Collective Information Literacy in Massively Multiplayer Online Games

Download PDF
2 downloads 20234 Views 332KB Size Report
Comment
school and other traditional learning spaces, in such unlikely places as online discussion ... International Society for Technology in Education (2007) information technology standards ignore ... The collective development of information sources for MMOs and online ... literacy, combined to give us the best breadth of codes.
E–Learning and Digital Media Volume 7 Number 4 2010 www.wwwords.co.uk/ELEA

Collective Information Literacy in Massively Multiplayer Online Games CRYSTLE MARTIN & CONSTANCE STEINKUEHLER Curriculum & Instruction Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA

ABSTRACT This article explores the forms of information literacy that arise in commercial entertainment games like World of Warcraft. Using examples culled from eight months of online ethnographic data, the authors detail the forms of information literacy that arise as a regular part of ingame social interaction, emphasizing (ironically) the intellectual nature of such purportedly ‘barren’ forms of play and highlighting the ways in which such practices help redefine the current model of what constitutes information literacy by bringing the collective and collaborative nature of such practices to the fore. Implications for future research are also discussed.

Naturally occurring literacy learning permeates massively multiplayer online games (MMOs) and virtual worlds (Gee, 2003; Steinkuehler, 2007; Black & Steinkuehler, 2009). As demonstrated in previous research, sophisticated practices related to science literacy (Steinkuehler & Duncan, 2009) and advanced reading comprehension (Steinkuehler et al, 2010) have been documented outside of school and other traditional learning spaces, in such unlikely places as online discussion forums and fandom texts related to games like World of Warcraft (WoW). The communities that underwrite these practices are participatory cultures (Jenkins, 2006) in which content production becomes a form of active consumption and information exchange is peer to peer. Vast amounts of diverse information are created for and circulated through such sociotechnical environments. It should be no surprise, then, that such spaces are ripe for analysis of the forms of information literacy that characterize them, providing provocative new models for what it means to be fully literate in today’s information society. However, traditional information literacy models are unable to account for some of the most basic practices found therein. With a narrow focus on information literacy as something that happens individually in institutionally sanctioned settings (typically, the library or school) and in relation to those institutional resources (such as reference desks and electronic databases), contemporary frameworks for information literacy skills, and accepted standards for what constitutes information literacy, leave much missing in terms of its inherently collaborative nature, its relationship to other twenty-first-century skills, and its ties to social capital for many online youth. Collective intelligence (Levy, 1999) is leveraged in the communities surrounding these games, relying on the knowledge of each individual to contribute to the information available to all. In this article, we review the existing literature on information literacy standards and discuss the forms of learning that occur in social online spaces like MMOs. Based on this discussion, we then analyze data gathered from an out-of-school MMO-based program and discuss the collective information literacy practices that arise in our data set. We conclude with an exploration of the current need for a new theory of information literacy if we are to better understand the existing (or merely nascent) capacities of young people online.

355

http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/elea.2010.7.4.355

Crystle Martin & Constance Steinkuehler Rethinking Information Literacy The term information literacy was first printed in a government report by Paul Zurkowski in 1974. Since then the term has gone through many iterations. Many definitions of information literacy exist in the form of various standards but each of these standards has limitations when applied to the collaborative spaces of massively multiplayer online games (Eisenberg & Berkowitz, 1990; American Association of School Librarians, 1998; Association of College and Research Libraries, 2000), able to reasonably account for activities found in traditional educational settings (typically designed with those environments in mind) but not the naturally occurring practices in more informal, everyday, online learning environments. Traditional information literacy standards describe information literacy as a set of abilities for finding and using information, such as the Association of College and Research Libraries’ definition (2000) which states that, ‘Information literacy is a set of abilities requiring individuals to “recognize when information is needed and have the ability to locate, evaluate, and use effectively the needed information”’ (p. 2). Most such standards focus on an individual’s search for information within an institutional setting using institutional resources such as library databases or print materials. In a like manner, the International Society for Technology in Education (2007) information technology standards ignore everyday information work and focus instead on the ability to use software as opposed to the actual ability to recognize an information need and take the steps needed to fulfill that need. Figure 1 illustrates a traditional information literacy model, demonstrating the generally linear quality of these structured processes.

Figure 1. Traditional model of information literacy.

The UNESCO document Towards Information Literacy Indicators (Catts & Lau, 2008) lays out a conceptual framework that divides the process of information literacy into five stages: (1) recognizing information need; (2) locating and evaluating the quality of information; (3) storing and retrieving information; (4) making effective and ethical use of information; and (5) applying information to create and communicate knowledge. Thus, the UNESCO framework makes some strides from previous models, offering indicators for information literacy as a conceptual framework without necessarily standardizing the process. Moreover, it conceptualizes information literacy as important to people of all ages and not simply focused on using the skills within formal education settings. Lifelong, out-of-school, everyday learning is an important application for information literacy which has often been neglected in many information standards. 356

Collective Information Literacy in Massively Multiplayer Online Games The representation of the stoic journey to find information with perhaps the help of a guide (such as a librarian) is not reflective of the information journey that participants take within highly collaborative, digitally mediated play spaces like MMOs. Within such social spaces, participants in the community rely on each other to complete tasks in the game as well as for information. The information resources available in and around these communities are mostly developed through the participation and collective intelligence of the group, excluding the information provided on corporate websites (Levy, 1999; Jenkins, 2006). But as has been shown by Steinkuehler et al (2010), expert gamers prefer and use the community created and maintained sites as their primary information sources. The collective development of information sources for MMOs and online social spaces resembles Levy’s (1999) theory of collective intelligence, distinguishing it from a singularity of intelligence where there is only one consciousness. His collective intelligence theory focuses on how members of a community bring the resources and expertise they have to share among the group, enabling a pooling of diverse resources in which information is stored across the social network rather than within an individual head (or computer or scratch pad from the library desk). Wikipedia is the most popular (and controversial) case in point. While not everyone in such communities contributes to the communal information and understanding, leaving a large part of the community functioning mostly as information consumers and evaluators (Tapscott & Williams, 2006), the ones who do contribute do so freely and, if their contribution is false or poor, the community either fixes or rejects it (Steinkuehler & Duncan, 2009). Through this process a base of information is created as well as community standards for a particular community like an MMO such as WoW (Jenkins, 2006). That information literacy practices are part and parcel of participating in online social spaces like MMOs has been touched on in previous studies but, to date, remain relatively unexplored. Rather, prior research has focused mainly on traditional and digital media literacy practices and the forms of informal learning that take place in MMOs and other collaborative online spaces. Here, a constellation of literacies, as described by Black & Steinkuehler (2009), range from in-game textbased interactions to in-game literacy practices to out-of-game fandom and resource creation (Steinkuehler, 2007). Literacy is considered in three ways by Steinkuehler et al (2005) when discussing literacies in online games and fan communities. They describe ‘literacy’ as a tool, a place, and a way of being in relationship to their uses around these spaces. Literacy as place addresses the use of literacy skills in-game and out-of-game concerning MMOs as players engage in in-game chat, lore and quests, as well as out-of-game forum discussions, wiki creation, and even face-to-face conversations. Informal science learning has also been shown to take place in out-of-game forums concerning MMOs with 86% of the posts analyzed being social knowledge construction and 65% having an evaluative epistemology (Steinkuehler & Duncan, 2009), which demonstrates a level of evaluation used by the community to create a standard of information. It has also been shown that MMO players are heavy information resource users as well as creators, with 45% of all resources players use being information resources which includes sites like wowwiki.com and wowhead.com – both are community-created information resources, as well as 11% of all resource used being forums (Steinkuehler et al, 2010). The significance of these findings for information literacy research has, to date, been left unexplored yet the connection is a warranted one: Players who have sought out forums or information resources have either a recognized information need or are disseminators of information to other players themselves. Methods Data Collection The data analyzed in this study were collected during a 2-year ethnographic study from the Games+Learning+Society Casual Learning Lab, which was an afterschool informal learning lab focusing on the MMO World of Warcraft. The lab was used as a vehicle for the development of proacademic practices and dispositions such as digital and print literacy, problem solving, and prosocial skills (Steinkuehler & King, 2009). The pilot program ran from October 2007 to May 2008, with the official program running from October 2008 to May 2009. Participants in the program were adolescent boys from mostly rural areas ranging in age from 12-18 years who could be described as ‘chronically disengaged’ or ‘at-risk’ in traditional school contexts (Steinkuehler & King, 2009). The 357

Crystle Martin & Constance Steinkuehler focus of this broader research was to observe the practices of participants around the game in a quasi-naturalistic setting, using the natural tendencies of online gaming communities to potentially re-engage members’ academic interest, with ‘interest driven learning’ being the key driving concept throughout the duration of the lab. Data included video, audio files, interviews with participants and staff, photographs, in-game chatlogs, and multimodal fieldnotes, resulting in a total data corpus of approximately 2506 pages, with an average of 500 words per page. Data Analysis After collection, data were migrated into an NVIVO database and a combination of a priori and emergent coding took place in teams of two. The a priori coding scheme had 11 themes and 48 codes including five codes specifically targeting information literacy practices (see Table I) which were based on the standards described in the literature review (American Association of School Librarians, 1997; Association of College and Research Libraries, 2000; Catts & Lau, 2008). The choice of these codes was based on the aforementioned well-recognized standards of information literacy, combined to give us the best breadth of codes. Intercoder agreement, calculated on a randomly selected 10% of the corpus, was 98%. Code

Definition

Seeking Info

To locate relevant information for the task at hand.

Evaluating Info

To evaluate the reliability and credibility of different information resources.

Interpreting Info

To identify significant information from less significant information, determine or infer its meaning, and draw appropriate and meaningful conclusions from it.

Synthesizing Info

To combine information from multiple resources into a coherent whole.

Disseminating Info

To seek out and use appropriate distribution channels for one’s own info production.

Table I. Overview of the ‘information literacy’ codes used in this analysis, their origins based on existing standards.

Findings Roughly 10% of the data were coded for information literacy, making it the third most frequent code across the entire corpus. Within the ‘information literacy’ coding scheme used (see Figure 2), ‘disseminating information’ and ‘seeking information’ were the most frequent. All remaining codes under the theme of information literacy appeared in less than 1% of the total corpus overall. The information literacy practices predominant in these data deviate somewhat sharply from more traditional views of what it means to be informationally literate. As traditionally conceived, information literacy is a process that one person makes through some version of the five steps that the UNESCO paper (Catts & Lau, 2008) outlines: information seeking, evaluation, interpretation, synthesis, dissemination. However, in the context of MMOs, information literacy is decidedly collective, with multiple people going through the process together to address one individual person’s information need. Collaboration and collective action are very natural in the setting of a massively multiplayer online environment, yet the information literacy practices that arise within them as such often go unrecognized and therefore unexamined. Moreover, this collective information literacy process is also deeply tied to collaborative problem solving as seen in Figure 3. For example, one player asks a second player where to access the titles that the player had earned for his character; the second player explains how to find the character titles. Once the first player follows the instructions he still cannot see his titles; the two players collaboratively problem solve the issue and conclude that the reason that the first person could not see the title was because of a game glitch. 358

Collective Information Literacy in Massively Multiplayer Online Games

Figure 2. Percentage of the entire data corpus that was coded for the ‘information literacy’ practices included in the original analytic scheme.

Figure 3. The notable co-occurrence of ‘problem solving’ and ‘information literacy’ practices when compared with remaining codes.

Type of Information Exchanged Two types of game-related content were most prevalent across in-game information-seeking requests. The first type of information was aimed at manipulating the game environment; examples of this would be questions about maneuvering the player’s character or how the player changes the chat channel. This type of information is very basic and would most likely only be sought by those who are n00bs, new to the game, and necessarily answered by a disseminator with more experience. The second type of information is a much larger category that includes questions from ‘where’ to ‘what’ and question types that can be asked and answered by people of a variety of levels of experience depending on the question. Examples of these question types could be 359

Crystle Martin & Constance Steinkuehler directional, what are the best items, how to spec (specialize a character by spending talent points earned by gaining experience) efficiently, which bosses drop what items, how much an item is worth, game strategies, etc. These questions can range in expertise from novice to expert and be answered by the same spread of knowledge depending on the level of question. Non-game information is also sought within WoW. Players discuss not only the game but other, non-gaming topics as well such as politics and current events. In such later contexts, collective information literacy is still at work with the same basic ‘call and response’ or ‘multiple disseminations’ pattern. Patterns of Information Literacy Practice Five main collective information literacy patterns emerged in the data analyzed, which we have termed: 1. call and response, 2. call and refer, 3. call and avalanche, 4. simultaneous, not sequential, and 5. fluid. Each pattern offers a unique look at how information literacy actually functions in the naturalistic setting of the WoW community. Again, these patterns apply across a variety of information types with the type of information sought not being considered when choosing the examples. Thus, all information needs (whether they were for the game or for non-game-related information) were considered equally valid information-seeking practices. Call and response. Call and response is a very prominent form of information literacy which occurs when one person who has an information need, called the ‘seeker’, asks the community at large for information and someone responds. Varianla: is void walker at lvl 10? [Seeking] Steamroller: yes [Disseminating]

This is the most basic (perhaps, foundational) form of collective information literacy between two community members. The information needs are usually simple, able to be met by a single ‘disseminator’ (the person giving the information) within one or two lines of chat (see Figure 4).

Figure 4. ‘Call and response’ pattern of information literacy.

Call and refer. Dissemination of out-of-game resources to in-game collective information seeking is another type of collective information literacy in WoW, referred to here as ‘call and refer’. In such interactions, the disseminator refers to or gives links to outside resources. As discussed earlier, many of the outside resources available are maintained by the collective intelligence of the game community. Kellna: I have a quest to complete but I don’t remember the quest giver and where he is located [Seeking] Eowyn: I find http://www.wowhead.com really useful for that [Referring]

The seeker in this instance displays a more refined information literacy skill set, not asking just for the bit of information which is the name and location of the quest giver for the particular quest but framing the information need as the larger problem of not being able to remember the quest giver and location for a quest in general. Asked in a general manner, the information received from the disseminator can be applied to many situations. The disseminator offers a resource that will be useful to the seeker in future situations as well as for the current information need (see Figure 5).

360

Collective Information Literacy in Massively Multiplayer Online Games

Figure 5. ‘Call and refer’ pattern of information literacy.

Call and avalanche. In the context of WoW, most information requested was at point-of-need – for example, ‘I don’t know how to get to X’. There were frequent instances of one player seeking information followed by multiple players disseminating it (i.e., one person would ask a question and quickly receive multiple answers A, B, C, D, etc.), here referred to as ‘call and avalanche’. In these situations, one player seeks information and several players offer responses to that question. Each answer that was disseminated may be appropriate to the question, but it is up to the information seeker to decide which answer to choose. In the example below the seeker is looking for a description of the land-based mount for the player when the player reaches the level at which they can use an epic land mount; epic refers to level of item quality that is situated between rare and legendary. Narilla: whats epic land look like [Seeking] Komatino: The kara horse only better [Disseminating] Harpyclaw: like the headless horseman mount [Disseminating] Syrix: like a horse with whitefeet [Disseminating]

In this example, the question is obviously answered by several people with at least average knowledge of the game because they refer to other horse mounts in the game as well as a basic visual description of the mount itself, which you can only acquire when you have reached the appropriate level and have the requisite financial resources (see Figure 6).

Figure 6. ‘Call and avalanche’ pattern of information literacy.

Simultaneous, not sequential. Up to this point, the examples for collective information literacy practices have focused solely on seeking and disseminating information. Traditional information literacy, including the coding scheme used for this data set, obviously includes other sub-practices as well – specifically, evaluation, synthesis, and interpretation. Our data indicate, however, that in the context of WoW, such practices were accomplished not merely by the information seeker, as presumed in traditional information literacy models, but also and as crucially by other participants in the information literacy process – not just the ‘information seeker’ but the ‘information disseminator’ or ‘reference provider’ as well. At times, such steps are overt and expressed within the text-based chat; at other times, however, they are elided and happen passively between the more overt moves of information seeking, dissemination, and then information seeking again, in a subsequent round, most often in the form of a question that builds on the first. The following example illustrates this concept:

361

Crystle Martin & Constance Steinkuehler [1] Steamroller: so r trolls gunna be neutral w/ horde and alli? [Seeking] [2] Elvan: i wish [3] Elvan: no ther gunna switch over to alli [Disseminating] [4] Steamroller: so r we gunna be able to change the race? [Seeking] [5] Elvan: they said however, if you have a troll and another horde character, there gunna move the lower character to a different realm [Disseminating]

Here, between the first dissemination (turn 3) and the second seeking of information (turn 4), the seeker tacitly accepts the information and asks a subsequent question based on the information given as premise. In ‘simultaneous, not sequential’ patterns of information literacy practice, evaluation, synthesis, or interpretation occurs but sometimes only tacitly, signaled primarily in the talk immediately after the first dissemination (see Figure 7).

Figure 7. ‘Simultaneous, not sequential’ pattern of information literacy.

Fluid. Finally, information literacy practice also occurs in a fifth unexpected pattern compared to the traditional models. In traditional models, information dissemination always comes at the end of the process and is undertaken by the initial information seeker (refer to Figure 1). In contrast, in online naturalistic environments like WoW, information literacy moves are done collectively by community members working in conjunction such that the practices which constitute information literacy often arise multiple times across multiple individuals in a single information-seeking episode. Consider, for example, the following exchange: Kellna: were there any quests that you got bored doing? [Seeking] Coldcuts: dailies :P [Dissemination] Kellna: i guess i don’t know that are those? can you explain please [Evaluate] Coldcuts: at 70 u get to do daily quests that are always the same [Dissemination] Coldcuts: they get boring after a while Kellna: any example? Kellna: what are you supposed to do? [Seeking] Coldcuts: a lot of stuff, but mostly kill, and collect [Dissemination] Kellna: doesn’t seem different than the other quests... killing and collecting... what do you think? [Interpreting] Gorsten: But they are exactly the same every day. [Dissemination] Kellna: i see Kellna: for some quests you need somebody else to help you (i think) [Synthesis] Kellna: what do you do in those cases? [Seeking] Coldcuts: find someone to help [Dissemination] Gorsten: Yes. Join into a group. Usually, you’ll both get credit. [Dissemination] Kellna: you seem right [Evaluating]

We call this the ‘fluid’ pattern of information literacy in that multiple conversational partners engage in various steps of the traditional information literacy model at different times and in different sequential orders. Figure 8 illustrates the fluid patterns as instantiated in the preceding example. It is, however, by no means the only form which this pattern can take. One strength of this particular form of practice is its flexibility in that groups collectively process information in such a way that the means may change (depending on members’ own knowledge and abilities) but the end point (information understanding) remains the same.

362

Collective Information Literacy in Massively Multiplayer Online Games

Figure 8. ‘Fluid’ pattern of information literacy.

Conclusions From these examples, a framework for collective information literacy emerges in which the communal rather than individual participation is the defining feature of online play spaces such as massively multiplayer online games. In this article, we have identified several important patterns of practice with their own distinct forms and configurations. Across each of these identified patterns, however, the defining feature that contrasts our model to those existing in the standards-based literature is that such work is accomplished collectively. Previous models for how information literacy is undertaken do not adequately account for the role of other people in information-related work accomplished online. Such models omit forms of practice that are wholly information literacy related yet accomplished among groups of individuals and not the sole ‘information seeker’ operating in isolation. In online social contexts such as World of Warcraft, however, information literacy is contingent on the presence and availability of other people. Peers are often the first line of inquiry because, simply put, storing information across one’s social network and then querying that network when a need arises is far more efficient and adaptive than storing copious amounts of information in one’s own head. In such spaces, the fact that the Internet is a communication device and not merely a collection of semi-static information resources becomes difficult to ignore. Of course, one result of the fact that online spaces such as these are social by nature is that the information practices located within them affect not only how information gets distributed but also crucial forms of power and prestige. Individuals who navigate the practices detailed here with finesse gain access not merely to information but to cultural capital such information access affords. Over time and through social interaction, some community members and not others emerge as valued resources, sought out time and again by others as valuable and trusted sources of information. This growing reputation becomes, in practice, an important form of cultural capital, a ‘resource that participants develop and acquire in the form of competencies and credentials and that they also invest in valued cultural objects, or artifacts’ (Malaby, 2006, p. 146). As Malaby argues, such in-game cultural capital can indeed ‘parley’ into other forms of capital both in the game and beyond it, in the form of recognized knowledge and expertise, social status, and (albeit a bit more rarely) material gain (e.g., through the buying and selling of in-game items and information). Thus, the fact that online information literacy is collective has potential ramifications not just at the cognitive level but also at the political level. Indeed, MMOs such as the one studied here are intriguing contexts for research on information literacy practice because they enable the investigation of such practices as they happen not just in those environments specifically designed to foster such literacy work but also in those everyday and informal spaces in which teenagers and young adults readily participate. A theory of 363

Crystle Martin & Constance Steinkuehler collective information literacy based on what people actually do is important to our understanding of information work generally, and such a theory must meet three important criteria: First, such a theory should account for the collaborative nature of online spaces, as detailed here. Second, it must include a structure that is flexible and allows for the non-linear process in which information seeking actually takes place, with the ability to go back and restart an information search at any point. Third and finally, it must account for non-academic environments and not merely designed, academic ones, based on analysis of what people do and how they use collective information literacy in such spaces and not just a priori definitions of individual practice. Further study of such voluntary, naturally occurring, online indigenous community practices holds promise for the future development of more robust models of information literacy practice online. References American Association of School Librarians (1998) Information Literacy Standards for Student Learning: standards and indicators. Chicago: American Library Association. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/aasl/guidelinesandstandards/informationpower/InformationLite racyStandards_final.pdf Association of College and Research Libraries (2000) Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Chicago: ACRL. http://www.ala.org/ala/mgrps/divs/acrl/standards/standards.pdf Black, R.W. & Steinkuehler, C. (2009) Literacy in Virtual Worlds, in L. Christenbury, R. Bomer & P. Smagorinsky (Eds) Handbook of Adolescent Literacy Research, 271-286. New York: Guilford Press. Catts, R. & Lau, J. (2008) Towards Information Literacy Indicators. Paris: UNESCO. http://www.uis.unesco.org/template/pdf/cscl/InfoLit.pdf Eisenberg, M. & Berkowitz, R. (1990) Information Problem Solving: the big six skills approach to library and information skills instruction. Norwood: Ablex. Gee, J. (2003) What Videogames Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. International Society for Technology in Education (2007) The ISTE Nation Education Technology Standards and Performance Indicators for Students. Eugene: ISTE. http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForStudents/2007Standards/NETS_for_Stude nts_2007.htm Jenkins, H. (2006) Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers: exploring participatory culture. New York: New York University Press. Levy, P. (1999) Collective Intelligence: mankind’s emerging world in cyberspace. Cambridge: Perseus. Malaby, T. (2006) Parlaying Value: capital in and beyond virtual worlds, Games and Culture, 1(2), 141-162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1555412006286688 Steinkuehler, C. (2007) Massively Multiplayer Online Games as a Constellation of Literacy Practices, E-Learning, 4(3), 297-318. http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/elea.2007.4.3.297 Steinkuehler, C., Black, R. & Clinton, K. (2005) Researching Literacy as Tool, Place, and Way of Being, Reading Research Quarterly, 40(1), 95-100. Steinkuehler, C., Compton-Lilly, C. & King, E. (2010) Reading in the Context of Online Games, in Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference of the Learning Sciences. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Steinkuehler, C. & Duncan, S. (2009) Scientific Habits of Mind in Virtual Worlds, Journal of Science Education & Technology, 17(6), 530-543. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10956-008-9120-8 Steinkuehler, C. & King, B. (2009) Digital Literacies for the Disengaged: creating after school contexts to support boys’ game-based literacy skills, On the Horizon, 17(1), 47-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/10748120910936144 Tapscott, D. & Williams, A.D. (2006) Wikinomics: how mass collaboration changes everything. New York: Penguin. Zurkowski, P.G. (1974) Information Service Environment Relationships and Priorities. Report no. NCLIS-NPLIS-5. Washington, DC: National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (ED 100 391).

CRYSTLE MARTIN is a doctoral student in the Educational Communications and Technology program in the Curriculum & Instruction Department at University of Wisconsin-Madison, studying with Professor Constance Steinkuehler, with a minor in Library and Information Studies. 364

Collective Information Literacy in Massively Multiplayer Online Games She is a member of Games+Learning+Society. Her research focuses on information literacy, online reading comprehension, informal learning, adolescents, and online collaborative spaces, especially massively multiplayer online games. She is currently exploring the use of literacy skills by adolescents in and around their game spaces. Correspondence: Crystle Martin, Curriculum & Instruction Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 225 North Mills Street, Madison, WI 53705, USA ([email protected]). CONSTANCE STEINKUEHLER is an Assistant Professor in the Educational Communications and Technology program in the Curriculum & Instruction Department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. She is a founding fellow of the Games+Learning+Society Initiative and chairs the annual GLS conference held each summer in Madison, WI. Her research on cognition, learning, and literacy in massively multiplayer online games has been funded by the MacArthur Foundation, the Spencer Foundation/National Academies of Education, the Academic ADL CoLab, and the UW-Madison Graduate Program and includes such commercial titles as Lineage I, Lineage II, Star Wars Galaxies, World of Warcraft, and RuneScape. Her current work focuses on the potential of virtual worlds to function as sandboxes for the reconstruction (perhaps, reinvigoration) of a new form of twenty-first-century citizenship – a ‘pop cosmopolitanism’ marked by the willingness to engage in an increasingly globalized and therefore diverse sociotechnical world and the development of intellectual practices crucial to successful navigation within it. Correspondence: Constance Steinkuehler, Curriculum & Instruction Department, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 225 North Mills Street, Madison, WI 53705, USA ([email protected]).

365