In recent years, playful design environments and digital games have been offering increasingly accessible programming tools and integrated editors, significantly expanding opportunities for the creation and sharing of user-generated content. These practices have engendered the diffusion of participatory online environments in which users present, discuss, and critique their creations. This study analyzes one of these design-driven environments dedicated to game levels created with the popular series LittleBigPlanet. Findings suggest that participants interact guided by their desire to become skilled designers and be recognized as such by their peers. To do so, they enact situated discursive functions that entail a pervasive use of specialist language, the formation of shared design references, and the valorization of new forms of originality based on remixing and intertextuality. By engaging in multimodal practices in a competent community of peer designers, participants create a safe “discursive studio” that offers a multiplicity of trajectories for learning and creativity.
AmabileT. M. (1983). Social psychology of creativity: A componential conceptualization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 357–376. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.45.2.357
2.
BaerJ.KaufmanJ. C. (2012). Being creative inside and outside the classroom. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
BlackR. W. (2008). Adolescents and online fan fiction. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
5.
BusterK.CrawfordP. (2007). The critique handbook. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
6.
CazdenC. (1981). Performance before competence: Assistance to child discourse in the zone of proximal development. Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition, 3, 5–8.
7.
DarracottJ. (1991). Art criticism: A user’s guide. London, England: Bellew Pub.
8.
DuncanS. C. (2010). Gamers as designers: A framework for investigating design in gaming affinity spaces. E-Learning and Digital Media, 7, 21–34. doi:10.2304/elea.2010.7.1.21
9.
DuncanS. C. (2012). Kongregating online: Developing design literacies in a play-based affinity space. In HayesE. R.DuncanS. C. (Eds.), Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 51–83). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
10.
DuncanS. C.HayesE. R. (2012). Expanding the affinity space: An introduction. In HayesE. R.DuncanS. C. (Eds.), Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 1–22). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
11.
DurgaS. (2012) Learning to mod in an affinity-based modding community. In HayesE. R.DuncanS. C (Eds.), Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 84–102). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
12.
EdwardsD. (1994). Script formulations: An analysis of event descriptions in conversation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 13, 211–247. doi:10.1177/0261927X94133001
13.
EdwardsD. (1995). Two to tango: Script formulations, dispositions, and rhetorical symmetry in relationship troubles talk. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28, 319–350. doi:10.1207/s15327973rlsi2804_1
14.
EllcessorE.DuncanS. C. (2011). Forming the guild: Star power and rethinking projective identity in affinity spaces. International Journal of Game-Based Learning, 1, 82–95. doi:10.4018/ijgbl.2011040106
15.
ElverdamC.AarsethE. (2007). Game classification and game design: Construction through critical analysis. Games and Culture, 2, 3–22.
16.
FischerG. (2004). Social creativity: Turning barriers into opportunities for collaborative design. In De CindioF.SchulerD. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference (PDC’04) July 27–31. (pp. 152–161). Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto.
17.
FischerG.GiaccardiE.EdenH.SugimotoM.YeY. (2005). Beyond binary choices: Integrating individual and social creativity. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 63, 482–512. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.04.014
18.
GamesI. A. (2010). Gamestar mechanic: Learning a designer mindset through communicational competence with the language of games. Learning, Media and Technology, 35, 31–52. doi:10.1080/17439880903567774
19.
GeeJ. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York, NY: Routledge.
20.
GeeJ. P. (2005). Semiotic social spaces and affinity spaces: From the age of mythology to today’s schools. In BartonD.TustingK. (Eds.), Beyond communities of practice: Language power and social context. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
21.
GeeJ. P. (2007). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
22.
GeeJ. P. (2010). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
23.
GeeJ. P. (2012). Afterword. In HayesE. R.DuncanS. C. (Eds.), Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 235–241). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
24.
HallidayM. A. K.MatthiessenC. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (3rd ed.). London, England: Hodder Arnold.
HayesE. R. (2008). Game content creation and it proficiency: An exploratory study. Computers & Education, 51, 97–108. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.002
27.
HayesE. R.GamesI. A. (2008). Making computer games and design thinking. Games and Culture, 3, 309–332.
28.
HayesE. R.LeeY. N. (2012). Specialist language acquisition and trajectories of IT learning in a Sims fan site. In HayesE. R.DuncanS. C (Eds.), Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 186–211). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
29.
HunterB. (2002). Learning in the virtual community depends upon changes in local communities. In RenningerK. A.ShumarW. (Eds.), Building virtual communities: Learning and change in cyberspace (pp. 96–126). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
30.
JenkinsH.PurushotmaR.WeigelM.ClintonK.RobisonA. J. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31.
John-SteinerV. (2000). Creative collaboration. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
32.
JohnsonR. S. (2013). Toward greater production diversity: Examining social boundaries at a video game studio. Games and Culture, 8, 136–160.
33.
JonassenD. H.LandS. M. (2000). Theoretical foundations of learning environments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34.
KafaiY. B. (1995). Minds in play: Computer game design as a context for children’s learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
35.
KafaiY. B. (2006). Playing and making games for learning: Instructionist and constructionist perspectives for game studies. Games and Culture, 1, 36–40.
36.
KafaiY. B.ResnickM. (Eds.). (1996). Constructionism in practice, New York, NY: Laurence Erlbaum Associates.
37.
KobergD.BagnallJ. (1991). The universal traveler: A soft-systems guide to creativity, problem-solving, & the process of reaching goals. Menlo Park, CA: Crisp Publications.
38.
LammersJ. C. (2012). “Is the Hangout…The Hangout?” Exploring tensions in an online gaming-related fan site. In HayesE. R.DuncanS. C. (Eds.), Learning in video game affinity spaces (pp. 23–50). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
39.
LammersJ. C.CurwoodJ. S.MagnificoA. M. (2012). Toward an affinity space methodology: Considerations for literacy research. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 11, 44–58.
40.
LankshearC.KnobelM. (2007). A new literacies sampler. New York, NY: Peter Lang.
41.
LauwaertM. (2007). Challenge everything? Construction play in will wright’s SIMCITY. Games and Culture, 2, 194–212.
42.
LaveJ. (1990). The culture of acquisition and the practice of understanding. In StiglerJ. W.ShwederR. A.HerdtG. (Eds.), Cultural psychology (pp. 259–286). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
43.
LaveJ.WengerE. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
44.
LeeY. (2008). Design participation tactics: The challenges and new roles for designers in the co-design process. CoDesign, 4, 31–50. doi:10.1080/15710880701875613
45.
OwensT. (2011). Modding the history of science: Values at play in modder discussions of Sid Meier’s Civilization. Simulation & Gaming, 42, 481–495. doi:10.1177/1046878110366277
46.
PeräkyläA. (2005). Analyzing talk and text. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 695–727). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
47.
PotterJ. (1997). Discourse analysis as a way of analyzing naturally occurring talk. In SilvermanD. (Ed.), Qualitative research: Theory, method and practice (pp. 144–160). London, England: Sage.
48.
ResnickL. B. (1987). Learning in school and out. Educational Researcher, 16, 13–54. doi:10.3102/0013189X016009013
49.
ResnickM. (2008). StarLogo TNG. Cambridge, MA: Media Laboratory and Teacher Education Program, MIT. Retrieved fromhttp://education.mit.edu/starlogo
50.
ResnickM.MaloneyJ.Monroy-HernandezA.RuskN.EastmondE.BrennanK.…KafaiY. (2009). Scratch: Programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52, 60–67.
51.
RogoffB. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In WertschJ. V.Del RioP.AlvarezA. (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139–164). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
52.
SantoroS. W. (2013). Guide to graphic design. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
53.
SawyerR. K.DeZutterS. (2009). Distributed creativity: How collective creations emerge from collaboration. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 81–92. doi:10.1037/a0013282
54.
SchegloffE. A. (1996). Confirming allusions: Towards an empirical account of action. American Journal of Sociology, 102, 161–217. doi:10.1086/230911
55.
SchönD. A. (1988). Designing: Rules, types and worlds. Design Studies, 9, 181–190. doi:10.1016/0142-694X(88)90047-6
56.
SchönD. A. (1992). Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Knowledge-Based Systems, 5, 3–14. doi:10.1016/0950-7051(92)90020-G
57.
ScrivenerS. A. R. (2005). Editorial. CoDesign, 1, 1–4. doi:10.1080/15710880412331289935
58.
Seely BrownJ.CollinsA.DuguidP. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18, 32–42. doi:10.3102/0013189X018001032
59.
SotamaaO. (2010). When the game is not enough: Motivations and practices among computer game modding culture. Games and Culture, 5, 239–255.
60.
SquireK. (2011). Video games and learning. Teaching and participatory culture in the digital age. New York, NY: Teachers College Print.
61.
SteinkuehlerC. A. (2007). Massively multiplayer online gaming as a constellation of literacy practices. In SheltonB. E.WileyD. (Eds.), The design and use of simulation computer games in education (pp. 187–212). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
62.
SteinkuehlerC. A.JohnsonB. Z. (2009). Computational literacy in online games: The social life of a mod. The International Journal of Gaming and Computer Mediated Simulations, 1, 53–65.
63.
WilenskyU. (1999). NetLogo. Evanston, IL: Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling, Northwestern University. Retrieved fromhttp://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo
64.
WintersN.MorY. (2008). IDR: A participatory methodology for interdisciplinary design in technology enhanced learning. Computers & Education, 50, 579–600. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2007.09.015
65.
WoodL. A.KrogerR. O. (2000). Doing discourse analysis: Methods for studying action in talk and text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
66.
Woodward-KronR. (2008). More than just jargon—The nature and role of specialist language in learning disciplinary knowledge. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7, 234–249. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2008.10.004
