"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.