Flow, Fun And Frame In The Classroom: Redefining The Engagement And Self-Determination Of Students With Intellectual Disability Through Games Maria Saridaki and Constantinos Mourlas Interactive Technologies and Games (ITAG) Conference 2014 Health, Disability and Education Dates: Thursday 16 October 2014 - Friday 17 October 2014 Location: The Council House, NG1 2DT, Nottingham, UK

2. The purpose of special education for students with intellectual disability is to enhance the quality of students’ life and promote their efforts towards autonomy and self-determination.

3. Ryan and Deci: “to be motivated means to be moved to do something”
Newmann: students who are engaged are involved in their own learning

4. tend to exhibit below-average academic motivation and self-determination
tend to expect negative outcomes in coping in domains directly affected by their disability
are able to learn to self-regulate and self- manage their own behavior
become less dependent on others, express preferences and use those preferences to make choices

5. What happens in an educational setting when games are introduced;
are digital games able to provoke change in the SEN educational setting and if so
how can we define this change?

6. Self-Determination Theory
Self-Determination Theory (SDT) represents a broad framework for the study of human motivation and personality
Goffman’s Frame Analysis
Frame analysis is the study of cognitive organization of social experience. Goffman argues that humans frame things in order to organize their understanding of something and to guide future action.
Flow Theory
An experience of what Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi’s calls Flow: the feeling of complete and energized focus in an activity, with a high level of enjoyment and fulfillment

7. 3 year long qualitative study with students with mild and moderate intellectual disability and their educators, using games in different educational settings.
Two different phases of study (T1) and (T2)

8. different games with different educational goals
different empirical tools such as focus groups participant observation and video
SDT, Perceived Competence Scale (PCS) questionnaire in the form of closed interviews with students.

9. games with a specific academic goal were chosen and/or designed: autonomous travel and travel training, as one of the core skills required for leading an independent life
systematic observation, videotaping, pre and post interviews to students and educators were used to gather data.
SDT, Perceived Competence Scale (PCS) questionnaire in the form of closed interviews with students.
Data were analyzed using analytic induction and Frame Analysis

10. seven educators and twenty five students with mild and moderate intellectual disability living in Athens.
(T1): students’ ages ranged from 10 years to 14 years and
(T2): students’ aged from 12 years to 18.
different social and financial backgrounds

11. T1 teachers were not given specific types of educational scenarios nor goals and were free to choose between, grammar skills, math skills, time management, personal hygiene, road safety and fine motor skills.
›Teachers formed two groups: one that provided the games to the students without further assistance and a second group where educators used the games as part of their curriculum.
T2 teachers, were also given the games mentioned in T1 as well as educational games regarding a specific educational goal in order to integrate it in their educational scenarios.
›Teachers formed two groups: one that provided the games to the students without further assistance and a second group where educator used the games as part of their curriculum.

15. For the purpose of this study and in order to define flow during our systematic observations, at least five characteristics had to be present in order to identify that the student was in a state of flow while playing.

17. Structured observation data were open- coded and analyzed in order to identify: fabrications, keyings, frame breaks, out-of- frame activity, misframing and frame disputes (Frame)
merging of action and awareness, clear goals, direct feedback, concentration on task, sense of control, loss of self- consciousness, transformation of time (Flow)
independent performance, control, self reliance, autonomy, competence and relatedness (SDT)

18. T1 Students presented characteristics of flow in both groups, especially merging of action and awareness, concentration and sense of control, had better SDT scale results in playfully integrated scenarios.
T2 students, also used the SDT tool, in both case studies and presented higher change in their self- determination regarding route learning and autonomous travel than T1 students who had not experienced route learning games.
 SDT scores showed high motivational change to students that used specifically designed games and higher scores were observed at students’ in the playful integrated classroom. It seemed that specifically designed games were able to augment self- determination to groups in T2 in comparison with T1 phase groups

19. Regarding video analysis and Frame Analysis, fabrications, keyings, frame breaks, Out-of-frame activity, misframing and frame disputes were present.
During frame breaks, special education classrooms both in T1 and T2 in both groups, presented high ability of plasticity between frames, since they are used in frame breaks, interruptions and surprises.
Students in T2 would change frames between game experience, classroom experience and their out-of school experience providing highly qualitative information to their educators.
During mis-framing and frame-disputes, students would present a highly communicative reaction, trying to manage the situation, deal with the issue and return to the flow zone and on their own words “having fun, together”.

20. During and after gaming sessions especially in T2, students’ requested further learning content or a change in the educational strategy in order to “learn in a better way” or “understand better” or “remember easily” as they stated.

21. In T2 students also requested to design their own games and were eager to request information regarding game design and game personalization.
In this case, teachers were eager to give the opportunity to the students to design a game but felt less in control as they lacked the technical skills and experience.
Students were willing to ask experts and perform web searches, while they described the sessions as empowering and “adult”, showing control, self motivation and taking initiatives.

22. high motivation in using educational games in their educational scenarios
they all expressed their fears and lack of information especially regarding the educational outcomes and practical consideration.

23. Educators who integrated the games in a playful way in their educational scenarios using the games as a reference for classroom learning:
›Described the experience as highly motivating, educational and dynamic. They also preferred to involve more than one students in the educational games based learning scenario as they described the process as highly communicative for the students.

24. In the non integrated classrooms, teachers had less control over the gameplay session and allowed the students to use the games as they wished, acting from time to time as observants and co-players.
They characterized the experience as positive, however they missed many educational and communicational opportunities due to their absence, or lack of control.

25. Educators characterized the games as a dynamic reinforce able to change the educational atmosphere.
Role changing of rich communicational value was observed in the integrated classrooms as teachers and students were willing to change roles and dependencies.

27. Correlating observation results with SDT score, fun was one of the main words that correlated with high educational and self-determination results. The more “fun” students’ described having, the more SDT scores were higher during the post-interview phase.

28. Analyzing SDT scores, interviews and observation results, revealed that many students with mild and moderate intellectual disability:
›made verbal connections between in- game situations with real life experience, documenting change in their self- determination and motivation towards autonomous travel and route learning.

29. in the SEN environment interruptions and surprises are common.
While on gaming sessions, students were eager to return to their previous condition despite any intrusions and continue to play or make questions regarding the educational content of the game.
These characteristic seemed to be a key point to educators as they described focus to be one of their main struggles during lessons.

30. When games were used as an integrated tool in playful settings:
›a positive alteration in the educational atmosphere,
›allowing change of roles
›re-enforcing communication between students and teachers.
›informative, empowering and able to reveal potentials,
›Transformations from educational content consumers to designers and “doers”.
›reinforce creativity, communication and motivation

31. Maria Saridaki - msaridaki@gmail.com
Constantinos Mourlas - mourlas@media.uoa.gr
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens