I have to admit, the idea of gaming as educational has been a bit of a mystery to me. I have been struggling to wrap my mind around using games as a teaching tool. As I was reading Aldrich, I had a "DUH" moment. Using simulation and games to teach skills..... As a PE teacher, that is what I do. In my last post, I mentioned a lack of skills transfer. Apparently, this applies to me also. In all of the reading I have done for this class, I actually enjoyed Aldrich's Chapter 8. The way he looked at Simulations, Games and Pedagogy, made sense. There was less of a division between those three elements than I had previously seen in other reading.
"The first thing that makes simulation work is context alignment. The performance situation is similar to the learning situation" (Aldrich pg 84). Simulations give students practice and practice leads to several different things. Practice gives people opportunities to work through problems in a less threatening environment. They can try different scenerios without the threat of failure. With increased security, students are likely to have greater confidence in what they are doing. All good things.
"Arbitrary (non-intrinsic) goals are often more motivating than real-world goals" (Aldrich pg 85). This statement explains why many students find games more interesting than your average English textbook. Of course, it also explains why people get all riled up about games and sports. They are entertaining.
Finally, Aldrich addressed the pedagological elements. His argument appears to be that when students are "lost and confused or don't see the relevancy of the experience to the real world" (Aldrich pg 90), it is time to fall back basic pedagogy. Giving background material, providing scaffolding and prompts are a few of the strategies that can be used to help students and support simulations and games.
Overall, Aldrich seems to argue for using all three elements in order to help students find success.
NOTE: I found this article interesting.
http://apnews.myway.com//article/20070221/D8NE9KKG0.html
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Saturday, February 17, 2007
Week #5 Reflection Project
I have always considered "gamers" to be loaners and a bit on the socially inept side ( not meaning to offend anyone). But I am beginning to change my mind, and that is a big deal for someone who sits in front of a computer out of need most of the time, not because I want to. I don't really think my idea of a gamer is much different than a lot of people. "Gaming has become much more than a solitary hobby and is, instead, a social activity, involving both old and new friends" (Gibson pg 152).
In reality, when I observe and listen to converstations my students are having, they are very passionate about their gaming. Much more so than they are, say, about Algebra or going to play baseball. "The new generation of students is accustom to fast flashing screens, like those found on MTV, and is comfortable with and exceptionally gifted at multitasking" (Gibson pg 153).
Gaming, it can be argued, gives students "multitasking opportunities and that gaming is often one of numerous activities in which a student is concurrently engaged" (Gibson pg 152).
This evolution of gaming into an interactive experience can potentially assist in motivation students and helping to develop problem solving, creatieve and communication skills" (Gibson pg 152). I tend to agree, at least in principle, with the above ideas. The potential for helping students is there. But looking at possible advantages of gaming, I am left with one glaring problem. How do we assess and measure students multitasking abilties? Their ability to solve complex problems and their communication skills? Lacking are appropriate assesments for these skill that we say can help students.
Are students really developing the skills they need? We all have the student who has mastered a particular game. This kid has poured over all of the manuels and cheat sheets they could find for their particular game. But they can't read a short story in English class and respond appropriately to a list of questions. There is a significant lack of skills transfer in many of our students. It can be aruged that many kids today are good at multitasking and even problem solving, but how is it that we can prove that in our current system of education, from elementary all the way to college?
Finally, I am going to just vent on this issue as it was brought up in Gibson. Communication Skills!! If gaming can help a student develop communication skills, where is it? Again, there is a lack of skill transfer. I am a firm believer in writing for writing sake. If places such as Myspace encourage kids to write, then I am all for it. But somewhere along the way, they need to be taught that they still need to learn academic writing skills. You can't talk about a skate park on the state writing test and use SK8 as an appropriate word. It makes my head hurt to grade any writing assignment I may give.
In reality, when I observe and listen to converstations my students are having, they are very passionate about their gaming. Much more so than they are, say, about Algebra or going to play baseball. "The new generation of students is accustom to fast flashing screens, like those found on MTV, and is comfortable with and exceptionally gifted at multitasking" (Gibson pg 153).
Gaming, it can be argued, gives students "multitasking opportunities and that gaming is often one of numerous activities in which a student is concurrently engaged" (Gibson pg 152).
This evolution of gaming into an interactive experience can potentially assist in motivation students and helping to develop problem solving, creatieve and communication skills" (Gibson pg 152). I tend to agree, at least in principle, with the above ideas. The potential for helping students is there. But looking at possible advantages of gaming, I am left with one glaring problem. How do we assess and measure students multitasking abilties? Their ability to solve complex problems and their communication skills? Lacking are appropriate assesments for these skill that we say can help students.
Are students really developing the skills they need? We all have the student who has mastered a particular game. This kid has poured over all of the manuels and cheat sheets they could find for their particular game. But they can't read a short story in English class and respond appropriately to a list of questions. There is a significant lack of skills transfer in many of our students. It can be aruged that many kids today are good at multitasking and even problem solving, but how is it that we can prove that in our current system of education, from elementary all the way to college?
Finally, I am going to just vent on this issue as it was brought up in Gibson. Communication Skills!! If gaming can help a student develop communication skills, where is it? Again, there is a lack of skill transfer. I am a firm believer in writing for writing sake. If places such as Myspace encourage kids to write, then I am all for it. But somewhere along the way, they need to be taught that they still need to learn academic writing skills. You can't talk about a skate park on the state writing test and use SK8 as an appropriate word. It makes my head hurt to grade any writing assignment I may give.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Week #4 Reflective Action Project
I am beginning to wonder if my classmates who are participating in the Live Discussions in SL might be gaining more information and at a more rapid pace than I am. By the time I get home at night and sit down to SL it is at least an hour later for almost everyone else and EdTech Island is generally empty. Now, while I tend to lean towards traditional learning methods, at least for myself, I am aware that a bit of scaffolding might help me move a bit more quickly through SL. As it is, I am still trying not to walk into walls, or get stuck, on occasion, in the fountian.
"Knowledge, at least according to social constructivists is the artifact of decisions made by people in groups, based on their on-going interactions. It is grounded in the inquiring activities and comingled task through which people relate" (Gibson pg 93).
Learning in a 3D eviroment, such as SL, seems to require that people get involved in a communtity in which they can learn and bounce ideas of others who are working with the same ideas or material. "Social constructivists view learning as the result of neither solely intrinsic nor purely extrinsic motivations but, rather, as a contiguous process that exists each time people willfully interact with each other in the world around them" (Gibson pg 93).
Throughout Gibson's Chapter 5 there seems to be a common theme of providing scaffolding to the new learners in online learning environments, especially in the 3D type learning evironments. While scaffolding is generally considered to be important in most learning situations, I feel that it is more so in environment such as SL. There is a significant level of disorientation for many learners (myself included) when they first enter such an environment. What that scaffolding looks like, I am a bit unsure of at this point.
"Knowledge, at least according to social constructivists is the artifact of decisions made by people in groups, based on their on-going interactions. It is grounded in the inquiring activities and comingled task through which people relate" (Gibson pg 93).
Learning in a 3D eviroment, such as SL, seems to require that people get involved in a communtity in which they can learn and bounce ideas of others who are working with the same ideas or material. "Social constructivists view learning as the result of neither solely intrinsic nor purely extrinsic motivations but, rather, as a contiguous process that exists each time people willfully interact with each other in the world around them" (Gibson pg 93).
Throughout Gibson's Chapter 5 there seems to be a common theme of providing scaffolding to the new learners in online learning environments, especially in the 3D type learning evironments. While scaffolding is generally considered to be important in most learning situations, I feel that it is more so in environment such as SL. There is a significant level of disorientation for many learners (myself included) when they first enter such an environment. What that scaffolding looks like, I am a bit unsure of at this point.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
Week #3 Reflection Action Project
Sociology 101! To study how and why people behave as they do, and do this through an online enviroment is fascinating. From an educational point of veiw, looking at sociology in this way gives students a unique perspective on the material. They are actually involved in the culture versus just examining it though text.
One problem I have with looking examining an online "culture", such as The Sims Online, is that "TSO is, in fact, a simplified and idealized world lacking the diversity, complexity, and organizational elaboration of real-life. The world contains no aging process, no old people, no fixed social classes...etc" (Gibson pg 53). I wonder if examining something that is deviod of real issues is valid in terms of actual sociology.
Changing topics slightly. As I worked on my Social Analysis powerpoint for this week, I begin to question why it is that people get involved in online gaming. For me, the whole idea of having an avatar to be my stand-in is sort of creepy. Historically, avatars were the men who went into battle dressed as the King or Commander, and generally, they were killed.
Why is it that we create the avatar's that we do? How do we chose how they look and what they wear? Part of it is the choices we are presented with. But having the ability to change body features and hair color impacts how the avatars look to some degree. I have seen some strange looking avatars as I have wandered about (or gotten lost) SL, but there have not been any avatars that are unattractive by sociatal standards. They are all of a specific height, slender and with no physical deformities. Would I have chosen a short, heavy avatar? Probably not.
After reading both of Elisabeth Hayes' articles, it seemed to me that most people, possibly subconciously, enjoy virtual gaming because of their ability to combine fantasy with real-life. They get the opportunity to be and do things that they may never get to do in their everyday lives.
I apologize that this post may seem slightly scattered and disjointed. I have had a problem untangling some of my thoughts surrounding the concept of identity and virtual gaming.
Any insights would be greatly appreciated.
Katie
One problem I have with looking examining an online "culture", such as The Sims Online, is that "TSO is, in fact, a simplified and idealized world lacking the diversity, complexity, and organizational elaboration of real-life. The world contains no aging process, no old people, no fixed social classes...etc" (Gibson pg 53). I wonder if examining something that is deviod of real issues is valid in terms of actual sociology.
Changing topics slightly. As I worked on my Social Analysis powerpoint for this week, I begin to question why it is that people get involved in online gaming. For me, the whole idea of having an avatar to be my stand-in is sort of creepy. Historically, avatars were the men who went into battle dressed as the King or Commander, and generally, they were killed.
Why is it that we create the avatar's that we do? How do we chose how they look and what they wear? Part of it is the choices we are presented with. But having the ability to change body features and hair color impacts how the avatars look to some degree. I have seen some strange looking avatars as I have wandered about (or gotten lost) SL, but there have not been any avatars that are unattractive by sociatal standards. They are all of a specific height, slender and with no physical deformities. Would I have chosen a short, heavy avatar? Probably not.
After reading both of Elisabeth Hayes' articles, it seemed to me that most people, possibly subconciously, enjoy virtual gaming because of their ability to combine fantasy with real-life. They get the opportunity to be and do things that they may never get to do in their everyday lives.
I apologize that this post may seem slightly scattered and disjointed. I have had a problem untangling some of my thoughts surrounding the concept of identity and virtual gaming.
Any insights would be greatly appreciated.
Katie
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
