The best thing about “Learning by Playing,” the most excellent feature in this week’s New York Times magazine, is not that it gives a fairly fair and balanced look at the potentials of learning games in the classroom. No, instead, it’s the willingness to ask big questions in a big, hairy mainstream publication that lots of people read:
What if teachers gave up the vestiges of their educational past, threw away the worksheets, burned the canon and reconfigured the foundation upon which a century of learning has been built? What if we blurred the lines between academic subjects and reimagined the typical American classroom so that, at least in theory, it came to resemble a typical American living room or a child’s bedroom or even a child’s pocket, circa 2010 — if, in other words, the slipstream of broadband and always-on technology that fuels our world became the source and organizing principle of our children’s learning? What if, instead of seeing school the way we’ve known it, we saw it for what our children dreamed it might be: a big, delicious video game?
Contrast that with the somewhat tired thinking that Time magazine offers around “What Makes Schools Great” and there’s no doubt we’re nowhere near a tipping point here or anything. (As someone who was thinking we were there like seven years ago, I’ve learned my lesson.) But I will say that it feels, at least, like more people are open to thinking about transforming schools, not reforming them, of seriously looking at “entirely different learning environments,” not just tweaks with tech. The National Ed Tech Plan, love it or not, at least pushes the thinking. The NCTE literacy standards are tough to meet in a traditional classroom. Some good stuff moving in the right direction.
The Times article, (assuming you haven’t read it yet) is about Quest to Learn, Katie Salen’s new school in New York City, funded by the Gates Foundation, flooded with technology, subject of all sorts of study, and for a host of reasons, difficult to replicate. But it’s also about a new language for classrooms, like
There are elements of the school’s curriculum that look familiar — nightly independent reading assignments, weekly reading-comprehension packets and plenty of work with pencils and paper — and others that don’t. Quest to Learn students record podcasts, film and edit videos, play video games, blog avidly and occasionally receive video messages from aliens.
And
The traditional school structure strikes Salen as “weird.†“You go to a math class, and that is the only place math is happening, and you are supposed to learn math just in that one space…There’s been this assumption that school is the only place that learning is happening, that everything a kid is supposed to know is delivered between 8 a.m. and 3 p.m., and it happens in the confines of a building,†she said. “But the fact is that kids are doing a lot of interesting learning outside of school. We acknowledge that, and we are trying to bring that into their learning here.â€
We need more of this type of conversation getting “out there” into the mainstream as conversation starters. I know that to most, the idea of a “gaming school” is just off the charts, and I’m waiting to see if the Times opens comments on the article. But if we get more and more of this, all the better.
One last point. There’s a video with the piece that is worth the watch. About 1:20 in, pay close attention to the scan of the classroom as the teacher is talking. I couldn’t help thinking about Sugata Mitra’s comment that 1-1 classroom computing isn’t the best scenario; 1-4 requires kids to work together and collaborate in more meaningful ways. That’s writ large, I think, in that scene.
Lots to think about…
We are working on a platform to accodomate this type of game based learning where kids get XP and level up. Details here:
http://mclear.co.uk/sites/xparena-a-decentralized-learning-reward-platform/
I’ll just say one thing about “Quest to Learn.” It seems to me that they’ve taken something SOME kids like, computer games, and tortured the metaphor to justify traditional school practices gussied up in groovy 21st Century propaganda.
As for 1:1, 1:4, etc… I know that you mean well, but please do not get caught up in such technocentrism! This is the thinking of accountants and cheapskates.
Sometimes the best way to 30 laptops is to turn 29 off. However, can not turn 30 laptops on when you need them if every child doesn’t have one. It’s the only way to ensure equity, personal knowledge construction – regardless of school’s artificial constraints – and may even afford more people the opportunity to work collaboratively.
Why don’t you share your computer with three other people?
It is amazing to me that 20 years and 2 months after I began work in 1:1 schools that this is still a subject for debate.
I encountered an incredibly wealthy school in Australia this week who has built a brand on being the school not to have laptops, just to be defiant in the face of progress and competition from every other school around them. Such immaturity harms children.
Don’t overreact, Gary. I don’t disagree that every child should have a computer; not being a cheapskate. ;0) And I don’t want to share mine with three other people, but I do see the value in sharing A computer with others from time to time as a way of really focusing on the collaborative parts of learning.
I agree with Will that it depends on the situation.
Today we visited New Tech High a project-based learning 1:1 type of school. I reminded me very much of SLA.
We spent two hours guided by learners (they don’t use the word students), we were able to enter classrooms and talk to the kids, pretty neat experience by the way. In one of the classes there were some groups of 3 students sharing a laptop. I asked a group why were they doing that instead of using their own and they said that it was “the best way to collaborate on a group project”. The kids (sophomores) were taking turns editing a video while holding an interesting discussion about copyright and copyleft.
Glad I could help you clarify your views 🙂
1-1 computing? 1-4 computing? Try the reality of most of our schools. It’s 2-1, 3-1 or 4-1 computing in our classrooms if we want it to be. The fact is, most of the computers our youngsters have are stuck at the bottom of school bags, in pockets or at home.
Video games have huge potential for learning and, in the UK and particularly in Scotland, are part of the mainstream edu-speak, thanks in large part to strategic vision that made them a priority of learning. You will see them as part of the definition of ‘text’ that is to be studied in school, and you’ll find some of the world’s leading practical classroom research into their impact in fairly ‘standard’ primary and high schools in Scotland and, increasingly, England.
The key to making it work at scale, though, is not strategic budgets (of which there are less and less) but asking children to bring in their own devices and think about how they could be harnessed. Those conversations are face-to-face, with parents and students, uncovering together what is possible. It’s not sending your Super to listen to Marc Prensky 😉
Ewan,
Although I have countless reasons to believe that the idea of “video games” in education is a holy grail that receives excessive attention, I do want to agree with something you said by putting it into context for American educators.
For the past twenty years – likely before you were born 🙂 – I have been aware of how British educators integrated computer games, particularly elaborate “choose-your-own-adventure” type games into the curriculum in ways that has never happened in the United States. My long-lost friend, Mike Matson’s company, 4mation designed adventure game software like Granny’s Garden and Guardians of the Greenwood that sold like crazy in the UK, Australia and New Zealand in the late 1980s-early 1990s. I know first-hand that US software developers could not imagine such primitive narrative-based “games” selling at all in the USA, and they were undoubtedly correct. The handful of commercial software titles created over the past 30 years that I would call “educational” have been commercial flops.
Teachers in the UK, Australia and New Zealand did in fact organize classroom activities, writing prompts, map making, art projects, etc… around the playing of these software “games.”
That is and was terrific. However, it would be a mistake to conclude that the computer “game” was the key variable in this scenario. I suspect that UK/AU/NZ teachers just enjoyed a greater tradition of whole language and curriculum integration than many teachers in the USA.
I would imagine that teachers capable of integrating video games in thoughtful ways, would be just as good at integrating any other sort of media, material or experience into the curriculum.
If video games are a special case, it would be most helpful to learn which ones, how they are used and why you believe they are special. It might also be useful to know if computer games and video games are synonymous.
What do you mean by a video game? Are all children supposed to like or learn from the same ones? Are experiences consistent across video games? Do you know how long gaming proponents have been promising educational breakthroughs? Why is it different now?
There are lots of questions to answer.
What ‘e said. You’re spot in, Gary. I hooked onto video games because try provide a more logical structure and stimulus for the kind of cross-curricular teaching I believes leads to stronger learning. I think the recent ressurgence is down to two factors: video games (commercial off the shelf ones) have never been more popular (with social games now moving in to steal their crown) and b) the quality if narrative and graphics has never been greater, leading into some incredibly rich writing and speaking opportunities.
But I do actually agree with you on this: video games and ‘games based learning’ (Urgh) have been fetishised. It’s been done to thrust it under the noses of parents a teachers but I wonder if we can’t take the foot off that pedal and recognise it for what it is: another one for our learning backpack, helping to create deep, rich, cross-curricular experiences as one of many media we can harness to that end.
I watched the video, but I haven’t had a chance to read the article yet. What struck me was that this wasn’t about technology at all. The video focused on the idea of systems thinking. They weren’t playing video games; they were building them. The idea was understanding the world through a systems thinking approach. The technology is there, not because it is technology, but because it helps them use systems thinking to create things that help them understand the world.
The talk of school reform continues to de-emphasize the single largest hurdle to public education—funding. For a new model of public education to succeed it has to be funded for all students, not just upper/middle class white students (statistically speaking). The primary (but not only) reason students are successful are factors outside the control of schools. I would love to have classrooms like my living room, with books and technology and discussion about connections with other areas front and center, but I would despise any school that aimed to be like the living room of half of our students; video games, no discussion of the content, parents not present, microwave food. The discussion on this blog seems somewhat oblivious to the state of a large number of the student population. Good learning environments are created by the people in them, not by programming.
I think there must be some balance to school reform. I like the idea of teaching through video games, but I also have seen the negative effects that gaming has on students. Things like hyperactivity and inability to stay focused after a period of playing said games. How do we deal with these issues. Also, not all students respond to gaming, some enjoy reading and learning through text. There is no blanket approach to teaching.
I think would be really interesting if school was fun. We might be able to learn more while we are having fun. Sometimes sitting in a classroom can be really boring but if they make learning fun I think a lot more students would start showing up in class.
I really like the idea of teaching by gaming. But the idea of having to share computers might be a hassle. I agree that it teaches the students how to collaborate, but 1 computer for 3 students is just not functional, in my opinion.
-A 9th grade student
Hello, I’m a 9th grade student in a computer’s class and our assignment was read a blog and comment on it, I chose yours.
I think your blog was very interesting and informative. I liked the idea of learning outside of school and on the computer/through video games. I have one question though: If you need help with anything or are confused about something, is there a way to contact a teacher or instructor?
Thanks for writing 🙂
-Jess
wow! what a great idea. School would have been fun if it was that way. I am sure we will learn more and have fun the same time. I am sure there will be less student that cut classes.
Great idea.
I believe this is a great idea, but like with most good ideas there does need a little tweaking. The student won’t do anything because the student-to-computer ratio is 1:4 than the students will be talking because they’re at such close quarters. It is a good idea to once in a while put more than one at a computer so that they can get those collaboration skills but this needs some more planning before anything should be attempted.
-An 11th grade student-
I think is a great idea but i don’t think everyone would like to do it and i think some schools should have it but not all of them because not everyone is into video game but it also looks like a great idea.
Hello, I’m a 10th grader and I read your post. It’s a very good idea to use gaming for education. It will also make the students have a better time in school. The reason so many students seem to dislike school is because it’s boring. What I’m trying to say is having a learning by gaming program will have a good effect on students.
Hello, I like the idea that you want to turn school teaching into a video game. It would make a fun way for students to learn, instead of being in a boring classroom with a teacher always talking. However, how would schools be able to afford all this technology?
-A 10th grade student
I think this a fantastic idea, but it would a lot of hard work and dedication to make this whole thing fall in to place.The idea of putting 3 students on one computer doesn’t sound like a great idea in my opinion.The best thing about this idea is that the teacher can really connect with his or her students.
-A 11th grade student-
Quest to Learn exemplifies the mandatory shift in mind-set that must be made about education and technology in order to make change. Unlike the Microsoft school in Philadelphia, Quest to Learn hadn’t simply handed their student’s laptops, or installed smart-boards in their classrooms, but completely redefined the purpose of education and how it can facilitate learning.
The “Quest to Learn” I believe will help better some of our education,because I think it’s very important that schools want to expand our academics with technology, because almost every kid and teen likes to be on the computer and they’re on their phones whenever they can.
I read this and I thought learning by playing is a good idea. I believe that people will actually enjoy learning this way and they will be more prepared for their future if they have to work on computers a lot.
I think that students would like learning by gaming because kids play video games all the time even when they are suppose to be doing their homework.
I really like this blog because there is a teacher that is looking into the eyes of a child and not a adult. Would this really work if it was done? This is very interesting to me because I never thought that a video game could help you learn.
I really love this whole concept. I find school very tedius and math is my worst subject, but I know I would enjoy school more, and be more willing to learn if I was using a video game. Our civilization is progressing extremely fast and schools are still teaching the same way they were 50 years ago, we need a change. I really hope this concept catches on.
-high school student.
I like the way how we get to have more fun in school. I like the idea of learning through video games and other activities unlike the normal way of learning. I think that this way, students would be more into education.
I agree that “Learning by Playing” is good. We play games on the computer all the time so why not make it a learning time? It neat that a teacher came up with this idea.
I read this blog and I think its a whole new way to learn. Since we live in the 21st century, now that everything is all about technology, this can be a new experience for the next generations. This idea can change the way we learn and interact. In my opinion, I feel like people need to keep in touch with others and to see the teacher physically.
-A 10th grade student
In my opinion the entire education system in the u.s. is flawed and needs a major overhaul.The traditional learning in schools is just not working anymore. Many kids now cannot learn with some teacher just lecturing them. Kids need something more.
The word America in this article could be replaced with {insert your country}
I definately think our students would respond to using technology as a teaching tool. From the time a child is born parents are providing video games, why not use this to our benefit as educators. However, I believe there needs to be a balance between teacher direct instruction and using games/technology.
It’s pretty clear that schools will have fewer resources (money/student) in five years than they had three years ago. At the same time, they need to teach more and faster.
It seems to me that the only way this can happen is if students learn how to learn on their own, and then are given engaging tasks that help and inspire them to learn more. Make students “free agent learners.” Games and creating games are two possible choices. Digital Storytelling is another. Solving community-wide problems is another. There isn’t just one unique solution, and none of the solutions is a magic bullet.
We need to try a lot of different things, and learn how each works best.
Education has been left behind for sure. Students are more advanced then ever before using technology yet homework and school work rarely use any technology. Some of the problem is funding and some is a problem with teachers like myself getting in a comfort zone. I think as much time we can spend with our students using technology they will only benefit and they will become more prepared for what is going on outside of school.