Unit Two: A (Very Brief) Overview of Games in the Classroom
Return To:
ETAP 623 Spring 2017 | Michael Panetta | Course Home | Unit One: A (Very Brief) History of Video Games
Games in the Classroom
The use of games in the classroom has a long history. I’m sure many of you reviewing this module have used or have heard of games used in the classroom. Academic versions of Jeopardy, for instance, are a common appearance in many classrooms. Such a game is commonly used in the review of material as described by Simkin (2013). Simkin used Jeopardy in several trial classrooms to tease out any experimental data on student retention of knowledge using the game. His study found little improvement in student retention compared to other models however noted that students felt they retained information more effectively than in classes without the review (p. 205-207).
Educational Video Games: A Brief Primer
Educational video games are also not a new development in the larger world of video games. Indeed, as early as the 1950s, the Carnegie Mellon Institute had developed a prototype business simulator called The Management Game (Smith, 2014b) designed to assist business students in the field of managerial sciences. The 1980s also saw the development of the Blaster Learning System, a line of computer software created by Davidson and Associates that had products to teach elementary and intermediate mathematics as well as language arts and science. There is also the classic game The Oregon Trail, designed in 1971 to assist students in learning about the harsh realities of pioneer life during the 19th century. Made for education video games are not a new phenomenon, however the goal of this module is not to convince you of their educational merits but rather of the educational merit of other commercially-available video games normally considered for entertainment.
Educational Video Games: Built-For-The-Classroom vs. Commercial
In order to do this, however, the world of built-for-the-classroom video games must be explored. Built-for-the-classroom video games are games designed for use exclusively as educational tools. Although these games can be entertaining, their primary purpose is to be educational. In contrast, commercial video games are meant to be entertaining first. Gee (2005) discusses many qualities “good” games ought to have, among which he lists production (the ability of a player to “co-design” a game through their actions), risk taking (the ability of a player to use failure as a learning tool rather than the high-stakes environment of a class exam), and the concept of performance before competence (wherein a player can play the game well before they are competent in the game, in defiance of traditional educational norms).
These three qualities, I argue, are curiously lacking in built-for-the-classroom video games. A game built for the classroom removes the concept of risk-taking altogether, often not allowing the player or student to progress further until the previous concept or stage is completed satisfactorily. The only purpose of failure, in this case, is to prevent the student from progressing. Similarly, a built for the classroom video game is generally built within its own universe. It does not allow for player creativity in solving problems and will often require a specific answer. Built-for-the-classroom games, likewise, employ a model of gameplay that assumes a linear building of knowledge, much like that you may provide in a lecture. The idea of a game, however, does not lock out a player from participating in a larger world because of their skill level. Indeed, by throwing the player to the sharks, as it were, the game expects the player to build competence through repeated failure or through the establishment of social ties within the game (especially in an online game) so that the novice player can learn from experts.
Concluding Thoughts
In this sense, well-designed commercial video games integrate these aspects into their design and can indeed be used in the classroom to act as academic anchors for a lesson plan. Indeed, some you may find can be the basis of an entire lesson or course. It is the goal of this module to discover what qualities of commercial video games, if any, are prerequisites for use in the classroom. This curation process will be the focus of the next unit.
Assignment
For your second assignment, I want you to consider some preliminary criteria for the curation process mentioned in the concluding thoughts. What do you feel would be the mark of an educationally sound commercial video game at this stage? Are there general characteristics or is it more of a trial-and-error process to discover what works best? Are there certain genres of video game that may work better?
Keep these thoughts in mind for the next unit and refer back to them as we proceed through the Curation Process.
Citations
Gee, J.P. (2005). Good video games and good learning. Phi Kappa Phi Forum, 85(2), pp. 33-37.
Panetta, Michael. (2017). Democracy 3.
Panetta, Michael. (2017). RCT.
SethAllen623. (2012). Jeopardy game board. Retrieved from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Jeopardy_game_board.png
Simkin, M.G. (2013). Playing jeopardy in the classroom: An empirical study. Journal of Information Systems Education, 24(3), pp. 203-210.
Smith, A. (2014). The priesthood at play: Computer games in the 1950s. Retrieved from: https://videogamehistorian.wordpress.com/2014/01/22/the-priesthood-at-play-computer-games-in-the-1950s/
Return To:
ETAP 623 Spring 2017 | Michael Panetta | Course Home | Unit One: A (Very Brief) History of Video Games
Continue On To:
Unit Three: The Curation Process, or How to Find the Best Game For Your Class