For the second part of this Module 9 we had to play a game, and
analyze what we learned. According to Prensky (2006), there are two categories
of games. The first is Mini games, or Edutainment games, that can be played in
less than two hours, with one to two players. They are learning games that
involve repetitive type of problem solving. The second category is complex, or
serious games that can last for days and can involve many players. They can take hours to master various levels
and can use alternate identities for the players. The game I picked is called
Virtual Village 4: The Tree of Life. I
would classify this game as a beginning level serious game. In this game the Island
life is dying and the Chief of the village picks five villagers to help him
revive the island. The player gets to pick their own five villagers based on
what skills you think will be necessary for survival. The villagers do not have the skills when the
game starts, but the player can help them learn these skills by moving them to
various places on the board to do certain tasks. The tasks involve learning to build huts,
research, healing, farming, etc. As the
villagers learn skills, the player earns points that can then be used as cash to
purchase various items for the village. I thought it was funny that, if you
leave the game for a while, your villagers continue to learn and grow with the
skills you left them with, and you can come back and add more skills.
Since this is the first time I have played a game, I wanted
to select a game that was a little slower pace, but still involved
multitasking. In this game, I had to keep an eye on all the villagers, and help
each build the right individual skills for the village that would help them
survive. As stated in Hung (2011), my “learning occurred in a “spiral” in which
players are exposed to increasing degrees of complexity and gradually get to
learn the total system” (p.14). Being a beginner
at games, at first I was really confused as to what to do, and then through
trial and error, I learned what I needed to do to get the villagers to learn
skills.
My challenge was being new to the whole environment of Digital
Game-Based learning (DGBL). I had to get
over my fear of pressing the wrong button, but just like my villagers, I too
learned that persistence and experimentation does pay off. I used to think that these games were just
wasting the time of children and all they do is teach kids to shoot at each
other constantly. Through my experience and the reading from this week’s
research, I have come to appreciate what the possibilities are in this tool.
With DGBL, students can learn to think through a problem, use experimentation
to investigate, multitask, and parallel process (Prensky, 2006, pp.8-9). So it took me some time to coordinate and
understand how to move the players, where to move them, and figure out what
they needed to learn and achieve. I
thought I did not have the ability to get the hang of the game, but I surprised
myself. I experimented with something I
did not feel comfortable with and began to understand the fascination and pull
that these games have for kids. I can
understand now how once you get involved in a task of a game, you become so committed
that you have to finish it, or achieve the next level, even if it takes
hours.
Prensky (2006), states that there are component in games
that keep kids engaged. These include “leveling up” or going up levels as you
master them, the game adapting to the abilities of the player, worthy goals,
and making decisions. If these
components can be included in the games we pick for our classrooms then
learning can be enhanced. By picking
games that embed the knowledge of concepts in the games “learning occurs in
meaningful and relevant contexts,…and is more effective than learning that
occurs outside of those contexts, as is the case, with most formal instruction. This principle is situated cognition” (Van
Eck, 2006, p.4) or learning. As they
play a game they become aware of all issues that come into play in decision
making and actions. They would learn the
language of the subject and the use of the tools in investigating and
analyzing. According to (Klopfer, Coulter,
Perry, and Sheldon) students should develop their reading skills as they play
these games, and because the games make them focus on a goal they learn to “filter
the relevant from the non-relevant”. They
also learn to tap into the experiences of a pool of people by collaboration
among many players.
Here is a picture of me attempting to play Virtual Village
4.
Works Cited:
Prensky, M. (2006). The really good news about kid’s games. “Don’t
bother me Mom, I’m learning!” : how computer and video games are preparing your
kids for twenty-first century success and how you can help! (pp. 7-15). St.
Paul, Minn. : Paragon House.
Prensky, M. (2006). Complexity matters: What most adults don’t
understand about games. “Don’t bother me Mom, I’m learning!”: how
computer and video games are preparing your kids for twenty-first century
success and how you can help! (pp. 55-63). St. Paul, Minn. : Paragon House.
Klopfer, E., Coulter, R., Perry, J. and Sheldon, J. “ Discovering
Familiar Places: Learning through Mobile Place-Based Games”. In Press for
S. Barab, K. Squire and C. Steinkuehler.
Games, Learning, and Society:
Learning in the Digital Age. Cambridge University Press.
Hung, A. C. (2011). Serious games and education. The work of play: meaning –making in
videogames (pp. 10-29). New York: Peter Lang.
Van Eck, R., (March/April 2006), Digital Game-Based
Learning: It’s Not just the Digital Natives who are restless… . Educause, Vol. 41, no.2 ,1-16.
