Month: February 2011

I live in a gaming household. This was not always the case… there was a time before “the game” but it seems so long ago now, I can’t quite remember it. When I think about the questions posed in this module related to the design of games I realize these are areas that I have explored in my mind countless times before; as a wary on-looker. For instance when I ponder “what aspects of design produce an engagement that feels like immersion?” that’s a straightforward reply. I believe in sanscrit the term is “Shenpa”, which roughly translates into the English word – hook. A good game will have a hook, a big hook. There must be a terrifying challenge or quest that only the rare few can master. And, like gambling or reading a new Dan Brown novel , what it takes to reach the ending… always justifies the means. The design must also include a continuous “hooking” with expansion packs and extra dungeoun levels to promote continuous interactivity with the game. It has to appeal to the ego – otherwise it fall flat.

When I attempt to superimpose my thoughts and experiences with gaming into the classroom there are some big stumbling blocks. One being the disparity I have seen between “educational gaming” and “pleasure gaming”. I have yet to see a design that even comes close to emulating the MMOG experience. The kids and other gamers would be a tough crowd – they have been immensely influenced by strong commercialization.

Then there is the educator, and their ideas and attitudes regarding games in the classroom. They belong to an entirely different cultural generation. The gaming culture has yet to infiltrate this subsection of the population because of the age divide. Many of us are sceptics; we don’t recognize the new “gaming medium” in our practice. Research hasn’t shown a strong correlation between using technology and increasing success – maybe this is just the next wave of theory that won’t be implemented successfully; even with an enormous cost and time investment. I can see that gaming actually embodies many of the unique characteristics of authentic learning but it I’m cautious. Even though I identify with shifting the onus off the teacher and putting it onto the learner, as gaming can do, in the past we have seen that there is little that can replace a strong educator in the learning equation.

I have this article to share on how gaming can make you smarter. However, after reading it, I’m still sceptical. More research is required before an entire shift in our educational context is justified.

CNN – How gaming can make you smarter
http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/01/31/video.games.smarter.steinberg/index.html?iref=NS1

Listening to the discussion of what’s really at the centre of education, I couldn’t agree more that placing knowledge-building is a paradigm shift on the level of leaving the Ptolemaic system and embracing a Copernican model. Like the powers that were in those days, I imagine the powers that be now would be very hesitant to adopt the approach of “ideas at the centre”. There is also the possibility that they may share the same rather nefarious logic that was projected in Copernican Europe for clinging to a geocentric universe one just can’t say. The next rationale question for me would be “what really drives curriculum?” Is it Government? Is it the textbook industry? Why do we cling so hard to curriculum and measurements?

The idea that we need to ultimately change our approach to education and to use Scardamalia’s terms the alignment of our educational constructs cannot be refuted. However, it doesn’t need to involve doing away with schools altogether because knowledge building can happen even in the strangest of places. My partner is an active MMOG with World of Warcraft (I don’t have time) He shared this video with me for a bit of a laugh but I was far from amused when I saw the topic. How innovation and knowledge building, through guild collaboration of an estimated 12 million people, are creating some cutting edge strategies and ideas. Furthermore, how business strategists are looking at the practices in this game to implement successful real world policy and stratagem.

It seems clear that if we provide venue for a critical mass of engaged thinkers to come together collaboratively – even in a virtual game setting – the end result is remarkable. I feel that we might still have the venue for this within our schools supplemented with the web. It’s just that we have not, as of yet, appropriately provided the engagement factor. And the primary reason the engagement factor is missing is our continued policy to implement curriculum and related assessments.

Stanford’s Entrepreneurship Corner: Speaker John Seely Brown
http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=2432