By : Pamela Paul
Features editor and children’s books editor at The New York Times Book Review.
WHEN
I was a child, I liked to play video games. On my brother’s Atari, I played
Night Driver. On his Apple II, I played Microwave, Aztec and Taipan! When I got to go to the arcade, I
played Asteroidsand Space Invaders.
Here’s
what I learned: At a certain level on Microwave, the music from the bar scene
in Star Wars comes on. If I am at the front line when aliens descend to Earth,
we’ll all be in trouble. Also, dealing opium in the South China Sea is more
lucrative than trading in commodities.
In
short, I didn’t learn much of anything. My parents didn’t expect me to. I just
had fun.
Today,
educational technology boosters believe computer games (the classroom euphemism
for video games) should be part of classroom lessons at increasingly early
ages. The optimistic theory is that students wearied by the old
pencil-and-paper routine will become newly enchanted with phonemic awareness
when letters dressed as farm animals dance on a screen.
Last
week, GlassLab (Games, Learning and Assessment Lab) unveiled an online resource
for teachers based on the role-playing game SimCity, and
this fall it plans to release a version of the game specifically for classrooms. According
to its Web site, GlassLab’s
mission, in part, is to show that “digital games with a strong simulation
component may be effective learning environments.” At the new PlayMaker school
in Los Angeles, financed in part by the Gates Foundation, a gaming curriculum
includes adventure questsand
other educational game apps. A 2012 report by the
New Media Consortium identified “game-based learning” as one of
the major trends affecting education in the next five years.
Meanwhile,
many parents believe that games children play on home computers should edify
children, improve their hand-eye coordination and inculcate higher math skills.
The most popular apps in the Apple store for toddlers and preschoolers are
educational. Even parents who scoff at the idea of toddlers learning from Dora
gleefully boast about their 2-year-olds’ having mastered basic math on Mommy’s
phone.
The
concepts of work and play have become farcically reversed: schoolwork is meant
to be superfun; play, like homework, is meant to teach. There’s an underlying
fear that if we don’t add interactive elements to lower school curriculums,
children won’t be able to handle fractions or develop scientific hypotheses —
concepts children learned quite well in school before television.
In
a 2012 survey of elementary and middle school teachers by Common Sense
Media, 71 percent of teachers say entertainment media use has hurt
students’ attention spans “a lot” or “somewhat.” The findings have had no
apparent effect on palpable enthusiasm for interactive teaching. When
experienced teachers express skepticism about the value of computer games in
school, they’re often viewed as foot-draggers or change-resistant Luddites. A
2012 Project Tomorrow
report (paid for in part by the technology industry), found
that only 17 percent of current teachers believe technology helps students
deeply explore their own ideas.
Technology
firms are understandably eager to enter the lucrative school market and acquire
customers at the earliest age. News Corporation plans to introduce in schools anew tablet
computer that directs a child’s wandering gaze with the
on-screen message: “Eyes on teacher.” Perhaps the child would have done just
that had he not had a colorful screen blinking in front of his face. Take-home
games for the device include one in which Tom Sawyer fights the Brontës. (Lest
children avert their attention to the actual books.)
Alarmists
warn that schoolchildren won’t excel in the i-economy if they aren’t steeped in
technology. Many schools boast of their iPad-to-kindergartner ratio on the
theory that children should learn early on how to use a touch pad. Really? Any
parent with an iPhone can tell you how long it takes a small child to master
the swipe.
OBVIOUSLY
there is a place for technology in the classroom. For students of a foreign
language, interaction with a native speaker is invaluable. Distance learning
can connect a talented inner-city child with a math professor at M.I.T. Schools
that cannot manage an incubator in the classroom will benefit from observing an
egg crack open on-screen. High school students can study programming, and yes,
even learn to design games.
In
classrooms, apps may supplement traditional lessons in handwriting, letter
recognition and math drills. Digital puzzle games offer none of the tactile
effort involved in turning a shape and trying — and trying again — to get it to
fit. Multiple studies show that skills learned on-screen don’t always transfer
to real life. Is it really advantageous forGarageBand to replace
school orchestras?
Many
of the games marketed as educational aren’t as much fun as video games children
would play if left to their own devices. But the added bells and whistles still
make it harder for them to focus on plain old boring work sheets and exams.
Imagine how flat a work sheet would seem after a boisterous round of Zap the
Math From Outer Space.
Technologists
aim for educational games that are “immersive” and “relevant,” “experiential”
and “authentic,” “collaborative” and “fulfilling” — adjectives that could
easily apply to constructing an art project out of found objects. It’s easy to
foresee a future in which teachers try to unpeel children from their screens in
order to bring them back to such hands-on, “real world” experiences. To renew
their “focus.” “Imagine if kids poured their time and passion into a video game
that taught them math concepts while they barely noticed, because it was so
enjoyable,” Bill Gates
said last year. Do we want children to “barely notice” when
they develop valuable skills? Not to learn that hard work plays a role in that
acquisition? It’s important to realize early on that mastery often requires
persevering through tedious, repetitive tasks and hard-to-grasp subject matter.
How’s
this for a radical alternative? Let children play games that are not
educational in their free time. Personally, I’d rather my children played Cookie Doodle or Cut the Ropeon my iPhone while waiting for
the subway to school than do multiplication tables to a beep-driven soundtrack.
Then, once they’re in the classroom, they can challenge themselves. Deliberate
practice of less-than-exhilarating rote work isn’t necessarily fun but they
need to get used to it — and learn to derive from it meaningful reward, a
pleasure far greater than the record high score.
______________________________________________
This Article has taken by RBK April 08, 2013 from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/17/sunday-review/reading-writing-and-video-games.html?pagewanted=all
No comments:
Post a Comment