research outlined in the preceding sections
raises key questions around the role of play
in learning, the ‘purpose’ of education, the
role of learning through activities perceived
as intrinsically motivating to children, and
the changing roles of children as learners.
The identification of any games as a site for
‘playful’ learning is repeatedly emphasised
through the research literature, sometimes
as an extreme opposition to children’s
experiences in school:
“Games are... the most ancient and timehonored
(sic) vehicle for education. They
are the original educational technology, the
natural one, having received the seal of
approval of natural selection. We don’t see
mother lions lecturing cubs at the
chalkboard; we don’t see senior lions
writing their memoirs for posterity. In light
of this, the question, ‘Can games have
educational value?’ becomes absurd. It is
not games but schools that are the
newfangled notion, the untested fad, the
violator of tradition. Game-playing is a vital
educational function for any creature
capable of learning.” (Crawford 1982)
The notion of playful learning emphasises
experiences such as experimentation,
exploration, trial and error, imagination,
roleplay, and simulation of experience
suggesting that it might be possible to
develop environments for learning based
on these activities.
Finally, observing children’s play of
mainstream games in leisure time raises
questions about the role we ascribe to
children as learners in schools. The review
of literature around children’s social games
play, for example, repeatedly highlights the
ways in which children take on the role of
teachers, providing advice, support, hints,
tips and models of learning to other
children. Perhaps more than any other
aspect, this reconceptualisation of children
as bearers of expertise, as capable of
acting in the role of expert, raises serious
questions about how we currently structure
learning experiences in schools.
3.3 LEARNING WITH MAINSTREAM
GAMES IN SCHOOLS
While the majority of research discussed so
far has been concerned with what and how
children learn in their informal playing of
computer games, in recent years there
have been a number of studies of the use
of mainstream computer games in schools,
intended to explore whether these games
can have any role in supporting current
educational objectives. Given the research
above on the potential of games to support
learning of competencies, collaboration
and participation in practice, however,
there are some significant tensions in
evidence when introducing mainstream
games into the school setting.
Three recent studies in the UK attempted
to understand how mainstream games
could be used in school. Each included
surveys of predominantly UK teachers
who had attempted, or wanted, to use
mainstream games in the classroom
(Becta 2001; McFarlane et al 2002;
Kirriemuir 2002). The most frequently
encountered perceived or actual
obstacles were:
• it was difficult for teachers to identify
quickly how a particular game was
relevant to some component of the
statutory curriculum, as well as the
accuracy and appropriateness of the
content within the game |
|
• the difficulty in persuading other school
stakeholders as to the potential/actual
educational benefits of computer games
• the lack of time available to teachers to
familiarise themselves with the game,
and methods of producing the best
results from its use
• the amount of irrelevant content or
functionality in a game which could not
be removed or ignored, thus wasting
valuable lesson time.
The key disadvantage with mainstream
games used ‘cold’ in the classroom was
the amount of time taken for both the
student and teacher to orient themselves
within the game. Squire (2003) describes
several sessions where historical strategy
simulation games are used in a classroom,
showing the considerable effort needed by
the teaching staff to keep the students ‘on
track’ within the game. This extra-topic
play may or may not be valuable to learning
generally but in either event the school
curriculum has clear boundaries and
objectives related to high stakes assessment
– wandering beyond these boundaries is
seen as wasting valuable time.
It is not only extraneous content that takes
gaming outside the boundaries of the set
curriculum. In the TEEM report (McFarlane
et al 2002), teachers and parents
recognised that games play can support
valuable skill development such as:
• strategic thinking
• planning
• communication
• application of numbers
• negotiating skills
• group decision-making
• data-handling.
However, neither teachers nor parents
were happy with the notion of playing
games in lesson time since such skill
development did not match the criteria
assessed in high stakes national tests.
4 KEY ISSUES IN DEVELOPING
GAMES FOR LEARNING
As far back as 1979, it was envisaged
that the motivational aspects of digital
games play might be used to support
the acquisition of knowledge outside
the game itself. Some of the distinctions
between the resulting ‘learning games’
and ‘mainstream games’ are shown
in Fig 1.
There are two key themes common
to the development of games for
education, namely:
• the desire to harness the motivational
power of games in order to ‘making
learning fun’
• a belief that ‘learning through doing’ in
games such as simulations, offers a
powerful learning tool.
This section of the report will examine
both these aspects of the design of games
for learning, and ask whether they are
well-founded objectives for design and
development of digital game-based
learning resources.
4.1 ‘MAKING LEARNING FUN
’
The central ethos of traditional
‘edutainment’ software has been to make
learning ‘fun’ although this is usually
shorthand for the encouragement of
engagement. One strategy is to introduce
... next page |
|
|
|
children take
on the role
of teachers,
providing advice,
support, hints,
tips and models
of learning to
other children |
