This section begins with a discussion of the two most common educational schools of thought: behaviorism and constructivism. Behaviorism is defined as learning through reinforcement. Very simply put positive behavior should be encouraged or rewarded, and negative behavior should be discouraged or punished. This is the education theory most widely used in public school classrooms. It serves to relegate learning to a behavioral response rather than an individual mental process. In the modern classroom, behaviorism creates a compliant and docile workforce who is ready to accept direction with little to no questioning. Throughout my time in public schools, this is the main method of “teaching” that I observed, and it is the method I was told to follow.
Constructivism presents that “the learner ‘constructs’ knowledge individually, that learning is inseparable from the learner’s interaction with the environment. (234)” Constructivism focuses on the individual learner as opposed to behaviorism’s focus on the general response of the group. Frobel, who invented kindergarten, writes that “the purpose of education is to encourage and guide man as a conscious, thinking and perceiving being in such a way that he becomes a pure and perfect representation of that divine inner law through his own personal choice. (235)” “In the kindergarten classroom, personal experience yields an understanding of the world. (235)” The constructivist strategy is not as rigidly structured and is not a focused on “subject-specific learning outcomes. (235)”
When applying these two educational models to videogames and the lessons they teach, it becomes clear that behaviorists generally would not condone the playing of most commercial videogames. It is the assertion of those associated with behaviorism that games can reinforce negative behaviors leading to the player performing them in the “real world.” The concern is that videogames will teach the “right things to the wrong people” and possibly train them to commit crimes (238). I found the example of the mother buying her son Flight Simulator to be particularly interesting. It was disturbing to hear that she found an FBI agent snooping around her house and hilarious due to the assumption by the clerk that a nefarious scheme must be in the works for a 10 year old to learn to fly. It is sad to think that the purchase of an openly available video game was seen as a terror threat. Videogames can teach certain skills, but generally those skills relate to problem-solving or analysis. The real potential for videogames is not based in the current commercial content, but in the learning principles they demonstrate.
Procedural literacy is described by Mateas as “the ability to read and write processes, to engage procedural representation and aesthetics, to understand the interplay between the culturally-embedded practice of human meaning-making and technically-mediated processes. (245)” In other words, it is an understanding of the technical and cultural processes, and how they interact. Two processes that Bogost chooses to focus on are those of “schooling” and “education.” “Schooling” refers to the understanding of the system of school and how to conform to the “requirements and conditions” of school. To be “educated means being literate in the fundamental operation of the knowledge domain, knowing how to advance arguments, how to think independently, and how to express and improve oneself” (262-263). During my time teaching middle school, the most common question I was asked was, “can’t you just tell me what you want me to say?” It shows the students’ unwillingness to think independently for fear that they will be scolded for incorrect answers. These students are being trained to expect to be given direction, and not to come up with ideas on their own. It concerns me that students learning their problem solving skills from games rather than from their classes. In school they are learning to “work the system” which somewhat prepares them for a similar “system” in the working world. Unfortunately, the most sought after traits in workers are ingenuity and resourcefulness.
In chapter 10, Bogost turns his attention to “exergames” and their evolution over time. Dance Dance Revolution is presented as the most advanced exergame currently available. He describes the success of the game in terms of its ability to “produce exercise as an emergent outcome of play itself. (310)” The game is designed to use the enjoyment of dance to overcome our lack of desire to exercise. The game can be tailored to suit each individual and provides feedback during each dance. It uses the motivational techniques of a personal trainer combined with the enjoyment of dance to promote the players own goals of exercise and fun. It removes the necessity for the player to have “a complete understanding of fitness. (314)” It makes these games more accessible to all levels of players.
Discussion Questions:
1. Is the inclusion of pseudo-social aspects (the personal trainer) in games like DDR used to appeal to our need for social interaction in play or learning?
2. Would it be possible for the generations of adults who have been trained under the “schooling” system to accept a new model for education for their children?
3. Would a more constructivist approach to education make those entering the workforce less satisfied with the roles they are assigned? Would it make them more likely to “buck the system?”
No comments:
Post a Comment