RE: Edutainment (was Re: Open Book)

[bickiia@earlham.edu]

>2) The acquisition of knowledge skills and attitudes goes on every day

>throughout our lives. The fact that some of use might choose and value

>learning as an explicit pursuit is, I think, important. I also think it

>is important to the community. Maybe edutainment devalues that pursuit,

>takes the work out of learning. Now, I'd be the first to say that 
>learning shouldn't have to hurt to be good - it should not be a dull 
>boring task. But isn't the joy of learning something which grows out of

>the application to and of it? To truly focus on learning we need not to

>be distracted by the dilutant (is that a word?) of entertainment. Thus

>I think that making learning fun, exciting, interesting, challenging 
>etc. is very important. dressing it up as something else isn't.

I think edutainment deserves most of the criticism you give it.  Most
educational games on computers are horrible.  But there are some
problems...

First, people want to have the computer direct the activity.  This is
very seductive, all the more so because a perversion of this is quite
easy to attain.  You can sit a bunch of kids in front of computers and
they are easy and attentive.  You'd almost think they were learning...

Anyway, the computer doesn't understand the cognitive processes of a
child.  It doesn't understand what the rest of your curriculum is.  It
doesn't know about the question a child asked earlier that day... well,
it doesn't know much of anything.  It is a fine tool, but it is an
incompetent teacher.

Second, they rely on rewards as motivation -- something quite outside
the actual learning.  I mentioned this in another post before... anyway,
it doesn't have to be this way, but rewards are an easy, content-neutral
way to drive a game.


I think Seymore Papert used the term "hard fun"... that children can
enjoy something difficult if it is also compelling.  Computer games are
usually difficult in some way, and easy games are boring.  Similarly, an
educational game can attempt to be hard and fun at the same time.  If
the game and the learning can be *one and the same* then there's the
possibility for a good program.

I really like Simcity.  That's why I've mentioned it many times :)  But
it's hard, educational, and lots of fun.  It's not directed at
education, so sometimes it drops the ball with accuracy, but it really
is pretty good.  I learned a lot about city planning from that game. 
Maybe not how to actually be a good city planner -- but at least what
the issues involved really are, the compromises to be made, etc. 
(Simtown, the little-kid version of Simcity, is utterly devoid of
educational value... sigh)

I think simulation has the best potential to be both fun, hard, and
educational.  Maybe more programs like these exist in Europe -- the UK
curriculum I read mentioned simulation quite a bit.

And there is a place for a little drill.  Some things are just about
memorization.  Math facts, maybe some foreign language vocabulary, and
probably some other things I haven't thought of.  While they shouldn't
be used much, I think there's a place for some of the dumb drill games.


  -- Ian