Following our meeting and discussions between 4:15 - 5:15 PM on March 10, here are my preliminary reflections: 1. Our consensus on using just ONE concept for our class project would work just fine. 2. The preliminary DESIGN idea David "Macromedia Flashed" on Nick's computer was great. 3. Looking back, and forward now, we could use the drop down option for the three "key word boxes," with say THREE choices (for each). This would allay Zack'c concern about processing students' potential spelling errors. 4. Instead of questions above the boxes, we could provide CONTEXTUAL clues to help players narrow down their choices. 5. We could provide players with "FEEDBACK" using rudimentary "critics" in the Reflection Space. 6. Each choice will have an associated fuzzy value (between 0 and 1). 7. To prevent or reduce GUESSING and random clicking of players, we could program students' COMBINED scores to reflect the PRODUCT of the values in each box per student, for BOTH players, and of course have some penalty for multiple guesses. 8. With the PRODUCT of the three boxes for both players in STRONG determining their ultimate SCORE (like the membership function in fuzzy sets), and having 729 possible choices, I think we would be able to foster greater REFLECTION among the players, our primary intent in STRONG. 9. The possibilities become endless now because with each additional choice, we add, there will be a geometric increase in the total number of possibilities. 10. For instance, with four choices in each drop down box, the total # becomes 4096 possibilities, and with five choices in each, 15625 possibilities! However, I still think we might want to explore collecting student responses on a DATABASE. I will explore this too and I think Krys is our authority on this.
|
