engage the students in further reflection on the purpose of their gamification ideas. The teacher offered different possible objectives, though it is unclear whether all are meant to be taken seriously or whether they are simply suggested to offer diversity and engage thought. This focus on the objectives, however, suggests that the teacher wanted students to move beyond basic game reward structures to think in terms of the overall goals their gamified systems strive for. This type of thought may exist at a higher level of abstraction since it encourages students to think not as players but rather as designers, and reflect on the social and educational values of the goals they set within their ideas. The next idea (from Laura), which was presented right after the previous teacher’s series of questions and may in part be a response to them, share similar ideas with Alfred’s idea and specifies a little more clearly what an objective of such a gamified idea might be. However, even this new idea appears to remain trapped in the perspective of the player focused on the system of rewards. Laura stated, Ähm, maybe for every time you put your hand up and say you gave a good answer you can get a level-up. And if you get six levels-up you get a one. So for every level you get a better mark, you know what I mean? So from six to, if you put your hand up six times, you get a one, if the answers are correct. Here Laura expanded on the previous idea by introducing levels instead of points. She clarified the objective in terms of the reward by connecting the levels to the grade structure of the class - each ‘good’ answer equals a level, and each level equals a point on the grade scale. Thus, this system places a value on oral 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 262 <?page no="263"?> participation and correct answer with measurable meaning for student grades. Yet, the question of what makes a better student, or of what a valuable objective for a gamified idea might be is left largely unanswered. According to this idea, a better student is a student who participates more, has a “good” answer and gets better grades. When the teacher asks for more clarification on what makes a good answer, Laura replied, “No no no, we get just a level up, if the answer is good. And maybe if it's very good we get two levels up, or so. And we should do it because it's like a motivation for every of us to (.) say something.” Again, the student did not substantially specify what makes an answer “good,” but in‐ stead specified what the reward for such good answers could be, differentiating the reward structure further by stating that particularly good answers could receive more points than just good ones. Stefan, however, brought up an issue surrounding the basic game and reward structure discussed so far which questioned the suitability of points and espe‐ cially the creation of a leaderboard for status. The teacher posed the question on how the class can keep track of the number of points or levels each student has - a practical question with serious implications since a computer system can track, process and present such information much more quickly and easily than a person or teacher can. Stefan replied that he did not feel that the class would have to record such ‘progress,’ and implied that points and an increase in student grade was not even necessary. He believed that status would be a sufficient motivator and reward in itself, Ähm, you don't have to write it down, I think, because the, this, most of the students will ähm, will like improve their, their ego and their pride, just like, I'm the best, I have the most points of all of them (several students laugh) all of the (.) the participants. For Stefan, increases in “ego” and “pride” are sufficient rewards that do not require any tracking or further connection to classroom rewards. However, Stefan also points out negative effects of such social comparison, “Yeah, they, they, the student will become a bit cocky, I think, but he just wants to know, to know everybody that he's the best.” Individual reward of status may be a moti‐ vation, but Stefan realized it might lead to dominant students acting ‘arrogant’ towards fellow students. Even the teacher addressed this negative aspect of such social comparison, stating, “Never underestimate ähm […] the urge to compare to one another.” Here the teacher implicitly admitted that even if status and social comparison was not the central goal of the gamified system, students would have the urge to compare themselves and their achievements with one another and that this comparison could have negative effects on motivation. 7.4 Challenge 2: Gamifying the Classroom 263 <?page no="264"?> The transcript analysis of the student ideas presented thus far indicate that learners focused predominantly on reward structures when developing ideas for gamifying school and classroom learning. They appear to take basic game structures of reward and punishment, like points, levels, and leaderboards and connect them to similar classroom structures of reward and punishment, like grades. They appear to either have difficulty with, or be unwilling to address larger issues of motivation and the learning goals it can support. Attempts made by the teacher to initiate reflection on valuable learning goals beyond grades and rewards were largely ignored. The only critical reflection came from Stefan who suggested that the ranking that would result from tracking points and levels could lead to demotivational comparison amongst students. One conclusion that can be made from this analysis is that students have difficulty thinking as ‘de‐ signers’ of games and gamified systems and are more adept at thinking as ‘players.’ This could explain their focus on rewards and their lack of reflection on the affordances to connect game mechanics to higher-level learning goals. As players of games, they are often motivated by points, levels, and leaderboards and see this as an acceptable method for increasing motivation in school for greater oral participation and increased correct responses. This student focus on reward structures and lack of reflection on the meaning and value of behavioristic methods of motivation and (learning) goal setting becomes more apparent in the second half of the class discussion on gamifica‐ tion, in which the classroom discourse shifted from a hypothetical discussion of gamified learning to a discussion on current rules of the classroom and how to change them. The transcript analysis of this discussion, as well as it implications for classroom learning and gamification, are presented in the following pas‐ sages. 7.4.2 The Reward Paradox of Learning Games. The following analysis reveals how the discussion of gamification in the class‐ room influenced the classroom beyond the confines of the teaching unit and led to reflection on previously established classroom practices. Student response to these changes was mixed, revealing a critical engagement with concepts of re‐ ward, motivation, and the social structure of the classroom. Student realization that the classroom discussion of gamification ideas (pre‐ sented in previous passages) shared similarity with a classroom practice already in place came directly after the third student idea was presented. The third stu‐ dent idea focused not on positive but rather negative rewards minus points for speaking German instead of English. Frieda stated, “Ähm, one other idea is that 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 264 <?page no="265"?> ähm everybody who talks German gets a minus point.” The teacher builds on this idea, connecting it to the previous discussion of levels as a form of game mechanic to motivate students to contribute to classroom discussions. He states, “Or gets one level down? ” This student idea is based on the same gamification principles of the other ideas, but uses punishment rather than reward to moti‐ vate students. Instead of being rewarded for speaking in English and providing quality answers, students are punished for speaking German in English class. While this negative reward system hardly sounds appealing to students, there are ways of using negative reward systems to motivate. If rewarding students for positive behavior results in improved grades, then punishing them for neg‐ ative behavior could result in reduced grades. Instead of motivating students to speak English, this negative reward structure could discourage students from speaking at all. However, as the teacher suddenly realized, the class had already found a mo‐ tivating solution to this negative reward system. In response to the student’s idea, the teacher stated, “Then, then we have some sort of gamification here already, if you collect three minus points, you have to bring a cake, right? ” This statement referred to the existing classroom practice, a type of gamification in which the students were punished for speaking German. Each time a student is caught speaking German, (s)he received a minus point, and three minus points for an individual student meant that the student must bring a cake for the rest of the class. This gamification system mixed positive and negative reward in a novel way which both rewarded and punished concomitantly. It also involved a social component which could influence motivation. Students were punished for speaking German, but their punishment was not related to grades. Thus, the game existed external to the ‘reality’ of the classroom and the punishment had no real consequences for the students’ school life. However, the punishment of having to make and bring a cake was real, and probably large enough to dis‐ courage the behavior of speaking German in class. If the punishment was solely a punishment, then it would likely have the effect of discouraging (at least some students) from talking at all, thus reversing the intention of introducing the negative reward structure in the classroom. However, paradoxically, the punishment was also a reward for the rest of the class, and for the individual who shared in eating it. This aspect could be seen as introducing a level of fun to the ‘game.’ The punishment was real, but it at the same time could establish and strengthen social ties amongst the students since punished individuals ‘rewarded’ other students with cake. Thus, it is pos‐ sible that the negative reward structure did not discourage students from speaking in the classroom out of fear of accidentally speaking German. The 7.4 Challenge 2: Gamifying the Classroom 265 <?page no="266"?> negative punishment was within the structure of the game, paradoxically, also a positive reward. Though this existing classroom practice did not have unanimous support amongst students, it was still nonetheless quite popular. Thus the system was one that was largely supported by the students, meaning that it contained ele‐ ments of voluntarism (a crucial component of games, cf. 2.3.2). After noting the connection between the student idea and the classroom practice of punishing students with cake, the teacher asked, “Is that motivating? ” Numerous calls of “yes” and “no” were heard from the class directly after in response. One student (Frieda) supported the cake game by complaining that there has been no cake this week. She stated, “But this week, we haven't got a cake.” When the teacher misinterpreted her comment by replying, “We have, we have cakes,” Frieda re‐ plied again, “This week? ” Frieda appreciated the cake game so much that she wanted there to be cake every week. The teacher reacted to this desire for more cake by suggesting a revision to the original cake game. He stated, “No, not this week. Oh, you want a cake every week? (Most students at once: Yes! ) Then we have to find a new objective.” Here it becomes apparent that the students were focused on the reward of cake, much like the gamification ideas presented in the previous subsection were focused on game rewards (like points and levels) as well as class rewards (like improved grades). And similar to the previous subsection, the teacher here focused on the objective of the changes to the game and its relation to learning goals. One student, Jürgen, suggested an objective revision by proposing changes to the rule system. He stated, “Maybe just two warnings, and then.” The teacher responded to this using games as a metaphor to explain the changes as progress. He stated, “Oh yeah. We can do that. We have reached a different level. (multiple students: Yeah) Alright. You're not beginners anymore, we are not silver. (Stu‐ dents laugh). We have reached gold already. That's a good idea.” Thus the teacher interpreted the changes within the progress system of a game. The cake game existed under a certain rule system for a fixed amount of time, but now as the students had improved, they moved to the next level where the rules are stricter. However, not all students were happy with this idea. Frieda asked, “Ähm, I've got a question. Do you really want to do this? With us? ” Interpreting an under‐ lying uncertainty in the student’s statement, Dr. Müller turned to the whole class, “Let's talk about positive and negative aspects. Would that be a good idea? ” The students who supported the idea provided reasons like the joy of cake and the positive motivation to participate. Frieda stated, “Ähm, I think some points are positive, maybe with plus or minus points, ähm. And because maybe we get a cake (laughs).” Karlheinz highlighted the motivation system, stating, “I think 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 266 <?page no="267"?> it's good when we do this, because ähm there are, ähm we will be motivated to ähm not break the rules.” Julia also appreciated the positive motivation, but also the ability to improve a current classroom practice, “Ähm, I find it ähm very cool, because it’s something we can add. I think that people would be more motivated for school.” Others feared, however, that the game and its structure might be demotivating. Daniela stated, “I guess it's kind of demotivating, ähm, to get a level down, ähm, or to see that everybody gets a level up, and you are just the only student to sit there and still, like, like three levels downer (teacher laughs). I guess it’s very demotivating. (.) But I like cake.” Of course it can be quite demotivating when, in a social setting, players of a game see that they are at the bottom of a ranking (or leaderboard). This is possibly a different situation in an online game setting, where players are anonymous and the game program does not mind ‘losing’ a few players when the overall system is motivating and constantly draws in new players. However, the classroom is a very different type of social setting, the school institution is not a game-business, and students are not customers. This is likely the reason that schools do not typically create leaderboards using students’ grades for the entire class or school to see. Stefan addressed the problems that can stem from the social aspect of such a leaderboard and social ranking. He stated, “I think one negative point is that it will, ähm, I think there will be a lot of bullying when the worst, ähm, the worst one will be bullied by the, by the best.” This comment pointed out that a social ranking can not only be demotivating as it may imply that students who are lower on the list are either weaker students or somehow ‘unlucky’ (cf. 2.3.1 on the meaning of failure in games), but also that stronger students may use the ranking to explicitly insult other students or bolster their own sense of superi‐ ority. Since bullying in (and out) of schools is often a serious problem, Stefan’s point about a student ranking leading to bullying seems justified. Despite these reservations, the class decided to make changes to their cake game as a result of their discussions on gamification. Alfred asked, “So do we have a new rule now? With the two minus and then we have to bring a cake? ” The teacher then asked the class, “Yeah did we establish that? (Multiple students: Yes) Yes, two German warnings equal one cake.” At this very point the class ends, and with it the final day of the teaching unit. Here it makes sense to return to what is being titled here as the paradox of game reward which becomes clear when gamification and games are integrated into classroom settings. Games (especially digital games) rely heavily on reward structures to motivate players and influence their behavior. These rewards are evident in game mechanics like points, levels, and in-game items and rewards (like trophies, etc.). However, these rewards (almost) never have any real-life 7.4 Challenge 2: Gamifying the Classroom 267 <?page no="268"?> consequences. Thus it is difficult to claim that players are motivated to play through a simple, behavioralist approach to rewards. Players like interacting within gamified reward systems, but mostly if the rewards are fictional. The classroom cake-game discussed in this subsection is based on somewhat similar principles. On the one hand, it was embedded into a classroom to influ‐ ence student behavior. Its objective was to increase learner speech in English and decrease (or eliminate) speech in German, and it targeted this with a neg‐ ative rewards system. On the other hand, the cake game had a punishment with no real consequences for student performance (in terms of grades). The pun‐ ishment was arbitrary to the school structure, yet it had meaning for the class (since all students, even the one being punished, liked cake). Thus, a loss in the game was also a win of sorts for everyone. However, some students were skeptical of the game and its motivational structure. Some believed it would not be motivational for those who lose, espe‐ cially if this was exhibited on a leaderboard, while others feared that the social ranking could lead to bullying. Nonetheless, there are two aspects of this sub‐ section (or rather, the classroom sequence it analyzes) worth noting. The first point is that the discussion on gamification as a classroom task turned into a classroom reality. It led to changes in the rules of the classroom that all students abided by. Therefore, the discussion of gamification had real, lasting conse‐ quences for the EFL classroom, its rules and its social interactions. The second point is that the class did not realize immediately (neither the students nor the teacher) that their classroom was already gamified by the cake game. Thus, it took not only various texts on gamification (a video plus a handout on game mechanics) but also nearly five minutes of discussion on how to gamify the classroom before the teacher noticed the similarity. While this is in no way a criticism of the class, it does emphasize that games can be a valid metaphor for understanding other aspects of real life (and especially interaction with(in) in‐ stitutions like schools) and that the similarities between game structures and life are not always apparent. This only becomes clear after considerable research and discussion on the topic. Such reflection on the intersection of games and life can lead to reflection on, for instance, the reward and punishment structures of schools and classrooms, as well as the effects on motivation and social inter‐ action. Considering the objectives of such structures can, furthermore, lead to considerations of how such structures can be modified and improved. Section 7.4 started out with the question whether the EFL classroom can be gamified. The purpose of the section, however, was not to answer definitively whether or not the classroom can be gamified, but rather to look at issues that arise when the topic of gamification is addressed and when students are given 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 268 <?page no="269"?> the task of gamifying the classroom. What has become apparent from the anal‐ ysis of classroom events is that students mostly focus on reward structures. When developing their own ideas, they focus on points, levels, and on how these might relate to grades. And when specifically addressing the pre-existing cake game, students focused largely on the joy of getting and eating cake in the classroom. This is, however, not to say that there were not moments of more critical reflection. These moments did occur, but they did not seem to move towards any creative solutions and they did not address the underlying meaning of focusing on rewards for learning. The teacher attempted to draw student attention closer to more meaningful learning goals than extrinsic rewards, but these attempts remained mostly ignored. A possible conclusion to this overt focus on reward could be that students still think as ‘players,’ and that tasks would require further work and instructions to encourage and enable students to think as game ‘designers.’ Thinking like a game designer, or like a designer of any system of interaction, requires thinking beyond the reward structures that motivate engagement to larger, more impor‐ tant questions concerning the reason for motivating behavior, or more impor‐ tantly, concerning the types of behaviors that are desirable, and what those behaviors mean for society and for the future. Or in other words, thinking like a designer requires students to think about the types of realities they would like to create, even if at the microcosmic level, and the implications those realities would have for learning and for the social fabric of participants. 7.5 Retrospective Interviews Semi-structured interviews were performed with both the students and the teacher within a week after the teaching unit was concluded. Similar to the previous case study, the student interview was a group interview while the teacher interview was performed one-on-one. The interview questions covered a range of general and specific topics, but the focus for analysis here is on aspects relevant to the topics of game identity and gamification of the classroom. These topics are related to the challenges that emerged from this case study and pre‐ sented in this chapter. Additionally, both the student and teacher interview also addressed the teaching unit at a retrospective meta-level, posing questions re‐ lated to the role of game discourse in the EFL classroom. The following subsec‐ tions first address the student interview before progressing on to the teacher interview. All names used are pseudonyms. 7.5 Retrospective Interviews 269 <?page no="270"?> 7.5.1 Student Interview Are games too personal? The analysis of the classroom events revealed that digital games play a sub‐ stantial role in the lives of many students. On the one hand, it can be claimed that games are a part of the identity of many students since they are a part of students’ past, as evident in their self-narratives. On the other hand, and related to the first issue, digital games are also a part of students’ social networks, as they are connected to memories of playing and interacting with friends and family members. This can influence the introduction and course of game dis‐ course in the EFL classroom. It offers potentials to critically reflect on the role of games for students’ lives, their personal identities and their relationships, yet it also offers pitfalls when discussing negative aspects of games, since negative aspects can be seen as a possible threat to those same personal identities and social relationships. The personal role that games play for students was supported by the interview responses. When asked about the role games played in students’ lives, responses included both autobiographical accounts of gameplay experiences as well as the social connection to both friends and relatives through games. For example, Dieter explained, I know as a child I always played Pokémon. Very first, ähm, äh, editions of Pokémon. I played them with my friends and I liked to, äh, trade them with them. And, and I play them, äh, today as well. So we, ähm we still are friends and we do the same things we did, ähm, when we were, when we was, ääähm, child. So the, ähm, friendship, ähm, is still there. Not only was Dieter’s childhood characterized by playing the game, Pokémon, but so was his network of friends. Furthermore, both the game and its influence on his social network extend into his current life, as he admitted that he still played the game with his friends. In Dieter’s explanation, the relationship be‐ tween the game and his social network was intertwined to the extent that it became unclear whether the friendships existed due to the game or whether the group of friends plays because they are still friends. Melanie told a similar story of how a digital game not only defined her own personal identity, but was also inextricably involved in childhood family mem‐ ories. Discussing the game, Tomb Raider, she stated, When I was a child I played Tomb Raider. Because of my sister, ääähm. She was like my hero when I was a child because she´s a woman and she shows that women. (Interviewer: Tomb Raider or your sister? ) No, not my sister (laughs). Tomb Raider was 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 270 <?page no="271"?> my hero and, ähm, because she shows that women also can play a big role in, äh, video games. Here, Melanie’s autobiographical depiction challenges stereotypes of both dig‐ ital games and gamers. She presents herself as a gamer who played with other female gamers (her sister) and who identified with a strong and dominant female game character, Laura Croft. Furthermore, the game served as proof to Melanie that games could also present positive role models for female gamers, and that games are not exclusively a domain for males. Five out of six students who were interviewed gave similar stories, connecting their childhood to the games they played growing up, as well as to the friends and family members involved. The one student who did not relate games to her childhood was Daniela. Interestingly, she presented the reason for this absence as stemming also from a familial relationship, but does mention her experience playing learning games in school, Well, I grew up, ähm, without any computer games and stuff like that, äh, at home, because my mother doesn´t like that and yeah. So, ähm, I, ähm, played no computer games or something like that. Well, I played computer games but it was like a learning game when I was in grade one, two, three, like primary school or stuff like that, but it was like nothing, äähm, how to say it, like Tomb Raider or stuff like that. Daniela’s experience, while not shared by the group per se, share relatable char‐ acteristics with young people her age. For Daniela’s experiences, games are re‐ lated to parental control as her mother forbade her to play games. The games she does have experience with, on the other hand, were introduced in a school setting. Therefore, her relationship to games is presented as largely embedded within a social context and defined by relations to certain individuals or insti‐ tutions. This interview section shows that games are indeed personal. They are on the one hand a part of students’ identity, as revealed in the autobiographical stories they tell concerning games in their childhood. On the other hand, games are also embedded in their social networks (also historically), as students tell stories of interacting with family members and friends through and around games. While none of this information would support a claim that games are too personal for the EFL classroom, it does point out that the topic of games should be handled in a sensitive manner, since for instance only focusing on negative aspects of games may be perceived as a direct attack on students’ iden‐ tity, past, and familial and social networks. Instead, the meanings of games for students could be used as a springboard for more critical discussions on how games have influenced students’ lives and the social fabric of society and culture. 7.5 Retrospective Interviews 271 <?page no="272"?> Can the class be gamified? During the teaching unit, the students discussed the concept of gamification, completed several related tasks, and even gamified their own classroom. During the interview, the participants were asked to reflect on the concept and discuss its meaning. This was the question they were posed, “Can you tell me what gamification is or what you remember it to be or what you think it is and explain why you think it might be important to understand? ” Their answers questioned the function of gamification and further investigated the role of reward. At the center of the discussion was the question whether gamification made life (or whatever aspect of life being gamified) easier or more interesting. Daniela stated that gamification makes life easier, “Gamification is when they take, äh, something what could happen in a game like, ähm, getting points or stuff like that and, ähm, you choose to use it in your normal way of life to make your life easier.” However, Stefan disagreed, stating that it does not make anything easier but rather increases the enjoyment, I wouldn´t say to make easier, I would say to make it more interesting, it´s just, it´s because youyou don´t do something, äh, it´s not easier because you, you get points for it you do it because you, äh, you just do it because you get points of it but it does not make it easier, that´s the difference I think. Of course this disagreement could just be a matter of semantics. One could argue that a task that is more enjoyable may lend the impression of being easier. However, this comment raises the point that gamification can turn activities that might be seen as work into a more fun, game-like activity which is more motivating. As Stefan stated, points do not make the activity easier, just more fun. Daniela provided an example from her family to point out what gamification means to her, and how it can be applied to daily activities to make them appear more interesting. She stated, My brother, I have two of them, and they really like these, ähm, I don´t know, racing games and when they have to clean and tidy up their room, I don´t know how they manage it but, ähm, they play they are like the cars and they have to clean it like this, äh, stuff like that. I don´t get how they´re doing it but my youngest brother told me that when he cleans up his room he, äh, plays he is the whatever, car driver (laughs). This statement is interesting for two reasons. First, it is a natural description of gamification. Her youngest brother most likely is not explicitly gamifying the task of cleaning up his room, and likely does not even know what gamification is. But like most young people, he knows instinctively how to make a game out 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 272 <?page no="273"?> of a boring activity in order to make it more fun and bearable. This story, and Daniela’s relation of it to the question of gamification, shows that gamification is not necessarily a new concept. Her statement is also interesting because it is a story which relates the topic of games to her family, serving as another example of the social nature of games. Games typically include other people, and if not directly, then are also easily recognizable and relatable experiences with which individuals empathize. Besides increasing the level of interest, two other reasons were provided for the purpose of gamification. Both reasons involved extrinsic reward. Lukas be‐ lieved explicit rewards are a factor which makes tasks more interesting. He explained, “I think if you get a prize for, for doing something then you´re auto‐ matically more interested in it bebecause you get something out of it. And so I think gamification is a good thing.” For Lukas, reward is a key characteristic of gamification and motivator. The possibility of getting a ‘prize’ makes a task more interesting. However, Stefan disagrees, stating it is often not the reward in games which is motivating, but the competition and the social status that arises out of being the ‘best.’ He stated, It´s maybe abstract but, äh, class-like actions are like gamification because you want to be the, want to have the best grade because then you´re like on the top and you can a bit, look down on the others because they´re worse maybe. It´s just like, you want to be the best and that´s a bit of gamification, makes it more competitive. Not only did Stefan relate the existing structure of schools to the structure of games, but he also compared the motivational impetus behind both. For him, it was not the prize (either points in a game or grades in the school) which is motivating, but rather the competition amongst players/ students. This is an in‐ teresting point that extends back to the reward paradox discussed in 7.4.2. Games often present rewards, but those rewards typically have no meaning outside of the game. However, the pride of being successful in a game, which is often quantified in games by points, badges, levels, etc. allow them to be comparable, not just to previous attempts made by the individual player, but also to other players. It is the social status that emerges from this competition, and its rec‐ ognition amongst other players, which lends meaning and reality to the results of gameplay experiences and successes. Stefan made a similar case for school through this comparison. Students are often motivated by competition with other students rather than by the reward of a grade - especially since the payoff of a grade is, in economic and social terms, often quite vague and temporally distant. Social status amongst classmates through competition, however, is more immediate and, at least for some, rewarding. 7.5 Retrospective Interviews 273 <?page no="274"?> This type of reward, however, has its downside. As recognized in the class‐ room during the project, competition can have a negative effect on motivation. Games are different than schools, perhaps, because the meaning of games re‐ main often within the context of the game, but the meaning of schools, and the performance which they measure, has concrete meaning for students’ futures. As Daniela points out, Well I guess it´s already done in class, sort of like (ähm) getting marks and stuff like that, ähm. But I guess if you make it like public for all the others it can be very de‐ motivating and, ähm, stuff like that if you are very bad or you just can´t improve yourself or something like that so I guess you have to be careful with stuff like that. While many games have leaderboards, they often do not simply make results public. First of all, many games allow players to use a handle, or an invented name, that allows the actual player’s identity to remain anonymous. Second, the leaderboard is often only accessible within the game. Making a leaderboard in school with students’ grades would likely be easily accessible to all students, and students’ identity would be difficult to remain anonymous. Therefore, it is not simple to take a game mechanic like a leaderboard and apply it unreflectively to a classroom setting. Daniela’s comment underlines this problem. The interview did not definitively answer whether the classroom could be gamified, but rather revealed further potential topics that can arise when stu‐ dents are placed with the task of gamifying an aspect of school. Not only can such tasks lead to reflections on how to make work and learning tasks more interesting or easier, on the role of reward and competition, they can also lead to critical reflections on the institutional structure of school, and the role of grades, competition, and the learning community within the classroom. These results support the idea that, although games are often ‘separate’ from reality, they can serve as fruitful models with which to compare and understand real-world behavior, social structures and institutions. What is the role of game discourse in the classroom? The student interview offered the opportunity to not only further explore issues directly related to classroom events, but also to investigate general issues related to the topic of games, student perceptions of game discourse in school, and the relevance of games and game discourse for EFL learning. One aspect that became apparent in the interview was the latent tension in the classroom between the binary perspective on games as ‘good’ or ‘bad.’ This finding stands in contrast to, in the researcher’s opinion, a relatively open and accepting approach to the topic of games taken by Dr. Müller. When asked whether the project progressed 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 274 <?page no="275"?> as the students expected in terms of the topics and themes that were discussed, Stefan replied, Because that´s a topic, always sort of topics always come up and, ähm, discussions for example in, äh, public discussions on like some TV shows, this are always these kinds of topics. Whether you play alone, are you getting violent because of video games but, äh, yeah that´s what I expected and that´s what was again. Although the topics of violence, addiction, and the value of games did arise, they were not, in the researcher’s opinion, dominant. What this statement does show, however, is the sensitivity of this student towards these topics and the general perspective on games that underlie them. This was also not an opinion openly shared by other interviewees, but it possibly points to an underlying tension that exists in public discourse on games that is taken up in schools (cf. case study 1 in chapter 6). This tension may also be felt in relation to the teacher, creating a barrier between the students and the teacher which is difficult to traverse. As Stefan stated, “It´s just a theory of mine but I think he, äh, doesn´t think about games in a serious way”. However, most students agreed that games and related discourse have a place in the classroom. All students agreed that it was easier to talk about games because it was a topic they were familiar with. As Dieter stated, “I think it was, ähm, or it is easier, äh, yeah, it´s easier because you know that game, you know, äh, what you want to say and, yes.” Furthermore, most agreed that games are relevant for the EFL classroom. Some stated that they had experience playing games in English due to their initial availability only in English. Stefan stated that he improved his English (and confidence speaking it) playing online mul‐ tiplayer games, I, äh, improved in English while I was listening to people talking about the games. It ´s like straight up for four hours they were talking about the game, how situations played out and then I was more confident in talking about, talking about my opinions on the game with my team I played in at that time and shared the information because, before that I was really quiet. I wasn´t really communicative and I just sat there, played the game and told them what was necessary but I was too shy. These statements reveal the role that English plays in games and the opportu‐ nities they offer for connecting to English learning in the EFL classroom. For some students, English acquisition occurs through interaction with the game itself, while for others, it occurs through interaction with other individuals who are either native speakers or who are using English as a lingua franca to com‐ municate with diverse online teams. This English acquisition occurs voluntary 7.5 Retrospective Interviews 275 <?page no="276"?> in the free time of the students and can influence what students see the role of English in the world today is, but also how they see the English learning that occurs in the classroom. However, students not only have contact to English through games directly, but also through what Sykes and Reinhardt call attendant discourses (2013: 3- 4) surrounding games. Four participants admitted to engaging with media and texts surrounding games - three through YouTube and one through a website, Reddit. Dieter, for example, stated, “I know, äh, some ´Let´s Players´ on YouTube who play, ähm, games. Sometimes they are from America or Australia, äh, yeah, ehm, I watch it then and play.” For Dieter, such let’s play videos can serve as either motivation, tutorials, or both. Through such attendant discourses, stu‐ dents not only have contact to English and gain information about the game, but also engage with the different beliefs, values and perspectives of the games and the world from the people who create those discourses. In other words, based on the responses from the interviews, it can be assumed that a portion of the students not only come into contact to English through games, but also through the discourse around games online, through gamer discourse. The student interview provided the opportunity to further investigate several themes, issues and questions that arose through the analyses of the classroom sequences. It was able to confirm the personal role that games play for many students, in terms of their relationships with others and of the development of their own identities. Though many students focused on aspects of reward during the discussion of gamification, in the interview students further questioned the sense of achievement as a reward, and the ability to compete and compare with others, as a major motivator. Finally, students provided reasons for integrating games and their surrounding discourse into the EFL classroom, as students en‐ joyed talking about media they were familiar with and through which they al‐ ready contact to English. 7.5.2 Teacher Interview Are games too personal? The analyses of the classroom events and the student interview revealed the ways in which the topic of games is interrelated to students’ lives and identities. The teacher interview supported this analysis, but also revealed that this rela‐ tionship was not purely coincidental. The class had previously worked with a graphic novel and the topic of stereotypes. Through this, the class had been primed to view the topic of video games, as well as the related media that was 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 276 <?page no="277"?> introduced to the class, through a perspective of identity. While discussing the game comic the teacher introduced to the class, Dr. Müller stated, As I remember something I haven´t mentioned before, ähm, when we worked with the graphic novels before, one of our main topic was, ähm, identity, constructing identity and boundaries of identity, influences on identity, stereotypes also, living between cultures. And so this was also here activated in the comic I suppose. Cause you had these, the avatar and you had the avatars meeting and they were like, we all look the same and where is our identity? Interestingly, however, the students did not take an objective view towards the topic and towards identity. Instead, many of them took the opportunity to reveal how games had shaped their own identity, and they exhibited themselves as empowered to show how games also co-constructed their social and familial networks. The media served as a backdrop, not to discuss stereotypes and iden‐ tity and culture at an abstract level, but rather to reflect on the roles that games played in their personal lives. This personal relation of students to the topic, however, appears to be sup‐ ported by the more personal relationship between the teacher and the students. Not only did the students share personal anecdotes about themselves and the topic (in both the classroom and in the interview), the teacher also shared per‐ sonal stories about his experiences with games. When asked about this in the interview, Dr. Müller explained, I want to engage in a meaningful conversation, I learn from them, content wise, as much or almost as much as they learn from me (laughs) especially when it is something that is, ähm, that is not self-enclosed, so I regard, ähm, material, authentic teaching material, like literature and like what we did here with the game play or the games, that is something that is not, ähm, only done for pedagogic purposes but it´s a real life product, it´s an authentic product and that is why it is so open to, ähm, yeah to many viewpoints… So the role didn´t change that much, what I tried to was not to establish an atmosphere where you have the pedagogical warning all the time. Cause I wanted them to engage unbiased, ähm, that was something that was different com‐ pared to teaching literature, for example. I didn´t want them to feel ah, this student is doing this so we all know how dangerous computer games are. Dr. Müller values meaningful conversation, which for him means that the strict distinction between the authority of the teacher and the ignorance of the learner is not present. This meant opening up his own perspective to be influenced by the perspectives of the students, to be “unbiased” towards their beliefs and values, and to let the students co-create meaning rather than simply impose his 7.5 Retrospective Interviews 277 <?page no="278"?> own onto them. If the students perceived this approach from Dr. Müller, if they indeed saw themselves as equal partners within a learning setting, then it is likely that they would take the opportunity to share their own personal per‐ spectives, life stories, and feel secure enough to reflect on their own identity construction through games. Thus, Dr. Müller saw his role as a teacher as such, “And you have to find a way of hosting the conversation and so that is inter‐ esting, not to judge but trying to help them move through critical analysis […] That is what is challenging as a teacher.” Can the classroom be gamified? Dr. Müller was quite supportive of the gamification activity in retrospect. For him, its potential lies not so much in the actual ability to gamify the classroom, or to change aspects of how students act, interact, or are rewarded. Rather, he understood its potential to be in how it could initiate critical reflection in the students without initiating a binary approach and the process of simplification that such an approach would enable. Furthermore, it was the opportunity of making the task into a reality that lent an authenticity and meaningfulness to both student contribution as well as critical-reflective thought. When asked about what he understood the potential of the gamification activity to be, Dr. Müller stated, The potential I see in it is compared to the other options we had, it was a new facet to it. […] And I think in, or given them also a critical start again. And not something where they would have to assume a role because I also had the idea of having a debate, an American debate, codified so, but then you have to assume a role also, if you want to be a pro or con, and you have to stick to this role, which is fine in a lot of cases but didn´t work for me in this didactic concept because I wanted them to be more sub‐ jective. Compared to the first case study, Dr. Müller’s approach attempted to avoid a binary approach to games, one that is embedded in looking at games as either ‘good’ or ‘bad.’ He saw such an opportunity, for instance, in applying a gamifi‐ cation activity in the classroom. This was an insightful approach, since, as dis‐ cussed in 2.3.3, gamification exists at the interface between games and reality. The reality of games, and especially students’ experiences with games, and the role that video games play in their lives, identities and social networks, is one which is void of blanket statements of good or bad. Giving students the oppor‐ tunity to explore this phenomenon, this interface, offered them the opportunity to explore the topic, both positive and negative aspects, without having to take on a ‘role’ and debate the complex issue in simplistic terms. Furthermore, as Dr. Müller stated, this approach allowed students to take a more “subjective” re‐ 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 278 <?page no="279"?> flection on games and reality, which fell in line with the more subjective ap‐ proach students were taking while considering the intersection between games, identity, and social construction of relationships through games. What is the role of game discourse in the classroom? Dr. Müller placed what he called discourse competence as the central purpose of the project. This competence is predicated on meaningful language use to solve problems critically and analytically. Reflecting on the purpose and suc‐ cesses of the project, that teacher stated, I found very interesting, that they all found something to say. It is elicitating, let´s say, language that is meaningful for them. You could say they all wanted to negotiate meaning and it´s something that is, I think to, äh, the most valuable form of producing language in a foreign language classroom. Because then they have something that has a communicative aspect, it´s what we call discourse competence. They engage, they problematize and they use language chunks for that and they use the English chunk we were working on, ähm, and they used the categories we gave them so they had an idea of how to analyze or you know, how to analyze a video game. According to Dr. Müller, the goal of engaging and developing discourse com‐ petence around digital games was largely reached through the project. This was likely a product of multiple factors, including the relation that students made to their personal lives, the connections they created to the effects of games on reality, of the approach that the teacher took and created through the activities and questions, as well as of the types of discourse media that was brought into the classroom. However, the teacher admitted that it was not always easy to find fitting materials and media to introduce to the classroom. Discussing the difficulties finding appropriate video clips online on gamification, the teacher highlighted the need to find material that fits the didactic purpose and that matches the grade level of the students. The other video I was a little torn with the gamification because you find a lot and you find a lot too academic material and you find very interesting and very high quality aspects but for tenth graders, that´s over their heads, I don´t need to do that. This statement highlights some of the issues facing teachers who search for their own materials and media online. Here, Dr. Müller had no trouble finding aca‐ demic-level material, but found it more difficult to find material that he felt his tenth graders could understand and work with. Dr. Müller found multiple benefits for game fan-comics. On the one hand, he was able to use a game comic he found online to introduce the project on games. 7.5 Retrospective Interviews 279 <?page no="280"?> It was a comic that he was not only able to understand, but that also thematized serious issues that Dr. Müller wanted to critically discuss. Reflecting on the comic he chose, he stated, Yeah, that was a personal choice. I find that I need to relate to the material, otherwise it´s very hard for me to teach it. Ähm, the fan comic was on The Matrix and I know this movie and I know this franchise and I think it has also thematic-wise or theme-wise it has a connection to what we were talking about. It has a connection to reality, virtuality, äh, fictionality and, and the in-betweens. And the gamification as‐ pect later on so I found it was a nice site to use it. Thus, Dr. Müller was able to find and introduce a game comic which required background knowledge he already had, since he was familiar with the movie, The Matrix, whose plot and storyline the comic used to embed a message about games. Furthermore, like the movie, the comic raised a question concerning reality. However, the comic used this question of reality to focus on games, and the teacher was able to use this comic to introduce the topic of games, how they influence the reality of the students, and how they can, through gamification, influence the reality of educational institutions. On the other hand, however, Dr. Müller found that the game fan-comics of‐ fered multiple potentials for the learners as well. When asked about their general potentials in the classroom, in retrospect to the project, Dr. Müller stated, I think they are a good way of visualizing, let´s say, cultural aspects. So that especially social phenomena connected to, äh, gaming and to the people who play and who, yeah, who play games and who talk about games. […] And it is something that you can use as, äh, is it a key, I don´t know, something or a fresher key for those people who do not play the game. I think it´s easier to get into it […]. Here Dr. Müller presented several arguments supporting the use of game comics to develop discourse competence. He stated that the visual aspects of the game present affordances for illustrating cultural aspects of gaming and gamers. In essence, they are good at presenting the cultural discourse of games from an emic perspective. Furthermore, Dr. Müller believed that they not only have af‐ fordances for those who play games, but also offer potential for those who do not play games to enter into the discourse. This belief, however, stands in stark contrast to the conclusion about game fan-comics made in the first case study (cf. 6.5) and the difficulties that can arise from especially comics which are nar‐ rowcast. The teacher interview largely supported the findings and conclusions from the analysis of classroom events as well as from the student interviews. Using 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 280 <?page no="281"?> provocative questions as organizing points of analysis, it supports the claim that potential problems can serve as potential learning opportunities to integrate game discourse into the EFL classroom and to initiate critical-reflective pro‐ cesses about digital games, the influences they have had on students’ lives, and the ways in which they have, and are, influencing reality. 7.6 Summary Chapter 7 presents the results of the second case study and focuses on specific challenges and meaningful themes that arose. Particularly, aspects of students identifying with and through video games were analyzed, as many learners fo‐ cused on relating to game discourse media with their own personal experiences with games as well as with their social (and often familial) networks with others who play games. The results suggest that video game discourse and media offer potentials for students to reflect on the role of games for the construction of their identities as well as their social ties. Furthermore, these findings also sug‐ gest that approaches to video games that focus only on negative features or that attempt to ‘demonize’ them can be viewed by students as threats to their per‐ sonal identities and social networks. While games are not too intimate for the classroom, they are embedded in discourses which relate directly to their per‐ sonal lives. This case study also revealed challenges that arise when the topic of gamifi‐ cation is introduced. Analyzing the student task of developing an idea to gamify the school or classroom reveals the extent to which students focus on extrinsic rewards. Attempts made by the teacher to initiate reflection and critical thought on learning goals and motivations which extend beyond grades and status went largely unanswered, suggesting that students tend to focus more on games as players and require further work and scaffolding before they can begin to think as ‘designers.’ The realization that their classroom was already gamified, coupled with the decision to modify this aspect of their class based on their discussions of gamification, revealed not only the relevance of the topic but also the oppor‐ tunity it affords for reflection on formalized learning (and educational struc‐ tures). The class’ rule that students who speak three times in German must bring cake for the rest of the class also revealed the reward paradox of learning games. The class found a unique way to create a reward/ punishment that functioned in the classroom without having consequences on students’ school performance and grades. 7.6 Summary 281 <?page no="282"?> Both student and teacher interviews confirmed much of the findings but also added student and teacher perspectives on the role of game discourse in the EFL classroom. This analysis reveals perceived potentials for not only introducing relevant subjects but also for connecting to out-of-school English contact as well as for developing discourse competence. Though this case study took a different approach to introducing game discourse, multiple opportunities arose. The teacher was able to use video game fan-comics and online videos to introduce topics, initiate reflection, and connect to the students’ lives, and students were able to utilize gamer media in their game presentations to share their experi‐ ences, relate the role of English, and engage in discourse topics they felt were important. In this case study, game discourse occurred largely in the third dimension of the game and the world. Much of the classroom discourse and student reflection occurred through considering and discussing the role of games for the con‐ struction of identity and for relationships to others. Working with the concept of gamification showed the relevance of game structures for other aspects of everyday life and encouraged students to think about reward structures, com‐ petition, goals and the interrelationships of participants. These findings can un‐ doubtedly be reintegrated in future game discourse and literacy tasks that more explicitly target deeper reflection and engagement. While the previous case study focused largely on problems that arose in the class that the teacher had to address before moving on, this case study focused more on relevant issues and problems that did not interrupt the course of the teaching unit but rather that could have led to deeper engagement and critical reflection if they had been foreseen. The following and final case study also focuses on challenges that did not interrupt the classroom, but which nonethe‐ less, upon closer analysis, reveals implicit conflicts and issues surrounding game and classroom discourse. 7 Case Study 2: Games, Student Identity and Gamification 282 <?page no="283"?> 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers The following case study was chosen due to the overwhelming engagement and autonomy of the class to structure its own learning, set learning goals, and manage its own learning process. Furthermore, it was chosen for the teacher’s overwhelming interest in the topic of games and belief that it was a meaningful and relevant part of students’ lives which also held potentials for linking to in the EFL classroom. Due to the limited space of this study as well as to the sat‐ uration of findings, this case study will focus only on the student and teacher interviews carried out at the end of the teaching unit. The interviews focused largely on the interests of both the teacher and the students and on the roles of both when game discourse is introduced. The teacher interview also focused on unexpected results of the teaching unit, and both interviews addressed the per‐ spective of each participating party on the other (i.e. of the students on the teacher and vice versa). Before the results of the interviews are presented, an overview of the school institution, the students and teacher is provided, along with an overview of the reconstructed lesson plans which constituted the teaching unit. 8.1 Institution, Students and Teacher This case study was carried out with a 10 th grade class in a comprehensive school in a two-week period in March 2016. The school is in a mid-size city in central Hesse and has a little over 700 students. The class was a basic level class with fifteen students in total. Eleven of the students were male and only four were female. The teacher (female) had over ten years’ experience as a school teacher. She (Frau Schmidt) not only had excellent command over the language, but also ensured a caring and positive learning atmosphere for the students. From the perspective of the observer, most if not all of the students liked the teacher. As was the situation for the first two case studies, Frau Schmidt was also interested in the study and topic because she believed it would be motivating for the stu‐ dents. The teacher also was aware of students learning English through games. Based on researcher observations and claims made by the teacher, the class was accustomed and able to engage in self-directed learning, and individuals within <?page no="284"?> the classroom would often take over the role of the teacher, leading discussions and organizing classroom interactions. 8.2 Reconstructed Lesson Plans This teaching unit was largely centered on the analysis of a video game fan-comic. On the first day, Frau Schmidt introduced the topic with a mindmap on the chalkboard, collecting ideas which the students associated with games and learning (including learning English). Afterwards, students created and filled out posters in a type of gallery walk which collected thoughts and reactions on various game-related topics. The purpose of this task was to further collect student ideas on the topic and to share them with the class. This task also fulfilled the purpose of providing the teacher with background information on games since, as she admitted to the class, she had little experience with games. Some of the topics of the posters were: What kinds of games do you play? Where do you play them? On what platforms do you play them? With whom do you play them? What storylines do the games have? The class worked on filling out the posters, each student moving to each poster and adding something to the topic. After the students were finished, the posters were presented to the class and the teacher asked comprehension questions concerning issues she was uncertain about or concerning patterns she noticed. At the conclusion of the first lesson, Frau Schmidt gave the students the assignment to join groups and for home‐ work, find a video game fan-comic on a video game they all play. The second lesson was devoted to individual group work analyzing the comics. For the analysis, the teacher provided the groups with three handouts: one on narrative analysis, one on comic analysis and the third on game analysis (cf. table 22). Lesson 1 (8: 00-9: 35) 1 Teacher introduces topic of game via mindmap. 2 Students fill out posters with different game topics. 3 Class discussion on posters and game topics Lesson 2 (11: 35-12: 55) 1 Group work analyzing video game fan-comics, teacher distributes handouts on narrative, comics and game analysis. Table 22: Case Study 3, Lesson 1 & 2 Overview 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 284 <?page no="285"?> In the third lesson, students presented their video game fan-comic analyses, addressing narrative, comic and game structures. Each presentation was fol‐ lowed up by a discussion in which students and teachers asked questions about aspects which were unclear or that they found interesting (cf. table 23). The teacher also attempted when possible to establish connections between the groups and the games that their comics were thematizing. Lesson 3 (8: 00-9: 35) 1 Groups present their video game fan-comic analyses, followed by class discus‐ sions. Table 23: Case Study 3, Lesson 3 Overview In the fourth and final lesson, the teacher introduced the topic of gamification similar to in the second case study. Here, the teacher introduced the topic of gamification first using a mindmap collecting ideas on what students thought the concept means. Next, the teacher distributed a short text describing the concept and introducing basic game mechanics. This text was followed by com‐ prehension questions and a short discussion of the text. Finally, in small groups, students were given the task to develop an idea to gamify the classroom. The teacher informed the students that they could develop even serious ideas which the teacher could introduce into her 5 th grade English class in order to help them learn English. After developing ideas, the groups presented their gamification plans to the class. General ideas were shared during the presentations and new ideas for improving or adapting gamification ideas were shared along the way. Lesson 4 (11: 35-12: 55) 1 Teacher introduces gamification concept using mindmap on chalkboard. 2 Students receive text explaining gamification. Students read and then teacher goes over comprehension questions. 3 Students work on task to gamify aspect of the classroom or school. 4 Students present ideas which leads to class discussion. Table 24: Case Study 3, Lesson 4 Overview Unlike the other case studies, this case study will only address the findings from the retrospective interviews of both the teacher and the students. This is in part due to saturation of findings and in part due to the limited space of this study. 8.2 Reconstructed Lesson Plans 285 <?page no="286"?> 8.3 Retrospective Interviews The responses from the student interview (an example transcript excerpt can be found in appendix D) largely reflected the general interest in the topic of game discourse and the student willingness to participate in the classroom project. Compared to the interviews involved in the previously presented case studies, the responses in this interview were quite extensive and required rela‐ tively little probing. For example, a quantitative analysis of the transcript reveals that the average student response was twenty-eight seconds in length. This in‐ cludes all responses, even single word responses (like ‘yes’ or ‘no’) that took as little as one second. With these single second responses removed, the average response was 34 seconds. This, when considering the quality of the responses (which will be presented and analyzed below) suggests an interest in the topic and desire to engage in reflective discussion. The teacher interview lasted a total of 53 minutes with 38 minute response time for the teacher - suggesting a similar interest in the topic and desire to discuss issues which were raised. An interview is always a coproduction, or the product of an interviewer, in this case with a set of guiding questions, and the dynamic responses of the individuals in the group. The relatively high level of dynamism of the interview means that there are results which emerged and were not predictable from the questions, by the interviewer, nor by any of the single participants. With this said, two major themes arose from the interview which provide further insight into issues regarding the introduction of game discourse to the EFL classroom. The passages below present an analysis of both the student and teacher inter‐ views along the line of these two themes - one concerning interest in intro‐ ducing game discourse into the EFL classroom and the other concerning the role of the teacher and of students, and changes to these roles when students provides their knowledge and experiences with and around games. 8.4 Challenge 1: Matching Interests in Classroom Game Discourse? What defines student interest in bringing game discourse into the EFLC? There were multiple reasons that students provided to explain their interest in bringing game discourse into the EFL classroom. The following looks more closely at three types of reasons - personal, social, and English language learning. Five out of the six student participants admitted to playing digital games regularly, and expressed a relevance of the topic for their everyday lives. 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 286 <?page no="287"?> This relevance will be discussed at a later point, but the following quote will suffice for now. Thorsten, when the group was asked at the end of the interview if they had any questions or comments to add, highlighted his interest in the topic and dealing with it in class. He stated, Und ehm ich fand es allgemein ganz cool diesen Unterricht ähm, weil ich konnte halt sehr viel sagen (.) worüber ich auch etwas weiß. Zum Beispiel/ Weil ich spiele jetzt auch schon sehr lange und ähm (.) in dieser Zeit hab ich halt auch sehr viel Wissen aufgebaut über diese Spiele. Here Thorsten underlined that he enjoyed speaking (in English) about a topic he had a lot of knowledge about. Furthermore, this knowledge was built up over a long period of time, as Thorsten stated, suggesting that games are not simply a subject matter of knowledge, but were also one of great meaning. Bringing the topic into the classroom was a chance to allow Thorsten to access that knowl‐ edge in English and communicate game related issues which were meaningful to his life and identity. However, it was not simply the ability to discuss a topic with which he is familiar; Thorsten also enjoyed the social aspect of bringing the topic into the classroom. Following the previous quote, he stated, Und das Ganze mit Freunden zu teilen, zu/ äh die zum Beispiel nicht da/ die nicht so viel darüber wissen. Das war halt auch mal was anderes, als jetzt einfach nur mal dort, dort zu sitzen und zu warten und zuzuhören, was die Lehrerin sagt. Äh es war halt wirklich mal was anderes und das hat mir auch wirklich sehr viel Spaß gemacht ähm meine Informationen da mitzuteilen. Und vielleicht hat es ja dem einen oder anderen das Interesse an diesem Spiel erweckt und denkt sich: Ja, vielleicht sollte ich das ja mal ausprobieren. For Thorsten, the ability to connect to his own background knowledge allowed him a more active participation in the class. Furthermore, this participation al‐ lowed him to communicate with “friends” in class. This choice of words denotes a close relationship with classmates which, in part, may stem from the action of sharing personal knowledge, experiences and values about games. Interest‐ ingly, this relationship and sharing is not limited to friends who already play games (or at least the same games) but includes fellow students who do not know so much about games and possibly even includes waking their interest in the topic. This statement points to section 7.3 from the previous case study which shows the embeddedness of games in social networks, and illustrates how dis‐ cussing games can strengthen personal ties of students in the classroom. 8.4 Challenge 1: Matching Interests in Classroom Game Discourse? 287 <?page no="288"?> This sentiment was shared by another student who only rarely played digital games. Jolene noticed that several of her classmates had improved their English considerably through playing digital games. She drew the conclusion through this observation that there is a connection between enjoyment and learning. She stated, Also ich glaub, wenn einem was Spaß macht, das man wirklich gerne macht, dann will man auch lernen. Also ich hab das alleine beim Sören gesehen, dass ist das beste Beispiel, Tobias auch. Weil dadurch, dass die so viel spielen, haben die ihre Grammatik und ihren Horizont auch auch im Englisch - Ja, Thorsten du auch (lacht) so erweitert, dass sie wirklich (.) spitze mittlerweile im Englischen sind und man sieht das aber auch bei Vielen, umso mehr Spaß das einem macht und umso mehr man lernt, umso mehr Spaß macht die Schule generell auch. Here Jolene points out three students (two of whom are present in the interview) whose English skills had been improved through playing games. Their joy of games had, according to Jolene, led to them being “Spitze mittlerweile im Eng‐ lisch.” Even though the topic may not have been relevant specifically for Jolene’s own life, she saw how it was relevant for the lives of other students, she recog‐ nized the language learning benefits that digital games have brought them and expressed general interest in introducing more fun into learning at school. The comments from both Thorsten and Jolene point out the relevance that students see in the topic of games for both school and for the EFL classroom. As a gamer, Thorsten enjoyed bringing his out-of-school, or informal, learning ex‐ periences into the classroom, and he also enjoyed sharing his knowledge and experiences with other students in the classroom. For him, sharing this infor‐ mation appears to establish or strengthen social bonds with other students. As a non-gamer, Jolene was surprised to discover how much English that her fellow gamer students had learned through digital games and used this experience to support the idea that effective learning involves fun and personal relevance. Furthermore, she expressed her feeling that bringing such relevant and inter‐ esting topics into school contexts can make learning in school more enjoyable and effective. Several students who played games regularly recognized the opportunity to develop their English skills through digital games. Tobias took on a strong lead‐ ership role in the classroom and exhibited a high level of English language com‐ municative competence. In the interview, he explained through a series of com‐ ments how he gained access to English through games and computer technology, how he began to understand the value of English for learning and communication, and how this changed how he perceived (and interacted in) the 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 288 <?page no="289"?> EFL classroom. When asked about the connection that the students see between games and English, Tobias explained how he first came into contact with English when he was younger. He stated, Ja also bei mir war es so: Ich hatte meinen ersten Computer mit 2009 ungefähr (.) und auch von meinem Vater bekommen. Äh da war ich 9 Jahre alt, genau, und ähm (.) dort hab ich ja ab und zu so Sachen gemacht wie bei/ mit Paint rumgespielt, ein paar Bilder gemalt und ab und zu auch mal auf "Spielaffe", also so Browsergames und so weiter mit meiner Babysitterin oder sowas (.) und da hat ich schon langsam angefangen ähm, da konnte ich so grad so mal nen Satz lesen oder sowas ähm und dann ab und zu mal wieder so äh englische Sachen wie zum Beispiel "Home". Ei/ Da hab ich mich so ge‐ fragt: Ja, was heißt denn dieses "Home"? Also erstmal "H-O-M-E" ist ja, ich dachte das wäre ein deutsches Wort. Dann äh wurde mir erstmal so gesagt: Ja "Home" heißt ha/ ähm (.) Heim oder ähm Hauptseite zum Beispiel in dem Fall und schon hatte ich so meine ersten Worte [...] This first contact to English awoke an interest in Tobias to develop his English skills further. For him, such experiences served as entry points, not only to other more complex English language experiences, but also to perspectives and values surrounding English and the affordances the language served to learning and communication. He stated shortly thereafter, und irgendwie prägt man sich das immer mehr ein, weil man damit, dadurch auch natürlich äh viel Spaß hat und äh grade deswegen, dass das Internet auch so groß geworden ist, äh ist natürlich alles Englisch, weil Englisch ähm so als Weltsprache einfach geradezu hilft die Barrieren, so eine Barriere quasi aufzubrechen und ähm mit jedem kommunizieren zu können From computers to computer games to the Internet - Tobias has had consider‐ able contact to English through computer technology that has helped him un‐ derstand the role of English as a lingua franca of the world and to value its ability to break through ‘boundaries’ of communication. It can be assumed through this comment, as well as from his highly active participation in the classroom, that this was not simply a revelation and value for Tobias, but also a reality that he often practiced. Tobias also understood the relationship between informal and formal English language learning, as he admitted that his informal language learning helped improve his grades in English. He explained how learning English through computer technology created a desire to learn English in school, stating, ja wenn man dann dieses Interesse dazu aufbaut hat man natürlich auch mehr Lust zu lernen, weil es dann so langsam so diese Lernlust weckt. Ähm. Ich glaub ich war 8.4 Challenge 1: Matching Interests in Classroom Game Discourse? 289 <?page no="290"?> so bis zur 7. Klasse eher so ähm nicht so gut in der Schule, äh war eher so der Dreier- Vierteräh -Typ, so von den Noten her, aber dann hat sich das immer mehr entwickelt, weil ich dann auch schon langsam auch wirklich Englisch lesen konnte (.) äh was heute in der Schule so gefördert wurde und ehm dadurch hat sich mir quasi eine komplett neue Welt geöffnet. For Tobias, the developments he made in English outside of school began to affect his grades in school. This occurred by awakening his desire to learn, and he learned to view the English language classroom as a tool that had its useful‐ ness embedded in the real world (external to school). The role of English in the informal lives of students was discussed in section 1.3. Here the idea was presented that students have more contact to English outside of the classroom, and this high degree of contact changes the role of the EFL classroom. As Legutke & Grau state, the role of the classroom changes to provide strategies and support to help students learn and master the challenges of English contact and use outside of the classroom in students’ everyday lives. Tobias described this process in similar words, as he explained how he learned to take a new perspective on the EFL classroom as he learned more and more through games and computer technology. He stated, also diesen Grundbaustein hab ich auf jeden Fall im äh außerhalb der Schule gelernt. Natürlich Grundvokabeln und so weiter in der Schule, aber den Grundbaustein ähm außerhalb der Schule. Und in der Schule hab ich das auf einmal ehm so verfeinert und ich hatte auf jeden Fall Lust, das weiterzubringen dann. Toby, who was initially bored by, and inactive in his EFL classes, began using the classroom as an opportunity to improve the language and interactions he was experiencing outside the classroom. This newfound role of the classroom had the effect of increasing his overall desire to learn and participate in class. In conclusion, Tobias explained how learning English had become a personal goal that was distinct from the expectations and pressures of school and the classroom. He explained, es ist auf jeden Fall für mich, äh, ist das auch ein persönliches Ziel von mir auf jeden Fall, äh, besser zu werden in Englisch. Äh, um einfach besser klar zukommen. Und, ehm, ich hab das dann auch irgendwann einfach als privates Interesse angesehen und nicht als äh schulische, äh, Zwang und das war glaub ich auch so dieses, äh, der Punkt, dass, der bei mir einfach das im Englischen auch verändert hat. So zwischen diesem ZWANG, so diesem, ähm einfach wirklich persönlichen starken Interesse dann. 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 290 <?page no="291"?> 1 On foreign language learning in virtual settings, cf. Biebighauser 2013 & Rösler 2000. Tobias points out that with the changing role of the English classroom came a change in perspective towards classroom learning. It was no longer character‐ ized by force but rather by a desire to fulfill personal learning goals. Thorsten told a somewhat similar story. He praised the playful way in which playing digital games in English helped him increase his language abilities. He noted, Ja äh es ist halt auch zum Beispiel diese ähm quasi dieser Spielespaß. Wenn da zum Beispiel in Englisch steht "take out your phone" oder sowas um weiter zu kommen und du weißt nicht was das heißt, dann denkt man sich: Ja, was soll ich jetzt machen? Dann probierst du halt mehr Dinge aus und dadurch (.) hat man quasi auch was zu tun in diesem Spiel und du weißt: Ja, irgendetwas muss ich machen, aber nicht was. Und dann probierst du halt Sachen aus und das ist halt auch dieser Spaß und wenn du es dann geschafft hast dann freut man sich halt auch mehr. For Thorsten, games offer the opportunity to learn English through trial and error, without the consequences of making mistakes that are often a part of classroom learning. Furthermore, Thorsten explained that he likes to play multiplayer online games, and that he developed language skills by communicating with others online through the games. 1 He stated, Und ähm, wenn man Online-Spiele spielt, die anderen reden dann ja immer: Yeah on the left side is one guy, oder something like that and ehm (.) und so denkt man sich: Okay, das heißt left (.) ich weiß, dass das links heißt und dann kann man sich schon denken, was das so ungefähr heißt The listening comprehension skills he acquired through online gaming were, according to Thorsten, able to transfer to the EFL classroom. He explained fur‐ ther, stating, Weil, zum Beispiel bei diesem Listening-Comprehension, bei Englisch (.) im Unterricht ist es mir öfters schwerer gefallen das zu verstehen, weil sie reden so schnell und so bisschen durcheinander. Aber durch dieses Spiel hab ich das (.) ähm ein bisschen (.) etwas besser gelernt ähm so zuzuhören und ungefähr die Wörter quasi auseinander zu halten und so fä/ fiel mir das dann mittlerweile auch ein bisschen Comprehension in der Schule leichter. 8.4 Challenge 1: Matching Interests in Classroom Game Discourse? 291 <?page no="292"?> Thus, Thorsten expressed the perspective that digital games, and especially on‐ line multiplayer games, enabled him to improve his language skills which, in turn, helped him to understand more in the EFL classroom. However, Thorsten admitted to more than simply a passive transfer from games to the classroom. He, like Tobias, expressed that the EFL classroom began to take on a role of supporting his informal language contact and use. Thorsten explained the influence that multiplayer game communication had on his per‐ spective of the EFL classroom, Ja es war einfach so ähm, um in diesem Spiel besser zu werden, muss man mit deinen Leuten kommunizieren. Und um besser zu kommunizieren, muss man halt besser in Englisch werden und dadurch hat man auch viel mehr Spaß gehabt an Englisch und denkt: Okay, wenn ich ganz genau weiß, dass diese und diese Wörter heißen, dann kann ich besser mit den Leuten dort reden und das wird uns dann zum Sieg führen. (..) Und (.) ja, das hat auch halt ein bisschen mein Interesse an Englisch geweckt. For Thorsten, digital gaming awakened his interest in learning English, and the EFL classroom began to serve the purpose of improving his language skills so that he could communicate better with his online team players and help collec‐ tively overcome game challenges. While this interview could not definitively answer the question concerning students’ interest in bringing game discourse into the EFL classroom, it does offer insights into some of the major reasons. There are personal reasons, as many students who play digital games enjoy bringing their knowledge, expe‐ riences, perspectives and values into the classroom. They also like being experts on a topic, rather than assuming the typical role of the student (more on this will be discussed under the next question). Connected to this are the social rea‐ sons, as multiple students expressed joy and interest in sharing their information with other students, while others expressed interest in learning from the ex‐ pertise of other students. Finally, the interview reveals a link between the contact to English through digital games and computer technology (including the In‐ ternet) and the EFL classroom. For some students, the classroom became a place of acquiring skills and strategies to learn, communicate and interact with others online and through games. Bringing the discourse of games into the classroom appears to be an opportunity to highlight what might be implicit connections between informal and formal learning spaces for student reflection, whether they come into contact to English outside of the classroom through games or elsewhere. 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 292 <?page no="293"?> What defines the teacher’s perception of student interest in bringing game discourse into the EFL classroom? In the interview Frau Schmidt explained her perspective on the student interest in introducing game discourse into the EFL classroom. On the one hand, Frau Schmidt mentioned that the students were interested in a new topic which was not “in the English book.” According to her, students perceive the topics in the course book as “boring” and are not what “kids are interested in.” The topic of games, on the other hand, was described by Frau Schmidt as “taboo” and a “for‐ bidden topic” which was of great interest to the students. She stated, “I think that forbiddenness of it, and the “oh my god, can we talk about this really, can we tell you really? ” made them want more, made them want to give more.” From her perspective, students were interested in talking about a taboo topic and this interest cultivated a desire to engage in classroom discourse about games. A part of the taboo was not simply the topic itself, but of the relevance of the topic to the students’ lives and the “forbiddeness” of the topic for school context. According to Frau Schmidt, “In games, while playing games, these kids pretend not to play it but still they are playing it.” Students pretend not to play games because it is not acceptable to admit that in the school context, likely due to the stigma of games in an educational setting. Frau Schmidt was able to exhibit to her students a genuine interest in the topic and was thus able to establish a more genuine classroom discourse. She stated, “this gaming thing was special for them, because they knew, we are not babbling about the bush, we are not doing stupid things, but we are interested in what we are doing.” She was able to convince students that the classroom interest was genuine and that the topic and the students’ contributions were being taken seriously. Thus, the topic was not only taboo, but one directly related to students’ lives. The opportunity to create authentic discourse on the topic in class was perceived as a motivator to engage with the topic in English. Notable from the interview was the teacher’s relation of the topic of games to other ‘taboo’ topics like drugs and alcohol, and even television shows like “Germany’s Next Top Model.” In making this comparison, Frau Schmidt ad‐ dresses her perspective that such taboo topics are a part of many students’ lives (either directly or indirectly) and yet are not a part of their formal ‘education’ in school. In addressing this gap between classroom topics and students’ lives, the teacher states “So, why not, why not have a book about games, about drugs, about alcohol, and, but not under the point of abuse, or overdoing things, but why do you do it? How do you do it? What's dangerous about it? But why do you still do it? ” This statement leads to the next question which addresses the teacher’s interest in bringing the topic of games into the classroom. 8.4 Challenge 1: Matching Interests in Classroom Game Discourse? 293 <?page no="294"?> What defines teacher interest in bringing game discourse into the EFL classroom? Bringing taboo topics like drugs, alcohol and games into the classroom might be seen as problematic because it could be viewed by some as supporting certain habits and activities. While this certainly could be the case, and while careful handling of such topics is definitely called for, Frau Schmidt saw an opportunity in integrating such topics to cultivate introspection in students and develop their maturity for aspects that are relevant and already a part of their everyday lives. The teacher states, you know, we have talked about this game, this forbidden game X, ähm, which is over 18, and they are all playing it, but still they learn something from it. I mean, I am not telling people to do drugs, or drink alcohol, but ähm the thing is, the more you get, the more mature, the more you talk about it, the more you have an introspection about it. And the introspection is what makes people able to deal with it. Frau Schmidt views maturity as the ability to deal with taboo topics. This ma‐ turity extends beyond making simple statements of right or wrong and addresses the more difficult questions of why people still do things (and why the students may be doing things) even if they know that they may be (to an extent) harmful. The point for Frau Schmidt appears to not be to convince the students that something is wrong, but to encourage reflection and deeper thought into the nature of certain taboo subjects as well as of their (and others’) behavior. Furthermore, Frau Schmidt appears to believe that introspection can turn some activities, especially gameplay, from mindless addiction into a learning experience. She states, The thing is, when you play as an addict, you're just an addict and you play for the sake of it. But once you've, this sort of introspection, you think about the way you do it, it makes you an expert somehow. And this is what's fun, because once you get interested in something, ähm, you start digging for more. And that's what I felt in those kids. Once they thought about their playing habits, they play differently. And that's what they told me. According to Frau Schmidt, instigating introspection in class on taboo topics like games can initiate a further process in students which extends beyond the spatial and temporal confines of the classroom. Talking about game experiences and topics in the classroom, so the teacher, led to students “digging for more” which in turn, changed their playing habits. Bringing the topic into the classroom not only influenced students outside of the classroom, according to the teacher, it also influenced the students inside 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 294 <?page no="295"?> the classroom to engage more. Frau Schmidt explained the effects of bringing the topic of games into the classroom, stating, It's like being a sports professional. You don't play tennis just to play it, but you talk about how to hold the thing, and how to do this (waves hand like swinging tennis racket), and once they've told me, how to, how they did it, and the more that they talked about it and the more that they thought about it, the deeper it got. And this is the most interesting thing in it. Articulation plays a crucial role for many of life’s activities. From the teacher’s perspective, bringing the topic into the classroom gave students the opportunity to articulate their gaming experiences. Articulation, as explained in 1.3, is con‐ nected to further cognitive processes, and in this case study, articulation allowed for deeper reflection amongst the students. Thus, according to the teacher, students were interested in the topic of games because it was both ‘taboo’ and relevant for their everyday lives. The teacher saw in this conflict an opportunity to cultivate student reflection from the bottom up by not imposing on the students an opinion or conclusion on games but rather by posing reflective questions. As a result, the teacher noted an in‐ crease in student maturity dealing with the topic as well as an influence in how students play games and reflect on their game experiences outside of the class‐ room. Here, the teacher found a benefit in not knowing much about the topic of games because she was able to learn from the students. The interest in learning from the students is addressed under the following question. 8.5 Challenge 2: Changing Classroom Roles What are the student perspectives on the role of the teacher and of the learners when game discourse is introduced to the EFL classroom? In the project, there were many moments in which it appeared as if the roles in the classroom were reversed. When students were given the opportunity to express knowledge, experiences, beliefs and values about games and their free time activities surrounding them, the students took on a role as experts and, since the teacher had little to no experience with digital games, the teacher often took on the role of a learner. In the interview, students were asked about their perspectives on switching these roles. Specifically, they were asked their per‐ ceptions on taking the role of a teacher as well as on the teacher taking the role of a learner. 8.5 Challenge 2: Changing Classroom Roles 295 <?page no="296"?> Three of the six students who were interviewed expressed a deep interest in taking on the role of a teacher during the project. Philipp expressed himself to be particularly interested in sharing with the teacher. First of all, he was inter‐ ested in imparting knowledge, as he stated, Ja, dadurch, dass wir, also die meisten von uns halt eben mehr wie unsere Lehrerin darüber wissen (.) ähm, ist es in jedem Fall so, dass wir bei diesem Thema mehr über das, über die Spiele ihr erzählt. Also, dadurch (...) erzählen wir über unser Wissen an unsere Lehrer und dadurch ist es so fast, dass wir ihr was sogar beibringen. However, he is not just interested in imparting knowledge, but also in sharing aspects of his personal life. At a slightly later point in the interview, Philipp not only expressed his belief that game discourse made the English classroom more interesting for him, but also that he particularly enjoyed being able to talk about games and their relation to his life. He explained, Ähm meistens ist es ja so, dass es dann so ein Standardthema in Englisch oder allge‐ mein ist und ähm meistens ist auch diese, dieses Thema langweilig. Deswegen hat man nicht immer Bock eigentlich auf den Englischunterricht, aber dadurch, dass es so ein Thema ist wie jeder schon sagt fast wie so ein Hobby ist. Und dadurch wo wir, dass wir viel darüber wissen und darüber erzählen können, ist es schon (.) so, dann denkt man sich voll in meiner nächsten Stunde: Ja, heute reden wir wieder über das Zocken und so, da kann ich wieder dies und das erklären, was ich vielleicht am Wo‐ chenende oder so gemacht habe. Here Philipp explained his role, and interest in the project, as not only being able to share knowledge about games, but also about his experiences (i.e. his weekend). For him, games appeared to be a part of his life and identity, and sharing information about them also involved sharing aspects of his personal life. This suggests, then, that sharing about games involves establishing and/ or maintaining social ties with others in the class, including the teacher. Philipp supported this idea, stating, “Und dadurch, dass auch unsere Lehrerin eine Person ist, die viel über uns wissen möchte und auch eigentlich bis jetzt weiß, ist es so, dass wir ihr viel erzählen können darüber.” Thorsten expressed a similar viewpoint. He explained that he enjoyed switching roles with the teacher and that this led to a closer bond. He stated, Das ist dann halt ein total cooles Gefühl ihr etwas zu erklären, dass sie nicht weiß, obwohl eigentlich sie immer die ist, die uns, uns etwas erklärt. Und einfach, dass diese Rollen vertauscht wurden. Das ist einfach (..) ein tolles Gefühl auch den Schülern gegenüber, wenn sie mal den Lehrer etwas erklären, wo und, wofür sie sich auch 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 296 <?page no="297"?> interessieren äh was uns interessiert. Und (..) ja, das steigert dann halt auch dieser Zusammenhalt zwischen den Lehrer und den Schüler. For Thorsten, this switch in roles produces not only a positive emotion for stu‐ dents, but also strengthens the relationship between the teacher and students. Thus, he presented it not as a loss of power for the teacher, or as a vulnerable position for the teacher to be in, but rather as an opportunity for the teacher to learn more about what interests the students. Tobias appeared in his comments to take this relationship a bit further. He believed that such exchanges (and changes in roles) can not only provide the teacher with information about games, and can not only strengthen relation‐ ships, but can also create an internal change in the teacher by influencing the teacher’s biases. Tobias explained how, previous to the project, the teacher ini‐ tially had biases against games and, over time and by showing interest in the students, these biases began to change. He stated, Ähm, aber dann hat, dann, das hat sich dann so Stück für Stück weiterentwickelt, dass sie immer mehr Interesse, persönliches Interesse dazu, dafür geweckt, äh, erweckt hat. Und dann hat sie auch mal nachgefragt ähm: Ja, was habt ihr denn gespielt? Worauf habt ihr das gespielt? Was ist das für ein Spiel? Was macht man da? Und äh da hat man auch so langsam auch ähm (.) ja, angefangen äh (.) ihr auch etwas beibringen zu wollen. Tobias saw the teacher’s biases against games as not simply a personal bias, but rather a generational one. For him, the closer relationship to the teacher ac‐ companied this change in the teacher’s bias. This change was marked in what Tobias recognized as a ‘true’ interest in the games and in the students’ lives. He commented, Und dadurch hat man auch so ein äh ja sogar so ein bisschen besseres äh ein bisschen bessere Beziehung zu ihr aufgebaut. Weil äh diese Spiele Einen quasi abtrennen von der älteren Generation, weil sie davon nichts halten. Und sobald man dann so merkt, dass sie sich auch wirklich dafür interessieren hat, ist man da auch auf jeden Fall offener dafür und sie hat ja auch realisiert, dass es uns wirklich was bringt. This and the previous comments show the negotiation of meaning that occurred, and which some students expect, when game discourse is introduced into the EFL classroom. This negotiation of meaning involves both the roles of the learners as specialists who have the opportunity to share knowledge, experi‐ ences, beliefs and values to a teacher who knows relatively little about digital games. Furthermore, this negotiation, according to the interview, requires teachers who are willing to become learners, who are open, curious and un‐ 8.5 Challenge 2: Changing Classroom Roles 297 <?page no="298"?> biased. These are the results of the analysis that looks specifically at student interest in taking on the role of a ‘teacher’ when game discourse is introduced to the EFL classroom. The students also held strong opinions on the role of a teacher who is faced with game discourse and knowledgeable students. Torben expressed his view that the teacher should be open and approach the topic without prejudice. Philipp stated that the teacher should be open for multiple opinions. Thorsten commented that the teacher should display curiosity for games and for students’ interactions with them. Dagmar, who remained relatively quiet during the in‐ terview, emphasized that teachers should exhibit interest in their students. She stated, sobald die Lehrer Interesse an einem Schüler zeigen und an dem, was der macht, dann macht auch der Unterricht mit diesem Lehrer einfach viel mehr Spaß, weil man sich auch wirklich austauschen kann (.) und es ist halt sehr gut, wenn die Lehrer offen sind These responses largely mirror the responses given for the student interest in game discourse and taking on the role of the ‘teacher’ in the classroom. If learners are to share their knowledge and experiences, then teachers should be genuinely open to and interested in the learners, not simply as consumers of knowledge, but also as coproducers. What are the teacher’s perspectives on the role of the teacher when game discourse is introduced to the EFL classroom? According to the linking language learning approach (cf. 1.3), connecting to the English that students have contact to outside of school in the EFL classroom means that both students and teachers reevaluate their role in the classroom. Because this teaching unit followed strongly the principles of linking language learning, the teacher was forced to reevaluate her own role as well as the role of the students. Concerning her own role, the teacher compared herself to a “shepherd dog” involved in processes of loosely guiding a group of individuals as they discover their own learning path. On the one hand, the teacher felt that it was her responsibility to lead the students, provide them with structure and establish a “red thread.” She stated, It's like a shepherd dog, I think. It was here. Because […] I structured it of course, because we had materials, we had questions while they brainstorming, and we had a line through, so we knew what to do and what we wanted from them. But still we were free enough to let them walk wherever or travel where ever they wanted to. Frau Schmidt was able to connect this approach to competence orientation, stating, “This is this Kompetenzorientierter Unterricht. That ähm tells kids we 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 298 <?page no="299"?> expect you to know this at the end of the learning process. So but we don't tell kids how to learn, because learners are so different”. However, the teacher was also to some extent forced into this position because she did not know much about the topic and because the students often knew more than she did. In her own words, “I was a newbie because I didn’t know anything about it”. Because this is a difficult position for teachers to be in, Frau Schmidt was asked what traits she felt teachers should have to handle topics which they know little about and which the students know more. Here there are two categories under which her answers fall. On the one hand, teachers need to exhibit open‐ ness to the topic and learners. In terms of openness of content, Frau Schmidt stated, “I told them that nothing was wrong. Because nowadays, or I don't know, there all the time, students tend to think, oh my, I have to give the answer that is right, because the teacher wants me to answer this.” Teachers also need to exhibit curiosity in the topic and willingness to learn from the students. Interest in the topic is also connected to interest in the students as individuals with their own valid backgrounds and knowledge. This leads to the other category of traits that Frau Schmidt expressed in the interview. On the other hand, teachers need to have faith. This includes trusting students as co-creators of classroom discourse and of their own learning envi‐ ronments. When asked about how she felt the students dealt with the respon‐ sibility of taking on the role of the teacher in the teaching unit, Frau Schmidt stated, “I became open more and more because I trusted them, and I think that is what you have to be. You have to be trustful”. This faith also includes the teacher, who must be able to deal with the uncertainty of giving some of the control over to the students. Discussing this uncertainty, Frau Schmidt stated, Yeah, because I didn't know. I mean, as a teacher I always know the answers the kids give me. When I teach history, I know what to ask and they know what to say. Because they want me, that I am happy. But the thing is, once I didn't know what they answered, I was so curious and I was sometimes nervous about things they told me because I didn't know anything about it. So I like, dug for more and they opened up and they told me about it. For Frau Schmidt, the uncertainty of the content of class is linked to control over the class and the learning process. Not knowing about the content, and allowing her students to actually teach her about games as she directed the discourse through questions, required trust in her students as well as the ability to deal with the uncertainty of the outcome. The role of the teacher is no doubt a complex one, and the overall positive responses made by Frau Schmidt are in no way an attempt to cover this up. 8.5 Challenge 2: Changing Classroom Roles 299 <?page no="300"?> Rather, there is much to be said about what Frau Schmidt left unsaid, especially concerning the way in which she led the class and the specific subject-based competences she utilized in order to guide the students through the teaching unit. However, what her interview responses do reveal is that there is a conflict in the roles of both the teacher and the learners when the topic of games is integrated into the classroom, especially when teachers have little to no expe‐ rience with and knowledge of games (cf. also case study 1 in chapter 6). In such situations, teachers need to activate their basic didactic competencies to set larger level goals and structure tasks which help reach those goals. However, teachers also need a high level of openness and faith. Openness involves the teacher being genuinely curious about the topic, having a willingness to learn from the students, and being interested in the students themselves and their out-of-class game experiences. Faith involves both trust in the students to be able to take on the role of ‘teachers’ and to contribute to the classroom with their experiences and knowledge and also a belief in themselves to handle the uncertainty of the outcomes. For Frau Schmidt, this uncertainty was handled largely with open questions and with a desire to understand her students, as well as with her ability to ask questions to induce deeper student reflection. Of course, closely related to Frau Schmidt’s responses on her own role are also her perspectives on the role of the students. Based on her responses, the teacher can only balance control with openness and faith if students are willing and able, to some degree, to take on the role of the teacher by providing their own experiences and knowledge on games. According to the teacher, the stu‐ dents were able to achieve this during the teaching unit. Frau Schmidt stated, “I think the most cool fact for them was that they could teach me. And this was an experience that they hadn't had before.” The teacher was able to learn a lot about her students, as she noted, “people were talking about their own lives as players, or about their own experiences about things they gained while playing. Ähm and while they opened up, the others started to open.” Thus, the students were contributing to the classroom discourse on games with their own experi‐ ences with games. This required, as seen in the last statement, that students “open up.” This statement was repeated several times in the interview, and sug‐ gests the level of trust that is required for students to take on the new role. Teachers need to be able to trust in students, and students need to be able to trust in the teacher. This shared trust allows both teachers and students to open up. Furthermore, this opening-up allows both parties to be more reflective of past experiences and allows for the integration of new perspectives on previous beliefs. 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 300 <?page no="301"?> Behind the beliefs on the changing roles of teachers and students are the teacher’s perspectives on the effects of the teaching unit on the students, on the classroom, and on the teacher herself. Interview results on this topic are pre‐ sented under the following question. What unexpected results did the teacher perceive from changing roles when introducing game discourse to the EFL classroom? The teacher was both asked and often freely addressed results of the teaching unit and of introducing game discourse into the classroom. The following results of the interview are presented in three categories that are largely intercon‐ nected. Frau Schmidt addressed the participation of the students, the maturity of the students, and the changes that she herself went through. One of the most addressed issues was the participation of the students. Frau Schmidt expressed surprise over the participation of her students, mentioning specific subgroups and individuals, both during the project and even afterwards. For instance, Frau Schmidt was surprised about the overall participation of her students, especially students who would not typically participate in class. She stated, “people, or kids in my classroom that did not talk so much before, started becoming teachers or experts or mentors for others.” This new participation, however, was not limited to the content but was also related to English as a foreign language. Frau Schmidt explained, “even people, you remember, even people that do not speak English properly, they tried to speak because it interested them. They were interested in it. And so they tried to say something in class and they would have never before.” This statement points out that students may have content knowledge to provide, but may not participate in classroom discourse because of language barriers. However, when learners are motivated to communicate by topics and discourses which are relevant and meaningful to their lives, then they are often able to overcome language-related inhibitions. This was observed by the teacher during the project. Frau Schmidt also noticed surprising effects along gender lines. Discussing a group of boys who were typically quiet during class, she stated, “I had never known that a boy group that was quite shy would interact so freely with others while talking about this.” This is not surprising, since the topic of video games is often attributed as a largely male dominated pastime. However, the teacher also noticed a surprising engagement by female students, stating, But I think, while in the process of this project, some of the girls who did not want to play before, or who did not want to say anything about playing because maybe they did not play at all, they were triggered by first the openness of others, being willing 8.5 Challenge 2: Changing Classroom Roles 301 <?page no="302"?> to talk about it, and secondly about their own prejudices, and their overcoming them. You know? On the one hand, Frau Schmidt reinforces the idea that gaming is largely a male pastime by stating that there were female students who did not play and who had prejudices against the game. On the other hand, however, Frau Schmidt expressed that these female students were encouraged by the openness of others to engage in classroom discourse on games and possibly even overcome some of their prejudices. Frau Schmidt also expressed a belief that the increased participation during the teaching unit carried on after the project ended. This belief attests to the continuing effects of enabling students to cocreate their own learning spaces and discourses within the classroom. The teacher stated, the pupils who had participated the most while doing the project are still participating. Because once they have known, or once they have experienced themselves as capable of doing something, they suddenly felt that they can participate more in class. The active participation and the role of expert and teacher reveal to students that they are capable of taking control of their own learning. Thus, according to the teacher, introducing such topics with an open interest and curiosity allows students to develop a sense of autonomy which can transfer into other learning settings. As Frau Schmidt stated, “the autonomy I gave them is still there.” The autonomy perceived by Frau Schmidt is related to her goal in increasing student maturity and belief that this was, to some degree, achieved through the project. This maturity is, in turn, connected to the idea presented earlier in this interview analysis that games represented a taboo topic for students. The stu‐ dents could have reacted in various ways to the ‘taboo’ topic, and according to the teacher, they did so with maturity. Referring to classroom discourse about gaming that arose, Frau Schmidt stated, And, I was absolutely, I don't know, triggered by the matureness these teenagers were talking about friendships that broke up, or gaining, being, yeah, making groups of people they haven't met before, and being disappointed and being happy about some‐ thing. Using a student as an example, Frau Schmidt explained how Thorsten related a story of making friends through an online game and the disappointment Thorsten experienced when this online friendship began to fall apart. Referring to Thorsten’s relation of his experience in the classroom, Frau Schmidt stated, “he would have never uttered it while teaching present perfect.” 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 302 <?page no="303"?> Frau Schmidt also related what she perceived as the results of this new-found maturity and responsibility. On the one hand, she felt that students learned more how to deal with failure and uncertainty. This is, for her, related to processes of maturing and ‘growing up.’ She stated, To make their ways through thorns and rainforests. And to overcome problems. To become resilient. Because, because failing for them is always, hey you are giving me a bad mark, and I say hey, I don't give you a bad mark, because you failed, but because you haven't overcome this. Thus dealing with the uncertainty of learning and engaging in discourse is linked to the possibility of failure. Learning to fail, which as the teacher sees is a byproduct of not only dealing with the topic of games but also of taking on the responsibility of learning (and teaching), is not only a part of maturing but also a part of creating resilience needed for student life beyond (and outside of) the classroom. This uncertainty that the students had to learn to deal with through the teaching unit is related to the uncertainty that the teacher also had to handle when giving over responsibility to the students. Frau Schmidt related this leap of faith that was required from her as a teacher through a metaphor of a bum‐ blebee. She explained, It's like this bumblebee, you know? Because it can't fly, because its wings are too tiny. […] Because it’s too heavy, the wings are too small. But the bumblebee doesn't know. And it flies so. And I was afraid at the beginning of this process, of this project, because I did not know what to do with them. I didn't really know what comes out of it. And ähm, but I think the openness, the structured openness of the project enabled the kids to, yeah, be at their fullest. Because they were not limited through me, through you, through themselves. They were just enabled to, yeah, speak their minds. It is possible, as this statement points out, that difficult topics like games are often avoided in the classroom because of the uncertainty of outcome and the lack of faith that teachers have in their students. It is possible, however, that if such topics are handled well, students are able to overcome the ‘impossible bar‐ riers’ perceived by teachers and are able to manage their own learning oppor‐ tunities and engage in serious and meaningful discourse. They are able to ‘ma‐ ture’ if they are provided the space, opportunity, and faith from their teachers. One of the ‘revolutionary’ potentials of honest discourse is that both parties involved are subject to lasting change and development. This means that, in the classroom, it is not only possible (and desirable) that students change but also teachers. For instance, Frau Schmidt realized through the project that, although 8.5 Challenge 2: Changing Classroom Roles 303 <?page no="304"?> she considered herself to be an open person, that she had prejudices against games and players. She stated, “I didn't know before, when we started the project, I was prejudiced against games, because I didn't know anything about it.” She later explained more specifically what knowledge she was missing which informed these prejudices. She claimed, I had never thought that games were good for something because I don’t play. I get bored with playing. And my family and friends they are playing of course, but I didn't know anything about the use of it. And ähm once the kids told me not only about their process of learning language but also about their structuring their gaming processes and learning something for life from games, ähm, yeah I’ve started being interested in it. This statement reveals the potential of students bringing game experiences into the classroom, and of the changing roles as teachers begin to learn about the challenges their students face in the outside world. 8.6 Summary This third case study was chosen because it was unique in revealing a strong autonomy of the students and a willingness of the teacher to support this au‐ tonomy and to deal with a topic she knew little about. As previously stated, this analysis focuses solely on the student and teacher interviews, and on their ret‐ rospective perspectives on interests and classroom roles. The teacher interview also focused on the unexpected results of the teaching unit. Because this case study relies solely on the interviews for the analysis, it can make no claim to the actual quality of the teaching unit and to the learning effects of the integration of game discourse in the classroom. What the interview analysis does show is a high level of agreeability between the students and the teacher on how and why game discourse is integrated. This level of agreeableness could, in turn, support why both students and teacher felt that the teaching unit was a success, and could have been a pre-requisite to rather than a product of the teaching unit. Nonetheless, the analysis showed that students are interested in sharing their knowledge of and experiences with games and they are also interested in connecting to other students and to the teachers through classroom discourse (cf. chapter 7 on the intimacy of games). Furthermore, they are interested in using the classroom as a place to develop and practice skills and strategies to help them learn (and communicate in) Eng‐ lish outside of the classroom. As a further generalization, teachers should be 8 Case Study 3: Teacher as Learner, Learners as Teachers 304 <?page no="305"?> open in terms of both the topic and the students (and their experiences), and students should open up and be willing to share with the teacher. They should also be expected to deal with (possibly taboo) topics in a mature manner and be willing to reflect on their experiences and knowledge. When these criteria are met, fertile ground has been established for high student participation and en‐ gagement, even for students whose English language skills are perceived as weak. In such cases, the classroom becomes a space which links to the potentials of out-of-class language contact and learning and also a space in which learners become the co-producers instead of simply the consumers of education and (cultural) discourse. 8.6 Summary 305 <?page no="306"?> 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion The following chapter sections address the implications of this study and acts as a conclusion. First, section 9.1 reflects on the methodological approach uti‐ lized in this study and the ways in which it influenced the types of findings it produced. By addressing the potentials and limitations, 9.1 attempts to create transparency of the findings, to support the implications of their conclusions and enable/ encourage further research on games and game discourse in the EFL classroom. Section 9.2 serves as the core of this chapter and addresses the im‐ plications of this study - from the theoretical framework to the case study find‐ ings - in terms of the research questions posed in section 5.2. Thus, section 9.2 is not simply a restatement of the conclusions of each individual case study, but an attempt to further process and analyze their findings in terms of the impor‐ tant concepts of this study and especially the model of video game discourse. This analysis can be seen as a further step of generalizing the results and pre‐ senting them in a form which can be more relevant for both further research and teaching practitioners. Section 9.2 presents not only a collective analysis of all three case studies but also suggestions for how the challenges and problems that arose can be either avoided or turned into further learning opportunities. Finally, section 9.3 looks to the future with hopes of this study being a part of (and initiating further) research and development of game discourse in the EFL classroom. It addresses issues for further conceptual and empirical research, teacher training, professional materials development and integration of games and game discourse into EFL curricula. 9.1 Reflections on Methodology The methodological approach utilized in this study offered certain potentials and limitations. Its explorative nature allowed the posing of general research questions that offer a first step into the field of classroom game discourse. The lack of previous research on the subject, and especially in Germany, meant that this study must build a foundation upon which other research can follow. By focusing on classroom research, this study was able to observe meaning through interactions amongst students, between students and teachers, and between students and tasks and materials. These interactions led to a classroom discourse <?page no="307"?> on games that allowed the study to focus even more closely on problems and challenges as they are embedded within the authentic context of the classroom. For instance, the emergence of the challenges analyzed in chapters 6-8 (and reviewed in 9.2 once more) could not have been foreseen before the empirical study began and could not have been embedded in its research questions a priori. Furthermore, a more open, explorative approach also allowed for a freedom of the topic of games in the classroom, as neither teachers nor students were strictly prescribed how to handle the topic. Finally, the multiple data collection techni‐ ques implemented in this study, and resulting triangulation analysis techniques, enabled research into the complexity of the problems and challenges that emerged in the case studies and also increased the multiperspectivity the re‐ searcher could develop for these problems. Thus, the research methodology uti‐ lized in this study offered potentials that other approaches could not have of‐ fered. However, these potentials must be embedded within an understanding of the limitations of this over other research methodologies. First, the study was highly interpretive which made it difficult to focus on single discrete points for re‐ search. This means, among other issues, that the focus and analysis was inter‐ pretive, increasing the possibility that other researchers may have had slightly different focal points, provided different analyses and come to slightly different conclusions. On top of this, there is undoubtedly room for researcher bias in such an approach. For instance, this study has faced the attraction of either supporting and defending, or rejecting and demonizing video games. Either end of this bias spectrum would have influenced the focus of the study as well as the ways in which collected data were analyzed, and this study has made a conscious effort to remain objective. Additionally, though the study aims at re‐ searching phenomena and collecting data in ‘natural’ classroom settings, the awareness of the research project by the teachers and students, as well as the constant presence of the researcher, influenced classroom behavior, interactions and discourse. While it did become obvious at times that some students and teachers were putting forth their best, it also appeared that classes quickly nor‐ malized the setting and situation and, in the end, the results of the study were only marginally influenced by the observer effect. Finally, the methodological approach taken in this study introduces challenges to the generalizability of the results and their application to other settings. Though this issue cannot be re‐ solved in this study, section 9.2 below presents generalizable findings while es‐ tablishing transparency in relation to the case studies from which the general‐ ized claims stem. These limitations presented in this section are in no way meant to undermine the findings of the study. Rather, they are intended to contextualize 9.1 Reflections on Methodology 307 <?page no="308"?> 1 Cf. chapter 5 (especially 5.2) on measures taken to increase the reliability and validity of research methodology, especially as they relate to the issues presented here. the potentials within the complex reality of qualitative research and especially to encourage further research on the topic using multiple different research methodologies. 1 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies This section addresses the three research questions presented in 5.2 as they relate to the findings from the three case studies. This approach seeks relation‐ ships between the case studies and offers points of intersection that allow further insight into the problems and challenges that arose in each individual case study. Furthermore, despite the qualitative exploratory nature of this study, this section attempts to make the first steps towards generalizations in order to make these findings more relevant for EFL classrooms, for teacher training, materials de‐ velopment and for future research. Though the questions are presented and addressed in consecutive order, they are interrelated and can only be addressed fully when viewed together. Considered as a whole, the four questions and an‐ swers provided are intended to combine the theoretical considerations and models presented in part I and II with the empirical findings from part III. 1) What types of problems arise when the topic of video games is dis‐ cussed in the EFL classroom? How can these problems help identify typ‐ ical features of classroom game discourse? Table 25 presents in tabular form the challenges and problems that arose in the case studies and that were presented in chapters 6, 7 and 8. Specific findings as they relate to specific case studies will not be covered in this section and readers are thus referred to the respective chapters (and chapter conclusions). Rather, the interrelatedness of the individual challenges to other case study challenges and to the findings and results of the individual analyses will be presented in the following passages and specifically under the third research question. Case Study 1 Case Study 2 Case Study 3 Chal‐ lenges - student (dis)interest - game complexity - intimacy of games - changing roles 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 308 <?page no="309"?> - suitability of gamer dis‐ course - gamifying the classroom Table 25: Classroom Challenges for VGL in the EFL Classroom The second research question not only addresses the theoretical intentions be‐ hind and approach to the empirical research, but also after-the-fact reflections on the role of the concepts, multiliteracies and foreign language discourse ability, for this study and for the presentation and implications of its findings. 2) How can the conceptual lenses of foreign language discourse ability and multiliteracies allow insight into the classroom learning potentials of these problems? The multiliteracies approach of this study looks at all forms of media as potential forms of communication with various affordances and limitations for initiating and engaging in game discourse. It allows a perspective on discourse as a system of not just multiple (and often conflicting) ideas but also media, modes and even genres. Thus, for this study the multiliteracies approach enables a look at com‐ munication and discourse as occurring not only between students and teachers, and amongst students, but also through tasks and materials (like comics, video clips, texts etc.) introduced to the classroom, which can also be seen as carriers of game discourse. The foreign language discourse ability approach, however, offers two poten‐ tials. First, it allows a productive perspective on challenges and problems. From this approach, problems are not unavoidable and do not stem from a simple ‘reality’ of how things are (here, how video games are and how people interact with them). Rather, problems result from discourse, are uncovered by and also result through discourse. Discourse, then, can be a method through which prob‐ lems are uncovered, and investigating discourse can be a method through which the origins and the subtle complexities of problems (and their interconnected‐ ness) can be better understood, and even possibly employed to turn problems into challenges, and challenges into learning opportunities. Second, the foreign language discourse ability approach allows for the integration of authentic, meaningful and relevant topics and tasks into the EFL classroom. It connects the contact that learners have to English outside of school and in their free time to the classroom, and integrates the mechanics of language (and language learning) into communicative competences and skills, and integrates these in turn into higher-level educational goals of enabling participation in society and culture. It first values and second supports participation in foreign language and 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 309 <?page no="310"?> even global discourse in a topic which is already largely a global phenomenon, namely video games. The case studies showed that many students have contact to English through games and game related media, and several students in each case study admitted to intentionally improving their English skills through games. 3) How can the model of discourse-based video game literacy (section 2.3) help discover the complexities of classroom game discourse? This includes identifying typical problems and developing strategies for turning them into learning opportunities. The model of game discourse allows a look at the distinguishability and the interrelatedness of levels and topics of game discourse. It is very likely that all constituent parts or individual examples of game discourse contain all domains, but that only one or two domains are exhibited at the explicit level. Thus, an expression explicitly on the level of the game system may include implicitly information about the player or about the value of games for society, and an expression about the value of games for society may include implicit information about the game as a system, for example. Furthermore, the model of video game discourse contains an underlying belief which should be further evaluated ex‐ ternal to this study. This belief is that informed discourse as an evaluative con‐ cept should include an awareness of the existence of the different levels, their interrelatedness, as well as the ideas, knowledge and attitudes inherent in the discourses of each level. Due to the differentiation and integration of the three levels of game dis‐ course, further approaches to addressing problems that arise in the classroom can be developed. This simply suggests that a problem that arises concerning one level explicitly may be able to be addressed by approaching one of the other two (if not both) levels explicitly. The case analyses in this study show that this can occur (as occurred in the first case study when issues of game complexity were exacerbated by the teacher’s lacking knowledge of and respect for that complexity - the teacher didn’t show respect for the complexity of games spe‐ cifically until she connected it to her respect for complex media in general, es‐ pecially narrative complexity). Thus, the model not only allows different levels of recognition and identification of problems and challenges, but also enables the development of more complex (and less obvious) solutions. However, at the same time the model shows the vast discrepancy between the potentials of game discourse at all three levels (cf. chapter 2) and the reality of classroom game discourse. Of all the potential complexity that the model covers, what became prominent in the case studies were not so much certain 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 310 <?page no="311"?> aspects of the model that were exhibited but rather problems and hurdles that stood in the way of reaching those potentials. Thus, the model not only offers potentials for conceptualizing the findings of classroom game discourse, but for also identifying absences in classroom discourse, investigating reasons for these absences and for creating tasks and activities which target these absences and which create a more holistic approach to cultural game discourse. Table 26 addresses the problems and challenges that arose in the case studies in terms of their relation to the three dimensions of game discourse. Here it is important to note that the dimension that each challenge is placed in is an in‐ terpretation of its most obvious fittingness, and it is not meant to overlook the implicit presence of and relation to other dimensions within each challenge. In fact, the passages below will address how each challenge fits within each do‐ main, but also how each challenge is related to other challenges and to other domains. Game Player World Challenges - complexity of games - reward paradox - focus on reward structures - student (dis)in‐ terest - intimacy of games - gamer discourse suitability - gamifying the classroom - switching roles Table 26: Case Study Challenges in Three Dimensions of Video Game Discourse Each problem/ challenge is summarized in a table which presents the following information. First, it differentiates between what the interests of the teachers and students are based on the results of the case study analyses and interviews. This information is then paired to the knowledge and abilities of the teachers and students, recognizing the discrepancies between desires and intentions, and what teachers and students are actually able to know and do. The information in each table also provides a reference to the case studies it stems from. Often times the statements may relate to several or all case studies, sometimes explic‐ itly and at other times implicitly. When possible, multiple reference case studies are given. Otherwise, the most explicit case study is related. Providing source case studies allows for a step in the direction of generalization without com‐ promising the validity of the analysis. In other words, these references to orig‐ inating case studies provide transparency to the more general claims. Finally, the information in each table is organized within the game discourse domains where possible. Some challenges only have information which falls into one or two domains, while others have information which falls into all three. This or‐ 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 311 <?page no="312"?> ganization is a further attempt to utilize the discourse-based model of video game literacy structure information surrounding each challenge and the con‐ nection/ relation to other or multiple domains. Game Complexity: Game complexity is the first challenge to be addressed since it lies at the foundation of game discourse (cf. discourse-based model of VGL in figure 7). According to this model of game discourse, there is a likelihood that the complexity of video games influenced all other levels of discourse that arose in the case studies. Thus, game complexity is presented here as a single challenge which arose in the 1 st case study, but also as a factor which likely influenced other challenges in other case studies. Many of the games that stu‐ dents chose to bring into the classroom were high in complexity. Games like Grand Theft Auto, Assassin’s Creed and League of Legends were typical examples of complex games students thematized. However, even seemingly ‘simple’ games like Mario Karts and Candy Crush can exhibit a structural and motiva‐ tional complexity which can confound individuals who are uninformed about the complexity of games. This choice of such games suggests that students are interested in complexity. In the first case study, Frau Schneider showed interest in the complexity of games that suggested a respect for complexity. Complex games became interesting to her because they exhibited a complexity which could be investigated and analyzed while ‘simple’ games became uninteresting because they exhibited an apparent lack of complexity. However, as the case study analysis points out, the teacher focused largely on narrative and fictional world complexity, ignoring the structural ‘game’ complexity which makes even many ‘simple’ games engaging. Game Complexity Interest Knowledge Game: - teachers are interested in complexity (narrative/ fictional world) yet intimi‐ dated by it (CS 1) - teachers may not be interested in ‘simple’ games (CS 1) - students are interested in game com‐ plexity (all CS’s), yet lack of teacher knowledge can be burdensome (CS 1) Game: - teachers lack background knowledge on games, also creating difficulties for task development (all CS’s) - students may lack ability to concep‐ tualize and articulate implicit game knowledge (CS 1) - students exhibit difficulties articu‐ lating knowledge to non-players (CS 1) 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 312 <?page no="313"?> - students may provide educationally acceptable answers to avoid conflict and work (CS1) Table 27: Case Study Findings of Game Complexity (CS = Case Study) However, game complexity could also be a barrier to classroom game discourse. As the 1 st case study highlighted, students were unable to capture the complexity of their chosen games in the form of a summary. While this may in part be due to the difficulty of expressing games in the generic form of a short summary, the difficulty is also in part due to the complexity of many video games and the inability that students have in capturing that complexity in discursive-linguistic form. This complexity also posed a challenge for the teacher who was intimi‐ dated by her own lack of knowledge of games. While the realization that some students had serious difficulty with the complexity of games may have encour‐ aged the teacher to initiate further analysis and reflection, she had little of her own background knowledge to rely on and support the learners with. Thus, a complex relationship between interest and knowledge emerges. The knowledge of the students may interest students to bring complex games into the classroom, but that knowledge may be largely implicit and not yet reflected and articulated. These difficulties may lead to student frustration and sense of failure (if they cannot successfully complete classroom tasks), and ultimately to a lack of interest to work with their games in the classroom. Teachers, on the other hand, may be unaware and/ or intimidated by the complexity of games. While they may be interested in the potential of complex games for challenging analyses, they may have little background knowledge to help them support stu‐ dents performing such analyses. In the 1 st case study, the teacher relied on her background knowledge of literature, which helped her recognize the narrative potential of games, but this specific focus also allowed her to overlook/ ignore (and devalue) the game-based (systemic) components and complexity of video games. Finally, game complexity likely negatively affected student motivation, which the teacher, Frau Schneider, interpreted as either a lacking interest in the topic in general or as a complete lack of student reflection of games and game experiences. Unfortunately, the complexity of games (as conceptualized within the first dimension of game discourse) was largely ignored in all case studies. On the one hand, this is likely due to the fact that teachers have no formal education on video games and oftentimes very little personal background knowledge and ex‐ perience. Student knowledge, on the other hand, may also be piecemeal, un‐ evenly distributed, largely implicit, unreflected and unarticulated. And further‐ 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 313 <?page no="314"?> more, because the school context means that dealing with games is work, and because teachers are no longer experts, students may resist teacher attempts to initiate reflection and articulation and offer excuses for not offering up their knowledge and experiences or may simply supply educationally acceptable/ expected answers. This complex dynamic may explain the dual nature of game complexity and its role in supporting participation in game discourse. It can both support and hinder integration into the EFL classroom, as knowledge and interest (or lacks thereof) exist in a complex interrelationship and balance between students and teachers. Gamifying the Classroom: The complexity of games may be related to an‐ other challenge which arose in a different case study. In the 2 nd case study, stu‐ dents were given the task to gamify the classroom after working with the con‐ cept of gamification. Though gamification exists largely in the 3 rd dimension of game discourse, it is discussed here in relation to the 1 st dimension because it involves knowledge of games as systems. On the whole, the class showed great interest in the gamification activity (in both the 2 nd and 3 rd case study) as did the teachers. However, as the 2 nd case study showed, many students focused on the reward structures of games and exhibited difficulties, despite the teacher’s (Dr. Müller’s) repeated attempts, engaging in deeper reflection on motivation and learning goals. Students largely focused on extrinsic rewards like better grades, social status amongst peers, or cake in their game ideas. Though some students reflected in the discussion the similarities between games and the motivational structures of school (and the classroom), and though some students were critical of the extrinsic motivational structures of their fellow students’ ideas, no ideas were brought forth which offered alternative forms of motivation and goals. While this may reflect constraints placed on the task, like time and complexity restraints, it is also likely that students, as video game players, have difficulties conceptualizing game systems beyond their extrinsic reward systems of points, levels, and in-game rewards. Looking beyond these structures to intrinsic mo‐ tivations behind play and narrative (and at the paradox of game rewards - i.e. that they have only extrinsic value within the game) appears to require an awareness that students do not have and a reflection that students have not undergone yet. 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 314 <?page no="315"?> Gamifying Classroom Interest Knowledge Game: - teachers and students are interested in gamification activities (CS 2 & 3) - teachers are interested in connecting games to higher level learning goals (CS 2, to some extent CS 3) World: - students are interested in reflecting on reward and motivational struc‐ tures of school (CS 2, to some extent CS 3) Game: - students’ focus on reward structures like status, points, levels and even real-life rewards like grades and cake, and tend to overlook other motiva‐ tional structures of games like play-states or learning goals (CS 2, to some extent CS 3) Table 28: Case Study Findings of Gamifying the Classroom (CS = Case Study) These two challenges, and the possible explanations presented here, simply suggest that, while students and teachers alike may have interest in games and their complexity, students have difficulties accessing that complexity, and it is also likely that those difficulties are not simply at the level of articulation but also at the level of conceptualization. Students may shy away from dealing with the complexity of games, not simply because they are uninterested, not simply because they are unwilling to share with the teachers, and not simply because teachers lack background knowledge. Rather, dealing with the complexity of games points out to students that there are aspects of games (and gameplay) which remain largely unnoticed and unreflected. Intimacy of Games: The next two challenges lie closely within the 2 nd dimen‐ sion of video game discourse by focusing on the student (as player). In the 2 nd case study, it became apparent through the analysis that games are an intimate subject for most students. This intimacy occurred along two lines: first, games are a part of many students’ identity as they grew up playing games since their early childhood. Thus, games play a considerable role in the memories of their childhood and processes of growing up. Second, and related to the first, games are a part of many students’ social (and familial) networks as student not only grew up playing games, but did so with friends and family. 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 315 <?page no="316"?> Intimacy of Games Interest Knowledge Player: - teachers are interested in player iden‐ tities (histories and social networks - CS 2) of students (all CS’s) - students are interested in presenting their player identities (histories and social networks - CS 2) (CS 2 & 3) Player: - teachers know little about students’ player identity (all CS’s) - students may only marginally be able to connect game intimacy to game knowledge (CS 1, to some extent also CS 2 & 3) Table 29: Case Study Findings of the Intimacy of Games (CS = Case Study) In the case studies (especially the 2 nd and 3 rd ) it became apparent in the classroom observations and in the interviews that many students are interested in pre‐ senting their game experiences, especially as they relate to their own histories and connecting/ relating to other people. In other words, they enjoy talking about games as a part of who they are. Teachers express interest in connecting to their students and learning about their lives, even if (or possibly because) they admit knowing very little about this. Furthermore, as Dr. Müller found out in the 2 nd case study, there is great potential in the intimacy of games to introduce aspects of identity construction and existence of stereotypes to develop inter‐ cultural communicative competence and initiate processes of reflection (of self and others). However, as the previous analyses of the complexity of games and gamifica‐ tion of the classroom show, students may be unwilling or unable to deal with the complexities of game systems and address reasons why games are engaging enough to be a considerable part of their lives and play such a role in establishing and supporting social networks. It seems likely that video games, as intimate parts of students’ lives, must be dealt with in ways that do not threaten that intimacy, and the relation of games to students’ identities, history and social networks. Student (Dis)Interest: In the 1 st case study, many students displayed a lack of interest in completing tasks set forth by the teacher that the teacher addressed the class and student interest. Some students replied, speaking for the class, that games were not a topic they were interested in anymore and that it has been dealt with in other classes. However, what became clear in the student inter‐ views, and which was mirrored in all other case studies, is that students are indeed interested in the topic of games in the EFL classroom (as well as in game-related material), but that they are disinterested in certain topics. Results 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 316 <?page no="317"?> from all case studies reveal that students are not interested in engaging with the topics of violence in games and addiction. They feel this is a topic covered in other classes and which dominate both school and mass media discourse on games. They also feel that teachers have internalized biases against games con‐ cerning these two issues. Student (Dis)Interest Interest Knowledge Player: - teachers are interested in critical en‐ gagement with game addiction and violence (all CS’s) - students interested in game topics but not addiction and violence (all CS’s) World: - students not interested in ‘binary’ game discourse (games as good or bad, CS 1 & 2) - teachers are aware of problems con‐ cerning addiction and they feel they should initiate critical reflection in students (all CS’s) - students are aware that teachers and schools have biases against games concerning addiction and violence (all CS’s) Table 30: Case Study Findings of Student (Dis)Interest (CS = Case Study) However, teachers are interested in cultivating critical engagement with games, and often in terms of these two issues. On the one hand, it seems fair to serve students’ interests and pay heed to topics towards which they might be sensitive. Furthermore, it also makes sense to understand the strong intimate connection that students have towards games, especially in terms of their own identities and social networks. Game violence and addiction are tricky topics because they tend to push games into a binary discourse in which it is easy to label games as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ and offer simplistic strategies for dealing with violence and ad‐ diction by supporting gaming abstinence. This approach stands in stark contrast to, if not in direct conflict with, student interests, beliefs and values towards games. On the other hand, it also seems fair that teachers wish to deal with issues of violence in games and game addiction, especially in order to initiate critical engagement with games and students’ behavior in and around them. Some stu‐ dents may use games to support violent tendencies and views of the world, and other students may be dealing with video game addiction and may struggle with balancing their time playing games with other valuable activities. While the conflict between teachers and students, between critical engage‐ ment and dislike of certain game topics, became most apparent in the 1 st case 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 317 <?page no="318"?> study, it was present in all three case studies. In the case studies where it did not become an explicit issue or challenge, it remained in the minds of teachers and students (except during the interviews) and likely influenced the way classroom game discourse emerged and developed. Suitability of Gamer Discourse: Introducing gamer discourse into the class‐ room was an attempt to bridge both the knowledge and interest gaps between students and the educational context. Research on game comics (cf. part II) re‐ vealed that gamer discourse typically addresses all three dimensions of game discourse (in almost equal proportions) and that gamer discourse is fully capable of engaging in critical reflection of games (even, and especially, with the topics of violence and addiction). Yet, this criticism is performed with insightful knowl‐ edge of the games, of game experience, and of the discourse on games. Further‐ more, this criticism is performed while also praising the games, and by not de‐ monizing them. Thus, gamer discourse possibly challenges the idea that students do not want to engage in discourse about game violence and addiction, and points that students may simply not be interested in dealing with the topics in a simplistic way that demonizes games or that challenges students’ valuing games. Gamer Discourse Interest Knowledge World: - teachers are interested in the poten‐ tial of game fan-comics to initiate re‐ flection and articulation in students (all CS’s) - students not interested in mass media game discourse (CS 1 & 3), but are in‐ terested in ‘gamer’ media discourse for EFL classroom (all CS’s) - students are familiar with (and inter‐ ested in) English language gamer dis‐ course and media, particularly with Let’s Play videos on YouTube (all CS’s) World: - teachers sometimes lack general background knowledge to under‐ stand gamer media (all CS’s) - the ‘narrowcasting’ of gamer dis‐ course presents challenges for stu‐ dents and teachers (CS 1, to some ex‐ tent also CS 2 & 3) - teachers can relate to and integrate into the classroom gamer discourse (CS2) - students found fan-comics inter‐ esting and could relate to them (CS 1) but also difficult to understand and explain (CS 1) Table 31: Case Study Findings of Gamer Discourse (CS = Case Study) All case studies showed (especially in the student interviews) that many students are interested in and familiar with gamer discourse, and that they feel that it 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 318 <?page no="319"?> deserves a place in the EFL classroom. As already mentioned, students are dis‐ trustful of mass media like popular news channels, but often watch YouTube channels on games, television programs like GameOne and even read gamer magazines. Furthermore, all case studies revealed that these are sources of Eng‐ lish contact for students. However, gamer discourse presents several challenges. The first and most obvious challenge was exhibited in the first case study which worked the most intensively with game fan-comics. Here, the challenge was labeled the ‘narrowcasting’ of gamer discourse, referring to the narrow and limited intended audience of many examples of gamer discourse (and game comics). This narrowcasting presented a further set of challenges. First, not all students were able to understand the comics (or if so, sometimes only to a limited degree). This means that some examples of gamer discourse were even too narrow for students who play the game. Second, the specificity of some comics made it difficult for students to explain to an audience with little background knowledge (either of games in general or even of the specific game itself). A further challenge to gamer discourse is the extra level of analysis often required. For instance, fan-comics require at least some consideration of how comic strips present information and how it comments on information (or game experience) through humor (cf. 3.2). These several layers of challenges were also noted by teachers (especially by Frau Schneider, cf. chapter 6) who felt that the comics were an “Umweg” (detour) on the way to promoting critical engagement and reflection. Additionally, gamer discourse presented difficulties for teachers, who had little knowledge of games in general and who could find little points of relation to the specificities of game fan-comics. However, in the 2 nd case Study, Dr. Müller was able to find several instances of gamer discourse (a fan-comic and video) to which he personally could relate to and which he was easily able to integrate into the class (cf. chapter 7). This may suggest a need to further differentiate between different types of gamer discourse, their specific functions within the gamer community, and the ease with which they can be integrated into the classroom. Comparing to points discussed thus far, it could be that gamer discourse (and especially game fan-comics) reflect other challenges. For one, they potentially reflect the complexity of games, and with the interests and knowledge and ability gaps of both students and teachers. They may also point out to students aspects of the games they have not reflected yet. Second, they may (and often do) reflect topics and points of criticism which students wish to avoid in school context. Issues like game violence and addiction may be topics that students would be willing to discuss and reflect on outside of school and in the presence of their peer group, but the context of school and its focus on critical engagement 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 319 <?page no="320"?> may change student interest and willingness to engage. In other words, the school context may place gamer criticism within a binary approach, giving the students the impression that game experiences are not valued. This issue, as already discussed, related to the intimacy of games for many students, and the idea that criticism of games may be viewed as an invalidation of the meaning of games for students’ identities and social networks. In other words, gamer discourse, because it exists within the 3 rd dimension of game discourse, has not only the potential to represent the potentials of the other two dimensions, but also the challenges associated with them as revealed in the case studies. Changing Roles: These challenges are all interconnected in the final (and pos‐ sibly greatest) challenge facing the classroom when game discourse is intro‐ duced. Though this challenge was thematized in the context of the 3 rd case study, teachers and students in all case studies underwent a changing of roles, as stu‐ dents were expected to bring their English language game experiences and challenges from outside the classroom, and as teachers attempted to provide the students with systematic help and strategies to master these challenges. In these situations, students took on aspects of the teacher role, and teachers took on aspects of the role of a learner. The complexity of this situation actually comes in determining - or negotiating - the exact roles of the teachers and students, or how teachers are learners and how they are still teachers, and how students are teachers while still being learners. The results of the case studies show that changing roles have implications for the three different levels of game discourse. At the level of the game, teachers are interested in learning about games from students, but they also want to initiate and support critical engagement with games and the students’ experi‐ ences with them. Some teachers are uncertain as to the extent to which students can critically engage with games on their own, and the analysis shows that sometimes students are resistant and at other times unable to do so. Some teachers are also uncertain whether students can teach them about games. Fur‐ thermore, while teachers are interested in learning about games from students, teachers also exhibit difficulty giving up the role of the teacher, and their own expectation to have expert knowledge on topics being discussed. At the level of the player, students not only want to share their personal lives and game experiences with teachers, they also want teachers to be interested in their lives. For this students expect teachers to be open and curious about both the topic of games and student experiences with them. While teachers are also interested in learning about their students’ lives, they are interested in culti‐ vating introspection, articulation, and maturity in their students. This means that teachers are interested in learning from students, but largely in order to 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 320 <?page no="321"?> teach them (or enable certain learning processes and goals). From the students’ perspective, it is largely the knowledge they have of games (through their ex‐ periences) which not only make them ‘experts’ on the subject, but also motivate them to speak in class, participate in tasks and discourse, share their lives with others and even ‘teach’ the teacher. Teachers admit learning from the students about games, yet also exhibit uncertainty concerning the extent to which they can learn from their students. At the level of the world, teachers are interested in authentic and meaningful discourse with students, while students expect teachers to be unbiased towards games (two of the three teachers expected this from themselves as well). As already suggested, however, teachers exhibit difficulty switching roles, even though they admit to learning about games, about their students’ lives, and even about their own biases from their students. Students exhibit a general desire to connect with other students and with the teacher through game discourse, but sometimes have difficulties communicating about games and their game expe‐ riences, especially to non-players (including teachers), and show unwillingness to deal with certain topics like game addiction and violence. Changing Roles Interest Knowledge/ Ability Game: - teachers want critical engagement (all CS’s), learners resistant/ unable (CS 1 & 2) - teachers may expect themselves to have content knowledge of games, even if they have none (CS1) Player : - teachers are interested in cultivating introspection, articulation and ma‐ turity (all CS’s) - students want teachers to be inter‐ ested in students’ personal lives and game experiences (CS 3) - teachers and students want open‐ ness/ curiosity (CS 2 & 3) World: - teachers are interested in authentic, meaningful discourse with students (all CS’s) Game: - teachers are interested in learning about games (CS 1 & 3), uncertain whether students can teach them (CS 1). Player: - game knowledge makes students ex‐ perts who are motivated to speak, participate, share their lives, and teach (all CS’s) - teachers and students learn about games from students (all CS’s) - teachers exhibit uncertainty whether they can rely on students (CS 1) World: - teachers may have difficulty switching roles (CS 1) - teachers learn about themselves (and their own game biases) (CS 3) 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 321 <?page no="322"?> - Students and teachers want teachers to be unbiased (all CS’s) - students want to connect to teachers and other students (CS 2 & 3) but may have difficulties communicating/ articulating games and experiences to non-players (CS 1) Table 32: Case Study Findings of Changing Roles (CS = Case Study) Thus, the idea of ‘changing’ roles may represent an ideal situation which in reality is much more difficult to achieve, and which ignores several aspects of the classroom interactions and processes which are unavoidable. The com‐ plexity of games presents a real challenge for students who are unaware of that complexity, unable to access their game knowledge because it is largely implicit and un-articulated, or are unwilling to communicate to the teacher because of the knowledge gap between the students and the teacher on the subject or be‐ cause the communication requires work which the teacher is unable to evaluate anyway. Teachers are largely unable to evaluate the game knowledge of students due to their lacking background knowledge, and are uncertain they can rely on their students for authoritative information. Furthermore, teachers are not simply learners, but wish to engage students in critical reflection on their knowledge of games. The intimacy of games also presents a challenge, because games play a strong role in students’ identities and social networks and because students are not interested in topics which challenge the overall value of games (and which suggest that games pose a danger). Here, students want to share their experiences and connect to the teacher and with other students, but they distrust teachers and their interests in their lives. While teachers are interested in the lives of their students and their game experiences, they are also interested in initiating critical reflective engagement of students with their own gaming behaviors. This includes topics of addiction and the possibility that games that allow or present violence may transfer into students’ lives. Finally, while stu‐ dents may be able to relate to and understand gamer culture and media, they exhibit difficulty engaging in reflective analysis and in communicating their analyses to other non-gamers. While teachers may be able to scaffold certain analytical processes (like narrative and comic for game fan-comics), this is dif‐ ficult when they cannot understand the content of the media and of the games they present - especially when students are unwilling or unable to engage with the content themselves. Thus the idea of changing roles may be more of an illusion for which there is no proper or exact metaphor. Students become teachers, but only at certain times and in reference to certain aspects. Teachers are still responsible for pro‐ 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 322 <?page no="323"?> viding a pedagogical/ didactic layer to the classroom discourse by expecting stu‐ dents’ critical and reflective engagement with games, with students’ experiences and behaviors and with discourse material brought into the classroom. Students may be experts on games, at least compared to teachers, but their ‘expertise’ is limited, diverse, unsystematic, sometimes unreflected, often unarticulated and typically unevenly distributed amongst the students. Teachers may become learners, but they often bring salient yet implicit biases that devalue games and limit the structure they provide students to become teachers and engage in dis‐ course. Furthermore, teachers as learners exhibit doubts in the abilities of stu‐ dents to take on their new role and often feel uncomfortable giving up their role of authority. Integrating game discourse, and its constituent domains of the game, the player, and the world, indeed provides several complex challenges to the classroom and to the roles that students and teachers take on. However, these problems and their emergence from and through classroom discourse can be imagined as challenges that offer learning potentials and greater access to the cultural discourse on video games. Under the following question, the problems and challenges presented thus far are redefined as learning opportunities. 4) How can the problems and challenges be turned into learning oppor‐ tunities? How can these be conceptualized and strategized within the model of video game discourse? In response to this question are a set of questions that accompany each dimen‐ sion of game discourse. The questions serve at least two purposes. First, they can be used for the further academic research of game discourse in the EFL classroom or for the development of materials by researchers or textbooks. Second, they can serve as questions which teachers can use to structure class‐ room lessons, to design lesson plan materials and tasks, or provide students for their own discussion, reflection, and individual research. Game: The following questions focus on the complexity of video games and the differentiation between games with fictional worlds (and embedded narratives) and game systems. They are meant to serve as a foundation for all other enquiry into and participation in other domains of game discourse. What makes games complex? What types of stories do they tell, and what narrative structures do they entail? What types of worlds (and world views) do they present? What types of stories do they allow players to experience and create? What about system com‐ plexity? How do goals, rules and feedback interact in games to engage players? What types of social interactions do they allow, in-game and out-of-game? The next set of questions concerns the structure and design of games (their content) 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 323 <?page no="324"?> in relation to learning. What can be learned from games? What can be learned from their complexity, from their topics and content, from the actions they allow and the systems they represent, and from the English language they use and the types of communication they allow? Player: The first set of questions address student interest in games and can offer a more sensitive and indirect approach to addressing negative aspects of player behavior. They can also be connected to the complexity of games. What makes games fun and engaging? Why do some games take up so much time and effort? Why do some games influence some players to be addicted or violent? The fol‐ lowing questions address the player’s experience playing games and questions why games play such a large role for so many people’s lives. These questions should also be linked to issues concerning the complexity of games. Why are games a part of your/ our lives? Why and how are they a part of our social networks, our history and our identity? Will people in the future still play video games? Why? The following questions address the role and functions of play for society, cul‐ tural and personal lives. They are an attempt to take a serious look at play, and at the same time re-introduce ‘fun’ back into the topic. What can we learn from playing games? What can we learn from ourselves, about people in general? What can we learn about the functions and roles play has in our lives for social interac‐ tions, for work, and for learning? World: The following three questions address the role of language for engaging in game discourse, and recognizes that many game experiences and aspects of games may not be (or only partially) articulated and that articulation in English offers multiple affordances. Here, articulation is seen as the first step towards engagement in communication about games. What aspects of games and game experiences do we have difficulties articulating in language and sharing with others? How can we develop our game articulation skills in order to better com‐ municate about games? What challenges and opportunities does the English lan‐ guage offer this articulation? Once the complexity of games and game experi‐ ences can be articulated (in English), comparisons between games (and gameplay) and real life (and real life cultural institutions) can be made. For in‐ stance, students can begin to make comparisons between games and schools, how they structure and present work, motivate and engage. How can games and game structures help understand other systems, like e.g. schools? How can this understanding allow us to create and improve systems that enable intensive and extensive engagement and improve our lives? What are the goals of play and games and how can these be related to goals of real-life institutions and systems? One of the biggest challenges this study addresses is the informed participation in Eng‐ 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 324 <?page no="325"?> lish language game discourse. This challenge is complex because it includes knowledge of all three domains of game discourse, the topics and conflicts which emerge between different groups and the media and modes through which they typically communicate. What discourses exist in and around games, and what conflicts exist within these discourses? How do different media and media channels create and/ or represent these different discourses and conflicts? The specific dis‐ course of those who play games (gamer discourse) provides opportunities and challenges. On the one hand, it can serve as a link to external cultural discourses on games and its complexity can serve as a source of considerable investigation and reflection. On the other hand, gamer discourse can engage in very specific aspects of game discourse and can be difficult to relate to for those who do not play games. What types of gamer discourse and media are students familiar with and interested in? What specific topics and types (or dimensions) of discourse do they engage in? How can these be explained and presented to individuals who do not play games? Classroom Discourse: The classroom discourse on games likely involves a switching of some of the roles, as students bring their knowledge of and expe‐ rience with games to the classrooms. However, though teachers may learn a lot from their students, this does not mean that students take on the role of teachers and teachers the role of the learner. Rather, students and teachers must negotiate new and dynamic roles as students and teachers have something to offer each other and as they both learn from each other. How do students and teachers ne‐ gotiate their roles when topics like digital games are introduced into the classroom? How do teachers and students engage in and navigate a discourse in which they are both novices and experts? What rules (either implicit or explicit) do students and teachers have for each other in how they treat the topic, how they treat each other, and what responsibilities and expectations they have? Finally, how do teachers learn from students while structuring learning tasks, initiating and guiding reflection and even ensuring students deal with important and relevant topics that they may wish to avoid? These sets of questions, aligned under the various dimensions of the dis‐ course-based model of VGL and embedded in the context of the EFL classroom, offer potential points for student engagement and reflection, for the design of activities and tasks, and even for further research. The following subsection focuses more on issues of further research and development of the topic of games in the EFL classroom by presenting an outlook on the study and further ad‐ dressing future developments which can follow. 9.2 Video Game Discourse in the EFL Classroom. Three Case Studies 325 <?page no="326"?> 2 For emerging research on digital games and teacher training, cf. Blume 2016. 9.3 Beyond this Study Greater than any findings this study reports is the need for further research and development on the subject of games and game discourse in the EFL classroom. On the one hand, further conceptual and theoretical research is required. The multiliteracies approach to EFL teaching and learning is relatively new, and challenges still exist for integrating non-linguistic forms of communication with EFL. Foreign language discourse ability, though easily connected to higher level goals of education, requires further development for several reasons. First, dis‐ course is a slippery concept, especially in the ways that it connects everyday interactions and communication with larger cultural meaning and production. Discourse runs the risk of becoming so broad that is encompasses everything, thus losing its scope to focus on, and explain, specific phenomenon. Second, connecting the higher level goal of foreign language discourse ability to the sometimes everyday mechanics of teaching a foreign language can be quite challenging for both teachers and learners. Further methods and typical tasks for achieving this connection must be developed and, more importantly, prac‐ ticed. The concept of linking language learning also requires further develop‐ ment, since, as the results of this study illustrated, teachers and students must negotiate new and complex roles as learners bring in topics from their own lives with which teachers are unfamiliar. Finally, the model of discourse-based VGL should be seen as being in its infancy. It is an initial attempt to conceptualize and structure the complexities of game discourse, and further research (even empirical) is required to establish a more solid framework. On the other hand, further empirical research is required, not only to test developments in concep‐ tual frameworks, but also to further explore the findings of this study and the complex dynamics of classroom game discourse and the problems and chal‐ lenges which arise. On top of further research, teacher training plays a crucial role in the reaching the overarching goals of this study. 2 The study showed that the lack of teacher knowledge on games poses a serious challenge and limitation on the develop‐ ment of classroom game discourse. While the model of game discourse in 2.3 presented an ideal case of what classroom discourse can be, the reality presented in the case studies were largely defined by the lacking knowledge of the teachers (though there are certain affordances to lacking teacher knowledge) and the difficulties and unwillingness of some students to contribute their knowledge and experience. Thus, teacher training can focus on games and how to teach 9 Implications of Results and Conclusion 326 <?page no="327"?> (with) them. Games can be taught as ‘texts’ and media which are cultural carriers and, much like literature, are models of the world and ways of interacting with/ in it. Media approaches to teaching games can start by looking at games as both fictional world and interactive systems. Teachers can also be trained with methods and approaches to teaching (about) games, and provided with a ‘tool‐ box’ of activities and task types to not only enable game analyses but also re‐ flection on the structure of games, on behavior in and around games, and on how games influence the world. Such teacher training can be seen as compli‐ mentary to training with other ‘texts’ where points of overlap and synergistic potential are bountiful. Finally, teacher training can include genres, task types and literacy practices which are familiar to students who experience online fan-communities. This is by no means limited to video games, and includes popular fiction, film, television shows, music, etc. On top of teacher training, materials need to be developed to help teachers teach games and game topics. Print publications, including journals and text‐ books, and supplementary material online can provide teachers with input, ideas, examples and even tasks for integrating games into the EFLC. As with other competencies, game discourse competency cannot be developed through one teaching unit, and teachers are more likely to integrate the topic, and de‐ velop their own abilities, if offered multiple opportunities over time through materials which are pre-designed and tested by experts. Finally, games and game discourse needs to be integrated into the curriculum, and not just simply of the EFL classroom. Documents like the CEFR and the German Educational Standards have already set the foundations for this inte‐ gration, but an explicit integration would not only validate the topic for teachers and educational institutions but also enable further conceptual development of the exact role that games play in the curriculum. 9.3 Beyond this Study 327 <?page no="328"?> Works Cited Aarseth, Espen (1997). Cybertext. Perspectives on ergodic literature. Baltimore and London: John Hopkins University Press. Aarseth, Espen (2004a). Genre trouble: Narrativism and the art of simulation. In Noah Wardrip-Fruin & Pat Harrigan (Eds.) First Person. New Media as Story, Performance and Game (pp. 45-55). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Aarseth, Espen (2004b). Quest games as post-narrative discourse. In Marie-Laure Ryan (Ed.) Narrative Across Media. The Languages of Storytelling (pp. 361-375). London: University of Nebraska Press. Ackermann, Judith (2013). Dekonstruktion einer Immersion. Der Avatartod als distan‐ zierendes Moment im Computerspiel. In Rudolph Inderst & Peter Just (Eds.) Build ‘em Up - Shoot ‘em Down. Körperlichkeit in digitalen Spielen (pp. 365-380). Glückstadt: vwh. Adams, Ernest (2004). Postmodernism and the three types of immersion. Retrieved from http: / / designersnotebook.com/ Columns/ 063 _Postmodernism/ 063_postmod‐ ernism.htm Aeppli, Jürg; Gasser, Luciano & Tettenborn, Annette (2010). Wissenschaftliche Integrität - Ethische Richtlinien des Wissenschaftlichen Arbeitens. In Empirisches wissenschaft‐ liches Arbeiten. Ein Studienbuch für die Bildungswissenschaften (pp. 55-61). Bad Heil‐ brunn: Klinkhardt. Aguado, Karin (2013). Die Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse in der empirischen Fremdspra‐ chenforschung: Grenzen, Potentiale, Desiderata. In Karin Aguado, Lena Heine & Karen Schramm (Eds.) Introspektive Verfahren und Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse in der Fremdsprachenforschung (pp. 119-135). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Anderson, Lorin & Krathwohl, David (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing. A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman. Antonelli, Paola (2012). Video games: 14 in the collection, for starters. Retrieved from http: / / www.moma.org/ explore/ inside_out/ 2012/ 11/ 29/ video-games-14-in-the-col‐ lection-for-starters/ Appelgren, Ester (2004). Convergence and divergence in media: Different perspectives. Elpub, 5(1), 1-19. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1177/ 1367877904040603 Arnseth, Hans Christian (2006). Learning to play or playing to learn - A critical account of the models of communication informing educational research on computer game‐ play. Game Studies, 6(1). Retrieved from http: / / gamestudies.org/ 0601/ articles/ arnseth <?page no="329"?> Australia, Commonwealth of (2013). Run that town. Retrieved from http: / / runthat‐ town.abs.gov.au/ Backe, Hans Joachim (2014). Politrickery. Brian K. Vaughans metapolitik. In Stephan Packard (Ed.) Comics & Politik. 7. Wissenschaftstagung der Gesellschaft für Comicfor‐ schung (ComFor) (pp. 443-460). Berlin: Ch. A. Bachmann Verlag. Baier, Janna & Schreiber, Simone (2013). Körperwelten. Von Frauen und Männern in, aus und vor dem digitalen Spiel. In Rudolph Inderst & Peter Just (Eds.) Build ‘em Up - Shoot ‘em Down. Körperlichkeit in digitalen Spielen (pp. 328-362). Glückstadt: vwh. Baker, Elizabeth; Pearson, David & Rozendal, Mary (2010). Theoretical perspectives and literacy studies. An exploration of roles and insights. In Elizabeth Baker (Ed.) The new literacies. Multiple perspectives on research and practice (pp. 1-22). New York and London: The Guilford Press. Beil, Benjamin (2013). Ohnekopf - Shooter. Zur Körperlichtkeit des First-Person-Avatars. In Rudolph Inderst & Peter Just (Eds.) Build ‘em Up - Shoot ‘em Down. Körperlichkeit in digitalen Spielen (pp. 145-178). Glückstadt: vwh. Benitt, Nora (2015). Becoming a (better) language teacher. Giessener Beiträge zur Fremd‐ sprachendidaktik. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag. Bergerson, Andrew; Baker, Scott; Martin, Clancy & Ostovich, Steve (2011). The happy burden of history. Berlin/ New York: De Gruyter. Berns, Margie (2007). The presence of English. Sociocultural, acquisitional, and media dimensions. In Margie Berns, Kees de Bot & Uwe Hasebrink (Eds.) In the Presence of English. Media and European Youth (pp. 1-14). New York: Springer. Berns, Margie; Claes, Marie-Therese; de Bot, Kees; Evers, Riet; Hasebrink, Uwe; Hui‐ bregtse, Ineke; Truchot, Claude & van der Wijst, Per (2007). English in Europe. In Margie Berns, Kees de Bot & Uwe Hasebrink (Eds.), In the presence of English. Media and European youth (pp. 15-42). New York: Springer. Betrus, Anthony & Botturi, Luca (2010). Principles of playing games for learning. In Atsusi “2c” Hirumi (Ed.) Playing games in school. Video games and simulations for primary and secondary education (pp. 43-46). Washington DC: ISTE. Biebighauser, Katrin (2013). Fremdsprachenlernen in virtuellen Welten. Aufgabenges‐ taltung in komplexen multimodalen Lernumgebungen. In Claus Gnutzmann, Frank G. Königs & Lutz Küster (Eds.) Fremdsprachen Lehren und Lernen (pp. 55-70). Tü‐ bingen: Narr Verlag. Biebighauser, Katrin; Zibelius, Marja & Schmidt, Torben (2012). Aufgaben 2.0: Aufgabe‐ norientierung beim Fremdsprachenlernen mit digitalen Medien. In Katrin Biebigh‐ auser, Marja Zibelius & Torben Schmidt (Eds.) Aufgaben 2.0 : Konzepte, Materialien und Methoden für das Fremdsprachenlehren und -lernen mit digitalen Medien (pp. 11- 56). Tübingen: Narr. Works Cited 329 <?page no="330"?> Black, Rebecca W. (2008). Just don’t call them cartoons. New literacy spaces of anime, manga, and fanfiction. In Julie Coiro, Michele Knobel, Colin Lankshear & Donald J. Leu (Eds.) Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 583-610). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Black, Rebecca W. (2009). English-language learners, fan communities, and 21st century skills. Journal of adolescent & adult literacy, 52(8), 688-697. Blume, Carolyn (2016). Being in the game: Language teachers as digital learners. In International conference ICT for language learning (pp. 313-316). Florenz: Libreriauni‐ versitaria. Blumer, Herbert (1986). Symbolic interactionism. Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bonnet, Andreas (2004). Chemie im Bilingualen Unterricht. Kompetenzerwerb durch In‐ teraktion. In Arno Combe, Meinert Meyer & Barbara Schenk (Eds.) Opladen: Leske + Budrich. Bonnet, Andreas; Breidbach, Stephan & Hallet, Wolfgang (2002). Fremdsprachlichkeit als Spezifikum - Auf der Suche nach einer integrativen Didaktik für den bilingualen Un‐ terricht. In Bernd Voss & Eva Stahlheber (Eds.) Fremdsprachen auf dem Prüfstand. Innovation - Qualität - Evaluation (pp. 151-163). Berlin: Pädagogischer Zeitschriften‐ verlag. Boston, City of (2014). City app showcase. Retrieved from http: / / www.cityofboston.gov/ DoIT/ apps/ Breitlauch, Linda (2013). Spielfreude als erfolgreiche Lern- und Therepiemethode. In Ru‐ dolph Inderst & Peter Just (Eds.) Build ‘em Up - Shoot ‘em Down. Körperlichkeit in digitalen Spielen (pp. 179-191). Glückstadt: vwh. Brousell, Lauren (2014). Gamification helps utility companies change customer behavior. CIO magazine. Retrieved from http: / / www.cio.com / article/ 2835752/ it-strategy/ gami‐ fication-helps-utility-companies-change-customer-behavior.html Bruner, Jerome (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard educational review, 31, 21-32. Re‐ trieved from http: / / scholar.google.com/ scholar? hl=en&btnG= Search&q=intitle: The +Act+of+Discovery#0 Bruner, Jerome (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univer‐ sity Press. Bruner, Jerome (2002). Making stories. Law, literature, life. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Bruner, Jerome (2004). Life as narrative. Social research, 71(3), 691-710. Buckingham, David, & Burn, Andrew (2007). Game literacy in theory and practice. Journal of educational multimedia and hypermedia, 16(3), 323-349. Retrieved from http: / / eprints.ioe.ac.uk/ 4224/ Works Cited 330 <?page no="331"?> Burwitz-Melzer, Eva (2003). Allmähliche Annäherungen: Fiktionale Texte im interkultur‐ ellen Fremdsprachenunterricht der Sekundarstufe I. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. Busch, Carsten; Conrad, Florian & Steinicke, Martin (2013). Coaching mit digitalen Spielen. Wie Manager in die Haut von Pixelhelden schlüpfen und was sie dabei lernen. In Rudolph Inderst & Peter Just (Eds.) Build ‘em up - Shoot ‘em down. Körperlichkeit in digitalen Spielen (pp. 274-289). Glückstadt: vwh. Caillois, Roger (2006). The definition of play and the classification of games. In Katie Salen & Eric Zimmerman (Eds.) The game design reader. A rules of play anthology (pp. 122-155). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Calleja, Gordon (2011). In-game. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Caspari, Daniela & Schmelter, Lars (2016). Qualitative Forschung. In Eva Burwitz-Melzer, Grit Mehlhorn, Claudia Riemer, Karl-Richard Bausch & Hans-Jürgen Krumm (Eds.) Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 583-587). Tübingen: A. Franke Verlag. Chase, Oscar G. (2015). Narrative, inference, and law in cultural context. In Guiseppina Marsico (Ed.) Jerome S. Bruner beyond 100. Cultivating possibilities (pp. 211-218). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Choi, Julie (2010). Living on the hyphen. In David Nunan & Julie Choi (Eds.) Language and culture: Reflective narratives and the emergence of identity (pp. 66-73). New York: Routledge. Cohen, Louis; Manion, Lawrence & Morrison, Keith (2007). Research methods in educa‐ tion. Education. London and New York: Routledge. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1111/ j.1467-8527.2007.00388_4.x Cohen, Louis; Manion, Lawrence & Morrison, Keith (2011). Research methods in educa‐ tion. London and New York: Routledge. Computerspielemuseum. (2015). Computerspielemuseum. Retrieved from http: / / www.computerspielemuseum.de/ 1210_Home.htm Cope, Bill & Kalantzis, Mary (2000). Designs for social futures. In Bill Cope & Mary Ka‐ lantzis (Eds.) Multiliteracies. Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 203- 234). London: Routledge. Cope, Bill & Kalantzis, Mary (2009). Multiliteracies: New literacies, new learning. Ped‐ agogies: An international journal, 4, 164-195. Cope, Bill & Kalantzis, Mary (2010). New media, new learning. In Darren L. Cole & David R. Pullen (Eds.) Multiliteracies in motion (pp. 87-109). New York and London: Rout‐ ledge. Corneliussen, Hilde G. & Rettberg, Jill W. (2008). Introduction: “Orc professor LFG,” or researching in azeroth. In Hilde G. Corneliussen & Jill W. Rettberg (Eds.) Digital cul‐ ture, play, and identity. A World of Warcraft reader (pp. 1-15). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Works Cited 331 <?page no="332"?> Cortsen, Rikke P.; Kanrassen, Ralf; Larsen, Louise C.; Magnussen, Anne & Scholz, Michael (2014). Between propaganda and entertainment: Nordic comics 1930s-1950s. In Ste‐ phan Packard (Ed.) Comics & Politik. 7. Wissenschaftstagung der Gesellschaft für Com‐ icforschung (ComFor) (pp. 111-132). Berlin: Ch. A. Bachmann Verlag. Costikyan, Greg (2013). Uncertainty in games. Cambridge, Mass.: The Guilford Press. Coyle, Do; Hood, Philip & Marsh, David (2010). CLIL. Content and language integrated learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crawford, Garry (2012). Video gamers. London and New York: Routledge. Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (2008). Flow. The psychology of optimal experience. New York: HarperCollins. Dadaczynski, Kevin; Schiemann, Stephan & Paulus, Peter (2016). Gesundheit spielend för‐ dern.: Potenziale und Herausforderungen von digitalen Spieleanwendungen für die Ge‐ sundheitsförderung und Prävention. Weinheim: Beltz Juventa Verlag. Daiute, Colette (2015). Narrating possibility. In G. Marsico (Ed.) Jerome S. Bruner beyond 100. Cultivating possibilities (pp. 157-172). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Deeg, Christoph (2014). Gaming und Bibliotheken. Mörlenbach: De Gruyter Saur. Denscombe, Martyn (2010). Generalizations. In Ground Rules for Social Research. Guide‐ lines for good practice. (pp. 181-195). New York: McGraw-Hill. Denzin, Norman K. & Lincoln, Yvonna S. (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative re‐ search. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonne S. Lincoln (Eds.) The Sage Handbook of Qual‐ itative Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1017/ CBO9781107415324.004 Deterding, Sebastian (2014). Eudaimonic design, Or: Six invitations to rethink gamifica‐ tion. In Mathias Fuchs, Sonia Fizek, Paolo Ruffino & Niklas Schrape (Eds.) Rethinking gamification (pp. 305-331). Lüneburg: meson press. Digital Meets Heritage. (2015, September). Focus on museums and games. Promoter. Re‐ trieved from http: / / www.digitalmeetsculture.net/ article/ focus-on-museums-and-games/ Divers, John (2002). Possible worlds. In Tim Crane & Jonathan Wolff (Eds.) New York: Routledge. Donald, Merlin (2010). Human cognitive evolution: How the modern mind came into being. Retrieved from https: / / www.youtube.com/ watch? v=T _8652_kJDk Dörnyei, Zoltan (2007a). Quality criteria, research ethics, and other research issues. In Research methods in applied linguistics. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodol‐ ogies (pp. 48-73). New York: Oxford University Press. Dörnyei, Zoltan (2007b). Research methods in applied linguistics. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Works Cited 332 <?page no="333"?> Dragona, Daphne (2014). Counter-gamification. Emerging tactics and practices against the rule of numbers. In Mathias Fuchs, Sonia Fizek, Paolo Ruffino & Niklas Schrape (Eds.) Rethinking gamification (pp. 227-249). Lüneburg: meson press. Dresing, Thorsten; Pehl, Thorsten & Schmieder, Christian (2015). Manual (on) transcrip‐ tion. Transcription conventions, software guides and practical hints for qualitative re‐ searchers. Marburg: Available Online. Retrieved from http: / / www.audiotranskrip‐ tion.de/ eng-lish/ transcription-practical guide.htm Duncan, Randy & Smith, Matthew J. (2009). The power of comics. History, form & cul‐ ture. New York: The Continuum International Publishing Group Inc. Duncan, Sean C. (2012). Kongregating online. Developing design literacies in a play-based affinity space. In Elizabeth Hayes & Sean C. Duncan (Eds.) Learning in video game affinity spaces. New York: Peter Lang. Duncan, Sean C. & Hayes, Elizabeth (2012). Expanding the affinity space. An introduc‐ tion. In Elizabeth R. Hayes & Sean C. Duncan (Eds.) Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 1-22). New York: Peter Lang. Durga, Shree (2012). Learning to mod in an affinity-based modding community. In Eliz‐ abeth Hayes & Sean C. Duncan (Eds.) Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 84- 102). New York: Peter Lang. Ellis, Rod (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford Uni‐ versity Press. Entertainment Software Association. (2014). 2014 Essential facts, 1-20. Eskelinin, Markku (2004). Towards computer game studies. In Noah Wardrip-Fruin & Pat Harrigan (Eds.) First person. New media as story, performance and game (pp. 36-44). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Everett, Cath (2011). Gamification for the public good. The DWP has begun to exploit the principles of gaming technology to improve internal performance. The Guardian. Retrieved from http: / / www.theguardian.com / government-computing-network/ 2011/ jun/ 27/ gamification-principles-public-services-dwp Falk, Simon & Götz, Sandra (2016). Interactivity in language learning applications: A case-study based on Duolingo. In Tamara Zeyer, Sebastian Stuhlmann & Roger D. Jones (Eds.) Interaktivität im Fremdsprachenlernen und -lehren mit digitalen Medien. Hit oder Hype? (pp. 239-260). Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag. Feierabend, Sabine; Karg, Ulrike & Rathgeb, Thomas (2012). JIM-Studie 2012. Jugend, Information, (Multi-) Media. MPFS: Stuttgart. Retrieved from https: / / www.mpfs.de/ fileadmin/ files/ Studien/ JIM/ 2012/ JIM_Studie _2012.pdf Feierabend, Sabine; Karg, Ulrike & Rathgeb, Thomas (2013). JIM-Studie 2013. Jugend, Information, (Multi-) Media. MPFS: Stuttgart. Retrieved from https: / / www.mpfs.de/ fileadmin/ files/ Studien/ JIM/ 2013/ JIM_Studie _2013.pdf Works Cited 333 <?page no="334"?> Feierabend, Sabine; Plankenhorn, Theresa & Rathgeb, Thomas (2014). JIM-Studie 2014. Jugend, Information, (Multi-) Media. MPFS: Stuttgart. Retrieved from http: / / www.mpfs.de/ fileadmin/ JIM-pdf14/ JIM-Studie _2014.pdf Fizek, Sonia (2014). Why fun matters: In search of emergent playful experiences. In Ma‐ thias Fuchs, Sonia Fizek, Paolo Ruffino & Niklas Schrape (Eds.) Rethinking gamification (pp. 273-287). Lüneburg: meson press. Flick, Uwe (2009). Qualitative Sozialforschung. Eine Einführung. Burghard König (Ed.) Berlin: Rowohlt Verlag. Flick, Uwe (2010). An introduction to qualitatative research (4th ed.) London: Sage. http: / / doi.org/ 978-1-84787-323-1 Freitag-Hild, Britta (2010). Transkulturelles Lernen. In Wolfgang Hallet & Frank G. Kö‐ nigs (Eds.) Handbuch Fremdsprachendidaktik (pp. 125-129). Seelze-Velber: Friedrich Verlag. Freitag-Hild, Britta (2015). Szenische Interpretationsverfahren am Beispiel von Lorraine Hansberrys A Rasin in the Sun. In Wolfgang Hallet & Carola Surkamp (Eds.) Dram‐ endidaktik und Dramapädagogik im Fremdsprachendidaktik (pp. 203-220). Trier: Wis‐ senschaftlicher Verlag Trier. Frenzel, Martin (2014). Das »Empört Euch« Credo von Hergé bis Baru. Über das Wider‐ ständige des Politischen in der frankobelgischen Bande Dessinée. In Stephan Packard (Ed.) Comics & Politik. 7. Wissenschaftstagung der Gesellschaft für Comicforschung (ComFor) (pp. 133-156). Berlin: Ch. A. Bachmann Verlag. Freyermuth, Gundolph S. (2013). Serious game(s) studies. Schismen und Desiderate. In Gundolph S. Freyermuth, Lisa Gotto & Fabian Wallenfels (Eds.) Serious games, exer‐ games, exerlearning (pp. 421-464). Bielefeld: transcript. Fritz, Jürgen (2013). Mein virtueller Körper und ich. Zum „corpus virtualis“ in digitalen Spielen. In Rudolph Inderst & Peter Just (Eds.) Build ‘em up - Shoot ‘em down. Kör‐ perlichkeit in digitalen Spielen (pp. 76-120). Glückstadt: vwh. Fuchs, Mathias (2014). Predigital precursors of gamification. In Mathias Fuchs, Sonia Fizek, Paolo Ruffino & Niklas Schrape (Eds.) Rethinking gamification (pp. 119-140). Lüneburg: meson press. Galarneau, Lisa, & Zibit, Melanie (2007). Online games for 21st century skills. In David Gibson, Clark Aldrich & Marc Prensky (Eds.) Games and simulations in online learning. Research and development frameworks (pp. 59-88). London: Information Science Pub‐ lishing. Gee, James P. (2007). Good video games + good learning. Collected essays on video games, learning and literacy. In Colin Lankshear, Michele Knobel, Chris Bigum & Michael Peters (Eds.) New York: Peter Lang. Gee, James P. & Hayes, Elizabeth (2012). Nurturing affinity spaces and game-based learning. In Constance Steinkuehler, Kurt Squire & Sasha Barab (Eds.) Games, learning, Works Cited 334 <?page no="335"?> and society. Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 129-153). New York: Cam‐ bridge University Press. Geertz, Clifford (1973). The interpretation of cultures. New York: Basic Books. Gerstenberg, Micha J. (2014). »The justice society of America pursues victory for America and democracy« Der amerikanische Superhelden-Comic als Propagandamedium im Spannungsfeld von Antisemitismus und amerikanischer Außenpolitik 1940-45. In Stephan Packard (Ed.) Comics & Politik. 7. Wissenschaftstagung der Gesellschaft für Comicforschung (ComFor) (pp. 227-251). Berlin: Ch. A. Bachmann Verlag. Gibbons, Alison (2012). Multimodality, cognition, and experimental literature. New York: Routledge. Gilbert, Felix (1986). Machiavelli: The Renaissance of the Art of War. In P. Paret (Ed.) Makers of modern strategy. From Machiavelli to the nuclear age (pp. 11-31). Princeton: Princeton University Press. Goodman, Nelson (1984). Of mind and other matters. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP. Gottschall, Jonathan (2012). The storytelling animal. How stories make us human. Boston/ New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Grabes, Herbert (2008). Encountering people through literature. In Jürgen Schlaeger & Gesa Stedman (Eds.) Real Yearbook (pp. 125-139). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. Grau, Maike (2009). Worlds apart? English in German youth cultures and in educational settings. World englishes, 28(2), 160-174. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1111/ j.1467-971X.2009.01581.x Grau, Maike & Legutke, Michael (2014). Linking language learning inside and outside the classroom: Perspectives from teacher education. In David Nunan & Jack C. Richards (Eds.) Language learning beyond the classroom (pp. 263-271). New York et al.: Rout‐ ledge. Griffiths, Thomas L.; Kemp, Charles & Tenenbaum, Joshua B. (2008). Bayesian models of cognition. Retrieved from https: / / cocosci.berkeley.edu/ tom/ papers/ bayeschapter.pdf Grimm, Nancy; Meyer, Michael & Volkmann, Laurenz (2015). Teaching English. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag. Grum, Urska & Legutke, Michael K. (2016). Sampling. In Daniela Caspari, Friederike Klippel, Michael K. Legutke & Karen Schramm (Eds.) Forschungsmethoden in der Fremdsprachendidaktik. Ein Handbuch (pp. 78-89). Tübingen: Narr Verlag. Guest, Greg; McQueen, Kathleen; & Namey, Emily (2012). Applied thematic analysis. London: Sage. Guinness, World Book of. (2014). Guinness world records 2014. Gamer’s edition. London: Guinness World Records Limited. Hague, Ian (2014). A defining problem. In Stephan Packard (Ed.) Comics & Politik. 7. Wissenschaftstagung der Gesellschaft für Comicforschung (ComFor) (pp. 73-88). Berlin: Ch. A. Bachmann Verlag. Works Cited 335 <?page no="336"?> Hall, Stuart (2008). “Encoding/ decoding.” In Neil Badmington & Julia Thomas (Eds.) The Routledge critical and cultural theory reader (pp. 234-244). New York: Routledge. Hallet, Wolfgang (2002). Auf dem Weg zu einer bilingualen Sachfachdidaktik: Bilinguales Lernen als fremdsprachige Konstruktion wissenschaftlicher Begriffe. Praxis des Neu‐ sprachlichen Unterrichts, 49(2), 115-126. Hallet, Wolfgang (2005). Bilingualer Unterricht. Fremdsprachig denken, lernen und han‐ deln. Der fremdsprachliche Unterricht Englisch, 39(78), 2-13. Hallet, Wolfgang (2008a). Die Visualisierung des Fremdsprachenlernens - Funktion von Bildern und visual literacy im Fremdsprachenunterricht. In Gabriele Lieber (Ed.) Lehren und Lernen mit Bildern (pp. 212-222). Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag. Hallet, Wolfgang (2008b). Diskursfähigkeit heute. Der Diskursbegriff in Piephos Theorie der kommunikativen Kompetenz und seine zeitgemäße Weiterentwicklung für die Fremdsprachendidaktik. In Michael K. Legutke (Ed.) Komunikative Kompetenz als fremdsprachendidaktische Vision (pp. 76-96). Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag. Hallet, Wolfgang (2008c). The multimodality of cultural experience and mental model con‐ structions of textual worlds. In Winfired Fluck, Herbert Grabes, Jürgen Schlaeger & Brook Thomas (Eds.) The literary mind. Real yearbook of research in English and Amer‐ ican literature (Vol. 24). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. Hallet, Wolfgang (2008d). Visual culture, multimodal discourse und tasks. Die bildkul‐ turelle Dimension des Fremdsprachenlernens. In Andreas Müller-Hartmann & Marita Schocker von Ditfurth (Eds.) Aufgabenorientiertes Lernen und Lehren mit Medien. An‐ sätze, Erfahrungen, Perspektiven in der Fremdsprachendidaktik (pp. 167-183). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Hallet, Wolfgang (2009). Romanlektüre und Kompetenzentwicklung: Vom narrativen Diskurs zur Diskursfähigkeit. In Wolfgang Hallet & Ansgar Nünning (Eds.) Roman‐ didaktik. Theoretische Grundlagen, Methoden, Lektüreanregungen (pp. 73-88). Trier: WVT. Hallet, Wolfgang (2010a). Fremdsprachliche literacies. In Wolfgang Hallet & Frank G. Königs (Eds.) Handbuch Fremdsprachendidaktik (pp. 66-70). Seelze: Klett Kallmeyer. Hallet, Wolfgang (2010b). Viewing cultures: Kulturelles Sehen und Bildverstehen im Fremdsprachenunterricht. In Carola Hecke & Carola Surkamp (Eds.) Bilder im Fremd‐ sprachenunterricht. Neue Ansätze, Kompetenzen und Methoden (pp. 26-54). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. Hallet, Wolfgang (2011). Lernen fördern. Englisch. Kompetenzorientierter Unterricht in der Sekundärstufe I. Seelze: Kallmeyer. Hallet, Wolfgang (2012). Die komplexe Kompetenzaufgabe. In Wolfgang Hallet & Ulrich Krämer (Eds.) Kompetenzaufgaben im Englischunterricht (pp. 8-19). Seelze: Klett Kall‐ meyer. Works Cited 336 <?page no="337"?> Hallet, Wolfgang (2013). Die komplexe Kompetenzaufgabe. Der fremdsprachliche Unter‐ richt Englisch. Kompetenzaufgaben, 47(124), 2-8. Hallet, Wolfgang (2015a). Die Performativität und Theatralität des Alltagshandelns: Per‐ formative Kompetenz und Kulturelles Lernen. In Wolfgang Hallet & Carola Surkamp (Eds.) Dramendidaktik und Dramapädagogik (pp. 53-70). Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier. Hallet, Wolfgang (2016). Genres im fremdsprachlichen und bilingualen Unterricht. Formen und Muster der sprachlichen Interaktion. Seelze: Klett Kallmeyer. Hallet, Wolfgang & Legutke, Michael (2013). Tasks re-visited. Introducing the special issue. FLuL, 42(2), 3-9. Halliday, Michael K. (2014). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). London and New York: Routledge. http: / / doi.org/ 10.4324/ 9780203431269 Harris, Catherine L. (2006). Language and cognition. In Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science (pp. 1-6). https: / / doi.org/ 10.1002/ 0470018860.s00559. Harvey, Colin B. (2014). A taxonomy of transmedia storytelling. In Marie-Laure Ryan & Jan-Noel Thon (Eds.) Storyworlds across media. Toward a media-conscious narratology (pp. 278-294). Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press. Heigham, Juanita & Sakui, Keiko (2009). Ethnography. In Juanita Heigham & Robert A. Croker (Eds.) Qualitative research in applied linguistics. A practical introduction (pp. 91-111). Palgrave MacMillan. Herman, David (2003). Stories as a tool for thinking. In David Herman (Ed.) Narrative theory and the cognitive sciences (pp. 163-212). Stanford: CSLI Publications. Herman, David (2011). Narrative worldmaking in graphic life writing. In Michael A. Chaney (Ed.) Graphic subjects. Critical essays on autobiography and graphic novels (pp. 231-243). Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press. Herman, David (2013). Storytelling and the sciences of mind. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Herzig, Bardo & Grafe, Silke (2010). Entwicklung von Bildungsstandards für die Medi‐ enbildung - Grundlagen und Beispiele. In Bardo Herzig, Dorothee M. Meister, Heinz Moser & Horst Niesyto (Eds.) Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 8. Medienkompetenz und Web 2.0 (pp. 103-120). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Herzig, Bardo; Meister, Dorothee M.; Moser, Heinz & Niesyto, Horst (2010). Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 8. Opladen: Leske+ Budrich. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1007/ 978-3-531-92135-8 Heyworth, Frank (2004). Why the CEF is important. In K. Morrow (Ed.) Insights from the Common European Framework (pp. 12-21). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Hills, Matt (2002). Fan cultures. Oxon: Routledge. Hills, Matt (2013). Fiske’s “textual productivity” and digital fandom: web 2.0 democra‐ tization versus fan distinction? Participations: Journal of audience & receptions Works Cited 337 <?page no="338"?> studies, 10(1), 130-153. Retrieved from http: / / www. participations.org/ Volume 10/ Issue 1/ 9 Hills 10.1.pdf Holborn, Hajo (1986). The Prusso-German school: Moltke and the rise of the general staff. In Peter Paret (Ed.) Makers of modern strategy. From Machiavelli to the nuclear age (pp. 281-295). Princeton: Princeton University Press. HopeLab. (2015). Re-Mission2. Retrieved from http: / / www.re-mission.net/ Horizon Report: 2014 K-12 Edition. (2014). Horizon Report. http: / / doi.org/ ISBN 978-0-9914828-5-6 Hugger, Kai-Uwe & Tillmann, Angela (2015). Mobiles digitales Spielen von Kindern: An‐ gebot, Nutzung und Bewertung des Mobilspielens durch Kinder und Eltern. In Kai-Uwe Hugger, Angela Tillmann, Stefan Iske, Johannes Fromme, Petra Grell & Theo Hug (Eds.) Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 12 (pp. 45-69). Wiesbaden: Springer. Huizinga, Johan (1980). Homo ludens. A study of the play-element in culture. London, Boston and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul. IDC Corporate USA. (2015). Energy. Document at a glance. Retrieved from https: / / www.idc.com/ getdoc.jsp? containerId=EIRS04V Inderst, Rudolf & Just, Peter (2013). Build ‘em up - Shoot ‘em down. Körperlichkeit in digitalen Spielen. Glückstadt: vwh. Jenkins, Henry (2003). Game design as narrative architecture. In Noah Wardrip-Fruin & Pat Harrigan (Eds.) First person. New media as story, performance and game (pp. 118- 130). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Jenkins, Henry (2006). Convergence culture. Where old and new media collide. Journal of chemical information and modeling (Vol. 53). New York and London: New York Uni‐ versity Press. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1017/ CBO9781107415324.004 Jenkins, Henry; Purushotma, Ravi; Clinton, Katie; Weigel, Margaret & Robison, Alice J. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1108 / eb046280 Jones, Roger D. (2013). Load, release, and fire. Exploring medieval warfare in an online simulation game. Der fremdsprachliche Unterricht Englisch. The Middle Ages, 47(125), 14-18. Jones, Roger D. (2015a). Approaching the cognitive and social functions of World of Warcraft fan-comics. Networking knowledge, 8(4). Jones, Roger D. (2015b). Digital games and fan-discourse: Implications and considerations for complex task development in the EFL classroom. Jones, Roger D. (2016). A playful approach to interactive media in the foreign language classroom. In Tamara Zeyer, Sebastian Stuhlmann & Roger D. Jones (Eds.) Interakti‐ vität im Fremdsprachenlernen und -lehren mit digitalen Medien. Hit oder Hype? (pp. 141-164). Tübingen: Narr Verlag. Works Cited 338 <?page no="339"?> Jones, Roger D. (2017a). Catching up. An autoethnographical approach to interdiscipli‐ narity, game culture and English as a foreign language teaching. In Maike Berger & Constanze Dreßler (Eds.) Autoethnographien zur Professionalisierung des wissenschaft‐ lichen Nachwuchses (pp. 73-85). Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag. Jones, Roger D. (2017b). Work faster, kid! Ein Computerspiel zum Thema Kinderarbeit rezensieren. Der fremdsprachliche Unterricht Englisch. Lebenswelten Erproben: Simu‐ lationen, 147, 42-47. Jones, Roger D. & Schmidt, Torben (2014). Games, culture and English. Bringing digital games and gaming culture into the EFL classroom. Praxis Englisch, Dezember(6), 39- 43. Jones, Roger D.; Stuhlmann, Sebastian & Zeyer, Tamara (2016). Interaktives Fremdspra‐ chenlernen: Potenziale und Herausforderungen. In Tamara Zeyer, Sebastian Stuhl‐ mann & Roger D. Jones (Eds.) Interaktivität im Fremdsprachenlehren und -lehren mit digitalen Medien. Hit oder Hype? (pp. 11-42). Tübingen: Narr Verlag. Juul, Jesper (2003). The game, the player, the world. Looking for a heart of gameness. In Marinka Copier & Joost Raessens (Eds.) Level up. Digital games research conference. Utrecht: Faculty of Arts, Utrecht University. Juul, Jesper (2005). Half-real. Video games between real rules and fictional worlds. Cam‐ bridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Juul, Jesper (2013). The art of failure. An essay on the pain of playing video games. Cam‐ bridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Juul, Jesper (2014). On absent carrot sticks. The level of abstraction in video games. In Marie-Laure Ryan & Jan-Noel Thon (Eds.) Storyworlds across media. Toward a media-conscious narratology (pp. 173-192). Lincoln and London: University of Ne‐ braska Press. Kahnemann, Daniel (2010). The riddle of experience vs. memory. Retrieved from https: / / www.ted.com/ talks/ daniel_kahneman_the_riddle_of_experience_vs_memory Kanowitz, Stephanie (2014). Hawaii wins with gamification of state online services. GCN. Technology, tools and tactics for public sector IT. Retrieved from http: / / gcn.com/ articles/ 2014/ 10/ 17/ hawaii-gamification .aspx Kimes-Link, Ann (2013). Aufgaben, Methoden und Verstehensprozesse im englischen Lit‐ eraturunterricht der gymnasialen Oberstufe. Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag. Kirschner, Paul; Sweller, John & Clark, Richard E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational psychologist, 41(2), 75-86. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1207/ s15326985ep4102_1 Klastrup, Lisbeth & Tosca, Susana (2014). Game of Thrones. Transmedial worlds, fandom, and social gaming. In Marie-Laure Ryan & Jan-Noel Thon (Eds.) Storyworlds across Works Cited 339 <?page no="340"?> media. Toward a media-conscious narratology (pp. 295-314). Lincoln and London: Uni‐ versity of Nebraska Press. Kleppin, Karin (1995). Sprach und Sprachlernspiele. In Karl-Richard Bausch, Herbert Christ & Hans-Jürgen Krumm (Eds.) Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 220- 223). Tübingen und Basel: Francke Verlag. Klieme, Eckhard; Avenarius, Hermann; Blum, Werner; Döbrich, Peter; Gruber, Hans; Prenzel, Manfred; Reiss, Kristina… (2009). Zur Entwicklung nationaler Bildungsstan‐ dards : eine Expertise. Bildungsforschung, (1), 224. Retrieved from http: / / www.bmbf.de/ pub/ zur_ entwicklung_nationaler_bildungsstandards.pdf Klippel, Friederike (1980). Spiel mit Ziel. Lernspiele im Englischunterricht. Praxis des Neusprachlichen Unterrichts, 27, 127-134. Kniffka, Gabriele (2016). Verfahren der Lernstandserhebung. In Eva Burwitz-Melzer, Grit Mehlhorn, Claudia Riemer, Karl-Richard Bausch & Hans-Jürgen Krumm (Eds.) Hand‐ buch Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 403-407). Tübingen: A. Franke Verlag. Koenig, Christoph & Sesink, Werner (2012). Notwendige Kompetenzüberschreitungen - Eine Anregung, den Kompetenzbegriff weiter zu denken. In Renate Schulz-Zander, Birgit Eickelmann, Heinz Moser, Horst Nieysto & Petra Grell (Eds.) Jahrbuch Medi‐ enpädagogik 9 (pp. 299-331). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Koestler, Arthur (1964). The act of creation. London: Hutchinson & Co. Kottak, Conrad P. (2010). Mirror for humanity. A concise introduction to cultural anthro‐ pology (7th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Kramsch, Claire (2011). The symbolic dimensions of the intercultural. Language teaching, 44(3), 354-367. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1017/ S02614448100 00431 Kress, Gunther (2003). Multimodality. In Bill Cope & Mary Kalantzis (Eds.) Multiliteracies. Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 182-202). New York: Routledge. Kress, Gunther (2010). Multimodality. A social semiotic approach to contemporary com‐ munication. New York: Routledge. Kühn, Simone, & Gallinat, J. (2014). Amount of lifetime video gaming is positively asso‐ ciated with entorhinal, hippocampal and occipital volume. Molecular Psychiatry, 19(May), 842-7. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1038/ mp.2013. 100 Kühn, Simone; Gleich, T.; Lorenz, R. C.; Lindenberger, U. & Gallinat, J. (2014). Playing Super Mario induces structural brain plasticity: gray matter changes resulting from training with a commercial video game. Molecular psychiatry, 19(August), 265-71. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1038/ mp.2013.120 Kühn, Simone, Romanowski, A.; Schilling, C.; Lorenz, R.; Mörsen, C.; Seiferth, N.; … Gal‐ linat, J. (2011). The neural basis of video gaming. Translational Psychiatry, 1(August), e53. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1038/ tp.2011.53 Works Cited 340 <?page no="341"?> Kultusministerium, Hessisches (2010). Lehrplan Englisch. Gymnasialer Bildungsgang. Jahrgangsstufen 5G bis 9G und gymnasiale Oberstufe. Retrieved from https: / / kultus‐ ministerium.hessen.de/ sites/ default/ files/ media/ go-englisch.pdf Kultusministerium, Hessisches (2017). Handreichung zur Arbeit mit den Lehrplänen der Bildungsgänge Hauptschule, Realschule und Gymnasium. English an schulformüber‐ greifenden (integrierten) Gesamtschulen und Förderstufen. Hessisches Kultusministe‐ rium. Retrieved from https: / / kultus ministerium.hessen.de/ schulsystem/ bildungs‐ standards-kerncurricula-und-lehrplaene/ lehrplaene/ integrierte-gesamtschule-igs Kultusministerkonferenz. (2014). Bildungsstandards für die fortgeführte Fremdsprache (Englisch/ Französisch) für die Allgemeine Hochschulreife (Beschluss der Kultusminister‐ konferenz vom 18.10.2012). KMK: Berlin. Retrieved from https: / / www.kmk.org/ fileadmin/ veroeffentlichungen _beschluesse/ 2012/ 2012_10_18-Bildungsstan‐ dards-Fortgef-FS-Abi.pdf Kupczynska, Kalina (2014). Pathos rules - über propagandistische Aspekte der Solidar‐ ność-Comics. In Stephan Packard (Ed.) Comics & Politik. 7. Wissenschaftstagung der Gesellschaft für Comicforschung (ComFor) (pp. 311-325). Berlin: Ch. A. Bachmann Verlag. Küppers, Almut (2015). Interkulturelle Kompetenzen, Dramapädagogik und Theaterwis‐ senschaft. In Wolfgang Hallet & Carola Surkamp (Eds.) Dramendidaktik und Drama‐ pädagogik im Fremdsprachenunterricht (pp. 145-164). Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier. Lammers, Jayne C. (2012). “Is the hangout... the hangout? ” Exploring tensions in an on‐ line, gaming-related fan site. In Elizabeth R. Hayes & Sean C. Duncan (Eds.) Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 23-50). New York: Peter Lang. Lankoski, Petri (2011). Player character engagement in computer games. Games and cul‐ ture, 6(4), 291-311. Lave, Jean & Wenger, Etienne (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participa‐ tion. Learning in doing (Vol. 95). Leavenworth, Maria L. (2014). Transmedial narration and fan fiction. The storyworld of The Vampire Diaries. In Marie-Laure Ryan & Jan-Noel Thon (Eds.) Storyworlds across media. Toward a media-conscious narratology (pp. 315-331). Lincoln and London: Uni‐ versity of Nebraska Press. Legutke, Michael & Schramm, Karen (2016). Forscshungsethik. In Daniela Caspari, Frie‐ derike Klippel, Michael Legutke & Karen Schramm (Eds.) Forschungsmethoden in der Fremdsprachendidaktik. Tübingen: Narr Verlag. Library, New York Public. Find the Future/ NYPL at 100. Retrieved from http: / / exhibi‐ tions.nypl.org/ 100/ digital_fun/ play_the_game Löffler, Renate & Klippel, Friederike (1983). AG 9: Spiele im Fremdsprachenunterricht. In Jürgen Donnerstag & Annelie Knapp-Potthoff (Eds.) Kongreßdokumentation der 10. Works Cited 341 <?page no="342"?> Arbeitstagung der Fremdsprachendidaktiker (pp. 143-155). Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag. Lütge, Christiane (2015). Handlungs- und Produktionsorientierung im Dramenunter‐ richt: Perspektiven für die fremdsprachliche Literatur- und Kulturdidaktik. In Wolf‐ gang Hallet & Carola Surkamp (Eds.) Dramendidaktik und Dramapädagogik im Fremd‐ sprachendidaktik (pp. 189-201). Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Trier. Magnifico, Alecia M. (2012). The game of Neopian writing. In Elizabeth R. Hayes & Sean C. Duncan (Eds.) Learning in video fame affinity spaces. New York: Peter Lang. Malaby, Thomas M. (2009). Anthropology and play: The contours of playful experience. New literary history, 40(1), 205-218. Mapmyfitness. (2015). mapmyfitness. Retrieved from http: / / www.mapmy fitness.com/ Marotzki, Winfried & Jörissen, Benjamin (2010). Dimensionen strukturaler Medienbil‐ dung. In Bardo Herzig, Dorothee M. Meister, Heinz Moser & Horst Nieysto (Eds.) Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 8. Medienkompetenz und Web 2.0. (pp. 19-38). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Martinez, Hélène (2013). From standards to tasks and vice versa. Challenges in foreign language teaching and learning. FLuL, 42(2), 99-114. Mayring, Philipp (2014). Qualitative content analysis. Theoretical foundation, basic proce‐ dures and software solution. Advances in bioethics. Klagenfurt: SSOAR. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1016/ S1479-3709(07)11003-7 McCloud, Scott (1993). Understanding comics: The invisible art. New York: HarperCollins. McGilchrist, Ian (2011). The divided brain. Retrieved from https: / / www.ted. com/ talks/ iain_mcgilchrist_the_divided_brain McGonigal, Jane (2011). Reality is broken. Why games make us better and how they can change the world. Penguin Books. Media, New York Public (2015). Mission US. An interactive way to learn history. Retrieved from http: / / www.mission-us.org/ Miethe, Ingrid (2010). Forschungsethik. In Barbara Friebertshäuser, Antje Langer & An‐ nedore Prengel (Eds.) Handbuch Qualitative Forschungsmethoden in der Erziehungs‐ wissenschaft (pp. 927-937). Weinheim: Juventa. Miller, Ann (2014). Konsens und Dissens im Bande Dessinée. In Stephan Pakcard (Ed.) Comics & Politik. 7. Wissenschaftstagung der Gesellschaft für Comicforschung (ComFor) (pp. 23-52). Berlin: Ch. A. Bachmann Verlag. Morreall, John (2009). Humor as cognitive play. Journal of literary theory, 3(2), 241-260. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1515/ JLT.2009.014 Morrow, Keith (2004). Background to the CEF. In Keith Morrow (Ed.) Insights from the Common European Framework (pp. 3-11). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Works Cited 342 <?page no="343"?> Mosel, Michael (2013). Die Transparenz des Interfaces. Auf dem Weg zum durchsichtigen Körper. In Rudolf Inderst & Peter Just (Eds.) Build ‘em up - Shoot ‘em down. Körper‐ lichkeit in digitalen Spielen (pp. 226-253). Glückstadt: vwh. Moser, Heinz (2010). Die Medienkompetenz und die “neue” erziehungswissenschaftliche Kompetenzdiskussion. In Bardo Herzig, Dorothee M. Meister, Heinz Moser & Horst Niesyto (Eds.) Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 8. Medienkompetenz und Web 2.0 (pp. 59- 79). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Müller-Hartmann, Andreas & Schocker-v. Ditfurth, Marita (2004). Introduction to English language teaching. Stuttgart: Klett. Müller, Claudia (2017). Serious games for global education. Digital game-based learning in the English as a foreign language (EFL) classroom. Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Murray, Janet (1998). Hamlet on the holodeck. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Murray, Janet (2004). From game-story to cyberdrama. In Noah Wardrip-Fruin & Pat Harrigan (Eds.) First person. New media as story, performance and game (pp. 2-11). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Nerd, Energy (2014). Is gamification the future of reducing energy costs? Energy Nerd. Retrieved from http: / / www.energynerd.co.uk/ gamifica‐ tion-future-reducing-energy-costs/ 3823 Niedersachsen, Bundesland (2015). Games & gamification: Bibliotheken als Spiel-Orte. Retrieved from http: / / www.bz-niedersachsen.de/ fortbildung-detailansicht/ events/ games-gamification-bibliotheken-als-spiel-orte.html Nitsche, Michael (2008). Video game spaces. Image, play, and structure in 3D game worlds. London: The MIT Press. NMC Horizon Report. (2014). Games and gamification. NMC Horizon Report. Retrieved from http: / / www.nmc.org/ publications/ 2014-horizon-report-higher-ed Nunan, David (2005). Doing research. In Research methods in language learning (pp. 211- 229). Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press. Nunan, David & Choi, Julie (2011). Shifting sands. The evolving story of “voice” in qual‐ itative research. In Eli Hinkel (Ed.) Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 222-236). New York: Routledge. Nünning, Vera & Nünning, Ansgar (2000). British cultural studies konkret. 10 Leitkon‐ zepte für einen innovative Kulturunterricht. Der fremdsprachliche Unterricht Eng‐ lisch, 34(43), 4-9. Orendorff, Aaron (2015). Why you should supercharge your workplace with gamifica‐ tion. Entrepreneur. Retrieved from http: / / www.entrepreneur.com / article/ 245950 Packard, Stephan (2014). Politisches im Comic und Comics in der Politik: Einleitung. In Stephan Packard (Ed.) Comics & Politik. 7. Wissenschaftstagung der Gesellschaft für Comicforschung (ComFor) (pp. 9-19). Berlin: Ch. A. Bachmann Verlag. Works Cited 343 <?page no="344"?> Pearce, Celia (2004). Towards a game theory of game. In Noah Wardrip-Fruin & Pat Harrigan (Eds.) First person. New media as story, performance and game (pp. 143-153). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Pennycook, Alastair (2010). Sweating cheese and thinking otherwise. In David Nunan & Julie Choi (Eds.) Language and culture: Reflective narratives and the emergence of iden‐ tity (pp. 194-198). New York: Routledge. Perfors, Amy; Tenenbaum, Joshua B. & Griffiths, Thomas L. (2011). A tutorial introduc‐ tion to Bayesian models of cognitive development. Cognition, 1-61. Retrieved from papers: / / publication/ uuid/ D5260FC9-8E83-46E1-8896-93306EDAAF50 Piaget, Jean (2005). The psychology of intelligence. The British journal of psychiatry (Vol. 86). Routledge & Kegan Paul. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1192 / bjp.86.360.95 Prensky, Marc (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants, part II. Do they really think differently? On the horizon, 9(6). Prensky, Marc (2010). Educating the millennial generation. In Atsusi “2c” Hirumi (Ed.) Playing games in school. Video games and simulations for primary and secondary edu‐ cation (pp. 7-32). International Society for Technology and Education. Raessens, Joost (2014). The ludification of culture. In Mathias Fuchs, Sonia Fizek, Paolo Ruffino & Niklas Schrape (Eds.) Rethinking gamification (pp. 91-112). Lüneburg: meson press. Resnik, David B. (2017). Research ethics timeline (1932-Present). Retrieved from https: / / www.niehs.nih.gov/ research/ resources/ bioethics/ timeline/ index.cfm Rösler, Dietmar (2000). Fremdsprachenlernen außerhalb des zielsprachigen Raums per virtueller Realität. In Gerd Fritz & Andreas H. Jucker (Eds.) Kommunikationsformen im Wandel der Zeit. Vom mittelalterlichen Heldenepos zum elektronischen Hypertext (pp. 121-135). Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag. Rösler, Dietmar (2010). E-Learning Fremdsprachen eine kritische Einführung (3rd ed.). Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag. Rösler, Dietmar (2012). Deutsch als Fremdsprache. Eine Einführung. Weimar: J.B. Metzler. Rösler, Dietmar (2013). Erfüllen Aufgaben ihre Aufgabe? Ein Blick in den akademischen Diskurs. FLuL, 42(2), 41-54. Rösler, Dietmar (2016). CALL und CMC - verschwimmen die Grenzen? In Tamara Zeyer, Sebastian Stuhlmann & Roger D. Jones (Eds.) Interaktivität im Fremdsprachenlehren und -lehren mit digitalen Medien. Hit oder Hype? (pp. 71-88). Tübingen: Narr Verlag. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques (1963). Der Gesellschaftsvertrag. Stuttgart: Reclam. Ryan, Marie-Laure (1991). Possible worlds, artificial intelligence, and narrative theory. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Ryan, Marie-Laure (2006). Avatars of story. London: University of Minnesota Press. Ryan, Marie-Laure (2010). Fiction, cognition and non-verbal media. In Marie-Laure Ryan (Ed.) Intermediality and storytelling (pp. 8-26). Berlin: De Gruyter. Works Cited 344 <?page no="345"?> Salen, Katie (2007). Gaming literacies: A game design study in action. Journal of educa‐ tional multimedia and hypermedia, 16(3), 301-322. Schäfer, Iris (2013). Inhabiting bodies in Valve Software’s Left 4 Dead series. In Rudolph Inderst & Peter Just (Eds.) Build ‘em up - Shoot ‘em down. Körperlichkeit in digitalen Spielen (pp. 42-63). Glückstadt: vwh. Schawbel, Dan (2013). Adam Penenberg: How gamification is going to change the work‐ place. Forbes. Retrieved from http: / / www.forbes.com/ sites/ danschawbel/ 2013/ 10/ 07/ adam-penenberg-how-gamification-is-going-to-change-the-workplace/ Schmidt, Torben (2016). Chocolate-covered drill & practice? Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des “gamifizierten” adaptiven Übens mit Fremdsprachenlern-Apps. In Eva Bur‐ witz-Melzer, Frank G. Königs, Claudia Riemer & Lars Schmelter (Eds.) Üben und Übungen beim Fremdsprachenlernen. Perspektiven und Konzepte für Unterricht (pp. 200- 210). Tübingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag. Schmidt, Torben; Schmidt, Inke & Schmidt, Philipp (2016). Digitales Spielen und Lernen - A perfect match ? In Kevin Dadaczynski, Stephan Schiemann & Peter Paulus (Eds.) Gesundheit spielend fördern. Potenziale und Herausforderungen von digitalen Spielean‐ wendungen für die Gesundheitsförderung und Prävention (pp. 1-33). Weinheim Basel: Beltz Verlag. Schonfeld, Erick (2010). SCVNGR’s secret game mechanics playdeck. Retrieved from https: / / techcrunch.com/ 2010/ 08/ 25/ scvngr-game-mechanics/ Schramm, Karen (2016). Unterrichtsforschung und Videographie. In Eva Burwitz-Melzer, Grit Mehlhorn, Claudia Riemer, Karl-Richard Bausch & Hans-Jürgen Krumm (Eds.) Handbuch Fremdsprachenunterricht (6th ed., pp. 587-593). Tübingen: A. Franke Verlag. Schramm, Karen & Aguado, Karin (2010). Videographie in den Fremdsprachendidaktiken. Ein Überblick. In Karin Aguado, Karen Schramm & Helmut J. Vollmer (Eds.) Fremd‐ sprachliches Handeln beobachten, messen, evaluieren. Neue methodische Ansätze der Kompetenzforschung und der Videographie (pp. 185-214). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Shaffer, David W. (2012). Models of situated action: Computer games and the probelm of transfer. In Constance Steinkuehler, Kurt Squire, & Sasha Barab (Eds.) Games, learning, and society. Learning and meaning in the digital age (pp. 403-431). New York: Cam‐ bridge University Press. Spitzer, Manfred (2012). Digitale Demenz. Wie wir uns und unsere Kinder um den Verstand bringen. München: Droemer Knauer. Squire, Kurt (2008). Video-game literacy - A literacy of expertise. In Julie Coiro, Michele Knobel, Colin Lankshear & Donald J. Leu (Eds.) Handbook of research on new literacies (pp. 635-670). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum. Start, Six to & Alderman, Naomi (n.d.). Zombies, run! Retrieved from https: / / zombies‐ rungame.com/ Works Cited 345 <?page no="346"?> Steinkuehler, Constance & Duncan, Sean (2008). Scientific habits of mind in virtual worlds. Journal of science education and technology, 17, 530-543. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1007/ s10956-008-9120-8 Storey, John (2009). Cultural theory and popular culture. An introduction (5th ed.). Harlow, England: Pearson Education. Strydom, Piet (2000). Discourse and knowledge. The making of enlightenment sociology. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. Surkamp, Carola (2002). Narratologie und Possible-Worlds Theory: Narrative Texte als Alternative Welten. In Ansgar Nünning & Vera Nünning (Eds.) Neue Ansätze in der Erzähltheorie (pp. 153-183). Trier: WVT. Sutter, Tilmann (2010). Medienkompetenz und Selbstsozialization im Kontext Web 2.0. In Bardo Herzig, Dorothee M. Meister, Heinz Moser & Horst Niesyto (Eds.) Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 8. Medienkompetenz und Web 2.0 (pp. 41-58). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Sykes, Julie M. & Reinhardt, Jonathon (2013). Language at play. Digital games in second and foreign language teaching and learning. ( Judith Liskin-Gasparro & Manel Lacorte, Eds.) Boston et al.: Pearson. Tateo, Luca (2015). Let’s frankly play: Ambivalence, dilemmas and imagination. In Gui‐ seppina Marsico (Ed.) Jerome S. Bruner beyond 100. Cultivating possibilities (pp. 55- 64). Cham: Springer International Publishing. The New London Group. (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures. In Bill Cope & Mary Kalantzis (Eds.) Multiliteracies. Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 9-37). London: Routledge. Thon, Jan-Noel (2014). On transmedial strategies of subjective representation in con‐ temporary feature films, graphic novels, and somputer games. In Marie-Laure Ryan & Jan-Noel Thon (Eds.) Storyworlds across media. Toward a media-conscious narra‐ tology (pp. 67-102). Lincoln and London: University of Nebraska Press. Thorne, Steven L. & Black, Rebecca W. (2011). Identity and interaction in internet-medi‐ ated contexts. In C. Higgins (Ed.) Identity formation in globalizing contexts (pp. 257- 278). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Thorne, Steven L., Black, Rebecca W., & Sykes, Julie M. (2009). Second language use, socialization,and learning in Internet interest communities and online gaming. The Modern language journal, 93, 802-821. Tulodziecki, Gerhard (2010). Standards für die Medienbildung als eine Grundlage für die empirische Erfassung von Medienkompetenz-Niveaus. In Bardo Herzig, Dorothee M. Meister, Heinz Moser & Horst Niesyto (Eds.) Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik 8. Medien‐ kompetenz und Web 2.0 (pp. 81-101). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften. Turse, Nick (2008). The complex. How the military invades our everyday lives. New York: Metropolitan Books. Works Cited 346 <?page no="347"?> U.S. Department of State. (2012). U.S. Department of State. Trace Effects. Retrieved from http: / / traceeffects.state.gov/ Valsiner, Jaan (2015). The purpose of purpose. In Guiseppina Marsico (Ed.) Jerome S. Bruner beyond 100. Cultivating possibilities (pp. 79-85). Cham: Springer International Publishing. Viebrock, Britta (2015). Forschungsethik in der Fremdsprachenforschung. Eine systemati‐ sche Betrachtung. (Daniela Caspari, Lars Schmelter, Karin Vogt & Nicola Würffel, Eds.). Frankfurt a.M.: Peter Lang. Vogt, Karin (2004). Der Gemeinsame Europäische Referenzrahmen für Sprachen: Inhalte, Ziele, Diskussionen. Der fremdsprachliche Unterricht Englisch, 38(69), 48-51. Vygotsky, Lev (1978). Mind in society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press. Walsh, Richard (2011). Emergent narrative in interactive media. NARRATIVE, 19(1), 72- 85. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1353/ nar.2011.0006 Wegener, Heide & Krumm, Hans-Jürgen (1982). Spiele - Sprachspiele - Sprachlernspiele. Thesen zur Funktion des Spielens im Deutschunterricht für Ausländer. In Alois Wier‐ lacher (Ed.) Jahrbuch Deutsch als Fremdsprache (pp. 189-211). Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag. Weinert, Franz E. (2001). Vergleichende Leistungsmessung in Schulen - Eine umstrittene Selbstverständlichkeit. In Franz E. Weinert (Ed.) Leistungsmessungen in Schulen (pp. 17-32). Weinheim and Basel: Beltz Verlag. Welsch, Wolfgang (2009). Was ist eigentlich Transkulturalität? In Lucyna Darowska & Claudia Machold (Eds.) Hochschule als transkultureller Raum? Beiträge zur Kultur, Bil‐ dung und Differenz (pp. 39-66). Bielefeld: Transkript Verlag. Yee, Nick, Bailenson, Jeremy N. & Ducheneaut, Nicolas (2009). The Proteus effect. Com‐ munication research, 36, 285-312. http: / / doi.org/ 10.1177/ 0093650208330254 Zichermann, Gabe & Cunningham, Chris (2011). Gamification by design: Implementing game mechanics in web and mobile apps. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly. Zimmerman, Eric (2004). Narrative, interactivity, play and games: Four naughty concepts in need of discipline. In Noah Wardrip-Fruin & Pat Harrigan (Eds.) First person. New media as story, performance and game (pp. 154-164). Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press. Zimmerman, Eric (2009). Gaming literacy. Game design as a model for literacy in the twenty-first century. In Mark J. P. Wolf & Bernard Perron (Eds.) The video game theory reader (pp. 23-32). New York: Routledge. Zipfel, Frank (2014). Fiction across media. Toward a transmedial concept of fictionality. In Marie-Laure Ryan & Jan-Noel Thon (Eds.) Storyworlds across media. Toward a media-conscious narratology (pp. 103-125). Lincoln and London: University of Ne‐ braska Press. Works Cited 347 <?page no="348"?> Appendix A: Transcription Rules Underlying Transcription Rules for Simple Transcription (Dresing, Pehl & Schmieder 2015: 28-30) 1. Transcribe literally; do not summarize or transcribe phonetically. Dialects are to be accurately translated into standard language. If there is no suitable trans‐ lation for a word or expression, the dialect is retained. 2. Informal contractions are not to be transcribed, but approximated to written standard language. E. g. “gonna” becomes “going to” in the transcript. Sentence structure is retained despite possible syntactic errors. 3. Discontinuations of words or sentences as well as stutters are omitted; word doublings are only transcribed if they are used for emphasis (“This is very, very important to me.”) Half sentences are recorded and indicated by a slash / . 4. Punctuation is smoothed in favor of legibility. Thus short drops of voice or ambiguous intonations are preferably indicated by periods rather than commas. Units of meaning have to remain intact. 5. Pauses are indicated by suspension marks in parentheses (…). 6. Affirmative utterances by the interviewer, like “uh-huh, yes, right” etc. are not transcribed. EXCEPTION: monosyllabic answers are always transcribed. Add an interpretation, e.g. “Mhm (affirmative)” or “Mhm (negative)”. 7. Words with a special emphasis are CAPITALIZED. 8. Every contribution by a speaker receives its own paragraph. In between speakers there is a blank line. Short interjections also get their own paragraph. At a minimum, time stamps are inserted at the end of a paragraph. 9. Emotional non-verbal utterances of all parties involved that support or elu‐ cidate statements (laughter, sighs) are transcribed in brackets. 10. Incomprehensible words are indicated as follows (inc.). For unintelligible passages indicate the reason: (inc., cell phone ringing) or (inc., microphone rus‐ tling). If you assume a certain word but are not sure, put the word in brackets with a question mark, e.g. (Xylomentazoline? ). Generally, all inaudible or in‐ <?page no="349"?> comprehensible passages are marked with a time stamp if there isn’t one within a minute. Additional Rules 1. Discontinuations are marked by / : “I was worri/ concerned.” Word doublings are always transcribed. 2. Pauses are indicated by suspension marks in parentheses, corresponding to the pause length from one second (.) to three seconds (…), and the (number) of seconds for longer pauses. 3. Affirmative noises und fillers (“uh-huh, um, yeah”) are transcribed. All the participant’s utterances, including fillers, are transcribed. 4. Speech overlaps are marked by / / . At the start of an interjection, / / follows. The simultaneous speech is within / / and the person’s interjection is in a separate line, also marked by / / . 5. Dialects are written as they are spoken. Appendix A: Transcription Rules 349 <?page no="350"?> Appendix B: Classroom Videography Transcript Example Case Study 2, Day One, Video 2: Discussion of "My Life in Games" Dr. Müller (21: 07): What was interesting about the video clip, or about the in‐ terview? Was there anything you found interesting? [Waits for students to raise their hand calls on student] Julia (21: 14): I find it interesting that, ähm, she said if she could live in, ähm, in a game universe she would live in GTA. Dr. Müller (21: 27): [laughs] Yeah, why is that interesting? Do you know that game? multiple students (21: 29): Yes. Julia (21: 31): Yes, I know it. I remember that I played this game. Dr. Müller (21: 34): Yeah, I know the little ones, when I took over the fifth grade, the fifth grade, they used to tell their parents, oh it's just a car racing game. (Students laugh) But it's not. I know the game. [laughs] Jonas (21: 45): You can race cars. Dr. Müller (21: 46): [laughs] Yeah you can but it's not a race car game. Stefan (21: 52): You just, you just drive around. That's the whole game, you just cruise. Dr. Müller (22: 01): I know what you do, I know what you do. [Calls on next student] Melanie (22: 04): I would agree with Julia, I would also say that the most inter‐ esting fact was that she said ähm, she would live in the GTA universe. Dr. Müller (22: 17): Yeah, why is that interesting? Melanie (22: 17): Because I would also live in GTA. Dr. Müller (22: 18): Really! ? Melanie (22: 19): Yes. <?page no="351"?> Dr. Müller (22: 20): Why is that? [laughs] Melanie (22: 20): [laughs] It is better. Yeah, so. Dr. Müller (22: 24): Yeah, it's called a sandbox game, right? multiple students (22: 25): No, no, it's an open world game. Alfred (22: 30): Sandbox is when you can build something. Jonas (22: 32): (Barry's Mod? ) is like a sandbox game. Dr. Müller (22: 38): I thought that would be interesting to have a game where you can do a lot. You don't have to do a, a jump and run game wouldn't be so nice to live in, right? (Students laugh). Since there are only two dimensions. Jonas (22: 52): Depends on the jump and run game. Dr. Müller (22: 55): [Calls on student] Alfred (22: 55): I thought it was interesting that she played a lot of ähm, ähm a lot of games, like, ähm, Left for Dead, GTA, Mario and (inc.), but that's ähm, games I, I personally, uhm, uhm I really like. I really like them. Yeah. For example, she also mentions The Legend of Zelda, Link, yeah. Dr. Müller (23: 22): What does she say about Link? [Alfred: Link? ] I found that funny. Alfred (23: 25): She (inc.) Dr. Müller (23: 28): She? (.) No one? No one knows? Melanie (23: 30): I think, I think she found him handsome. Dr. Müller (23: 33): Very handsome [students laugh]. She said she had a crush on him. [Calls on student] Daniel (23: 40): Uhm, she said that she like the Prince of Persia. Dr. Müller (23: 47): Yeah, I know, I know the titles of the game, but I don't play them. Frieda (23: 50): Yeah uhm, one thing I found very funny was that she, I think it was the last game. Uhm, that she don't go out with her friends [Teacher corrects grammar]. She doesn't. Sorry. That she doesn't go out with friends and just stayed at home. And, just played the game. Appendix B: Classroom Videography Transcript Example 351 <?page no="352"?> Appendix C: Teacher Interview Transcript Example Teacher Interview, Case Study 1 Frau Schneider (08: 02): Ne. Ich sehe das ganz klar als Vorteil. Äh, das ist über die Jahre stark angewachsen. Das war vor fünf, sechs, sieben Jahren noch gar nicht so Thema, weil auch, ich sage mal vor sechs, sieben, naja sagen wir mal vielleicht zehn Jahren, wo ich angefangen habe, hatten wir kein Computerraum, ja? Schüler hatten noch keinen Internetzugang zuhause, also das ist ja relativ [...] kurzfristig auch die Entwicklung in der das gewachsen ist. Und ich sehe das (inc.) von all dem was du angesprochen hast steigt, weil (.) ich sehr häufig jetzt Schüler und auch in dieser Klasse interessanterweise, Leute haben diese gut sind, und bei zwei, drei habe ich nachgefragt, woher habt ihr denn euer Vokabular, und, äh, einer sagte ganz klar, ich spiele alle meine Videospiele auf Englisch und chatte in der Community auf Englisch. Einer sagte in bin in Chemie interessiert. Ich gucke mir immer die Versuche auf YouTube in Englisch an. Ähm, weil er wusste, funnel, ja, das wusste ich nicht, keine Ahnung. Und ähm, dachte so, das ist super. Ähm, hab jetzt immer auch mal Schüler, die versuchen ihr Englisch zu verbessern (.) ähm, indem sie Filme schauen auf Englisch die sie mal auf Deutsch mal gesehen haben. Und so das klassische, ja, ihr musst üben, ihr musst Vokabeln lernen, ihr musst Bücher lesen, ähm, das rate ich Schülern auch noch wenn sie sich verbessern wollen aber mein Ansatz ist mittlerweile auch, mach es so nie‐ derschwellig wie möglich und guck Big Bang Theory auf Englisch und YouTube, ja? Und, ähm, ich glaube es ist egal, in welchen Zusammenhang sie mich, sich mit Englisch auseinandersetzen, ähm, solange es passiert. Und, egal auch auf welchem Niveau. Ich glaube das Sprachgefühl entwickelt sich trotzdem und es wird zunehmend der Fall sein, und das sehe ich als positiv an. Interviewer (09: 44): I've read a bit on this, and I think this is very interesting because I haven't quite gotten my head around this, and I haven't found an answer to this yet, ähm. But I've read a lot of theory talking about how the role of the classroom is changing, mhm (affirmative). If students are spending more time coming into contact with let's say a foreign language, outside of the class‐ room, then how does that change the role of the classroom? Uhm, what do you think about that? Do you think that changes your role in any way, or does that Frau Schneider (10: 14): Es wird auch bei uns viel diskutiert und mit viel uns angetragen, und ähm, heißt immer mal, Lehrer werden zunehmend zu Lernbe‐ <?page no="353"?> ratern, und es soll mehr Eigenverantwortlichkeit in die Schule kommen, ähm. Ich sehe das für mich auch noch nicht richtig kommen. Also ich weiß nicht genau, wie meine Rolle definiert sein wird. Ähm, und ich glaube auch nicht dass es so schnell, so sein wird, weil das System so nicht angelegt ist, in der Schule. Ähm, in der Fremdsprache sehe ich schon auch so, ich meine ich komme jetzt aus ne, aus ner Generation, die das auch noch anders, A) selbst in der Schule vermittelt bekommen hat, B) selbst gelernt hat. Ähm, in unserer Rolle, dass wir sehr stark Lernvermittler sind, und ich sehe noch nicht wie ich ein korrektes Englisch, ähm, anders vermitteln soll als, ähm, durch Vorbildfunktion, auch durch klassische Grammatik Eingabe, ja? Und dieses, ähm, (.) instinktive Spra‐ chenlernen, ähm, ist was was (.) meiner Vorstellung von Sprachenlernen wider‐ spricht. Ich finde es toll, ähm, wenn jemand ins Ausland geht, die Möglichkeit da 24 Stunden lang davon konfrontiert zu sein. Das ist natürlich sicherlich wun‐ derbar und geht auch sehr schnell. Aber in der Schule wo wir natürlich dreißig Lerner sitzen haben, wie soll ich das anders als über eine Kognition machen? Plus ich bin kein Native Speaker, ja? Das heißt ich bin ja selbst nicht auf dem neuesten Lernstand. Ich kann, ähm, Sprache auch nur bis zu einem gewissen Grad intuitiv benutzen und muss dann oft irgendwelche Strukturen zurück‐ greifen, und, ähm, ich sehe jetzt nicht wie es anders Schülern beibringen sollen. Plus ich halte auch diesen Ansatz, ähm, von wir bringen uns alle selber bei, ähm, für fragwürdig. Ich weiß nicht, wie es funktionieren soll. Appendix C: Teacher Interview Transcript Example 353 <?page no="354"?> Appendix D: Student Interview Transcript Example Student Interview, Case Study 3 Interviewer (07: 48): Und glaubst du, glaubt ihr, es gibt auch zum Beispiel, wenn wir über diese Technologieentwicklung von Virtual Reality, oder was weiß ich, dass es auch praktische Anwendungen gibt, oder geht das nur um Spielen? Tobias (07: 58): Ja äh, ähm also zum Beispiel ähm Piloten haben ja auch schon wirklich Simulation [I: Mhm (affirmative)] in ähm auch rea/ also realitätsbezo‐ gene We/ ähm Simulationen in bestimmten Zimmern und ehm da lernen die ja quasi auch mehr oder weniger durch ein Spiel äh solche Umgebungen (.) und da könnte ich mir das auch vorstellen zum Beispiel beim Militär so etwas zu verwenden. Unter anderem Stresssituationen für Soldaten oder so etwas in dieser Art, weil äh viele Soldaten können/ wissen natürlich nicht, wie es sich anfühlen würde wenn einer Rea/ äh in einer reellen Situation und ähm da kann ich mir sehr gut vorstellen, dass man durch ehm noch bisschen mehr Entwick‐ lung dazu, zu einem Zustand kommen konnte/ könnte, wo man das sehr gut nachahmen kann. Interviewer (08: 42): Also ich weiß, dass es eigentlich passiert in Militär, Polizei [Tobias: Ja.] auch Feuerwehr und sowas. In so stressigen Situationen [Tobias: Ja.] wo man schnell handeln muss, dass es da eingesetzt wird, schon. Tobias (8: 52): Mhm (affirmative) Interviewer (08: 52): Sehr interessant (.) Ja? Thorsten (08: 54): Äh ich wollte auch noch sagen, dass ähm diese Games sind heutzutage auch wirklich sehr berühmt bei zum Beispiel "YouTube". Weil es gibt sehr viele quasi "YouTuber", die über irgendwelche Spiele und sowas berichten und wirklich teilweise auch echt Geld damit machen. [I: Mhm (affirmative)] Ich weiß jetzt nicht wie viel es ist, aber einige mit, was weiß ich, 14 Millionen Abonnenten oder sowas, die können sich dann schon mal was leisten und das nur weiß sie etwas spielen (.) und das aufnehmen und dann auf/ ins Internet stellen und das ist echt faszinierend wie berühmt man quasi dadurch [I: Ja.] werden kann. Und ähm (..) ja das hat halt auch einen großen Einfluss auf die Menschen ähm (.) und wie man jetzt rea/ ähm (.) ja wie man jetzt reagieren würde, würd ich jetzt nicht sagen, aber (.) wie manche Leute (.) quasi ticken sozusagen, [I: Mhm (affirmative)] also, ja. Und (..) ja. <?page no="355"?> Interviewer (09: 43): Okay. Ja? Tobias (09: 45): Ja und äh diese Entwicklung von "YouTube" und allgemein im Internet ist / trägt natürlich auch enorm dazu bei, dass äh diese Spiele erfolgreich sind. Und, dass sie die immer weiter produziert werden können, weil äh vor einigen Jahren, das ist ja noch nicht mal so lange her, vor 5 Jahren oder sowas, war es noch nicht mal so verbreitet unter Jugendlichen, dass sie sich irgendwie täglich YouTube-Videos angeguckt haben [I: Mhm (affirmative)]. Ähm weil da hatte man auch schon so die ersten Touch-Handys oder so, so wie Smartphones. Aber da waren die noch nicht so, wirklich so ähm normal, da war das noch nicht so üblich so etwas zu ehm haben und mittlerweile ähm ist es ganz normal, dass äh Fünftklässler mal ein teures neues Handy haben und dadrauf können sie natürlich auch die neusten Sachen austesten und probieren, was aber auch durchaus nicht schlimm ist. Also (.) äh klar hört man immer wieder Leute äh sagen: "Oh die Generation ähm (.) geht vor die Hunde. Das ist ehm total schlecht,“ aber wenn man sich das so bedenkt, hätten wir die Möglichkeit dazu gehabt, dann hätten wir das auch genutzt, das ist logisch, dass ist einfach nur mal die Entwicklung. [I: Mhm (affirmative)] Das ist auch ganz gut so. Interviewer (10: 40): Okay. Ich wechsle das Thema so ein bisschen. Wie findet ihr das Thema allgemein "Videospiele". Für (.) für erstens für die Schule und zweitens für den Englisch Unterricht? (..) Habt ihr auch Vorerfahrungen in der Schule? Tobias (11: 03): Ehm (.) es gibt zwar dazu auch positive Sachen und negative Sachen. Äh (.) ein negatives Beispiel ist, dass wenn man zu oft spielt, kann man dadurch ah und später schlä/ schlafen geht natürlich, kann man dadurch auch natürlich den Unterricht, sag ich mal, wenn man die Hausaufgaben nicht macht, den Unterricht verpassen. Und ehm müde sein, das ist halt eben keine positive Sachen in der Schule. Appendix D: Student Interview Transcript Example 355 <?page no="356"?> Appendix E: Example Parent Letter Informationsschreiben zu einer wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung zur Entwicklung von digitalen Spielkompetenzen im Englischunterricht Gießen, den 17.12.2014 Liebe Eltern, als wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter und Doktorand am Institut für Anglistik (Ab‐ teilung Didaktik) der Justus-Liebig-Universität Gießen führe ich ein For‐ schungsprojekt zur Entwicklung digitaler Spielkompetenzen im Englischunter‐ richt durch. Digitale Spiele beinhalten nicht nur typische Video- und Computerspiele, sondern auch App-Spiele, die man häufig in Smartphones, Tablets und in den sozialen Medien findet. Da digitale Spiele heutzutage allge‐ genwärtig sind, betrachte ich die Entwicklung von digitalen Spielkompetenzen als notwendig. Mein Forschungsschwerpunkt richtet sich auf die Möglichkeiten, die Comics jungen Erwachsenen hinsichtlich des Erwerbs von Sprachkompe‐ tenzen sowie im Umgang mit neuen Medien, insbesondere digitalen Spielen, bieten. Meine Forschung zu diesen Comics zeigt, dass sie ein hohes Potenzial für eine kritische Auseinandersetzung mit dem Verhalten in und mit Spielen, aber auch mit dem Inhalt von Spielen, wie mit den Regeln und mit der Spielwelt selbst hat. Mein Forschungsvorhaben wurde durch das hessische Kultusminis‐ terium und die Schulkonferenz der XXXschule genehmigt. Im Rahmen des Englischunterrichtes im Kurs/ in der Klasse Ihrer Tochter/ Ihres Sohnes möchte ich eine Studie durchführen, in der Comics über digitale Spiele unter verschiedenen Gesichtspunkten und mit unterschiedlichen Aufga‐ benstellungen behandelt werden. Die Unterrichtsstunden werden von mir auf Video aufgezeichnet; außerdem fertigen die SchülerInnen Texte an, um den Lernverlauf zu dokumentieren. Einzelne SchülerInnen werden nach der Unter‐ richtseinheit gebeten, in Interviews ihre Meinung zum Unterrichtsverlauf ab‐ zugeben. Die Unterrichtsvideos, Interviews und SchülerInnenprodukte werden ausschließlich durch mich aufgenommen und transkribiert, anonymisiert und ggf. im Rahmen meiner Doktorarbeit veröffentlicht. Aus den Transkripten, die in der Veröffentlichung erscheinen, kann nicht auf einzelne SchülerInnen, Lehrkrä, Klassen oder Schulen rückgeschlossen werden. Alle Aufnahmen, Angaben und Daten werden anonymisiert, vertraulich be‐ handelt, sicher gelagert und nicht an Dritte weitergegeben. Weiterhin werden <?page no="357"?> alle erhobenen Daten vier Jahre nach Abschluss des Forschungsprojektes ge‐ löscht. Die Auswertung der Erhebungsunterlagen erfolgt nur im Rahmen der angegebenen Studie. Es ist auch möglich, an der Studie teilzunehmen, aber eine Teilnahme an einem Interview abzulehnen. Die Ziele und Inhalte des Englisch‐ unterrichtes gemäß des hessischen Bildungsstandards ändern sich durch die Durchführung der Studie nicht. Auch fallen keine zusätzlichen Unterrichts‐ stunden an; anderer Unterrichtsstoff geht nicht verloren. Falls Sie der Teilnahme an der Studie nicht zustimmen, kann Ihr Sohn/ Ihre Tochter dennoch am Englischunterricht der Klasse teilnehmen, der im Rahmen der Studie stattfindet. In diesem Fall wird Ihr Sohn/ Ihre Tochter im Klassenraum so platziert, dass er/ sie nicht auf den Videoaufzeichnungen zu sehen ist. Sollte er/ sie dennoch versehentlich auf dem Video zu sehen sein, etwa indem er/ sie durch das Bild läuft, wird er/ sie mit einem schwarzen Balken überblendet. Au‐ ßerdem werden keine Arbeiten Ihres Sohnes/ Ihrer Tochter von mir eingesam‐ melt und ausgewertet und er/ sie wird nicht gefragt, ob er/ sie für ein Interview zur Verfügung steht. Die Beteiligung an der Studie ist freiwillig. Für Ihren Sohn/ Ihre Tochter ent‐ stehen keine Nachteile, falls Sie der Teilnahme an der Studie nicht zustimmen. Die Einwilligung kann ohne Angabe von Gründen jederzeit mit Wirkung für die Zukunft widerrufen werden. Ich würde mich sehr freuen, wenn Sie der Teilnahme Ihrer Tochter/ Ihres Sohnes an der Studie durch die beigefügte Einverständniserklärung zustimmen und mein Forschungsprojekt dadurch unterstützen. Gerne stehe ich Ihnen für Rückfragen jederzeit per Email oder Telefon zur Verfügung. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Roger Dale Jones Appendix E: Example Parent Letter 357 <?page no="358"?> Einverständniserklärung zur Teilnahme an einer wissenschaftlichen Untersuchung zur Entwicklung von digitalen Spielkompetenzen im Englischunterricht Ich bin damit einverstanden, dass meine Tochter/ mein Sohn ____________________________________________________ an dem Forschungsprojekt zur Entwicklung von digitalen Spielkompetenzen im Englischunterricht der E-Phase teilnimmt. Mir ist bewusst, dass meine Tochter/ mein Sohn im Rahmen der Studie gefilmt wird, sie/ er ggf. nach ihrer/ seiner Meinung zum Unterricht befragt und dieses Interview auch gefilmt wird, und von ihm/ ihr im Rahmen des Unterrichts er‐ stellte Texte und Produkte ausgewertet werden. Ebenso ist mir bewusst, dass alle Aufnahmen, Angaben und Daten anonymi‐ siert und vertraulich behandelt werden, nicht an Dritte weitergegeben werden und die Auswertung der Erhebungsunterlagen nur im Rahmen der angegebenen Studie erfolgt. Die gesammelten Daten werden nach der Transkription und Anonymisierung nur im Rahmen der Studie veröffentlicht. Aus den Trans‐ kripten, die in der Veröffentlichung erscheinen, kann nicht auf einzelne Schü‐ lerInnen, Lehrkräfte, Klassen oder Schulen rückgeschlossen werden. Mir ist bewusst, dass die Beteiligung an der Studie freiwillig ist und meiner Tochter/ meinem Sohn keine Nachteile entstehen, falls ich der Teilnahme an der Studie nicht zustimme. Meine Einwilligung kann ich ohne Angabe von Gründen jederzeit mit Wirkung für die Zukunft widerrufen. Name Erziehungsberechtigte/ r: Ort, Datum / Unterschrift: <?page no="359"?> List of Figures Fig. 1: Expanding Lifeworld Discourses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Fig. 2: Video Games as Multilayered Dynamic Discourse . . . . . . . 46 Fig. 3: Increase in Digital Gaming Frequency amongst Germans Aged 12-19 ( JIM Studie 2012, 2013 and 2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 Fig. 4: Two Approaches to Games as Interactive Texts . . . . . . . . . . 56 Fig. 5: The Dimension of Player and Player Experience . . . . . . . . . 80 Fig. 6: Two Dimensions of the Cultural Context of Video Games . 98 Fig. 7: Gamer Discourse as Mediator between Gameplay and Cultural Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113 Fig. 8: Herman’s Model of Multimodal Narration (Source: Herman 2013: 111. Reprinted courtesy of David Herman and The MIT Press.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124 Fig. 9: Typical Elements of WoW Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 Fig. 10: Perspective Taking in “Warsong Woes” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Fig. 11: Perceptual Overlay in “Do as I Say, Not as I Do” . . . . . . . . . 141 Fig. 12: Interface Markers in “Adventures in Herbalism” . . . . . . . . . 142 Fig. 13: Coding Tree from WoW Fan-Comic Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 Fig. 14: Game Criticism Comic: “Some Quest Drops…” . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Fig. 15: Game Extension Comic: “What bosses do…” . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 Fig. 16: Player Criticism Comic: “The Chief is up” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Fig. 17: Player Extension Comic: “Chin Up” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164 Fig. 18: World Criticism Comic: “Do it yourself ” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Fig. 19: World Extension Comic: “World of Warcraft Olympics” . . . 169 <?page no="360"?> List of Tables Table 1: Eleven Features of Affinity Spaces (cf. Gee 2007: 98-101) . . . . 110 Table 2: Interpreting Video Game Experiences - Questions Supporting Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 Table 3: Rules for WoW Comic Submission (http: / / eu.blizzard.com/ de-de/ community/ comics/ 06.04.2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 Table 4: Theoretical and Practical Tools for the Analysis of World of Warcraft Fan-Comics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Table 5: WoW Fan-Comics and the Video Game Literacy Model . . . . . . 150 Table 6: Overview of Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185 Table 7: Classroom Research Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Table 8: Case Study 1, Lesson 1 & 2 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201 Table 9: Case Study 1, Lesson 3 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Table 10: Case Study 1, Lesson 4 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202 Table 11: Quality Features for Game Summary Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Table 12: Assassin’s Creed Student Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214 Table 13: Candy Crush Student Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 216 Table 14: Student Analysis of Assassin’s Creed Comic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221 Table 15: Students Address Challenges and Weaknesses of Assassin’s Creed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223 Table 16: Student Assassin’s Creed Comic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 Table 17: Student Analysis of Candy Crush Comic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 Table 18: Students Address Challenges and Weaknesses of Candy Crush 230 Table 19: Student Candy Crush Comic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 Table 20: Case Study 2, Lesson 1 & 2 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 Table 21: Case Study 2, Lesson 3 & 4 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253 Table 22: Case Study 3, Lesson 1 & 2 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284 Table 23: Case Study 3, Lesson 3 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Table 24: Case Study 3, Lesson 4 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285 Table 25: Classroom Challenges for VGL in the EFL Classroom . . . . . . . 308 Table 26: Case Study Challenges in Three Dimensions of Video Game Discourse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311 Table 27: Case Study Findings of Game Complexity (CS = Case Study) . 312 Table 28: Case Study Findings of Gamifying the Classroom (CS = Case Study) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315 <?page no="361"?> Table 29: Case Study Findings of the Intimacy of Games (CS = Case Study) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316 Table 30: Case Study Findings of Student (Dis)Interest (CS = Case Study) 317 Table 31: Case Study Findings of Gamer Discourse (CS = Case Study) . . 318 Table 32: Case Study Findings of Changing Roles (CS = Case Study) . . . 321 List of Tables 361