SERIOUSLY FUN ACTIVITIES FOR TRAINERS, FACILITATORS, PERFORMANCE CONSULTANTS, AND MANAGERS.
Our mission statement, copyright notice, and cast of characters.
RAMEs: Replayable Asynchronous Multiplayer Exercises
Create virtual focus groups.
Design Your Own Games and Activities
Thiagi's latest book.
Use mind reading to review training topics.
The Library and The Playground
Faster, cheaper, and better.
Rewarding participants for recalling information.
Using MBTI Functional Preferences
Use sensing, intuition, thinking, and feeling.
More Interactive Lectures
The list grows from 25 to 30.
Let's Play a RAME
Come play a RAME with us!
SERIOUSLY FUN ACTIVITIES FOR TRAINERS, FACILITATORS, PERFORMANCE CONSULTANTS, AND MANAGERS.
To increase and improve the use of interactive, experiential strategies to improve human performance in an effective, efficient, and enjoyable way.
Editor: Sivasailam (Thiagi) Thiagarajan
Assistant Editor: Raja Thiagarajan
Managing Editor: Brenda Mullin
Editorial Advisory Board: Andrew Kimball, David Gouthro, Diane Dormant, Julie England, Kat Koppett, Les Lauber, Matt Richter, Steve Sugar, and <type your name here>
The materials in this newsletter are copyright 2003 by Workshops by Thiagi, Inc. However, they may be freely reproduced for educational/training activities. There is no need to obtain special permission for such use as long as you do not reproduce more than 100 copies per year. Please include the following statement on all reproductions:
Reprinted from PLAY FOR PERFORMANCE. Copyright © 2003 by Workshops by Thiagi, Inc.
For any other use of the content, please contact us (firstname.lastname@example.org) for permission.
All registered subscribers receive PLAY FOR PERFORMANCE free of charge.
However, to prevent us from becoming bankrupt, we have decided to adopt a Busker Protocol. If you like what you read, if you find it useful, and if you'd like us to continue publishing the newsletter, please feel free to chip in with any financial contribution. Our estimated annual cost for this newsletter is $30,000. So we suggest an annual contribution of $30 (which is less than one-third the subscription cost of Thiagi's earlier paper-based newsletter). We would appreciate any amount that you send us, but make sure it is less than $30,000 (since we don't want to make a profit). You can mail your check to Thiagi, 4423 East Trailridge Road, Bloomington, IN 47408 or call us at (812) 332-1478 to charge the amount to a credit card. Or you can charge your credit card online, through Workshops by Thiagi, Inc. Please let us know if you need an invoice for financial record keeping.
Thiagi believes in practicing what he preaches. This is an interactive newsletter, so interact already! Send us your feedback, sarcastic remarks, and gratuitous advice through email to email@example.com . Thanks!
Trainers and facilitators can use a variety of interactive, experiential strategies and techniques to improve human performance. Based on his two decades of research, Thiagi has identified, catalogued, and experimented with different strategies. This article explores a web-based interactive strategy called Replayable Asynchronous Multiplayer Exercises (RAMEs)
The object of a RAME is to require and reward participants to share their ideas with each other and to collaboratively evaluate and synthesize these ideas. RAMEs use web pages, automated response forms, and email to present participants with problems and challenges.
We recently ran a RAME activity called SUGGESTIONS FOR SIMAGES. If you didn't participate in this activity, let us simulate it:
As a member of the North American Simulation and Gaming Association (NASAGA), you receive an invitation to join a RAME:
We'd like you to participate in a RAME called SUGGESTIONS FOR SIMAGES. The object of this RAME is to collect your ideas on how to improve NASAGA's online newsletter SIMAGES. The RAME is played in three rounds:
ROUND 1. Contribute a suggestion for improving the value of SIMAGES to its readers.
ROUND 2. Review the set of suggestions from other players and select the top two. (Other groups of players will be reviewing your suggestion along with several other suggestions and decide whether your suggestion is worthy of being rated as one of the top two.)
ROUND 3. Review the best suggestions selected by different groups and select the top two “best-of-the-best” suggestions.
It will take about 5 to 15 minutes to participate in each round.
LET'S PLAY! Please visit this website to register as a player
You click on the link and go to a web page that asks for your name and email address. You fill out the form and click the “Submit” button. You immediately receive a thank you note.
After a couple of days, you receive an email letter with instructions for the first round of the RAME:
Thank you for joining the SUGGESTIONS FOR SIMAGES RAME.
Are you ready for the first round?
Please visit the website listed below, type your suggestion in the convenient form, and click the “Contribute” button.
The deadline for contribution is 11:59 PM, Wednesday, January 3rd.
You click on the URL in the email note and visit a web page with another form. You type this suggestion for SIMAGES:
Provide a series of interviews that permit NASAGA members to interact with each other.
You click on the “Contribute” button and receive a thank-you note.
A couple of days later, you receive another email note:
Thank you for your valuable suggestion on how SIMAGES can provide better value for NASAGA members.
During this round, you will review a set of suggestions from other players. Compare the suggestions with each other and choose the top two suggestions.
Please visit the website listed below to review the suggestions and make your choices.
You click on the URL and visit a web page that contains eight suggestions for improving SIMAGES. Your suggestion is not included in the list and all of the suggestions are displayed anonymously. Under each suggestion, there is a drop-down menu to record your choice of the top two. You review the suggestions carefully and select these two ideas as the top two:
Set up a column for Best Practices to share what we know. Pick a hot topic and invite people to contribute their favorite tips, tricks, and wisdom about it. In the Best Practices column in the next issue of SIMAGES, show people's responses, and begin a new topic.
Send a reminder notice to NASAGA members when a new issue is available.
A couple of days later, you receive another email note with instructions for the next round of the RAME:
During this round, you will review the best suggestions chosen by different groups in the previous round. You will rank these suggestions and identify the top two “best of the best”.
Please visit the website listed below to review the suggestions and make your selections.
YOUR VOTE COUNTS! As a registered RAME player, you are entitled to vote for the two best suggestions for improving SIMAGES.
You visit the web page and review eight different suggestions. You are happy to see your original suggestion included in the list. Being an objective person, you do not automatically select your suggestion as the best. You review the other seven suggestions and reluctantly choose another suggestion as the best and select your suggestion as the second best.
A couple of days later, you receive this email note:
Thank you for participating in the SUGGESTIONS FOR SIMAGES RAME.
You can see the final results on this website page.
When you visit the page, you see the eight suggestions arranged in order of the number of votes they received. Your suggestion received the fourth highest number of votes. The page also contains a complete list of all suggestions contributed by different players, this time with the name of the person who contributed the suggestion.
RAMEs represent a special type of framegame. As in other types of framegames, we can remove the existing content and plug in any new content. For example, we are currently conducting another online RAME, using the same template (which we call BEST SUGGESTIONS) with members of the International Society for Improving Performance.
RAMEs are online versions of the structured sharing strategy that facilitate mutual learning, teaching, decisionmaking and problem solving among members of a group. (For examples of this structured sharing strategy, see ONE, TWO, AND MORE in the October 2002 issue of PFP or ONE WILL GET YOU TEN in the December 2001 issue of PFP.)
RAMEs are automated versions of email games (described in detail in the November 2001 issue of PFP). In an email game, the facilitator manages all the play functions manually. For example, if you were to conduct SUGGESTIONS FOR SIMAGES as an email game, you would set up a spread sheet; copy and paste the names and email addresses of each player; copy, paste, and track each suggestion; organize the players into groups and send them a list of suggestions, making sure that no player receives her own suggestion; and so on. The RAME version that we used was programmed by our colleagues at ProMedia to handle these mechanical tasks automatically. All I have to do is to specify the initial question, the number of teams, and the number of votes for each player.
Here are two major benefits of using RAMEs:
RAMEs have some limitations also:
Would you like to participate in a RAME? See our invitation below.
Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer has recently released a 400+ page book, Design Your Own Games and Activities: Thiagi's Templates for Performance Improvement.
Actually, it's not really a new book but rather a new collection of Thiagi's most popular books: Interactive Experiential Training, Interactive Strategies for Improving Performance, and More Interactive Strategies for Improving Performance.
If you are a performance consultant, instructional designer, facilitator, or trainer, you will repeatedly use the 30 powerful practical tools in this collection of Thiagi's techniques.
All the 30 interactive strategies in this book share hands-on, minds-on, and hearts-in people-to-people interaction. These tools add effectiveness and enjoyment to different performance-improvement interventions including training, teambuilding, knowledge management, and process improvement.
Each interactive strategy is clearly described in a structured-text format and illustrated with several examples. A complete, ready-to-use activity (with reproducible masters) follows the exploration of each tool. With the information and examples given, you can conduct, adapt, and design different types of games and activities. A CD-ROM that comes with the book contains the activities as Microsoft Word documents. You can save the documents to your computer, make suitable modifications, and print them out.
The 30 interactive strategies in this book are organized into two sections: framegames (templates that permit rapid design) and simulation games (activities that reflect models of the real world).
Here's the list of framegames: structured sharing, creativity techniques, interactive lectures, textra games, item processing, video vitamins, debriefing games, card games, board games, matrix games, paper-and-pencil games, instructional puzzles, audio games, telephone games, game shows, email games, improve games, openers, and closers.
Here's the list of simulation games: action learning, reflective teamwork activities, the case method, production simulations, training devices, metaphorical simulation games, interactive storytelling, role playing, cash games, PC simulations, and jolts.
Design Your Own Games and Activities includes a glossary of interactive strategies, different indexes, and lists of books and websites.
The best feature of this book is its price: For $55, you get what others have paid $130 for (to buy the earlier collection of three books).
Here's an interesting piece of instructional magic that I used recently during a technical-training session about the Internet. Before explaining how you can use this magic trick as a review technique, let me describe how the session went.
Near the end of the day, I showed a flip chart page with a list of technical terms that I had discussed earlier:
I asked a volunteer to come to the flip chart. I walked behind the flip chart, closed my eyes, and turned my back. I asked the volunteer to silently select one of the terms on the list. Then I instructed the volunteer to point to the term so all other participants could see it.
With my eyes still closed and my back toward the group, I asked my volunteer and all other participants to look at the number that follows the technical term in parentheses. I explained that this number is the “numerological code” obtained by converting the letters in the term into mystical numbers. I asked everyone to remember this numerological code.
I sent the volunteer to her seat and turned around to face the group. I distributed a copy of the Magical Circles sheet to each participant. I explained that the figure shows five circles displaying the letters A, B, C, D, and E. Each circle is surrounded by several random numbers.
I asked participants to look at Circle A and see if the numerological code for the secretly selected term is one of the numbers around it. Participants yelled out “Yes” in response. I repeated the same question with each of the other four circle, with participants yelling out “Yes” or “No” to each circle. The participants said “Yes” to Circles A, B, and E and “No” to the other two circles.
I now pointed to the first “Yes” circle (Circle A) and asked participants to visualize the technical term on the screen in blinking lights.
After a suitable pause, I pointed to Circle B and asked participants to imagine looking up the secretly selected term in a dictionary. I asked everyone to visualize reading the definition of the term, one word at a time.
After another pause, I continued with each circle in turn. When I reached Circle E, I asked participants to visualize a person doing something associated with the secret term.
I closed my eyes and frowned with great concentration. I slowly revealed the selected technical term, using patter (magicians' jargon for improvised monologue) like this:
My mind reading trick is based on an old magical principle. You have probably seen it performed by someone who asks you to think of a number and then asks whether it is included in different sets of numbers.
To discover the secretly-selected technical term, all I have to do is to add the smallest number (at the 12 o'clock position) of each circle that received the “Yes” answer. In the earlier example, the “Yes” circles are A, B, and E; the three numbers are 16, 2, and 1. When I add these numbers I get 19. Now I find the technical term that has this number (19) as its numerological code. In my list, 19 happens to be address bar. The rest of the trick is just showmanship and patter.
That's all there is to it. Let's assume when I repeat the trick someone else who says that the numerological code is around Circles C and D. The first numbers around these screens are 8 and 4 which add up to 12. Scanning the list of technical terms reveals that the secretly selected technical term is chat.
Here's a test to make sure that you have mastered this simple secret. I have selected a term from the list. Its numerological code is in all five circles. What is the term that I selected? Review the list, figure out the answer, and check it against the correct answer.
Obviously, this piece of magic can be loaded with your own training content. My list has 31 items, but you can use it with as few as five items. (However, the trick is more impressive with a larger number of items.) Your items can be words, people, job titles, ethnic groups, leadership qualities, customer types, or whatever. You may even use a set of diagrams or photographs.
Here are the steps for creating your own version of Telepathic Review:
An important element in presenting the trick is asking participants to visualize the item. In addition to the three activities given in the earlier example, here are some suggestions:
Obviously, you can perform this magic trick with an individual spectator. (Amaze your significant other tonight!) So why am I asking everyone to get involved? Two reasons: Group participation forces everyone to recall and review an important item they learned. Also it reduces the probability of an individual making an error, forgetting the number, or intentionally lying just to watch you squirm.
Several of my associates and I have been using the library-playground format in designing e-learning courses. A typical course that uses this format has two components:
The library-playground approach treats participants as self-directed learners and lets them make their own choices.
Here's the first choice a participant has to make: Should I start with the library or the playground?
Impulsive participants may start with the playground and try their hand at trial-and-error learning. Even if their score is depressing low, they gain valuable instructional insights. The games administer a pretest to identify the facts, concepts, and skills that they need to learn. As a result of the play experience, participants are ready to go to the library and review relevant topics.
Reflective participants who prefer to master all skills and concepts before attempting to apply them may start at the library. Later, they go to the playground and get several opportunities to apply what they have learned and earn a high score.
Participants who are in the middle of the impulsive-reflective continuum can shift from library study to playground activity as the mood strikes them.
A key difference between an expert and a beginner in any field is that the experts have greater fluency with the facts, concepts, procedures, and principles. They can rapidly recall and apply these pieces of knowledge. It usually takes several years of field experience to become an expert in a field. Participants can shorten this time requirement by visiting the playground frequently. The games are designed to provide them with repeated practice and immediate feedback about.
To keep the participants' interest level high, the games in the playground use powerful principles from the psychology of mental flow state. According to Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, if participants repeatedly perform a task that is way below their skill level, they get bored. On the other hand, if the task is way above their skill level, they become frustrated. The games in the playground use a self-adjusting flow strategy. Each game is available at different levels of difficulty. If a participant finds the questions to be too difficult, she can switch to an easier level. If she gets bored with simple stuff, she can switch to a more difficult level. This adjustment factor plus the fact that the participant gets new questions in a new sequence every time she replays a game, keeps the learner at an optimum level of performance. In addition, if the participant craves variety, she has several game formats to choose from.
From the designers' point of view, the library-playground format enables us to crank out online courses rapidly and inexpensively. From the learners' point of view, the courses are effective, empowering, and enjoyable.
The numbers 16, 8, 4, 2, and 1 add up to 31, so the correct answer is baud.
Here is a fast-paced game that I use to review the training content from product-knowledge or technical publications.
6 to 25. Best game is for 12 to 25 participants, organized into groups of four or five.
15 - 30 minutes.
Get the big picture. Read the handout (which contains instructions to players and to “Game Masters”) along with the instructions below.
Prepare Question Cards. Write 50 or more short-answer questions based on the training content. Print each question on a separate card. Shuffle the packet of questions and number each card. Prepare a duplicate (with the same numbers) for each group.
Prepare the Answer Sheet. Type the question numbers and the correct answers for each question. Prepare a copy of this sheet for each group.
Demonstrate the play of the game. Distribute copies of the job aid, How To Play 2-Minute Drill to each participant. Pause while participants read the instructions. Then, ask for three volunteers to come to the front of the room. Explain that you will be the Game Master for the first round and demonstrate the play of the game. Invite players to refer to the job aid as they watch the game in action. At the end of the 2-minute demonstration, point out that every member of a group will have a turn to be the Game Master.
Organize groups. Divide participants into two to five groups. Each group should have three to five players. It does not matter if some teams have an extra participant. Explain that the players in each group compete with each other.
Distribute cards. In each group, select a player to be the first Game Master. Give a question deck to each Game Master.
Begin the first round. Start the timer and blow the whistle. Ask Game Masters to conduct the game with their group.
Conclude the first round. At the end of 2 minutes, blow the whistle again and ask players to stop. Instruct each player to count the number of face-down cards that were correctly classified. This is the player's score for the first round.
Conduct the second round. Ask the Game Masters to collect the cards and to shuffle them. Give the pile of cards in each group to the new Game Master (the person seated to the left of the previous Game Master). Conduct the game as before.
Repeat the procedure. Continue playing additional rounds of the game until every member of each group has had a turn at being the Game Master.
Conclude the game. After the final round, identify the player (or players) with the highest total score in each group. Congratulate these players as the winners.
Receive a card. When the facilitator blows the whistle, the Game Master will give you a question card.
Answer the question. If you know the answer to the question on the card, yell out the card number and the answer. If you don't know the answer, make an educated guess.
Replace the Question Card. Wait for the Game Master to call out your card number and give you feedback. If the Game Master says that your answer is correct, place the card in front of you with the question side facing up. If the Game Master says your answer is incorrect, give the card back to Game Master. In either case, get another Question Card from the Game Master.
Continue playing. Repeat the process, trying to give as many correct answers as possible within the 2-minute period. When the Game Master stops the round, count the number of cards that you correctly answered. This is your score for the round.
Play the next round. The game will be repeated for several 2-minute rounds. Repeat the same procedure during each round (except during the round when you are the Game Master).
Get ready. Get a deck of Question Cards from the facilitator. Also get a copy of the Answer Sheet.
Begin the round. Wait for the facilitator to blow the whistle. Immediately give everyone a Question Card.
Listen for answers. In a little while, players will begin yelling out card numbers and answers. Since they will not be taking turns, this is going to be chaotic.
Give feedback to the first player. Check your Answer Sheet for the card number that you heard first. If the player's answer is correct, say “Right!” and give the player a new card. The player will place the correctly classified card in front of him or her with the printed side facing up. If the player's classification is incorrect, give the correct answer, and take the Question Card back from the player. Place the incorrectly answered card at the bottom of the deck and give another Question Card to the player.
Do several things at the same time. Keep track of the numbers and answers yelled out by players. Call out the next number that you heard and give appropriate feedback. Repeat the process.
Conclude the round. Keep repeating the process until the facilitator blows the whistle again. Ask each player to count the correctly classified cards to determine the score for this round. Collect all the cards, place them at the bottom of the deck, and give the deck to the next Game Master.
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is the most frequently used personality type inventory around the world. This instrument is based on four pairs of opposite preferences: extraversion-introversion, sensing-intuition, thinking-feeling, and judging-perceiving. Your personality type is a combination of the four preferences, one from each pair.
Two of the MBTI pairs are labeled as functions. One of these functional pairs deals with how you perceive the external world. If you have a preference for sensing, you tend to focus on the present reality. You are factual and practical. You experience the world through the five senses and proceed through your activities in a step-by-step fashion. In contrast, if you have a preference for intuition, you tend to focus on future possibilities. You are inspired and theoretical. You trust your hunches and proceed through your activities in an insight-by-insight fashion.
The other functional pair deals with how you make decisions. If you have a preference for thinking, you use your head to apply a system of logic. You are objective and rational, firm but fair. In contrast, if you have a preference for feeling you use your heart to apply a system of values. You are subjective, empathetic, and compassionate.
In processing information and in making decisions, neither preference in each pair is more important or effective. For maximum effectiveness, you need diversity among personality types in a team. Even as an individual, you can improve your performance by systematically asking and answering questions from the points of view of sensing, intuition, thinking, and feeling.
Here's a set of suggested questions that are based on the four MBTI functions. They provide an effective structure for debriefing discussions after a group has gone through an experiential activity:
You can add more questions to this list. During the actual debrief, it is not necessary to discuss these questions in a linear sequence. Feel free to jump from one category to another. The important idea is to cover all the bases and encourage inputs from different personality types among your participants.
For the past five months, we have been exploring the technique of interactive lectures. This technique incorporates highly motivating game elements with lecture presentations, and gives you complete control of the instructional session.
Here are brief summaries of six more interactive lecture designs, bring our total to 30. (You can refer to the earlier articles on interactive lectures in the October 2002, November 2002, December 2002, January 2003, and February 2003 issues of PFP.)
Basic idea. Participants organize themselves into three teams and assume positive, negative, and neutral roles toward a controversial issue. Presenter conducts an informal debate among the teams and adds her own comments.
Application. This lecture game is especially useful with potentially controversial instructional content.
Sample topics. Affirmative action. Gun control. Health insurance. Political correctness. Sexual harassment policies.
Flow. Make an objective presentation to introduce the issue and identify its major elements. Write the issue on a flipchart in the form of a proposition for debate. Form three teams and assign an extremely positive role to one, an extremely negative role to another, and a neutral role to the third. Ask the positive and negative teams to spend 5 minutes making a list of arguments in support of their position. During the same period, ask the neutral team to prepare a 2-column list of both positive and negative arguments. Conduct a debate between the opposing teams. Ask the neutral team to decide which of the other teams did a more credible job. Also ask members of the neutral team to read arguments on their list that both teams missed. Add your comments and correct any major misconceptions by presenting factual information. Conclude with a question-and-answer session.
Basic idea. Presenter introduces two contrasting approaches. Participants collect information about the similarities and differences between these two approaches. Presenter organizes, summarizes, and clarifies the information.
Application. This lecture game is especially useful for comparing two alternative approaches. Usually one approach is traditional and the other is a new alternative that you are recommending.
Sample topics. Inclusive vs. exclusive behaviors. Leaders vs. managers. Virtual teams vs. face-to-face teams. Analytical intelligence vs. practical intelligence. Instructional technology vs. performance technology.
Flow. Before the presentation, prepare a table that identifies the two approaches and the critical comparison factors. Prepare questions related to each cell in the table. Begin the presentation with a definition of the two approaches. Randomly distribute question cards to all participants. Ask participants to come up with personal responses to the questions and to collect information and opinions from the others. After a suitable pause, distribute blank copies of the comparison table to all participants. Work through each cell in the table, eliciting information from participants. Correct any misconceptions and add additional information as needed.
Basic idea. Presenter acts as a talk-show host and interviews a panel of experts. Participants contribute additional questions and comments.
Application. This lecture game is especially useful when the instructional content is somewhat controversial.
Sample topics. New corporate policies. Sexual harassment. Rightsizing. Reengineering the organization.
Flow. Assemble a panel of experts, experienced people, or employees affected by the topic. Work out a list of major points to be covered in the presentation. Conduct a simulated talk show. Begin by introducing the topic and interviewing the panel members. Move into the audience of participants and invite them to make comments or ask questions. Encourage a free and open dialogue among participants and the panelists. Conclude the session by summarizing major points.
Basic idea. Presenter does a “data dump” of factual information. Presenter stops the lecture at intervals, allowing teams of participants to come up with questions on the materials covered so far and to conduct a short quiz contest.
Application. This lecture game is especially useful for presenting significant amounts of technical information or conceptual content.
Sample topics. Principles of quantum physics. Compiler construction. The Linux operating system. ISO 9000 standards. Quality award criteria.
Flow. Warn participants that your presentation will be interspersed with quiz contests. Set up a timer for 10 minutes. Make the first segment of your presentation. Stop the presentation when the timer goes off. Organize participants into teams of three to seven members. Ask each team to come up with three or four fact-recall, rote-memory questions and one or two open-ended, divergent questions. After 3 minutes, ask a team to read a fact-recall question and choose an individual from any other team to come up with the answer. Later, choose another team to ask a divergent question and ask a team to give a response. Continue with the next segment of your presentation, building up on the questions and answers from participants. Repeat the quiz sessions as many times as needed.
Basic idea. Participants are divided into two or more groups. Each group listens to a lecture (and watches a demonstration) about a different part of a procedure. Participants then form teams with one member of each group. Team members work on an application exercise and help each other master all the steps in the procedure.
Application. This lecture game is especially useful when the instructional content involves a step-by-step procedure.
Sample topics. How to construct a Pareto chart. How to create an advertising slogan. How to draw a flowchart. How to specify a performance objective. How to write an executive summary.
Flow. Before the presentation, divide the procedure into steps. Begin the presentation with a brief overview of the steps and their interrelationships. Divide participants evenly into groups, one for each step. Make a separate presentation to each group. Create teams with one member of each group. Give the teams an application exercise. In completing the exercise, team members should teach each other the steps of the procedure. Provide consultative help and give additional exercises as needed.
Basic idea. Presenter displays a series of statements about the topic and asks participants to decide whether each is true or false. Presenter then provides background information related to each statement.
Application. This lecture game is especially useful when participants are likely to have major misconceptions about the topic.
Sample topics. Cultural diversity. The Digital Millenium Copyright Act. The Internet. AIDS and sexually transmitted diseases.
Flow. Prepare a list of statements related to common misconceptions about the selected topic. Make half of the statements true and the other half false. Briefly introduce the topic and explain its importance. Distribute copies of the list to participants and ask them to individually decide if each statement is true or false. When they have finished this task, you read the first statement aloud. Ask participants who think that the first statement is true to raise their hands. Explain why the statement is true or false and provide relevant background information. Repeat the procedure with each statement.
We are not done yet. Watch out for another set of interactive lecture summaries in a future issue of PFP.
RAMEs are a powerful tool for online collaboration. See our Tool Kit section for more information about RAMEs.
Are you ready for some experiential learning? Would you like to participate in a RAME?
Here's your invitation to join a RAME called GAMEGAME.
In this RAME, we will use the same template (BEST SUGGESTIONS) to generate, evaluate, and synthesize ideas about making training games more effective.
To participate in this RAME, all you have to do is to register to play at this web page: http://www.playforperformance.com/bestofthebest/round1.asp?q_gameid=19 .
When you visit this page, you will see a short form that asks for your name and email address. You should be able to fill it out in 15 seconds (unless your name is Sivasailam Thiagarajan).
The deadline for registering yourself as a RAME player is 11:59 PM, Monday, March 10, 2003.
Come play GAMEGAME with us!