I will tell you as a kid the games/tools on a computer that got me hyped up were mine craft, paint (if it is considered one), and solitaire. As I grew older Mario party, Sims, and an array of Nintendo games became a few of my favorites. My school never incorporated online games because...the "web" was still evolving. We live in a day and age where the internet fits in most of our pockets (smartphones) and provides an ocean of knowledge to aid in anything we may request (all the who, what, where, and when's). I feel that although the traditional route was helpful the technology era can advance education. I am going into Biology and I played around with Citizen Science because it pertained to ecology. I thought it was so fun...at first...but I then came upon a part where I had to create arguments and evidence and for some reason I just couldn't move on to the next level because I was doing something wrong. I spent a good fifteen minutes trying to figure out what to do and I was not going anywhere so I moved on and played a few other games pertaining to social studies and language arts. I felt the Global Citizen interface was a little too complicated. As cute as it was-it just was not the one for me.
James Gee discussed the implications of using games in the classroom and defined what a good game was. According to Gee Good games "incorporate good learning principles, principles supported by current research in Cognitive Science" in addition to being relevant, he notes that good games also need to be user friendly. His main point was not to question if games should or should not be incorporated in school but rather how does one make a subject a game and how does one monitor that kids in and outside of school are learning and using "game" technique to think strategically.
I want to talk about experience with online games while working at Scarlett Middle School. Last week the students spent basically the whole day using the knowledge they had (multiplication, division, addition, subtraction) to participate in interactive online math games. Two main games played had incorporated speed, however, both did not monitor accuracy. One of them was very fun and really prompted the kids to answer correctly and achieve a faster (speed rate). The other game did not account for accuracy and the students found that just clicking random answers would give them a higher score and a faster speed. That particular game had a major kink and to me it was a bad game. I feel that "good games" need to have all the kinks ironed out, not penalizing for accuracy was one that really impended student learning. Personally, I feel that games can be used in the class but they have to be tested and evaluated by teacher before they are assigned. Incorporating all of the characteristics that Gee mentions e.g customization, accuracy, identity, risk may be very difficult to find but teachers who wish to incorporate games should do their best to find such games in order to administer them in the class.
James Gee discussed the implications of using games in the classroom and defined what a good game was. According to Gee Good games "incorporate good learning principles, principles supported by current research in Cognitive Science" in addition to being relevant, he notes that good games also need to be user friendly. His main point was not to question if games should or should not be incorporated in school but rather how does one make a subject a game and how does one monitor that kids in and outside of school are learning and using "game" technique to think strategically.
I want to talk about experience with online games while working at Scarlett Middle School. Last week the students spent basically the whole day using the knowledge they had (multiplication, division, addition, subtraction) to participate in interactive online math games. Two main games played had incorporated speed, however, both did not monitor accuracy. One of them was very fun and really prompted the kids to answer correctly and achieve a faster (speed rate). The other game did not account for accuracy and the students found that just clicking random answers would give them a higher score and a faster speed. That particular game had a major kink and to me it was a bad game. I feel that "good games" need to have all the kinks ironed out, not penalizing for accuracy was one that really impended student learning. Personally, I feel that games can be used in the class but they have to be tested and evaluated by teacher before they are assigned. Incorporating all of the characteristics that Gee mentions e.g customization, accuracy, identity, risk may be very difficult to find but teachers who wish to incorporate games should do their best to find such games in order to administer them in the class.
Great post Sara! We seemed to have a similar experience playing educational video games. I played Lure of Labyrinth and found it to be rather boring. It took a long time to load certain parts of the game which was very annoying. I couldn't figure out the first math puzzle because I wasn't even sure what the rules were. I think it had something to do with proportions but that's as far as I could figure out. I could only imagine what a 7th grader would think about this game. I think the lesson here is that just because it's a video game doesn't mean that students will automatically be engaged and excited to play. The game still has to appeal to students and also teach them something like math or biology. I imagine if someone could do this, they would probably be a millionaire.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny to hear your description of what went on in math class last week - as a student intern in the 8th grade ELA class, I remember that day..all the kids came to our class totally riled up and competing playfully but intensely with each other. Clearly they enjoyed those games: if they usually come to class with an energy level of 5, that day they came in at 10.
ReplyDeleteIt was great to see them totally present and excited. But in general, I don't know that I support the use of games in class. School is a unique opportunity for learning because only in school do students find themselves surrounded by both peers and (theoretically) a learned adult ready to pay them undivided attention. Kids naturally play games on their own and with their peers outside of class; why must we use our precious time in class on an activity in which they are most likely already partaking in at home?
As far as I can tell, the ideal is to incorporate those aspects of games that excite and engage the kids into our lessons. This way, we are using our class time in a way that the students can't access in any other context (i.e. we create a purposefully crafted lesson), but we are also making the experience fun, exciting, and engaging.
Sara,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate hearing from the perspective of someone in the STEM field. I agree with your idea about accuracy, and of having teachers evaluate games before they are assigned. I think this is especially important in subjects such as math or science where you are penalized for wrong answers. I think games can be an innovative way to make students engaged but I believe they should be a "good game" and not have any glitches or flaws just as you believe. I found that world language games were faulty in their ability to be challeging, whereas math or science games most likely have difficulty in being "glitch free". Hopefully as teachers we will be able to choose what are students play and how they play them.
Becky