May 7 2015, Neurogaming Converence, San Francisco—Dan Tynan from Yahoo moderated a panel on using advances in neuroscience and gaming technologies to accelerate learning. Panelists were Alan Gershenfeldrshenfeld from e-line media, Amy Kruse from Intific, Peter Hartzbeckrtzbeck from imotions, and Dhiraj Jeyanandarajan from Qneuro.
Define the terms for neurogaming for education?
Jeyanandariajan suggested software that uses neurogame technologies like recording eeg for cognitive state plus game play mechanics to personalize the learning experience.
Kruse defined education and training that includes biometrics and physiology for closed-loop functions.
Hartzbeck added self training. There are a wide range of apps and functions, some of which are also used for diagnostics. Some functions like notifications and imagination are helped by the games.
Gershenfeld noted that 3-D action games have been shown to change brain functions. You take out the mechanics and apply them to levels. The benefits are greater engagement, etc.
Still R & D or real?
Jeyanandariajan stated that the neurogames are coming. The closed-loop, dynamic features are compelling.
Hartzbeck noted that the number of sensors makes for a large headset when you have eeg, heart rate, eye tracking, facial expression, etc. There are some attempts at research centers to scale down, but nothing is on the horizon for consumers.
Kruse declared that the move to commercial must show added value. The move to consumers will accelerate the development of apps and increase adoption.
Gershenfeld demurred that there are different markets, and each requires separate marketing, design, and models. The solutions and objectives must match.
Education learning changing over time?
Hartzbeck noted that Unity changed game development by providing a standard game engine. There are lots of small tasks involved in building emotional response tools. The younger people already have experience with the typical development tools and app creation. The shrinking of the sensors helps reduce the size of the end device.
Kruse stated the interactions between people change when they an view their data and themselves. Younger people are showing greater interest in data of themselves and it now makes sense to include these data in your daily activities.
Gershenfeld added that the great changes are coming in the k-12 areas as curriculum changes to add more technology. The emphasis is now on control functions and reducing friction in the learning environment. The adoption rate is hindered by the opponents for any significant changes.
Jeyanandariajan commented that costs are a big issue, but now that consumer prices are dropping, the teaching-learning areas need relevant apps.
Challenges: kids, schools, classrooms, additional work versus adoption?
Hartzbeck responded that privacy is one issue that is not being well addressed. In the future, we will have more screening and diagnostics.
Jeyanandariajan declared that we need to show effectiveness and the benefits for change. The industry needs independent verifications of claims and well designed a-b testing protocols.
Gershenfeld contributed moving directly to the teachers who are most resistant to change. The whole ecosystem matters as the many platforms have no alignment nor feedback.
Bottom up like PC or BYOD?
Kruse stated that neurogaming tools are already in use in the ADHD sphere, but most are in clinical settings. These apps can be configured and moved to a more commercial and consumer-friendly instantiation.
Hartzbeck suggested that we still need more research to refine basic methodologies and define real diagnostics. We have a lot of data from the research areas, but we don't know how to apply those data to other fields and markets.
Jeyanandariajan advocated directing attention to the parents and showing that entertainment games can be integrated with neuro and education.
Gershenfeld called for a new service model, from an after school function to an in-school controlled environment that provides a full solution. The difference is that a unified control of scope and sequence will get around the Frankenstein problem of many different parts that have to somehow work together.
Other stakeholders?
Gershenfeld responded that educational entertainment is not trying to address the trans-teen and young adult populations. There are no efforts to encourage self actualizing. The 7-12 grades have to compete with the smaller indie games, so the educational aspects have to have some content differentiation.
Stigma?
Kruse stated that good games need variable quests, especially when put up against the "cheap" time-killer games.
Games versus schools?
Gershenfeld cited a survey that indicated the most experienced teachers want to incorporate games into their teaching palette. The have learned that they need to incorporate whatever works well for a majority of students. Unfortunately, most educational neurogames are poorly designed for the needs of the teacher and have designers who don't know much about teaching.
Jeyanandariajan agreed that games are ok, be we need to educate the decision makers about the benefits. The games themselves are the end result of lots of underlying layers including neuro, schools, etc. which have been integrated to produce a complete and unified solution.
Kruse appended the teaching systems need to blend technology, feedback, teachers, peers, and mentors to be realistically effective.
Commercial validity challenges?
Jeyanandariajan stated that the hurdles are related to the fact that most schools are poor and cannot afford the necessary equipment. Even if they move to tablets, they still need other add-ons to the compute and display platform to get the necessary inputs for neuro and bio feedback. For example, an eeg sensor is an added component that cannot be eliminated, but can be used in a stand-alone operation without the tablets in the schools.
Gershenfeld emphasized that the channels and ecosystems for digital stories and tools need placement management and ways to continually confirm and update functions. print publications have already solved the innovation issues with combinations of print and digital, so a digital starting point should be easier.
In summary, the educational world needs adaptive, personalized systems.
