Are we really sure there's that many people who are game savvy, interested in gaming and / or prepared to learn from gaming and simulation on the computer?
Tonight I watched a friend's daughter's friends (4 of them at a time!!! All huddled up on the couch with these little multi-buttoned consoles they were thumbing and "driving" - for lack of a better word - they contorted their bodies with the gaming devices as if it were affecting their play) - playing a shooter game. They were monkeys, and the two boys were skilled at the game, the two girls were just playing along and expressed their blase attitude toward games and how they don't normally play them.
So I asked them, "Do you play games in school?" Nope. Although the one really good player (a male) showed some strong interest in the idea.
"Have you ever been in Second Life?" None of them had, although two of them had read about it (extensively they said). One commented, "You mean, 'Past Life'?" No comment when I asked about it - figured it was a teenager to adult non-sequitor.
Two of them thought they couldn't because they believed you had to pay for it. When I told them it was free, they were mildly surprised. One of the girls asked if you had to install anything. I said yes. She then said her dad wouldn't allow her to install anything on the computer they had at home.
All the while they were still playing and watching the quartered up TV screen (imagine 4 spasmodically changing square windshields packed into a bigger square screen of the TV).
I asked if they thought they would enjoy games if they were used in school, and the comments came back from the best male player, "Nah, we all just end up ADD in front of these games." (the "twitch mode" per Clark Aldrich)
I asked how they focused on such incredibly fast moving little screens (the best male player was able to outplay the others and watch their screens and know what was going on in their quadrant - they were working as a team - not well mind you due to the skills range and interest gaps - but the one "leader" was directing others and watching his own screen, and then directing the team to change their weapons), the one boy said you just lose focus of everything else. Hmmm... now how is that going to be good for teachable moments...???
Clearly, there was a strong divide in interest and skill levels among these 4 15-16 year olds, and it was just killing time together - like they were some interesting new species where instead of one person, they were four persons acting like a single organism. Very interesting, and I'm sure, a pre-screening of what my home will look like in 11 or 12 years.
Anyways, are we sure there's really sufficient generic interest and skills necessary to make gaming and simulation a part of the classroom? For what age groups and grades is this appropriate? And what about the male / female split? Yes, there's stats that show 2/5 of adult players are female, but what about the kids we could unleash this stuff on?
If I had seen all 4 of them (I have no idea what their academic status or proficiency was) engrossed, unable to carry on conversation with me, and all with a knowing nod let me know they were on line in SL a couple hours a night, I would have maybe changed my mind about it. But, from what I've seen among this "just driving" group, and my other buddy's kids and friends in the 10-13 age group, there's not a lot of consistency. My friend whose kids are 17-19 on the other hand, the boy is an ADD / Ritalin taker and a fanatic gamer (incredibly smart, and incredibly good, but struggling in his social "fitting in"), and his sister not interested but a very high-honors pre-college senior.
What gives?
tc
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
I'm not sure, but I think that if, instead of asking if they'd enjoy games in school, you had their teacher give them a break with one of the more engrossing educational games, this would be a completely different story.
Also, perhaps a lot of these ADD problems would disappear if we adapted education to learners instead of asking them to adapt to it? I actually studied transcendental meditation when I was in High School in a (failed) effort to increase my ability to focus. My guidance counsellor and my mom wouldn't let me take any of the learning disability tests because they didn't think the accomodations would be worth the mark on my profile. In hindsight, I don't think it was a problem with me, but rather with the material and the delivery. At the time, I was taught to believe it was a problem with me, but I no longer think that way and the plethora of ritalin stories seems to bear me out: maybe it's not the arrow — it's the indian…
Micah, perhaps I asked the question in a way that was leading... but I did not ask if they would "enjoy" playing games in school, I simply asked if they "did" play games in school. You may be reading a little too much into my simple questions.
Also, what made you think that the "lack of ability to focus" was a bad thing? I for one, believe it's a positive trait for creativeness, freedom to explore mentally. Most likely, there were presenting problems that you attributed cause to - and someone who should have known better perhaps equated your performance in school or "on task" with a perceived lack of focus.
From the opps I've had to chat with you and read your thoughts, I don't find this to be a quality of your thinking at all. I believe we too often misinterpret the signs and invent the poltergeists we think we have. Meaning, boys are boys, we have different hormonal development and brain development than girls, and we tend to look for ways to expend our energy and "do" more than we reflect on that doing - especially as children... and that's completely normal.
Problems aren't always as simple as we think they are.
Also, I don't understand your comment about the arrow and Indian - as that turn of a phrase is often used to imply that the tools and things you control are not the problem if you keep missing your mark, and that it points back to the person's skill, knowledge, experience and mastery as the source of a missed target. I know I used to blame my fly rod for lots of missed fish. I've since determined that in fact, it was not the arrow, but the Indian.
In the context of using games and computer sims in class - sure, if it provides motivation, de-stressing, outlets for energy and "doing" release, immersion, and space to mentally play, AMEN! Learning is not all lessons - it is a process.
I think what you may have been trying to say is that if we adapt the games to provide the same release, outlet, motivation by maintaining in them the qualities that seem to correspond to those positive factors in the class room, and also find a way to make the engagement a "teachable moment" - we find a way to make learning enjoyable, and if we can validate our hypotheses about this treatment / solution, we might find a way to encourage more effective instruction and learning.
Certainly, the way games are now, and the way they are played, and by whom, and for what reasons, are not all in the best interests of an education. So, the key I think will be to select and use the most appropriate characteristics of games and sims and computer engagement within a well-designed and well thought out schema, and, as one element in a diverse diet of experiences and opportunities for people to learn and enjoy the ride.
tc
I meant that perhaps all of these ADD Cases aren't really ADD after all, but rather students not putting up with use of the wrong tools?
How old are these kids? For those 13-17, there's a Teen Second Life. They can create a free account too.
Yin, my friend's daughter's friends were in 10th grade (I think that's 15 and 16?). I did, actually mention to them that they could get into Teen SL for free, but the one final comment I got before they began to ignore me was, like I said in the initial post, "My dad won't let me install anything anyways..."
Even the two who said they'd read about it, seemed to have no apparent interest in going "into" SL / doing it.
The more I read about SL, the more I think it's adults hyping it up and speculating, and that there are a number of valid and strong reasons why it may not be all it's being touted as, and, in my opinion, it won't have the appeal to as many younger people as they expect. For those who are into it, "Hooray!" Another great step forward for better and flexible learning.
It's funny though, that SL, when pressed about the adult content and the problems some French (?) parents had with their kids being exposed to adult content while in SL, stated for the record, that SL was an adult only experience ("Second Life has always been restricted to those over 18.", http://blog.secondlife.com/2007/05/04/age-and-indentity-verification-in-second-life/).
Post a Comment