computer games technology :-
computer game has its own large fields of technology. The findings presented below will prove to be important pieces in establishing the field of educational usage of computer games, and inform further empirical studies and theory on educational usage of games. The area is split into several themes that have influenced the area, and they represent very different approaches to the object of study. More than anything it illustrates the breadth and potential of educational computer games. The overview could have been split in different ways but I choose to maintain the themes area to show the different satellites around the educational computer games. This is also to underline that these area do in fact have next to no exchange of findings among each other. Towards the end of the chapter I will try to fit a matrix that captures the overlap of the different themes.
We commence with instructional technology that remains one of the strongest influences on how educational computer games are produced today. Although the narrow focus on motivation has somewhat gone out of fashion in research circles it remains dominant in current educational usage of computer games, and continue to play a role in current research.
The research area of instructional technology is primarily active in the 1980s in relation to computer games. Over the years it is represented by researchers like Thomas Malone, Mark Lepper, Richard Bowman, and Marshall Jones. The contributions especially focus on the value of computer games for motivating students, and how educational computer games are built to harness these qualities. The basic idea is that you should not be satisfied with drill-and-practice for educational programs but should enhance the learner’s motivation through different mechanism. Computer games are for these researchers an obvious place to look for inspiration.
Thomas Malone (1980) is not as such interested in the educational features of computer games but is interested in providing more enjoyable educational computer programs. He especially focuses on intrinsic motivation defined as what makes an activity fun or rewarding in its own right rather than through external rewards. In his early work he suggests that the essential characteristics of good computer games can be captured in three categories: challenge, fantasy, and curiosity (Malone, 1980). He later expands these in collaboration with Mark Lepper (Malone & Lepper, 1987a) to five categories. Through this collaboration he also expands his work to encompass computer-based instruction in general with strong ties to computer games (Malone & Lepper, 1987b).
According to Malone and Lepper (1987b) a drill-and-practice perspective assumes that anything else than the learning material in a learning experience is noise, and potentially a hindrance for learning. The graphics, narrative, sound, or ad hoc activities in a computer game are those in the way for learning. From this perspective it hardly makes sense to call edutainment drill-and-practice as edutainment is ripe with exactly the qualities opposed from a drill-and-practice perspective. However edutainment is usually described as drill-and-practice due to it sharing the same underlying learning theory of behaviourism. It also focuses on transferring information from computer game to player without taking into account the increasingly accepted role the learner plays in actively constructing knowledge and the social context around the learning experience (Piaget, xxxx; Lave, xxxx).
Malone & Lepper (1987a) distinguish between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to distinguish between different forms of drill-and-practice computer games. On one hand they acknowledge that a long list of educational computer games have extrinsic game-elements, which is just in the way for the learning experience. These correspond to the heavily criticized edutainment titles, where there is no connection between the computer game and the learning part. The game part is mainly used as a reward for doing some learning activity. Malone & Lepper (1987a) believe that intrinsic use of game elements in drill-and-practice computer games can facilitate enhanced learning and better sustain interest for a given topic over time. They identify a number of categories that should be considered in designing drill-and-practice computer games to enhance learning.
Challenge: The activity should be of appropriate difficulty level for the player. This is done through clear both short-term and long-term goals, uncertain outcome, and facilitating investment of self-esteem through meaningful goals. Furthermore clear, constructive, encouraging feedback is essential.
Curiosity: The information in the game should be complex and unknown as to encourage exploration and organisation of the information both in relation to the sensory area and the cognitive area.
Control: The player should gain the overall feeling of being the controlling party. This is done through a responsive environment, high degree of choice in the environment, and by equipping the player with the ability to perform great effects.
Fantasy: The activity can increase intrinsic motivation by using fantasies as a part of the game universe. These should appeal to the target group emotionally, serve as metaphors for the learning content, and be an endogenous part of the learning material.
Interpersonal motivations: This refers to the increased motivation resulting from the social context of the computer game most directly competition and collaboration with peers. Also the recognition of your peers will serve to motivate.
Lepper & Malone (1987b) also bring up classic problems in using computer games educational purposes. They point to the problems with time-on-task, motivation, and computer games. Depending on the learning context the question of motivation may be more or less important. Assuming we have a fixed school hour to spend on an educational computer game the additional features for increased motivation may turn out to divert the students from learning the relevant material. In a home setting these additional features will however sustain the interest of the player and result in time spend on educational content that is an extra supplement.
Related to this is the question of whether it makes a difference that the learner feel in control when learning through a motivating educational computer game compared to traditional teaching methods. Malone & Lepper (1987b) point out that this may be a choice between superficial learning and in-depth learning. When learning is driven by the student’s own discovery in computer games the quality of learning improves. However Malone & Lepper find the theoretical evidence to support these notions limited but see computer games as a better discovery environment than earlier attempts. These considerations are followed up by the constructivist perspective’s interest in microworlds, which is presented later. They acknowledge that the real issue may be how to balance the wish for learning specific content, attitudes, or skills with the discovery-based and motivating approach argued for as appropriate with computer games. The clash between guiding, instruction, and coaching and player control is classic. They also envision great problems in matching the open environment with learners with different ability. The focus is on the academic level but with the increasingly complex computer games (compared to that time) it also becomes a question of catering for different levels of game experience among learners. These challenges today still remain central in educational usage of computer games.
The research on computer games from an instructional technology perspective has also shown a sustained interested in the theory of Csikszentmihalyi’s concept of flow. It has received a lot of attention within computer game research but generally it is not well integrated but rather used in a very general sense. According to Csikszentmihalyi to achieve a flow experience a person’s full attention must be centred at an activity and you feel at one with it. An important point is that the flow experience is so strong and intense that people will engage in it without any other rewards, incentives or reasons. It is these characteristics that lures game researchers to as it might explain the infatuation with computer games. Csikszentmihalyi (1992:49-66) identifies eight characteristics of the flow experience:
Feeling you can complete the given activity
You can concentrate on the activity
The activity has clear goals
The activity provides fast feedback
Deep involvement in the activity
A sense of control over the actions necessary to perform the activity
Self-awareness disappearing during flow
Sense of time is altered.
computer game has its own large fields of technology. The findings presented below will prove to be important pieces in establishing the field of educational usage of computer games, and inform further empirical studies and theory on educational usage of games. The area is split into several themes that have influenced the area, and they represent very different approaches to the object of study. More than anything it illustrates the breadth and potential of educational computer games. The overview could have been split in different ways but I choose to maintain the themes area to show the different satellites around the educational computer games. This is also to underline that these area do in fact have next to no exchange of findings among each other. Towards the end of the chapter I will try to fit a matrix that captures the overlap of the different themes.
We commence with instructional technology that remains one of the strongest influences on how educational computer games are produced today. Although the narrow focus on motivation has somewhat gone out of fashion in research circles it remains dominant in current educational usage of computer games, and continue to play a role in current research.
The research area of instructional technology is primarily active in the 1980s in relation to computer games. Over the years it is represented by researchers like Thomas Malone, Mark Lepper, Richard Bowman, and Marshall Jones. The contributions especially focus on the value of computer games for motivating students, and how educational computer games are built to harness these qualities. The basic idea is that you should not be satisfied with drill-and-practice for educational programs but should enhance the learner’s motivation through different mechanism. Computer games are for these researchers an obvious place to look for inspiration.
Thomas Malone (1980) is not as such interested in the educational features of computer games but is interested in providing more enjoyable educational computer programs. He especially focuses on intrinsic motivation defined as what makes an activity fun or rewarding in its own right rather than through external rewards. In his early work he suggests that the essential characteristics of good computer games can be captured in three categories: challenge, fantasy, and curiosity (Malone, 1980). He later expands these in collaboration with Mark Lepper (Malone & Lepper, 1987a) to five categories. Through this collaboration he also expands his work to encompass computer-based instruction in general with strong ties to computer games (Malone & Lepper, 1987b).
According to Malone and Lepper (1987b) a drill-and-practice perspective assumes that anything else than the learning material in a learning experience is noise, and potentially a hindrance for learning. The graphics, narrative, sound, or ad hoc activities in a computer game are those in the way for learning. From this perspective it hardly makes sense to call edutainment drill-and-practice as edutainment is ripe with exactly the qualities opposed from a drill-and-practice perspective. However edutainment is usually described as drill-and-practice due to it sharing the same underlying learning theory of behaviourism. It also focuses on transferring information from computer game to player without taking into account the increasingly accepted role the learner plays in actively constructing knowledge and the social context around the learning experience (Piaget, xxxx; Lave, xxxx).
Malone & Lepper (1987a) distinguish between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to distinguish between different forms of drill-and-practice computer games. On one hand they acknowledge that a long list of educational computer games have extrinsic game-elements, which is just in the way for the learning experience. These correspond to the heavily criticized edutainment titles, where there is no connection between the computer game and the learning part. The game part is mainly used as a reward for doing some learning activity. Malone & Lepper (1987a) believe that intrinsic use of game elements in drill-and-practice computer games can facilitate enhanced learning and better sustain interest for a given topic over time. They identify a number of categories that should be considered in designing drill-and-practice computer games to enhance learning.
Challenge: The activity should be of appropriate difficulty level for the player. This is done through clear both short-term and long-term goals, uncertain outcome, and facilitating investment of self-esteem through meaningful goals. Furthermore clear, constructive, encouraging feedback is essential.
Curiosity: The information in the game should be complex and unknown as to encourage exploration and organisation of the information both in relation to the sensory area and the cognitive area.
Control: The player should gain the overall feeling of being the controlling party. This is done through a responsive environment, high degree of choice in the environment, and by equipping the player with the ability to perform great effects.
Fantasy: The activity can increase intrinsic motivation by using fantasies as a part of the game universe. These should appeal to the target group emotionally, serve as metaphors for the learning content, and be an endogenous part of the learning material.
Interpersonal motivations: This refers to the increased motivation resulting from the social context of the computer game most directly competition and collaboration with peers. Also the recognition of your peers will serve to motivate.
Lepper & Malone (1987b) also bring up classic problems in using computer games educational purposes. They point to the problems with time-on-task, motivation, and computer games. Depending on the learning context the question of motivation may be more or less important. Assuming we have a fixed school hour to spend on an educational computer game the additional features for increased motivation may turn out to divert the students from learning the relevant material. In a home setting these additional features will however sustain the interest of the player and result in time spend on educational content that is an extra supplement.
Related to this is the question of whether it makes a difference that the learner feel in control when learning through a motivating educational computer game compared to traditional teaching methods. Malone & Lepper (1987b) point out that this may be a choice between superficial learning and in-depth learning. When learning is driven by the student’s own discovery in computer games the quality of learning improves. However Malone & Lepper find the theoretical evidence to support these notions limited but see computer games as a better discovery environment than earlier attempts. These considerations are followed up by the constructivist perspective’s interest in microworlds, which is presented later. They acknowledge that the real issue may be how to balance the wish for learning specific content, attitudes, or skills with the discovery-based and motivating approach argued for as appropriate with computer games. The clash between guiding, instruction, and coaching and player control is classic. They also envision great problems in matching the open environment with learners with different ability. The focus is on the academic level but with the increasingly complex computer games (compared to that time) it also becomes a question of catering for different levels of game experience among learners. These challenges today still remain central in educational usage of computer games.
The research on computer games from an instructional technology perspective has also shown a sustained interested in the theory of Csikszentmihalyi’s concept of flow. It has received a lot of attention within computer game research but generally it is not well integrated but rather used in a very general sense. According to Csikszentmihalyi to achieve a flow experience a person’s full attention must be centred at an activity and you feel at one with it. An important point is that the flow experience is so strong and intense that people will engage in it without any other rewards, incentives or reasons. It is these characteristics that lures game researchers to as it might explain the infatuation with computer games. Csikszentmihalyi (1992:49-66) identifies eight characteristics of the flow experience:
Feeling you can complete the given activity
You can concentrate on the activity
The activity has clear goals
The activity provides fast feedback
Deep involvement in the activity
A sense of control over the actions necessary to perform the activity
Self-awareness disappearing during flow
Sense of time is altered.
No comments:
Post a Comment