Psychological and Social Effects of Games: Learning From Games And Game Designers

In much of what I have read on the subject of games and learning, I find two major questions particularly interesting. Here I offer my perspective based both on the research of others and on my personal experiences in gaming.

Question 1: Can a video game teach a player specific skills or knowledge that can be utilized outside of the game world?

In some cases, the answer is clearly yes. A recent study conducted by the University of Central Florida found that students that played educational math games made significant improvements on standardized math exams when compared to a control group that did not play the games.^[1] The study suggests that students were able to take the specific mathematical skills that were used inside the game and apply them in real life. Games are even capable of helping to develop physical skills such as coordination and dexterity, a fact evident in the research of Dr. James Rosser, which shows that surgeons that play Super Monkey Ball perform more quickly and with fewer mistakes.^[2] From personal experience, I have noticed an increase in dexterity as a result of playing Guitar Hero.

However, it is important to note that not every skill associated with the subject of a game is transferable in this way. I have played a fair amount of Halo but I am still a lousy shot on the paintball field, and though I can play most songs in Guitar Hero at the "expert" level, on an actual guitar I am lucky if I can properly play a G chord. It is fairly obvious to me that just because a game is based on some subject matter does not necessarily mean that a player will learn anything regarding that subject that can be applied in the real world.

Question 2: Should we modify our educational system to reflect the effective learning principles utilized by game designers in creating a good game?

This is a question that constitutes a major focus of the writings of James Paul Gee, and one that concerns not what players can learn from games, but rather what educators can learn from game designers. In other words, what is important about video games is the fact that "good" games excel at teaching a player the skills and knowledge needed to play.^[3] Whether or not the information learned in the game is useful in reality is completely irrelevant. Gee's point is that in order to successfully teach a player to understand and master the system of rules built into a game, designers must provide an effective environment for learning to take place. This involves, among other things, allowing players to explore and learn at their own comfortable pace, providing well-structured problems that point them in the right direction, setting goals that are challenging but not frustrating, providing repeated trials with clear and timely feedback to indicate progress, and keeping the player interested and motivated.

While I would not immediately throw away traditional education and all that it embodies, in my opinion this question is worth exploring. Throughout my education I have read textbooks, listened to lectures, and taken tests, and in this way I have succeeded in learning. However, for me the process of learning to play a new game feels far more natural, sometimes to the point that I am not even fully aware that I am actually learning. A good game is intuitive and immersive, challenging yet forgiving, and allows the player to learn easily and without fear of failure. Incorporating more of these principles in schools would be a difficult task, but considering the possible benefits, is an effort that I believe is certainly worth a shot.

In my opinion, though the first of these questions is intriguing and significant to the possible directions in which gaming may grow, it is the second question that bears more importance. While putting games in the classroom may aid in education, studying game design in order to improve the classroom itself would have a much greater and lasting effect.