One of the perennial issues that hangs over designing learning experiences is that of fantasy. That is, we set examples and practice in contexts. Most of the time, to be fair, those contexts can and should be real. But there are times when fantasy may be beneficial (as I’ve heard from game researcher and learning design Professor Karl Kapp). The question is, when? I had a thought when out for my usual walk (not unusually), so let me expand a bit on some ideas, fantasizing about transfer.
First, it’s clear that context matters. My rationale is that the settings seen across examples and practice – the context ‘space‘ as it were – determines where you’re going to recognize the opportunities for application. Our brains abstract the underlying structure from multiple opportunities (e.g. recognizing what doesn’t change across instances). That structure likely will apply in more situations than we can create in the learning experience, so it’s good. But how far we transfer is determined by how varying the situations are that we see.
Now, if want near transfer, we need to use situations close to the ones learners will experience. But what about far transfer, where we want recognition in all appropriate (and no inappropriate) situations? The argument has been, and I’m a proponent, that the lack of explicit mooring to the real world actually facilitates that transfer. We still need a situation, and the relevant structure has to be maintained, but can we change the trappings? So, for instance, a company set a business simulation in a Wild West saloon, You were still managing the books, but what you were accounting for (ahem) were things that were simplified and exaggerated. Which took the focus away from the mundane details and let you focus on the business principles.
And that’s a good rationale, but what occurred to me is another potential argument. I was thinking about fear, in the case of difficult issues. For instance, bullying, sexual harassment, and the like. Things that are scary to experience, particularly if you’re vulnerable. Would setting it in a fantastic world make it easier to listen to the messages? You’re dealing with aliens, or demons, not real people? I can’t say for certain (is there research on this? I’m not aware of any, but that doesn’t mean it hasn’t occurred!), but it seems plausible.
Note that while facilitation is always recommended, in this case you’d definitely need some. Essentially, you can’t assume people will make the appropriate inferences and transfer back to the real world. In general, practice by itself isn’t a full learning experience. (Even if you put models and examples and feedback right in the game world, you still shouldn’t assume the extension.) You want to help folks recognize the relationships between the learning experience and real performance. That’s a given, pretty much, but it’s especially true when talking fantasy.
Look, we can be fantasizing about transfer, but let’s engineer it. We can use fantasy settings, I’ll suggest, at least in certain situations, but never assume that transfer will occur. Or we really will be fantasizing!
Leave a Reply