Susan Bermingham et al. social nature of game‐making activities, with their multiple skills and roles. Furthermore, only a few papers focus on assessment of learning processes and outcomes in game‐making contexts (Brennan & Resnick, 2012; Resnick et al., 2009) and assessment methods in game‐making remain unclear. MAGICAL’s efforts in these respects focus on some of the skills in Voogt & Pareja Roblin’s 21CS meta‐framework. Collaboration. MAGICAL proposes game‐making as a collaborative activity that involves multiple design and authoring roles. This is the project’s main innovation, as the few game‐making studies that consider collaboration do so in terms of peer review of individually produced games (Robertson, 2012). To support team‐based game‐making, MAGICAL is developing a special fantasy‐themed authoring environment called MAGOS in which the various functions and mechanics for making a game are represented as magical powers. These are distributed among up to four player/authors who initially have different areas of responsibility, e.g. game level design, implementation of physics, creation of visuals, integration of sound effects and music. The possibility to exchange ‘powers’ as required during real‐time editing (supported by online chat) is intended to encourage and facilitate cooperation, negotiation and, potentially, collaboration. Attention will focus on how collaborative processes unfold both in synchronous face‐to‐face mode and online, whether synchronously or asynchronously. Other important aspects here are the role of teacher mediation and the impact of MAGOS’ affordances, especially those designed and integrated specifically for the purpose of supporting collaboration. Creativity and problem solving. Game‐making brings a wealth of opportunity for addressing creativity in its various forms and manifestations (Eow et al., 2010; Frossard et al., 2011). MAGICAL adopts a holistic approach to creativity, considering it in terms of human qualities (Hague & Williamson, 2009), processes (Frossard et al., 2011), and the artefacts produced (Cropley, 2001; Amabile 1996; Plucker & Beghetto 2004; Villalba 2008). Drawing broadly on these perspectives, creativity can be considered to be manifest in the generation and implementation of meaningful, engaging and novel solutions in appropriate formats and for particular audiences. Accordingly, MAGICAL’s focus on creativity stretches beyond the aesthetics of learner‐produced games to embrace aspects like novel ideas, approaches and solutions, the capacity to draw original or unforeseen connections, and unorthodox or imaginative ways of dealing with limitations. A closely related 21CS that could well emerge from ‘learning by doing’ with collaborative game‐making is problem solving, especially in what Bransford & Stein (1993) define as the ‘problem‐solving cycle’: recognising and defining a problem, reflecting on and developing a solution strategy, gathering and analysing ideas, considering/trying alternatives, evaluating the implemented solution. These can be related to the cognitive processes that Mayer and Wittrock (2006) identify in problem solving, namely representing, planning, executing, and self‐regulating (evaluation of self‐efficacy and consequent adjustment). As a learning by doing approach, collaborative game‐making could offer learners opportunities to activate these processes within the problem‐solving cycle, especially when design and development is carried out in iterative phases. MAGICAL also considers ‘problem posing’, i.e. the capacity to design games and game situations that are challenging but solvable. Problem posing reflects attitudes like designing‐for‐others (Kafai, Ching & Marshall, 1997; Baytak & Land, 2010; Owston et al. 2008) and systems (or design) thinking, i.e. appreciation of system complexity and awareness of how individual elements interrelate within the whole (Hayes & Games, 2008). ICT literacy. In the field of education and digital technologies, 21CS often fall under headings such as digital competences, digital literacy, and ICT literacy (Council of the European Union, 2006; Ferrari, 2012; NETS Project & Brooks‐Young, 2007). The 21CS meta‐framework mentioned above distinguishes between the very broad concept of information literacy and the more specific area of ICT literacy. For project purposes, MAGICAL focuses on fluency and fruitfulness in technology use; application of existing ICT knowledge; and critical, iterative production of digital artefacts and application of design thinking. Communication, critical thinking and productivity are not investigated in MAGICAL as distinct 21CS in their own right but are considered within treatment of the other 21CS. Together with social/cultural skills & citizenship, these may be the subject of future investigation.
48