Where We Begin
Exploring games and education is inherently controversial.
Games can seem uneducational; they are typically associated with play and
childhood. Even the name implies that games are the opposite of work.
Assertions that games must be used to make learning “fun” ignore the fact that
students who are deeply engaged in learning consider it both fun and hard work.
Most of us begin a discussion of games with some discomfort and with an
incomplete experience base. For many educators, the term “game” conjures up a mental
image of playing cards or a game like Jeopardy. These “casual games” are brief
(five minutes to two hours) and simplistic. Today’s games are complex, take up
to 100 hours, require collaboration with others, and involve developing values,
insights, and new knowledge. They are immersive virtual worlds that are
augmented by a more complex external environment that involves communities of
practice, the buying and selling of game items, blogs, and developer
communities. In many ways, games have become complex learning systems. It is
hard to understand something without direct experience. Yet that is how many
approach games in education. Most educators are neither game players nor game
developers. How much of our skepticism about the educational value of games is
tied to experience (or lack of experience)? If we had the same experience base
as a 15-year-old game enthusiast, might we view games differently? If we were
discussing “virtual worlds,” “synthetic worlds,” or “immersive multiuser
environments,” would our mind set be different? Our own biases and experiences
can influence the exploration of games in education. Although definitions vary,
digital games provide visual information to one or more players, accept input
from the player(s), and use a set of programmed rules. Unlike more traditional
games, the rules are not described in an instruction manual; they are
programmed into the code. The sensory interface and story adds emotional
appeal, as well. Games should be thought of as a family of related items; they
are not all alike—they are not designed for the same audiences, nor do they
incorporate the same features of game play. Among the common categories of
games are
• adventure games,
where the player moves through a virtual world,
• puzzle games, such as Tetris,
• role-playing games, where the player assumes the role of a
person or creature, such as Dungeons and Dragons,
• strategy games, such as The Sims, where a player’s strategy
drives the game,
• sports games, such
as golf or football, and
• first-person shooter games. 3 Games are now part of modern
culture.
Not only are scholars beginning to study gaming as part of
contemporary society, but an increasing number of degree programs have emerged.
Preschool children play educational games to learn colours, numbers, and names.
Virtually all children will have played video games by the time they graduate
from high school.
Game play is common in college, as well. In a U.S. survey, 65
percent of respondents were regular or occasional game players. Games are part
of their multitasking environment; students play games while visiting with
friends, listening to music, or doing assignments (in observations, male
students were frequently seen to have online games open alongside their
assignments). Thirty percent of college students admit playing games in class.
However, games aren’t just for youth; the average age of a game player is 30.
In the United States, 50 percent of adults play games; one in five adults over
50 is a video gamer. Males and females play games about equally (55 percent are
male; 43 percent are female). Perhaps the prevalence of games is why 63 percent
of parents believe games are a positive part of children’s lives; nearly 60
percent of teachers in the United Kingdom are willing to use games in the
classroom. Not to be forgotten is the gaming industry; it is sizable. Digital
gaming is a $10 billion per year industry, projected to reach $29 billion by
2007. In 2004, nearly 250 million games were sold. Whether or not we play
games, gaming has become part of our culture. But games are still evolving.
Rather than their simpler predecessors, today’s games are coming to represent
“distributed authentic professionalism,” meaning that players are learning how
to be a professional—a solider, an astronaut, an entrepreneur, and so on.
Knowledge and skills are built into the virtual characters, objects, and
environments; the players must master the skills they don’t have as well as
integrate their skills with those of the virtual characters and other players.
These types of games distribute expertise among the virtual characters and the
real-world players. More than just a game, they are networked communication
systems with interactive chat, internal e-mail, and messaging. They also
require the player to adopt a certain set of values and a particular world view
which is connected to performing activities within a specific domain of
knowledge. By the end of the game, the player has essentially experienced a
profession.
Effective Learning
Environments
Other papers (Shaffer et al. and NESTA Futurelab) describe
how games can facilitate learning. It is important to emphasize that games and
play may be effective learning environments, not because they are “fun” but
because they are immersive, require the player to make frequent, important
decisions, have clear goals, adapt to each player individually, and involve a
social network. Games have many attributes detailed below that are associated
with how people learn.
• Social. Games
are often social environments, sometimes involving large distributed
communities. “It is not the game play per se but the social life around the
edge of the game that carries much of the richness in terms of the game’s
meaning, its value, and its social and cultural impact.”
• Research. When a new player enters a game, he or she must
immediately recall prior learning, decide what new information is needed, and
apply it to the new situation. Those who play digital games are often required
to read and seek out new information to master the game.
• Problem solving.
Knowing what information or techniques to apply in which situations enables
greater success, specifically, problem solving. This often involves collective
action through communities of practice.
• Transfer. Games
require transfer of learning from other venues―life, school, and other games.
Being able to see the connection and transfer existing learning to a unique
situation is part of game play.
• Experiential.
Games are inherently experiential. Those who play games engage multiple senses.
For each action, there is a reaction. Feedback is swift. Hypotheses are tested,
and users learn from the results.
Most educators are
familiar with the world-to-the-desktop interface that computers provide,
enabling users to access resources, distant experts, collaborations, and
communities of practice. The user “sits outside” the virtual world, but can
access resources through it. An increasingly common interface—a critical one
for games and immersive environments—might be called an Alice-in-Wonderland,
multiuser virtual environment. Whether the technology involved is a computer or
a handheld ubiquitous device, participants can interact with computer-based
agents and artefacts, virtually. A key distinction is that the
world-to-the-desktop interface is not psychologically immersive. Virtual
environments and augmented realities cause a psychological sense of sensory and
physical immersion resulting in one feeling “inside” an environment.
Experience and reflection are important parts of learning; an
ideal learning environment allows the learner to alternate between being
“inside” an environment (fostering situated learning) and being an outsider
looking in (fostering insights gained from perspective). Active learning based
on immersive experience (real or simulated) that includes frequent
opportunities for reflection is both engaging and effective for a broad
spectrum of students. Most multiplayer virtual environments used today are
games.
These immersive environments use authentic contexts, activities,
and assessment; they also involve mentoring and apprenticeships in communities
of practice. The result is a powerful pedagogy that allows for immersion and
intense, extended experiences with problems and contexts similar to the real
world. It may not be the “game” that is effective for learning but the
immersive multiplayer virtual environment in which it is set.
Immersive multiplayer virtual environments let players
participate in new worlds, inhabiting roles that would otherwise be inaccessible
to them. They allow people to think, act, and talk in new ways. Rather than
relying on words and symbols, learners experience the virtual world. Players
can experience the ways a particular discipline thinks about and solves
problems, as a physicist, an astronaut, or a physician. By requiring one to
become a member of the community (or guild) and to develop knowledge, skills,
and values, novices are exposed to the ways professionals deal with problems,
mirroring the practice of becoming an expert. “A large body of facts that
resists out of context memorization and rote learning comes easily if learners
are immersed in activities and experiences that use these facts for plans,
goals, and purposes within a coherent domain of knowledge.”
Another critical element of games is the community that
develops around them. Ideas are shared in these communities, group
problem-definition and problem-solving occurs, as well as a good deal of
socializing. In fact, the description of a game community mirrors closely the
definition of an educational community of practice. The community has a culture
of learning; everyone is involved in a collective effort of understanding. The
expertise of members is diverse; members are valued for their contributions and
helped to develop further as the group continually advances its collective
knowledge and skills. The emphasis is on learning how to learn and sharing
learning. “It is not necessary that each member assimilate everything that the
community knows, but each should know who within the community has relevant
expertise to address any problem.” Developing this skill is important
personally and professionally, not just in the game world.
Games and Schools
Although games can be effective learning environments, not
all games are effective, nor are all games educational. Similarly, not all
games are good for all learners or for all learning outcomes. Games may remain
on the side lines until rubrics and evaluation strategies are developed that
assess a game’s value. “Faculty members need training to analyze, design,
develop, implement, and evaluate digital game-based learning (DGBL). Staff
members need training to support faculty during this process.”
How games are used is important as well. Simply using games
may not be very effective; use is not synonymous with integration. In fact, use
of one strategy is often assumed to replace another (for example, a game
replacing face-to-face instructional time). What is more important is to
consider how to add games to the educational tool set, blending them with other
activities. Integration requires an understanding of the medium and its
alignment with the subject, the instructional strategy, the student’s learning
style, and intended outcomes. Integration of games into curricula is much more
likely to be successful than mere game use.
There are a range of options for integrating games into
education. Strategies include allowing students to create their own games or
integrating commercial games into the curriculum. If games are integrated into
the curriculum, it will be important to understand what types of games promote
the desired learning outcome. For example:
• Card games
promote memorization, concept matching, and pattern recognition
• Jeopardy-style games encourage quick mobilization of facts, labels,
and concrete concepts
• Arcade-style games are good for improving speed of response,
automaticity, and visual processing
• Adventure games
are useful for promoting hypothesis testing and problem solving.
If games are integrated into the curriculum, strategies may
go beyond game play. An alternative to playing a game is to ask students to
critique a game. This allows students to explore not just the subject but how
the game is structured. Since most games were not designed for educational
purposes, it is not surprising that details may be missing or facts incorrect.
Another strategy is to
have students discover what is missing or incorrect in a game. Beyond selection
of a game, educators must consider when and how to integrate a game into the
curriculum or the class. Options include use as a
• preinstructional strategy,
• coinstructional
strategy (augmenting, illustrating, discussing), and
• postinstructional
strategy (for assessment and synthesis).
Games may also be considered a part of the informal
educational environment.
Implementation Issues
Among the most staggering game figures are their development
costs, commonly reported in the tens of millions of dollars. It would be easy
to assume that educators need to spend millions to develop educational games.
Cost is often used to argue against the use of games in education. However,
game engines are increasingly available, reducing the cost of game development.
MIT, for example, has made its augmented reality game engines available to
other developers. Rather than developing the software for the game, the
developer simply overlays his or her scenario on a generic shell. In the last
year, even developers of military simulations have seen their development costs
drop as game development tool sets become more widely available.
Institutions must consider a host of implementation issues.
For example:
• Are computer laboratories available where students can play
games? Are they appropriately configured? Are they available for the extended
hours that game play involves?
• Is the right equipment available, such as headphones,
speakers, special consoles?
• Is support available for the game, both technically and in
terms of game play?
• Are there instructional designers who can develop games?
• Is gaming integrated
into the curriculum or just added on?
Professional development and support is a significant
implementation issue. “Everyone involved in the design, development, or
implementation of digital game-based learning needs training on what DGBL is
and how it is supported and implemented, institution-wide.” Students will need
support for games, implying help desk personnel must be prepared for common
questions, procedures, and technical issues. And, instructional or IT units may
need assistance with licensing agreements and negotiating discounts. Using
games or multiuser immersive virtual environments in education will require
“unlearning” many unconscious beliefs, assumptions, and values about teaching
and learning, as well as the structure of education. Unlearning requires higher
levels of emotional and social support than traditional forms of staff
development. Ideally, it should take place in distributed learning communities
so learning occurs in context.
Today and Tomorrow
Most games that have been developed to date were not designed
for educational purposes. Although they may educate, that is not their primary
goal or their most important design feature. Moving forward, educators must
hope for games based on learning theory and research. These future tools may
not be games but rather massively multiplayer immersive worlds where learners
develop epistemic frames and social networks.
Games are in an early stage of evolution. As we gain more
experience, our adoption and adaptation of games will become increasingly
sophisticated; we may find that the ultimate value of games does not mirror
today’s uses.
No comments:
Post a Comment