Development and Testing of Modified Monopoly
ETEC 526 Designing a Game
Prototype Playtesting
As a part of the final class project we had to develop a game. I worked with a partner and we did a modified Monopoly game to help 6th grade students increase their personal finance skills. Three game components where created along with the regular Monopoly, a game sold by Hasbro Toys, to help students learn how to manage finances through real-life scenarios. It took a lot of planning and testing, re-evaluating, and re-thinking in its development. I found it to be fun and challenging and required me to add to my technological skills by creating a Gantt Chart to display our work timeline. Attached is our Individual Design Document (IDD) along with the PowerPoint modules that accompanied the game. What I learned working on this and many other projects for the class has given me a new appreciation for game design and development and what goes into it. I don't consider myself an expert gamer or designer but I am enjoying the learning process and the skills that I have developed because of it.
The first thing we discovered was that we needed to make playtime adjustments. It was noticed by our classmates and later by us that a Monopoly game played to the fullest would require at least a full 90-minute block schedule so that student would have sufficient time to complete the game. If the timeline is limited on one 50 minute class session by the time the students would really get into the game, it would be time to stop.
Enrichments and Adjustments
Aarseth, E. (2001). Computer game studies, year one. The International Journal of Computer Game Research.
Clark, A. C., & Ernst, J. (2009). Gaming research for technology education. Journal of STEM Education, 25-30.
Crawford, C., & Peabody, S. (2000). The Art of Computer Game Design. Vancouver.
Dondlinger, M. J., & Wilson, D. A. (2012). Creating an alternate reality: Critical, creative, and empathic thinking generated in the Global Village Playground capston experience. Journal of Thinking Skills and Creativity, 153-164.
Gee, J. P. (2011, March 23). How learners can be on top of their game: An interview with James Paul Gee. (H. Jenkins, Interviewer)
McClarty, K. L., Orr, A., & Frey, P. M. (2012). A literature review of gaming in education. Pearson.
McLeod, J., Vasinda, S., & Dondlinger, M. (2012). Conceptual visibility and virtual dynamics in technology-scaffolded learning environments for conceptural knowledge of mathematics. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 283-310.
Read, J. L., & Stephen, M. S. (2011, April 27). Interactice games to promote behavior change in prevention and treatment. JAMA, p. 2011.
Rieber, L., Smith, L., & Noah, D. (2018, August 28). The value of serious play. Retrieved from Educational Technology Publications, Inc.: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428195
Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play: Games design fundamentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
ETEC 526 Designing a Game
Prototype Playtesting
As a part of the final class project we had to develop a game. I worked with a partner and we did a modified Monopoly game to help 6th grade students increase their personal finance skills. Three game components where created along with the regular Monopoly, a game sold by Hasbro Toys, to help students learn how to manage finances through real-life scenarios. It took a lot of planning and testing, re-evaluating, and re-thinking in its development. I found it to be fun and challenging and required me to add to my technological skills by creating a Gantt Chart to display our work timeline. Attached is our Individual Design Document (IDD) along with the PowerPoint modules that accompanied the game. What I learned working on this and many other projects for the class has given me a new appreciation for game design and development and what goes into it. I don't consider myself an expert gamer or designer but I am enjoying the learning process and the skills that I have developed because of it.
The first thing we discovered was that we needed to make playtime adjustments. It was noticed by our classmates and later by us that a Monopoly game played to the fullest would require at least a full 90-minute block schedule so that student would have sufficient time to complete the game. If the timeline is limited on one 50 minute class session by the time the students would really get into the game, it would be time to stop.
Enrichments and Adjustments
- The way to modify the game is to have students play two sets of regular Monopoly with the Modified Monopoly. They will roll the dice at whatever numbered amount they roll that’s the amount of cash they will have on hand. Example roll a 5 get $500, roll a 12 get $1200. In the end, the groups can compare and contrast the regular Monopoly game with the Modified Monopoly game.
- A scenario will be created that requires the players to go to the banker and ask for a loan. This will help them to learn how to manage money by making regular payments , paying other real-life bills, budgeting their money, and writing checks in order to experience budgeting in real life. (These are experiences are especially important for students in low-socio-economic schools who often have no concept of what it takes to survive in the real world. It will teach them the value of planning and gaining more education.)
- We had several questions about the schedule and to address that we decided that sessions should be done over several days of class. With the introduction and background taking up 2-3 class sessions and practicing the game the next 2-3 days. Finally, the students would be ready just to start playing the different modifications of the game.
- When we looked at the enrichment activities and the Modified Monopoly game, we discovered that this program is suitable for the 6th-grade level students. So we have modifications to our IDD for the appropriate grade level TEKS.
Aarseth, E. (2001). Computer game studies, year one. The International Journal of Computer Game Research.
Clark, A. C., & Ernst, J. (2009). Gaming research for technology education. Journal of STEM Education, 25-30.
Crawford, C., & Peabody, S. (2000). The Art of Computer Game Design. Vancouver.
Dondlinger, M. J., & Wilson, D. A. (2012). Creating an alternate reality: Critical, creative, and empathic thinking generated in the Global Village Playground capston experience. Journal of Thinking Skills and Creativity, 153-164.
Gee, J. P. (2011, March 23). How learners can be on top of their game: An interview with James Paul Gee. (H. Jenkins, Interviewer)
McClarty, K. L., Orr, A., & Frey, P. M. (2012). A literature review of gaming in education. Pearson.
McLeod, J., Vasinda, S., & Dondlinger, M. (2012). Conceptual visibility and virtual dynamics in technology-scaffolded learning environments for conceptural knowledge of mathematics. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 283-310.
Read, J. L., & Stephen, M. S. (2011, April 27). Interactice games to promote behavior change in prevention and treatment. JAMA, p. 2011.
Rieber, L., Smith, L., & Noah, D. (2018, August 28). The value of serious play. Retrieved from Educational Technology Publications, Inc.: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44428195
Salen, K., & Zimmerman, E. (2004). Rules of play: Games design fundamentals. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
