Videogames and
Education: What Can We Learn while Playing?
We live in
a digital age. This fact can no longer
be avoided. The personal computer has
invaded every place where paper texts were once so dear. The internet has changed the way we write and
the way we learn, but with this comes a growing concern. Many wonder what the effects this change in
medium will have on the future, whether it is helping or hindering our
society. Video games are a highly
stigmatized component of the digital age.
There is a concern as to how video games, and their use, are affecting
the development of children. There are
studies from a plethora of fields supporting the value of video games as
pedagogical tools. Whether it is a U.S.
Department of Education research on the benefits of discrete educational
software, like Math blaster, or a study of laparoscopic surgeons using a video
game to practice minimally invasive procedures: Video games are teaching us and
its working (Gentile). What is
confusing, is that while video games are demonstrating success in localized
research studies, they continue to be perceived in a broad sense as merely
games. And while it is easy to design
and evaluate a video game that measures a student's improvement at basic math
skills like addition and subtraction.
Many argue, that more critical and complex areas of study can only
benefit from classical education. This
raises the important question: How do video games develop complex critical
thinking skills, and what makes them as valuable, or better than earlier methods? OR Why are video games so stigmatized, and
what do you they teach us that classical education does not?
In the
field of Anthropology, any human culture can be understood as the dynamic
relationship between ideology, social structure, and technology. Over time empirical evidence shows that
generally technology will develop quickly, changing the cultural dynamic and
slowly thereafter peoples social structure and ideology will adjust to the
accommodate the new system. Ironically,
contemporary humans are aware of this propensity for delayed reaction to
technology, yet cannot avoid it. As was
the case with past technological developments: written language, the printing
press, photography, television; Digital media and video games face resistance
on an ideological level in our society.
Each of the aforementioned technologies are new forms of media, new
systems for the distribution of information.
All of these technological mediums eventually became part of our
educational system, both directly and indirectly//. Why are video games any different? In a recent article by Jenny Weight, Self,
Video Games and Pedagogy, she writes, "Your attitude to whether
teachers should harness the video game as a pedagogical tool is flavoured by
your attitude to reality and identity," (Weight). This is a powerful statement about our
reaction to videogames as human beings.
Weight is addressing the stigma of digital reproduction, and indirectly
the complex idea of authenticity. That
is to say, a person's reaction is shaped by their identification with, or opposition
to, the digitization of information and media.
While the average person isn't consciously saying to themselves, I don't
like videogames because they call to question my definitions of reality and
identity, it is important to note what is different about video games from past
forms of media. Video games mimic the
world of experience i.e. unlike books where an author describes a subject and a
location, in a videogame the simulated player moves and experiences the
location as the subject themself. It is
this frightening distinction, the ability to become the subject and experience
in real time a digital world, I believe is both the greatest value of video
games and the source of their rejection.
While it may be obvious that we can
and do learn from video games, the concern becomes can they teach relevant,
career oriented, practical skills? The
answer is yes they can. Literacy, in the
sense of reading and writing has been a contingent aspect of higher education
for centuries. Yet modern society now
requires literacy in computers, internet, and digital media. As James Paul Gee says, "We live in the
midst of high-risk complex systems like global warming, a global economy, and
global conflicts among civilizations and religions. The pace of change is
faster than it has ever been. To succeed in this world our children need
21st-century skills," (DGL 61). As
human culture evolves with new technologies linking the globe and expanding our
perspectives, individuals are required to develop new forms of literacy. Video games serve as a unifying means to this
end. To explain how video games develop
these skills Gee uses the terms "little g games" and "big G
Games". The learning derived from
video games must be understood as more complex than just the interaction with a
piece of software. The software itself
is Gee's "little g game", but the social activities and learning that
occurs outside of the game as result of the experience is the "big G Game"
(DGL 62). It is this idea of the big G
game that is underrepresented and hard to grasp for those who have not
experienced it personally. The
"metagame" as it is also called, refers to the discourse and active
behaviors that occur outside the video game itself. To explain what Gee is referring to with the
big G game take for example the online multiplayer game League of Legends. League of Legends, or LoL, is part of
the Multiplayer online battle arena, or MOBA, genre. LoL just so happens to be the most played PC
game in the world. The game itself
consists of 10 players competing against each other in teams of 5, much like
basketball. Players choose from a series
of characters, each with unique skills that are used to defeat they opponents. The game itself is entertaining and
competitive, but does not directly require any social, literary, or critical
skills to perform. The educational value
of the game is a result of the "metagame" that exists outside the
game play itself. The big G game of LoL,
includes a range of online forums, user generated content, websites created
from specific requirements of players, the list goes on. LoL even possesses its own subreddit
page. To even understand my last
statement, a reader requires the same digital literacy I am describing. Players develop social and literary skills
through the process of reading and responding to forum conversations. LoL can even develop online research skills,
as players often search for and compare information specific styles of game
play. Due to the games team based
structure, players experience a variety of social interactions which promote
cooperative and group-based skills.
Those outside the culture of video games may find this concept hard to
grasp. Dave Shaffer discusses the big G
Game phenomena in his article How to Measure
21st Century Thinking in Game. He
asserts that to understand how we learn from games is, "with the
recognition that a game is fundamentally a culture... Playing a game—and
certainly playing a game well—requires a certain way of thinking about and
being in the world: a set of skills, knowledge, values, ways of making
decisions, and ways of seeing oneself and being seen by others that 'work' in
the game," (Shaffer 3). LoL then,
is a massive cultural entity. By
interacting with the greater culture of the game, individuals, whether
passively or actively, acquire and refine skills that are practical and often
necessary to function in the modern working world.
No comments:
Post a Comment