Mallory led me to an edublog called "Hurricane Maine" that I thought was worth exploring, not least of all because it had a section on technology. I really wanted to focus in on the tech aspect of this exploration of edublogging, as separate from my content areas. In the tech section, I found a post containing a video by Larry Rosenstock of High Tech High School, in which, among other things, he talks about teaching by means of computer/video games.
Rosenstock's take on it is that there has to be some value in it, as kids are so highly motivated to play the games, despite the adversity they offer the gamer. However, from there he proceeds to say that the only games that kids in his school are allowed to play are ones that they themselves develop at the school, and that are non-violent and educational. Here is my response (which is in the approval process, and I suppose may or may not appear on the site, especially since I biffed and misspelled Rosenstock's name! Oops):
"Thanks for this post. I have come across other materials concerning learning through video games, and I am interested in the idea.
"Below is my transcript of what Rosenstock says about this topic in this video. He says it after observing that kids will sit for hours and days playing video/computer games in which there are many setbacks and disappointments, playing on and on nevertheless. Here's what he says: "…isn’t there something that we can take away from that pedagogically, if we were to change the nature of the transaction? Um, and so there’s a lot of opportunity there. So, at High Tech High, from the beginning, we’ve said that you can’t play video games unless you made them here, and they can’t be violent, and they have to be educational." "I want kinds, again, producing not consuming; I want kids making, making those things."
"I'm really glad he brought up the topic, but I wish he had gone into more detail. I wonder a number of things, such as: what does he consider "educational"; and what does "violent" mean, exactly. I have a suspicion that games that fit his rubric of what is educational and that are also cleansed of all kinds of conflict that he might consider violent might seem a tad dull, especially to boys. I'm pretty sure that every video game I ever enjoyed (I am male) involved some kind of violence, whether a less intense, cartoonish kind, or a more realistic kind.
"Finally, I understand his desire that the games be created at the school, as this involves the kids in producing, not just "consuming." However, it seems to me that this approach might be quite limiting. What level of programming would really take place? Would it satisfy the students' hankerings for the sophisticated kind of programming they are used to outside of school? Why not satisfy both objectives by allowing the kids to employ outside-produced games that are both highly sophisticated and extremely customizable, and so allow for a lot of user input and creativity? Surely games that prioritize children’s personalization and in-game creativity shouldn’t be dismissed as strictly “consumption.”
"I think that by disallowing games that have been produced by professionals with many years of development under their belts, not to mention degrees, or for that matter games that might be produced by, say, educators, we may perhaps be fatally limiting what is available to the kids. I say "fatally" because the effort to introduce gaming to kids as Rosenstock suggests sounds, with all due respect, like it might be slightly DOA. I wish he had said something that would prove otherwise.
"I am very interested in the topic, but I don’t know that I want to embrace his limitations." [End of comment]
It's also not the most glowing response, however much it's an honest representation of my reaction, so we'll see if it makes it.
Hi, Monte! It's been a while.
ReplyDeleteI would really love to see the blogger's response to this post as well. Or even the responses of other people who read the entry and your comment.
As I read through your entry, I had the same concern about the limitations of the students. It's not realistic to expect students to have enough programming experience to create a video game. It seems like teaching them the necessary programing would take a lot of time away from teaching them the lessons they're supposed to be learning through the video game. That just doesn't seem right to me.
Seriously, though, let me know if you get a response to your comment.
-Stephanie
I'm so glad that you included your response, Monte, as perhaps Louise isn't monitoring her blog as regularly during the summer, so it may be a while before it shows up there. I think that you make a thoughtful point, Monte. In the podcast interview with the faculty of the NYC Quest2Learn school from "Teachers Teaching Teachers," the host talks about kids seeing "educational" games as 'Broccoli covered with chocolate,' and I think that this is not without reason. While I cab certainly see there being many learning opportunities presented by peers reviewing the work of peers, I share your fear in this case that (especially for experienced gamers), the bar is raised so high by commercially-produced games as to seemingly render Mr. Rostenstock's ideas as wishful thinking (makes me want to hear more from him on this point).
ReplyDeleteI really like the challenge that you set out about looking at commercial games with an educator's eye, and in working with students on a sort of discovery process infused with this spirit. I can't pretend to know where this leads, but I feel that this process offers the opportunity to connect very powerfully with kids where they are, and it seems to be worth investing some time, thought and experimentation in figuring out what it means, for example, for kids to begin looking at their gaming experiences, and thinking about them in terms of "what am I learning?" and "How does what I'm doing reflect skills, affects, abilities that I possess?"
Well done, Monte! It's clear that you are keeping an open mind about this topic. It seems as if many of us in the MAC program are on the fence about this whole gaming topic. There is clearly value in utilizing games for learning; the trick is how to harness that energy and motivation to do something other than shoot and maim and kill others?
ReplyDeleteTo me this feels like a wide open frontier - we're lucky to be in the middle of it. We all seem to be scouting around for the magic answer on the best use of technology. So far the chatter out there seems to be
confusing and vague. But in a couple years, we'll develop our own philosophy to bring our kids into this new age.
--Joe
DAD! I found your blog! I didn't actually read it, but I found it!
ReplyDelete