I examined educational gaming, the use of computer and video games in education.
Why all the fuss about educational gaming? Gaming is well established in our culture, it is reported that in 2005 over 154 million Americans were playing video games and the average eighth-grade boy spent 23 hours a week playing games, his female counterpart about 12 hours per week (Klopfer et al, 2009).
Games are often hard, long and complex and yet young people play them for fun (Gee 2007). In contrast, schools have problems getting students to do hard, long and complex work. Games are seen to encourage and develop many skills; key skills include communication and collaboration with other users, problem solving and processing information quickly (Facer 2003). Hence the motivation for educational gaming; if gaming is so pervasive, kids enjoy it and it develops skills valued by education, surely education and gaming should be able to work together?
The obvious approach has been using games in the classroom. Various models have been suggested.
1. Games as rewards
As students enjoy playing games, then games can be provided to students as rewards for finishing their other, 'real', work. Alternatively, games can be used as motivators to retain students at danger of dropping out of school (Royle et al 2010).
2. 'Skill and drill' games
Skill and drill games are simple games, usually focussing one skill with an emphasis on rote learning. For example, maths games that teach addition. Such games are found in schools but lack the complex nature of games that students play for fun (Hommel 2010).
3. Existing games in the classroom
Off-the-shelf games can be used in an education setting. For example, the game Diplomacy has been used to teach students about the political causes of World War I (Klopfer et al 2009).
4. Educational games for the classroom
As off-the-shelf games are designed for entertainment first, another model is to develop games that retain the entertainment but are based on educational objectives. Examples include Lure of the Labyrinth and The Small Business Game.
5. Games as supplementary resources
Even if games are not used in the classroom, there is an argument that games should be one of the resources in a school library (Hommel 2010). The games would then be used by students outside the classroom to consolidate the classroom material.
As well as looking at games in the classroom, research has asked the question "How can we make learning ... more game-like in the sense of using the sorts of learning principles young people see in good games every day" (Gee 2010). Such thinking attempts to see the students as a player (Prensky in Facer 2003) in a learning game. Many of the game playing ideas have parallels in the ideas of Social Constructivism (Klopfer et al 2009).
Despite the apparent link between gaming and education, issues remain in the field of educational gaming:
1. Educational game is a contradiction
"Historically, 'having fun' and 'learning' have been seen to be diametrically opposed" (Facer 2003). Using games in an educational setting is an attempt to bring fun closer to education. But if games are then changed to make them more suitable for education, by reducing or eliminating the violence for example, will they throw out the baby with the bathwater?
'Stealth learning' (Prensky in Facer 2003) is the approach of making an experience educational without the player being aware of the learning. Such an approach ignores the need for a learner to experience some awareness of learning.
Can educational games be fun? More research is needed.
2. Games: the time investment versus the return
Games require a significant investment in time. The nature of complex games being long and hard means that they may take many hours to play (Hommel 2010). A teacher must balance the time spent playing a game and the educational outcomes achieved. It may be true that game playing has many positive educational outcomes (like problem-solving and collaborative work) but if these outcomes are only 5% of the game and the rest of the time is shooting and hand-eye coordination skills, then are games the most effective way to achieve the educational outcomes?
3. Not everyone likes games
Despite the claim that games are motivational, not everyone find learning based on computer games to be motivational (Whitton 2007).
There are also gender issues with games. Games mainly have 'male' world views - 'shoot-em-up' games are an obvious example. As well social cultures come into play when looking at games. Many women just don't get the point of games or have more than enough other activities to stimulate or keep them busy without having to play games.
Research is required to identify how to make games more inclusive.
4. Negative aspects of games
Unfortunately, games often have negative associations (Baek 2008). Violent and aggressive behaviour is often attributed to game playing. There may be correlation but no clear causation (Hommel 2010). There are also concerns with students becoming addicted to games. Further research is required to find out if games do cause negative behaviours and how these negative outcomes can be avoided.
5. Fitting into curriculum and classroom schedule
A Korean study (Baek 2008) found that two major concerns of teachers were how to fit games into the curriculum and into the classroom schedule. Curriculum usually focusses on content, not the more general skills associated with gaming. This challenge is faced by teachers who are asked to produce general problem solvers and creative thinkers but also students who can pass endless literacy and numeracy tests. Similarly, the classroom schedule of 60 minutes classes is often not conducive to games that require time to set up and play.
Some conclusions:
It is clear that some (but certainly not all) games have "educational" value. How to best incorporate games into the classroom remains unclear. The variety of approaches of using games in the classroom gives teachers a range of possibilities.
I think that the current curriculum is so tightly focussed on subject content that "general" learning (such as problem solving) that does not fit into one particular subject remains unloved. We assume students get problem solving skills from school but do not have problem solving as a specific curriculum item of study.
The idea that games give educators ideas about teaching and learning is powerful. Games challenge the idea that students only learn by being given facts from a teacher.
Baek Y.K., (2008). What Hinders Teachers in Using Computer and Video Games in the Classroom? Exploring Factors Inhibiting the Uptake of Computer and Video Games. CyberPsychology & Behaviour, Volume 11, Number 6, 2008.
Facer, K. (2003) Computer games and Learning. FutureLab.
Gee, J. (2007) Good Video Games and Good Learning Collected Essays on Video Games, Learning and Literacy, Lang.
Hommel, M. (2010) Video Games and Learning, School Library Monthly, Volume XXVI, Number 10, June 2010.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Graff, J. and Haas, J. (2009) The Instructional Power of Digital Games Social Networking Simulations and How Teachers Can Leverage Them. The Education Arcade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Royle, K. and Colfer S. (2010) The breadth and scope of computer games in learning: Applications to 14 to 19 learners with a specific focus on applicability to those who are classified as Not in Employment, Education or Training (NEET). CeDARE. September 2010.
Whitton, N. (2007) Motivation and computer game based learning. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007
Showing posts with label ELPC G1. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ELPC G1. Show all posts
Monday, April 18, 2011
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
Some Final Thoughts on Leveraging Off Social Networking
I thought I would end my blogs on teachers leveraging off social networking with a research article on success in the field. Unfortunately, I was not able to find a research article that provided a summary of teacher experiences. Instead here are a few sites and articles on teachers using social networking that I found interesting.
A simple way of using Facebook in the classroom is to create a Facebook page for the class and use the page as a tool for listing homework and for communicating with students (Hart 2010). Students are informed of new posts on the page (such as a reminder that homework is due). Students can send messages asking for assistance or clarification. By not posting any personal information about the teacher or students, the page can be an effective communicator without any of the usual concerns of social networking. Such a Facebook page still keeps the teacher as the central actor and therefore does not encourage peer to peer learning.
An English teacher had his students create Facebook pages for characters from a novel (Featherstone 2009). Each page should have attributes appropriate for the character. Does this mean that there aren't 500 million real people on Facebook?
A Victorian Government report (2009) describes an online science fair and a maths books as projects successfully completed at schools. The report refers to the use of the SuperClubsPlus social networking site. This is a site designed for school children 6 to 14. Enrolment is restricted to children and requires validation from the child's school. There are on-line mediators monitoring the site 24 hours a day. Such a site obviously addresses the security and privacy concerns of sites like Facebook. The report contained positive teacher feedback on social networking in the classroom.
And my final thoughts? I think that social networking has some great advantages but the security and privacy concerns will not go away in a public site. Restricted sites such as Nings and the SuperClubsPlus address these concerns. Eventually the learning management systems (LMS) that schools seem to be using will be extended to have social networking within the LMS. The only problem then for students and teachers will be keeping up with all the different on-line communities to which they belong.
Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. (2009) Teaching and learning with Web 2.0 technologies. http://www.education.vic.gov.au/ Accessed 15 April 2011.
Featherstone (2009) Mr Featherstone's Class Blog http://mrfeatherstone.blogspot.com/2009/04/unit-project-facebook-character.html Accessed 15 April 2011.
Hart L. (2010) Using MySpace and Facebook Pages in the Classroom http://www.brighthub.com/education/k-12/articles/18955.aspx Accessed 15 April 2011.
A simple way of using Facebook in the classroom is to create a Facebook page for the class and use the page as a tool for listing homework and for communicating with students (Hart 2010). Students are informed of new posts on the page (such as a reminder that homework is due). Students can send messages asking for assistance or clarification. By not posting any personal information about the teacher or students, the page can be an effective communicator without any of the usual concerns of social networking. Such a Facebook page still keeps the teacher as the central actor and therefore does not encourage peer to peer learning.
An English teacher had his students create Facebook pages for characters from a novel (Featherstone 2009). Each page should have attributes appropriate for the character. Does this mean that there aren't 500 million real people on Facebook?
A Victorian Government report (2009) describes an online science fair and a maths books as projects successfully completed at schools. The report refers to the use of the SuperClubsPlus social networking site. This is a site designed for school children 6 to 14. Enrolment is restricted to children and requires validation from the child's school. There are on-line mediators monitoring the site 24 hours a day. Such a site obviously addresses the security and privacy concerns of sites like Facebook. The report contained positive teacher feedback on social networking in the classroom.
And my final thoughts? I think that social networking has some great advantages but the security and privacy concerns will not go away in a public site. Restricted sites such as Nings and the SuperClubsPlus address these concerns. Eventually the learning management systems (LMS) that schools seem to be using will be extended to have social networking within the LMS. The only problem then for students and teachers will be keeping up with all the different on-line communities to which they belong.
Department of Education and Early Childhood Development. (2009) Teaching and learning with Web 2.0 technologies. http://www.education.vic.gov.au/ Accessed 15 April 2011.
Featherstone (2009) Mr Featherstone's Class Blog http://mrfeatherstone.blogspot.com/2009/04/unit-project-facebook-character.html Accessed 15 April 2011.
Hart L. (2010) Using MySpace and Facebook Pages in the Classroom http://www.brighthub.com/education/k-12/articles/18955.aspx Accessed 15 April 2011.
Social Networking to Help Teachers
Social networking in the classroom is usually the main focus of teachers using social networking, but can teachers also leverage off social networking to help themselves?
Cloudworks (Conole et al, 2009) is a social network "for sharing learning and teaching ideas and designs". Teachers would be able communicate and collaborate on teaching and learning. The Cloudworks project expended considerable effort in the design of the network. Clouds are the "social objects" of the site. A cloud is the basic unit in the network - it could be an idea about teaching, or a particular resource. The site allows connections to be made between clouds. A cloudscape allows users to aggregate clouds around an idea or an event.
Going to the Cloudworks site however, is a little like visiting an empty shopping mall. The mall looks great, has all the facilities but no shops and no people. The Field of Dreams approach "If you build it, he will come" unfortunately did not seem to work for the Cloudworks project. A quick look at the tags shows the focus of the site: virtual worlds, PhD skills, research, etc. The site is a research tool, not a working network.
The Ning in Education site was established as a community of educators discussing how to use Nings in education. Going on the site, however, the first forum that caught my eye was a discussion on why the site was not being used by educators (Shapiro, 2011). The point of the discussion was "People are joining this NING, however there is a very low participation level after people join." Several of the blog entries however noted that teachers want to be able to access material (how can I use a Ning in the classroom?) and get on with teaching. Many teachers are read-only users of Web 2.0 as they don't have time to post resources for others.
Conclusion? Social networking may be a great tool for teachers to collaborate and communicate. However, smaller communities of teachers with common interests, setting up their own Ning, may be more effective than trying to build a "one size fits all" solution like Cloudworks.
Conole G. and Culver J. (2009) Cloudworks: Social networking for learning design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 24(5) pp 763-782.
Shapiro, R. (2011) What are you looking for from Ning in Education? http://education.ning.com/forum/topics/what-are-you-looking-for-from. Accessed 15 April 2011
Cloudworks (Conole et al, 2009) is a social network "for sharing learning and teaching ideas and designs". Teachers would be able communicate and collaborate on teaching and learning. The Cloudworks project expended considerable effort in the design of the network. Clouds are the "social objects" of the site. A cloud is the basic unit in the network - it could be an idea about teaching, or a particular resource. The site allows connections to be made between clouds. A cloudscape allows users to aggregate clouds around an idea or an event.
Going to the Cloudworks site however, is a little like visiting an empty shopping mall. The mall looks great, has all the facilities but no shops and no people. The Field of Dreams approach "If you build it, he will come" unfortunately did not seem to work for the Cloudworks project. A quick look at the tags shows the focus of the site: virtual worlds, PhD skills, research, etc. The site is a research tool, not a working network.
The Ning in Education site was established as a community of educators discussing how to use Nings in education. Going on the site, however, the first forum that caught my eye was a discussion on why the site was not being used by educators (Shapiro, 2011). The point of the discussion was "People are joining this NING, however there is a very low participation level after people join." Several of the blog entries however noted that teachers want to be able to access material (how can I use a Ning in the classroom?) and get on with teaching. Many teachers are read-only users of Web 2.0 as they don't have time to post resources for others.
Conclusion? Social networking may be a great tool for teachers to collaborate and communicate. However, smaller communities of teachers with common interests, setting up their own Ning, may be more effective than trying to build a "one size fits all" solution like Cloudworks.
Conole G. and Culver J. (2009) Cloudworks: Social networking for learning design. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 24(5) pp 763-782.
Shapiro, R. (2011) What are you looking for from Ning in Education? http://education.ning.com/forum/topics/what-are-you-looking-for-from. Accessed 15 April 2011
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Educational networking
The use of social networking tools for educational purposes faces obstacles with privacy and safety concerns. Can the use of "educational networking" sites address these concerns?
Holcomb et al (2010) studied the use of a Ning in Education SNS (Social Networking Site) for distance education courses at the University of North Carolina. The study wanted to see if the more restricted Ning would address privacy and safety concerns but retain the advantages of educational networking.
The results were positive: The Ning "provided numerous educational values and benefits for learning within a secure environment" (Holcomb et al 2010). As distance educational students, the participants were able to communicate and collaborative more easily with their peers.
The biggest problem was the time commitment required to use the Ning; "the time to keep current was a significant drawback".
I found these results to be consistent with my observations of using a Ning in PPLE. Due to the closed community, I was much more comfortable submitting work, knowing that the community was a small, trusted group. I benefited from reading other students' thoughts and also from thinking about my thoughts in order to write. However, the time taken to write and read the Ning has meant that my participation has dropped off during the semester due to other demands on my time.
As well as the Ning, the article suggests Elgg and Classroom 2.0 as other educational networking tools.
These tool appear to address the concerns about privacy and safety from the outside world. The tool do not directly address problems that could occur within the group. Moayeri (2010) states that the perceived need for teachers to police Nings used in a classroom setting was a major time burden for the teachers. Maybe education and the idea of a closed community will reduce the need for teachers to police such educational networking sites?
Holcomb L., Brady K. and Smith B. 2010 The Emergence of "Educational Networking": Can Non-commercial, Education-based Social Networking Sites Really Address the Privacy and Safety Concerns of Educators? MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Vol 6, No. 2, June 2010, pp 475-481.
Moayeri, M. 2010. Classroom Uses of Social Network Sites: Traditional Practices or New Literacies? Digital Culture & Education, 2:1, 25-43.
Holcomb et al (2010) studied the use of a Ning in Education SNS (Social Networking Site) for distance education courses at the University of North Carolina. The study wanted to see if the more restricted Ning would address privacy and safety concerns but retain the advantages of educational networking.
The results were positive: The Ning "provided numerous educational values and benefits for learning within a secure environment" (Holcomb et al 2010). As distance educational students, the participants were able to communicate and collaborative more easily with their peers.
The biggest problem was the time commitment required to use the Ning; "the time to keep current was a significant drawback".
I found these results to be consistent with my observations of using a Ning in PPLE. Due to the closed community, I was much more comfortable submitting work, knowing that the community was a small, trusted group. I benefited from reading other students' thoughts and also from thinking about my thoughts in order to write. However, the time taken to write and read the Ning has meant that my participation has dropped off during the semester due to other demands on my time.
As well as the Ning, the article suggests Elgg and Classroom 2.0 as other educational networking tools.
These tool appear to address the concerns about privacy and safety from the outside world. The tool do not directly address problems that could occur within the group. Moayeri (2010) states that the perceived need for teachers to police Nings used in a classroom setting was a major time burden for the teachers. Maybe education and the idea of a closed community will reduce the need for teachers to police such educational networking sites?
Holcomb L., Brady K. and Smith B. 2010 The Emergence of "Educational Networking": Can Non-commercial, Education-based Social Networking Sites Really Address the Privacy and Safety Concerns of Educators? MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, Vol 6, No. 2, June 2010, pp 475-481.
Moayeri, M. 2010. Classroom Uses of Social Network Sites: Traditional Practices or New Literacies? Digital Culture & Education, 2:1, 25-43.
Wednesday, April 6, 2011
Is Social Networking a New Literacy?
Social networking is a powerful tool, but are teachers using social networking to do the same old thing using new technology, or are they using social networking to create a new way of doing things? This week I am looking at an article by Moayeri (2010) that explores this question.
Moayeri describes a study of two teachers in the same school using social networking (a Ning) as a part of the classroom work. Although both teachers are "digital pioneers" (Moayeri 2010) they used the Ning in different ways.
The first teacher would post questions on the main blog page and students would be required to respond on their own page's blog. Students were required to comment on other students submissions, but had to move onto the other students' blog pages to read their work.
In contrast, the second teacher used a single discussion forum for students to discuss topic questions. All students could then easily see the whole discussion and other students' thoughts. The forum was soon also used for social announcements. As well, the Ning site used for non-textual material and for students to share work (such as videos made by students).
Moayeri classifies the first classroom as using new technology for traditional practice. The second classroom however used the new technology to create a collaborative multimodal learning environment and was therefore using a "new literacy".
The article is an honest overview and does note problems using the Ning in the classroom. Assessment was difficult, how do you grade collaborative work and how do you make the amount of effort required for Ning activities commensurate with the assessment weighting? The Ning also required more work of both the teachers and the students. And because of the use of the Ning, oral discussions in the classroom were reduced in the class - effectively reducing oral literacy for another literacy that is heavily text based.
There were some strong positives. Most students enjoyed having their work seen and being able to see other students work. Students liked the idea that they could see another student's piece of assessable work before they submitted their own. Students liked the idea of building a product - the final Ning - over a semester.
The second classroom reported that a stronger classroom community was developed by using the Ning as a social tool. The Ning helped break down barriers between student groups: across gender and across popularity. Given the importance of learning communities in developing positive learning environments (Charles 2005) this is a significant advantage.
The experiences in the article are consistent with what I have observed in the Grad Dip. The use of the blog in ELPC (for example) has really replaced a paper submission with an online submission. There are additional advantages, such as students learning how to use blogs and in course administration, but I would not call it a new literacy. In PPLE however, a Ning has been used as a discussion forum and it has been interesting to read other students' thoughts about discussion topics set by the lecturer. The lecturer has made the Ning submissions non-assessable, avoiding the assessment problems described in the article. As well, only about a 25% on the tutorial group posts on the Ning, either due to not wanting their work public or because of the time it takes to contribute. Would I consider it a new literacy? It is certainly different to writing an essay and different to an in-class discussion, but few people on the Ning have actually commented on another student's posting. We submit, the lecturer comments. Maybe it will only become a new literacy when we become brave enough to interact and work as a collaborative community?
Charles, C.M. (2005). Building classroom discipline (8th ed.). Pearson.
Moayeri, M. 2010. Classroom Uses of Social Network Sites: Traditional Practices or New Literacies? Digital Culture & Education, 2:1, 25-43.
Moayeri describes a study of two teachers in the same school using social networking (a Ning) as a part of the classroom work. Although both teachers are "digital pioneers" (Moayeri 2010) they used the Ning in different ways.
The first teacher would post questions on the main blog page and students would be required to respond on their own page's blog. Students were required to comment on other students submissions, but had to move onto the other students' blog pages to read their work.
In contrast, the second teacher used a single discussion forum for students to discuss topic questions. All students could then easily see the whole discussion and other students' thoughts. The forum was soon also used for social announcements. As well, the Ning site used for non-textual material and for students to share work (such as videos made by students).
Moayeri classifies the first classroom as using new technology for traditional practice. The second classroom however used the new technology to create a collaborative multimodal learning environment and was therefore using a "new literacy".
The article is an honest overview and does note problems using the Ning in the classroom. Assessment was difficult, how do you grade collaborative work and how do you make the amount of effort required for Ning activities commensurate with the assessment weighting? The Ning also required more work of both the teachers and the students. And because of the use of the Ning, oral discussions in the classroom were reduced in the class - effectively reducing oral literacy for another literacy that is heavily text based.
There were some strong positives. Most students enjoyed having their work seen and being able to see other students work. Students liked the idea that they could see another student's piece of assessable work before they submitted their own. Students liked the idea of building a product - the final Ning - over a semester.
The second classroom reported that a stronger classroom community was developed by using the Ning as a social tool. The Ning helped break down barriers between student groups: across gender and across popularity. Given the importance of learning communities in developing positive learning environments (Charles 2005) this is a significant advantage.
The experiences in the article are consistent with what I have observed in the Grad Dip. The use of the blog in ELPC (for example) has really replaced a paper submission with an online submission. There are additional advantages, such as students learning how to use blogs and in course administration, but I would not call it a new literacy. In PPLE however, a Ning has been used as a discussion forum and it has been interesting to read other students' thoughts about discussion topics set by the lecturer. The lecturer has made the Ning submissions non-assessable, avoiding the assessment problems described in the article. As well, only about a 25% on the tutorial group posts on the Ning, either due to not wanting their work public or because of the time it takes to contribute. Would I consider it a new literacy? It is certainly different to writing an essay and different to an in-class discussion, but few people on the Ning have actually commented on another student's posting. We submit, the lecturer comments. Maybe it will only become a new literacy when we become brave enough to interact and work as a collaborative community?
Charles, C.M. (2005). Building classroom discipline (8th ed.). Pearson.
Moayeri, M. 2010. Classroom Uses of Social Network Sites: Traditional Practices or New Literacies? Digital Culture & Education, 2:1, 25-43.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
How Can Teachers Leverage Off Social Networking?
Social networking (Facebook, MySpace, wikis, blogs) is at the heart of Web 2.0 - a powerful medium for people to communicate and share knowledge. For my second ELPC G1 topic, I will look at the question, how can teachers leverage off social networking?
This question follows from an article by Klopfer et al (2009) (which I also used in my first ELPC G1 topic). The article looks at games, simulations and social networking and how teachers can leverage them. (And before the grammar police start getting excited, I know leverage is not a verb but it sounds technical!)
Klopfer (2009) argues that social networking is more than just entertainment; social networking is impacting the way we think, learn and interact, and even shaping the way we think, work and live. The article is a call to arms. The article observes that there is a disconnect between the way students are taught in school and how social networking is used outside school - "It is critical that education not only seek to mitigate this disconnect in order to make these two 'worlds' more seamless, but of course also to leverage the power of these emerging technologies for instructional gain" (Klopfer et al 2009).
The article notes that collaborative learning is contained within the Social Constructivism pedagogy. Social Constructivism (this week's topic in Educational Foundations) holds "that meaningful learning occurs when people are explicitly taught how to use the psychological tools of their culture (like language, mathematics, ..) and are then given the opportunity to use these tools in authentic, real-life activities" (Snowman 2009, p340). It could be argued that social networking, despite its recent appearance, has now become one of the psychological tools of western culture, especially teenage culture. The Social Constructivist would then say that students should be using social networking in authentic activities to enhance their learning.
An example of a teacher using a social networking tool, a Ning, in a class is described in the article. The use of the Ning allowed students to continue discussion outside of the classroom, gave the teacher a way to communicate a range of information to the students, and an easier way to see other students' work.
As usual I remain cautious and a little skeptical. Just because something is good for encouraging people to communicate, and communication is important in education, doesn't mean that something should be used in education (alcohol is one such example that springs to mind on a Friday afternoon). However, the use of the Ning as described in the article does appear to offer some realistic positive outcomes that a teacher can leverage off social networking.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Graff, J. and Haas, J. (2009) The Instructional Power of Digital Games Social Networking Simulations and How Teachers Can Leverage Them. The Education Arcade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Snowman J. et al (2009) Psychology applied to teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
This question follows from an article by Klopfer et al (2009) (which I also used in my first ELPC G1 topic). The article looks at games, simulations and social networking and how teachers can leverage them. (And before the grammar police start getting excited, I know leverage is not a verb but it sounds technical!)
Klopfer (2009) argues that social networking is more than just entertainment; social networking is impacting the way we think, learn and interact, and even shaping the way we think, work and live. The article is a call to arms. The article observes that there is a disconnect between the way students are taught in school and how social networking is used outside school - "It is critical that education not only seek to mitigate this disconnect in order to make these two 'worlds' more seamless, but of course also to leverage the power of these emerging technologies for instructional gain" (Klopfer et al 2009).
The article notes that collaborative learning is contained within the Social Constructivism pedagogy. Social Constructivism (this week's topic in Educational Foundations) holds "that meaningful learning occurs when people are explicitly taught how to use the psychological tools of their culture (like language, mathematics, ..) and are then given the opportunity to use these tools in authentic, real-life activities" (Snowman 2009, p340). It could be argued that social networking, despite its recent appearance, has now become one of the psychological tools of western culture, especially teenage culture. The Social Constructivist would then say that students should be using social networking in authentic activities to enhance their learning.
An example of a teacher using a social networking tool, a Ning, in a class is described in the article. The use of the Ning allowed students to continue discussion outside of the classroom, gave the teacher a way to communicate a range of information to the students, and an easier way to see other students' work.
As usual I remain cautious and a little skeptical. Just because something is good for encouraging people to communicate, and communication is important in education, doesn't mean that something should be used in education (alcohol is one such example that springs to mind on a Friday afternoon). However, the use of the Ning as described in the article does appear to offer some realistic positive outcomes that a teacher can leverage off social networking.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Graff, J. and Haas, J. (2009) The Instructional Power of Digital Games Social Networking Simulations and How Teachers Can Leverage Them. The Education Arcade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Snowman J. et al (2009) Psychology applied to teaching. John Wiley & Sons.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Factors that inhibit using computer games in the classroom
If computer games are such a great way to encourage learning, what is stopping them being used the classroom? This is the question addressed by Baek (2008).
The factors that hinder the use of computer games were compiled and rated using a survey. In the first session a master list of issues was developed using input from 35 teachers. The master list was then submitted as a questionnaire to 444 teachers to rate each issue of a rating of 1 (for low) to 5 (for high).
The results were grouped under six broad categories:
I don't have a statistical background, so I can't comment on the factor analysis. I found the raw ratings fairly low. For example, the top 38 issues (out of 63) scored between 3.08 and 4.15.
From the mean scores, the inflexibility in the curriculum and the fixed class schedules were two issues of most concern. In other words, how can the games help students learn curriculum content, and how can game playing be fitted into an already tight schedule of class times?
The two issues with highest mean scores were both in the inflexibility of curriculum group. The first was that teachers have difficulty finding an educational game suitable for a learning objective. The second was that it is time-consuming effort to design, locate, and devise teaching methods to enhance the student learning process utilizing a particular game. Both these issues indicate that even if teachers support game playing for learning, then there are still significant challenges to implementing game playing in the classroom. There is a need for better resources for teachers, not just a list of games, but developed modules showing how learning for a particular curriculum item can be supported by a computer game.
As an end note, it is interesting that this was a Korean study - a reminder that computer gaming is not just a Western activity.
Baek Y.K., (2008). What Hinders Teachers in Using Computer and Video Games in the Classroom? Exploring Factors Inhibiting the Uptake of Computer and Video Games. CyberPsychology & Behaviour, Volume 11, Number 6, 2008.
The factors that hinder the use of computer games were compiled and rated using a survey. In the first session a master list of issues was developed using input from 35 teachers. The master list was then submitted as a questionnaire to 444 teachers to rate each issue of a rating of 1 (for low) to 5 (for high).
The results were grouped under six broad categories:
- Inflexibility in the curriculum
- Negative effects of gaming
- Students lack of readiness
- Lack of supporting materials
- Fixed class schedules
- Limited budgets
I don't have a statistical background, so I can't comment on the factor analysis. I found the raw ratings fairly low. For example, the top 38 issues (out of 63) scored between 3.08 and 4.15.
From the mean scores, the inflexibility in the curriculum and the fixed class schedules were two issues of most concern. In other words, how can the games help students learn curriculum content, and how can game playing be fitted into an already tight schedule of class times?
The two issues with highest mean scores were both in the inflexibility of curriculum group. The first was that teachers have difficulty finding an educational game suitable for a learning objective. The second was that it is time-consuming effort to design, locate, and devise teaching methods to enhance the student learning process utilizing a particular game. Both these issues indicate that even if teachers support game playing for learning, then there are still significant challenges to implementing game playing in the classroom. There is a need for better resources for teachers, not just a list of games, but developed modules showing how learning for a particular curriculum item can be supported by a computer game.
As an end note, it is interesting that this was a Korean study - a reminder that computer gaming is not just a Western activity.
Baek Y.K., (2008). What Hinders Teachers in Using Computer and Video Games in the Classroom? Exploring Factors Inhibiting the Uptake of Computer and Video Games. CyberPsychology & Behaviour, Volume 11, Number 6, 2008.
Motivating Learning Via Computer Games
"The over-riding reason for interest in this field is that computer games seem to motivate young people in a way that formal education doesn't." (Facer 2003)
For this posting, I am looking at an article by Whitton (2007) in which she explores motivation and computer games. Whitton challenges the assumption that because players are motivated to play games, that they would be motivated to learn by playing games.
Whitton conducted an experiment to analyse a population of university-level students and their perceptions of game playing and game playing for learning. Surprisingly, the survey showed little evidence for promoting game playing because of its motivational affects.
It is interesting that 65.5% of students surveyed said games would be motivating for learning and 28% were neutral. It could be argued then, that 93.5% of students would not be put off by using games for learning. This seems to counter the author's claim that there is "little evidence for the motivational rationale" (Whitton 2007).
Whitton used third-year undergraduate and Masters-level computing students. As this group is predominantly male and young, Whitton argues that this group should be extremely "pro-gaming" and hence the 65.5% figure would be lower for other groups. As I come from a computing background, I would suggest that most computing types are often too tired from working on computers all day to be major gamers. Programming is the ultimate game - interactive, challenging, rewarding, frustrating - why bother with a simple shooting game? I think the same survey with different populations (including secondary students) would be interesting.
Whitton (2007) does make the good point "If games are experiential, active, problem-based and collaborative then they have the potential to be effective environments for learning, not specifically because they are games but because they exhibit the characteristics of constructivist learning environments."
In summary, use games for learning (if appropriate) but not simply because you hope to motivate learning by using a game.
Facer, K. (2003) Computer games and Learning. FutureLab.
Whitton, N. (2007) Motivation and computer game based learning. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007
For this posting, I am looking at an article by Whitton (2007) in which she explores motivation and computer games. Whitton challenges the assumption that because players are motivated to play games, that they would be motivated to learn by playing games.
Whitton conducted an experiment to analyse a population of university-level students and their perceptions of game playing and game playing for learning. Surprisingly, the survey showed little evidence for promoting game playing because of its motivational affects.
It is interesting that 65.5% of students surveyed said games would be motivating for learning and 28% were neutral. It could be argued then, that 93.5% of students would not be put off by using games for learning. This seems to counter the author's claim that there is "little evidence for the motivational rationale" (Whitton 2007).
Whitton used third-year undergraduate and Masters-level computing students. As this group is predominantly male and young, Whitton argues that this group should be extremely "pro-gaming" and hence the 65.5% figure would be lower for other groups. As I come from a computing background, I would suggest that most computing types are often too tired from working on computers all day to be major gamers. Programming is the ultimate game - interactive, challenging, rewarding, frustrating - why bother with a simple shooting game? I think the same survey with different populations (including secondary students) would be interesting.
Whitton (2007) does make the good point "If games are experiential, active, problem-based and collaborative then they have the potential to be effective environments for learning, not specifically because they are games but because they exhibit the characteristics of constructivist learning environments."
In summary, use games for learning (if appropriate) but not simply because you hope to motivate learning by using a game.
Facer, K. (2003) Computer games and Learning. FutureLab.
Whitton, N. (2007) Motivation and computer game based learning. In ICT: Providing choices for learners and learning. Proceedings ascilite Singapore 2007
Computer Games and Learning
In an earlier posting, I talked about a paper by Klopfer et al (2009). Their argument for new cognitive abilities cited a paper by Facer (2003) that I'll discuss in this blog entry.
Unfortunately the paper does not directly cite research articles, but instead refers to "research in educational psychology by, amongst others, Patricia Marks Greenfield". Greenfield is currently Distinguished Professor in Developmental Psychology at UCLA and has a long and impressive academic record. Her earlier work (Greenfield 1984) would have been pioneering in looking at video and computer games; her later work ranges over all forms of video and many uses of computers but does also look at computer games specifically (for example Subrahmanyam et al (1994)). I don't have the psychology background to look at this work in detail, so will have to accept the claims by Facer.
The article by Facer (2003) is an overview article, discussing various themes. Key is that "computer games seem to motivate young people in a way that formal education doesn't" (Facer 2003). Motivation is discussed, the fact that children play computer games because they are 'fun', a concept that Facer appears to struggle with. It is noted "Historically, 'having fun' and 'learning' have been seen to be diametrically opposed" (Facer 2003). I don't find this surprising, the easiest way to turn children off any activity is to call it "educational".
Communication, problem-solving and mathematical development are listed as hidden curriculum skills that are developed by computer games. The article describes how difficult it is to include content in computer games and has the quote "a focus on curriculum learning objectives may be lost as the user becomes involved with the game" (McFarlane et al, 2002). I would paraphrase this as computer games are fun, and have lots of hidden curriculum benefits, but don't expect the learning objectives to be paid much attention once players start playing games.
The article briefly looks at gender issues. It notes that there are two key areas: games mainly have 'male' world views, and social cultures come into play when looking at games. I think that there are now many 'non-male' games available now but gaming is still seen as a male activity. This is then a social culture issue. Many women just don't get the point of games or have more than enough other activities to stimulate or keep them busy without having to play games.
Facer, K. (2003) Computer games and Learning. FutureLab.
Greenfield, P. M. (1984). Mind and media: The effects of television, video games, and computers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Graff, J. and Haas, J. (2009) The Instructional Power of Digital Games Social Networking Simulations and How Teachers Can Leverage Them. The Education Arcade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A. and Heald, Y. (2002) Report on the Educational Use of Games: an Exploration by TEEM of the Contribution Which Games Can Make to the Educational Process, Teem: Cambridge. www.teem.org.uk.
Subrahmanyam, K. & Greenfield, P. M. (1994). Effect of video game practice on spatial skills in girls and boys. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15, 13-32.
Unfortunately the paper does not directly cite research articles, but instead refers to "research in educational psychology by, amongst others, Patricia Marks Greenfield". Greenfield is currently Distinguished Professor in Developmental Psychology at UCLA and has a long and impressive academic record. Her earlier work (Greenfield 1984) would have been pioneering in looking at video and computer games; her later work ranges over all forms of video and many uses of computers but does also look at computer games specifically (for example Subrahmanyam et al (1994)). I don't have the psychology background to look at this work in detail, so will have to accept the claims by Facer.
The article by Facer (2003) is an overview article, discussing various themes. Key is that "computer games seem to motivate young people in a way that formal education doesn't" (Facer 2003). Motivation is discussed, the fact that children play computer games because they are 'fun', a concept that Facer appears to struggle with. It is noted "Historically, 'having fun' and 'learning' have been seen to be diametrically opposed" (Facer 2003). I don't find this surprising, the easiest way to turn children off any activity is to call it "educational".
Communication, problem-solving and mathematical development are listed as hidden curriculum skills that are developed by computer games. The article describes how difficult it is to include content in computer games and has the quote "a focus on curriculum learning objectives may be lost as the user becomes involved with the game" (McFarlane et al, 2002). I would paraphrase this as computer games are fun, and have lots of hidden curriculum benefits, but don't expect the learning objectives to be paid much attention once players start playing games.
The article briefly looks at gender issues. It notes that there are two key areas: games mainly have 'male' world views, and social cultures come into play when looking at games. I think that there are now many 'non-male' games available now but gaming is still seen as a male activity. This is then a social culture issue. Many women just don't get the point of games or have more than enough other activities to stimulate or keep them busy without having to play games.
Facer, K. (2003) Computer games and Learning. FutureLab.
Greenfield, P. M. (1984). Mind and media: The effects of television, video games, and computers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Graff, J. and Haas, J. (2009) The Instructional Power of Digital Games Social Networking Simulations and How Teachers Can Leverage Them. The Education Arcade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
McFarlane, A., Sparrowhawk, A. and Heald, Y. (2002) Report on the Educational Use of Games: an Exploration by TEEM of the Contribution Which Games Can Make to the Educational Process, Teem: Cambridge. www.teem.org.uk.
Subrahmanyam, K. & Greenfield, P. M. (1994). Effect of video game practice on spatial skills in girls and boys. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 15, 13-32.
Thursday, March 10, 2011
ELPC 1 - Educational Gaming 2
As a keen game player, Gee (2007) writes enthusiastically about the ability of video games to engage young people "in an activity that is hard, long, and complex".
Gee's conclusion is not that schools should play video games, instead he asks "how can we make learning in and out of school, with or without using games, more game-like ... ?" (Gee 2007).
In order to understand games, Gee lists sixteen of the learning principles that good games incorporate. Gee argues that schools need to consider these principles and apply them in the classroom.
I would suggest that many of these principles would appear to be part of mainstream school life already. For example, in principle 7, Well-Order Problems, Gee states "equal thought needs to be paid to how to order problems in a rich immersive space in a science classroom". Thousands of science teachers around the world are attempting to order problems in such a way every day, with or without the influence of video games.
Gee does highlight some principles of games that do not readily appear in the classroom. Interaction is a key feature of games but does not occur in a textbook. Video games encourage risk taking, but assessment-driven teaching does the opposite. And finally games promote performance before competence where players learn skills by doing, in contrast to the classroom approach of teaching a skill and then practising by drill.
One principle listed is that games are pleasantly frustrating. Having witnessed many tears and tantrums (including my own) sparked by frustration at video games, I think that games do not always stay as well-aligned as Gee suggests. However, something about video games draws frustrated gamers back whereas school work pushes frustrated learners away.
Gee, J. (2007) Good Video Games and Good Learning Collected Essays on Video Games, Learning and Literacy, Lang.
Gee's conclusion is not that schools should play video games, instead he asks "how can we make learning in and out of school, with or without using games, more game-like ... ?" (Gee 2007).
In order to understand games, Gee lists sixteen of the learning principles that good games incorporate. Gee argues that schools need to consider these principles and apply them in the classroom.
I would suggest that many of these principles would appear to be part of mainstream school life already. For example, in principle 7, Well-Order Problems, Gee states "equal thought needs to be paid to how to order problems in a rich immersive space in a science classroom". Thousands of science teachers around the world are attempting to order problems in such a way every day, with or without the influence of video games.
Gee does highlight some principles of games that do not readily appear in the classroom. Interaction is a key feature of games but does not occur in a textbook. Video games encourage risk taking, but assessment-driven teaching does the opposite. And finally games promote performance before competence where players learn skills by doing, in contrast to the classroom approach of teaching a skill and then practising by drill.
One principle listed is that games are pleasantly frustrating. Having witnessed many tears and tantrums (including my own) sparked by frustration at video games, I think that games do not always stay as well-aligned as Gee suggests. However, something about video games draws frustrated gamers back whereas school work pushes frustrated learners away.
Gee, J. (2007) Good Video Games and Good Learning Collected Essays on Video Games, Learning and Literacy, Lang.
Tuesday, March 8, 2011
ELPC 1 - Educational Philosophy
I believe there are many ways to experience the wonder of the world; Mathematics provides a crucial perspective on how to understand and think about the world.
As a teacher, I want to demystify Mathematics and motivate students to understand why Mathematics is important. I want to assist students develop the numeracy skills necessary to participate in modern society.
As all students are different, when teaching I will use a range of techniques that engage and provide meaningful learning experiences. For example, collaboration is an effective approach that can be used to teach Mathematics at all levels.
Mathematics is one component of education. I see myself working in partnership with other teachers to provide a school that offers a range of formal subjects and extra curricular activities (ranging from sport to music to debating to drama) that allows students to develop into balanced, complete and inquiring individuals, set for a productive life.
As a teacher, I want to demystify Mathematics and motivate students to understand why Mathematics is important. I want to assist students develop the numeracy skills necessary to participate in modern society.
As all students are different, when teaching I will use a range of techniques that engage and provide meaningful learning experiences. For example, collaboration is an effective approach that can be used to teach Mathematics at all levels.
Mathematics is one component of education. I see myself working in partnership with other teachers to provide a school that offers a range of formal subjects and extra curricular activities (ranging from sport to music to debating to drama) that allows students to develop into balanced, complete and inquiring individuals, set for a productive life.
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
ELPC 1 - Educational Gaming 1
I decided to look at Educational Gaming as my first topic. While spending far too many hours playing Civilization 3 I have thought, I wish I played this game when I did history at school.
Where to start? I starting skimming articles in Meg's library, but decided to read Klopfer et al in detail when I saw that they advocate Civilization as a learning tool.
The article is a well-written, positive piece on gaming and simulations. I liked the teacher examples that had successes but also listed challenges. Their argument that using gaming and simulation technology should be an evolution rather than a revolution matches my own view on technology in most situations.
The article claimed "these technologies are more than just entertainment". Later in the article the skills that generated by playing video games are listed. I want to look at this research further to see how the development of the skills is measured. It appears that video games must be developing skills such as problem solving, but if the player is using trial and error or merely developing skills using buttons, especially without having any meta-analysis on the problem solving, then the problem solving is more like rote learning than deeper learning. More in a later blog entry.
I will look at Lure of the Labyrinth which is a game than is claimed to develop algebra skills. Another blog entry? The article suggests that "ill-structured domains" like history are ideal for games. What about a well-structured domain such as mathematics?
I also read the Hommel article. The irony noted by Prensky that most educational games are simple, while entertainment games are complex, is interesting. I am not sure that just because a game is complex that it must therefore provide learning opportunities.
This article also noted that educators can learn from games, even if games are not used in the classroom.
I wonder what behaviourists would make of computer games: are there too many rewards required to make real learning happen? Is competition (against the machine, friends) a good way to encourage learning?
And finally, what about non-technology games: Is Diplomacy as a board game a better learning experience than Diplomacy the computer game?
Hommel, M. (2010) Video Games and Learning, School Library Monthly, Volume XXVI, Number 10, June 2010.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Graff, J. and Haas, J. (2009) The Instructional Power of Digital Games Social Networking Simulations and How Teachers Can Leverage Them. The Education Arcade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Where to start? I starting skimming articles in Meg's library, but decided to read Klopfer et al in detail when I saw that they advocate Civilization as a learning tool.
The article is a well-written, positive piece on gaming and simulations. I liked the teacher examples that had successes but also listed challenges. Their argument that using gaming and simulation technology should be an evolution rather than a revolution matches my own view on technology in most situations.
The article claimed "these technologies are more than just entertainment". Later in the article the skills that generated by playing video games are listed. I want to look at this research further to see how the development of the skills is measured. It appears that video games must be developing skills such as problem solving, but if the player is using trial and error or merely developing skills using buttons, especially without having any meta-analysis on the problem solving, then the problem solving is more like rote learning than deeper learning. More in a later blog entry.
I will look at Lure of the Labyrinth which is a game than is claimed to develop algebra skills. Another blog entry? The article suggests that "ill-structured domains" like history are ideal for games. What about a well-structured domain such as mathematics?
I also read the Hommel article. The irony noted by Prensky that most educational games are simple, while entertainment games are complex, is interesting. I am not sure that just because a game is complex that it must therefore provide learning opportunities.
This article also noted that educators can learn from games, even if games are not used in the classroom.
I wonder what behaviourists would make of computer games: are there too many rewards required to make real learning happen? Is competition (against the machine, friends) a good way to encourage learning?
And finally, what about non-technology games: Is Diplomacy as a board game a better learning experience than Diplomacy the computer game?
Hommel, M. (2010) Video Games and Learning, School Library Monthly, Volume XXVI, Number 10, June 2010.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., Graff, J. and Haas, J. (2009) The Instructional Power of Digital Games Social Networking Simulations and How Teachers Can Leverage Them. The Education Arcade, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)