From: Kelvin Sung [KSung@uwb.edu]
Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 10:09 PM
To: Panitz, Michael W.
Cc: ksung@u.washington.edu
Subject: 2007-1-3 Meeting

On Jan 3rd, Mike and Kelvin met in Kelvin’s Office at 1pm. The following are records from our discussion.

 

  1. XBOX 360 unit for Mike:
    1. CCC will purchase one for Mike
    2. We will get Creators Club membership from the MSR funding once the funding check arrive in late Jan, early Feb.

 

  1. Schedule for the project: Mike will be busy in August 2007, so we will start the project earlier in the Summer, we will work in June and July instead of August.

 

  1. Plan:

 

    1. Identify 3 potential assignments from each of 142 and 143. 6 assignments in total.

 

    1. For each assignment:

                                                    i.     Identify the learning objectives (reference to ACM Curriculum 2001)

                                                   ii.     Derive technical checklist that student would learn from the assignment

                                                  iii.     Describe aspects of the assignment that will ensure students practice the technical competencies

                                                  iv.     Derive a technical specification for the assignment.

 

    1. Design two sets of assignments based on the spec from 3.b.iv

                                                    i.     The first set is non-games, non-graphics, but API-based

                                                   ii.     The second set is XNA based

 

    1. We imagine Mike will implement 3.c.i, while Kelvin will implement 3.c.ii

                                                    i.     Kelvin plans on implement, refine the XNA based assignments and build a simple API for assignment development based on the XNA framework.

 

    1. Using the assignments:

                                                    i.     Based on short 10 week-quarters, we envision sufficient time to use 2 of the assignments each time.

                                                   ii.     We may try using different combinations of the assignments for each (e.g. use a1, a2 for 142 in Fall, and a2,a3 in 142 in Winter)

 

 

  1. Assessments: we will need to develop tools and get external assessments for the following:
    1. 3.b: assess the appropriateness of the learning objective and technical spec in guiding student learning

                                                    i.     Assessment Tools must be derived (both quantitative and qualitative)

                                                   ii.     External faculty: must evaluate 3b and we must refine 3b after receive the evaluation.

                                                  iii.     We should document how our refinements address the potential issues raised by the evaluation process.

 

    1. 3.c.i:assess if the assignments address the learning objectives listed in 3.b

                                                    i.     Tools: must be derived (again, quantitative and qualitative)

                                                   ii.     External faculty: will evaluate 3.c.i.

 

    1. 3.c.ii: assess if the assignments address the learning objectives and if the games are “fun”.

                                                    i.     Tools: must be derived (again, quantitative and qualitative)

                                                   ii.     External Games industry person(s) will evaluate

 

    1. 3.d.: assess the assignment implementation

                                                    i.     Tools: must be derived (quantitative and qualitative)

                                                   ii.     External Games industry and external faculty

 

    1. 3.e.: when using the assignments, we must:

                                                    i.     Design tools to assess students knowledge on the technical checklist

1.      pre-test

2.      post-test

3.      general pooling questions for students

                                                   ii.     The research question we want answers to are:

1.      Did students have these knowledge before the assignment

2.      Did students learn from these assignments

3.      How did they learn (what aspect of the assignment helped them learned)

 

Kelvin is in contact with Ruth Anderson from CSE at UWSeattle, for having her as potential external faculty reviewer.

 

== meeting ended at about 2:50pm.

 

  1. Other issues not discussed:
    1. Developing tutorial for faculty to implement their own assignment
    2. What else?