I am very interested to see how our class discussion develops around the texts we were assigned for this week. To be honest, I was pretty critical reading some of the titles, but I would like to see where Kristin and Jeff take us with these.
In general, I felt that the texts on gaming were pretty persuasive. Though I'm not really sure if I'm settled on the idea that we really need to be playing more games in order to save the world, it's an interesting thought. I definitely do think that there is some type of skill set we're missing to utilize from the large proportion of gamers out there. I also think that there has to be some way that we can get students to feel as excited about school work as they are about winning in a game setting. If intellectual satisfaction is the motivation behind playing so much online games, then there must be something I can do as a teacher to generate that in my classroom and get kids motivated about school work in the same way they are about games. I want my students to have that epic win face while doing my assignments!!
I was left with some questions though. First, neither texts on gaming addressed the gender disparity in game play. I'm not sure if this is a perceived or factual disparity, but I definitely feel that males are more likely to play games for long periods of time than females. This may be do in part to the types of games that are currently on the market, but I would have liked to see that addressed.
Second, in the video Jane McGonigal didn't really talk about the role of appeal in investment in gaming. I think for many people, they might be willing to play WOW but not necessarily a game about saving the earth. Or maybe they would be?? She didn't talk about whether or not the games she created were able to attract large enough numbers of players to translate into effective world change. There's something deeper in people' s engagement of WOW that goes beyond just an intrinsic human empowerment through gaming.
Finally, and this is more general, I was a little confused about how the online portfolio text fit in. I don't know how it connected with the other two assigned texts. Furthermore, I didn't really get what the big deal was with the online portfolios. To me they just seem like glorified file folders of student work. Is there something about the fact that they are online that makes them more effective??
I'm excited to hear everyone's thoughts in class on Friday ...
In general, I felt that the texts on gaming were pretty persuasive. Though I'm not really sure if I'm settled on the idea that we really need to be playing more games in order to save the world, it's an interesting thought. I definitely do think that there is some type of skill set we're missing to utilize from the large proportion of gamers out there. I also think that there has to be some way that we can get students to feel as excited about school work as they are about winning in a game setting. If intellectual satisfaction is the motivation behind playing so much online games, then there must be something I can do as a teacher to generate that in my classroom and get kids motivated about school work in the same way they are about games. I want my students to have that epic win face while doing my assignments!!
I was left with some questions though. First, neither texts on gaming addressed the gender disparity in game play. I'm not sure if this is a perceived or factual disparity, but I definitely feel that males are more likely to play games for long periods of time than females. This may be do in part to the types of games that are currently on the market, but I would have liked to see that addressed.
Second, in the video Jane McGonigal didn't really talk about the role of appeal in investment in gaming. I think for many people, they might be willing to play WOW but not necessarily a game about saving the earth. Or maybe they would be?? She didn't talk about whether or not the games she created were able to attract large enough numbers of players to translate into effective world change. There's something deeper in people' s engagement of WOW that goes beyond just an intrinsic human empowerment through gaming.
Finally, and this is more general, I was a little confused about how the online portfolio text fit in. I don't know how it connected with the other two assigned texts. Furthermore, I didn't really get what the big deal was with the online portfolios. To me they just seem like glorified file folders of student work. Is there something about the fact that they are online that makes them more effective??
I'm excited to hear everyone's thoughts in class on Friday ...
Rayhan, I totally agree with what you said about the appeal of Jane McGonigal's actual video games. Yes she made some excellent points that were really fascinating, regardless of how crazy it my seem. But my main thing is basically, who is really going to play those games? I mean, I'm not even that knowledgeable on video games at all, but I can't believe that these save the world games are essentially the "same" as something like Grand Theft Auto, or Halo, or whatever. I mean the kids/people who are into those games aren't necessarily just going to stop playing THOSE games so that they can play Jane's creation. I feel like you can't generalize the video game world into one world in general. What if the drive racing game world is different from the one that she has created with her game on conserving oil? I just think while it is a decent idea and sounds logical to some extent, she seemed to assume that if you like video games, then there is no way why you wouldn't like her game. This seems like to be a little too much of an assumption. To me, her game seems boring and kind of too realistic where the point of virtual games becomes defeated. Like I said earlier, I am not a gamer (literally at all) but I do see the fun in video games and have played my fair share of Mario Kart and whatever else on the Wii. However, just because I enjoy an hour of Mario Golf here and there does not mean I am going to replace that hour with "What happens if the oil in our country runs out?" No. I am probably going to find something else to do, or just choose Mario instead. I definitely agree that she made some amazing points that fascinated everyone, however, her thoughts on the actual change that this would produce indeed seem a bit idealistic.
ReplyDeleteRayhan,
ReplyDeleteFirst off, "I want my students to have that epic win face while doing my assignments!!" is fantastic.
Next I agree with your point about how Jane failed to persuade on why kids would want to play the types of games she's talking about. I think this would be the largest and most obvious obstacle to this being an effective teaching method. Not sure I have anything helpful to say on that end, but if we could find a way to use Mario Golf for geometry lessons I am all for it. It's a tall order to say the least. But as video games become a large part of our student's lives we should consider how to include ourselves in that world.
Your wait and see approach to classroom discussion about the text is excellent. Because you have developed your own thoughts about the texts, yet you are still open to hearing other views. You stated that there is some type of skillset that these gamers have that the larger population is missing. What types of skillsets do you see gamers bringing to the population at large? I know Jane alludes to some in the video, I was just wondering if yours are the same or different from hers. You know I noticed that there was no mention about gender and gaming. I thought about this as well while listening to the Ted Talk and reading the article. I do not nor have I played video games. The extent to my gaming background is playing with my nephew when he was younger. Now he’s a teenager and I have no clue how to play the games he’s playing now. I wonder what percentage of the population of gamers are female? That would be an interesting study.
ReplyDelete