http://clarkaldrich.blogspot.com/search?q=games+and+simulations
The author seems to be very passionate about gaming, simulations, and AI. He has several entries on the subject. I was so intrigued that I read them all. My favorite entry is entitled: Virtual Worlds, Games, and Simulations: The Challenges of the Next Five Years. It is very likely that I will reference his material in the future.
Thanks!
ReplyDeleteTracee, I enjoyed your blog from Clark Aldrich (2009). I agree with you that Aldrich did an excellent job in describing how learning with games, simulations, and virtual worlds are more interactive in helping students “learn to do” rather than just “learn to know.” I like his prediction that students will become more involved in building basic interactive content in virtual worlds as a critical and desired skill set. I would definitely be in favor of more authoring tools and environments for students to learn to build simulations and serious games.
ReplyDeleteBuilding simulations around traditional linear content like biology and literature is what Aldrich calls a mistake. He could be correct in that until linearity of simulations are replaced by interactivity of simulations, a communication gap will exist between students and teachers.
I particularly liked Aldrich’s transformation scenario of trading passivity for interactivity, trading binder reports for experience reports, trading bullet points and inspirational quotes for equations, interfaces, and dynamic relationships, and trading journalism for open source simulation designs.
But, I believe Aldrich’s prediction that only China and India will have all-school curricula as simulations is a bit short-sighted. I think America has the potential, the resources, the skill sets, and the peer-review capability to have a fully simulation based curricula from pre-K to the Ph.D. I think Aldrich is absolutely correct that computer game makers will have an advantage in educational simulation and serious game genres. But, their best bet will be to provide authoring tools that can be easily used by teachers, students, and administrators in producing simulation-learning objects across an interdisciplinary format. Aldrich is on the money when he sees IBM as launching new initiatives across all simulation and game ventures.
Aldrich really hit my heart deeply in agreement when he predicted that US school curricula will retool around teaching innovation, or Big Skills creation, that will make simulations prized at the Pulitzer level while putting an end to multiple-choice standardized tests by 2015, after years of decline. I wholeheartedly support his conclusion that multiple-choice standardized tests should end in favor of multimedia designs that test creativity and innovation versus rote memory of formulas and how best to answer multiple choice tests.
I think textbook publishers will have a rough time of it, for sure; but as a die-hard textbook fan I would hate to see them disappear as the dinosaur because of pure linear content. Multimedia textbooks may have a way to survive if they adopt a computer based backup that is easy to use, easy to maneuver, and packed with ways to simulate ideas on the touch of a keypad. So, what if textbook publishers entered, or merged with, the notepad, or handheld computer model of interactivity as simulated learning objects that can be manipulated, extrapolated, and compilated into new formats at the authoring level of diversity and complexity?
What if ordering a textbook for $50 to $100 meant you got a handheld micro computer, or smartphone that could access the Internet and pull up the textbook content as well as learning objects in the area of study that captured your personal interest in a format that also met the learning standards of the educational program you are participating in? Linearity would be replaced with interactivity of learning objects that could be cast, recast, and classed in different lights depending on the hypothesis the teacher-student, or trainer-trainee, deemed to meet the ever evolving world of real life through academic lenses. Learning objects give text dynamic flexibility in place of rigid stability.
I really liked how Aldrich dissected the term “fun” for some learners may not be “fun” for other learners. Aldrich gave the example of two boys playing basketball on the driveway until late evening with much noise. They lived next door to an old man. The old man went to the boys and asked them to play basketball as hard as they could for a week, for $200, to make a visiting friend happy who could not walk, but who loved the sound of basketball. The boys accepted gladly. They were excited the first few days they played. The middle days, the boys were reluctant. The last days of the week, the boys played sluggishly. The man paid the two boys the $200. The boys were so sick of basketball, they never played in the driveway again. The old man never had a friend over. He just hated the boys’ playing ball all through the night. The old man figured this was the cheapest way to get rid of the problem.
Aldrich analogized from basketball to computer games in the classroom. He felt that advocates of computer games in the classroom and parents who want their children to play less computer games should be allies, and not enemies. Aldrich found that once computer games are in the classroom, no student would ever play them for fun. Because when you make computer games as part of a test, like making basketball part of a $200 payoff, computer games become miserable like basketball became miserable. In the end, Aldrich found that you can’t make most content fun for most people in a formal learning program. Fun means that everyone consumes the content in a desired flow state and eagerly encourages their friends to spread the content with excitement. What Aldrich hoped to convey to his audience is that the criteria to measure computer games by is: Do they make content richer, more engaging, more visual, more relevant, and more fun, with better feedback, for most students. I think Aldrich is absolutely correct. But, I would still like to see a way to make computer games and simulations “fun” for all students. It is possible to do a survey on the elements of “fun” that can enrich multimedia learning, games, and simulations for all students. Thanks for the excellent blog, Tracee.
Reference
Aldrich, C. (2009). Creating artificial personalities, not necessarily artificial intelligence. Retrieved May 13, 2009, from http://clarkaldrich.blogspot.com/search?q=games+and+simulations
Tracee,
ReplyDeleteI would love to reference this again myself. Thanks for sharing!
Tracee,
ReplyDeleteThe blog you references really provided excellent examples of gaming and simulation. It is important for people to know that games that exist are not just for entertainment but can have a real purpose. Great reference.
-Jolandra