FC NOW: The Fast Company Weblog
October 21, 2005
Better Science Through Video Games
Want to make your kid smarter? Tell him to put down that book and pick up a joystick. Playing video games is actually more of an intellectual challenge than reading, says Steve Johnson, author of “Everything Bad is Good for You” at Friday afternoon’s session of PopTech!
“Decision making doesn’t happen the same way in books as in games,” he says. “Video games teach the scientific method: Build a working hypothesis, test it, and if it doesn’t work, try again.
“The ability to make the right decisions at the right time based on the information in front of you is the very definition of being smart,” he says.
Posted by Linda Tischler at October 21, 2005 6:50 PM | Category: re:con pop!tech 2005 |
10 Comments
ADVERTISEMENT
FC NOW MENU
NEWSLETTERS
FC NOW CATEGORIES
FC READS
How many parents would let their children kick a prostitute to death for fun? How many would buy a potentially addictive substance for their children and encourage them to use it in their own living room? The answer to both of those questions, according to the latest MediaWise Video Game Report Card: more than you would think.
Of course, video and computer games are not all bad. Many of them are educational, family-friendly or just good clean fun. When parents do a good job of limiting the amount and content of games their children play, video games can be a healthy part of a child's life. But many of the most popular games kids play are not appropriate for young people, and parents have no idea.
Video games make kids smarter for what?
Context is critical.
What value is being good at science, yet have no understanding about how it affects the environment or the people in it. Without reading and a well rounded education, children are isolated from diverse points of view and historical perspective.
A liberal (as in broad) education from reading books teaches children how to learn from others mistakes as well.
I agree that making the right decisions at the right time is the definition of a competent human being. I do not agree however with the decisions the games in mainstream America promote. I don't remember any ability to call the cops on someone in the popular Grand Theft Auto games but swerving out of the way of an oncoming car onto the street, killing multitudes of pedestrians, may have been the 'right decision' but the alternatives leave a bit more to be desired.
I am quite young myself and own a large collection of violent games and will not allow my children to play them until they understand the differences between right and wrong decisions in real life. Growing up playing games that teach you that confessing to a wrongdoing is much less rewarding than capping the person who saw you do it isn't my idea of the right decisions.
While I love all the advances in the educational gaming market I still think the majority of games kids play only give them the intellectual challenge of learning how to get away with things or choose the option that offers the least resistance.
But hey, who am I to say, it's only a game; kids don't pick up things that they do every day for the majority of their youth... do they? Excuse me, I have to go read some Edgar Allen Poe to my 2 year old...
I find the discussion video games V reading books fascinating! As a mother of four children aged between 12 and 20 it is something that is constantly on our agenda. I have a 20yo son who is "addicted" to games and a 13yo daughter who is a "brilliant" reader - or is my son "brilliant" at games and my daughter "addicted" to reading? The affects of too much reading can be the same as too much games eg tired, grumpy, social isolation. Its not the video games or the books that is the problem. Both are great fun, entertaining and allow children to become lost in another world. The problem lies with parents who over indulge or even push their children into spending too much time on one activity. After all it is easier let children disappear and be quiet in whatever activity than it is to teach your child to bake bread or build a dog kennel or write a poem or ........
OMG!! (If you have to ask what that stands for you probably won't grok the remainder of this post either so stop reading now!).
I mistakenly expected more from the majority of FC readers than is evinced in these comments. Can anybody else here mention a game besides GTA? Let me back up...anybody here ever actually play GTA? Of course its not age appropriate for some kids, neither is Desp. Housewives but I will argue that there is much greater potential value in the medium of games than in the medium of TV.
Why don't you all go pick up Civ 3 or maybe Age of Empires or if you prefer the handheld, try Trauma Center or Pheonix Wright for the Nintendo DS.
Why don't we all forget GTA for a minute a get to something really provocative...like maybe the classroom isn't the best way to learn anything. Like maybe game-based learning is more powerful than the Socratic method ever was?
But no, let's not have those valuable discussion about the nature of learning - let's just keep dragging out GTA like its some kind of totem for all that is bad in the world and then we can go back to sticking our heads in the sand and ignoring the potential of anything new.
Geez.
I am currently at 21 year old in the middle of my junior year in the business institute of a 4 year college. I was never allowed to play video games as a child, in fact they were not even allowed in the house. As a result, instead of playing video games I read, which was strongly encouraged by my parents. Looking at the numerous students on my capmus who will regularly pick up a joystick rather than their homework makes me think that I am most definitely better off reading, doing my homework, working and visiting with friends than playing video games. Why let a child make decisions in a fantasy world when they could be out making decisions in the real world. Which one do you think they would learn more from and gain the most value?
Leigh,
You miss my point - video games are not the point. Game-based learning is the point. Did you ever play games as a child, not video games but any games? Games are built on learning - read Raph Koster's book Theory of Fun for a great explanation on that. I grew up reading too - I have books stored in about 3 different states now so I don't think gameplaying and reading are mutually exclusive - there is also some pretty awful stuff people could be reading. To your point about decision-making - are you kidding? Do you really only want children to learn about consequences from bad choices in the real world? Wouldn't you rather have kids be able to develop critical-thinking and decision-making skills in a safe environment before they had to make those calls in the real world where the consequences could be life or death? Do you read case studies in B-school? Use spreadsheet sims? That's because no one wants you to make your first mistake about allocating inventory in their real world - they'd rather have you learn the lesson in a game.
"Decision making doesn’t happen the same way in books as in games."
Unfortunately the author the quote, Steve Johnson, is both correct and incorrect. I am working on a decision enhancing project, and have been giving a lot of thought to this topic. There are 3 very large problems with using games:
1)The types of decisions in computer games are made in highly limited context. They are generally very simplistic. Most games are played along a linear storyline, with one, maybe 2 outcomes, and they revolve more around memorizing patterns of eye-hand coordination than actual decision-making. Even in RTS games, it often boils down to who can click the fastest, jump-start a strong economy, and overrun the enemy, or who happened to choose the right strategy at the get-go.
2)Computer games only teach utilitarian decision-making. What works? The project I work for is a contract with the Armed Forces (Air Force). With that in mind, do we want to train troops to do what is expedient? No. In computer games you don't need a good brain to make the right decisions, ultimately the game forces you to make the correct decisions if you to advance. And even then, YOU ARE MAKING THE DECISIONS THE PROGRAMMER HAS IN MIND. What works in games was decided by programmers in situations that have little likeness with reality. In other words, it is like a rat-in-maze figuring out which is the right way. What works in real-life is a far different question, with a whole different set of questions that must be asked. Is it ethical? Will it cause scandal? What is the fallout? WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF I FAIL?
3)That last question is perhaps the most telling. Computer games trade time for fun. It is the least risky environments imaginable. Within the game itself, if you loose, you start over from the last save point or you respawn or you back-track a little; and as far as real-life consequences all you loose in a little time. One of the most important parts of decision-making is foreseeing and addressing consequences. In computer games the consequences are insignificant, and usually inevitable.
As for this project regarding decision-making, the most revealing things are papers and books. Books like "Sources of Power" and "Smart Choices" and historical books like "Thinking in Time." I can take the data in these books and apply it to real life. Starcraft, (www.blizzard.com) as fun as it is, simply doesn't help me when I am trying to decide on a budget, react to a confrontation, etc.
Yes, computer game decision-making is different than book driven decision-making. So put down your controller and pick up a book, unless you can re-create Groundhog Day (Bill Murray) in your life. Because that's exactly what computer games are like, and how the correct decisions come abotu in them.
"Decision making doesn’t happen the same way in books as in games."
I am working on a decision enhancing project, and have been giving a lot of thought to this topic. There are 3 very large problems with using games:
1) The types of decisions in computer games are made in highly limited context. They are generally very simplistic. Most games are played along a linear storyline, with one, maybe 2 outcomes, and they revolve more around memorizing patterns of eye-hand coordination than actual decision-making. Even in RTS games, it often boils down to who can click the fastest, jump-start a strong economy, and overrun the enemy, or who happened to choose the right strategy at the get-go.
2) Computer games only teach utilitarian decision-making. What works? The project I work for is a contract with the Armed Forces (Air Force). With that in mind, do we want to train troops to do what is expedient? No. In computer games you don't need a good brain to make the right decisions, ultimately the game forces you to make the correct decisions if you to advance. And even then, YOU ARE MAKING THE DECISIONS THE PROGRAMMER HAS IN MIND. What works in games was decided by programmers in situations that have little likeness with reality. In other words, it is like a rat-in-maze figuring out which is the right way. What works in real-life is a far different question, with a whole different set of questions that must be asked. Is it ethical? Will it cause scandal? What is the fallout? WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF I FAIL?
3)That last question is perhaps the most telling. Computer games trade time for fun. It is the least risky environments imaginable. Within the game itself, if you loose, you start over from the last save point or you respawn or you back-track a little; and as far as real-life consequences all you loose in a little time. One of the most important parts of decision-making is foreseeing and addressing consequences. In computer games the consequences are insignificant (as far as real life losses if you fail), and usually inevitable (as far as the linear gameplay is concerned).
As for this project regarding decision-making, the most revealing things are papers and books. Books like "Sources of Power" and "Smart Choices" and historical books like "Thinking in Time." I can take the data in these books and apply it to real life. Starcraft, (www.blizzard.com) as fun as it is, simply doesn't help me when I am trying to decide on a budget, react to a confrontation, etc.
Yes, computer game decision-making is different than book driven decision-making. So put down your controller and pick up a book, unless you can re-create Groundhog Day (Bill Murray) in your life, because that's exactly what computer games are like and how the correct decisions come about in them.
hmm reading doesnt require a high levle of thought at all...games like starcraft have more decsiion tihnking involed.it is solical isolation either,if u play on line.online therer r games made by other players with special effects almost defying the orgianol disng of the game.if thses games the player has many desciions to make and the fastewr and more a player plays thses games mthe faster in real life he/she will be able to make them in real life.yes it is limited to a point of desicion band doesnt alwayz invole real life but it does help you be able to make reasonable descions faster.