Since we’re reading and discussing John Seely Brown this week, here is a video of him talking about the importance of what he calls a “gaming disposition” in learning. In educational research, there has been increasing explorations of gaming and learning; not only video games, but all sorts of games. This research has been fueled in part by the level of engagement that young people show when playing games such as World of Warcraft. Beyond video games, he applies this to a small group of surfers in Maui who, similar to World of Warcraft, engage in a cycle of learning that involves proposing new moves, then trying them out, analyzing them (via a video camera they bring with them) and then refining and improving based on their analysis.
- Question: How might Web 2.0 and/or social technologies be used to encourage a
gaming disposition
? - Question: Seely Brown also suggests that a
gaming disposition
emphasizes the importance of play in learning. What’s your take on this? Is this a realistic, feasible goal in the teaching and learning environment where you work? Why or why not?
May 31, 2014 at 11:11 am
I appreciate the phrase “gaming disposition” and I like Brown’s definition:bottom line oriented (want to be measured); embracing change; engaging in higher order tasks; with a questing disposition
However, I do not know how well this translates to the real world because an important distinction exists: in gaming the risks that players take *are not real*. by not real, i don’t mean that the feelings, experiences, and engagement is not real. I mean, rather, that the consequences are not real. The risks are not real. The happenings of the gaming world do not impact the actual daily lives of the players, unlike risks in the real world.
Like Brown’s surfer neighbor who using a personal learning network to become a better surfer, I have seen this with friends of mine, whose son went from a novice to phenomenal snowboarder in one short season. How? The passion he had for snowboarding translated to a nonstop quest for the acquisition of snowboarding skills; when not snowboarding he was watching videos of snowboarding all day every day whenever possible.
I find an important distinction between the gamer and the snowboarder here: the snowboarder is participating in a community of practice online but ALSO practicing IN THE REAL WORLD. Simply joining youtube and looking at vidoes did not make him a phenomenal snowboarder in one season; practicing what he saw is what created that skill set. The tacit knowledge was not enough; he experienced real world feedback about his skills every time he got on his snowboard.
There is no question that my friend’s son has a gaming disposition about snowboarding, as Brown’s neighbor does about surfing. However, does my friend’s son have a gaming disposition about algebra, french verb conjugation, or vocabulary acquisition? Not so much. I do not know if it is reasonable to expect that every subject we need to learn will be as exciting for us as our hobby.
May 25, 2014 at 9:13 pm
[The URL link did not show in the initial post, and I am unable to edit so I am reposting that section here. Thank you.]
Searching for more information on gaming dispositions (because my questioning mind wanted to know), I located this article as it relates to workforce:
The Gaming Disposition
I found the context interesting as traditionally gamers are thought to be ‘slackers’ or ‘delinquents’ but in turn, they are the ones that would be highly sought after to employ because of their problem solving abilities.
May 25, 2014 at 9:06 pm
Question: How might Web 2.0 and/or social technologies be used to encourage a gaming disposition?
The system of badging has been around, as seen within the girl scouts and boy scouts organizations. Only recently has it been thought to be applicable to other non-gaming situations, such as learning. Using Web 2.0, in an educational context with a gaming disposition are perfect partners. I concur with Zach as he stated that digital forms of badging may be used to encourage a questioning or gaming disposition, such as Foursquare. Users will intrinsically value the achievement, even if there is no physical award. Searching for more information on gaming dispositions (because my questioning mind wanted to know), I located this article as it relates to workforce I found this interesting as traditionally gamers are thought to be ‘slackers’ or ‘delinquents’ but in turn, they are the ones that would be highly sought after to employ because of their problem solving abilities.
Question: Seely Brown also suggests that a gaming disposition emphasizes the importance of play in learning. What’s your take on this? Is this a realistic, feasible goal in the teaching and learning environment where you work? Why or why not?
I believe play is the foundation of all learning, so a learner with a questioning disposition would potentially turn any obstacle into a game to make it more fun. They would start asking themselves questions: “What happens if I do this?”, or “Can I flip this upside down?”. All in the name of trying to solve “the game.”
Adding a gaming environment may be utilized in library environments, and has slowly been integrated within several already. I have read journal articles where library patrons are gaining badges for successful completion of using the online catalog to search and locate a book, downloading digital items, or even asking the librarian for help. Many public and academic libraries are jumping into using gaming environments as a teaching method because it attracts their intended audience and makes the library a fun place, instead of just a building with books.
May 25, 2014 at 8:14 pm
As someone who was an avid video game player as a child, I can recall how much my peers hated ‘edutainment’ (that is, games that intend to teach as much as they do to entertain.) I believe that Seely Brown’s World of Warcraft example is a reflection of a positive, accepting and embracing change in attitude, and I can think of two reasons for it:
1) Thanks to the development of the Web (Web 2.0), smartphones and tablets, children are more accustomed to change than they were when I was a kid in the early 90s. Advancements in mobile hardware itself and the ‘dynamization’ of the Web (Web 2.0: instead of staring at static pages we can’t really interact with, we now have blogs, wikis, and multimedia sharing devices such as YouTube for us to easily share content and knowledge with videos, podcasts, posts and comments.) are key players in this. Children and teens can swiftly pick up phones, load the YouTube mobile app, and search for Vsauce videos on moving illusions, what the shortest poem is, and who owns the moon, for example. The lack of hassle in finding relatively quickly loading resources, as well as the resources’ use of advanced multimedia, makes learning much more fun to younger persons.
2) Modern gaming consoles and computers are capable of much quicker processing, much more detailed graphics, much better sound quality, and much more interactivity with others than they were a couple decades ago. An edutainment game used to mean picking up a several button controller and hitting up or down until you could find a number an on-screen character told you to select. A contrast to the past: The World of Warcraft example encourages active participation in a fun and stimulating audiovisual social environment to problem solve, promoting the sharing of knowledge and experiences with others.
May 24, 2014 at 9:50 pm
Students aren’t just consuming, they’re already producing on their devices. People of all ages are using mobile devices for instant answers, and will take action immediately after their answer is found using search engines such as google. You can see the result of this behavior in the classroom, especially mine. Students want information instantly. If someone doesn’t have an answer to a problem, they use their device until they can find the solution. They are used to this power from their own devices, and expect the same from their teachers. If classroom teachers limit the use of technology, they are hindering the ability for students to inquire more and ask higher order thinking questions.
Gaming allows for creative learning. I use gaming to reinforce what I teach, especially in math class. I use centers in math, one is always a game and one is always an app. Buzz Math is a great app and website that looks like a game, and I can assign specific activities that correspond to our daily lessons. I also use our promethean board, and will give options of group games they can play that will also reinforce what they’re learning.
Apps on mobile devices not only benefit the teacher, but students, parents, and administrators. When used efficiently, apps and gaming can be used for communication, enhancing learning by inquiring more into a specific subject, and practicing a particular skill.
May 22, 2014 at 4:05 pm
Zach- I like where you delineate the three levels of contingency within the educational badging system. I like how views participation or engagement in a more nuanced way rather than just a simple binary (e.g., did the person do _x_ activity successfully or not?).
May 22, 2014 at 10:31 am
I think one of the most important aspects of gaming is a system of measurement or assessment. Microsoft and Sony has this down to an art with the Xbox achievements and Sony’s trophy system. They aware games with achievements that have a point value attached to it. These points make up a gamers score and they are able to compare or measure themselves to fellow gamers.
Social media apps like Foursquare and Untapped have embraced a badging system which is quite fun. Users check into places they visit on Foursquare, or different beers they drink on Untapped, and users receive certain badges for completing certain tasks, like drinking the popular American beers to earn the All American badge. It doesn’t tell you what exactly they are, but it hints to that these beers are all over TV commercials. So users must sample different American beers to earn that certain badge. It takes beer drinking to a whole new level of fun.
There is quite a strong badging movement at Penn State, and I think once the badging movement takes off, education will began to change and develop more of a gaming disposition. There are currently three popular types of education badges that could be used by instructors.
Task Non-Contingent, which promotes behavior. It doesn’t depend on task completion. An example of this would be awarding a badge for children at a swim class who simply enter the pool.
Task Contingent, which is earned at the completion of a task no matter if it is correct or wrong. It offers positive reinforcement. An example of this would be awarding a badge for the children after swimming their first lap.
Performance Contingent, which is based on established standards. This would be used for learners at all levels and is best for assessment and highlighting learning. An example of this would be awarding a badge to the children who swim a lap in x amount of time.
I think Seely Brown’s gaming disposition is realistic in higher education, and I think a big part of that would be in badging. The generation currently in grade schools are gamers, whether they are hard-core World of Warcraft gamers, or Angry Birds gamers. Most games today measure results and award some type of achievement. Kids like this. Brown mentioned that they are “bottom-line oriented”. I find this true for myself, as well as the 150 children I hang out with every Tuesday and Wednesday at youth group. They like to see a point or ranking system. Yeah, they use this for competition, but they also use it for internal competition amongst themselves. The like to better themselves and get a higher rank or badge level. I’ve attended a few workshops at Penn State on badging and PSU is currently in the process of rolling out a badging platform called L3 (Lifelong Learning Landscape). So I do believe it is feasible, and not too far way. And i believe this will be the start of the gaming disposition in education at Penn State.