Wow. So you gotta give this Jane lady some credit right? Getting up in front of all of those people and talking about her PhD in how video gaming can change the world. Honestly, I thought it was really impressive.
First of all, this lady is very well spoken. I thought she did a phenomenal job at articulating everything and making it very easy to follow. So that kept me engaged from the get-go (as if the subject matter wasn't enough). I thought she was great at speaking, and great at putting so many points out there. I thought she really did do a great job at making something that is totally irrational/crazy (like video gaming to save the world) into an idea that kind of, sort of sounds like it makes sense.
I don't know, though,
I guess, I was impressed with her, her presentation, her points. But overall, even though the games that she designed clearly related to real-life problems, I'm having a hard time grasping how playing those games is going to make the world better. What I am getting at is that if you play a game where the challenge is to survive without oil, then when our world actually runs out of oil, you will know that to do. That is somewhat valid. I just wonder if she is missing the component of all of the other people in the world. There is everyone in this world to consider here. Maybe that is one of the aspects of the game, which would add an interesting and logical perspective, but it still seems bizarre. I mean, there is also the question in my head of: How is the world going to get that much better if people are literally sitting around all day playing video games? But then a side of me wants to say, well at least sitting around on your butt and thinking about it is at least better than sitting around on your butt and not thinking about it at all. I don't know, Jane has really got me thinking to be honest. I am really eager to hear what everyone else has to say about it in class, or through comments! :D
And now to shift to the reading, "Good Video Games and Good Learning." What I mostly got out of this related to Jane's speech in that, it is more beneficial to think of these issues, whether they are world problems, or boring facts that you learn in class as games. Ideally, there would be a way to make everything that is boring to learn a video game. I guess my only problem with that is I feel like it is still going to be boring. I know if I was presented with Mario Golf, and something like "Chemistry Gaming 101" I am most likely going to opt for the Mario Golf. For me, I'm taking the time to play a game and do something fun, so why would I pick something boring. Even if we turn every problem solving scenario in the world into a video game, there is still going to be the issue of people deciding not to play those games.
I can't help but think about my mentor student at Scarlett though when I am reading all of this. He is a huge gamer, and recently was telling me all about it and how all he ever wants to do is play video games. He actually even told me a few days ago that he wishes there was a game to practice his reading because he would play these kinds of learning games if they existed. These games could be a learning strategy--and a way for kids to study. If they can help students learning, why wouldn't we be in favor of them?
I wish I could clearly decide what my stance is on all of this. I think I am in favor of the ideas. I actually find them very fascinating, and even though I still find myself with these doubtful response questions to the ideas, I am by no means dismissing them. The fact is, our world is moving, technology is becoming more and more important, and so like Jane said, maybe it is time to use games to do real world work and put these powerful gamers to the test.
So I guess I've been slightly all over the place with my ideas so far, but after thinking it through, the bottom line is, it is important to consider video games when talking about the future.
They are a clear example of how technology is increasing. And so just
like we as teachers need to take advantage of pod-casting, and blogging, and the latest computers in our classroom, we need to take advantage of
video games. It is time to open up to the world, and not dismiss it. If we are going to demand this change, and demand these improvements in teaching then we need to be open to helpful ways to help make that change happen.
Having seen some of Jane McGonigal's games, I think that part of her conjecture has to do with a less radical reorientation than it might appear. Looking at her Urgent Evoke game, for example, the effort seems to be oriented towards replacing the field of play, moving from fantasy worlds to the world in which we live, taking some of the energy and enthusiasm of the gamer's outlook and seeing if it can be applied to issues of hunger, health, etc. She is playing, I think, with the idea that the agentic orientation of the game player ("I can solve any problem and vanquish any foe") represents people at their best, feeling their most able and most alive, and that they--we--are hungry for opportunities to feel empowered and to creatively tackle problems.
ReplyDeleteIt's a different way of thinking, and while I don't know if you can make this "jump," I think that she is tackling the right problems.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that it's hard to find a settled stance on this video game approach. But I agree with Jeff's post above that Jane's way of thinking is a different and interesting approach. We could utilize games that have positive educational messages then use these formats to teach our students. The problem that may arise is sometimes games become more important to the kids than the ideas you're trying to teach. I think finding the right balance of gaming and learning is a tough challenge, but one we should consider dealing with as video games become more important to our students.
ReplyDeleteYes I agree! The speaker was totally engaging! I had a hard time telling whether or not she was being serious about the invention of real life games or just making a point. I gathered that the gist of the message that she was trying to convey, and I believe she clearly stated this if I recollect correctly is that if the amount of time, perseverance and intensity spent on gaming was placed on solving the world’s problems – we might be further along on solving those problems.
ReplyDeleteLearning from video game doesn't necessarily mean sitting around all day playing video games. It means you play video games productively,though I wouldn't use video games to teach. Knowledge can be found everywhere, even in video games. How I would use the video game knowledge would be to set up my class to model the ideals that video games use. That model is forgiving and pushes students forward even though the content is tough.
ReplyDelete