-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Curriculum Integration
A plan for integrating the space invader exercise into the curriculum follows the holistic framework and the educational game design approach of Malliarakis, that emphasis clean learning objectives with predefined goals predefined on each part, a calibrated progression through each part, mechanics alignment and transparent outcomes referenced on each educational part. The Space Invader exercise implements all of those principles through five step by step parts, with each one specifying:
- context and motivation,
- prerequisites and learning objectives
- exercise workflow
- progressions and extension challenges.
That way a structure that supports an instructor to organize and learner engagement is followed. Exposing students to interactive learning with the combination of feedback and a viable instructional strategy, across groups of varying sizes, leads to improved outcomes and benefits.
The intended course context using the space invader exercise is covering introductory object-oriented programming, event driven programming and fundamental UI/UX principles, categorizing it to undergraduate modules. That categorization could be suitable for lab sessions, a practical workshop or a project-based in alignment with a theoretical approach of the learning objectives with course learning outcomes on encapsulation, inheritance, polymorphism, event handling and UI design.
There are several delivery models that can be used, depending on the actual way of implementation. A possible implementation would be using a five week lab sequence which each week aligns to each part of the exercise, that was presented in a table, as follows:
Week 1: Part 1 (Environment and Spaceship) Focus: Project Setup, Categories and Classes, methods initialization, fundamental rendering and placements.
Week 2: Part 2 (Enemies and Mechanics) Focus: input, keystrokes, step loops, object movement logic.
Week 3: Part 3 (Shooting and Collision) Focus: Shot Class, event driven firing and collision detecting.
Week 4: Part 4 (UI and Score) Focus: UI, real time feedback, UI lock, textmorph subclass
Week 5: Part 5 (Extensions) Focus: Creative expansion of the game through multiple options
A five week lab sequence can also be expanded, as some parts, as they are based on new knowledge and a more complicated aspect of the game can be changed to an once per two week progress. Part 1 to Part 4 are sequential and need to be followed, as of part 5 which is the exception, university students can select their own implementations through the list of challenges that will match their interests and available time that is not mandatory as the goal is the creativity of the game’s outcome as well.
Another factor that needs to be discussed is the in class or independent work of the exercise. The instructor that will be organizing the class can provide through the in class work, guidance, explanation on the live coding and debugging, demonstration of the Squeak environment and the tools of system browser, explore morph and debugger window, as well as some theoretical help of choosing specific key parts while coding as explaining the reasoning behind the use of subclasses in certain parts as well as the use behind the isKindOf: etc. The independent approach of the exercise for each university student can be followed with each completion of challenges per part and a screen time with feedback with the organizer. Based on the structure, the pedagogical alignment is stated with prerequisites and measurable objectives, the step by step concept ensures students can link their interaction with programming concepts as well as the extensions part support the learning and motivation for them.
A way to evident the completion of each part is needed for the exercise and the assessments assigned to the students. A bullet point completion criteria per part that can be followed based on the challenges and step by step guidance is:
Part 1: Game is initialized correctly with no errors, Ship is visible and positioned within the game environment and defined boundaries. Part 2: Arrow keys or keystroke movement for Ship, Enemy moves using step logic. Part 3: Shot spawns, and moves, with defined keystroke, collisions removes both Shot and Enemy when hit. Part 4: Scoreboard visible in game environment and updates on enemy “kill”, locked for manual edits. Part 5: At least two or more extensions are integrated to the game and described properly.
Grading approach is another part of the design based integration plan. The full completion of the exercise can be evaluated through the following criteria:
- A 60% could be defined by the completion or accuracy of the evaluation criteria.
- A 30% about the quality of code, class and subclasses names, refactoring and code separation.
- A last 10% can be the evaluation of the reflection of work, by explaining their work, problem fixed based on challenge, or problems in general
For the evaluation part, the organizer can follow different ways. The most efficient one is the submission of the Squeak’s image and changes from the students to the evaluator which in that way, there will be full control and navigation through the environment and a better feedback and understanding of progress on each part.