Short answer? No. Long answer? We already have.
For fairly obvious reasons, video games are included in what we refer to as “new media” – and there is a lot of interest in incorporating new media in our classrooms. Some of these new innovations have clear and simple transitions into pedagogical settings while others do not share the same benefits. The internet, for example, is easily made a tool for learning through applications like this very blog. It promotes tangential learning, interpersonal exchanges, meaningful applications of language/learning, appropriate use of register as it relates to form, and it all culminates into building an “e-literacy” that is all but required in the modern age. Video games are not afforded the same smooth transition. There are people on both sides clamoring for either the gamification of educational systems or reducing their effectiveness to purely entertainment – a toy inappropriate for school. My argument is that the systems in place that make video games so compelling are the very same systems that promote effective teaching. It is not a matter of introducing new concepts to the classroom but bringing to surface what makes learning fun.
A great illustration of how learning and gaming overlap can be seen in this episode of Sequelitis by YouTuber Egoraptor (Contains Adult Language). The entire episode is an amazing introduction to this concept, and I encourage you to watch the whole thing, but enough can be gathered from just the Intro Stage segment (from 6:00 – 13:00).
Of course, not all games are the same and while most good games have built in, implicit instructional scaffolding some do not. On a broader scale, we can see that games tend to make use of interactivity, multimodal learning, and a keen awareness of both intrinsic and extrinsic reward mechanisms.
Interactivity is not only the most straightforward characteristic of gaming but is also one of the easiest to crossover into learning. Games are fun because each player has agency and autonomy over the game space. Through recent studies we have learned that the same is true for learning in general. There is something powerful about being able to guide your own learning experience and interactivity is one of the cruxes of modern Communicative Language Theory.
Similarly, games excel at providing multiple access points to the same content. Games like Divinity Original Sin include player selectable difficulty settings such that the individual can alter the mechanics of the game to maximize what they want to experience from it. They are offered choices like Explorer Mode (Player is stronger, enemies weaker; emphasis on experiencing the story rather than game mechanics), Tactician Mode (Players are given more access to spells/attacks, enemies are harder; emphasis on combat) and Honor Mode (if the player’s party dies then the game save is deleted; emphasis on perfection). Because these difficulty settings can be changed at anytime, a player can complete a section on explorer mode to get a better feel of the game, then switch to tactician to test their knowledge. A less explicit example of multimodal learning can be seen in Scribblenauts where players use the on-screen keyboard to type in nouns (which are then summoned into the game space) in order to solve puzzles per level. More generally, games employ force-feedback mechanisms (controller vibrations), on screen visuals/text and audio cues in order to convey messages to the player. This translates perfectly to differentiating learning strategies. Not everyone learns, or plays, the same way and learners can only benefit from being offered multiple access points.
Lastly there is reward mechanisms of which games use both intrinsically and extrinsically. For example, Angry Birds is intrinsically fun in simply flicking birds at poorly constructed buildings; the moment-to-moment action is satisfying. But just flinging birds around won’t get you the most stars and that is where extrinsic reward mechanisms come into play. Intrinsic rewards come from inside the person while extrinsic rewards come from outside. If a game is not intrinsically rewarding then there is nothing keeping the player invested until the extrinsic reward comes in. The same is true for learning. Most people tend to agree that more education means more working opportunities means “more successful”. While the “successful” bit can be problematic we can see that pure extrinsic rewards are not enough to keep people motivated. A game (or learning) needs to be engaging. Conversely a game that does not include extrinsic rewards suffers from diminishing returns of the intrinsic reward. Blowing bubbles is great fun – but gets old quick. Successful games pace their extrinsic rewards while introducing new intrinsically rewarding elements to keep players going. School needs to do the same.
In the end it is not so much that schools need to become fantasy role-playing settings, but educators can look onto video games as inspiration for what keeps people invested in learning. It needs to be interactive, multimodal and rewarding.
Sources
Hanson, A. [Egoraptor]. (2011, Oct. 31). Sequelitis – Mega Man Classic vs. Mega Man X. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/8FpigqfcvlM
The Nintendo Basement. (2009, May 9). Scribblenauts Trailer. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iTIz55VIE-I
Bratt, C. [Eurogamer]. (2016, May 11). How Overwatch’s sound design makes you a better player. [Video File]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_zqpdwBr5w
Gee, P. J. (2005). Good Video Games and Good Learning. Phi Kappa Phi Forum 85 no2 Summer 2005. Retrieved from https://newclasses.nyu.edu/access/content/group/43a2024c-db89-4ba2-ac5f-a3ab86d4875c/Session%2012/Gee%20_2005_%20Good%20Video%20Games.pdf