Lesson Plan

Truth Hurts demonstrates that:

• designing solutions to technology problems is not quite as simple as design, make, appraise. It is much more complicated and 'messy' than this neat formula suggests
• problems and solutions interact: designers may start with one specification of a problem, develop an idea for a solution, and then evaluate it to learn more about the problem. In developing a design 'solution' to a technological problem, the problem itself (and our understanding of it) often changes. In Truth Hurts, Bec and Pi are asked to design a game about boys for girls to play, but by the end of the episode they have redefined this design 'problem'. 
• design is a social process: design problems arise in social contexts and their solutions usually arise from the activities of many people - sometimes working alone, sometimes collaboratively - who bring different understandings and skills to the design process. Throughout Truth Hurts, Bec and Pi's efforts to 'solve' their game design problem are shaped by the experiences of others.

1. Tuning in 

1.1 First viewing and response 

View Truth Hurts

In small groups, give students time to discuss their immediate responses to the episode. Ask the groups to list and discuss the key problems faced by the characters in the episode. 

Examples

Bec and Pi: problem of designing a computer game about boys for girls; 

Mike: wants to get his parents back together. 

Mike: wants to get above level two in Trillin. 

Prompt

'In what ways does Mike's attempt to get his parents back together compare with Bec and Pi's efforts to design a relationships game?'

 
Groups report to class about the results of their discussions

Encourage students to be specific about scenes and dialogue which illustrate the general points they are making. For example, if students make a generalisation that you can't treat human relationships like a computer game, ask for examples of how this is illustrated in the episode. 

Extension

You may want to draw attention to specific lines of dialogue so that you can focus attention on the ways that everyday language use may lead us to discuss different kinds of problems in similar terms. For example: 
Virgil states ".I'd calculate that the perfect way for a girl to strike up a  conversation with a boy she likes would be. " 
PI says, "I'm working out the lines of logic for my game. I'm playing 
the odds. (and later in same scene) .So how can you work out if you're really compatible with someone?" 

In many contexts (such as school mathematics) we use 'calculate' and 'work out' to mean much the same thing. These expressions carry a clear implication that there are predictable 'lines of logic' that can lead us to a 'correct' answer to a question. Asking students to consider 'are you really compatible with someone?' is that type of question. For a real life example of people taking the possibility of 'calculating' compatibility seriously see the news item 'Blind-date radio station wedding broadcast', The Age, Melbourne, Wednesday 27 January 1999, p. 8.

1.2 Homework - students investigate games 

Ask students to make a list of all the games they have at home - board games, card games, strategy games and electronic games. Ask them to group these games into at least two different categories that makes sense to them - for 
example, electronic and non-electronic games, or games for one player and games for two or more players. 
Ask students to choose their favourite game of each type for each of the last five years and display these choices in a chart. For example: 
 

Simon's favorite games (Feb 1999)
Age	Games for 2+ players	Computer games	Other
6	Thomas the Tank Engine jigsaw game	Where in the world is Carmen Sandiego?	Words..To Go!
7	Chess	Midnight Rescue	Adventures of Batman & Robin
8	Trivial Pursuit	Sim Ant	Game Boy Gallery
9	Monopoly	Cricket 96	Donkey Kong 3
10	NBA Jam Session	SimCity 2000	Pokemon

Each student will bring to class 

1. their chart and one or two of their current favourite games and, 
2. if possible, one example of a favourite game from about five years ago (or, if they have a younger brother or sister, one of their current favourites). 

1.3 Preparing for the Game Fair 

Tell students that they are going to have a 'Game Fair' and its purposes are: 

• to allow them to become familiar with any games they have not played previously; 
• to reassess games they played when they were younger (or are now being played by younger children); 
• to provide a range of real examples that will help them to develop an approach to evaluating the qualities of games. 

1.4 Evaluate the games 

The whole class collaboratively develops an evaluation checklist to assess all games. To assist students with this, they could look through some recent issues of Choice magazine and note some of the criteria commonly used for evaluating all types of household goods. For example: 
- easy to follow instructions; 
-safety features; 
- length of guarantee, etc. 
 

Discuss with students how these criteria can also apply to games. Then apply the 1-3-6 consensus technique: 

Individually, students write down a specified number (e.g. four) of qualities they expect all games to have and rank them in order of importance. 

In small groups, students work to reach agreement on a combined list of the (say) six most important qualities they expect all games to have. 

Combine groups of three to make groups of six. these groups work to agree on a combined list of (say) the eight most important qualities they expect all games to possess (depending on total class size, you might want to vary these 
group sizes slightly - sometimes 1-3-7 or 1-4-8 will work better than 1-3-6). 

Depending on total class size, you might want to vary these group sizes slightly - sometimes 1-3-7 or 1-4-8 will work better than 1-3-6. 

Consolidate results from all groups into a whole class list, again reducing the total number of qualities. For example: 
 

- ease of use;  - instructions;  - presentation; - durability;  - safety.etc.

The final number of qualities is not particularly important - it is the process of discussing, debating and reaching consensus on the criteria for evaluation that is the valuable learning experience

Record the evaluations

Record the agreed evaluation criteria on a prepared spreadsheet (computer, butchers paper, blackboard etc). Give all games brought to class a number. Agree about a way of coding assessments of the game eg:

1.5 The Game Fair 

The main purpose of this activity is to raise awareness of a wide variety of games as design products and of problems and issues in their appraisal. Every student should have brought their chart(s) and choice of game/s to class. 

Divide the class into two groups. 

Whichever method you choose, it is important to encourage students to share their assessments - every game will be one of its owner's 'favourites' so if it is given a poor rating by other students some vigorous discussions and debates may 
result! 

2. Learning the technology design process 

Here we re-view Truth Hurts, focusing on identifying the steps in the technology design process. 

2.1 On the board

Put a large version of this table on a whiteboard, chalkboard or butchers' paper. 

Technology Design Process - Truth Hurts
Investigating	Devising	Producing	Evaluating

Ask students to make a copy for themselves on a sheet of paper or in their workbooks. Briefly discuss the meanings of these terms with students. 

 2.2 View Truth Hurts again

While viewing the video pause, freeze or replay key segments so that students can observe the characters doing specific tasks, (e.g. investigating) and note these on their charts. You could designate some students or particular groups as process spotters to help with the analysis. Discussion and debate of these processes will help students to know what they need to do when working on their own game. 

The chart you will eventually produce should look something like this (however, students should be encouraged to describe these activities in their own words): 

Technology Design Process - Truth Hurts
Investigating	Devising /Planning	Producing/Making	Evaluating
Bec and Pi bantering with the guys: 'we should put that  in the game'     Virgil's 'random chat analysis' of what boys talk about  Virgil's report: "Everybody lies...Check out the Net!"             Bec and Pi question Ram: 'Would you buy a game where...  you might lose?'	Alex, Bec and Pi brainstorming 'a game about boys'  Bec's and Pi's card databases, Pi's digital  spreadsheet                                  Pi: '... our game isn't about boyfriends any more';  Bec: 'It's about girlfriends now'	Pi is 'working out the lines of logic' for her game     We see the game prototype on Pi's PC and Mike entering  his parents' profiles Pi working on her logic paths, Bec surrounded by  cut-outs, cards, labels, graphs..	Bec; "this is harder than I thought" Bec and Pi share their 'problems' with Alex Virgil's evaluation: 'Pi and Bec are really getting the hang of therelationship  stuff...'  .Pi: '... we don't seem to be in control [of the game]'     Bec and Pi tell Alex: 'It's not  working... our game is off the rails' Pi to Mike: 'It's a dud'

One of the advantages of charting the processes observed in Truth Hurts in this way is that it provides a visual 'map' of the non linear nature of the process. It is not a predictable sequential investigative format. If necessary, point this out to students.

3. Deciding directions/getting organised 

3.1 Choosing a game design task 

Remind students they are going to design, make and appraise a game or modify an existing game. You may wish to suggest a target audience for the game or allow students a choice, e.g. to design a game for their own age group or for a younger audience. 

Discuss some of the issues and problems they may encounter eg designing games for themselves may require less 'audience research' but games for younger children may require more investigatory work but a less complicated design/production activity.To reinforce this point, it would be useful to compare two games designed for different age groups brought to the Game Fair. Compare them in terms of the language levels they use or assume, the types of graphics or illustrations that are used, and the format for providing instructions, etc. 

3.2 Design the game

As students organise themselves to design and make their game, ask them to monitor and record their procedures on a Technology Design Process chart as they did for Truth Hurts. Provide butchers' paper for each group so they later can display their progress and processes to the whole class.

• Emphasise the value of maintaining the chart recording their progress and processes. The charts will provide a useful register for developing their skills of individual and group reflection and for developing their conceptual understanding of technology processes and the language in which these 

processes are socially negotiated. For example, if a group has an empty or nearly empty 'Investigating' column, this should prompt students to ask: Have we investigated enough? If so, how? Is it summarised adequately in the chart? 
• You may also want students to maintain personal records of their progress, such as a design 'log', diary or journal in which they record their ideas, changes to their designs, reflections, self-evaluations and/or peer-evaluations. 
• Refer to the activities of the characters in Truth Hurts whenever this is appropriate. The video text in this case is not just an 'illustration' of the technology processes on which you want students to focus but also provides a story through which the meanings of the concepts are enriched. For example, with a group of students who are determining the players' goals in their computer game, you might say: 'Remember when Alex was talking to Bec and Pi about their game, she said, "Maybe we're designing a game without one clear solution. Maybe different players should create different outcomes for themselves?" Is that what you are doing, or do you want one clear solution?' 
• Encourage students to try out their games as work-in-progress with other members of the class or with younger children, as appropriate. When students come to summarise such activities in their charts they may have difficulty in deciding whether to put them in the 'Investigating' or 'Evaluating' column. This is a useful learning experience - such terms are ambiguous and could quite easily both relate to a particular activity. 

4.Reflect and evaluate 

4.1 Another Game Fair

Students will already have had many opportunities to reflect on their games and the processes of producing them, but this sequence of activities should end with some celebratory sense of closure. A final Game Fair where groups demonstrate their games and give an account of their processes to the class is one way of doing this. Self and peer assessment of the games (using the same evaluation schedule developed previously or modified in the light of their experience) could also take place at this stage. If at all possible, such a final Game Fair should be expanded to includestudents from other classes, other teachers or parents. 

4.2 Reflecting on the representation of technology processes in Truth Hurts 

Create new groups by bringing together one member from each of the game producing groups. Ask the groups to discuss these questions: 

• On the basis of your experience of designing a game, how accurately did Truth Hurts represent the processes involved? In what ways was your experience similar to Bec and Pi's? How was it different? 
• How well did Truth Hurts dramatise the experience of designing a game in collaboration with others? What did you like/dislike most about Truth Hurts as a story? 
• Pi says 'We're designing this game, but.we don't seem to be in control'; and, later 'Sometimes it's like the game is playing us'. What do you think Pi means by these statements? Did you have any similar experiences when you were designing/making your game? 
• Like a computer game, the Truth Hurts episode is itself a technology product. Make up another table as follows and suggest at least two activities in each column that you think the makers of this episode had to do to produce it.