Double Entry 11

Learning to Play or Playing to Learn - A Critical Account of the Models of Communication Informing Educational Research on Computer Gameplay

by Hans Christian Arnseth

1. "The fact that children, adolescents and adults learn important lessons about themselves and their surroundings by engaging in game-like activities is uncontroversial. Throughout social and behavioural science discourse on social and cognitive development, gameplay is regarded as an important arena for the development and formation of thinking, identities, values and norms (Cole, 1996; Piaget, 1951; Rogoff, 1990). "

This quote surprises me because it seems the readings and other current ideas from outside of research and some in the educational community point towards a negative take on gameplay in an educational setting.  I remember from the many different psychology courses I have had over my educational career that play is an intregal part of the development process.  Yet it seems that after a certain age that idea is discarded as childish.  In my opinion, the idea of play is still relevant, even for an adult.  What changes is the types of games being played.

2. "The important point to make is that the order of words says something about focus and emphasis. Regarding playing to learn, the emphasis is on learning, which is to say that some content or skill should be the end result of game playing. As such, knowledge and skills are treated as effects or outcomes. In regard to learning to play, on the other hand, the emphasis is on the activity of playing. As such, learning might be regarded as an integrated part of mastering an activity, in this case, gameplay."

This quote makes me upset.  Like the author says, the wording makes the meaning different.  Thus Learning to play and Playing to learn are two different things.  I believe that is only true to the researcher.  If a student plays a game to learn, they will have learned something.  If a student plays a game to play, and in the process, learns how to play the game, then they will have learned something.  THe outcome is still something learned.  The only difference is how it can be twisted to sound like learning instead of playing.   The fact still remains that playing occured, and if the student enjoys playing while learning something, what matters if it was learning to play or playing to learn?  Same outcome, same goal.

3. "...according to Kirriemuir & McFarlane (2004) experience of gameplay seem to affect children’s expectations of learning, in the sense that they prefer tasks that are fast, active and exploratory with multiple and parallel channels of information. Traditional instructional methods might not meet such demands particularly well."

The student expects to learn something in school.  If they are given a math game that has nothing to learn but math, they expect to learn math, but are less likely to actually get anything out of the expereinece due to the fact that such games are often limited in gameplay, design and effectiveness.  A game where the student is free to explore a world in which they have options to control their expereince seem to interest students more than traditional teaching materials.  Surprise is not my thought when reading this, but a general, REALLY?  I would never have guessed this.  How can this be, students want to take control of their own experiences, when all they have ever heard in this life, in this country is freedom of the person to control their own destiny. It is engrained into every aspect of their lives.

Youtube video that speaks about the virtual school in Florida, which uses games to help students learn in an environment that feel most comfortable in.