"Class Dismissed": An Alternative to Injecting Games into the Classroom

I am not the first person to ponder the potential of games in education. I just read an article from the Scholastic Web site that analyzes the abilities of video games to engage students and help them learn, and outlines some of the dangers educators need to avoid in order to make an introduction of video game curricula successful. The Mayfair Games Web site has a "Teacher Zone," which harbors a couple of different articles that describe how their games can teach valuable skills in the classroom. Research is being done as well to validate the use of games as educational tools. A researcher's post on bgdf.com elicits advice for developing a system to demonstrate scientifically how "games [...] can be used to increase motivation to learn."

Primarily, however, it seems that these expeditions into the realm of game pragmatics address ways to interject a game--such as Catan--into a system--such as the classroom--that, once played and discussed, will bring about a desired result--a modification in learning. Simply put, current use of games for instruction necessitates that participants know they are playing a game. A middle school class might stop other activity, sit down in groups, play Catan, and then evaluate what they have learned. Similarly, high school students might take an hour out of the week to develop an empire in Civilization 3, such as at Roosevelt High School, in Chicago.

In both examples, the idea is to teach a lesson through an entertaining medium. The game is not the lesson, the game is the avenue by which the lesson is learned. In other words, a history lesson about the Romans might just as easily be learned by watching the movie Gladiator--and surely there are still some bookworms out there who won't be able to keep their hands off the actual textbook. How should educators decide which medium is best? Or should media be integrated in such a way as to engage as many learning styles and interests as possible?

Permit me to ask a different question. Since, as in the cases above, the game is merely the medium of certain curricula, what if the game becomes the actual curriculum? Board game mechanics, as manifested in various Eurogames (among others), create incentives to play--and replay--and in the process the players learn both the best ways to interact within the system and the small details that are required in order to participate effectively. The right combinations of incentives guides players to learn both technique and detail. For example, after playing Axis and Allies a couple of times a player might learn some strategies that are effective in breaking the backs of the Germans, as well as certain historical details, such as that India was part of the British Empire, or that islands without production capacity can still be very valuable. The game mechanics provide the incentives that make the game fun, and players learn as a result.

Good mechanics transcend boundaries of genre and medium. Until Agricola came along, I don't think that "farming" would have rated very high on lists of interesting game ideas, but the mechanics of Agricola make it compelling. In the same way, refined mechanics could make even the most mundane subject lessons in school equally interesting. Imagine a class whose final grade is determined by a combination of accumulated "resources," such as in Agricola. "Resources" could be produced via a system of "worker placement," in which students are compete with others for rights to one of a number of finite options. As students participate they learn the material because their grades depend on it, but mostly because the mechanics are compelling.

Perhaps this method could be applied to organizational theory as well. Workers could compete for pay raises or bonuses, not by taking off time from work to play a game, but because the mechanics of the workplace act like a game. I admit, of course, that this application of game mechanics could be incredibly difficult to implement, but I think it warrants some amount of research. Games are breaking in to the classroom, and as we discuss the best ways to educate our children with games, we should explore the possibilities of games not only as tools, but as systems. The effects--while beneficial to education--could be even further-reaching and more provocative.

Mind Over Movie #2 Clarification and Explication

In apparent contradiction to my last post, I just made a post at a board game design Web site, in which I argued that movies are conducive to developing games. "For me, designing board games is about giving an the player an opportunity to participate in an experience, which is the same goal of good movies. A good movie engages both your senses and your mind, and good board game does the same. A good movie allows you to discover a great story; a good game allows you to become part of the story yourself--to encounter it at a fundamental, decision-making level."

My post on bgdf.com argues that movies can be inspirational because they share core attributes with games, whereas the previous post on this blog demonstrates how we can convince our friends to open their minds to a different realm of entertainment.

I believe that good movies can have a distinct purpose in our lives, whether by speaking to a difficult emotion we feel at the time or by teaching a particular lesson that we need to learn, or simply by arousing nostalgia, and while for each of us, the definition of what is "good" varies, I think deep down we know--if we want to know--what that is. At the same time, however, bad or mediocre do the opposite. They distract us from our vision and can clutter our thinking space: they are noise that can diminish quality social opportunities.

Good movies, then, like good games, serve a purposeful function in our lives and social interactions, but we should be careful that neither games nor movies should lose their distinction and become an emotionally blunt and hollow filler.

Mind Over Movie

Games are almost always on my mind. I'm convinced they are a better way to spend time in a group than almost anything else, so when a co-worker stopped by today and told me about his trip to see The Transporter 3, I challenged his convictions.
First, I probed him to make sure that he wasn't some ultra movie-fanatic, or even that he just thought movies were a lot of fun. "Do you go to movies because you are really into them or do you just go because there isn't a lot else to do?" (We live in a relatively small college town where lack of things to do spurs a lack of creativity, which in turn spurs a lack of things to do.) He replied, "Nah, mostly just something to do." Success!
Second, I piqued his interest by explaining that there could be more creative ways to spend time and money. "You know Brian (his name was Brian--still is, actually), something I've gotten into recently is playing new board games. They're a good way to connect with people and pretty economical too." "What like Risk?" "No..." "Jenga? Scrabble?" "No, no...more like..." "Monopoly?" "No definitely not! ... Hey! Why don't I just show you!" By this point he was curious, so I probably could have shown him anything. After all, most Americans are pretty oblivious to the fact that there could be any other board games out there besides the games they learned growing up. Any aberration is quite a novelty.
Step three, then, was to show him some pictures online from places like board game geek. The good thing about Eurogames is that their looks speak for themselves, and they are warrant at least a second glance if not also serious consideration. Plus, once I had him looking at pictures of games I had to summarize and explain some basic rules and embellish some examples of why Eurogames are worth the money.
Brian seemed interested enough, but it was three in the morning, so he could have just been lacking the energy to interrupt my tireless rant. I like to think that I opened his mind to a whole new world of activities--that I inspired him to go see for himself. Brian is just one person, but I believe that every person is important. Maybe he will buy a game and someday when his friends ask him to go see yet another meaningless movie, he will offer a different suggestion, and pass the word on to the next person...and the next.

Holiday Party

Our Holiday party turned into a games event. No, not Eurogames, just regular old American party games etc., but it made me think about social dynamics. People want to have a good time with each other, and even though everyone has a different opinion of what a good time is, they will give up some of their specific ideas of a good time in favor of the group. Games help groups to have a good time because they create a sense of shared commitment and identity. Though we may not have anything in common, the fact that we are playing the same game gives us valuable information about each other, and games bypass the complicated small-talk laws that few people understand and apply perfectly. Large groups? Small groups? It doesn't matter as long as there is a game to fit the need.

Limits of game theory?

I just had an interesting conversation with my dad. Like usual we are the last ones awake in the house and the fact that its Thanksgiving did no nothing to change that tonight, and like usual, I find that we have some of our best conversations in the between time of activity and bed. We discussed application of game theory and whether or not there is an alternative direction of study in the field. I noted that all the research I had seen on game theory revolved around the use of numbers to reach an economic pinnacle, that is, game theory analyzes competitive markets for the ideal strategy to win. I think that this research fails to account for the application of game theory in situations where there is no economic benefit. For example, how can game theory benefit an organization's workplace environment (how can it be manipulated to benefit interactions between people and the machine)? Dad suggested that even people's choices within a system can be reduced to an economic cost/benefit analysis, in which case game theory does pertain as a means of explaining and prescribing. We did not debate hotly, though I am not sure that we came to a conclusion. I believe it is a topic that warrants more discussion, although--as with anything--I will need to do more research.

Philosophy of Dance Music

At a small dance party tonight it occurred to me that dance music promotes a specific philosophy. Many of the songs on the play list tonight encompassed lines such as, "Just dance baby! It will be alright! I'll keep you company through the lonely night!" Dancing solves all your problems, and dance music not only provides the beat but also the ideology for dancing. It encourages you to get outside yourself because on the outside your problems don't seem so bad. It's easy to get absorbed in the music and the rhythm. Dance music demands both the soul and the body. The one finds agreement with the carefree philosophy, and the other participates--physically--in a few moments of brief total indoctrination.

Creating games

I made a game three years ago called the Legend of Shadow Creek. For various reasons it did not get completed to my satisfaction, but this past week I pulled it out of the closet to look at it again.
I designed a few modifications and put them to the test. As I played, McNeill came into my room. The door was open. I like testing games by myself, but I like testing them with other people even better, so I invited him to join me. Quickly I scrapped the game I was playing, re-set up, and explained the game. I was encouraged by his positive feedback and comments such as "cool mechanism" or queries regarding rules. McNeill was very engaged in considering the game seriously and he participated not only in the game play but in giving constructive feedback and criticisms. By the time we finished I had an entire page of written notes scrawled on a paper on the table, but I had more than that. He had given me a reason to continue. He had given me feedback and he expected to see changes. Not only did this demonstrate his interest in my game, but also his dedication to seeing it completed. His excitement helped fuel me to conduct a second play test yesterday evening with a complete set of six players, and while not all six were as enthusiastic as McNeill, I was not discouraged. Although I don't like to admit it, I think I rely very heavily on others opinions of what I have made, which could be bad if I let it keep me from continuing what I want to do, but can also be a good thing when it serves as inspiration for future success.

MSN article

Linked article: 10 Great Family Table Games


Jill Jasper notes--albeit briefly--that Settlers of Catan (Mayfair Games, 1995) could benefit childhood development. She says, "this is a game that really teaches kids the value of conserving and trading," which, I would argue, is a lesson that not just children need to learn. Jasper's article suggests that ambitious games with strategic planning and interaction could train individuals how prepare for challenging situations that may require similar skills. She mentions that Catan is like Risk (Parker Brothers, 1957), "except with less risk." Catan is a sort of simulation by which participants can witness firsthand the impact of their decisions. From my own experience I might note that playing the thief on one of my sisters might beget retribution, whereas playing the thief on my other sister, would incur no abuse. For Jasper it seems that it is Catan's ability to train that makes it a great family game. It is useful for application because it mirrors aspects of real life in a way that other artistic mediums cannot. Catan--and games in general--give interactive experience to players, which are lessons that are not quickly forgotten.

Agricola and college

Can students learn life lessons from a board game?



We played the new game Agricola (2008, Lookout Games) the other night. It took us about two and a half hours to set-up, learn the rules, and play. In the game, players take turns selecting actions that will benefit their farm. Each player has a farm board with spaces for fields and rooms. The goal is to have the most points at the end of the game by having the greatest diversity of goods and by utilizing your farm space most effectively.
The game was fun, and I would like to play again, but I could not help thinking about this game relates to the college experience. In the game there are numerous ways to gain points. For example, if, at the game end, you have 4 cattle, you would receive 3 points, but if you have 0 cattle, then you would lose 1 point. Since there are numerous categories in which players can earn and lose points (cattle, sheep, grain, vegetables, enclosed pastures) the difficulty of the game lies in balancing as many categories as possible.
In the same way, the college experience is a balance of a number of important factors. Students are asked to learn social skills, develop positive eating habits, study for class, and do their own laundry, without forgetting to have a little fun now and then. Students need to balance these behaviors among other things, and are not likely to have a successful or enjoyable college experience if any one behavior is not utilized or learned. Like in Agricola, a student could become an expert in one area and still lose the game if other areas are not explored.
While it is unlikely that the other students who were playing Agricola with me considered the parallels of the game to college life, I believe it is possible that the game can teach diversification, management skills, and balance. If nothing else, students, as they play the game, are given an avenue through which to explore options and make decisions that affect an outcome. At the same time they are able to participate with one another to develop more effective strategies, which in addition to enabling students to share their diverse thought processes, also provides them with a social activity that can help to develop a shared identity and sense of community.
By the way, when we played the other night I lost by one point. I have yet to suppose that success in the board game directly correlates to success in making "A's," although if it does, then I should be studying the Agricola rulebook instead of my Literature notes.

Writing

I have found that the best way for me to write is in short doses at the beginning or the end of the day. The only explanation I have for this right now is that I feel more relaxed at terminal stages in life. When I am in the middle of things I am too distracted, stressed, or excited to sit down--why is it that I always need to sit--and write. Similarly, when I have a plan to write in the evening on a day, and the activities of the day go too long, I experience more stress because I know I will not be able to relax during the fine del dia as I so like to do. Instead I sit--there we go again--hunched over the computer or notebook, scrawling as fast as possible so that I can say I got something down even though it is not well thought out or interesting. Case in point.

Time

How do you engage time? Time has emotions just as we do. If it is treated calmly, with respect for the important things in life, then it responds in like fashion. I let time dawdle today as I talked with a friend who stopped by when I least expected. Time seemed to enjoy the slowness--the effortless passage between two points--of the afternoon. It smiled when I let it scribble all over my notebook this evening, and it yawns in contentment when I accept it for what it is--short--instead of trying to stretch it out like wrap that won't cover the bowl completely no matter how hard I try. Time feels better when it isn't forced to be longer. And consequently I do too.

Addendum to the previous post

I would also have to drive less in order to save money, which has suddenly become more difficult to do.

Pitfalls of Low Prices at the Pump

I went to the Gas Station tonight to "fill up." I feel so smart for waiting until now to get gas because it has dropped from $3.75 pg in my neck of the woods to $2.70 pg in about two weeks! Now, it is important to understand that I live by a strict budget. I rarely spend beyond what I have written on paper to spend, but as I pulled up to the pump tonight I found myself wanting to spend more than I had budgeted. "Gas is so cheap!" I rationalized. "I should fill up now before gas prices return to their homes in the clouds!" But wait...why should I spend more to save more? I didn't plan to spend that much, so what does it matter if the price is lower. I should be thankful for the bargain--I get a little more gas tonight for the meager sum i had allotted.
Then I got to thinking about how easily we fall into the pitfalls of consumerism. That is, we buy more when we have the opportunity to be saving more. Wal-Mart encourages us to buy a colossal size bag of chips at 24cents per oz instead of the all-we-really-need regular size at 35cents an oz. Maybe other people aren't like me. I tend to eat more chips or use more gas when I have more. Either that colossal size bag won't last me any longer than the regular size, or I won't be able to eat them all before they get stale. On the one hand I get fatter, and on the other I waste my money.
Getting back to the pump I realized that all the gas I needed was what I had budgeted for. Not only that, I felt good about myself for sparing the environment some carbon, and also my car for not putting extra miles on it. Moderation is the key. This is nothing new--I think Ben Franklin talked about it--but it bears refreshing.

Pinebars opens

Welcome to Pinebars! This is the beginning of a new blog dedicated to thoughtful analysis of things popular culture, less-popular culture, and counter-culture. So far the thoughts are just my own, and the words are borrowed from English, but maybe I will increase the number of contributors with time. Read words here if you like. After all this is only a Web site.