Pedagogical Pattern #22
Simulation Game Workshop Pattern
(Version 1.0)
Alan O'Callaghan
Chair, Object Technology Group
De Montfort University
School of Computing Sciences
The Gateway
LEICESTER LE1 9BH
aoc@dmu.ac.uk
Intent:
Motivation:
Provides a simulated learning environment in the form of a game which nevertheless involves
some important "real world" concepts.
The pattern also provides, for large groups of learners, the possibility of using exercises that give them a feel for what is abstractly general and what is variable in a particular scenario.
Forces:
- OT is, in software engineering practice, arguably concerned about "programming-in-the-large"
and about the structure of software systems. It is difficult, if not impossible, to reproduce such
systems (and therefore the problems they exhibit) in the classroom.
- A problem with most scenario workshops is that they are too specific,
and have an artificial "feel" about them. The necessary suspension of belief on behalf
of the learner that is necessary to engage with the problem sometimes has the effect of further
distancing the learner from the learning in the exercise.
- Games use the "suspension of belief" to create a virtual world with which the learner is able to
engage sometimes because of (rather than in spite of) their artificiality.
Applicability:
Works best in large groups, allowing six to eight teams to be formed, each composed of 6-8
persons.
Requires a sizeable time-slot, min. 3 hours.
Consequences:
Learners are able to develop their own solutions to an artificial problem, and then compare them
with other groups. This can provoke discussion as to why there are differences. Care has to be
taken to reduce, or better still, eliminate the "mine is the best solution" syndrome which diverts
learners from constructive self-criticism.
Implementation:
A short scenario, the main elements of which can be described in 10-15 minutes is presented.
Each group is also presented with additional information on an A4 sheet containing no more than
4 paragraphs, each paragraph dealing with a discrete factor. For each group one paragraph of the
information differs from that in the master template - so that while every group will have 3
paragraphs out of 4 in common with most groups, its own information is unique. However, at
this stage, each group will believe itself to have exactly the same information as every other.
Additional information, simulating dynamic changes in requirements, are "drip-fed" into the
groups' discussion of the set problem at 20-30 min. intervals. Each one of these changes has
impact relating to the information contained in the A4 sheet.
Some common form of representation of solutions is required from each team, preferably a
display poster. Prior to summation by the educator(s), each team will nominate one person to
explain their solution to people from other groups. This person will stay with the poster. All
other team members are invited to visit all other posters, ask questions about the decisions taken,
and then report back for comparison and discussion. At this point it will dawn on participants
that each team had a slightly different scenario. The educator will sum up, highlighting the points of commonality between the problems, and how they varied, and any commonalities between the solutions offered.
Related Patterns:
None.
Example of Use:
This pattern was used in the development of the workshop on OT Migration and Legacy Systems
at the Object Technology '96 conference, Oxford, UK by the Object Engineering and Migration
group from De Montfort University.