games – EDUC 342: Child Development & New Technologies https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu Wed, 17 Feb 2016 07:00:06 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.6.1 Week 7 response https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-response/ https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-response/#respond Wed, 17 Feb 2016 07:00:06 +0000 http://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/?p=1481 This week’s readings emphasized the important difference between thoughtful, well-designed learning games and ineffective games. I figured that Zhang was talking about Coolmath before she even named it because of that site’s reputation for shallow math games. I hope that Zhang’s study is not understood to mean that math games are ineffective. Berkowitz et al and the Devlin video both show how well-constructed games can measurably improve performance. The latter portions of Zhang, where she discussed how students in lower-performing states played more Coolmath, conjured the possibility in my mind that teachers and parents in those states might be directing their kids to Coolmath by a simplistic assumption that those math games will mechanistically boost math scores, and using the games as a replacement for more rigorous lessons.

 

Parents and teachers should be able to distinguish between good games and ineffective ones, as well as how to properly integrate such games as a part of their students’ academic diet. It is not enough for some ed-tech designers to know good practices for educational games. If those quality games are indistinguishable in the app store from lower-quality games, this barely helps the student population writ large. Perhaps there could be some sort of certification board, like the ESRB or MPAA, that could review and certify research-backed educational games?

]]>
https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-response/feed/ 0
Week 7: Math https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-math/ https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-math/#respond Tue, 16 Feb 2016 17:34:43 +0000 http://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/?p=1431 The Zhang article made me wonder how students’ interactions with online math games have changed in the age of YouTube. From Ashley’s talk last week, we learned that kids are no longer using Google to search for content. In the article, from November 2012-October 2013, 6% of traffic to coolmath-games came from social media sites including YouTube. A higher percentage of traffic is likely coming from YouTube today.

I downloaded the YouTube Kids app and searched for “Cool Math Games.” Unsurprisingly, most of the content that came back were videos of kids playing the games on the Cool Math Games website. This peculiar “watching” phenomenon is so huge, I can’t help but wonder if there’s some way to leverage watching videos of gameplay into a learning experience.

Based on the data from Zhang’s research, the kids that are searching for this content are among the lowest performing. Is there a way to connect them with the help they need? Perhaps a new study (based on the data that YouTube has on its users) could link those interested in coolmath-games with a program to encourage families working together on math problems at home, the very beneficial practice discussed in the Berkowitz et al. article, and could compare the achievement of those with and without this intervention.

]]>
https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-7-math/feed/ 0
Week 5 Post: “Chocolate Covered Broccoli” https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-5-post-chocolate-covered-broccoli/ https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-5-post-chocolate-covered-broccoli/#respond Tue, 02 Feb 2016 06:02:14 +0000 http://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/?p=1341 Brenda Laurel coined the term “chocolate covered broccoli” in her 2001 book, Utopian Entrepreneur. It’s a phrase that gets thrown around so much in educational research that it’s starting to lose its meaning. But I really thought it was the perfect term for Granic, Lobel, and Engels’ approach to exploring the possibilities for serious health education in games. The broccoli, or information that medical professionals would like to share, is good for players’ health. The chocolate is a fun but unrelated distraction. The final product feels disjointed (if not downright disgusting) leading to little user engagement.

The researchers identify two important factors that might block a success health-related game: first, few of these games are scientifically evaluated. The second is that the experts in the healthcare field are not focused on the fun.

One of the more interesting games that I’ve heard about which deals with mental health in a conceptual way is Minority Media’s Papo & Yo. The active role is that of a young boy in a Brazilian slum who escapes his abusive alcoholic father. He meets a character called Monster, who is at first helpful and friendly, but he hides an addiction. If he eats a frog, Monster turns into an uncontrollable creature and the boy is forced to find a rotten fruit that will temporarily cure Monster.  The gameplay is sparse, devoid of puzzles and the usual stream of villains to be defeated. Perhaps this game is not fun in the traditional sense, but it’s an engaging experience about the feeling of love and loss. There is no clear solution. The young boy must deal with this split personality and eventually leaves his friend when he realizes he cannot help Monster.

Papo & Yo received a great deal of praise upon its release in 2012. The creator of the game, Vander Caballero, was inspired by experiences from his own childhood. This personal element is the missing piece to creating a game that effectively teaches a lesson about mental health. In this case, that the player is not alone in his or her struggle. The game must have a place in reality, drawn from the actual stories of those who’ve dealt with mental illness. By leveraging the skills of a talented designer with life experiences, mental health professionals may be able to create a game that accomplishes their lofty goals of both educating and entertaining.

]]>
https://ed342.gse.stanford.edu/week-5-post-chocolate-covered-broccoli/feed/ 0