# data[].attributes.body
#1- Focus on "knowing" instead of "knowledge".  A key takeaway for me was the focus on "doing", and how that ties in to a student learning something.  With this philosophy, games in the classroom could teach students about so many different topics.
#2- Another key takeaway was about learners learning specific skills and and knowledge based entirely on their role in a game. This can help students learn in a safe and structured environment. I'm thinking about students who come from families in poverty and don't get a lot of experience with different people/communities/careers outside of their own environment. Games could help teach them about these different environments in a safe and engaging way, and can broaden their knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
There were many points covered in Understanding Enactivism that resonated with me a lot as a classroom teacher.  Two of the topics discussed that stood out the most to me were that game designs can encourage, and sometimes force, teachers to utilize their creativity within their lessons, and that by working with students to refine their games has the potential to push learning to its max.

When looking at teacher creativity it stated, “When analyzing the data, creativity emerged as another significant theme. The game design and building experiences afforded opportunities for teachers, sometimes even forced them, to exercise creative thinking and innovative design.” (p. 799)  As I reflected on my own personal experiences as a teacher I found that there were many times where I chose not to utilize my creativity when creating certain lessons.  My reasons for this ranged from not having enough time to create something extensive, to the lack of available resources to use within the lesson.  However, the interesting thing about game based learning is that it allows more flexibility in creativity to close the gaps in things like available resources, but it also forces teachers to not have the option to avoid creativity in their lessons.  There are many times where we can become complacent in the content that we create and in many cases never reflect and revise.  Not to be seen negatively, but the fact that games based learning can in some ways force teachers to do the necessary revision they need to do to their lessons every year could be a helpful tool.

The second point that resonated with me a lot was how utilizing students in game creation can increase learning outcomes.  It states, “When teachers enacted to what one might not consider the most obvious affordance of the experience, connecting to their instructional practice, the learning was at its height.  Working with students to co-design further motivated teachers to create and refine their games.” (p.802)  As I have worked with many different teachers with varying professional opinions on classroom autonomy I have noticed that there is a clear division between teachers who accept student input and those who don’t.  I am a teacher who values my students input.  It is important to note that this does not mean that every comment must be taken into consideration.  Kids will be kids and try to manipulate things at times.  However, as professionals, we are mostly able to detect the things that are genuine and those that are not.  Students are our most valuable asset in the classroom because they are the ones going through it at that moment.  Times change and so do our students style of learning.  The way I learned is going to be very different for future generations.  Additionally, our students are more in tune with the most up to date technology and can help us in this way.  Students want to do things that they enjoy in school, and our goal should be to make their learning as enjoyable as possible.  Their input can be a valuable tool in achieving this goal.

# data[].attributes.body
"Educational games are experiential exercises in a virtual world where learners apply knowledge and skills in the execution of their assigned roles (Gredler 2004). The value of gaming and its compelling educational potential include authentic and engaging learning in a safe environment (Becker 2007; Dede 2005; van Eck 2006). Games can enhance learning by increasing students’ interest in the subject matter and by meeting students’ needs in a more effective way (Kiili 2007; Prensky 2001). Games allow high levels of positive
emotional engagement (Rieber et al. 1998) and, therefore, can improve participation and
achievement (Jayakanthan 2002)."

#1: The focus for me throughout this course has been to seek out application of this learning and apply it to Special Education. I feel the excerpt above bodies the mindset I have while applying this in our current classrooms at CVES. Sometimes kids are able to exercise their skills being learned while experiencing a virtual world. It is easier for them to apply their skills outside of themselves and their reality. I love the mindset of the games enhancing their learning and capitalizing on their interest.

#2: Additionally, I really loved the point of positive emotional engagement. The games allow for interactions to be positive in nature and FUN! The best learning happens when students have positive and fun engagements to hinge their learning on. The memories of having fun while applying their skills create an environment where the best learning occurs!

# data[].attributes.body
One of my takeaways from this case study was how “teachers invited their students to co-design with them” (Li, 2012).  This is an excellent way to encourage students to interact with the curriculum but also allows students to take ownership of their learning.  Many of my former 4th and 5th grade students were avid gamers so they would have insight and opinions to share regarding the design process.  Additionally, creating an environment where students could help co-design would promote student to student and student to teacher collaboration and allow a natural environment for student leaders to emerge.

My second takeaway was how incorporating game-based learning into the curriculum, almost instantly increased student engagement and excited.  Tim, the junior high ESL teacher highlighted, described how adapting the Dungeons and Dragons board game into a digital format was so successful and increased student participation and engagement, especially in the boys.  While the curriculum my county uses is pretty rigid and scripted, incorporating game-based learning into summative assessments would be a creative and innovative way to engage all students.  I am envisioning students making a board game or digital game based on the novel they just read.  Another idea could be for students to create a math game teaching their classmates about a particular concept, rather than completing a traditional paper and pencil test at the end of a unit.

Li, Q. (2012). Understanding enactivism: A study of affordances and constraints of engaging practicing teachers as digital game designers. Educational Technology Research & Development. 60(5), 785-806. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-012-9255-4

# data[].attributes.body
There is lots of talk about engagement in education today. Educators want students to be cognitively invested in the learning activities they plan for students, and the situations described in the article exemplify students immersed in authentic experiences collaborating with the teacher and other students. On page 797 Li (2012) writes:

“While designing and building their educational games, several teachers integrated their students’ learning of curriculum and skills for the twenty-first century into the process. Engaging students in the sometimes ill-structured situations inherent in game design, the teachers observed how such authentic, real life problems inspired their students to apply newly gained knowledge. Watching their students take ownership of learning through game development, the teachers noted that students’ learning of curriculum content had never been as motivating and honoring.”

Based on this and other examples in the article, co-authoring video games is a highly engaging endeavor for students worth pursuing in the classroom. Personally, I’ve heard from parents and teachers about elementary aged students who code simple scripts on their own time that reveal understandings about content learned in the classroom.

In this age of standardized testing, educators are concerned that students’ creativity is being thwarted because too much time is being devoted solely to content outlined in standards and to test preparation. Game design can merge creativity and content as teachers contemplate game style, storyline, characters, and game rules (Li, 2012). Involving students in the process exercises their creativity and expands the possibilities for creating a game that is fun and motivating for the intended player audience.

Li, Q. (2012). Understanding enactivism: a study of affordances and constraints of engaging practicing teachers as digital game designers. Education Tech Research Dev, 60, 785-806.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading through Understanding Enactivism, my two takeaways were that game-based learning helps challenge students to learn from a different environment and that the goal of game-based learning is not only to challenge the students, but to challenge and change the perspective of the instructor as well.
According to Li (2012), a core idea of Enactivism is that, “co-emergence, or the notion that the change of both a living system and its surrounding environment depends on the interaction between the two. Systems enact with each other from which learning occurs” (787). In game-based learning, students are interacting with a specific game that is meant to enhance their understanding of the topic or content. In a typical setting, learning occurs when students interact with the teacher. The teacher provides the lecture, the students write notes, and then the students are forced to memorize the information and display that on a comprehensive exam. With Enactivism and game-based learning, it challenges the notion that students need to learn in one-specific way. The new environment they are interacting with is the video game. In which, they can gather information differently depending on how they interact with the game itself. This will promote different types of learning and will benefit students who may struggle in a traditional classroom setting.
With the emergence of new technology, it is not hard to assume that a technological shift in education will begin to take place. With access to video games as tools for learning, teachers can change and adapt their lessons and activities to meet the needs of their diverse student population. Game-based learning challenges the previous notion that there is only one or two correct ways to teach students. As students play the video games and are being more successful in the classroom, this has the opportunity to change how a teacher thinks and acts when it comes to how they design their future lessons. According to Li (2012), “students’ enhanced understanding of subject matters and problem solving skills, in turn, impacted those involved teachers’ beliefs about both pedagogy in general and game-based learning in particular” (798). Game-based learning challenges traditional educational beliefs. In the 21st century is it crucial that teachers adapt their teaching style to meet the needs of their students. With the emergence of new games and technology that can be used to promote growth in the classroom, it is critical that teachers are willing and able to make the adjustments and adapt and modify their teaching style to incorporate these new learning tools.

# data[].attributes.body
One takeaway from Li’s paper is that a key difference for enactivism is that it has a “focus on ‘knowing’ instead of ‘knowledge’ (Li, 2012, p. 788). Part of this knowing comes from the application and engaging in the various gaming processes. I have found that in my various graduate courses that when I apply the learning, I learn much more. For example, after taking a class on teacher observations, I now know so much more from actually engaging in that process of observing colleagues. In this class, I am learning more about game design and how to implement it in a way that teaches me and also helps me teach others. We learn by doing, so when we have the chance to not just play, but also design, we learn exponentially more.

Another takeaway is that “creativity emerged as another significant theme” from the conclusive data. Li further adds that game design and related experiences essentially forced teachers to “exercise creative thinking and innovative design” (Li, 2012, p. 799). Sometimes, we get so bogged down with the scope and sequences, the units, the day-to-day tasks we have, that we often have limited time to dedicate to exploring and implementing creativity. Game design offers a wealth of opportunities to think creatively, work collaboratively, and implement quickly.

All in all, the class and article have me rethinking and essentially “unlearning” what I thought I knew about gaming and realize how limited my scope of understanding was.

# data[].attributes.body
In Li’s paper about enactivism, the case study explores main concepts and how enactivism can be used to promote participatory culture or the shift from being an observer to a participant (Li, 2012). One key takeaway was that enactivism reflects a true environment of digital learning where the teachers are not only using educational games to support instruction but producing games to be involved in the instructional process. In the classroom, I believe it is really important for students to be able to engage in the content to learn. “Enactivism challenges the traditional view of perception and action” by presenting a new thought on how to solve problems (Li 2012, p. 788). This is an even bigger shift from simply providing hands-on activities or instructional support for a teacher to choose from.

Another takeaway was the fact that the study focused on there not being only one answer. Frequently, I tell my students that there is more than one way to find an answer in order to encourage them to use different strategies. It helps promote the idea that students can learn from each other as they engage in learning about different topics. I think the concept of enactivism could promote this continual change to help evolve learning in the classroom.

Reference

Li, Q. (2012). Understanding enactivism: A study of affordances and constraints

of engaging practicing teachers as digital game designers. Educational Technology Research & Development. 60(5), 785-806. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-012-9255-4

# data[].attributes.body
Students were able to take more ownership in their learning and were more in engaged with the content.
Game based learning allows students to become better problem solvers.

# data[].attributes.body
The first main takeaway of the article for me is the movement away from having the norm of one right answer (Li, 2012). While in math there is typically only one right answer for the problem, there are multiple ways of getting to the correct answer. By allowing students the opportunity to discuss their different views and methods of solving, it will promote an increase of learning in the classroom. Students will have the opportunity to learn from each other and see different ways of solving problems that I as the teacher may not have even seen. I have started to engage in this practice in my classroom in the past few years, where I provide students a problem a math problem and have them work in groups to decide how they would solve it. Then we have each group present their methods, and we discuss as a class the positives and negatives of that method. Not only does this allow students to learn other methods, I as the teacher learn more about each students learning styles and the way their brain thinks about math, which is valuable information for me to have a teacher.

Mt second top takeaway is the learning-by-game design viewpoint that was developed by Papert and discussed in this paper (Li, 2012). In my opinion, there are many teachers who could understand how gameplay can be beneficial to education. However, their view may be limited to only educational games. By allowing teachers to learn about the game design process and study COTS games, they are learning how even traditionally considered “non-educational games” can have educational value. This knowledge can translate to students as well. Once teachers realize the value of learning-by-game design, they can allow their students to explore the world of game design and use it to further their learning of the content in the classroom.

Reference:

Li, Q. (2012). Understanding enactivism: A study of affordances and constraints of engaging practicing teachers as digital game designers. Educational Technology Research & Development. 60(5), 785-806. DOI: 10.1007/s11423-012-9255-4

# data[].attributes.body
My first and most meaningful takeaway upon viewing this paper was on page 786. The concept that  "single right answers" may not always be the one size fit all solution that historically may have been the case in traditional classroom settings. Education is an ever evolving concept and enactivism is an emerging concept that takes this into consideration.

My second takeaway is found on page 790. The concept that little focus is on teacher designers. Whether it is the through the creation of game based learning activities or through the concept of teacher created lessons within the confines of curriculum, little attention of research and study focus on the impact of the classroom teacher. As an undergraduate students I found that there is so much focus on the standards of curriculum without truly examining what a good lesson consists of. Teacher created curriculum, activities, and games are essential to good instruction.

# data[].attributes.body
Reading through Understanding Enactivism (Li, 2012) really exemplified the relation between 21st century education and game-based learning and how interconnected they are and could become as we move forward. The constructs of enactivism emphasize how “systems enact with each other from which learning occurs” (787) “hence directly linking action and perception, mind and body” (788), a holistic view of learning. Over the past few decades we have moved away from connecting meaning learning to student motivation but it has come back into focus, especially in our coursework, and was seen through teacher reflections in Li’s paper.

Students reaction and participation in the game creation really demonstrated how important gaming is going to be moving forward. Developing games with their classes, the teachers in the paper really saw how “the experience inevitably transformed classroom teaching from passive content consumption to active knowledge generation” (797) which allowed the students to “take ownership of learning through game development, the teachers noted that students’ learning of curriculum content had never been as motivating and honoring” (797). My favorite and most resonating reflection from a teacher was the following “Students became really engaged and proud as many told their parents, ‘‘This is the work we are doing to help Mr. Sam with his UNIVERSITY HOMEWORK!’’ (797). This is EXACTLY how my own kids feel as they have helped me through this course. They are so excited when I had questions about Minecraft when developing the lesson plans and as Deb and I develop our game, they love providing feedback and adding to the creativity. Although young, they are already engaged thought just talking about video games, not even playing them, and game based learning really needs to be seen as high engagement tool teachers should utilize in the 21st century.

# data[].attributes.body
One of my main takeaways from the reading was how game design can lead to reciprocal learning. This confirms the “enactivist view that learning occurs in a co-adaptive fashion where agents and the world co-emerge through their ongoing interaction” (Li, 2012, P. 801).  When the teacher includes the student in the design of the game the students become more engaged in the process of not only creating it but in playing and thus the learning process. Student engagement is an ongoing issue in education that all teachers are trying to combat in creative ways. By allowing students to in a way, create the lesson, they are taking ownership of their learning. Most of the time this will lead to increased student engagement and enjoyment.

My second takeaway was how we can use gameplay can improve students’ social presence in the classroom and with their peers. “Games allow high levels of positive emotional engagement and, therefore, can improve participation and achievement” (Jayakanthan 2002). As teachers, we can all agree that some students are shy and do not interact much with their peers. Gameplay gives all students the opportunity to explore, play, and learn together in a risk-free setting. Since most students are playing games in their free time anyway, we are meeting their needs and interests. This creates an environment where students are comfortable and relate to the lesson. When students are comfortable expressing themselves and sharing ideas and strategies they begin to know while doing.

# data[].attributes.body
What are top 2 take aways from Li's (2012) paper?
Write your thoughts on this wall by clicking the "+" sign

# data[].attributes.body
Something I related to from the article was on page 789, "Games can enhance learning by increasing students’ interest in the subject matter and by meeting students’ needs in a more effective way." This stuck out to me because I realized, now more than ever, how tech savvy my students are. They can make their scratch character move and ozo-bots in STEM move way faster than I can. They have a brain that works in “gamer way” more than I do. They have more talent and can explain themselves more with technology then I could! Kids are immersed in games every day, so teaching them with games and allowing them to show their knowledge with technology will immerse the students in the learning. Technology may be a more effective way for students to learn, show their learning, and express themselves while doing something they enjoy!

Something else that I took away from the article was on page 786, 'In particular, this case study describes practicing teachers’ thinking and experience while they were immersed in designing, developing, sharing and using games for instructional purposes." This stuck out to me because not only are the teachers using the technology, they are creating the technology and developing their own games for their students to play. This helps the teacher ensure the game is meeting the standards 100%! Sometimes, I find games or websites are not effective because there are ads, options to play that are not suitable for the players, ect. If I was to create my own game, I would know the materials is suitable. I related to this after creating part of the IP Task 4 project! I realized if I write my own game cards, I 100% know they are going to be solving questions I want them to be solving.

# data[].attributes.body
An idea that resonated with me was on page 789 "Educational games are experiential exercises in a virtual world where learners apply knowledge and skills in the execution of their assigned roles (Gredler 2004)." Implementing games in the classroom allows a safe space for students to have an experience with an application of their learning. Whenever I have provided students with a game-like experience in class, they are given an opportunity to apply their knowledge in a new way in a new role which typically lends itself to meaningful learning for the students.

Another idea that resonated with me was the importance of students as co-designers in this study. Students who had never been engaged in class were now and were learning in a more non-traditional way in gameplay. The idea that teachers are simply too busy to create or find useful games was a key takeaway for me as I often have this mindset. However, it made a point that students as co-designers could help with this issue. It also allows for students to apply their learning in a much different way than simply asking questions. They must take on a brand new perspective which could have some incredible benefits to student learning.

# data[].attributes.body
On page 789, Li (2012) discusses “learning-by-game-design, an approach that focuses on providing students various opportunities to construct their own games and develop new relationships with knowledge in the process.” This really resonated with me because this is how students have been learning in art class for a while now. When students are learning by building game design, they are testing the game, the game provides them information, and they derive knowledge from this information. This is how they learn and improve their game. In art class, we do the same thing and give students an art material and a goal and try to let them see what happens. How can they create a certain texture? Or what happens if they mix two colors together? What happens if I try to draw something in front of something else? These hands-on experiences allow them to obtain knowledge from the information they receive.
On page 788 Li (2012) says that “a key element of enactivism is its focus on ‘knowing’ instead of ‘knowledge’.” This resonates with me as a teacher, and as a learner. Often our students will “learn the information” in order to pass a test or quiz and immediately lose the information. I know this was true for myself when I was in school, particularly when I was not interested in a particular subject. If I did not find a way to logically link bits of information and understand how it related to a particular topic/unit I would simply study the “facts”, pass the test, and quickly lose any “knowledge” that I had learned. When you really know something, as opposed to just having knowledge, you can recall, explain, and or do something in that particular subject. Knowing allows you to access that information faster, and therefore solve new problems faster instead of constantly having to go back to the basic fundamental knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
1.      The enactivist slogan quoted on page 788 really resonate with me “All doing is knowing and all knowing is doing”. I feel that neither constructivism nor behaviorism does a really good job explaining language acquisition especially second language acquisition. However, the in activists of point of stressing the role of user participation really explains the way second language is acquired. Being immersed in the target language environment sensing the comprehensible input both linguistically and culturally, is learning/knowing. And the learning reacting with that environment back and forth, affecting how the environment proceed and react in return is demonstration of knowledge cauterization.

2.      “The game-design process enabled contextualized learning that was considered meaningful and useful through effortful and meta-cognitively guided processes. “ (Li, 2012, P. 789) I feel strongly connected to these remarks as I have been having my students created their own games with the Kit-collab function of GimKit. The students gain a sense of ownership as they create questions and contribute to the game to be played later but the whole class. This sense of ownership makes the whole activity meaningful to them. This in return encourage them to put in more effort into the game creation process, using the target language in our case. 1.      And last week as I was asking for my students’ input on the board game design we did in the IP adoption assignment, the students got very excited about applying the commercial off-the-shelf game Among Us into our language learning. Multiple students volunteered to learn how to embed our target language content into the game setup/design. Some other students offered to take up the avatar design and creation role. The students will be learning and improving in multiple disciplines other than foreign language if be proceeded with this activity.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading the article, I can relate to a quote on page 786 that stated “single- right answers may no longer be considered the norm”. I can relate to this because my special education students learn in different ways. They learn by visuals, text, hands-on exploration, etc. When they are learning new material, there is multiple answers to the same question. For example, I was working with my students this week on money. The student had to make $1.50 using coins. I had one student show a dollar bill and two quarters. I had another student show six quarters. Both students had the right answer but in different ways.

Another quote that I could relate to was on page 789 “Games can enhance learning by increasing students’ interest in subject matter and by meeting students’ needs in a more effective way” (Killi 2007; Prensky 2001). This is a major element of my lessons for my students. I must create lessons that are engaging for my students. Games have really helped my students grasp different content. The games give a different way for my students to stay engaged. Games have helped my students with their IEP goals as well. If they think they are just playing a game, it is more likely for them to complete the lesson.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the take-aways I gained while reading Li’s article about enactivism is the importance of creation using new knowledge gained, rather than simply taking in as much new learning as possible and trying to brain dump what was retained (2012, p. 788). With this change in theoretical paradigm, students are not only encouraged to participate, but also create based on what they have learned. This makes me think about the importance of collaboration and creative thinking skills that we want our 21st-century learners to possess. This is why we give them open-ended projects with the opportunity to demonstrate their learning without any constraints. As well as time to talk and listen to peers because collaboration can help foster more ideas. Personally, this is one of the most difficult struggles I am having while participating in virtual learning right now. It feels like a majority of teacher talk and students do not have as much time to talk with peers or use tools to create. Fortunately, Google Meet just came out with the breakout rooms feature, which has been a game-changer for my instruction and student engagement. Students are craving time to talk with peers and share ideas.

The other biggest “lightbulb” moment I had from reading this article, was the importance of teacher and learner co-design (Li, 2012, p. 802). Based on the study, Li found that students were much more engaged when they were involved in the design of these educational games. Also, teachers were more engaged as well! They were more motivated and helped implement ways to meet the diverse needs of their students. It made me think of the number of times I have designed a classroom game or activity, and if I had incorporated my students into the creation of the game, they might have been more invested and I would have learned something about what they are interested in and how they want to learn!

# data[].attributes.body
I thought that “designing and building an educational game is, in itself, a pedagogical process” (Li, 2012, p. 787) was interesting. Taking this course and practicing the various tasks and activities have made me learn that teaching has a wide spectrum. Game-based learning has challenges, but there are many opportunities to not only help students to learn, but to also learn with students. There are many factors that need to considered into game design, especially when the focus is on educational content. I think that the idea of students taking part in the game-designing process makes it a learning experience. They are able to improve their own knowledge of content, as well as build and strengthen other important skills, such as problem-solving and critical thinking (Li, 2012).

The paper also mentioned that “children enjoyed making games and learning programming skills through designing interesting game worlds and characters” (Li, 2012, p. 789). I know that my students love playing games, but I am also aware that some of them are designers and creators. For example, one of my students shared this (https://studio.code.org/c/1192474483) earlier in the school year. I like to include games in my teaching, but I think having students learn to build their own and/or code would be a fun, yet challenging learning experience. I think that trying Hour of Code or Scratch would motivate students and help to improve math skills.

# data[].attributes.body
“Games can enhance learning by increasing students’ interest in the subject matter and by meeting students’ needs in a more effective way (Kiili 2007; Prensky 2001). Games allow high levels of positive emotional engagement (Rieber et al. 1998) and, therefore, can improve participation and achievement (Jayakanthan 2002)” (Ling, 2012, p. 789). This is a takeaway for me because it shows how important games are to student’s learning. When students are interested in something, they want to learn more. They are more positive towards the subject because they are doing something they enjoy. Having positive emotional engagement is important because students need to know that they can keep trying even if they get an answer wrong. If you die in a game, you can always go back and try again.

“Teachers often find it difficult to obtain appropriate games to use (Becker 2007), and while designing games by themselves could offer an excellent opportunity for the alignment of educational content and games, teachers are just too busy. Developing such learning tools can be daunting if not appropriately structured” (Ling, 2012, p. 802). This quote is a takeaway for me because it is honest in saying that teachers are already to busy. They do not have time to make assignments into games all the time. I do agree that it is an excellent opportunity for the students and to help them stay engaged but it is not realistic to make every assignment into a game. Although, that would be ideal in a perfect world. I do like how in this class we are looking more into game-based learning and ways to use it. I think incorporating students into the game making process could also be helpful when incorporating game-based learning into your classroom.

# data[].attributes.body
The first thought that resonated with me was that "'single right answers' may no longer be considered the norm" (p. 786). I considered this for a while after reading it, thinking about my own career path and current job. As a director of an early childhood education center, we are bound by constraints and legalities from the state and our company. Many things are black and white, but in the reality of education, almost nothing is! Students all learn differently and can come to different answers through vastly different processes. I have witnessed children learning early math facts, for example, and some complete the process by counting on fingers, some by using cubes to count, and some by thinking alone. Though they end up reaching the same answer, is that the point? Or is the point to get the students to think flexibly, so that they have the skill set to determine how to achieve an answer? I believe that children can be correct without being correct; their minds pocess so much information at a time that it is impossible to expect a single right answer out of them. This is further shown through scientific experiments. Teaching young children about hypotheses would certainly show the flexibility how how brains function and how to arrive at a conclusion.

I also enjoyed the portion on participatory culture (p. 788). As budding designers, we are often asked to consider the audience's need to learn and how to best teach skills. The line "pariticpatory culture presents a change from control to connection" (p. 788) is so important to consider. When designing a training course, am I just controlling the information students need to learn and expecting them to regurgitate what I've taught them? No, the goal is to engage learners enough so that they are motivated to demonstrate knowledge and seek it themselves.

# data[].attributes.body
My first take away from Li’s article (2012) is this quote from page 799: “Creativity occurred naturally through the game design and building process, enabling and even pushing teachers to think innovatively.” Even through simple Scratch challenges and coding mini-games, I’ve found myself pushing myself to think creatively, as well as through the creation of my game-based learning solution. Designing lessons that incorporate games - designed myself or not - has great benefits for teachers’ own creativity and innovation.

My second take away from the article was the discussion on learner co-design. On p. 801, Li (2012) states that involving students in the game-design process “points away from the idea of independent reality and toward a deliberate participation in the unfolding/coevolving of a world.” This is at the core of enactivism as a theory, and, as shown through this study, had effects on the participating teachers that exceeded their expectations. Learner co-design benefits all parties in an innovative way and it was interesting to dive deep into its impacts.

# data[].attributes.body
My first take-away was on p. 797 (Li, 2012), where Li describes the Social Studies teacher's experience of "play-testing" his game with his class. This was an interesting anecdote as the buy-in from the students seemed to be two-fold: one, they were personally invested with helping the teacher out with his project (evidenced in the quote from the student saying "we get to help so-and-so with his university homework!"), and two, in that they were invested in seeing how they could improve the game to make it more fair. It became a more holistic approach to education, in that it, a) forced the students to really know their stuff about history in that they had to really know about Athens and Sparta in order to properly fix the game, and b) it started to pull on either students' knowledge from other classes (probability or statistics) or their background knowledge from their interests, hobbies, or personal life. As schools are becoming more focused on the "well-rounded" aspects of education, with classes starting to support one-another in content through horizontal articulation, I can see this type of "co-authored" education being invaluable as it forces children to pull from their educational experience as a whole, rather than learning each subject in isolation.

My second take-away was on p. 800 when talking about the constraints of teachers' knowledge or technical ability when implementing or creating games. I feel that as the barriers of access to technology start to raise, and students are able to do such things such as animation, programming, making music, creating artwork, etc. through their school devices, teachers will also have to start broadening their wheelhouse in order to appeal to student interests/keep their classes engaging. This is difficult for many teachers: there is a habit to become complacent in your teaching style, and, especially when it comes to new technology or mediums that require technical skill, many teachers will ignore anything that requires "more work." I think that this style of learning, especially in what the paper quotes as "reciprocal learning" in that the teacher and student are "learning together" in a way, can only be beneficial. It is frustrating to be sure; I know that I have had a ton of difficulty in playing with Scratch (even though I only submit the Gamify assignments, I still try to complete the scratch assignments too as I can see the educational benefit) but I do find the end result rewarding when I do complete it. As the one teacher quotes in the article " I can honestly say that I have learned the most through the game design and building process while simultaneously being extremely frustrated with my learning..." (Li, 800). I think to stretch and push yourself as an educator is only fair, as we are asking this of our students. I think students will have much more buy-in if they see their teacher "working" and taking risks as much as they are.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading through Understanding Enactivism (Li, 2012), I was intrigued to learn about how teacher and student game design plays a role in understanding. “Earlier work (Kafai 1995; Papert 1993; Perkins 1986) showed that the creative investment one made in the game-building process led directly to intellectual ownership of the game’s content.” Students who have the ability to participate in game design must think conceptually about how the game would schematically be played by others. This will require students and teachers to anticipate potential problem areas for gamers and discover solutions as they make their game available.

Another major topic that stuck out in the text related the creativity of game design. As gamers proceed, the curricular content is not readily apparent and gamers are more focused on completing a task instead of learning a new topic. The tools that gamers use to complete accomplish their goal can later be transferred into the classroom. Due to the high level of engagement of the game, students are more likely to recall the knowledge they learn in the game.

# data[].attributes.body
The most impactful takeaway for me is the idea of affordance and constraint (Li, 2012). Professionally, my work is at the intersection of design principles and teaching and learning principles. As learning designers, we apply design principles and design processes to course development. Applying affordance and constraint to the learners (in this case teachers) themselves takes us one step further, ensuring that the learner is the focal point of the course design. We often ask ourselves what types of activities will engage the learners. By slightly adjusting our perspective in our learning design approach, we can instead ask what affordances might be enacted by the learner and what constraints will challenge the learner?

I have spent the past several months considering my own beliefs about teaching and learning as I begin to refine my dissertation topic. The most common epistemologies discussed amongst my peers are constructivism and socio-constructivism, both of which situate the learner in context of their environment creating a dualism between the environment and the learner (Schuh & Barab, 2007). What I find intriguing in this study is the removal of this dualism. The learners (teachers) are not just situated with their learning environment, but agents and part of this environment (Li, 2012).  The environment does not just provide context for the learning to occur, but also shapes the environment as the learning occurs.

References

Schuh, K.L., & Barab, S. (2007). 7 Philosophical perspectives.In Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., Van Merrienboer, J., and Driscoll, M. P. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. (3rd ed., pp. 67-82). Routledge.

Li, Q. (2012). Understanding enactivism: a study of affordances and constraints of engaging practicing teachers as digital game designers. Educational Technology Research and Development. 60(5), 785-806. Springer. doi: 10.1007/s11423-012-9255-4

# data[].attributes.body
While reading the Li (2012) article, Understanding enactivism: a study of affordances and constraints of engaging practicing teachers as digital game designers, the following ideas stood out to me as key takeaways.

The first is related to the idea of affordance.  It was explained that affordance is rooted in “the connection between characteristics of the environment and an agent’s capacity, hence directly linking action and perception, mind and body” (Li, 2012, p. 788).  The article further explained that affordances enable understanding of one’s   perception of a specific environment and factors influencing their ability to learn through interaction with the environment.  This idea stood out to me because it reminded me of a theory in occupational therapy that considers the relationship between the person and their environment as transactive and views the individual’s context, whether it be physical, social, cultural, or environmental,  as a key factor that influences that which they are able to do, or their performance capacity.  It was explained that evaluation of affordances must also include investigation of constraints.  Similarly, occupational therapy not only includes examination of things that support an individual’s engagement and participation, but also factors that act as barriers or hindrances to their opportunities.  In both enactivism and occupational therapy, understanding of these factors in critical to an understanding of functionality.

Another key takeaway is the benefit of game-based learning.  Li explains, “Games can enhance learning by increasing students’ interest in the subject matter and by meeting students’ needs in a more effective way” (Li, 2012, p. 789).  This stood out to me because I have recognized this to be true not only in practice, but also in personal experience.  Adding a competitive or even just a fun element to learning a topic not only increases engagement and participation, but it also results in lasting understanding of concepts.  Whenever I find that I am having difficulty remembering or understanding something, I seek out related games online, or create one of my own and find that in doing so, I am able to cut down on my study time because I am retaining more information more quickly.

# data[].attributes.body
Li (2012) was an enlightening and engaging read. Upon reading this paper, numerous ideas and concepts stuck to me. In particular, however, two ideas especially resonated with me. The first concept was the importance of a teacher-learner co-design as it relates to an enactivist-learning world. Li (2012) states that "learning, in this case, is not limited to the teachers themselves, but also extends to their own students and beyond" (p. 802). This was particularly important to game development and application as learners played a vital role in the feedback and refining of the games. Oftentimes, as an educator and developer, it is easy to overlook faulty aspects of a game or activity, particularly because of our own biases, efforts, and inability to fully immerse ourselves in the game or truly experience it as the individual in the target population. However, as someone in the targeted population experiencing it for the first time, one may see the areas of improvement evident or have particular feedback about their experience. Thus, this aspect is crucial in game development. Thinking about this concept even more allowed me to think back to my leisurely game experiences and being presented with surveys, opportunities to provide feedback, and rating scales. Truly, these means allow developers and creators to produce the highest quality game that will benefit the player.

The second concept that stood out to me was the importance of creativity in the game development process. Li (2012) states that the teachers' creativity "was reflected in the ways they could creatively integrate content knowledge into the game, and how they creatively designed games to motive and engage learners" (p. 799). Truly, through such an effortful process arises the necessity of creativity and "thinking outside of the box." Oftentimes, educators resort to using already-establish, less-than-par games that don't entirely target their learning objectives. They may also use and reuse over-exhausted forms of games in their classroom/educational spaces for learning. However, the process of creating a game is so much more than a Google search. Educators are allowed the opportunity to integrate all of their learning objectives, taking into account their learners' preferences and feedback, and troubleshoot. Through this process, creativity takes the wheel in order to allow them to produce the most optimal game-based learning solution best catered to their target population.

# data[].attributes.body
One of the main takeaways I noted from the reading was the benefit of teacher-student reciprocal learning (Li, 2012, p. 795). Li (2012) states that "For teachers, this experience afforded them opportunities to re-conceptualize pedagogy and enhance their creativity based on students’ input and feedback. Students, on the other hand, benefitted from these experiences because they became motivated, active learners who exercised their own creative skills" (p. 795). This was a main takeaway for me because when I think of this in the context of occupational therapy, I believe that use of strong, evidence based interventions in therapy benefit both the therapist and the client, similar to the reciprocal benefits that teachers and students experience.

Similarly, the importance of flexibility also stood out to me when reading this article. Li (2012) states that activities are "flexible enough that it offers opportunities for personalized creation" (p. 803). Although the article describes the benefits of flexibility for teachers, flexibility in occupational therapy often benefits the patients more than the therapists. The concept of flexibility is also important within the field of occupational therapy as it ensures that interventions and activities used with clients are client centered. This can potentially address problems due to lack of resources available to the therapist, or even cognitive or physical limitations experienced by the patients.

# data[].attributes.body
While reading Li (2012), the first thing that stood out to me was the discussion on creativity and engagement. In the process of creating something fun, adventurous, and appealing to deliver educational content, teachers became more engaged in the content themselves. Even though teachers were not co-creating their games with their students in the planning/design phase, they were actively prioritizing their students' interests and motivations in a more holistic way than traditional lesson planning. I think this is the component that distinguishes an enactivism approach and game-based learning solution from a class activity based around a game that isn't fun or effective for students. Much like the teachers in the article described, these pedagogical challenges are a significant barrier for teachers to implement enactivist approaches.

Another takeaway for me was about collaborative, interprofessional work to address limitations in technical (or other!) skills. I think there is a lot of value in education when a teacher approaches teaching as a collaborative, interactive experience. However there must be a distinction between learning together and a teacher being unprepared. Although the constraints on prep time for teachers is an essential limit to respect, I think the culture of the environment would be enhanced when teachers use their own peers as co-creators. A school-wide culture of enactivism would likely enhance the strength of this approach across classrooms and facilitate a rich learning environment beyond individual class lessons.

# data[].attributes.body
My first takeaway is centered around the theme of re-conceptualizing pedagogy. Li mentioned this concept in the results section of her journal article. It was enlightening to see the idea of incorporating co-design into lessons happen in a real classroom environment. This led to a more engaging classroom experience for both the teacher and the students. Allowing the students to use problem solving skills to solve game based problems led to creative solutions by the students. The results showing that both the teachers and students gained from the experience should increase buy-in if I attempt to apply similar scenarios in my workplace.  This is captured best here, "Such reciprocal learning precisely confirms the inactivist view that learning occurs in a co-adaptive fashion where agents (i.e. the teachers) and the world (i.e. their students) co-emerge through their ongoing interaction" (Li, 2012, p.801).
Another aspect of the paper that I enjoyed was the challenge of linear thinking (Li, 2012, p. 788). The traditional classroom operates in a way that involves seeing something, using a prescribed method, and then acting in accordance. The paper suggests that action and perception are interchangeable, thus one can not be removed from the other. I enjoyed this because actions should not be seen as something that is final. Actions should be evolving which allows students to grow their understanding and mindset.

# data[].attributes.body
An idea that relates to my teaching experiences is on page 789 where Li (2012) describes educational games impact on learning. “Games can enhance learning by increasing students’ interest in the subject matter and by meeting students’ needs in a more effective way” (Kiili 2007; Prensky 2001). Specially, I have always loved creating/finding math games on topics I am teaching to play with students in centers or play in groups. Games can be engaging and more motivating for a student than completing a worksheet. I have found learning through games to be a very effective way of teaching and can improve participation. Two out of four of my math centers involve game based learning, usually a game board to play with a group and an online game.

I was surprised that Li explained “research on practicing teachers’ experience as digital game designers is virtually non-existent” (Li 2012) because I took this class/major with an interest in creating educational games. I already have a love for creating math and reading educational games and saw there is a need for science games. I am surprised other teachers aren’t trying to design digital games for students. I would think teachers would be the most likely to create educational games because they are the people with the educator background and see what students need.