Schedule
:: Lesson 1 :: Track
A Summaries :: Track B Summaries
Virvou, Katsionis, & Manos, Combining software games
with education: Evaluation of its educational
effectiveness
Reading summary/quotes:
This article describes a study in which students were allowed to play a
video game that taught geography. The study was a two part evaluation
comparing an Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) to a game using the same
pedagogical engine underneath. Both parts used a pre-test versus
post-test comparison of learners using both the ITS and game. The first
part of the evaluation used a random sample from one school. The second
part used a stratified random sample from a second group. The
stratification for the second group was based on prior performance in
the academic subject being studied. The end result was that the
students who played the video game did better than students who used
the ITS computer program (drill and practice). Students who struggled
in class tended to do better using the video game than those students
who are doing well in class.
“The process of learning is a very complex cognitive task that can be
very imposing on students (p. 54).”
“Brody points out that the marriage of education and game-like
entertainment has produced some not-very-educational games and some not
very-entertaining learning activities (p. 54).”
“One could argue that the greatest advantage of games is the motivation
provided to students by the game environment whereas one possible
disadvantage for the learning cprocecss could be the students'
distraction by this game environment (p. 57).”
“School children usually have a preconception of educational means as
being totally different from entertainment... An entertaining aspect of
education would be rather unexpected (p. 57).”
"However, despite the fact that all students had liked the game in the
context of their classroom work, a large part of them criticized the
game in comparison with other commercial games (p. 63).”
Discussion points/questions:
- The author seems to want to make the point that learning is not
fun, and a very difficult task. it is 'going to school' that is not
very fun, and a very difficult task. Learning is very different than
going to school. So we've made school not fun, then told the children
that this is 'learning' (so now learning isn't fun), and then we are
trying to turn around and make school fun. Seems like we are running in
circles.
- Is this really a good way to teach geography? Playing a game that
really has nothing to do with geography, but then geography questions
pop up. Why not have a simulation that actually applies to geography.
The game is too far removed from the subject matter.
- The author states that the game seems to help with 'plausible
reasoning', but nothing in the game supports that at all.
- Did the children like the game because it was fun, or because it
was better than school? How long would it take before the children
became bored with this game?
- The report never states how much time was spent with each program,
though they did mention that the children who were in the lower levels,
tended to be off task more using the control program. So were they
better simply because they spent more time with VR-ENGAGE?
- How does motivation tie to this? Is motivation good simply because
students spend more time, or because that somehow helps them to learn
better? How long with the motivation last, if students don't think this
game is as fun as commercial games?
- Is this game only affective when 'school' is the alternative? In
other words, do we need to place the children in a bad situation, so
that a bad game looks good by comparison?
- How much of the overall effect is due to novelty?
- Do games provide a constant novelty effect?
- Do we drain the curiosity out of children in the factory-model
school, and by introducing games are simple removing them from the
factory-model school and allowing them to follow their curiosity?
- Do games provide a more individualized version of ZPD?
Contributors: Tom Caswell, Marion Jensen, Jennifer Jorgensen,
Jon Scoresby, and Tim Stowell