page
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
research intro
literature reviews
the debate on
‘making learning
fun’ also often
assumes that
children do not
enjoy learning |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
learning is at
its most vibrant
when it has
relevance to
the learner |
| Mainstream digital games |
Learning-oriented games |
• widely known as computer
and/or video games
• developed solely for fun for
the user and to maximise profit
for the publisher
• typically developed for PCs and video
games consoles. Contemporary titles
usually require the most powerful
hardware currently available
• increasingly developed in relatively
simplistic format for mobile
telephones
• typically sophisticated in terms of
graphics, interface and complexity;
production budgets similar to small
to medium sized film budgets
• marketed directly to games players
as being fun and exciting, graphically
superb, the best game of its
particular genre
• uses high review scores in games
magazines and tie-ins with other
media as marketing aids |
• historically known as ‘edutainment’,
though negative associations with this
word mean it is largely avoided by
contemporary games publishers
• almost exclusively produced for the
PC; very few titles for the Mac or
dedicated games consoles
• games are more simplistic, are
produced in a range of formats, eg
Flash, Shockwave, Java, Visual Basic
• most titles are designed for sole-user,
offline play.
• development costs are typically a fraction
of those of major pure digital games
• not typically marketed to users,
instead marketed mainly to parents
and teachers
• marketed as being accurate, relevant
to formal curriculum, developing
specific skills/knowledge
• uses recommendations from teacher,
parent and educational organisations
as marketing aids |
Fig 1: comparison between mainstream and ‘learning’ games
|
content into a game-like scenario by
stealth. In theory this is an attractive
arrangement (Ahuja 1994):
“In conventional education, the learner
is usually aware of the objectives of the
activity he or she is engaged in. For
children, such learning objectives often
have little meaning… In interactive
edutainment, on the other hand, the
objective can be hidden while the activity
appears driven by exploration, discovery
and adventure. Children are attracted to
such activity easily and will quite willingly
go through a session, indeed, sometimes
ask for it. A good example of this is the
game Where in the World is Carmen
San Diego, where the child learns history
and geography in the process of being
a detective.”
Where in the World is Carmen San Diego
has indeed been a successful exemplar
of this concept, focusing on providing elementary school reading, maths,
geography, word, and critical thinking
skills. Other educational games that
have been shown to be successful in
research studies focus on increasing a
range of skills; for example, a piano tutor
software package with overtones of video
game elements requires concentration,
a sense of timing, accuracy and rhythm
(Sims 2001).
There are, however, some researchers who
express disquiet at the amount of focus
purely on motivation as a reason for
playing games. For example, the authors
of Project KID DESIGNER (Rieber et al
1998) write:
“...limiting the discussion to motivation is
apt to designate the role of games as a
form of educational ‘sugar coating’ -
making the hard work of mathematics or
language arts easier to ‘swallow’. We take
games much more seriously as we
consider both their motivational and
cognitive elements. Whereas most children
play prepackaged games in school given to
them by teachers, we are interested
instead on the process of game design
itself and how it can enhance learning.”
And indeed today it seems that there
are other concerns about the notion of
‘sugar coating’ education as a game,
both in terms of motivation and in terms
of the extent to which |
|
these resources
actually achieve their educational
objectives. To date, arguably, attempts
to create truly engaging and effective
learning games have foundered for
the following reasons:
• the games have been too simplistic in
comparison to competing video games
• the tasks are repetitive, eg continually
doing sums, and thus quickly become
boring and ‘work’
• the tasks are poorly designed and do
not support progressive understanding
• related to this last point, the range of
activities is severely limited within the
game, usually concentrating on one
skill, or accumulation of homogenous
content
• the target audience becomes aware that
it is being coerced into ‘learning’,
possibly in a patronising manner.
Finally, the debate on ‘making learning
fun’ also often assumes that children do
not enjoy learning. Yet much research
evidence contradicts this, arguing that
children do enjoy learning when they have
a sense of their own progression and
where the learning is relevant and
appropriate for them. The ‘learning by
stealth’ approach suggests that learning
can only be enjoyable when it is
unconscious. This is a significant area of
contention, with some researchers arguing
that reflection is an important part of the
learning process, and others pointing out
that we don’t necessarily reflect on our
own actions in day to day life, and yet still
manage to learn from them (Prensky
2001). There seems less doubt however,
that learning is at its most vibrant when it
has relevance to the learner and is
therefore truly authentic, regardless of the
degree of consciousness (McFarlane 1997).
4.2 FROM ‘FUN’ TO ‘FLOW’
This focus on ‘fun’ and on ‘concealing the
learning’ within educational games may, in
fact, be a red herring. Instead, it might be
worth returning to some early analyses
that describes the pleasures of games play
... next page |
|
