[game_edu] game_edu Digest, Vol 59, Issue 13

[John Sharp]

Lewis' comment on accreditation and what is known as justification  
(simply put, proving someone's qualifications to teach in a given  
field in the absence of a terminal degree in that field) is an  
important one here. With a governing body like SACS, the documentation  
to prove this is exhaustive (and exhausting). Using myself as an  
example, I had to write a 20+ page document explaining how my  
professional experience qualifies me to teach each learning outcome  
for all classes I teach. It took numerous drafts and hours and hours  
of work to complete and get approved. It also has to be re-done every  
few years when the accreditation body revises its justification  
criteria.

SCAD is willing to at least attempt this process-- roughly 25% of our  
game design and dev faculty don't have terminal degrees in the field--  
but not every institution is willing to even try given the burden.  
This can hurt the quality of education in a field like game dev where  
the traditional means of learning was on-the-job training and there  
aren't so many people out there with the proper academic credentials.

But you all knew this already...


On Sep 23, 2009, at 8:57 PM, game_edu-request at igda.org wrote:


> Send game_edu mailing list submissions to

> 	game_edu at igda.org

>

> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

> 	http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

> 	game_edu-request at igda.org

>

> You can reach the person managing the list at

> 	game_edu-owner at igda.org

>

> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

> than "Re: Contents of game_edu digest..."

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>              IGDA Education SIG

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Today's Topics:

>

>   1. Re: placement rates (was Introduction - Sheri Rubin)

>      (baylor wetzel)

>   2. Different kinds of accreditation causing confusion

>      (Lewis Pulsipher)

>   3. Re: placement rates (was Introduction - Sheri Rubin)

>      (Johnnemann Nordhagen)

>   4. Re: game_edu Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12 (Kevin O'Gorman)

>   5. Re: Readings, Libraries & Copyright (Malcolm Ryan)

>

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>

> Message: 1

> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:26:06 -0500

> From: baylor wetzel <baylorw at gmail.com>

> Subject: Re: [game_edu] placement rates (was Introduction - Sheri

> 	Rubin)

> To: IGDA Game Education Listserv <game_edu at igda.org>

> Message-ID:

> 	<e30391930909231026i106e3074o60b70913861d7018 at mail.gmail.com>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>

>> I wonder if there will be a backlash from that in a few

>> more years (for example, imagine a school with

>> 25% adjuncts that suddenly found with an economic

>> upturn that half of its adjuncts left for industry again

>

> In our case, we went from ~18 full time/0 adjunct to 8 full time and  

> some

> number of adjunct (6-7 i think). We were already teaching 5-6

> classes/quarter, so workloads increased and the chair always seems  

> to be a

> few seconds away from a heart attack, but he somehow manages it (we  

> have a

> really good chair). We've also managed it by increasing the number of

> students we turn away (i think we've always turned away a fair  

> number, but

> it got a lot stricter this year)

>

> We were told by our parent institution that we were out of sync with

> comparable schools in the number of adjuncts (and therefore, cost).  

> They had

> let us skate by because our program was wildly successful in  

> recruiting (in

> ~7 years we've grown from zero students to ~650, roughly half the  

> school).

> Now that we're ~50% adjunct, i wonder if we're at the average. i  

> personally

> thought it was a bad idea to lay off so many people - we could have  

> really

> hurt the school if those people hadn't come back as adjuncts. But the

> administration felt the current staff would come back and they were  

> correct,

> so from their standpoint, it was a good move

>

> Like most schools, we don't have a lot of game companies nearby.  

> Most have

> had layoffs, which is where a lot of our faculty came from. One  

> recently

> packed up and moved to North Carolina, leaving a lot of game  

> developers

> looking for jobs and willing to work (for now) for what we pay

> (~$40k-$60k+benefits for full time, i think ~$2k per class for  

> adjunct). We

> haven't (in our area) lived through an upswing where everyone went  

> away for

> better jobs but i know at least half our faculty has side companies  

> that, if

> they take off, will probably leave

>

> We have lost several of our senior faculty, but not to game  

> companies. They

> all went to normal businesses where they work less and get paid more  

> (and

> have happier wives and possibly kids). i saw the same thing in the  

> game

> industry for the same type of people at the same age (early to mid  

> '30s,

> first kid)

>

> -baylor

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20090923/82cebedd/attachment-0001.html 

> >

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Message: 2

> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:37:31 -0400

> From: Lewis Pulsipher <lewpuls at gmail.com>

> Subject: [game_edu] Different kinds of accreditation causing confusion

> To: game_edu at igda.org

> Message-ID:

> 	<790382db0909231037u5abff844ke82cce7d3775e71d at mail.gmail.com>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>

> You're talking about two very different kinds of accreditation.   

> Full Sail

> is accredited as a trade school, not a standard college, which makes  

> it

> plausible that they're expected to have a 70% placement rate, vastly  

> higher

> than the typical placement rate of standard colleges.  If they're

> specifically teaching a trade, the students ought to succeed in it.   

> SCAD

> and a few others with game-related programs are accredited as standard

> colleges and universities.

>

> The standard college accreditors have become "academic Nazis" more

> interested in degrees than in knowledge or experience.  In one extreme

> example I heard from the college president himself, SACS deemed a  

> person

> with a Ph.D. in Zoology not qualified to teach freshman biology-- 

> degree not

> specifically in biology!  The college let him go rather than contest  

> this

> (which doesn't say anything good about the college, does it?).

>

> Full Sail is called a "university" because the state of Florida  

> approved

> that name change, it has nothing to do with accreditation.

>

> LP

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20090923/1908f366/attachment.html 

> >

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Message: 3

> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:06:34 -0700

> From: Johnnemann Nordhagen <jnordhagen at gmail.com>

> Subject: Re: [game_edu] placement rates (was Introduction - Sheri

> 	Rubin)

> To: IGDA Game Education Listserv <game_edu at igda.org>

> Message-ID:

> 	<558f402b0909231006x3e17edeen316698dce47363d4 at mail.gmail.com>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>

> I'd be curious to see the source of those statistics - are you sure  

> it was

> LA specifically, and not California as a whole?  The San Francisco  

> Bay Area

> is also a big games center - larger than LA, I think, with LucasArts  

> and all

> its spin-offs, Sony, Capcom, Konami, and of course EA.  Seattle  

> might also

> be up there, with MS, Nintendo, and Valve, plus a handful of others.

>

> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 3:01 PM, baylor wetzel <baylorw at gmail.com>  

> wrote:

>

>>> USC has a 49% placement rate?

>>

>> Oh lord no. i was at their last demo days in May and from listening  

>> in the

>> hall, it sounded like everyone had multiple offers. i watched give  

>> people in

>> a row turn down an executive from a particularly well known MMO  

>> that my

>> students would have killed to get into. i'd be surprised if their  

>> placement

>> rate wasn't near 100%

>>

>> The last statistics i saw said 49% of all game jobs in North  

>> America are in

>> LA. 18% are in Austin and then a handful of cities (or North  

>> Carolina) had

>> the majority of the rest. Games jobs, like Hollywood jobs, are very

>> concentrated geographically. My school, in the midwest, has a hard  

>> time

>> getting companies to visit us (especially in Winter), which is  

>> perhaps why

>> we've had 40-50 of our students at the last 3 GDCs. LA, on the  

>> other hand,

>> has game companies everywhere, so it's less of an imposition for  

>> their staff

>> to show up at a local school

>>

>> Location isn't the only reason USC's program places so many people  

>> (from

>> what i can tell, it's actually a pretty good program), but it  

>> certainly

>> helps

>>

>> -b

>>

>> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 4:54 PM, Dan Carreker <DanC at narrativedesigns.com 

>> >wrote:

>>

>>> Baylor,

>>>

>>> I think you have some great points here.

>>>

>>> USC has a 49% placement rate?  (making sure I understand you  

>>> correctly)

>>> Does anyone have any other data on placement rates? I'm giving a  

>>> talk

>>> soon on how to choose a game design school and I'm sure this  

>>> question will

>>> come up.

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> Dan Carreker

>>> www.NarrativeDesigns.com

>>> "If I had only six minutes to live, I wouldn't brood.

>>> I'd type a little faster."  - Asimov

>>>

>>> ----- Original Message -----

>>> *From:* baylor wetzel <baylorw at gmail.com>

>>> *To:* amenezes at imagecampus.com.ar ; IGDA Game Education Listserv<game_edu at igda.org 

>>> >

>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 22, 2009 2:45 PM

>>> *Subject:* Re: [game_edu] Introduction - Sheri Rubin

>>>

>>>> In the end, we are training future customers for these

>>>> companies and it would be wiser to consider us as

>>>> partners, not customers, don't you thnk?

>>>

>>> i realize i'm going to seem like a tremendous jerk, but i'm not  

>>> sure that

>>> it is a real partnership. Probably the top issue our school is  

>>> facing is

>>> placement - most of our students just aren't getting jobs with game

>>> companies. This situation is true for most of the game schools i  

>>> know of

>>> (USC's GamePipe, based in LA next to 49% of all North American  

>>> game jobs,

>>> being the big exception). i don't think my school has a lot of  

>>> leverage with

>>> game companies and although i wish they'd give us licenses for old  

>>> games,

>>> snippets of source code, free (or cheap) copies of Unreal 2007,  

>>> etc., i

>>> honestly don't see any reason why they should

>>>

>>> It's also worth noting that publishers aren't developers and  

>>> developers

>>> are often very, very small and frequently go out of business, so  

>>> setting up

>>> a relationship with most is fairly difficult. Many of the people  

>>> they hire

>>> aren't people with game degrees, they're friends and talented people

>>> (probably without a degree) who send in a fantastic portfolio.  

>>> Maybe they

>>> should hire someone different (although there's a good argument  

>>> that they

>>> shouldn't), but they don't. So what's their incentive to take the  

>>> (not

>>> insubstantial) time to manage relationships with game schools,  

>>> especially

>>> given how many have popped up in the last few years (the growth in  

>>> the

>>> number of game schools has been truly dizzying)?

>>>

>>> We use cheap tools (Flash, Torque, the level editor in Unreal  

>>> 2004) and

>>> not very cheap educational versions of tools such as Photoshop and  

>>> 3DSMax.

>>> If we want to show them "classic" games, we show them movies and  

>>> screenshots

>>> of them (asking a student to invest 40 hours per game to find  

>>> those classic

>>> bits like the bathroom scene in Deus Ex or the low int dialog  

>>> option in

>>> Fallout is fairly unrealistic) or, to study concepts, we make our  

>>> clones. As

>>> much as we wish we could get Mudbox, a motion capture system, the  

>>> source

>>> code to Half-Life and unlimited free copies of Monkey Island, we'd  

>>> be happy

>>> with just the game companies showing up at our career fair

>>>

>>> -baylor

>>>

>>> ------------------------------

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> game_edu mailing list

>>> game_edu at igda.org

>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>>

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> game_edu mailing list

>>> game_edu at igda.org

>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>>

>>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> game_edu mailing list

>> game_edu at igda.org

>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>

>>

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20090923/b3c0addf/attachment.htm 

> >

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Message: 4

> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:48:01 -0400

> From: "Kevin O'Gorman" <gamekog at gmail.com>

> Subject: Re: [game_edu] game_edu Digest, Vol 59, Issue 12

> To: game_edu at igda.org

> Message-ID:

> 	<f38f33020909231048v3dfec1fcjf3c0a4fc3dd705e4 at mail.gmail.com>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>

> Thanks, John.  I knew if I kept scrolling I would find someone who  

> would lay

> out the accreditation system and save me the trouble.  : )  Funny  

> how the

> folks accredited by SACS have such a handle on this.  By the way,  

> there are

> regional and national accreditors, and different ones for  

> universities and

> trade schools.  So you will not find one answer to fit all situations.

>

> Come to think of it, if someone would just launch a game development  

> PhD

> program that is available online thye would have packed classes and we

> wouldn't have the terminal degree issue anymore.

>

> --Kevin O'Gorman

> Art Institute of Atlanta

>

>

>>

>> Message: 1

>> Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:41:30 -0400

>> From: John Sharp <john at supercosm.com>

>> Subject: Re: [game_edu] game_edu Digest, Vol 59, Issue 11

>> To: game_edu at igda.org

>> Message-ID: <61639BFA-9130-47B0-8104-67DA26171C5C at supercosm.com>

>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed";

>>       DelSp="yes"

>>

>> Accreditation varies from institution to institution. At Savannah

>> College of Art and Design, we're accredited as an institution by the

>> Southeastern Association of Colleges and Schools. Within SCAD, some

>> departments are further accredited by industry-specific organizations

>> as required by that particular field and or law. Architecture and

>> interior design, for example, both have outside accreditation, for

>> example.

>>

>> As far as I know, there isn't an accreditation body for game design/

>> dev, though it has been a topic of conversation within the education

>> SIG from time to time.

>>

>> John Sharp

>> | supercosm LLC

>> | www.supercosm.com

>> | P 404 377 5440

>> | C 917 673 0374

>>

>>

>>

>>

>>

> -------------- next part --------------

> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

> URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20090923/f0d667b6/attachment.html 

> >

>

> ------------------------------

>

> Message: 5

> Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:57:21 +1000

> From: Malcolm Ryan <malcolmr at cse.unsw.edu.au>

> Subject: Re: [game_edu] Readings, Libraries & Copyright

> To: IGDA Game Education Listserv <game_edu at igda.org>

> Message-ID: <B2E36C48-851B-41F0-A18E-04BB21E92144 at cse.unsw.edu.au>

> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed; delsp=yes

>

> On the issue of licensing, I discovered that Steam offers a special

> "CyberCafe" license [1] that gives access to "100 games". This may be

> an option for universities if they want to run a games lab. I have

> contacted them about educational pricing, but haven't heard anything

> yet.

>

> As for the games I use, I structure my course around MDA and the 8

> kinds of fun [2]. My list of examples changes from year to year, but

> this year I've used:

>

> Bartok (card game)

>    - A simple modifiable game to illustrate MDA

>

> Trogdor

>    - To analyse mechanics, dynamics and aesthetics

>

> Braid

>    - Discovery: For the elegantly crafted training levels

>    - Sensation: the atypical choices of art and music

>

> AudioSurf

>    - Drama: pacing and a dramatic arc

>

> The Path

>    - Fantasy: Creating fantasy through atmosphere and indirect

> storytelling.

>    - Discovery: An open world with many paths to 'victory'.

>

> Fahrenheit/Indigo Prophecy

>    - Storytelling: Changing avatars creates dissonance as the

> player's loyalties shift

>    - Storytelling: The opening scene puts the player in media res.

>

> Mafia (round-table game)

>    - Fellowship: Mixture of cooperation and competition.

>

> Zen bound

>    - Sensation/Ritual: Slow meditative pacing with art and music to

> match.

>

> Everyday shooter

>    - Sensation: The game is as much about interactive colour + music

> as it

>      is about challenge.

>

> Galatea/Aisle/Facade

>    - Fantasy: Storytelling with many endings. Dialogue systems.

>

> Fallout 3

>    - Self expression: Character creation and growth. (I could do with

> a shorter game to illustrate this but most RPGs tend to be long).

>

> Crayon Physics

>    - Self expression: Not just about finding a solution, but building

> the 'coolest' solution.

>

> World of goo

>    - Sensation: A consistent theme and an interface that makes the

> 'goo' feel almost tactile.

>

> Once Upon a Time (card game)

>    - Fanstasy/Self Expression: A 'story-making' game that facilitates

> the players to tell their own story.

>

> [1] https://cafe.steampowered.com/

> [2] http://8kindsoffun.com/

>

> On 23/09/2009, at 1:26 PM, pawlicki at cs.rochester.edu wrote:

>

>>

>>

>> Even if the list were 100 long it should be annotated to the point of

>> why it makes the list - what it exemplifies. In this way, someone

>> with specific course goals could select from the list.

>>

>>> Haha... "standard"... good one. :-)

>>>

>>> There have been numerous "must-play" lists. Whenever I try to make

>>> one of

>>> my own, I can never seem to narrow it down below 30 or so.

>>>

>>> I think a lot depends on your goals. If it is just a matter of "game

>>> literacy" -- that is, playing at least one canonical game in each

>>> major

>>> genre, playing all the games that are well-known, and so on, then

>>> you will

>>> come up with a very different list than if you are looking for

>>> games that

>>> offered technical innovation for its time, which in turn is

>>> different from

>>> a list of games that were pioneering new forms of design or unique

>>> visual

>>> art styles or even games that were failures in notable ways.

>>>

>>> Rather than trying to cram all of these into a single class, it

>>> might be

>>> better to spread it across the entire curriculum. Provide exposure

>>> to a

>>> few games at a time as they tie in to the content of any given

>>> course, and

>>> make sure the sum total of classes gives students exposure to all  

>>> the

>>> games you'd consider "must-play". Sure, you can have a "Game

>>> Appreciation"

>>> course that covers a lot of games, but I'm not sure you could fit

>>> everything into 10 or 12 weeks... nor would you want to (else you

>>> run the

>>> danger of students thinking that all the games in that class aren't

>>> relevant to their other coursework, since it's all too self-

>>> contained).

>>>

>>> - Ian

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>> ________________________________

>>> From: "pawlicki at cs.rochester.edu" <pawlicki at cs.rochester.edu>

>>> To: IGDA Game Education Listserv <game_edu at igda.org>

>>> Sent: Tuesday, September 22, 2009 1:17:48 PM

>>> Subject: Re: [game_edu] Readings, Libraries & Copyright

>>>

>>>

>>> Malcolm,

>>>

>>> I would be interested in your list.

>>>

>>> Assuming that a semester is about 12 weeks or so, do we have

>>> a "standard repertoire" of the top 10 games that all

>>> students should have played and critically examined?

>>>

>>> Ted

>>>

>>>

>>> Thaddeus F. Pawlicki, Ph.D.

>>> Undergraduate Program Director

>>> Computer Science Dept.      (585) 275-4198

>>> University of Rochester      FAX (585) 273-4556

>>> Rochester, NY  14627-0226  pawlicki at cs.rochester.edu

>>> http://www.cs.rochester.edu/u/pawlicki/

>>>

>>>

>>> ''One of the most difficult tasks men can perform, however much

>>> others may

>>> despise it, is the invention of good games and it cannot be done by

>>> men

>>> out

>>> of touch with their instinctive selves.'' - Carl Jung 1977

>>>

>>>> Malcolm Ryan wrote:

>>>>> As a lecturer in game design, I want to set a 'reading list' of

>>>>> games

>>>>> for my students to play. In other disciplines the University has

>>>>> standard copyright arrangements which allow them to make sets of

>>>>> readings available to students at little or no cost, but there

>>>>> doesn't

>>>>> seem to be any appropriate arrangement for software.

>>>>>

>>>>> Have you encountered this problem? How have you addressed it?

>>>>>

>>>>> I know that a lot of good cutting-edge independent work is

>>>>> available

>>>>> cheaply or for free online, but I don't want to be forced to

>>>>> exclude

>>>>> AAA titles from examination. Ideally I would like to set up a

>>>>> library

>>>>> of games but I am worried about the copyright and licensing  

>>>>> issues.

>>>>> Does anyone know more about this?

>>>>>

>>>>> Malcolm

>>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>>> game_edu mailing list

>>>>> game_edu at igda.org

>>>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>>> _______________________________________________

>>>> game_edu mailing list

>>>> game_edu at igda.org

>>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>>>

>>>

>>> _______________________________________________

>>> game_edu mailing list

>>> game_edu at igda.org

>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>>

>>>

>>>

>>>     _______________________________________________

>>> game_edu mailing list

>>> game_edu at igda.org

>>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>>>

>>

>> _______________________________________________

>> game_edu mailing list

>> game_edu at igda.org

>> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>

>

>

> ------------------------------

>

> _______________________________________________

> game_edu mailing list

> game_edu at igda.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>

>

> End of game_edu Digest, Vol 59, Issue 13

> ****************************************


John Sharp

| supercosm LLC

| www.supercosm.com

| P 404 377 5440

| C 917 673 0374