AnEcologicalModelofImpactInnovation:BuildingInterpretiveSpaceforAnticipatoryActionandthePotentialtoThrive1,2

SashaBarab,ArizonaStateUniversity3

Abstract

All too often, those of us involved in building innovations for impact fall hostage to a type oftechnological determinism in which designed product(s) are treated as responsible for achievingoutcomeson individuals—rather thanwith individualspositionedas impactagents.However,manyofthe innovationswedesign, and thegoals theyweredesigned toenable, requirehumanengagement,foresight,andintegrationtounlockthepotentialandrequireanenablingecosystemforsuccess.Shiftingfrom a product-centric view of innovation to a more impact-centric framework focused less on thedesignandmoreonwhatpeoplecandowithit,requiresashiftinpositioningonwheretheinnovationlives.Inthismanuscript,anecologicalframeworkisofferedinwhichthedesignedproductistreatedasone component of a dynamic innovation system, with innovation positioned as a sharedaccomplishment that is distributed across the designed product(s), active participant(s), skilledfacilitator(s), and enabling ecosystem(s). At the core of such a framework are engaged individuals,becoming innovators in their own right, as they grow the capacity to envision new possibilities andintegrate components of the innovation (e.g., technologies, concepts, expert models, otherperspectives) to realize goals in which they are invested and within environments in which thisinnovationwillhaveimpact.

OverviewoftheArgument

Acrossmanydisciplinesthereisoftenaluretowardsoverlysimplistic,ifnotdeterministicmodelsforconceptualizinghowimpactisachieved.ThevariouslearningsciencesofwhichIamamemberarenodifferent,emergingpartlyinresponsetoadissatisfactionofafielddominatedbyinstructionalmodelsfocusedonefficientcontenttransmission;thatis,instructionalsystemsdesignedtoefficientlydisseminateanexpertmodel(e.g.,howtoarguepersuasively,howtotestahypothesis,howtodebugabadlineofcode)orformalcharacterizationofaconcept(e.g.,thesis,eutrophication,encapsulation)withtheassumptionthatthelearnerwillapplytheabstractedcharacterizationtofuturecontexts.However,whilesuchdeterministicmodelsandprocessesmightproveefficientformaximizingshort-term

1SpecialthankstotheNationalScienceFoundationfortheirsupportinhostingworkshopsandmeetingsfromwhichtheideascontainedinthischapterweredeveloped.SpecialthankstotheIntelFoundationfortheirgeneroussupportinfundingthedevelopmentoftheDesigningProjectsforImpactJourneyandtheJourneyBuildingPlatformonwhichitresides.2SpecialThankstoEarlAguilera,AlanGershenfeld,AnnaArici,andKathrynDutchinforalltheirinputinhelpingtoevolvetheideascontainedinthismanuscript.3SashaBarabisaProfessoratArizonaStateUniversityinMaryLouFultonTeachersCollegeandtheSchooloftheFutureofInnovationinSociety,aswellastheExecutiveDirectoroftheCenterforGamesandImpact.

learningoutputs(e.g.,standardizedtestperformance,followingasetofprocedures,rapidinformationdissemination),theytendtobelesssuccessfulforgoalsthatemphasizemorelong-termlifeoutcomes–thatis,makingmeaningfuldifferencesinpeople’slives(Hollifield,1986;Clark,1990).

Whenoneadoptsanoutcome-focusedoruse-inspiredposture(Stokes,1987)forlearning,coreconceptsandexpertmodelsarenotrecipesforsuccess,butinsteadaremoreusefullyconceivedassystemaffordances,whatGibson(1986)describedasopportunitiesforaction.Fromthisecologicalframework,innovationisnotapropertyofthetechnology,butiscreatedinrelationtothewaysthatengagedindividuals(i.e.,positionedasinnovatorsthemselves)andresponsiveecosystemsareabletoleverageinnovationcomponents(e.g.,coreconcepts,expertmodels,ubiquitousinterfaces)torealizedesiredgoals.Thedesignedproductissimplyoneaspectofalargerinnovationsystem,withthekeytosuccessbeinghowtheideasandmodelsenabledbytheinnovationusefullyengage“thelifearoundproblems.”Thisinnovationsystemspansfromtheinitial“constraintsandtheformulationofgoals”totheunderlyingmodelsthatserveas“provisionalresponses”andbroadensouttoincludelocalecosystemsandengagedindividualswhomustenvisionpossibilities,andthenintegratethemodelsasthey“bumpupagainsttheworld”suchthattheyachievenewgoals(Pendleton-Jullian&Brown,inpress,p.8).

Whereasaproduct-centricperspectivemightfocusonthetechnicalpropertiesoftheinnovationoreventheexperienceoftheuserenabledbytheinnovation,anoutcome-centricperspectiveisfocusedonwhatpeopleareenabledtoaccomplishaspartoftheinnovationcontext,wherepeoplemakemeaningoftheinnovationfortheirlives.Suchpositioningrequiresashiftinpositioningwheretheinnovationlives,withtheinnovatorandinnovationemergingeachtimeanewimplementationisengaged.Inthislattermodel,whiletechnologymightbeanecessarycomponentinaninnovationprofile,itisinsufficienttoenablethenecessaryconditionsforthelearnerandsystemtothrive.Thisassumptionisnotmeanttoimplythatdesignersshouldobfuscatetheirresponsibilityforoutcomeachievement.Rather,itissimplyanacknowledgementthatoutcomeobtainmentisadistributedaccomplishmentspreadacrossmultipleinteractingcomponents,occurringwhen(1)thedesignedproduct,(2)anactiveparticipant,(3)skilledfacilitators,andan(4)enablingecosystemarefunctionallyunited.

Groundingthisframework,let’sbeginbylookingatwhatsomemightperceiveasaself-containedsolution;thatisaproduct-centricor“technologicalfix”approach.Formanyofus,antibioticsareapillthatonetakestofixwhatailsus,withabeliefthatthechemistryofthepillitselfwillnecessarilybringaboutthedesiredoutcome.However,evenwhentheinnovationisapillthatonesimplyswallows,whatweknowisthatoutcomeobtainmentrequiresmanyinteractingvariablessharedacrosstheantibiotic,thedoctor,thecommunity,theinsurance,andthepatient’srelationshiptoallofthese.Breakdownintheinnovation’spotentialtoachieveoutcomescouldbeanywherefrompoordiagnosistouncooperativepatienttocommunity

resistancewithmanypossiblecomplicationsin-between(Aminov,2010).Myownworkhasfocusedonthecentralgoalofhelpingindividualsthriveinarapidly-changing,globally-connectedsociety,anoutcomerequiringalevelofparticipationandfuturecapacityonbehalfoftheenactingindividualthatonlyexacerbatesthechallengesofsuccessfullyrealizingoutcomes.Suchcontextualizedapplicationrequiresmorethanknowingtheformalpropertiesofaconceptorexpertmodel,butinvolvesaparticularindividual,imaginingaparticularstate,withinaparticularcontext,andthenintegratingtheconceptstoachievethedesiredstate—aprocessdescribedbelowasanticipatoryaction.

Clearly,thereareproblemsthataremoreamenableto“technologicalfixes”(Sarewitz&Nelson,2008)inwhichthesolutionisboundupwithinthetechnologyitself(e.g.,immunizationsmoresothanantibiotics).However,whenonefocusesonissuesofliteracy,discrimination,orhealth,anddoessowithanagendatohelppeoplethriveintheseareas,itisquiteunlikelythatadesignedproductwillprovesufficientforachievingmeaningfulimpact.Ingeneral,abstractingto-belearnedcontentfromthesituationsinwhichithasvalueoftenunderminestheveryunderstandingsthateducatorsaimtofoster(Bransford,Brown,&Cocking,2010),especiallyamongthoseindividualswhodon’talreadyhavearichappreciationfortheuse-valueofthatwhichisbeinglearned(Barab,Zuiker,etal.,2007;D’Amato,1992).Thisisinpartbecauseformostsituations,thewaysthattheenablingknowledge,skills,models,etc.arecharacterizedinthedesignedproductsunderspecifywhatitmeanstointegratethemasusefultoolstorealizeparticulargoalsinparticularsituations(Greeno,1998;Nathan,2005).

Infact,acentralassumptionunderlyingthismanuscriptisthatanyspecificationofcontentindependentfromitsactualuseinagivensituationwillnecessarilyunderspecifywhatsomeoneneedstoknowinsomefuturesituationtobringaboutdesiredends(Nathan,2005).Further,andevenifthelearningsituationwasabletoprovideenoughofthecontextualhookstoallowlearnerstosuccessfullyusethenewlylearnedknowledge,skills,modelstobringaboutmeaningfulends,itisnoguaranteethattheywouldchoosetodoso.Thechallengesinherentinembeddingknowledge,skills,anddispositionswithinaninnovationislessabouttheabilityofdesignertomakecoreconceptsclearoreventhelearnertomemorizeabstractedarticulations,butliesinhowtheideasthenbecomere-integratedasuseful“tools”forbringingaboutdesiredoutcomeswithinparticularsituationsbyparticularindividuals.Beingabletothriveinvolvesthecultivationofanengagedandpurposefullearner,growingabilitiesastheydoworkonreal-worldproblems,withtheimportantoutcomebeingthattheycometoexperiencethemselvesashavingtheability,confidence,andcommitmenttodogreatthings—especiallywhenenabledbythedisciplinarymodelsbeingleveraged.

Thiscreatesadilemmafordesignersinthatanyformalaccounting(whetherofaconcept,expertmodel,skill,ordisposition)requiresalevelofabstractionthatsimultaneouslyallowsforthecoreconceptsbeingmorewidelyrelevantatthesametimesmakesthemlessrelevanttoaparticularsituation.Infact,designingproductsthatenableotherstoaccomplish

meaningfulgoalsbasedonthesuccessfulapplicationofwhattheylearned,isachallengingendeavor–onethatisunlikelytosucceedifdesignerssimplyviewtheproblemasatechnologicalone.Atsomepoint,themodelofwhereinnovationlivesneedtotransitionfromdevelopedproductstoengagedlearners,skilledfacilitators,andenablingecosystems.Thefocushereislessonthedesignedproduct,oreventhekeyconceptsthattheproductwasdesignedtoimpart,andmoreoncatalyzingpotentialoftheinnovationsystemtoenablethoseresponsibleforrealizingtheimpactgoalstosucceed.

Buildingoffthisinitialframing,Iarguethatifthegoalofthedesignistobuildcapacitysuchthatlearnersexperiencethemselvesascapableofdoinggreatthings,thentheinnovationmustestablishaninterpretivespacethroughwhichsuchcapacitycanberealized.Suchapotentialcannotbehandedtoanotherorusefullydescribedindependentofuse.Further,ifonebelievesthatany“characterizationofcontent”willalwaysunderspecifyhowitwillbeused,thentheinterpretivespacemustallowforsomelevelofforesight,andbuildasupportivecommunityandenablingecosystemtosupportthelearnerinengaginginthenecessaryintegrationprocessofmakingcontentuseful.Thesought-afterexperientialstateisoneinwhichthereisanengagedlearnerwhoisinvestedinachievinggoalsforwhichtheyareabletoleveragetheto-be-cultivatedknowledge,skills,anddispositionsasenablingtoolstorealizepersonallymeaningfulandsociallysignificantgoals.Whilecertainaffordancescanbebroughtinbytheinnovation,ultimatelyitisuptothelearners,supportedbymoreknowledgeableothersandtheirpeers,toproducethenecessaryvisionandcriticalreflectiontorealizedesiredend-stateswithinaparticularecosystem.LearningasBeingAbletoThrive

Itisquitecommontothinkofimpactassomethingthatonedoestoanother,withtheexpectationthattheinterventionwillchangeaproblematicstate.Intermsofimpact,itisoftenassociatedwithwordssuchasstrike,force,andcollide.Inasimilarvein,whenonethinksaboutintervention,commonwordsthatcometomindincludetreat,fix,orchange.Incontrast,acoreassumptionofthisargumentdefinesimpactasasharedaccomplishmentthatisenabledthroughanenticinginvitation,ratherthananimposedintervention.Intermsofmyworkongame-enabledimpact,Iviewgamesasemployingthiskindofinvitationalapproach,wheretheplayerisencouragedtotakeactiveresponsibilityfortheprocessofchange,asopposedtopassivelyacceptinganinterventionthrustuponhimorher.InthetypesofgamesthatIdevelop,theplayerispresentedaproblemalongwithanopportunitytoadopttheroleofacharacterwhohasthepotentialtotransformthegameworldproblem(s),aswellastheirperspectiveofthemselvesasindividualswhoarecapableofrealizingsuchoutcomes(Barab,Gresalfi,&Ingram-Goble,2010).

Incontrast,manywouldarguethatoureducationalsystem,characterizedbyadidacticpedagogicalbaseintendedtomostefficientlyinducethe“mastery”ofspecificobjectives,isan

ineffective,ifnotdehumanizing,model(Bruner,1985;Dewey,1963;Whitehead,1929).TheanthropologistJeanLave(1991)statedthatschools“decompose”activitytothepointthatlearningismeaningless,according“knowledgeableskillareifiedexistence,turningitintosomethingtobe‘acquired'anditstransmissionintoaninstitutionalmotive”(p.79).Thebeliefthatexperiencecanbedecomposed,departmentalized,andtaughtindependentlyfromthosesituationsinwhichithasmeaning,orfromthoseindividualswhomustusethem,hasresultedinabeliefthatchangecanbeplacedintoaninnovationandtransmittedtoanother.Instead,whatIadvanceisanecologicalframework,inwhichlearningandimpactinvolvesmorethanacquiringaparticularskillortool,butactuallyinvolvesbuildingan“increasinglyrichimplicitunderstandingoftheworldinwhichthey[theimpact-agents]usethetoolsandofthetoolsthemselves”(Brown,Collins,&Duguid,1989,p.33).

ForDewey(1963),learningorunderstandingdonotsimplyoccurbydoing;rather,learningisdoing.Further,one’sreasonsfordoing,aswellasthecontextthroughwhichdoingoccurs,areconsideredcentraltodefiningthatwhichislearned.InLave’s(1988)words,“learningisparticipation.”Moregenerally,thefunctionalists(C.S.Peirce,WilliamJames,andJohnDewey)werelessconcernedwithdescribing“whatismind?”or“whichstimulielicitwhichbehaviors?”thanwithcharacterizing“whatismindgoodfor?”Ifwesubscribetotheseconcepts,learningandimpactcannotbeunderstoodasconditionsthatcanbeimposedonthelearner,whoisexpectedtointernalize“concepts”which,purportedly,canlaterbematchedupinameaningfulwaywithsomereal-worldphenomena.Thisisbecausebehaviorisrarelychangedbyanotherwithoutsomelevelofconsent,ifnotsustainedinvestment,bytheindividualwhoisgrowingthecapacityforchange.Atsomepoint,theto-be-changedindividualneedstobecomethechange-agent,takingownershipfortheimpactactivities,aprocessthatismosteffectivewhenmotivatedbytheirappreciationforthatwhichitallowsthemtoachieve.

Fromthisperspective,innovationsdesignedforimpactarelessabouttransferringcontentandmoreaboutenablingthoseweservetodogreatthings—asubtlebutimportantshiftinmindset.Suchoutcomescannotbeassigned,mandated,ordetermined,butinsteadareinvited,enabled,andsupportedthroughthoughtfuldesign,inspiredindividuals,skilledfacilitators,andenablingecosystems.Enablinglearnerstoapplytheto-be-learnedcontent(whetherknowledge,skills,orevendispositions)toachieverealworldgoals(i.e.,thrive)isadistributedorecologicalprocessinwhichthelearner,asinnovator,engagesinaformof‘anticipatoryaction.’Anticipatoryaction,buildsoffthenotionofanticipatorygovernance(Barden,Fisher,Selin,&Guston,2008;Gustin,2014;Guston&Sarewitz,2002;Sarewitz,2011),aphraseusedtodescribeanappropriateaspirationfordemocraticengagementwithtechnologicaltransformation.

Centraltothenotionofanticipatorygovernanceisthesentimentthatinorderforsocietytobenefitfromnewtechnologiesweneednotresignourresponsibilityforintegratingtechnologyintoourlives,norignoretheinfluentialroleithasinshapingpossiblefutures.

Learninginnovationsdesignedtobuildhumancapacity,similarly,donotdeterminetheoutcomestheyaredesignedtoenable,butatthesametimeitwouldbeirresponsibletoexpecteachindividualtoconstructthenecessaryknowledgeneededtothriveintheworld.Instead,weshouldengageinthreeareasofsimultaneousactivities,whicharealsocentraltolearningconceptualizedasanticipatoryaction:

• engagement(becominginvestedinadeliberation,emotionalinvolvementorcommitment),

• foresight(imaginingplausiblescenarios,envisioningpossiblefutures),• integration(adaptingtolocalcircumstances,

innovatingforimpact).

Themovehereistopositionlearningasanactive,orengagedprocess,inwhichoneisenvisioningpossiblefuturestatesandthenworkingtointegratewhatisbeinglearnedtodoworkontheworldinwaysthat,ifsuccessful,achievethefuturestate.Suchaviewisincontrasttolearningmodelsbasedonanacquisitionmetaphor(Sfard,1988),andcreatesachallengefordesignersinthattheyareattemptingtosupportcontentlearningatthesametimebuildingavisionforhowonemightusethecontenttoachievepersonallymeaningfulandsociallysignificantgoals.

Intermsofengagement,acorechallengefacingthedesigneristocultivatethelearner’sinvestmentinthegoalsofthelearninginnovation,requiringtheadoptionofavaluedgoalandabeliefthatlearningwillenablegoalobtainment.GresafliandBarab(2011)differentiatedbetweenproceduralengagement(usingproceduresaccuratelybutwithoutadeeperunderstandingofwhyoneisperformingsuchprocedures),andconsequentialengagementwhereoneisfocusedonrealizingparticularconsequencesandworkingtodeterminethenecessarystepsandmeansforrealizingsuchanoutcome.Inpreviousworkfocusedongamesforimpact,wewouldbuildanentireworldandmiddle-schoolyouthwouldbeinvitedtotakeontheroleofascientist,areporter,oranaccountantandwouldlevel-upskillsinanattempttosolveaproposedproblem(Barab,Gresalfi,Dodge,&Ingram-Goble,2010).Oneteacher,whencomparinglearninginoneofourimmersiveworldgamestomoretraditionallessons,stated:

“Ithinkthedifferenceisinthegametheyalsofeelempowered.Anditwasn’tsomuchthe‘3D-ness’ofit,asmuchastheysawdirectcauseandeffect…They’reexploringtheworldatthatage,of“CanImakeadifference?”Thefirsttimetheydosomethingorwritesomethingthatmakesadifference,theythink“Thatwasarealbigdeal!”””

Consistentwiththeperspectiveofthisteacher,keytothesuccessoftheseexperiencesandwhyinteractiveandimmersiveworldsaresopowerful,isthatdesignerscanbuildthese

Figure1:AframeworkforAnticipatoryAction,whichunderliesthecapacitytoThrive.

worldssothattheyscaffoldlearnersthroughsuccess,providingthenecessaryfeedbacksuchthatplayerscanexperiencetheconsequencesofunproductivedecisionswiththenecessaryscaffoldingtosucceed.Forexample,inourwaterqualitygame,fishweredyingandtheplayerwasinvitedtotakeontheroleofascientist,collectingdata,buildingwarrantedclaims,andconvincingothersonthecredibilityoftheargument(Barab,Zuikeretal.,2007).Fromourperspectiveasdesignersoftheexperience,itiscriticallyimportantthattheplayerfeelsliketheyaredoingmorethanfollowingapre-setscript;ratherthattheyactuallyhavetoimaginenon-specifiedpossibilitiesandworktobringaboutthesedesiredends.Whilesucceedinginthesedesignedworldscanprovepowerful,ultimately,thetypesofimpactandintegrationthatarethefocusofthismanuscriptrequireamotivatedandcapableindividualwhoisabletocreatefuturepossibilitiesintheworldbeyondthegame;thatis,thriveintherealworld.

EcologicalFrameworkforImpactInnovation

Withthetargetexperientialstateofanticipatoryactiondescribed,itisnowproductivetoreturntotheecologicalframeworkforconceptualizingimpactinnovation.Whenitcomestobuildinggamesforimpact,theinnovationiscommonlyconsideredtobethegameitself;thatis,thedesignedproduct.Infact,theinteractiveandparticipatorynatureofgames,coupledwiththeirmarketsuccess,hasresultedinunrealisticexpectationsandoverlysimplisticmodelsaboutthepotentialofgames,inandofthemselves(asproducts),totransformsocietyinproductiveways(Burak&Stokes,2015).Instead,whatthefieldhaslearnedafteradecadeofresearchandmillionsofdollarsspentonthepursuit,isthatthemostpowerfulimplementationsarethoseinwhichthegamewasonecomponentofabroaderframework;othercomponentsinclude

curricularresources,askilledfacilitator,interactionswithotherplayers,astrongtheoryofchange,andproductivealignmentbetweenthetypeofgameandtheimpactgoals—allwithinasupportiveecosystem(Clark,Tanner-Smith,&Killingsworth,2014;Wouters,Nimwegen,Oostendorp,&Spek,2013).Inthisway,gamesforimpactdonotdetermineoutcomes,butinstead,likeothertypesofinnovations,arebestpositionedaspartofservicesthatmustbe

continuallyoptimizedforecosystemintegration,ongoingsustainabilityandscaledimpact.Itisquitepossibletomisinterpretthisfinding,thatgamesaremosteffectivewhen

Figure2:EcologicalFrameworkforImpactInnovation

implementedasjustonepartofabroaderenablingecosystem,asanindictmentonthepotentialofgamesforimpact;incontrast,othershaveinterpretedthesefindingsasimportantinformationnecessaryforbuildingaproductivetheoryofchange(Gee&Hayes,2002).Ifonebelievesthatdesignedproduct–inthiscase,thegame–doesnottransmitsolutionstotheworld,butinsteadenablesaninnovationsystemtorealizeimpactoutcomes,thenonemustexpandtheirviewofwhatisausefulboundingconceptualizinginnovationsforimpact;thatis,doesinnovationresideinaproductorisitapropertyofafunctioningsystem.Here,Iamarguingfortheutilityoftreatingtheinnovationwithanexpandedunitofanalysisthatdoesn’tcreateunproductiveboundariesbetweenthedesignedtechnologyandotherkeycomponentsthatneedtobeconsidered,andcontinuallyoptimized,ifoneisgoingtosuccessfullyleveragegames,oranyotherinnovation,forimpact.

Anecologicalperspectivedoesnotseparatethedesignedcomponents(i.e.,aproduct-centricbias)fromthebroaderfunctioningsystem,treatingtheinnovationasadistributedsysteminvolvingthedesignedproduct,engagedindividuals(human-centricbias),skilledfacilitators(service-centricbias),andanenablingimplementationenvironment(ecosystem-centricbias)allintheserviceofparticulargoals(outcome-centricbias)astheinnovation.Inthisecologicalmodel,theinnovationlivesintheinteractionamongmultiplecomponentsasasharedaccomplishment,andisthusre-createdeachtimeitisimplemented,withthechallengebeingtocultivatemeaningfulparticipationfromeachofthecomponents(designedinnovation,engagedparticipants,supportivefacilitators,enablingecosystem)duringtheimplementation.Infact,fromtheperspectivebeingarguedhere,implementationitselfisaninnovativeactinwhichatransformativepotentialisbeingcreatedwithinaparticularcontext.

Themeaningfulrealizationofanimpactinnovationcannotbeassigned,mandated,ordetermined,butinsteadisinvited,enabled,andsupportedthroughthoughtfuldesign,inspiredindividuals,skilledfacilitators,andenablingecosystems.Engineeringforsuchempowermentrequiresthatthedesignallowsforaninterpretivespacethroughwhicheachofthecomponentscanstepin,own,envision,andbringforththeircontributions—asentimentfurtherelaboratedinthenextsection.Whileitsinfinitelyeasiertopredeterminethe“answers”andapplicationstotheproductswedesignortheservicepeopleweemploy,ifwetrulywanttransformativeoutcomeswehavetoenabletheplayersthemselves—embracinganimpact-centricframeworkthatlooksforimpactnotsolelywithinthedesignsweoffer(atthedesigncore),butmoreimportantlyishowtheygettakenupontheperiphery,“atthenodes.”Theseindividuals,facilitators,andplayersareultimatelytheonesresponsibleforcreatingthetransformationandensuringithaslocalvalue.

Viewingimpactasasharedaccomplishment,supportedbydesignersoftheinnovation,butultimatelyrealizedinpartnershipwiththe‘impact-agent’inrelationtotheirecosystemneedsandpossibilities,isanimportantshiftthatrequiresabeliefinthepotentialofallindividualstorealizegreatthings.Thecoreinnovation,tobetrulytransformative,mustlighta

passionwithinthosetobeimpactedsothattheychoosetocontinuallyrecreateitspotentialinrelationtoeachnewsituationinwhichthecoreideascouldbetransformative.Product-centricandotheroverlydeterministicframeworksarelessusefulforcultivatingsuchatransformativepotential,evenwhiletheymaybequiteeffectiveformaximizingimmediateoutputs.Infact,whenweareusinganinnovationtogrowacapacity,itisoftenwiththeexpectationthattheimplementationconditionswillbringnewintegrationrequirementsand,therefore,requireforesightandimaginationtointegratewhatwaslearnedinamannerthatwillbringaboutthedesiredoutcomes.

Inthissense,andconsistentwithanecologicalframework,thelearningpotentialliesnotintheinnovationperse,butinwhathappensaroundtheinnovation.Theroleoftheuserasimpact-agent,then,istointegratetheideasboundupinthetechnologicalportionoftheinnovationtobringaboutdesiredoutcomesintheirlocalcircumstances.Again,thenecessityofanecologicalframeworkthatlocatestransformativeoutcomesoutsidetheboundariesofthetechnology,shouldnotbetakenasanindictmentofthelimitsoftechnology.Infact,Iresearchvideogamesspecificallybecausetheyareinteractive,participatory,anddeeplyengaging,allowingevenyoungchildrentostepintoreal-worldrolesinwhichtheyconfrontproblems,makemeaningfulchoicesandexploretheconsequencesofthesechoicesbeyondthegameworldsthemselves.Inthenextsection,Iapplytheecologicalframeworkbeingadvancedtounderstandinghowgamescanserveasapowerfulenablerforanticipatoryactionintherealworld.

GamesasThrive-EnabledServices

Applyingourframeworkofinnovationecologiestogamesforimpact,theutilityofsuch‘seriousgames’asalearningandimpacttechnologyliesintheirpotentialtounlockhumanpotentialasonecomponentofanenablingsystem—notasastand-alone,boundedproduct.AkeytounlockingthispotentialistheintegrationofwhatGee(2013a,2013personalcommunication)referstoassmall‘g’gameswithbig‘G’infrastructures(Steinkuehler,2006).Toelaborate,small“g”gamesrefertotheboundedexperiencesofplayerswithingame-worlds;theyareself-containedandfinite,pre-optimizedtointroduce,coverorreinforceaparticularlessonandwell-suitedforlearninginasafe,simulatedandstructuredenvironment.Incontrast,Big“G”interactionstakeplaceoutsideofthegame,acrosscontextsandcommunities,actingasextensionsoftheoriginaldesign,andprovidingthegamealargerlifeandworldimpact.Suchinteractionsmightincludethediscourses,affinityspaces,andsocialconnectionsthatplayersandcommunitiesbuildbasedontheirsharedexperiences(Gee&Hayes,2011).

Big“G”gameinfrastructuresareopen-endedandseamlesslyintegratethesmall“g”gamesintoalarger,flexible‘meta-game’structureandaffinityspacethatfostersuser-drivenextensionsandadaptationsinsupportofreal-worldgoalsandoutcomes.ItiswiththeBig“G”componentsthatwetransformindividualexperienceswithinagameintoadynamicinteraction

toenablereal-worldextensions.GeeandHayes(2012)arguedthatwhenitcomestovideogamesandimpact,themostpowerfullearningiswhathappensaroundthegame,notjustwithinit.Fortheecologicaltheorist,noonecomponentcanbeadequatelydescribedinisolation,but,additionally,referstotheentiresetsofrelationsthroughwhichactivities,outcomes,andevenhumanbeingsareactualized.Ironically,themoreagencygivenovertothetheinnovation(asdesignedproduct),andthusthemoreresponsibilityfortheoutcomes,thelesslikelythelearneristoinvest,own,andasaresult,viewthemselvesascapable(andbringaboutthenecessarylocaladaptations)ofachievingmeaningfuloutcomes.

Thisisnotmeanttounderstatethechallengesofdesigningimmersiveworldstosupportdeepcontentlearning.However,thrivinginthereal-worldinvolvesmanymoredegreesoffreedomintermsofthevarioustypesofsituationsthatonemustsucceed.Thechallengeistofindthatsweetspotinwhichthereisenoughinterpretivespaceforthelearnertostepinandinvest,butnotsomuchthattheygetlostintheprocess.Irefertothisbalanceasa“danceofagency”inwhichthedesignerandlearnersharetheaccomplishment,withcontinualtradeoffonwhoisinthelead--abalancethateffectiveteachersmanageeachday.Inthisframework,theinnovationisre-createdeachtimeitisimplementedandrealizedasasharedaccomplishmentdistributedamongthedesigner,theuser,theservice,andtheecosystemitself.Whenonebeginstoconsidertheinnovationnotastheboundedproduct,butastheimplementationsystem,webegintoprovideamuchricherframingthatharnessesmuchmoreinnovationpotentialthanwhenonesimplylooksatanyonecomponentoftheecosystem.

Totheextentthattheinnovationactuallyunlocks,inspires,orenableslocalcapacity,wecanbegintoseeboundlesspotentialinwhatanimpact-agentcanachieve—apotentialonlylimitedbytheimaginationandcapacityofagivenecosystem.Thequestionthenbecomesifonecannotsimplyembedthe“solution”withinthedesignedinnovation,andiftheimpactisaresultofmeaningfulinteractionamongthecomponents,whatexactlyisitthathappenswithintheseinteractionsthatgivesrisetomeaningfulimpact?Itishere,withinwhatwerefertoastheinterpretivespace,thataninnovationcanrealizeitspotentialthroughaprocessofanticipatoryaction.Itisthisactivitythatisthefocusofthenextsection.Takenasawhole,theserelationalperspectivesprovideamoreexpansiveframingforconceptualizingwhatshouldbeconsideredtheboundariesoftheinnovation—fromafocusonproducttoafocusonthebroaderinnovationecosystem.

Thechallenge,however,ishowtopositionthedesigntocultivateengagement,inspireforesight,andenableintegration,allinamannerthatisownedandmaderelevanttotheimplementationsiteandnotsimplythedesigner.Ifweapplythisthinkingtotheconceptof‘gamification,’thatis,theinfusionofelementsfromgamesintoothercontexts,severalchallengesbecomeapparent.Forexample,adesignermustmanagethedecisiontotakecontroloveraplayer’sbehaviorsthrough“external”motivation,orinvitingtheplayerto“makesense”ofasystem’sfeedbackastheydeconstructtheirmeanings,withtheultimategoalof

inspiringplayerstounlock‘moreadvanced’versionsofthemselves.Thisdistinctionbetweenusingscorestocontrolplayerbehaviorsversusleveragingactionablefeedbackandilluminatepossibilitiesthroughwhichplayersareinvited,orevencompelledtopursuetheirowntransformationisakeychallengeinbuildingallcurriculum,letaloneleveraginginnovationforimpact.

Inthismodel,innovationlivesnotsimplyinthehandsofthosedevelopinginnovations,butwithineachindividualwhoisrealizingtheimpactgoals;anongoingprocessrequiringengagement,foresight,andintegration.Infact,manysituationsanddesiredoutcomesrequireongoingadaptations,novelcreations,andthecontinualbalancingofmultipleandcompetingvariables.Buildinginnovationsthatcultivatetheintentionofaplayertorealizeapotential,andtodosoinwaysthatcontinuallyadapttonewconditions,hasbeenthefocusofthisargument.Suchinvestmentrequiresadeeplevelofengagementonthepartoftheplayer,whichinvolvesleavinganinterpretivespaceforthevariouscomponentsoftheinnovationsystemasdepictedinfigure2tooccupy.This,however,isoneofthebiggestchallenges,especiallyforthosewhoover-design,specifyingallpossibleinteractionsandnecessarystepstoensuresuccess.Ironically,ifonedoesnotleavespacefortheimplementationstofill,thenlearningasanticipatoryactioncannottakeplace.HelpingTeachersThrive Infurthergroundingthisargument,IwilldescribeourworkwiththeIntelFoundationfocusedonbuildinganinnovationthatwouldenableteacherstoengageproject-basedlearningtobuildinnovativelessonsfortheirstudents.WhenoriginallyapproachedbyIntel,itwasintermsofourworkaroundcreatingimmersivegameworlds,basedonatheoryoftransformationalplayinwhichlearningdilemmaswereintroducedtoteacherswhowouldtakeonrolesinwhichtheywouldhavetoapplyconceptualunderstandingstofixaproblematicstage(e.g.,takingontheroleofascientistwhowouldinvestigatewhyfishweredyinginavirtualpark,orateacherwhoseclasswentbadlyandhadtointerpretdatatobuildaclaimastowhy)(seeBarab,Gresalfi,&Ingram-Goble,2010;Arici&Barab,inpress).However,whenweparticipatedinastakeholdermeetingwithteachersanddistrictfacilitators,itbecameclearthattheywantedmoreofagame-infusedlearningcurriculumthananimmersivegameworld(IntelStakeholderMeeting,March2013).Therefore,theproposalwasrepositionedtodesignanimpact-focused,inquiry-based,community-enabledlearningjourneythatleveragedgamificationtechniquesandmethodologies. Asadditionalbackground,for12yearstheIntel®TeachProgramhadbeenhelpingmorethan10millionK–12teachersaroundtheworldtointegratetechnologyintoclassroomsandpromotestudent-centeredapproaches(seeIntelElements).Oneoftheirmostpopularcoursescenteredontheconceptofproject-basedlearning,andwhiletheyhadexpert-vettedlearningcontentintheformofdownloadablePDFs,thelearningexperiencewasnotverydynamic,and

resultedinareflectiveactionplanratherthandirectlyimplementableprojects.Assuch,weworkedtoconvertor‘thrivify’thecurriculum,creatinglearningjourneyswithQuest-lines(analogoustounits),Missions(analogoustolessons),andChallenges(analogoustolearningactivities)thatteacherswouldcompleteusingagame-infusedplatform.Importantly,the“innovation”thatwewereseekingwasnotsimplytheemergingplatform,butalsoincluded(1)positioningthecurriculumaspartofause-inspiredjourney,(2)enablingthecommunitytoparticipateincollaboratingmeaningmaking,(3)increasingamountsofinquiryactivitieswhereplayerswerepositionedasbeingknowledgeablyskillful,and(4)providingfacilitatorstoolstoevaluateplayercontributionsandextendlearningopportunities. Consistentwiththesecomponents,andbeyondanyproduct,weframethedeliverablesintermsofThriveprincipleswiththe“innovation”beingan“approach,aplatform,acommunity,andacurriculum.”Particularemphasiswasplacedonthefollowingpedagogicalprinciplesandnestedsub-components(seeAppendixA,Part1),whichformedthebackboneofourapproach,andcollectivelywouldbedevelopedtogiverisetoanticipatoryaction:

a) ImpactFocused,PersonallyRelevant-contentwillbecarefullychosentoensurereal-worldvalue,positionedaspartofause-inspiredtrajectory,andcontextualizedtoensureplayersmakeconnectionstopersonalandcareergoals.

b) InquiryBased,Journey-Driven-playersarepoweredbyinquiry-based,game-infusedblendedlearningpathwaysdesignedtonurtureanengagedandpurposefullearnerwhoachievespersonally-valuedmilestones.

c) CommunityEnabled,LocallyAdapted-theexperience,whilebasedoncarefullycuratedcontent,canbecustomized,adapted,andexpandedtoensureplayersuccess,communityvoice,andlocalrelevance.

Oncewehadstakeholderalignmentonapproach,thenextstepwastocreatelearningpathwaysandbuildoutaplatformthatembodiedtheseprinciplesandestablishedajourneythroughwhichplayerswouldgrowtheability,confidence,andcommitmenttoimplementproject-basedlearningintheirclassroom.Whilebeyondthescopeofthispapertofullydeconstructthecurriculumorplatformelements,sufficetosaythatthecoreconceptsthatstakeholdersaimedtocommunicateweretranslatedintothreeQuest-lineswithnestedmissionsandchallenges.An

Figure3:LearningPlatformwithQuests,Missions,andChallenges

importantchallenge,however,wastoleveragethedesignedjourneystorylinesoitwasownedbytheplayer,atthesametimeprovidingenoughconstraintthatplayerswouldlikelyseethemselvesofcapableofandinvestedinimplementingproject-basedlearningintheirclassrooms(seeFigure3forascreenshotofoneQuestandmissionscreen,focusedonactionablefeedback).

Experiencedasinquiry-basedQuests,teachersembarkonavirtualJourneybeginningbyexploringquestionssuchas“Whyproject-basedapproaches?”andworkingthroughthe“pain-points”viadialoguewithmentorcharacters,curatedresources,andpeerinteractions.TheJourneythenmovesintothesecondQuest,focusedonthe“nutsandbolts”ofdesign,assessment,andimplementationallthewhileencouragingreflectioninitiallywithvirtualpeers,andthentranscendingintorealpeerinteractions.Particularlearningchallengesleveragemultiplemodalitiesandrangefromanalyzingteacherstories,tocompletingmini-games,tocomparingemerginginsightswiththoseofavirtualmentor.WhilethefinalQuestfocusesonprojectimplementationstrategies,throughoutthejourneyteachersengagereal-worldrelevantlearningactivitiesand“systemunlocks"focusedonapplyingemergingunderstandingstoreal-worldpractice.Designgoalsincludedprovidinganengagingcurriculumthatstructureslearningasacombinationofaspirationalgoals,alongsidecarefullysequencedself-directedandfacilitatedactivitiesdesignedtocultivatethecriticaldispositionsandessentialliteraciesnecessarytoimplementeffectiveprojectsintheclassroom.

Whilebuildingcuratedgrowthpathwaysthathighlightedadifferentcomponentsofproject-basedlearningwasimportant,akeyelementwastousevirtualgamecharacterstoframeanarrativethatsupportedplayersinconnectingtheseskillstoreal-worldscenariosandchallenges(seeFigure4).Arelatedchallengewastobalancetellingwithinviting,withthegoalofleavingenoughinterpretivespacearoundtheideassuchthatplayerscouldowntrajectories,meanings,andextensions.Intermsofwhatcountsasausefulclaim,weworkedtoprovidemomentsinwhichplayersproducedtheirownclaimsonwhatwasalegitimatecharacterizationalongsideexpertclaimsprovidedbythesystem.Forexample,atonepointtheplayerisencouragedtoexaminecompiledstoriesfromothercommunitymemberstoidentifyprojectcharacteristics;inthenextlearningchallenge,sheisexpectedtocompareherlistwiththelargerbodyofliteratureandthosegeneratedbyavirtualmentor.Inotherchallenges,the

Figure4:StoriedPositioningofLearningContent

playerlearnsaboutsomeofthebarriersthatpreventteachersfromengagingproject-basedlearning,andthenengagesaninterviewwithareluctantteacherinwhichhertasktoselectdialoguechoicesthatweightthebenefitsofproject-basedlearningagainstthebarriers.Tofurthersupportownership,choice,andlocalapplication,“systemunlocks”werealsocreatedtosupplementthecarefully-sequencedlearningpathwaysbecomingavailableasplayerlevels-uptheirskillsandinvolveapplyingcorelearningconceptstoalocalreal-worldsituation.

Afinalaspectofthecurriculumisthat,whilethesystemcanprovidesomeexpertmodelsandplayerscangeneratetheirowninterpretations,acoreassumptionwasthatcollaborating,mentoring,andsharingamongmemberswouldprovidedeepandrelevantinsightsfortheplayer.Thatis,wewantedtoleverageaconnectedlearningframework(Ito,2010)inwhicheachmemberhasthepotentialtoprovidenewappliedstories;therebycontinuallyincreasingtheknowledgeintheecosystemandeffectivelycrowd-sourcingthecollectiveunderstandingofthecoreideasboundupintotheinnovation.Further,asplayerssharedstories,membershadaccesstoappliedopportunitiesthatostensiblyhademergedoutofanothermember’sprocessofengagement,foresight,andintegration.Whileothercommunitymemberscanprovideusefulinsightsandapplications,akeybeliefwasthatfacilitatorscouldalsoplayasignificantrole,modifying,adapting,andexistinglearningexperiences,highlightingtheimportantofafacilitatortoolkitthroughwhichtheseskilledandexperiencedmentorscouldprovideinsightandpushdeeperlearning.

Thesemovesareconsistentwithemergingmeta-studiesongamesanimpactinwhichhavefoundthatgamesweremoreeffectivethantraditionalmethodsintermsofachievingimpactgoals,especiallywhen(a)supplementedwithotherinstructionmethods,(b)multipletrainingsessionswereinvolved,and(c)playersworkedingroups(Wouters,Nimwegen,Oostendorp,&Spek,2013).Ourdesiretoswitchfromaboundedgametowhatismoreofagamifiedlearnerengagementsystemalsocapturesthenotionthattheinnovationmediumshouldmatchtheimpactgoals,afindingconsistentwiththemeta-analysisconductedbyClark,Tanner-Smith,andKillingsworth(2014)inwhichtheyfoundthatcertaingamestructuresweremoreorlesseffectiveforcertainoutcomes,eachleveragingparticularmechanicsandaffordancesthatshouldbethoughtfullyalignedtotheparticularlearninggoals.

Acriticalchallengethatremainsforusinthisworkisthesolvingthechallengeofjourney“ownership”forparticipants.Inotherwords:Howdoweempowerourparticipantstoviewoursystem,aswellasthefeedbackandlearningexperiencesitaimstoprovide,aspropellingthemforwardontheirownpersonaljourneys,asopposedtoviewingtheir“completion”ofthedesignedsystempathwayasthejourneyitself.Here,whilewerecognizethetimeandenergyhavingbeeninvestedinbuildinganenablingsystemthatpositionsthelearningexperienceasa“journey,”wealsorecognizethatthequestionof“Whosejourneyisit?”hasyettobeaddressedinawaythatplayersconceptualizethemselvesasdesignersoftheirownlearningjourneys.Ifwearetrulycommittedtorespectingandempoweringour

participantsthroughtheconceptofinterpretivespace,itisaquestionwecannottakelightlyaswemovetoscaleourinnovationsforbroaderimpact.Wealsothinkthesolutiontothisdilemmaofinvitation,andhowwebuildstructurewithoutunderminingownership,isnotsimplyatechnologicalproblem,butonethatwillrequireculturalexpectationsandultimatelyrequiretheanswercomefromthelearnerherself.

Beyondthecommitmenttoallowingforaninterpretivespacethroughwhichplayerscouldengageinanticipatoryaction,theworkdemonstratesanecologicalcommitmentwithanequalfocusonproducingadesignedproduct,enablinganimpact-agent,empoweringskilledfacilitators,andgrowingoutcome-centricgoals.Moregenerally,themodelinAppendixArequiresmovingbeyonddesignprinciples,butalsolookingattheshiftfrompedagogytopractice(part2),withalargeportionofourcurrentworknowfocusingonhowwereducebarriersandeffectivelyenableteachersandorganizationstoadoptandintegratetheinnovationaspartoftheirgoals.Forexample,supportingregionaltrainingagenciesandinternationaltrainingagenciestakingownershipoftheimplementationprocessastheysupportteachersintheirlocalconstituenciesleveragingtheplatformtoimprovetheirlocalpractice.Lastly,isthethirdcomponentofpartnership(part3,AppendixA)inwhichthefocusisonmovingfrompracticetoscaledimpact—afuturestageinourpartnershipjourney.DesigningforImpact

Ingamesforimpact,oranyotherinnovationarea,manydesignersarealltoowillingtorelegateemancipatorypowerstothetechnologies,asopposedtoseeingtheinnovationasresidinginthehead,hands,andheartsofthoseindividualswhoengage,adapt,andintegratetheideasboundupintheinnovationtobringaboutdesiredends.Infact,thereisoftenanaïveassumptionthatifweclearlydefinethestructureandworthofthecontent,learnerswillvaluetheappliedconnectionsandengagethenecessaryadaptationsinsituationswhereitisrelevant.Or,evenmoreproblematic,istheassumptionthatthereexistsa“technologicfix”tosomeofthecomplexoutcomesthatrequireactiveindividuals,skilledfacilitators,andenablingecosystemsworkingtogetherwithin,enabledby,andbeyondthedesignedproducts.Forexample,whenonefocusesonissuesofhealth,discrimination,orusingproject-basedlearning,anddoessowithanagendatohelppeoplethriveintheseareas,itisquiteunlikelythatatechnologicalfixwillprovesufficientforachievingmeaningfulimpact.Incontrast,whatisbeingadvancedinthischapterisanecologicalreformulationoflearning,ofinnovation,andofhowoneoptimizesforimpact;itinvolvesashiftfromamodeloftransmissiontooneoftransformation,throughmeaningfulparticipationandanticipatoryaction.

So,forexample,ifthefocusoftheinnovationisonahealthylifestyle,asmarttechnologicaldevicecanremindtheplayertostandup,toexercisemore,orevenprovidefeedbackonone’sdiet.Onecouldindeedemploygamificationtechniquestomotivateandrewardpositivebehaviors,orevenpunishundesirablebehaviorswhilethe“treatment”isbeing

applied,andappeartomeetwithsomesuccess.However,noneoftheseproduct-centrictechniquesarelikelytoleadtosustainablechangeunlessthereisafundamentalshiftinwhichtheplayerbecomesinvestedintheoutcome,envisionsthegamescoresassupportingtheirgoalrealization,andispartofanecosystem,possiblyevenconnectstomentorsorjoinsacommunity,thatsupportsthem.Thisfundamentallyhumanisticargumentisnotintendedasacritiqueofthepoweroftechnology,butsimplytosaythatwhenoneadoptsathriveperspectiveinwhichlearningmustbeenacted,thenweneedtoexpandourviewofwhatconstitutestheinnovation.

Acentralthesisthatunderliesourworkisthis:Torealizetransformativeimpactatanylevelrequiresanoutcome-centricdesignprocess,andisunlikelytoberealizedifthedesignteamismoreenamoredwiththeirdesigns(design-centric)thanwhatindividualsareusingthemtoaccomplish.Infact,itisquitecommontotreatthedesignedinnovationascontainingasolutionthathasthepotentialtoproducedosomethingfortheindividualasopposedtoincollaborationwiththoseindividualsandsystemstobeimpacted.Inparticular,thefocusofthismanuscriptisoninnovationsdesignedtobringaboutaspecificoutcomeinrelationtoaproblematicissue.Designs,whenfocusedonenablingotherstorealizelocalgoals,areless‘solutions,’andmorewhatPendletonandBrown(2015)refertoas“provisionalhypotheses,”whosevalueresidesintheachievementstheyenablenotthestructurestheydeliver.Consistentwiththeprovisionalhypothesisconstruct,andtheagiledevelopmentmethodologiesmentionedbelow,ourworkinvolvesgroundingthedesignchoicesinatheoryofchange,focusedonrealizinganimpactgoal,andgroundedinparticulardesignassumptions.

Suchworkislessaboutinstrumentalproblemsolving,andmoreaboutdistributedaccomplishmentacrosstheaspirationalgoals,thedesignedproduct,theintegrationchallenges,allinthehopeofprovidingsustainableandscalableimpact.Consistentwithworkinthelearningsciences,thisapproachisoftenreferredtoasdesignexperiments,design-basedresearch,ordesign-basedimplementationresearch(Barab,2015;Brown,1992).Penuel,Fishman,Cheng,andSabelli(2012,p.15)statethatsuchworkhasfourkeyelements:“(a)afocusonpersistentproblemsofpracticefrommultiplestakeholders’perspectives;(b)acommitmenttoiterative,collaborativedesign;(c)aconcernwithdevelopingtheoryrelatedtobothclassroomlearningandimplementationthroughsystematicinquiry;and(d)aconcernwithdevelopingcapacityforsustainingchangeinsystems.”Suchworktakesplaceinnaturalisticcontexts,andwhilemuchoftheliteraturepositionsthemethodologyasusefulforadvancingtheory,myfocushasbeenuse-inspired(Stokes,1963)learningexperienceswherelearnersarecontinuallyconnectingwhatisbeinglearnedtowhattheycandowithit.Above,someofthepedagogicalprinciplesandcoreassumptionsaboutwhereinnovationneedstolivewerediscussed,belowaresomegeneralguidepostsorareasthatteamsmustconsiderwhenbuildinginnovationsforimpact.

StakeholderAlignment.Whilesomedesignworkisoftenunderthedirectionofone

individualorasmallteam,oftentheworkinvolvesmultiplestakeholderseachwithdifferentagendasandperspectives.Therefore,akeychallengeistofocustheworkinamannerthatalignsmultiplestakeholdersandagendasincludingthosethatmayappeardisruptivetosomeofthestakeholders(Donaldson&Preston,1995).Itinvolvescarefulconsiderationofmultiplevoices,questioningassumptions,andclarifyinginformalandimplicitbeliefsaswellaskeyvaluesofthework(Knight,Cutcher-Gershenfeld,&Mittleman,2015).Aspartofthisprocess,itisquiteusefultogroundclaimsinpreviousrelatedwork(i.e.,conductingalandscapeanalysis)andwithintheneedsofthetargetpopulation(i.e.,needsanalysis).Itiscommontojumpdirectlyintothedesign,but,instead,itcanprovequiteusefultoleveragethisinitialprobleminterrogationtoproducea“logicmodel”thatguidesdesigndecisions.Alogicmodelrepresentsanarticulationoftheconnectionsamongdesigndecisions,participantactivities,andexpectedoutcomes,potentiallyprovidingaroadmapforthework(KelloggFoundation,2001;Taylor-Powell,Jones,&Henert,2008).

AgileDevelopment.Fromthisfoundation,oneshouldthenfocusonbuildingoutavisionofwhatcouldbe(Pendelton&Brown,2015),aprocessthatinvolvesengagementandforesight,aswellasimaginingfuturepossiblescenarios(Zander&Zander,2015).Barben,Fisher,Selin,andGuston(2008,p.986)discussdiversemethodologiessuchas“lifecycleassessment,Delphistudies,cross-impactassessment,future-orientedbibliometrics,andnovelswaysofperformingtechnologyassessment”asusefulforbuildingforesight.Aspossibilitiesareresonatingwiththevariousstakeholders,rapidprototypingcanalsoproveuseful,butthefocusshouldbeonbuildingvisionsofwhatcouldbeandnotsimplyondesignfeatures.Asdesignworkbegins,weleverageagiledesignmethodologiesthatrespondtoemergingfeedback,shiftingpriorities,evolvingtheories,andopportunisticimplementations.Becauseofthisshiftinglandscape,itisincrediblyimportanttohaveadesignprocessandproductionrigorortheteamrunstheriskofiterating,atthesametimeuserfeedbackisbeingintegrated.Further,itisimperativethatoneembracesaparticipatorydesignprocess(Gaver,1996;Sanday,1998;Schuler&Namioka,1993;Schwen,Godrum,&Dorsey,1993;Wasson,2000)thatcontinuallyengagesparticipantinputwithageneralbiastowardswhatReis(2012),andothersassociatedwiththeleanstartupmovement,refertoascustomerdevelopmentratherthanproductdevelopment.Here,thegoalisonputtingtheworkinfrontofactualusers,testingearlyandoftenwithfeedinginsightsbackintosubsequentdesigniterationstobetestedwithanemphasislessonfeaturesandmoreonuserexperience(Maurya,2012).

EcosystemIntegration.Importantly,evenwhileembracingaparticipatorydesignprocesswithfrequenttesting,ecosystemintegrationneedstobetreatedasaseparatechallenge.Here,thenotionisthattheinnovationlivesintheimplementation,withfidelitybeinglessaboutwhethertheimplementationmatchesdesignerintentions,butmoreabouthowthedisruptivepossibilitiescometobeintegratedintoplayer,facilitatorandlargerecosystemgoals.Itisabouthowdisruptivetoolsgiveriseto,andbecomecomponentsof,

‘disruptivesystems’whoseconfigurationisjointlydeterminedbymultiplecomponentscontinuallyrespondingandevolvingtomeettheimpactneeds.Ononelevel,theecosystemincludesthelifetrajectoryoftheplayeritself,andthe“innovation”shouldbeintroducedatapointinwhichitisconnectedtoexistingorpossiblelifegoals.Atanotherlevel,ecosystemintegrationinvolvesthebroadernetworkofpeersavailableandenthusiastictodeconstructandapplythelessons,helpingtolocalizethecoreideasinrelationtolocalecosystemneeds.Atitscore,itisaboutempoweringthecommunitytoadapt,integrate,andextendthedesignitself,aswellasthepossibilitiesitengenders.Inaveryrealway,itishereinthelocalintegrationwhereimpactoccursordoesnot.

ScalingImpact.Thislastguidepostneedstobeconsideredatthebeginning,whetheraspartofalogicmodelintermsofone’stheoryofchange,oraleancanvasframeworkifoneistryingtoensurethereissustainablebusinessmodelonthebackendtothework(Maurya,2012).Often,businessmodelsareanafterthought,andthenitbecomesdifficulttopivot,andfundingmightbeusedup.Regardless,havingaplanforsustainingandscalingtheworkisessential,andanimportantcomponentofdesigningimpactinnovationslikelytobringaboutsustainableandscalableoutcomes.Therefore,wehavefounditessentialtoexploredouble-bottomline(impactandprofit)frameworksorsomemightprefer“impact-friendlybusiness”models(Bornstein,2007;Rodin&Brandenburg,2014).Beyondthefinancialmodelofscaling,thereisalsothepedagogicalchallengesofothersbeinglikelytoproducemeaningfulimplementationswhenmuchofthe“innovation”isexpectedtocomefromthe“nodes”themselves.For,itisonethingwhentheproductisexpectedtoproducethechange,orthebrandisdictatedfromsomecentralcore,andquiteanotherwhentheimpactis“invitational”withtheexpectationthatthoseattheimplementationsiteswillmeaningfullyoccupytaketakeownershipofaninterpretivespaceandengageinthetypeofanticipatoryactionnecessarythathasbeenadvocatedhere.Thisinvolvesongoingoptimizationintermsofmeasuringandimprovingsocialimpacts(Epstein&Yuthas,2014),andfiguringouthowtocontinuallyfeedlessonslearnedandmodelreconciliationsbackintothecommunity,evenwhileensuringfidelityisaboutlocalintegrity,notstandardization.InspiringFuturePossibilities

Inthismanuscript,wecommitourselvestotheconvictionthatinnovationforimpactshouldnotbethoughtofasproduct-centricinnovationsfocusedonoutputs,norsimplyasaservice-centricinvitation,butinsteadneedtobeenlistedasonecomponentofanoutcome-centricframeworkinwhichimplementationpartners(whethersystemadministrators,learningfacilitators,ortheplayersthemselves)areenabledtore-interpretcorelessonsintermsoftheirlocalapplication.Thisprocessisan‘insidejob’thatrequirestheplayertodeveloptheability(relevantskillsandknowledge),confidence(believetheycanbesuccessful),andcommitment(desireordispositiontotry)to‘lean-forward’andtakeownershipforherowntransformation,

findingopportunitiestoapplythecontenttoachievegreatthingsinherworld—notsimplythatofthedesigner.Thechallengeisinhowourdesignsshareagencyandmeaning,allowingtheplayertoco-determinestructureandimpactwithoursystem,witheachotherandwiththecontextsofimplementation.

Inthismodel,impactisnotaforcethatanindividualoraninnovationcauseswithinanother,itisapotentialrealizedinpartnershipwiththosebeingimpactedwhoultimatelymustown,adapt,andadvance.Inotherwords,impactisaninvitationalandnon-linearphenomenon,ajointaccomplishment,withthedesigned‘intervention’providingonepieceoftheinitialconditionsthroughwhichthe‘impactecosystem’canrealizemoreadvancedwaysofbeingandbecoming.Thismodelisincontrasttoprogramsthat,evenimplicitly,treatimpactashavingoccurredwhentheplayeracquiresthedesigners’contentormessage.Inourframework,impactislessabouthowtheimplementationmatchesthedesigner’sintent,andinsteadishowwellthedesigninvitesfacilitatorsandplayerstotransformtheirlocalsituation.

Thisframeworkisinvitational,inwhichthegame-enabledserviceisapropositionorinvitationextendedtotheimpact-agentwhomustaccepttheinvitationasacontractandcommittohisorherparticipationiftheoutcomegoalsaretoberealized.Thisimpact-centricframeworkassumesthattransformativeimpactisadistributedphenomenon,oftenunlockedandenabledbyaninnovation,butultimatelyneedstobeownedbythosewhomtheinnovationisdesignedtoempower.Whileitsinfinitelyeasiertopredetermine“answers”anduse-scenariostotheproductswedesign,ifwetrulywanttransformativeoutcomeswehavetoenabletheplayersthemselves—embracingahuman-centricframeworkthatlooksforimpactnot“atthecore”(inthedesignsweoffer),but“atthenodes”(whereplayersreside).Thecoreinnovation,tobetrulytransformative,mustlightapassionwithinthosetobeimpactedsothattheychoosetocontinuallyrecreateitspotentialinrelationtoeachnewsituationsinwhichthecoreideascouldbetransformative.

Viewingimpactasasharedaccomplishment,supportedbydesignersoftheinnovation,butultimatelyrealizedinpartnershipwiththe‘impact-agent’inrelationtotheirecosystemneedsandpossibilities,isashiftthatrequiresabeliefinthepotentialofallindividualstorealizegreatthings.Thislevelofachievementdoesnothappeninavacuum,butisapropertyofasystem,requiringthatlearnersasengagedinnovatorsworkwithskilledfacilitatorsandsupportiveecosystemstoadapt,apply,andextendthecorelessonstolocalcircumstances.Suchaperspectivehasimplicationsforwhatisbeingdesigned,howoneconceptualizestheworkthedesigndoes,andthedesignprocessesthatisleveraged.Ilookforwardtohowothersembraceadistributed,orecological,frameworkforconceptualizingwhatisinnovationandhowinnovationcanbestbeleveragedtohelpallpeoplerealizeoutcomesthatmattertothem.

ReferencesBarab,S.A.,Dodge,T.,Ingram-Goble,A.,Volk,C.,Peppler,K.,Pettyjohn,P.,&Solomou,M.

(2010).Pedagogicaldramasandtransformationalplay:Narratively-richgamesforlearning.Mind,Culture,andActivity17(3),235–264.

Barab,S.A.,Gresalfi,M.S.,&Ingram-Goble,A.(2010).Transformationalplay:Usinggamestopositionperson,content,andcontext.EducationalResearcher,39(7),525-536.

Barab,S.A.,Pettyjohn,P.,Gresalfi,M.,Volk,C.,&Solomou,M.(2012).Game-basedcurriculumandtransformationalplay:Designingtomeaningfullypositioningperson,content,andcontext.Computers&Education,5,518-533.

Barab,S.A.,Zuiker,S.,Warren,S.,Hickey,D.,Ingram-Goble,A.,Kwon,E-J.,Kouper,I.,&Herring,S.C.(2007).Situationallyembodiedcurriculum:Relatingformalismstocontexts.ScienceEducation,91(5),750-592.

BarbenD,FisherE,SelinCandGustonDH(2008)Anticipatorygovernanceofnanotechnology:Foresight,engagement,andintegration.In:HackettEJ,AmsterdamskaO,LynchMandWajcmanJ(eds)TheHandbookofScienceandTechnologyStudies.Cambridge,MA:TheMITPress,pp.979–1000.

Bornstein,D.(2007).Howtochangetheworld:Socialentrepreneursandthepowerofnewideas.OxfordUniversityPress.

Bransford,J.,Brown,A.,&Cocking,R.(2000).HowPeopleLearn:Brain,Mind,Experience,andSchool.Washington:NationalAcademiesPress.

Brown,A.L.(1992).Designexperiments:Theoreticalandmethodologicalchallengesincreatingcomplexinterventionsinclassroomsettings.TheJournalofTheLearningSciences,2(2),141-178.

Brown,J.S.,&Collins,A.,&Duguid,P.(1989).Situatedcognitionandthecultureoflearning.EducationalResearcher,18,34-41.

Bruner,J.(2002).Makingstories:Law,literature,life.NewYork:Farrar,StrausandGiroux.Clark,C.(1990).Governmentspending,policyoutputs,andpolicyoutcomes:healthpolicy

inYugoslavia.EnvironmentandPlanningC:GovernmentandPolicy,8(2),123-138Clark,D.,Nelson,B.,Sungupta,P.,&D’Angelo,C.(2009,October).Rethinkingscience

learningthroughdigitalgamesandsimulations:Genres,Examples,andEvidence.TheNationalResearchCouncil,WashingtonDC.

D'Amato,J.(1992).Resistanceandcomplianceinminorityclassrooms.InE.Jacob&C.Jordan(Eds.),Minorityeducation:Anthropologicalperspectives(pp.181-207).Norwood,NJ:Ablex.

Dewey,J.(1963).Experience&education.NewYork:CollierMacMillan.(Originalworkpublishedin1938.)

Donaldson,T.,&Preston,L.E.(1995).Thestakeholdertheoryofthecorporation:Concepts,evidence,andimplications.AcademyofmanagementReview,20(1),65-91.

Epstein,M.J.,&Yuthas,K.(2014).Measuringandimprovingsocialimpacts:AGuidefornonprofits,companies,andimpactinvestors.Berrett-KoehlerPublishers.

Gee,J.P.(2003).Whatvideogameshavetoteachusaboutlearning.NewYork:Palgrave.Gee,J.P.,&Hayes,E.R.(2011).Languageandlearninginthedigitalage.Routledge.Gibson,J.J.(1979/1986)Theecologicalapproachtovisualperception.Hillsdale,NJ:

Erlbaum.

Greeno,J.G.(1998).TheSituativityofKnowing,Learning,andResearch.AmericanPsychologist,53(1),5-26.

Gresalfi,M.S.,&Barab,S.A.(2011).Learningforareason:Supportingformsofengagementbydesigningtasksandorchestratingenvironments.TheoryintoPractice,50,300-310.

Guston,D.H.(2014).Understanding‘anticipatorygovernance’.SocialStudiesofScience,44(2)218–242.

Hollifield,J.F..(1986).ImmigrationpolicyinFranceandGermany:Outputsversusoutcomes.AnnalsoftheAmericanAcademyofPoliticalandSocialScience,485,113–128.Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1045445

KelloggFoundation.(2001).Logicmodeldevelopmentguide:Logicmodelstobringtogetherplanning,evaluation&action.BattleCreek,MI:W.K.KelloggFoundation.

Knight,E.,Cutcher-Gershenfeld,J.,&Mittleman,B.(2015).Theartofmanagingcomplexcollaborations.MITSloanManagementReview,57(1),16.

Lave,J.(1988).Cognitioninpractice:Mind,mathematics,andcultureineverydaylife.Cambridge,England:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Lave,J,(1997).Thecultureofacquisitionandthepracticeofunderstanding.InD.Kirshner&1.A.Whitson(Eds.),Situatedcognition:Social,semiotic,andpsychologicalperspectives(pp.17-36).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Inc.

Nathan,M.J.(2005).Rethinkingformalisminformaleducation.SubmittedtoEducationalPsychologist.

Norman,D.A.(1988).TheDesignofEverydayThings.NewYork:BasicBooks.Penuel,W.R.,Confrey,J.,Maloney,A.,&Rupp,A.A.(2014).Designdecisionsindeveloping

learningtrajectories-basedassessmentsinmathematics.JournaloftheLearningSciences,23(1),47-95.

Penuel,W.Fishman,B.,Cheng,B.H.,&Sabelli,N.(2011).Organizingresearchanddevelopmentattheintersectionoflearning,implementation,anddesign.EducationalResearcher,40:331-337.

Reis,E.(2012).Theleanstartup:Howtoday’sentrepreneursusecontinuousinnovationtocreateradicallysuccessfulbusinesses.CrownBusiness:NewYork.

Rodin,J.,&Brandenburg,M.(2014).ThePowerofImpactInvesting:PuttingMarketstoWorkforProfitandGlobalGood.WhartonDigitalPress.

Sarewitz,D.,&Nelson,R.(2008).Threerulesfortechnologicalfixes.Nature,456(7224),871-872.

Sarewitz,D.(2011)Anticipatorygovernanceofemergingtechnologies.InMarchantG.E.,AllenbyB.R.andHerkertJ.R.(eds).TheGrowingGapbetweenEmergingTechnologiesandLegal-EthicalOversight:ThePacingProblem.NewYork:Springer,pp.95–106.

Schuler,D.,&Namioka,A.(Eds.).(1993).Participatorydesign:Principlesandpractices.Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.

Schwen,T.M.,Godrum,D.A.&Dorsey,L.Tl.(1993).OnthedesignofanEnrichedLearningandInformationEnvironment(ELIE).EducationalTechnology,33(11),5-9.

Sfard,A.(1998).Ontwometaphorsforlearningandthedangersofchoosingjustone.EducationalResearcher,27(1),4-13.

Stokes,D.E.(1997).Pasteur’squadrant:Basicscienceandtechnologicalinnovation.BrookingsInstitutionPress.Washington,D.C.

Taylor-Powell,E.,&Henert,E.(2008).Developingalogicmodel:Teachingandtrainingguide.Benefits,3,22.

Wasson,C.(2000).Ethnographyinthefieldofdesign.HumanOrganization,59(4),377-388.Wouters,P.,vanNimwegen,C.,vanOostendorp,H.,&vanderSpek,E.D.(2013).AMeta-

AnalysisoftheCognitiveandMotivationalEffectsofSeriousGames.JournalofEducationalPsychology,105(2),249-265.

AppendixA

THRIVELEARNING

“Becausetimeinvestedinlearningshouldenableustodogreatthings!”

1.UnderlyingPedagogy-Learningisanchoredbyresearch-groundedbestpracticesfoundineffectiveimpact-focused,inquiry-based,game-infusedandcommunity-enabledblendedlearningenvironments…designedtocreateengagedandpurposefullearnerswhoworkindividuallyandcollaborativelyonprojectsthatarepersonallyrelevantandsociallysignificantwiththegoalofhelpingALLindividualsthriveinarapidlychanging,digitallyconnectedworld.Particularemphasisisplacedonthefollowingthreepillars:

a) IMPACT-FOCUSED,PERSONALLYRELEVANT

Contentiscarefullychosentoensurereal-worldvalue,positionedaspartofause-inspiredtrajectory,andcontextualizedtoensureplayersmakeconnectionstopersonalandcareergoals.

• Fosterthecontextualizedknowledge,relevantskillsandabilities,andstoriedachievementsnecessaryforsuccessful21stCenturylivesandcareers;

• Providelearnersengagingchallengesthatconnectlearningtopersonalinterests,lifeandcareergoals,andrealworldunlocks;

• Cultivatetheunderlyingconfidences,neededcommitmentsandcriticaldispositionstothriveinacomplex,rapidlychanging,digitallyconnectedworld.

b) INQUIRYBASED,JOURNEYDRIVEN

Playersarepoweredbyinquiry---based,game---infusedblendedlearningpathwaysdesignedtonurtureanengagedandpurposefullearnerwhoachievespersonalmilestones.

• Scaffoldsuccessthroughcarefullysequenced,blendedlearningpathwayswithcopiousactionablefeedbacktosupportplayerstosucceedontheirjourney;

• Provideinquirychallengesusingmultiplemodalitiesandadelicatebalancingofchallengesandrewardstomaintainanengagedandpurposefullearner;

• Designopportunitiestoapply/practicewithinvirtualandrealworldsettingsthatprovideplayerssafefeedbackinrelationtoindividualchoices.

c) COMMUNITYENABLED,LOCALLYADAPTED

Theexperience,whilebasedoncarefullycuratedcontent,canbecustomized,adapted,andexpandedtoensureplayersuccess,communityvoice,andlocalrelevance.

• Motivatecollaboration,mentoring,andsharingamongacommunityofenthusiastssupportingeachplayercompeteswiththeirbetterselves;

• Empowerfacilitatorstomodify,extend,andadaptexperienceinrelationtoplayerandcommunityneedswithafocusonecosystemintegration.

• Providecopiousandaccessibledatasothatindividualsandthecommunitycancontinuallyoptimizethesystemforsustainedandscaledimpact.

Note:Itisimportanttorecognizethatnoneoftheparticularprinciplesornestedsubpointsarenecessarilynew,butcollectivelythewaytheinteractiswhatrepresentsthepotentialoftheThriveconcept,andespeciallytheirpositioningasenablingandnotcausinglearnergrowth.

2.FromPedagogytoPractice-Learningisenabledbyproductsandservicesthatreducebarriersandeffectivelyenableteachersandorganizationstoimplementtheirinnovationexperience.Particularemphasisisplacedon:

a) REDUCEFRICTIONFORDISCOVERYANDADOPTION

Ensuretherearestrongexemplarsthathighlighthowresearchandpedagogycantransitionintoproductsandservicesthatcanbediscoveredandimplementedbyanyteacheracrossdiverselearningcontextsb) ENSURELOCALECOSYSTEMINTEGRATION

Ensureteachersandotherstakeholderscaneasilyadopt,adaptandextendcurriculumtoenableproductorservicetomeetlocalneeds,contextandclassroomconfigurationsc) ADDRESSACLEARNEED

Ensureproductorserviceistunedtofillaclearneedthatreplacestimeormoneyintheclassroom;ideallybecominga‘musthave’vs.a‘nicetohave’.

Note:Itisimportanttorecognizethatthereisalargegapbetweenstrongtheoryandeffectiveimplementationoftheoryinpracticeandthatthereareenormouschallengesinbothdevelopingeffectiveinquiry,experientialandgame-basedlearningcurriculumandimplementingacrossdiverseecosystemsandaudiences.

3.FromPracticetoScaledImpact-Learningissupportedbyacommunityofcurriculumdesigners,teachers,administrators,learnersandotherstakeholderswhohaveaccesstotheresearch,tools,frameworksanddistributiontocreate,releaseandimplementtheirinnovationexperience:

a) CREATIONENGINESANDENABLINGSERVICES

Ensuringthereexistsengines,tools,andframeworksthatcanhelpcurriculumcreatorsmanagethechallengesofintegratingbestpracticesaroundresearch,technology,designanddistributionofinquiry-based,game-infused,blendedlearningb) PUBLISHINGECOYSTEMANDCOMMUNITY

Ensuringthereisopportunityforallcreatorsofinquiry-based,game-infused,blendedlearningtoindividuallyandcollectivelybuildinnovations,solvechallenges,mentorpeers,andsharebestpractices.c) DATAANALYTICSWITHRESEARCHLOOPSEnsuringthereexistsrichdataanalyticsincludingusepatterns,communityoptimizationsandimpactstoriesthatcanbeleveragedtoiteratethetools,engines,andframeworks,tobuildnewcurriculumandmoreeffectiveimplementationmodelssothatthecommunitycanachievesustainableandscalableoutcomes.

Note:Itisimportanttonotethattherewon’tbesystemicchangesandscaledimpactthroughahandfulofindividualsolutionsbutratherthroughacommunityofpracticethathastheresearch-groundedpedagogicalframeworks,toolsandtechnologyanddistributioncapabilitythatcanbecontinuallyadaptedandextendedtomeetthedemandsofacomplex,continuallychangingeducationalandglobalecosystem.