Our session at G4C on Impact Types

Update: Video of our panel is now live! (per 5/20/2014)

Session description (original post):

g4c-2014At our session this week at Games for Change, we will be announcing a new project to frame “how games have impact.” The idea is that the field is fragmented, and unnecessarily so. Funding from the Packard Foundation agrees that a typology of sorts might be worth investigating. Can we start bringing the disparate research together with how assessment practitioners actually approach their jobs? More to come, but for now here are the details:

Title: Impact from Games? Pick the Right Field First!

Presenters: Benjamin Stokes, Tracy Fullerton, Gerad O’Shea, Shelley Pasnik

Description: What kind of impact is possible with a game? The secret is that successful games have *different* kinds of impact. Too often, the success factors and indicators are mucked together. Perhaps it is time we stop confusing behavior change with advocacy campaigns, let alone success in crowd-sourced labor! For the first time, with funding from the David & Lucile Packard Foundation, we are aiming to spell out different big picture frameworks for “how games have impact.” On April 24th, we are launching this public discourse: come away with starting points to evaluate your next game, and maximize its impact.

p.s. — Here’s the slide we used on “impact types” to push past the usual surface discussion of learning-vs-outreach:

Comments are closed.