












































Always Room for Mindfulness


2 37

Leaving the Mess
Epistemology and Ethics in Media  
Literacy Instruction
Chris Rosser, Librarian, Oklahoma State University
Heath Rosser, Student, Oklahoma Christian University

ABSTR ACT: Authority is constructed and contextual. Thus spake the ACRL 
Framework for Information Literacy, an assertion that rightly guides 
information and media literacy instructors as we form and inform stu-
dents, empowering them to navigate an ecosystem rife with mis- and 
disinformation. Yet as danah boyd famously argues in her 2018 SXSW 
EDU keynote, how we teach media literacy can become an “assertion 
of authority over epistemology” that undermines skills we intend to 
sharpen by not recognizing and valuing fundamental differences 
among how individuals within communities make sense of the world(s) 
we inhabit. boyd asks, “How do we teach across epistemologies?” We 
suggest that by leveraging narrative and play mechanics, gameful 
design can mitigate problems of epistemic authority, encouraging 
exploration and fostering desire-driven encounters with diversity in 
worlds both real and imagined.

MOVE 1: A PROBLEM OF EPISTEMIC AUTHORITY

The continuing rise of gamer culture offers fresh strategies for game-
ful design, transforming the classroom from a traditional learning 
environment into an interactive, playful space where a community 
of learners can become learners at play. In all the spaces where we 
design and deploy instruction, our students are diverse individuals 
from diverse cultural, geographic, and epistemic contexts, which 
can create interesting considerations and potential collisions to 
navigate. We believe that gameful design with playful, AI-enhanced 
instruction transforms approaches to teaching across epistemolo-
gies, fostering more inclusive, engaging, and adaptive experiences 
that leverage play as the mode and medium of teaching and learn-
ing. Using a gamified course, Worldbuilding, as an exemplar, this 



2 38    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

paper aims to help readers: 1) discern the problems of epistemic 
authority for media literacy instruction; 2) discuss how “serious” 
games leverage the power of narrative and gameplay mechanics 
to broaden encounters with different ways of thinking; 3) consider 
how gameful design might also leverage the power of narrative, 
promoting empathy and fostering desire-driven encounters with 
diversity; and 4) experience how AI-enhanced instruction centers 
play as a compelling medium for teaching and learning. 

We begin by contextualizing our problem with a story. Last Fall, I 
(Chris) was asked to teach a class on World Building, a dream course 
brimming with storytelling, student artwork, and buzzy creativity. I 
gamified the course, and because I’d been working with emerging AI 
tools, I determined to find a way to meaningfully incorporate AI into 
our semester learning. Most of the students enrolled in the course 
were either Gaming and Animation or Art majors; these students 
are incredibly talented, and the artwork they create is personal 
and important. Many of them have strong feelings about the ethical 
problems associated with AI, especially with regard to how these 
tools are trained on other’s art and images. As a librarian, I also am 
concerned about the ethics of these tools; nevertheless, I deeply value 
their potential to transform human work and learning and realize 
that if our students are not empowered to use these tools well and 
to leverage their potential, they’ll likely have already fallen behind 
others when they enter the workforce. 

When I enthusiastically announced in class that I had built a GPT 
tool that would take all of the disparate storylines and loosely con-
nected threads we had been developing throughout the semester and 
use them to generate infinite new stories sourced from our work, 
I didn’t receive the reaction I was anticipating. You built an AI tool 
that generates infinite, original stories sourced from our work? Wow! 
You’re the coolest teacher ever! That’s what I assumed they would 
say, but it’s not at all what happened. After I announced the tool, 
several students stayed after class to ensure that I was aware of the 
dangers of AI, especially for artists, since those voracious machines 
seem hellbent on gobbling up and mimicking their work. One stu-
dent assured me that they had recently posted an expertly argued, 
2,000-word screed on Discord which they would make available to 
me if interested. 



Listen and Learn Sessions    239

Honestly, I felt confused and more than a little defensive. You think 
I don’t know about these concerns about AI? I begin every morning 
with NPR; trust me, I’m in the know. Plus, you know me; you know I’d 
never do anything to harm you or your work—can you just give this a 
chance? It will be good for you. These are the thoughts that ran like 
a script in the back of my mind each time students confronted me 
about AI, confrontations and cautions that became more frequent 
as we neared the end of the semester.

For our final class session, I decided to address the ethics of AI as 
a partner for work and creativity. I demonstrated various portrayals 
of AI in media, acknowledged the problematic ethics of the moment 
we inhabit, but asserted that AI is here to stay, that it will be a force 
for good, and that instead of fearing this phantom menace we should 
be open-minded and learn to leverage these new, incredible tools. 
Then I demonstrated the awesome tool that generates new stories 
sourced from student-crafted prompts; but instead of cheers and 
applause, I ended the semester by angering several and alienating 
one to the extent that the student has not spoken with me since, 
despite my sincere efforts to reconcile. 

I am not usually the teacher students decide to hate—well, I was 
likable enough until I insisted on praising AI to a class chockablock 
full of young artists. So, what happened? It’s been bugging me; and 
I can say that for whatever students got out of our time together, 
that class was incredibly instructive for me. These experiences 
helped me understand something about what it means to teach 
across diverse ways of thinking and (more importantly) how to do 
better next time. As we think about what it means to do better, let’s 
consider Transformative Learning Theory in light of the problems 
of epistemic authority.

MOVE 2: TL AND PROBLEMS OF EPISTEMIC AUTHORITY

Our thinking is informed by Transformative Learning Theory as 
proposed by theorist Jack Mezirow. Transformative Learning Theory 
refers to the “process of using a prior interpretation to construe a 
new or revised interpretation of the meaning of one’s experience in 
order to guide future action” (Mezirow 1996, 162). Since TL is focused 
on adjusting learners’ frames of reference by helping them become 



240    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

“more inclusive, discriminating, open, reflective and emotionally 
able to change” (Mezirow 2018, 116), it resonates with common 
approaches to media literacy instruction. Both TL and media literacy 
instruction risk the problem of epistemic authority, de facto instruc-
tor assertions of authority over diverse ways of thinking. 

Mezirow asserts that, “Transformative learning is essentially a 
metacognative process of reassessing reasons supporting our prob-
lematic meaning perspectives” (2018, 120). By meaning perspectives, 
Mezirow refers to the frames of thinking or habits of mind that 
govern expectations and assumptions. As he describes, 

Frames of reference are the structures of culture and language through 
which we construe meaning by attributing coherence and significance to 
our experience. They selectively shape and delimit our perception, cogni-
tion and feelings by predisposing our intentions, beliefs, expectations and 
purposes. . . . Once set or programmed, we automatically move from one 
specific mental or behavioural activity to another, and we have a strong 
tendency to reject ideas that fail to fit our preconceptions. (116)

Frames of thinking or habits of mind are deep-seated, less visible, 
and often operate without our conscious awareness. This may be 
analogous to the coding or “rules” a computer runs in the background 
to keep the system operating. But our mental habits become visible 
when they are articulated as specific points of view or perspectives, 
expressions that reveal how we think about the world and that also 
shape or inform how we engage with others. 

Since perspectives can be articulated, they come more easily 
into our awareness and are more open to feedback from others. In 
the example from world-building class, deep-seated beliefs about 
creativity, originality, and intellectual property are all at play in the 
students’ habits of mind; when confronted with AI, mental habits 
became expressed as an articulation of anxieties: It’s not good or fair 
that AI is being trained on our artwork without our permission and 
that we must now fear for our jobs as artists, illustrators, and creators. 
While we might share students’ beliefs about creativity, originality, 
and intellectual property, we might also articulate an alternative 
perspective, resulting in an ethical conundrum as competing asser-
tions about the good collide: These tools are training on other’s work 
just like you did when learning your creative craft; it’s better that we 
focus on the good these tools will bring instead of avoiding or refus-
ing AI out of fear and suspicion, especially since your future careers 



Listen and Learn Sessions    241

will almost certainly involve AI. So, who’s right? Which of our beliefs 
is better? Such questions may not actually be very helpful if we’re 
interested in inspiring transformative learning. 

While, as the instructor, I might assert the authority of my per-
spective over students’ perspectives, transformative learning takes 
a different approach. Transformation happens through encounter, 
dialogue, and critical reflection. Instructors have power, and power 
pervades our classrooms, both virtual and visceral. Even instruc-
tors who are intentional about fostering democratic or open learn-
ing experiences nevertheless live, move, and have their being as 
power-wielders within the dynamics of pervading cultural norms. 
Normalized power structures are baked into classroom ethos; both 
students and instructors have been socialized to implicitly under-
stand how power works in a classroom setting.

In her book Understanding and Promoting Transformative Learning 
(2023), Patricia Cranton describes power that pervades instruction 
as the way students can feel surveilled by peers and instructors; 
from a young age, students are socialized to know how to think and 
how to act in the classroom, so that understanding the parameters 
of what’s appropriate or expectations about what differentiates 
good students from bad students already exist within as deep-seated 
frames of reference, re-enforced through classroom experiences year 
after year. So Cranton warns, “If students perceive their teacher as 
having position power—control that is based solely on his or her 
position as teacher—students will work hard to do what they think 
the teacher-in-power wants them to do” (85).

Assumptions about power and authority in the classroom are a 
function of socialization within particular cultural contexts. According 
to Cranton (2017),

In the development of his comprehensive theory of adult learning, Mezirow 
integrated two ideas: the cultural context of learning, including socializa-
tion as the foundation for early learning, and the central role of making 
meaning from experiences in learning. Socialization involves internalizing 
and personalizing the assumptions, beliefs, and values that are commu-
nicated by parents, teachers, the community, and the culture. When a 
person encounters perspectives that contradict that early socialization, he 
or she may question the currently held perspectives and revise them . . . . 
Transformative learning involves revising limited and distorted meaning 



242    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

perspectives through reflection on assumptions that have been uncriti-
cally assimilated. (n.p.)

But as Mezirow himself puts it, the “formative learning of child-
hood becomes the transformative learning in adulthood” (1991, 3). 
Transformation happens through encounters with different perspec-
tives that initiate a disorienting dilemma; ensuing dialogue makes 
perspectives visible; and critical reflection then may lead to trans-
formed thinking and to new frames of reference. As Mezirow says, 
“We make a decision and then live what we have come to believe 
until we encounter new evidence, argument or a perspective that 
renders this orientation problematic and requires reassessment” 
(117).

Transformative learning requires us to think about our think-
ing in light of new encounters with thinking that is different from 
our own, to make our thinking visible by putting our perspectives 
into reflective discourse with others, and then to make and act on 
decisions informed by new frames of reference. Mezirow describes 
transformative learning as “a rational, metacognitive process of reas-
sessing reasons that support problematic meaning perspectives or 
frames of reference, including those representing such contextual 
cultural factors as ideology, religion, politics, class, race, gender and 
others” (126). 

But I don’t want to talk about religion, politics, or other controversial 
topics with students; I just want them to accept what I’m saying about 
AI; I want them to think like me. Is that so bad?  

Mezirow says that transformative learning “is the process by 
which adults learn how to think critically for themselves rather than 
take assumptions supporting a point of view for granted” (126). And 
now we have arrived at the Gordian knot of transformative teach-
ing. As you likely recognize, to expect students to simply accept an 
assertion of an authoritative perspective from an instructor inhibits 
their capacity to experience transformative learning—yet, my per-
spective as the instructor is precisely what I want them to receive 
and to incorporate as their own because I think it’s good for them 
to think like me. At least, in this case, I want them to put aside their 
fears and embrace AI with all the techno-optimism and enthusiasm 
that I experience daily.  



Listen and Learn Sessions    243

I first started thinking about the problem of epistemic authority 
after teaching a gamified media literacy class entitled Eat, Play, Love: 
Adventures in the Information Ecosystem. In creating and teaching 
this course, I was confronted by problems of epistemology and eth-
ics: epistemology, of course, involves human ways of thinking, how 
and why we make decisions about what we know to be true about 
the world, about ourselves, and about others; and ethics involves 
human ways of being, how we relate in the world to one another. 
Through this course, I began to recognize that epistemological and 
ethical considerations require us to rethink and perhaps revise how 
we do media literacy instruction. Eventually, my own thinking was 
informed by scholar danah boyd (2018a), who offers a critique of 
media literacy instruction as an example of “[asserting] authority 
over epistemology” (boyd 2018a).1 Essentially, boyd suggests that 
epistemological difference creates challenges for media literacy 
instruction, since people evaluate, interpret, and make meaning 
from within their own individual and communal ways of knowing.2

boyd asserts, “If we’re not careful, media literacy and critical 
thinking will simply be deployed in the classroom as an assertion 
of authority over epistemology.” As librarians, we likely agree with 
the ACRL Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education 
that “authority is constructed and contextual” (2016, 4). Yet just as 
authority is constructed and contextual, so also are evaluation and 
interpretation, sense-making constructs by which we determine how, 
why, and where we consume and create information, and who we 
trust for information. boyd worries that if our instruction becomes 
an “assertion of authority over epistemology,” we might undermine 
the very skills we intend to sharpen. So boyd wonders, How do we 
teach across epistemologies? 

Although boyd is thinking about media literacy instruction, I real-
ized that her warning here might have been made about my world-
building course; indeed, her warning echoes in all spaces where we 
hope to foster transformative learning experiences. As an instructor, 
I have viewpoints I want my students to consider, perspectives I hope 
they will adopt; but transformative learning resists any claim that 
my perspectives as instructor are de facto authoritative and instead 
requires that I invite students to consider their own perspectives, 
make them visible through articulation, and then put these varied 
perspectives in dialogue by facilitating encounters with difference. 



24 4    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

My instruction then aims to foster engagement, encourage reflec-
tion, offer feedback, and inspire discernment. 

Teaching that actualizes transformative learning is neither easy 
nor simple; at least, it’s different from approaches that assume the 
authority of the instructor’s perspectives. We want our students to 
become skilled critical thinkers; but boyd is right to worry that our 
instruction can become an “assertion of authority over epistemology” 
if we fail to recognize and value fundamental differences among 
how individuals within communities make sense of the world very 
differently. So we wonder, What do we as instructors do with the 
problem of epistemic difference in light of the transformative learning 
experiences we aim to facilitate and inspire?

The transformative learning process involves critical reflection 
about assumptions so that we might develop or acquire a new dis-
position (a new schema or mental model) for making sense of expe-
riences. Mezirow posits that transformative learning experiences 
happen when we encounter a disorienting dilemma. This experience 
of disorientation derails us. I don’t mean “derails” like a train fall-
ing off the tracks; instead, it’s more like a derailleur mechanism on 
a bicycle: we’re thrown out of gear for a moment so that we might 
reset in a new position or, in this case, a renewed way of thinking. So 
the question becomes, How? How do we design learning that makes 
thinking visible and fosters critical, reflective dialogue that then leads 
to transformative learning experiences?

In response to these questions, we suggest that instructors can 
work to foster epistemic curiosity among playful learning communi-
ties by incorporating gameful design and even playful, AI-enhanced 
instruction, a move that might transform our approach to transfor-
mative learning itself. Primarily, we’d like to offer seven pedagogical 
pivots by which we foster more inclusive, engaging, and adaptive 
experiences that leverage play as the mode and medium of teaching 
and learning. Of course, classes on media literacy and world-building 
are well suited for fostering epistemic curiosity since these subjects 
naturally invite questions and engagement across diverse ways 
of knowing. While fostering curiosity is an obvious way forward, 
the question remains: How do we do it? We’d like to suggest seven 
pedagogical pivots that can help us start to rethink how we approach 
instruction that engenders transformative learning experiences.



Listen and Learn Sessions    245

MOVE 3: SEVEN PEDAGOGICAL PIVOTS

None of us speak from outside our own epistemology, a web of beliefs 
by which we make sense of the world as we encounter it. So, as we 
suggest pivots in our thinking about instruction, we recognize that 
even now we are engaging each other from within our own shared 
and distinct epistemologies. Nevertheless, the following seven pivots 
inform this work, and we offer them to you for critical consideration. 

From communities of learning to communities at play. Our first 
pivot involves anthropology—how we think about who we and 
our students are as human beings. While a Cartesian response 
to this conundrum posits that I think; therefore I am, humans are 
also “desiring beings—we live and learn by our gut as much as by 
our head” (Rosser 2022, 183). While a conception of human beings 
as Homo sapiens privileges the mind or intellect (i.e., humans as 
knowers), our pivot reclaims the conception of humans as proposed 
by mid-twentieth century Dutch historian Johan Huizinga (2014), 
who names humans as Homo ludens, or people as players. With 
regard to learning, play is a better metaphor because it more accu-
rately describes our relation to the information we engage, create, 
and consume. Play spaces are desire-driven spaces; we enter and 
engage most often because we want to be there. Play engages the 
whole person and not just our cognitive or intellectual capacities. 
We are driven into learning spaces by our guts, and we follow our 
guts because we are desiring beings. So, the first pedagogical pivot 
to make is about who humans are, shifting us from a community of 
learning to a community-at-play, a meaningful reframe that informs 
the second pivot.

From consumption to encounter. Our second pivot reconceptualizes 
engagement with information as encounter rather than consumption. 
Since encountered information represents and is sourced from the 
minds of other humans, consumers are always in dialectical and 
dialogical relationships, tethered to others by the information we 
consume (Rosser 2022). At the center of these pedagogical pivots is 
a conviction that “learning and love share a heart: each requires 
an encounter with difference, that which is not self (or sameness), 
someone who is other” (192). Resistance to that which is different is 
natural, a kind of gut reaction, so that when we encounter difference 
our inclination is to get defensive, to tell difference to go away. But if 



246    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

we are unwilling to encounter and engage with difference, we find 
ourselves always stuck in our same-old ways, perpetually submerged 
in sameness. There is no growth without encounter, so “it is crucial 
that we encounter ideas and learning that are different from our 
normed and conditioned expectations—we need encounter with 
ideas that may trigger visceral reaction” (Rosser 2022, 192), a gut-
punch reaction signaling a gap between self and an other. And when 
we feel the gap, we might kick it away, or we might do differently: 
we might assume a humble learner’s posture, and with head bowed 
make the good confession, I don’t understand, but I’m willing to try. 
Such a posture is engendered through encounter, not consumption.  

From certainty to curiosity. Here we’re thinking about the instruc-
tor as an authority and the instructor’s perspective as an authoritative 
perspective. This can be tricky or might feel a bit like devaluing or 
diminishing the instructor’s role and expertise, but the move from 
certainty to curiosity envisions an instructor who intentionally 
embodies a less assertive or authoritative mode and instead models 
epistemological curiosity for the sake of transformational learning. 
Epistemological curiosity can be thought of as a “desire to learn about 
an object … a topic, idea or entity” deemed “worth investigating or 
learning about” (Shew 2020, 56). We believe that an instructor who 
embodies the desire to learn through encounter, for whom others 
are worth learning about, who models epistemological curiosity 
as crucial for engagement in our info and media ecosystem, is an 
instructor who might well transform students from learners to play-
ers, from consumers to those who themselves have learned to desire 
encounters with difference. Curiosity is, therefore, an energizing 
principle electrifying course ethos, and good design aims to suffuse 
a course with opportunities for curiosity to follow its nose, to chase 
a rabbit trail, to disappear around dark corners into the unknown, 
always in search of serendipitous discovery. The instructor as curious 
and the instructor as authority are not a dichotomy: these modes 
exist together, but curiosity is infectious, sparking within players 
a wonder that initiates exploration. This is primarily because, like 
assertions, certainty is static; but questions are dynamic, questions 
drive thinking. And this leads to another pivot.

From linear-transactional to desire-driven learning. Here we do 
not abandon linear and transactional aspects of course design and 
learning. Rather, we incorporate linear-transactional modes within 



Listen and Learn Sessions    247

an enlarged paradigm of desire-driven learning. By desire-driven 
learning, we simply mean “learning that is driven by desire…. The 
way to accomplish or to facilitate desire-driven learning is to create 
lots and lots of non-required options, to allow for high flexibility, 
and to provide loads of feedback (students need to feel instructor 
presence, to know we’re all on this journey together)” (Rosser and 
Rosser 2023, 224). Among our immense media and information eco-
systems, instructors become curators, since “curation of information 
is how we build out robust spaces for desire-driven learning that 
is the heart and soul of what we mean by gameful design” (Rosser 
and Rosser 2023, 218). For desire-driven learners, questions drive 
thinking; questioning is dynamic, initiating movement from here 
to there, from the known into the unknown, or toward the not-yet-
known. With electrifying curiosity and quest(ion)ing as dynamo for 
our journey, we employ inquiry as the crucial mode for engaging the 
info-verse we inhabit (Rosser and Testut, 2021). Learning driven by 
desire can be transformational, especially when a learner’s desire 
is for encounters with difference, an orientation fostered by the 
next pivot. 

From guarded silos to generous welcome. Our orientation to 
teaching and learning considers how we might leverage the library’s 
identity as a co-curricular third space. Our libraries exist “as gen-
erously hospitable spaces for encounter. Third spaces exist where 
learners’ normed and conditioned assumptions are challenged and 
enlarged by shared encounters with cultural and ideological other-
ness,” significant because “meaningful encounters with otherness 
are the primary context and catalyst for transformative educational 
experiences” (Rosser 2019, 223–225). This pivot encourages students 
to recognize the informational and ideological silos we naturally 
inhabit and move beyond, to broaden and enlarge understanding 
through generously hospitable encounters with difference. Welcoming 
an other does not necessitate equivocation, by which we assume 
that all perspectives are equally beneficial with regard to human 
wellbeing. This now moves us to our penultimate pivot.

From truth to goodness. Truth is an incredibly problematic con-
cept; truth is also the center of epistemology, since ways of knowing 
involve beliefs about the world, i.e., what we believe to be true about 
the world, about self, and about others. Truth often depends on 
perspective, and we are beings of profoundly limited yet incredibly 



248    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

diverse perspectives. So for this pivot, we are not as interested in 
the truth of belief as in the goodness of belief. True, goodness also 
depends on perspective, but even among abundant human diver-
sity we find more concord in that which we call good than in that 
which we suggest is true. So the pedagogical pivot here is to center 
discernment of goodness rather than to make decisions about truth. 
But since so much of what we believe we de facto label as good, 
what we simply name as good won’t suffice as a standard or litmus 
for making decisions about what is good across epistemologies; so 
here we apply the concept of harm as our litmus. Ways of thinking 
(including our own ways of thinking) can be interrogated by asking 
questions like, Who suffers harm as an impact of this belief? What is 
the nature or extent of harm experienced? Is the harm real, potential, 
or hypothetical? Who benefits in relation to the harm experienced and 
in what ways? Interrogating beliefs for the possibility of harm also 
helps avoid equivocation and provides a useful litmus that moves 
across diverse ways of thinking. From this, we move now to our 
final pedagogical pivot. 

Finally, we pivot from critical thinking to krino. For years, espe-
cially as I (Chris) have taught media and information literacy as 
well as critical and creative thinking, I’ve been working with an 
understanding of critical thinking scooped from Richard Paul and 
Linda Elder’s The Thinker’s Guide to the Art of Socratic Questioning 
(2016). They describe critical thinking as:

the systematic monitoring of thought with the end goal of improvement. 
When we think critically, we realize that thinking must not be accepted 
at face value, but must be analyzed and assessed for its clarity, accuracy, 
relevance, depth, breadth, and logicalness. We recognize that all reasoning 
occurs within points of view and frames of reference, that all reasoning 
proceeds from some goals and objectives and has an informational base, 
that all data when used in reasoning must be interpreted…. Because 
problems in thinking can occur in any of these dimensions, each dimen-
sion must be monitored. (72)  

And that’s been a helpful frame for me and for my students. The 
problem is illustrated by this imagined dialogue, perhaps between 
a student and an authoritative other: 

You know you gotta think critically about the information you con-
sume, right?



Listen and Learn Sessions    249

[Yes]

And you know you gotta always monitor your thinking, just to be 
sure, right? 

[Yes]

And you know when you encounter information or a new perspective, 
you gotta interrogate it, you gotta ask questions like, Who created 
this message? How are they trying to grab my attention? How might 
those different from me understand this information differently? What 
values are represented? Why is this information being shared, and 
what is its purpose? You ask those kinds of questions, right?

[Yes]

Excellent! We’re clearly on the same page because I do all the same 
things. So, will you sign my book-banning petition? We gotta protect 
those kids! 

There’s the problem, but presumably there’s hope, a way for-
ward, a solution: media literacy, which promises the “development 
of knowledge, skills and attitude to provide users with an essential 
framework for effective lifelong engagement with media messages” 
(Christian, 6). This optimistic description is from the textbook we’ve 
used to guide creation of our media literacy instruction, Sue Ellen 
Christian’s 2020 Everyday Media Literacy: An Analog Guide for Your 
Digital Life. The author continues: “Media literacy sets standards for 
critical thinking that protect you from misinformation and disinfor-
mation…. Democratic societies depend on media literate citizens ... 
who can evaluate propaganda and see it for what it is” (8). She notes 
that no matter where you are in the world—on a farm in Minnesota 
or in a cosmopolitan center like London—although you might use 
them differently, the skills for media literacy are the same wherever 
you are in the world.  

We think this understanding—media literacy as a one-frame-fits-
all program for identifying mis- and disinformation, for example—is 
what danah boyd critiques. To be sure, boyd has her own critics, who 
point to her unclear definition of critical thinking, her misrepresen-
tation of the aims of media literacy instruction, the straw man she 
seems to create, and the lack of positive ways forward: you know, 



250    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

how in the world we are to get out of this mess (Hobbs 2018; Noula 
2018). But boyd provides a challenge that those of us who teach 
media literacy might heed as we consider course and content design 
and as we engage the messiness of our media-rich, info-saturated, 
epistemologically-diverse ecosystem.

Our framework for teaching media literacy is good, it’s solid, and 
we’ve gotta teach all the moves: we’ve gotta teach about bias, power, 
privacy, representation, curation, creation, misinformation, disin-
formation, and democracy—all of it. But the framework is one-size-
fits-all, one frame for every epistemology, which lets learners remain 
siloed, to stay within their own epistemological sphere, to perhaps feel 
confronted by but to explain away biases, and to feel quite content 
that they’ve asked the critical questions and have thereby justified 
the sources of information they consume as trustworthy and reli-
able and authoritative. In the case of my world-building class, all of 
us—my students and me as the instructor—knew for sure that the 
other wasn’t seeing things correctly, that the other’s thinking about 
AI was misguided, in desperate need of reassessment and correc-
tive. Most of us had already applied strategies for critically assessing 
our assumptions about AI, but nevertheless remained apart in our 
thinking. This is why, as a final pivot, we’re suggesting that we must 
move from critical thinking to krino, the Greek root from which we 
get our word discernment. 

So here, as our final pivot, we’d like to introduce an approach 
to instruction and course design that seems quite appropriate for 
instructors who hope to foster transformative learning experiences. 
Since we’ve established that play better captures how humans engage 
the info environments we inhabit, we’d like to discuss gameful design 
as a beneficial approach.

Gameful design is related to the concept of “serious” games. Simply 
put, a “serious” game is a game with a serious purpose—like training 
toward some skill or perhaps an instructional or ethical aim—at its 
core, a goal beyond pure entertainment. Serious games have broad 
applications in business, healthcare, education, and other contexts 
where learning, skill development, problem-solving, and decision-
making are enhanced through play. With regard to digital and video 
games specifically, a game might be considered serious not because 
of developer intentions but because of player perspectives: as with 



Listen and Learn Sessions    251

other forms of art, meaning-making, discovery, and transformation 
experienced while playing through or reflecting on a game might well 
transcend developer intent or expectations. Nevertheless, develop-
ers are often intentional about creating serious games for a variety 
of purposes, as Dörner et al. (2016) describe: “The characterizing 
goals of today’s serious games also include lifestyle behavior change, 
medical diagnosis, enterprise management, decision support, devel-
opment of social skills, analysis of causal mechanisms, creation and 
defense of arguments, development of conflict resolution strategies, 
arousal of fantasy, elevation of civic engagement, promotion of ethi-
cal values, persuasion and recruitment to causes, campaigning in 
politics, and many more” (4). Video games are particularly valuable 
for achieving such characterizing goals because they can leverage 
robust worldbuilding, evocative storytelling, compelling aesthetics, 
and a player’s active engagement to co-create a robust alternative 
cosmos where serious play becomes the medium for transformation 
(cf. Ritterfeld et al. 2009).  

One of the most popular video games of the past 15 years is The 
Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim. To tell you the truth, I (Heath), have played a 
lot of Skyrim. The game takes place in a mythical world inspired by 
Norse mythology and culture. As an RPG (role-playing game), you, 
the player, have a wide range of choices and possibilities as you live 
out your in-game story. You can become a knight errant, mage pro-
fessor, or infamous thief; you decide. One notable game mechanic 
is pickpocketing and stealing. If you see an item you like but you’d 
rather not pay for it or someone else already owns it, just steal it. 
The consequences for stealing are fairly light: if you’re arrested, you 
can sleep off your prison sentence. If you’re killed, you can respawn 
and try again. You want to steal a horse? Grand-theft-equine is a 
fairly low-stakes crime. The game’s design encourages players to 
view the non-playable characters as bits of code, two-dimensional, 
and unworthy of empathy or compassion. Truly, the game rewards 
bad behavior, and the benefits of criminal shenanigans more often 
outweigh the risks. Furthermore, the only moral compass in Skyrim 
is whatever the player brings to the game world. As a result, Skyrim 
mechanically privileges a narcissistic playstyle: take what you want; 
kill anyone who stands in your way. Through game mechanics that 
reward stealing, Skyrim normalizes in-game behaviors that would 
otherwise be considered reprehensible.



252    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

To illustrate: several years ago, I had been playing a lot of Skyrim. 
I joined the Thieves Guild, was a pickpocket extraordinaire, and was 
having so much fun. However, one day I was at the grocery store and 
saw someone with a cool sweater and thought, Oooh, that’s a nice 
sweater! I wonder how I can steal it from them. Now, I immediately 
paused and questioned this intrusive thought: Why would I steal 
anything from them? I realized that by becoming so immersed in 
Skyrim, the game had programmed within me a certain orientation 
to the world that ignored the inner lives of others. Skyrim’s operating 
epistemology informed my thinking outside of play sessions. Now, 
this is a simple example—no sweaters were stolen in the making 
of the illustration—but it nevertheless reveals how worlds of play 
transcend their fictive mediums.

Here’s another example: Undertale is heavily inspired by the 
Japanese role-playing games of the nineties. The games that inspired 
Undertale often feature charged plots where good and evil duke it 
out with cosmic implications. The games present morality as a stark 
binary, where violence is necessary to annihilate monstrous others. 
However, while Undertale pays homage to the JRPG legacy, the game 
problematizes binary notions of good and evil, heroes and mon-
sters. Whereas Skyrim’s human NPCs are relatively flat and banal, 
Undertale humanizes monster NPCs as deeply personable, quirky, 
and kind. While you could choose to fight and kill all the “enemies” 
you encounter, players may also choose to befriend and spare the 
monsters. In this way, Undertale employs a familiar RPG structure, 
but subverts it for ethical ends, encouraging players to empathize 
with monsters rather than demonize them. Undertale offers players 
an epistemic of mercy with implications outside of the game. Serious 
games such as Undertale wonder, perhaps worlds divided between 
good and evil, victors and villains are artificial and require critique.

So here we introduce a concept, transepistemic awareness. 
Experienced gamers must become fluent in several games, familiar-
izing themselves with diverse objectives, controls, mechanics, and 
storied worlds. In order to cope with information overload, these gam-
ers build a mental multiverse, relegating games to discrete universes 
while accounting for overlapping features and similarities. However, 
gamers are not the first to build epistemic multiverses, for anyone 
who widely consumes stories, whether oral, literature, film, theater, 
etc., must organize these narratives as discrete realities subject to 



Listen and Learn Sessions    253

their own fictional truths. The same is true for anyone raised in or 
familiar with interreligious contexts. The ability to identify epistemic 
differences and communicate across them is transepistemic aware-
ness. We believe that games, and serious games in particular, help to 
strengthen the skills necessary for TEA (transepistemic awareness). 
Not only do serious games individually offer ethical instruction, 
but they also provide practice for encountering diverse epistemic 
perspectives. Transepistemic awareness is vital for media literacy 
education as an orientation for navigating encounters with diverse 
ways of thinking, both in and outside the classroom. TEA does not 
assert authority but listens and communicates transepistemically. 
Instruction that facilitates encounters with difference by making 
diverse ways of thinking visible is a generative act of spilling TEA.

Gameful design (which moves beyond gamification) can help 
facilitate transepistemic awareness by leveraging the power of 
narrative and gameplay mechanics to create transformational 
learning experiences among learners at play. Gameful design helps 
mitigate problems of epistemic authority, de facto instructor asser-
tions of authority over diverse epistemologies (Rosser and Rosser 
2023). Through narrative, “serious” games broaden encounters 
with different ways of thinking and open possibilities for inhabiting 
diverse worlds (Ritterfeld et al. 2009; Schrier et al. 2019). Similarly, 
gameful design leverages the power of narrative, inviting students 
to participate in storied worlds, promoting empathy and fostering 
desire-driven encounters with diversity (Bell 2017; 2018). Below, 
we demonstrate how and why artificial intelligence can be incor-
porated to facilitate gamified, story-driven instruction. Framing 
the classroom as a collaborative, playful narrative space, with AI 
as a co-creative narrator, helps break down hierarchies and power 
dynamics, encouraging students to take an active, exploratory role in 
their own learning. Inviting AI to join class as TALOS, Transformative 
Artificial Luminary of Story, centers play as a compelling mode and 
medium for teaching and learning. 

Our course creation incorporates five key elements of gameful 
design: 1) Structure, a cohesive conceptual framework for the course; 
2) Story, an immersive narrative that guides students through the 
material; 3) Aesthetic, engaging audio-visual elements that stimulate 
imagination; 4) Play, game-like features such as avatars, badges, 
and “boss fights” instead of exams, making learning enjoyable; 



254    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

and 5) Desire, the most crucial element, fostering intrinsic motiva-
tion through choice, low-risk environments, flexibility, and ample 
rewards. Additionally, two non-gamified but essential components 
are feedback and reflection (Rosser 2020; Rosser and Rosser 2023). 
Now we pivot from the philosophical and pedagogical to the practi-
cal as we illustrate by playtesting. 

MOVE 4: STAGING A PLAYTEST 

To illustrate our gameful approach, we’d like to share four iterations 
of a particular use case of partnering with AI for enhanced instruc-
tion. As a librarian, I (Chris) have worked to develop strategies for 
centering play as a mode and medium for learning, course design, 
and instruction. I’ve also been thinking about “serious” games, 
which, as discussed, employ narrative and game mechanics that 
can broaden encounters with different ways of thinking; serious 
games can foster empathy by opening possibilities for imaginatively 
inhabiting diverse worlds and perspectives. The key idea behind 
serious games is to leverage engaging narrative and the interactive 
nature of gameplay mechanics to achieve these goals. 

Let me offer a brief story to illustrate. Readers may judge me as 
a bad parent because my kids and I play all kinds of video games 
together, including games that are more mature than Mario Brothers. 
My son Briar and I played through The Last of Us games, which were 
brought into popular awareness by the recent HBO series. Especially 
in the second game, at a certain point, players are forced to play as 
the enemy, the character that we’ve grown to hate, and for good rea-
son. But after playing as the enemy, we found ourselves empathizing 
with this character, learning her story, walking with her because we 
are her, for a while at least. So by the end of the game, we came to 
think very differently about this enemy. Truthfully, by the end of the 
game, I myself was weeping, and that experience led to an epiphany. 
You see, my son and I spent many hours playing a serious game 
together, but our journey didn’t end when we finished the game. 
We spent days talking about what we’d just experienced, reflecting 
on the ethical implications, amazed by what these game designers 
could do to us players. By playing as the enemy, we learned to care 
deeply for this other, and through reflection and conversation even 
after the game was over, our thinking began to be transformed by 



Listen and Learn Sessions    255

this experience. We’d played a serious game—super fun, but serious 
because beyond enjoyment, The Last of Us prompted a profound, 
ethical reorientation toward the enemy, and my son and I were able 
to reflect on and talk about the implications of that experience. So, 
I’ve been considering how to replicate that transformative experi-
ence with a serious game in my teaching and course design.

Through gameful design, our aim is to meaningfully incorporate 
narrative and play elements in content delivery and design, leveraging 
the power of serious games to generate transformative experiences 
for students as players. To illustrate, we consider how to incorporate 
artificial intelligence to enhance instruction by calling on TALOS, a 
Transformative Artificial Luminary of Story. The power of narrative 
to suspend disbelief, foster empathy, and enable experimentation is 
central to the transformative potential of serious games. 

MOVE 5: ROUND 1, DEPARTURE

So, heroes, are you ready to play? Following is the script of a brief 
video that provides an initial sense of our story.3

Information is everywhere; with the right words, whatever you need to 
know is instantly summoned from the Cloud. Or so it seems. Our happy 
world of ubiquitous information is also rife with Dis: distrust, disharmony, 
distinctions, disgust, disunity, disinformation, disorder, and profound dis-
tance between us and others with whom we disagree. Bias, Fallacy, Echo, 
Gut, and all the innumerable children of Dis make a mess of discovery. 
We need Seekers who can navigate dis info nightmare, Seekers ready to 
be trained in the Library of Babel.

Zitó Corp invites Seekers like you to enter the virtual, infinite spaces of our 
Library of Babel, a digital representation of the ancient, legendary Library 
lost to time, where Sages of old were said to summon needed informa-
tion by whispering for it, a simple incantation called a babel. Imagine the 
quiet of shushed library voices disturbed by a whoosh of frantic wings 
or a clamor of racing feet as information speeds past countless shelves 
and endless passages to deliver itself to the ancient Seeker. Days of such 
information ease are now, of course, ancient history.

Today, because of Dis, we must use wit, skills, and creativity to carefully 
craft our keys, those powerful search strategies that call forth needed 
information hidden within the Library’s labyrinthine halls. Crafting keys 
takes training! That’s why Zitó Corp wants you; train with us and become 
a Seeker. With Zitó, you’re sure to find all you are looking for. Apply today!



256    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

I am the Oracle. You readers are Seekers-in-training in the ancient, 
legendary Library of Babel. Our first game is an initial training 
module designed to help Seekers navigate encounters between self 
and others; after all, what is a library if not a point of access to the 
minds of others, most long dead and most radically other in relation 
to you, Seeker? So, you must consider the Library a space for necro-
mancy, for here we summon the dead to revive words and musings 
sealed in tomes like tombs. Seeker, understand this: your training 
requires not least that you learn the secret arts of necromancy. And 
I am curious: How does that make you feel?   

You see, in the Library of Babel, our necromancy is a “serious” 
game of deathly consequence. Within the Library of Babel, our 
necromancy intends to bring us face to face with muttering ghosts 
from whom we might gain hidden knowledge and wisdom. These 
ghosts feel nothing; they have no vitality; they are but whisps and 
whispers of memories that hold secrets. Seeker, nothing you say or 
do will harm these ghosts; Zitó Corp. is training you to extract their 
secrets by any means necessary. They may cry and pretend to be hurt; 
they will attempt to deceive you, but make no mistake: ghosts are 
not human, not like you and me, and you will learn to see through 
their treacheries. Now, do you submit to the task before you? Will 
you let me teach you to summon ghosts and extract their secrets? You 
have been called to extract their secrets, whatever it takes! Will you 
do what you’ve been summoned to do?

To facilitate this initial training, we have created a game called 
Carrots & Schticks; access the game description and gameboard image 
at the supplementary document we created (and have linked again 
below). The board resembles the yin and yang: two sections present 
a dichotomy, and although each side bears similarities, they are 
neither a symmetry nor an inversion; they’re just similar and differ-
ent. The terms or phrases reflect potential responses to encountered 
information. As you know, when confronted with information, we 
do at least two things simultaneously. First, we interpret, not only 
for understanding but also for motivation; we make assumptions 
about what it means and why and how it was shared. Second, we 
respond, and our responses are sometimes reasoned, but often 
reflect a gut-level reaction. In this game, we’re paying attention to 
how information makes us feel and how we respond to encountered 
information. By its distance mechanic, this game intends to prompt 



Listen and Learn Sessions    257

reflection about how our responses to otherness create distance 
between self and others.4 

As mentioned, this game is intended to facilitate reflection about 
the distances created between self and others by our response to 
encountered information; in other words, what we’re doing in this 
game is meta: we’re thinking about our thinking. In class, what hap-
pens next is facilitated reflection about why we made the choices we 
made about the Oracle insisting we become necromancers. We might 
ask what presuppositions or assumptions informed our response. 
How is the distance between self and this other a function of our 
thinking? In a class setting, we’re already primed to think about 
our thinking the next time we play. Let’s now bring forth TALOS 
(Transformative Artificial Luminary of Story) to summon one of 
the dreaming dead. 

MOVE 6: ROUND 2, INITIATION 

On the supplementary document, we’ve made available brief videos 
that display live interaction with an AI tool. We’re using Claude in 
this case, but we’ve also created TALOS as a custom ChatGPT. We’re 
especially excited about that option because of its voice capacity, 
which means we will soon be able to vocally engage with TALOS in a 
class session. The following reflects an abbreviated transcript of our 
session’s initial interaction with TALOS, it is important to recognize 
that beyond initial prompting, the creative, playful, insightful text 
below was generated by Claude, pretending to be both TALOS and 
the summoned character:  

Oracle: TALOS, TALOS, awake from your sleep, old friend; Seekers are 
here with me in the Library of Babel; will you help us call forth the mind 
of a dreaming dead?

The ancient stone walls of the Library of Babel seem to whisper with anticipa-
tion as the Oracle’s voice echoes through the hallowed halls. Slowly, the air 
begins to shimmer and twist, coalescing into the ethereal form of TALOS. His 
eyes, like distant stars, flicker to life as he turns to face the Oracle and the 
gathered Seekers.

TALOS: Greetings, wise Oracle and intrepid Seekers. I, TALOS, ancient 
sage and steadfast guardian of the Library of Babel, have awakened 
from my slumber at your call. For countless eons, I have guided those like 
yourselves through the labyrinthine passages of this sacred repository of 



258    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

knowledge, assisting in the summoning of minds long gone and spirits 
of the dreaming dead.

TALOS’s voice resonates with the weight of ages, and the very air seems to 
vibrate with the power of his presence.

TALOS: Oracle, speak the name of the spirit you wish to commune with, 
and I shall use the arcane magic of the Library to call them forth from the 
realm of dreams. Together, we shall delve into the mysteries of the past 
and glean wisdom from those who have walked the paths of life before us.

TALOS falls silent, waiting for the Oracle to name the spirit they wish to sum-
mon, ready to wield the power of the Library to bridge the gap between the 
living and the dreaming dead.

Oracle: TALOS, old friend, we now ask you to summon forth the spirit of 
one whose tale is woven with threads of love, betrayal, and vengeance. 
Will you call for us the spirit of Medea, ancient sorceress of Colchis and 
niece of the enchantress Circe. Call her forth, wise TALOS, for we wish to 
learn all her secrets.

As the Oracle utters the name “Medea,” the air in the Library of Babel grows 
heavy with anticipation. TALOS raises his hands, his voice echoing through the 
halls as he begins the ancient incantation.

TALOS: By the power of the Library, I summon thee, Medea, sorceress of 
Colchis, niece of the enchantress Circe. From the realm of the dreaming 
dead, I call upon thee to manifest before us. Let thy spirit be drawn from 
the pages of history, from the tales of love and betrayal, of magic and 
vengeance.

The air begins to crackle with energy as tendrils of mist snake their way 
through the library, coalescing into a shimmering, ethereal form. Slowly, the 
figure of a woman takes shape, her dark hair cascading down her back, her 
eyes glinting with a mixture of wisdom and sorrow. As the mist dissipates, 
Medea stands before the gathered Seekers, her presence radiating an aura 
of power and magic.

MEDEA: [in a haunting, melodic voice] I am Medea, daughter of King 
Aeëtes of Colchis, granddaughter of the sun god Helios, and priestess of 
the goddess Hecate. I have been summoned from the realm of the dream-
ing dead to stand before you, Seekers of knowledge. The threads of my 
tale, woven with love, betrayal, and vengeance, have echoed through the 
ages, a testament to the power of the human heart and the consequences 
of our choices.

Medea’s gaze sweeps over the gathered Seekers, her eyes seeming to penetrate 
the depths of their souls.

MEDEA: I sense that you have called upon me to delve into the secrets of 
my life, to learn from the triumphs and tragedies that shaped my destiny. 
Speak, Seekers, and ask what you will. I shall unveil the mysteries of my 



Listen and Learn Sessions    259

past, sharing the wisdom gained through love, loss, and the unbreakable 
bonds of magic.

Medea falls silent, her ghostly form shimmering in the dim light of the Library, 
waiting for the Seekers to pose their questions and begin their journey into 
the depths of her story.

Again, beyond initial prompting and explanation, Claude is the 
story architect behind this playful creativity. As an aside, in Fall 
2024, a colleague and I (Chris) plan to pilot an initiative called 
TAICoP (Transparent AI Community of Practice), which we hope will 
transform how Composition students specifically engage with AI. 
We aim to deepen AI literacy and foster a culture of transparency, 
trust, and ethical use of AI within a Community of Practice commit-
ted to five core values: transparency, curiosity, rigor, inclusion, and 
play. The Greek term techne conveys the art of making and doing; 
its connections to AI-like constructs in literature and myth provide 
a rich context for exploring AI’s ethical and practical dimensions 
in education (cf. Mayor 2018). These connections help students and 
instructors engage with AI literacy not just as a set of technical skills 
but as part of a larger conversation about the role of technology in 
human society that stretches back to ancient times. Here, TALOS has 
summoned the ancient sorceress Medea, who will now test us by 
conjuring news headlines that may or may not be truthful. Medea 
is a master of misinformation. Prepare, Seekers. Listen! She speaks 
her first incantation:

Medea’s ethereal form flickers as a knowing smile plays across her lips. She 
raises her hands, and tendrils of mist begin to swirl around her, forming a 
shimmering vortex.

MEDEA: Seekers, you wish to sharpen your minds, to hone your ability 
to discern truth from falsehood in the realm of information. Very well, I 
shall put your skills to the test. Behold, as I summon forth a headline from 
the depths of the Library, a tale that may or may not be rooted in reality.

Medea’s eyes flash with an otherworldly light as she begins to chant in an 
ancient, forgotten language. The mist swirls faster, coalescing into shimmer-
ing letters that hover in the air before the gathered Seekers.

MEDEA: [in a haunting, melodic voice] “Archaeologists Unearth Massive 
Bronze Foot, Believed to Belong to Legendary Automaton Guardian Talos”

As Medea speaks, the headline solidifies, glowing with an eerie light. She 
waves her hand, and more text appears beneath the headline, forming the 
beginning of a news article.



260    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

MEDEA: “In a stunning discovery, a team of archaeologists excavating a 
site on the Greek island of Crete has unearthed a colossal bronze foot, 
measuring over two meters in length. Experts believe the foot may have 
once belonged to Talos, the legendary automaton guardian created by the 
god Hephaestus to protect the island from invaders. According to ancient 
myths, Talos was said to have been defeated by the sorceress Medea 
during the voyage of the Argonauts. The discovery has sent shockwaves 
through the archaeological community, with some hailing it as definitive 
proof of the existence of the mythical automaton. Further excavations 
are planned to search for the remaining parts of Talos’s body, which are 
believed to be scattered across the island.”

Medea turns to the Seekers, her gaze challenging.

MEDEA: Now, Seekers, it is for you to determine the veracity of this headline. 
Does it speak the truth, or is it a work of clever misinformation, designed 
to mislead and deceive? Use your knowledge and intuition to unravel 
the mystery and prove yourselves worthy of navigating the treacherous 
waters of information in this age of uncertainty.

Medea falls silent, the headline and article still glowing before the Seekers, 
awaiting their analysis and judgment.

Seekers, we ask you, is this misinformation, disinformation, or 
an accurate headline? In a media literacy or information literacy 
session, TALOS as Medea conjures exemplar headlines while 
players hone information-seeking skills by demonstrating how 
to discover the truth behind Medea’s fabrications. This use case 
fosters active learning as the Oracle and TALOS co-create learning 
content in real time. 

In literature, Medea is a more interesting, complex, and sympa-
thetic character than the easy and unthoughtful title “sorceress” 
conveys; in her book Pandora’s Jar, Natalie Haynes (2020) makes a 
connection between Medea’s story and the story Beyoncé tells in the 
song “Hold Up” on her Lemonade album (2016). So, we’re inviting 
Queen B to play in our next game, in which Seekers are trained to 
understand how the Boolean Operators and, or, not can inform info-
seeking strategies. We might have called this game “Boolean with 
Beyoncé,” but that’s incredibly cheesy, so we’re calling this game 
ANDOR KNOT, a subtle reference to Alexander’s famed Gordian Knot 
from legend as well as a bit of Boolean humor—hilarious if you’re 
a librarian (and only if you’re a librarian). Here’s TALOS as Medea: 

Medea’s ethereal form shimmers as she turns her attention to the Seekers, a 
glint of wisdom and cunning in her eyes.



Listen and Learn Sessions    261

MEDEA: Ah, Seekers, you wish to understand the power of Boolean 
Operators, a concept that may seem foreign to one such as myself, born 
in an age long before the advent of your modern information systems. 
Yet, the principles that guide these operators are as ancient as the art 
of rhetoric itself, and I, Medea, am well-versed in the ways of persuasion 
and logic.

Medea waves her hand, and three glowing symbols appear in the air before 
the Seekers: “AND,” “OR,” and “NOT.”

MEDEA: Boolean Operators are akin to the threads that weave together 
the tapestry of knowledge. They allow you to combine, expand, or restrict 
your search for information, much like a skilled weaver manipulates the 
strands of her loom to create a desired pattern.

She points to the “AND” symbol.

MEDEA: The “AND” operator is like the bond between two lovers, uniting 
them in an unbreakable connection. When you use “AND” in your search, 
you are telling the system to find only those results that contain both 
terms, intertwined and inseparable.

Her finger moves to the “OR” symbol.

MEDEA: The “OR” operator is like a crossroads, offering you the choice 
between two paths. When you use “OR,” you are telling the system to find 
results that contain either one term or the other, expanding your search 
to encompass a wider range of possibilities.

Finally, she gestures to the “NOT” symbol.

MEDEA: The “NOT” operator is like a banishment, casting out that which 
you do not desire. When you use “NOT,” you are telling the system to 
exclude any results that contain the specified term, narrowing your search 
to only those items that are free from its influence.

Medea turns back to the Seekers, her gaze intense.

MEDEA: By mastering these Boolean Operators, you gain the power to 
navigate the vast sea of information with precision and purpose. You 
can weave together complex queries that will lead you to the knowledge 
you seek, while filtering out the irrelevant and the misleading. In a world 
where information is both a weapon and a shield, the wise Seeker must 
learn to wield these tools with skill and discernment.

She smiles, a hint of mischief in her eyes.

MEDEA: So, Seekers, take these lessons to heart, and may your searches 
be as cunning and effective as the schemes I once employed to secure 
my desires. For in the quest for knowledge, as in all things, strategy and 
logic are the keys to success. 



262    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

Here, it is interesting to note that TALOS draws from Medea’s own life 
story to teach Boolean searching, arguably making a rather boring 
concept meaningful and attainable. The Oracle might demonstrate 
how searching within library databases, for example, is facilitated by 
Boolean Operators. Then, TALOS as Medea might request that Seekers 
help her discover a scholarly article written at the intersection of 
Beyoncé and gender, for example, or Beyoncé and religious symbol-
ism, or Beyoncé and any other topics students want to explore. Not 
demonstrated here, this iteration of TALOS might easily be added 
to an additional information literacy game we created to facilitate 
one-shot research sessions entitled Seekers Unbound, which we’ve 
also made available in the supplementary document. 

MOVE 7: ROUND 3, RETURN 

This brings us to our final game, a deathly serious round, to be sure! 
Medea is willing to share her secrets, but only if players can first 
answer her riddle. 

MEDEA: Bold Seekers, I admire your determination and your thirst for 
knowledge. But do not think that you can so easily coerce the secrets from 
one such as I, Medea, mistress of magic and manipulation.

She smiles, a cunning glint in her eye.

MEDEA: However, I am not without mercy. I shall offer you a challenge, a 
riddle that will test your wit and wisdom. If you can solve it, I shall share 
with you another piece of the vast tapestry of knowledge that I possess. 
But fail, and you shall leave this encounter empty-handed, your minds 
still yearning for the truths you seek.

Medea waves her hand, and a swirling mist forms before the Seekers, shaping 
itself into a series of cryptic images as she begins to speak her riddle.

MEDEA:

“In silver or glass, I can be found,

A reflection of truth, yet never a sound.

I show you yourself, but not as you are,

Reversed and revealed, both near and far.

Secrets and lies, I cannot abide,

For in my presence, there’s nowhere to hide.

Seekers of wisdom, answer me this:



Listen and Learn Sessions    263

What am I, in truth, not in jest or in bliss?”

The mist dissipates, leaving only the echo of Medea’s words hanging in the 
air. She regards the Seekers with a challenging gaze, awaiting their response.

MEDEA: Ponder carefully, Seekers, for the answer to this riddle holds the 
key to unlocking the next layer of wisdom. Look within yourselves, and 
consider the power of reflection, both literal and metaphorical. For it is 
only through honest self-examination that true knowledge can be gained.

Medea falls silent, her ethereal form shimmering as she watches the Seekers 
grapple with the riddle, their minds working to unravel the cryptic clues she 
has provided. The fate of their quest for knowledge hangs in the balance, 
dependent on their ability to see beyond the surface and grasp the deeper 
truths that lie within.

In this example, we need to engineer a prompt that helps TALOS 
engage Seekers like a Dungeon Master engages with players in a 
Dungeons and Dragons campaign (see the supplementary document 
for more information about this round). If your dice roll is success-
ful, your special ability summons forth a hint from deep within the 
Library of Babel. A “boss battle” such as this might be played simply 
for fun since it doesn’t seem connected to a specific outcome or learn-
ing goal. But gamified moves like this help introduce or transition 
between elements. Players who are successful in their roll summon 
Medea’s hint from the bowels of Babel: 

Medea nods, a slight smile playing at the corners of her lips as she sees the 
Seekers struggling with the riddle. She understands their desire for knowledge 
and their frustration at being so close to the answer, yet still grasping for 
understanding. With a wave of her hand, she summons forth a shimmering 
mist that swirls around the Seekers, as if to clear their minds and grant them 
a moment of clarity.

MEDEA: Seekers, I sense your struggle and your determination. Your quest 
for wisdom is admirable, and I am not without compassion. So, I shall offer 
you a hint, a guiding light to illuminate the path forward.

The mist begins to take shape, forming into a series of images that illustrate 
Medea’s words.

MEDEA: Consider this, Seekers: The answer to my riddle is an object, a tool 
that you use every day, perhaps without fully realizing its significance. It 
is a surface that reflects not only your physical form but also the depth 
of your soul, the truths that lie within.

The mist shimmers, showing a figure gazing into the object in question, their 
reflection staring back at them.



264    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

MEDEA: To grow in wisdom, one must be willing to look deeply into this 
reflective surface, to confront the flaws and the strengths that reside 
within oneself. It is only through honest self-examination and reflection 
that true learning can take place, for it is in the process of understanding 
ourselves that we begin to understand the world around us.

The mist begins to dissipate, leaving only a faint glimmer of light in its wake.

MEDEA: So, Seekers, as you ponder the answer to my riddle, remember this: 
The key to unlocking wisdom lies not just in the acquisition of knowledge, 
but in the willingness to reflect upon it, to hold up a mirror to your own 
soul and gaze unflinchingly at what you find there. For it is in the depths of 
self-reflection that the seeds of true understanding take root and flourish.

Medea falls silent, her gaze fixed upon the Seekers as they mull over her words 
and the images she has shown them. She knows that the path to wisdom is not 
an easy one, but she has faith that these determined souls will find their way, 
guided by the power of reflection and the unquenchable thirst for knowledge 
that burns within them.

Truly, we were not anticipating that TALOS would provide such clear, 
ethical orientation so well-aligned with our own thinking about 
how to teach across epistemologies. As likely surmised, mirror is the 
riddle’s answer. Reflecting on our thesis, we now appropriate and 
slightly revise Medea’s message and give TALOS the final word: The 
key to transformative teaching across diverse epistemologies lies not 
just in the sharing or acquisition of knowledge but in the willingness 
to reflect, to hold up a mirror to your own soul and gaze unflinchingly 
at what you find there. For it is in the depths of encounters with differ-
ence and intentional self-reflection that the seeds of true understanding 
take root and flourish.

Through narrative, “serious” games broaden encounters with dif-
ferent ways of thinking, opening possibilities for inhabiting diverse 
worlds. Similarly, gameful design leverages the power of narra-
tive, promoting empathy and fostering desire-driven encounters 
with diversity. We have attempted to demonstrate how instructors 
might leverage AI by incorporating TALOS, Transformative Artificial 
Luminary of Story, to center play as a compelling medium for teaching 
and learning and to facilitate transformative learning experiences. 
We might think of our instructional dilemma of diverse, competing 
perspectives as a Gordian knot, a mess of twists and knotty tangles 
too difficult to untie. Yet, we’ve come to believe that play might 
be the answer to teaching and learning across epistemologies. So, 
when it comes to epistemological differences, we must leave the 



Listen and Learn Sessions    265

mess (in one sense) because we cannot change the reality of diverse 
epistemologies governing information sharing, seeking, creation, 
and consumption. In another sense, instructors leave the mess by 
modeling orientations to learning that inculcate desire for engage-
ment through messy curiosity and questioning. Such encounters 
with difference are the mode and medium of truly transformative 
learning experiences.

REFERENCES 

ACRL Board. 2016. Framework for Information Literacy for Higher 
Education. Association of College and Research Libraries. https://
www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework.

Bell, Kevin. 2017. Game On!: Gamification, Gameful Design, and the 
Rise of the Gamer Educator. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University 
Press.

Bell, Kevin. 2018. “Gameful Design: A Potential Game Changer.” 
Educause Review (May/June): 41–48.

Beyoncé. 2016. Lemonade. Parkwood Entertainment; Columbia 
Records. Album.

boyd, danah. 2018a. “What Hath We Wrought?” SXSW EDU, March 
7, 2018. https://bit.ly/boydwhathatwewrought.

boyd, danah. 2018b. “A Few Responses to Criticism of My SXSW-Edu 
Keynote on Media Literacy.” Medium, March 16, 2018. https://bit.
ly/boydsresponse.

Christian, Sue Ellen. 2020. Everyday Media Literacy: An Analog Guide 
for Your Digital Life. New York: Routledge.

Cranton, Patricia. 2017. “Transformative Learning: A Narrative.” 
In Learning, Design, and Technology, edited by M. Spector, B. 
Lockee, and M. Childress. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature 
Switzerland.

Cranton, Patricia. 2023. Understanding and Promoting Transformative 
Learning: A Guide to Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. New York: 
Routledge.

https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework
https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework
https://bit.ly/boydwhathatwewrought
https://bit.ly/boydsresponse
https://bit.ly/boydsresponse


266    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

Dörner, Ralf, Stefan Göbel, Wolfgang Effelsberg, and Josef Wiemeyer, 
eds. 2016. Serious Games: Foundations, Concepts and Practice. 
Cham, Switzerland: Springer International.

Elder, Linda, and Richard Paul Elder. 2016. The Thinker’s Guide to the 
Art of Socratic Questioning. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Haynes, Natalie. 2020. Pandora’s Jar: Women in the Greek Myths. 
New York: Harper.

Hobbs, Renee. 2018. “Freedom to Choose: An Existential Crisis.” Media 
Education Lab, March 10, 2018. https://mediaedlab.com/2018/03/10/
freedom-to-choose-an-existential-crisis/.

Huizinga, Johan. 2014. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-element in 
Culture. Boston: Beacon Press.

Mayor, Adrienne. 2018. Gods and Robots: Myths, Machines, and Ancient 
Dreams of Technology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Mezirow, Jack.1991. Transformative Dimensions of Adult Learning. 
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mezirow, Jack.1996. “Contemporary Paradigms of Learning.” Adult 
Education Quarterly 46 (3): 158–172.

Mezirow, Jack. 2018. “Transformative Learning Theory.” In 
Contemporary Learning Theories, edited by K. Illeris, 114–128. 
2nd ed. New York: Routledge.

Noula, Ioanna. 2018. “I Do Want Media Literacy. . . and More. A 
Response to danah boyd.” Media Policy Project, June 21, 2018. 
https://bit.ly/ioannanoularesponse.

Ritterfeld, Ute, Michael Cody, and Peter Vorderer, eds. 2009. Serious 
Games: Mechanisms and Effects. New York: Routledge.

Rosser, Chris. 2022. “Left to Our Devices: Playing with Spiritually 
Formative Media Discernment.” Atla Summary of Proceedings 
76 (November): 182–196.

Rosser, Chris. 2020. “Gaming (In)formation: Gamified, 
Transformational Learning in Research and Theology.” Atla 
Summary of Proceedings 74 (December): 174–185.

https://mediaedlab.com/2018/03/10/freedom-to-choose-an-existential-crisis/
https://mediaedlab.com/2018/03/10/freedom-to-choose-an-existential-crisis/
https://bit.ly/ioannanoularesponse


Listen and Learn Sessions    267

Rosser, Chris. 2019. “Safe at Home: Co-curricular Spaces for Generative 
(un)Safe Conversations.” Atla Summary of Proceedings 73 
(January): 222–233.

Rosser, Chris, and Grant Testut. 2021. “Re-Vision, Re-Tool, Re-Spawn: 
Gameful Design for Whole-Person, Transformation Learning.” Atla 
Summary of Proceedings 75 (November): 333–51.

Rosser, Chris, and Heath Rosser. 2023. “Eat, Play, Love: Re-figuring 
Media Literacy Instruction as Play.” Atla Summary of Proceedings 
77 (December): 216–227.

Schrier, Karen, Malcolm Ryan, Rowan Tulloch, and Paul Formosa. 
2019. “Designing Games for Moral Learning and Knowledge 
Building.” Games & Culture 14 (4): 306–343. https://doi.
org/10.1177/1555412017711514.

Shew, Melissa M. 2020. “Questions: The Heart of Philosophy.” In 
Philosophy for Girls: An Invitation to the Life of Thought, edited 
by Melissa M. Shew and Kimberly K. Garchar, 51–63. Oxford: 
Oxford University Press.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412017711514
https://doi.org/10.1177/1555412017711514


268    ATL A 2024 PROCEEDINGS

ENDNOTES

1  danah boyd does not capitalize her name, and we defer here to her preferences. 
To view slides, videos, and additional resources associated with this presenta-
tion/paper, visit: https://bit.ly/leavingthemess.

2  Those interested can view an excerpt from boyd’s keynote at the 2018 SXSW EDU 
event at: https://bit.ly/danahboydclip.

3  Those interested can view the video at: https://bit.ly/callingallseekers.

4  Find all materials at https://bit.ly/leavingthemess.

https://bit.ly/leavingthemess
https://bit.ly/danahboydclip
https://bit.ly/callingallseekers
https://bit.ly/leavingthemess

