After considering the latest class chat on rhetorix about gaming and the articles “Learning and Games,”by James Paul Gee and “Productive Gaming: The Case for Historiographic Game Play,” by Kurt Squire and Shree Durga, I put more score on the comment that if a student studying new media does not become involved in video games and game/literacy theory, then the student may be debunked.
Not that I believe video games are “bad” for you, but I tend to support the idea that they waste time. At least, before I read these articles. I am fascinated with anything that has to do with literacy and video games supply another arena for writing.
In these articles, the authors deeply analyze numerous aspects of video game theory. Simulation seems to be the “hot topic” but in these games, simulation involves collaboration and a lot of thinking and processing virtual data. I agree that experiencing an event and then storing it in memory helps people have the necessary ‘hands-on” training that allows them the memory muscle to be able to more naturally repeat the action. I also agree that video games can assist learning in the compostion classroom.
I especially like the correlation to literacy. The writing process is similar to the thinking process of playing a game. It seems many things correlate with essay form. Ideas in a game like those in an essay, ones in the US or ‘English” anyway, are straight forward and no nonsense. Additionally, game serves to build identity, community, critical thinking, etc. etc.
I totally agree with all of those aspects. I found when my son gamed, he developed some pretty sweet characteristics. He was so aware of all things going on around him, made him a better driver on the streets! He also became extremely quick and sensitive to sound, that is, he was aware of more noises and sounds around him.
So, again, where I am now on the gaming issue? Anyone up for Battlefield?