Bogost- Chapter 1

Ian Bogost- Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Video Games

Chapter 1

Let me begin by saying that I am still not completely sure I fully understand the ideas that are presented in this chapter. I hope that through the group discussion and the reading of later chapters, these ideas will become more concrete.

This focus in this chapter is an explanation of procedural rhetoric. This is accomplished through a detailed examination of the origins of rhetoric and the many accepted forms present in modern society. Bogost defines procedurality as “a way of creating, explaining, or understanding processes. And processes define the way things work.” (Bogost 2-3) He discusses the negative connotation that the procedure has developed. It is seen as something rigid that prevents possible action or reaction. He argues that this is not entirely the case. He contends that while procedures outline the steps one should follow to complete a task, without the establishment of a procedure, we may not see the action as a possibility. He uses the example of store returns to illustrate his point. Without the creation of return procedures, customers may not understand that they have the right to return items.

Bogost also defines the term procedural representation as a way of “explaining processes with other processes.” (Bogost 9) Rather than explaining in words, meaning is derived from the enacting of processes. Procedurality is a fundamental aspect of computers which makes them an ideal “inscription medium.” (Bogost 10) Given that computational procedures are inscribed through code, they are not “subject to the caprice of direct human action.” (Bogost 15) This means that procedures are set and are not subject to the influence of emotion.    

Bogost defines rhetoric as “effective and persuasive expression.” (Bogost 3) He explains the history of rhetoric and its origins as a form of speech used specifically for persuasion. The societal structure of this time required people accused of a crime to personally defend themselves in the form of oratory. Their speech was made in front of an intimidatingly large jury. This resulted in rhetoric being widely taught to help prepare individuals to argue their innocence when necessary. A general structure was created to show what proper rhetorical oratory should include.

Over time, written, artistic and visual rhetoric have been accepted as legitimate forms. These forms of rhetoric no longer focused on persuasion, but emphasized ideas. The concept of rhetoric changed from the creation of “effective influence” to the idea of “effective expression.” (Bogost 20) Oral and written rhetoric allow for “deep analysis” of the words and their meanings. Each separate part of the argument can be broken down and examined. Visual rhetoric is understood more “wholistically” in the fact that our minds interpret it as a whole unit rather than in pieces. People respond to the emotional impact of visual rhetoric and the philosophical impact of written and oral rhetoric.    

Procedural rhetoric is “the practice of using processes persuasively.”(Bogost 3) When someone can understand the way something works, the process, they are much better equipped to make an opinion about it. The best way to truly understand a process is to work through it personally. It may not be feasible, due to time, money, or space constraints, to fully enact the process in real life. Computers, however, can enable us to complete simulations of the process and allow us to fully understand not just the steps, but the choices one must make and the consequences associated with those choices.  Bogost explains that video games are ideally suited to this form of rhetoric. They are engaging, they make ideas “vivid” and allow us to fully perform, within a simulated environment, the steps of the process. Once the process has been enacted and understood, one can make an informed opinion about the process and the overall concept it represents. Video games that use this method to inform can also be used to persuade. By focusing the player’s attention on certain aspects of a process, the player is allowed to analyze those specified situations more deeply. For example, Bogost describes “the McDonald’s game” and how it is used to expose the moral dilemmas associated with running a global fast-food chain. The player must make choices, such as whether to bulldoze indigenous rainforests to make cattle pasture land, and then deal with the consequences of those choices, in this case, environmental groups, global warming, and possible corruption. By understanding the process and all its component parts, they are able to see with much greater clarity, the impact of their choices and the impact of the choices made by those in the real world. Through all of this, you are led to create an opinion, though a guided one, rather than being explicitly told what your opinion should be and why.

Discussion Questions:

1.      Are there commercial games out today, not including those who expressly state that they are designed to persuade, that use this form of rhetoric?

2.      Is the use of it in commercial games a positive or negative aspect to gaming?

3.      How can we best incorporate the use of procedural rhetoric into our SecondLife game?       

Chapters 7 & 8

The Social Mind

In this chapter, Gee describes how learning can be a social activity when learners are allowed to tap into an information network. This network of “people, texts, tools and technologies” contains a vast amount of knowledge that the learner can access on demand. By accessing these resources when they need it, they can take their learning and achievement to higher levels. Gee gives an example of a time he played a game called Half-Life. In the game, he reached a point near the end of the game where he became “stuck.” He was able to consult an online site where he found a cheat code that allowed him to overcome one smaller obstacle so that he could finish the game. His ability to locate the information and use it effectively allowed him to overcome his shortcomings.  

Just like in video games, learners in classrooms have certain strengths and weaknesses. Not all students have the same experience, prior knowledge or natural abilities. Given the opportunity, learners can access their network, and supplement their own knowledge and abilities to achieve higher success and greater learning.  In the classroom, there is a major emphasis on the abilities of the individual. Learners are denied access to their networks of information because they are seen as cheating. In reality, we are denying these learners the use of one of their strengths, the ability to locate and correctly apply knowledge and tools.

In any field of study, researchers will interact with others in their field through personal contact, reading journals, attending lectures, etc. We do not expect the researchers to ignore all the studies done within the field prior to their arrival. We assume that they will take the information already available and build upon it. Learners in classrooms should be allowed to do this as well through collaborating with classmates, using available technology, and dispersing their own knowledge.

Distributed among the “people, texts, tools and technologies” of a network is stored knowledge. Gee states that the most powerful aspect of the network is not found in its separate parts but in the interconnectedness of the network. He refers to this as the “power of distribution.” A good network not only contains important information, but is designed in such a way that new information can be dispersed quickly. Because the information is housed in a variety of sources, the collective knowledge can be changed or adapted quickly when needed. Once one “node” in the network makes a discovery, it is dispersed throughout the rest of the network.

Gee discusses two methods of teaching, reciprocal teaching and jigsaw method. The first method, reciprocal teaching, involves the teacher and a group of students taking turns leading the discussion of a passage. The teacher asks a question, the students discuss it and come to a conclusion, the “leader” then summarizes the discussion and “asks for predictions about future content.” Through this method, the ideas of each individual are made public, allowing all learners to benefit.

The second method, jigsaw method, students are assigned a segment of the overall class topic to research and master. After learning the topic, they are split into groups where each student will teach their group members about their given topic. Each student becomes an “expert on only one part of the whole topic,” but then “distributes its knowledge to the whole.” (Gee 204) In both methods, the learners take on the roles of both “learner” and “teacher.”

During my time teaching middle grades, I had the opportunity to see these strategies demonstrated in a classroom environment. In every instance, the students commented that they “had fun” even though the material they were learning was “kinda hard.” After seeing reciprocal teaching method used in an English class, I asked one student what she liked best about the class that day. She explained that she was happy that she was allowed to express what she thought about the reading. Even when disagreements about the text came up, students handled them civilly and did not insult one another. I found this to be a great example of what can be done when you create the proper atmosphere in your classroom. Students were not afraid to share their ideas, ask questions, or give opinions of the text because they had no fear of embarrassment. The teacher did not allow students to be rude or insulting to one another.

In the last chapter, Gee summarizes the ideas he presented in the book and discusses how people have reacted to the book since it was first published. He reiterates that he is not necessarily advocating the use of video games in the classroom, only the learning principles found within good games. He also restates the importance of learners talking about and reflecting on their learning.

Discussion Questions:

1.      When students are not allowed to use their information networks to solve problems, are we teaching them that being resourceful is a form of cheating?

2.      In schools, are current teachers equipped to teach using these new methods? Do they have or are they willing to get the training necessary to be effective?

3.      Will further rejection of social learning by schools lead to a distrust of schools and academic literacy? Does this distrust already exist? Can use of new methods regain that trust?

    

Chapters 5 & 6

Telling vs. Doing?

In chapter 5 Gee examines the debate regarding learning methods involving overt information or immersion in practice. He quickly comes to the conclusion, as most video game designers have, that these methods should not be separate but integrated to allow effective learning. To learn, one must have the overt information but it must be presented within the context of activity. As Gee explains it must be "just in time," meaning the information is given as needed rather than all at once prior to activity. He gives the example of training modules in video games. He explains that as the player moves through the game environment information is presented (by accessing kiosks, through the words of a mentor) only when needed immediately or in the near future. If all of the rules, methods, or goals were presented at the beginning very little of the information would be retained for later use and no learning would occur. On the other hand, if the player were allowed to wander through the game environment with no guidance there would also be no learning. Information and context must be integrated to achieve meaning.

To further encourage learning and a thorough grasp of the basic skills, video games employ what Gee refers to as incremental principle. Early stages of the game present the player with situations that teach basic patterns the player then uses to make later decisions involving more difficult situations. This means that as players gain new skills, the difficulty level is increased and so that game play remains on the fringes of their regime of competence. By constantly increasing the challenge, the learner is forced to not only use skills already attained, but to build on or adapt them to the new problems. They may also be required to pull prior knowledge gained through other sources, eg. Other games, and use it to transform their existing strategies.

Transference, as it is referenced by Gee, is often a difficult task for learners within a classroom setting. All learners come in with some level of prior knowledge, but they may have a difficult time finding the link between past experience and new situations. For example, students are taught in math class to work through a problem using a certain set of steps, or process, to achieve an answer. Small mathematical errors may occur, but learning the process is the more important task. This idea can be transferred to the English classroom. However, in English class students feel that their writing should be perfect the first time and that mistakes are failures. They have difficulty accepting writing as a process and that, like small mathematical errors, grammatical errors do not constitute failure, they are expected and corrected as part of the process. Their concept of what it means to be a writer needs to be adjusted to include editing and revision as acceptable behaviors.

Cultural Models: Friend or Foe?

Reading through chapter 6, I began to reflect on what cultural models I have adopted and those that I have come in contact with through educational settings. Looking at cultural models as a way we determine what is “normal” or “typical” and understanding that these models can change quickly, differ between groups, and encompass general groups gave me a way to put into words trends that I have witnessed. Due to the fact that these models are often unconscious, rarely will someone declare “this is what is normal!” However, they will show their displeasure in a variety of ways if they deem a behavior as abnormal.

Working in a low income school that was situated within a “wealthy” school district gave me a unique perspective of both sides. The cultural models of some students were obviously at odds with one another. For example, my low income students devalued education because they had not seen it benefit their friends or family members. However, some of them saw disobeying the teacher and not completing assignments as “rude” behavior. This led some to find a sort of middle ground where they would do the assignments, but not put in much effort. This allowed them to not be rude, but also to not waste much effort. In contrast, the wealthier students saw it as their path to a desirable future which allowed them to complete their work with no hesitation.  

Discussion Questions:

1.      Can the cultural models of students be overcome within a classroom setting?

2.      One cultural model that seems to be generally accepted is that “there are good students and there are bad students. Good students can become bad students, but bad students cannot become good students." Is this true in the respect that how we see ourselves decides how we choose to behave? Can “bad students” ever learn to see themselves as “good students” and then choose to behave like them?

3.      As I thought about the concept of information within context, I began to wonder how I can most efficiently create this environment in my classroom. My content will focus primarily on the basics of grammar, punctuation, and written structures. Should I have them begin by writing a paragraph and then providing them with ways to correct it, thereby giving them information within the context of writing? Should I have them take on the identity of an editor and as they work through a piece of writing give them information on how to identify and correct the mistakes? Should we begin by establishing what is "good" or "bad" writing within our classroom domain?

Identity and Learning

Identity is the combination of experiences, social skills, physical attributes, ethnicity, religious affiliation, social interests, etc., into one person. It is the way in which we see ourselves and others see us. Some aspects are fixed, at the least for the moment, and some we are able to change or improve. This applies not only to our “real” selves but to the “virtual” selves we create upon entering certain roles in life or through games. Everyone has a variety of roles they play in real and virtual worlds. This could be parent, child, student, teacher, employee, employer, or in the case of games a character embodied in an avatar. Just as our various roles overlap, so do many aspects of real or virtual identities.

In gaming and in life, there are certain aspects we can change about ourselves, some cannot be changed. In gaming, the game design decides the types of characters you can choose to be, each with its own strengths and weaknesses. In life, we are born with a certain gender, ethnicity, physical appearance, and mental ability. Some of these can be altered, i.e. weight or hair color, and some are unchangeable, as in ethnicity. Though we have control over our views, goals, and values and how we present them to the world, we do not have control over how others perceive us. We may choose to act in ways that make us more or less “likeable” to certain groups, but ultimately it is up to them to choose an opinion of us. In addition, identities can influence the way we see ourselves or our possible selves.

Through gaming, players create new identities by choosing existing characters and endowing them with attributes of their choosing. In this way, the character is only partly designed by the player. However, most players become increasingly committed to being “true” to the character and make choices based on what they feel the character “should” have done. In this moment, the player reflects on “who the character will be,” and “what history should they have.” (Gee 51) This creates the projective identity, the sense of ownership of this character as your creation and responsibility.

In the classroom, students must be “willing to see themselves in terms of a new identity.” (Gee 54)  This new identity must be one that does not directly conflict with existing identities. For example, a former student of mine expressly stated that she “didn’t do good in English,” and “it was just too hard.” It would be impossible for her to adopt the identity of “one who likes to write” or “one who enjoys reading.” Gee contends that this identity must be repaired before any real learning can occur. I agree with this wholeheartedly. The three principles of “good teaching” that Gee outlines include “enticing them to try,” “enticing them to put in lots of effort,” and providing a way for them to “achieve some meaningful success.” (Gee 58) In other words, make it interesting, make it worthy, and give it value.

In the particular instance given above, I used her love of vampire movies to entice her to try reading Stephanie Meyer’s novel, Twilight. It was a novel above what she considered her reading level, but was actually within her abilities. She had explained to me that she had never been able to finish a novel because it got to be “too hard.” Within a few days, she had become so engrossed in the story that I heard other teachers complaining about her constant request for silent reading time. After a few weeks, she had completed the 700+ page novel and was rewarded with the opportunity to attend a “Twilight Premiere Party” hosted by the school librarian on the day the movie came out in theaters. The party was only open to those who had read the complete novel. In addition, she was surprised by her parents with tickets to the movie. At the end of the year, she informed me that she “never thought [she’d] be a reader!”

In addition to seeing yourself as a learner, you must also have experiences through which the material is given meaning. Gee refers to this as embodied meaning. Humans learn best through concrete examples rather than abstract ideas. When learners have an opportunity to see an abstract idea put into practice in a concrete way and are then able to experiment with it, they are able to more easily understand it. He gives the example of students using a computer program to simulate the application of Galileo’s principles of motion. The simulation takes the abstract and gives it a context and thereby a meaning.

Humans use their experiences, and thereby the embodied meanings of the information, to create patterns that help them solve problems. By presenting information within a suitable context, learners can engage the material, understand it, and use it to create new patterns.

Discussion Questions:

1.      What types of material intelligence can we equip English students with to allow for more creative thought and greater understanding of writing concepts?

2.      Can students who have reached the college level have damaged identities? Can they still be repaired or are they irreparable?

3.      Are students’ identities as learners being further damaged or strengthened by the current school setting?       

   

Gee- Chapters 1 & 2

Thinking about learning, education, and schooling brought back flashes of my MAT education courses, as well as, situations experienced as a teacher in a sixth grade classroom. There are a wide variety of ideas about how we learn, what it means to educate, and how "schooling" fits into our world. Education courses teach that people learn "best" in different ways and that their specific "learning style" must be utilized in order for them to fully engage the material. To educate can mean to give information, to guide them in their search, or to simply allow their pursuit. "Schooling" is seen as the presentation of content, giving someone information so that it can be repeated back upon request and possibly applied within a previously practiced context. To my mind, none of these ideas fully engage the learner with the material nor do they encourage the learner to continue exploring without direct prodding.

In my own classroom, I found that students came to me with the idea that they were not supposed to form new opinions about or manipulate the material presented. The statement "tell me what you want me to say," was commonplace. They had been discouraged from using their social resources (friends, classmates, siblings) to help in the learning process as this was seen as cheating. They were told that rote memorization was the best method. Students had learned that finding the purpose or value of material was unimportant, as was retaining the information past the test.

All of these experiences made me wonder why education and learning had to be such a tedious and unpleasant task. The common problem in the classroom is that students have “better things to do” with their time. Often video games are a large part of these “better things” and I had exasperated parents come to me and ask why their child couldn’t “put the same amount of effort into learning as they do playing.”  As Gee points out, these two activities, learning and playing, do not have to be separate and in the case of video games are quite simultaneous. The problem parents see, as described in Gee’s example of the grandfather, is the “problem of content.” (Gee 22)

Gee disputes this idea by stating that everything we learn is connected, in some way, to a specific domain. Facts or information is given meaning based on the context within which it is presented. If the context changes, so does the meaning. Students with the ability to regurgitate data but not use it in new situations or understand its principles and characteristics are not actively learning or engaging the material. Therefore, they are not truly learning, they are merely memorizing. They need to understand the situated meaning (meaning within the particular context) of the information and also what ways it is allowed to be used. What is acceptable and unacceptable.

To learn is to engage, transform, and produce appropriately. I couldn’t agree more with his definition.  He also takes this one step further to discuss the social nature of learning. Here he discusses how each domain comes with its own set of social practices that shape the way in which the learner interacts with the information.  Gee uses the term “semiotic domain” to describe “an area or set of activities where people think, act, and value in certain ways. It is the way in which a specific group assigns meaning to “signs” in the form of words, images, gestures, etc.  He gives the example of the legal language. If one knows legal language, but not legal practice then the information is useless. They do not have a way to put the knowledge to use. In the same way, if we give students information, but do not allow for its use in a realistic setting, it is of no value.

Gee refers to content as internal domain and “the typical ways of thinking, acting, interacting, valuing, and believing,” and the associated social practices as external domain. (Gee 28) People within a said domain begin to incorporate into their identity aspects drawn from the content, as well as, the social practices of others within their affinity group.  As social practices change so does the content, because each shapes the other. The affinity group creates an identity, a set of acceptable and unacceptable behaviors, values, thoughts. The content around which the affinity group forms will have to be changed and adapted as the group changes. In addition, if the content changes, and it is deemed a positive change, then the affinity group will also have to adapt.

Video games force players to “think about the world in new ways.” (Gee 31) They provide a platform, a domain, within which learners are presented with information, allowed to use it, and given new situations within which they can apply, expand or abandon their previously learned strategies. They learn to solve problems, to view mistakes as attempts rather than failure, that sometimes a mistake can present new options or combinations for existing information. The player develops strategies that can not only translate to the classroom, but to lifelong learning. These strategies implant themselves in the player’s identity. The player sees himself/herself as one who can, for example, solve problems, work through puzzles, explore with positive results, and make mistakes without failing.

Discussion Questions:

1.      Can identifying with one particular affinity group determine your future decisions and thereby dictate the direction your life takes?

2.      Do current negative opinions of gamers limit the number of people who participate in gaming? And could this be detrimental to those who would have  possibly benefitted from the early formation of problem solving strategies and positive personal identities?

3.      Does the time consuming nature of video games serve as a positive or negative given the fact that it encourages extended focus, but also discourages certain other healthy activities?

SecondLife Avatar

Here is a screen shot of my avatar. I have gone through the welcome island and have begun to explore Maasi-Mara Island. I am very new at this and I'm still trying to understand how to really move around and do things in this game.

A little about me....

Hello, everyone! I am Rebecca McCall and I am a wife, mother, grad student, and technology novice. I am very excited about this course and hope to learn new ways to incorporate technology into the regular classroom. I taught middle school English for two years and will begin teaching as an adjunct professor at TriCounty Tech in the fall. This is my first experience with blogging, Twitter, SecondLife, and most of the other things we will be using in this course. I'm looking forward to trying out some new things and learning new uses for technology in the classroom.