Comments for Reflections

Comment on Educational Gaming: Achieving the WoW factor? by basilcapizzi

basilcapizzi — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 13:09:09 +0000

I absolutely agree with what you see as the real breakthrough. When I say I find it difficult to imagine what a Maths game would look like in a classroom I really am picturing a Maths game with the same level of engagement / playability as any popular game enjoyed by thousands of students every afternoon.

I’d certainly like to have shares in the software developer who could produce such a game, ;-P.

Comment on Educational Gaming: Achieving the WoW factor? by Alistair Owens

Alistair Owens — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 08:43:10 +0000

Education games, such as the maths games currently in use in school were predominately developed by educationalists to help the teacher project the subject centrally in the classroom. The real breakthrough would be to harness the skill of the games developer to design an entertaining educational game that would entice children to play the game outside of school.

Comment on Digital Video: A Motivating Force by | hazel

| hazel — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 07:57:38 +0000

[...] http://basilcapizzi.edublogs.org/2008/11/07/digital-video-a-motivating-force/ [...]

Comment on Educational Gaming: Achieving the WoW factor? by warky

warky — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 23:50:48 +0000

Haha, awesome!

Comment on Fisch: a chain reaction? by From The Fishbowl: Is it ok to be a technologically illiterate teacher? | Teaching & Learning in Changing Times

Sun, 26 Oct 2008 14:25:28 +0000

[...] the above statement I do agree with much of what Fisch discusses in his post and so I will take up Basil’s challenge and play devil’s [...]

Comment on Fisch: a chain reaction? by Fisching for some technological illiterates | GRAY'S SPACE

Fisching for some technological illiterates | GRAY'S SPACE — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 11:37:17 +0000

[...] Basil’s blog on the Karl Fisch blog. I thought I’d weigh in for my two cents worth. On both pracs I meet [...]

Comment on ConstructiVism vs ConstructioNism: Is there a constructive difference? by ConstructiVism vs ConstructioNism | Life is about learning

ConstructiVism vs ConstructioNism | Life is about learning — Tue, 14 Oct 2008 00:17:50 +0000

[...] Basil’s post on ConstructiVism vs ConstructioNism was thought-proviking. I too didn’t realize a subtle difference existed between the paradigm propergated by Piaget and Papert. I agree with Ackermann’s & Basil’s point that best learning would take place when both are combined. However majority of learning in a classroom is based on constructivism – where children during the activity as part of the lesson. Once the bell goes – books are closed topic is forgotten until the next period – off course homework sparks moments of repetitive thought. Just thinking over my high school only a very lesson have really sparked of thinking – where a topic or idea discussed in school lingered on after bell to make a impact on my life. This does highlight the importance of trying to teach our lessons so that there is greater connectivity to the children’s life. Create a free edublog to get your own comment avatar (and more!) [...]

Comment on ConstructiVism vs ConstructioNism: Is there a constructive difference? by Reactionary post to “ConstructiVism vs ConstructioNism” | UTS Digital Generation - Danny Mavromatis

Sat, 11 Oct 2008 14:21:15 +0000

[...] Capizzi wrote on this subject in his blog and I found it a valuable introduction to reading the article itself. Basil provides [...]