To Örebro University

Military organisations have a long history of using games for training. Over the years, they have developed training practices involving role-play, simulations, puckstering and gaming. Most researchers in serious games, i.e. games used for non-entertainment purposes, focus their studies on the learners. This licentiate thesis, instead, takes a closer look on the roles of instructors in game-based training situations, specifically at the Swedish Land Warfare Centre. Through a mix of theoretical and empirical studies, training practices were scrutinised, resulting in a framework for gamebased vocational training. A key element of this framework is the coaching by gaming perspective in which instructors give un-intrusive, formative feedback through role-play and gameplay. Another important aspect of the framework involves dynamic debriefing. These insights points to specific needs for system support for instructors involved in game-based training. They also emphasise the fact that serious gaming is a highly contextualised activity made up of more than the game and the players.

Military organizations have a long history of using simulations, role-play and games for training. This also encompasses good practices concerning how instructors utilize games and gaming behavior. Unfortunately, the work of instructors is rarely described explicitly in research relating to serious gaming. Decision makers also tend to have overconfidence in the pedagogical power in games and simulations, where the instructor is taken out of the gaming loop. We propose a framework, the coaching cycle, that focuses on the roles of instructors. The roles include instructors acting as game players. The fact that the instructors take a more active part in all training activities will further improve learning. The coaching cycle integrates theories of experiential learning (where action precedes theory) and deliberate practice (where the trainee’s skill is constantly challenged by a coach). Incorporating a coaching by gaming perspective complicates, but also strengthens, the player-centered design approach to game development in that you need to take into account two different types of players: trainees and instructor. Furthermore, we argue that the coaching cycle allows for a shift of focus to more thorough debriefing, since it implies that learning of theoretical material before simulation/game playing is kept to a minimum. This shift will increase the transfer of knowledge.