TESthink, educate, share

Am I missing something about games-based learning?

Avatar

TES Scotland opinion - Forum

This is where Scottish teachers go to let off some steam. Join the debate in the Scotland Opinion Group and chat about the key issues affecting education in Scotland.

Members 1056 Total Posts 17386

Am I missing something about games-based learning?

  • post reply
    I dunno, maybe I'm overly cynical here but I've read the article in this week's TES where Mike 'Everything is fine with CFE' Russell talks about the use of technology and I just wonder have I missed something? (http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=6213346) To be clear, I love technology. I will use whiteboards happily, hell I've even been known to use them with the kids for counting games etc, I use social media all the time, carry a smartphone etc and like nearly every other teacher out there, recognised from an early stage that GLOW was doomed to failure because of its downright clunkiness and ZX spectrum functionality. I have to confess though that I'm increasingly concerned about the role of 'games based learning' in the classroom. The description of one of the games in the article talks about kids having to fight off monsters and 'find' food to survive. What exactly is this teaching and preparing them for? In one school I taught, a room previously used to teach music had all the instruments shoved right into the corner to make way for the xbox and flat screen tv so the kids could play guitar hero. Perhaps I'm being old fashioned, but surely 'real-world' skills are what we're supposed to be teaching? Yes, I've seen the 'fun' projects that are trailed on the NAR when the children have been so enthused about their learning that they've managed to knock up 200 words about their 'band' (literacy), they've worked together (HWB) and remembered the number of songs they've played (numeracy). Goodness, they even decided on a name for their band and created an album cover so art has been covered too. Is our education system really so shot that this passes for 'deep learning'? I've looked at the rationale for games based learning on the Education Scotland website http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/usingglowandict/gamesbasedlearning/about/research.asp, the first reference to support the strategy comes from ELSPA - Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers Association. Doesn't seem that educational or indeed without bias. Yes, the kids seem to enjoy the consoles, but its nothing new. They all have them at home. I want to know if its teaching them anything and indeed anything that decent teachers aren't perfectly capable of teaching them? We have a crisis of obesity in Scotland. I'm not certain whether encouraging our weans to spend more time in front of the box is the right message either.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    I'm not sure that there's much to miss. Yes, games can teach certain skills but we don't suggest that every subject can be taught through a game of football so why is it suggested that electronic games can be so universally useful? There are mixed messages about the use of phones and tablets too - one minute these should be discouraged as they are being used for cyberbullying and the next all that is forgotten and we shouldn't be teaching without them! I use technology where I see a use for it and games to reinforce learning but these are merely two strategies among many.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    readyfortheweekend
    The description of one of the games in the article talks about kids having to fight off monsters and 'find' food to survive. What exactly is this teaching and preparing them for?
    Maybe its a metaphor, except for the last bit - you do actually have to eat food to survive ;)
    In one school I taught, a room previously used to teach music had all the instruments shoved right into the corner to make way for the xbox and flat screen tv so the kids could play guitar hero. Perhaps I'm being old fashioned, but surely 'real-world' skills are what we're supposed to be teaching?
    Ask yourself what real world skills are taught using football, cricket, rugby, guitar, keyboard, drums or any other hobby/pastime/game. It's all part of education. As long as it's got a direction and a defined measurable target, then surely it's good to include interests that our pupils have?
    Yes, I've seen the 'fun' projects that are trailed on the NAR when the children have been so enthused about their learning that they've managed to knock up 200 words about their 'band' (literacy), they've worked together (HWB) and remembered the number of songs they've played (numeracy). Goodness, they even decided on a name for their band and created an album cover so art has been covered too. Is our education system really so shot that this passes for 'deep learning'?
    When you were at school, were you ever asked to write about your hobby? I don't see what the difference here is, to be honest. Society changes, kids change, kids hobbies change. Latch on to that and you're on to a winner. I only wish i could find a way to tap into things like this with my subject.
    Yes, the kids seem to enjoy the consoles, but its nothing new. They all have them at home. I want to know if its teaching them anything and indeed anything that decent teachers aren't perfectly capable of teaching them?
    what's different is that at home they play the game, eat, drink, fall asleep. In school, the teacher can direct what happens after the playing part of the activity - you mentioned writing activities, for example.
    We have a crisis of obesity in Scotland. I'm not certain whether encouraging our weans to spend more time in front of the box is the right message either.
    We also have a crisis of underachievement, particularly in literacy and numeracy, so anything which encourages children to write must surely be a bonus?
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    As with so many things I see computer games as another tool to use in teaching. Sometimes it is useful/appropriate, sometimes it is not. As a teacher we shouldn't just use it because it sounds good, the children like it and it keeps them occupied but because it enhances their learning. A couple of times I've found games for the Wii which are fantastic for what I was teaching. In Ocean World you are a researcher who finds fish and other sea creatures, learns about them, takes photos and records research. The information is really informative and the music is really calming. I've also found a game exploring constellations which linked them with their myths which really engaged the children in reading and launched them into making up their own constellations and myths.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    CheesyWotsits
    When you were at school, were you ever asked to write about your hobby? I don't see what the difference here is, to be honest.
    The difference is that we had to write about hobbies we participated in outside of school. We didn't have t spend weeks developing the hobby in school time so that we could write our 200 words about it.
    CheesyWotsits
    anything which encourages children to write must surely be a bonus?
    Does it encourage children to write or do they simply learn that whenever they do something fun they have to do some "boring" writing at the end of it? I think they are probably doing less writing, too, because of all the time given over to being Guitar Heroes!


    [edited by: airy at 13:43 (GMT 0) on 28-4-2012]
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    airy
    The difference is that we had to write about hobbies we participated in outside of school. We didn't have t spend weeks developing the hobby in school time so that we could write our 200 words about it.
    The time spent in class gaming is not as much as you imagine. Certainly, the last time I researched it, the gaming part was not the bulk of the activity. Yes, the kids would play more of the game at home, but in school, the focus was on the good part.
    CheesyWotsits
    Does it encourage children to write or do they simply learn that whenever they do something fun they have to do some "boring" writing at the end of it?
    From my experience, which includes sitting in on an imaginative writing activity centred around a point-and click adventure game, the writing part was not perceived by the pupils as boring. Kids like writing about things which interest them.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    airy
    I think they are probably doing less writing, too, because of all the time given over to being Guitar Heroes!
    "think" and "probably" ....those are not good words in an discussion without evidence to back it up. :) Go have a read about it and find out more. There's a lot out there, including a lot of evidence. I wasn't convinced first time I'd heard about games based learning, and I'm still a long way off using it in a meaningful way in my own lessons, but there's some great examples out there. Best thing is that you don't have to throw out traditional teaching either - it can be done alongside it if you wish ;)
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    the only games based learning I have looked into is the Brain Training with the DS. I have used the study in lessons: to show why it is important not to miss out part of the y-axis on a graph.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    CheesyWotsits
    airy
    The difference is that we had to write about hobbies we participated in outside of school. We didn't have t spend weeks developing the hobby in school time so that we could write our 200 words about it.
    The time spent in class gaming is not as much as you imagine. Certainly, the last time I researched it, the gaming part was not the bulk of the activity. Yes, the kids would play more of the game at home, but in school, the focus was on the good part.
    CheesyWotsits
    Does it encourage children to write or do they simply learn that whenever they do something fun they have to do some "boring" writing at the end of it?
    From my experience, which includes sitting in on an imaginative writing activity centred around a point-and click adventure game, the writing part was not perceived by the pupils as boring. Kids like writing about things which interest them.
    Was that the Myst project? I've also seen that done well but my experience of Guitar Hero is not as positive. Kids who are good at writing enjoy writing about things that interest them. Others hover on the edge of groups and offer the odd idea but do very little else; a strategy which makes them look involved but teaches very little. Obviously good teachers take steps to avoid this and run such projects well. My problem with the hype surrounding the use of technology is that it doesn't focus on the good teaching but on the tech itself as if it was a panacea.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    I've found that the focus is very definitely on the good learning and teaching. Again, only basing that on what I've experienced and researched. I've never got the impression that the tech was a panacea, but more of a tool to aid learning. Poorly designed lessons and poor ideas are not what GBL is about.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply

    Personally I just think GBL will just be treated by the majority of pupils as a skive. And what does it do to the more able pupils? They will not be kidded on and will see this as dumbing down of learning. I can see how some GBL can indeed make an improvement in education through role play and simulation, but not the nonsense by getting kids to play guitar hero or any other PS3/XBox type game. That is plain daft. The game is up for CfE if that is the way we are going.

    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    We should be teaching pupils Computing Science i.e. how to create Computer Games. That involves many skills and deep learning. GBL is shallow end, lets face it.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply

    Some of you need to look at real GBL  a school in West Dunbart CHS have done fantastic things based around Mario Cart.  The kids play the game for very small chunks every  6 weeks or so but they all buy into the stuff.  This is real GBL where it is used as a tool to enhance learning not learning by playing the game.

    Take a look before you right it off.

    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    Write. No doubt Mario Cart is a fun game to play but that is not the point. If you do not go beyond playing it to find out how it works or what makes a computer 'tick' you will NEVER get to 'deep' learning. You will always be a slave to the machine rather than a master of it.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    I don't think games based learning is supposed to be about learning about computer games. Yes, it's good to learn computing skills but the likes of Mario Kart and Guitar Hero are motivational tools to create a context for learning not what is actually being learned about.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    I don't think any of us are stupid. We know it is supposed to be a context for learning, but kids being kids will just want to play Mario Cart and Guitar Hero. They will just want to play the games and see the "lessons" as a chore. As I said before, the more able pupils will see this as simply a sham and more dumbing down. I know there have been Scottish educators who have won European awards for GBL, but I am also sure that there has been research published since that debunked it all as having zero impact on pupils' learning. I am all for projects and having themes for learning, after all I am sure we all did 'The Romans' in Primary, but we should be looking for some more advanced and intelligent themes for pupils rather than assuming they all fall for gimmicks based on PS3 and XBox.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    My post was in response to the one above which seemed to see playing games as a replacement for proper computing skills. I would hope that GBL would never be a replacement for computing. I think, like every other resource, it's only as good as what teachers do with it. Hence my earlier worry that the focus is alway on the tech rather than the teaching.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    While I don't think there is anything particularly wrong with Games Based Learning, I feel it has to be seen in context as 'shallow end' learning. There are one or two notables who have hyped it and who appear to have made quite a career from that. So be it. I don't have any evidence to suggest that GBL is being used (in Primary??) as a replacement for proper Computing Science, but perhaps that is the case. I would like to know. How many Primary teachers have tried out Computer Programming with their classes (where appropriate of course)? There are some great free resources out there, e.g. Scratch.
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply
    gnulinux
    While I don't think there is anything particularly wrong with Games Based Learning, I feel it has to be seen in context as 'shallow end' learning.
    Care to elaborate, as that statement itself is rather shallow? What do you mean?
    I don't have any evidence to suggest that GBL is being used (in Primary??) as a replacement for proper Computing Science, but perhaps that is the case.
    It's not used to replace Computer Science. GBL is about using games as a context for learning. eg using an adventure game as a stimulus for an essay. Using a lemonade stand game as a stimulus for running a business. Using a "tanks" game as a way of introducing the idea of a parabola.
    I would like to know.
    The easy way to find out is to research it. Ask around your school who is using it. Ask your colleagues in other schools. Ask the kids coming up from primary. Watch videos online, read articles etc....
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply
  • post reply

    gnulinux
    How many Primary teachers have tried out Computer Programming with their classes (where appropriate of course)?

    We use what the LA loads onto our computers or allows us access to. We have had CPD in things like Pivot and various other programs that "let" children "do" something or other, like make a movie. And then there's PPT, aka the be-all and end-all. So all sorts of stuff at the shallow end, learning to use software that will be obsolete in six months, and nothing at the deep end of creating your own software. Thanks for that Scratch info---I'd never heard of it, will check to see if the LA has blocked it or no...I'm guessing, probably. Confused
    Posted
    Please join this group to replyReply