Learning the Game to Fit the Manual
Despite what any parent had said before, video games are a great way to learn about the real world. James Paul Gee — professor of Literacy Studies at Arizona State University —states “there’s more going on” behind the flashing lights of a video game. In his talk associated with Edutopia.org, Gee dives into the mechanics behind critically acclaimed video games such as Blizzard’s World of Warcraft and Valve’s Portal and explains how mechanics that are employed by the players of the game are not only applicable to the real world, but essential to the learning experience of students.
Gee starts the talk by discussing the player interactivity dynamic of World of Warcraft (WoW), a Massive Multiplayer Onlin Role Playing Game (MMORPG) released in 2004 with ~5.5 million subscribers still playing. In WoW, the player has the choice of creating and building their character towards a specific class with different specialties, each with a respectively different skill set to fulfill different tasks in the game’s challenge areas called dungeons. Gee explains that the problems within these dungeons require the integration of multiple skill sets, the base number around 5 people, of different varieties to advance and oversaturation of a certain skill can hinder the team’s progress. This method of forming groups with skill differentiation creates what are called “cross functional teams,” groups that know their role but act in accordance towards their teammates needs.
This dynamic between people of different specialties interacting towards a common goal is not just a phenomenon that occurs in gaming, but in the work space as well. Gee mentions that in high tech workplaces, cross functional teams almost entirely organized in cross functional teams, teams of experts in their own specific field, and competent of their teammate’s roles such that they can integrate their own skills to either support or even replace them if necessary. The diversity of utility in the work field opens possibilities for increased productivity and enhanced problem solving. Such high proficiency and efficiency leads to the growth of businesses and even advances in science.
Gee extends this idea of applying a game mechanic into the real world by discussing Portal, a fun puzzle game centered around portals with their own physics that the player must adapt to. Where one might argue that Portal offers no actual physics insights, but merely a “tacit understanding,” Gee explains that the fun and passion one may develop for the game can lead them towards further interest such that they explicate all the information he/she can gather to form a better understanding of the game. This understanding leads that individual to go on what is called an “affinity space,” a communal network space for learning created by a common engagement, and share that information to get a better understanding of the game.
But where does all this explication and communal analysis converge? What purpose does this have in the real world? The image above shows an example of a detailed explanation of the “flinging” mechanic of the game using academic language, or what Gee calls specialist language that involves actual physics terminology, linking the game to real life physical concepts. This degree of understanding description from in-game experience puts in the mind of the player an ability to mentally simulate planned scenarios to work towards a goal. This level of involvement in an activity is what Gee argues is the key towards learning from not just video games, but other forms of digital media.
When you first buy a physical copy of video game, it usually comes with an instruction manual that details how to play, what X or Y means and so on. It would only make sense to read it to get an understanding of the game; however, most people, like me or Gee, skip reading and dive straight into the game because figuring things out is more fun. Things make more sense reading instruction manual after playing than reading it beforehand because you have that visual or audio familiarity with whatever the manual describes from prior experience. This psychological concept of association, whether it be visual or aural, would be able to find an image, an action, an experience, a goal, a dialogue or anything that fits those words in the manual because you would have experienced it beforehand. This forms the link between game and real life, between idiosyncrasy and comprehension. The problem in real world application is that learning is mostly based from text, books and manuals that describe clearly but don’t effectively show. But if association were to take place — if we were to bring the activities to problem solving — the learning process would be much more efficient.
Gee argues that this method of associative learning should be implemented in schools, not by video gaming, but by activity based learning — something to form that visual or aural or experience link. Implementing more effective activities in the education process would give students a game to fit the manual, something to associate the experience and the knowledge of books with for a greater understanding and better involvement. Its one thing to read about chemistry and algebra, but its another thing to have students involved in the worlds of chemistry and algebra. This involvement could spark a snowball effect of cross functional teams of different fields to collaborate and share information on affinity spaces to enhance the learning experience, for real world concepts and not just video games.
As one who enjoys the recreation of video games like Portal, I agree completely agree with Gee’s arguments of bringing more engaging activities into the educational system. In my experience, activity based learning has been the most effective — as well as the most fun — way for me to learn and has helped me to not fail and actually be interested in my work. If more engaging activities were brought into the curriculum, the learning experience would improve exponentially and be much much much more enjoyable.
