AECT Standard 2
Corgi Coders: An Instructional Game Outline
Context and Conditions
The Corgi Coders: An Instructional Game Outline was designed and developed for EDET 652 in the summer of 2024 as part of my first semester of graduate studies in Learning Design and Technologies at the University of South Carolina. This artifact is unique when compared to other artifacts from my portfolio, as this was a more creative project, rather than one deeply rooted in the instructional design models I would learn throughout the later parts of my graduate studies. For this project, I was prompted to develop design documentation for a game that includes instructional content. I designed an RPG-style video game that would instruct middle school students in coding and algorithmic thinking. It addresses the problem of low interest or motivation in many students in that age range, and as a middle school computer science teacher, I was able to use my background knowledge in computer science education and in middle school students to guide this design documentation.
While I was not aware of the MRK (Morrison et al., 2019) or ADDIE (Branch, 2009) instructional models at the time of this artifact’s development, I did informally utilize the early stages of design and development, and the work does reflect core principles related to MRK and ADDIE. Particularly, there was a focus on learner needs and alignment of instructional content with those needs. The instructional problem of low motivation in computer science was identified, and this informed the design of learning objectives and puzzle-based activities within the video game.
Scope
Role
This artifact was a part of an individual project. I served as the creative mind and designer of the game. I wrote all the documentation, including the learning objectives, characters, settings, and story. I was able to contribute my knowledge of video games, computer science, and middle school students and their motivations to the documentation.
Instructional Design
While I was not intentionally using the MRK or ADDIE models as frameworks for this artifact, as it was created very early into my graduate studies, there are some connections that can be made between it and the instructional models I would learn about later. First, MRK is particularly centered on the learner and their needs. In order to create the game documentation, I had to identify the need of students’ low motivation in computer science. I had to consider learner characteristics of middle schoolers such as their love of games, incentives, and positive reinforcement.
This artifact also reflects elements of the ADDIE model, particularly the analysis and design phases. Although I did not conduct a formal analysis, as that was outside the scope of the project, the instructional problem of low student engagement and motivation was identified, and the design phase is evident in the development of learning objectives, puzzle-based activities, and the sequencing of content throughout the game. Although the MRK and ADDIE models were not explicitly used at the time when I created the game documentation, this artifact demonstrates an emerging understanding of how instructional design principles can be used to create engaging learning experiences.
Related Performance Indicators
AECT Standard 2 (Content Pedagogy): Candidates develop as reflective practitioners able to demonstrate effective implementation of educational technologies and processes based on contemporary content and pedagogy.
Performance Indicators:
-
Creating - Candidates apply content pedagogy to create appropriate applications of processes and technologies to improve learning and performance outcomes.
-
Using - Candidates implement appropriate educational technologies and processes based on appropriate content pedagogy.
Reflection
This artifact demonstrates the strengths and areas of growth before formal learning related to instructional design models. I was able to design a learning product that is highly engaging and instructionally well-designed with the use of scaffolding. For example, each puzzle in the game teaches a specific concept, and throughout the game, concepts build on themselves to meet the defined learning objectives. The narrative of saving the main character’s city motivates the learners, and the game mechanics and consequences encourage persistence in the player. However, there are many limitations to my design documentation. While there were clearly defined objectives, a target audience, and engaging activities, there was no formal learner analysis, collection of needs assessment data, or formal assessment plan or items. If I were to approach this project again, with the knowledge and skills I have developed over the past two years, I would include these components to create a more intentional learning product.
Additionally, I would include a formative evaluation that involves playtesting portions of the game with middle school students in order to provide insight into how learners interact with the game’s puzzles and activities. This evaluation would allow me to understand where students experience confusion and whether the difficulty level of the activities is appropriate for the target audience. A one-to-one evaluation could demonstrate if students are truly understanding computational concepts such as loops and conditionals, and a small-group trial could show patterns in student engagement. Overall, this artifact represents an early stage in my own personal development as an instructional designer. It reflects strong creativity and an understanding of creating engaging experiences for learners. However, it lacks intentional alignment and the data-driven decision-making that can be found in my later work. This project is an important foundation for that growth that highlights the progression of my skills over time.