Let's troubleshoot SCRATCH!
Read:
What Video Games Have to Teach Us
About Learning and Literacy
What is Gee's fundamental argument?
What do agree or disagree with?
How does it impact what you believe about good teaching?
How can a program like SCRATCH be used in your classroom?
Please post your thoughts as a comment to this blog posting. Please respond to three of your peers postings.
Due Date
Initial posting due Sunday November 15 by midnight.
Respond to your peers by Monday November 16 by midnight.
Gee's fundamental argument is that kids can learn from video games, so therefore they should be used in an educational/academic setting for the purpose of teaching. I think it would be inappropriate to use entertainment technology as the core method of instruction. A critical part of instruction is teaching children positive attitudes about work. I fear that Mr. Gee's approach would lead children (and later as adults) to only work if it involves a video game. Secondly, video gaming tends to isolate individuals to a signifigant degree. Education involves teaching students how to work, play, and get along with others. These two issues make the use of entertainment gaming, as a method of instruction, a bad idea.
ReplyDeleteI would use Scratch as a way for students to demonstrate what they have already learned! If they pick up technology skills along the way, even better!!
In this article, Gee's argument is that video games incorporate learning principles and that they can enhance the learning process. Gee also believes that the use of video games will become prevelant in our schools and workplaces in order to promote such things as critical thinking skills, problem solving, decision making skills, and teamwork.
ReplyDeleteI have played quite a few video games in my time and I do agree with Gee to an extent. I believe whole-heartedly that we learn best by doing and that motivation challeges those who play them to use their brain for all of the aforementioned skills and, no doubt, many more. Also, many of the games available these days really get the player involved. As Gee mentioned, the player not only consumes but also produces knowledge. In many cases the whole outcome of the game is based on the decisions of the player. I do believe that video games have alot of benefit. What parent would argue with the benefits of the "Little Bear", "Arthur", Or "Spongebob" games that are designed to aid even the youngest of our childrent in the learning process?
There are, however, drawbacks to the use of video games. This article made some valid points but was obviously heavily slanted.The biggest drawback that I can think of (and since I have kids I know this to be true) is that once a player starts, it is hard to quit. These games are totally time comsuming. Like it or not, once you are drawn in you don't want to quit. Believe me, I've been there! Our youth is so obsessed with technology these days as it is they are missing out on the simple things that I enjoyed as a youth- such things as going outside to play (excercise), social interaction with real people, and if we learned teamwork it was through cooperation with a real life person/people who was/were there with us helping us work through things. I heard on the news recently that video games are harming our youth's ability to function in real life scenerios and their ability to communicate directly with others on the most basic level due to their need to be constantly entertained. I also believe this too it true to an extent.
How does all of this impact what I believe about good teaching? Well, I do believe that a good teacher needs to find ways to keep their students engaged and find new ways to help teach the kind of skills that many video games draw on. If this can be harnessed somehow as a supplemental learning tool I say go for it! If it is just going to distract the students take up a whole lot of time, and generally get the students wound up it may not be such a good idea.
I do like SCRATCH and, if time permitted, I would use it in my classroom. Many of the games on it were pretty mindless and useless but I also saw a whole lot of them that I really liked. I think that this would help those learners who need to see things visually and those students who are more the "hand on" type. Some things are really hard to explain and even harder to visualize in a conventional classroom setting. I believe that some of these games can definitely bridge that gap.
Gee's fundamental argument is that schools, workplaces, and families can learn a lot from good computer and video games. I agree with Gee's point that many video games do teach principles or involve aspects that can help children learn more, for example, when information is given to them in a game as it relates to the current issue instead of in bulk at the beginning or end of a game. I don't agree with some of Gee's statements about education, because some of the things he says would only apply to educators that aren't doing their best job. Although video games could be helpful as supplemental material to any particular content, good teaching, to me, revolves around getting students to work together and learn communication..not being isolated and playing a game by yourself.
ReplyDeleteAs far as SCRATCH is concerned, I'm not sure that I'd use it in my classroom. I would potentially use a game I found in Scratch as supplemental material to a lesson, but I'd never require my students to create or modify a project, especially at the elementary level.
I think the fundamental argument in this article is that "good gaming" can be beneficial to students and can be used as a teaching source. I agree with the idea that skills can be acquired from gaming. Some good learning principles that Gee claims students receive from "good gaming" is being presented with information as needed (not out of context or very far ahead of the time the information is actually needed like textbooks often do). The article also suggests that students get to determine their level of "do-ablilty". They advance at their own pace and don't have to wait for students who are lagging behind like in a typical classroom setting. Video games also provide a lot of creativity for kids. Overall, Gee suggests that video games motivate people to succeed (and ultimately win) which is another important asset in life. Team collaboration can also be gained. While all of these are true and undoubtedly beneficial, in my opinion these things go unnoticed by children. Unless these skills are pointed out while playing the game, kids will be unaware of the skills they are experiencing, and are less likely to use them outside of a videogame setting.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a stretch for being considered 'good teaching'. Finding new and interesting ways to get children engaged with a topic is important, but the main goal is to get children to realize what they are learning. If they happen to have fun along the way, then all the better.
Scratch can be used to assess how well students understand concepts that you have taught. They can create games using conceptual learning topics and show their understanding of the process through their scratch project. It also adds interest and creativity (which the article suggests gaming should do).
in response to Sherri's post:
ReplyDeleteI most definitely agree that video games isolate individuals! Unless they are playing a multiplayer game or over a network with other students, the learning environment is very individualized and narrow.
In this article, Gee's fundamental argument is that video games can be used in a variety of settings to provide learning instruction for multiple skills. Gee makes a valid point, motivation does drive learning, and games do support that. I'm not sure that games should take the place of learning instruction time, however they would make for a good supplement to stations, or independent study time/free time. I think this article encourages teachers to think outside the box and use games and technology to enhance lesson plans and concepts taught within the classroom. Scratch helps children not to just consume information, but to produce and design curriculm.
ReplyDeleteThe fundamental argument that Gee presentsis that good computer and video games are "learning machines" that many schools, families, and workplaces can learn from. I agree this to a small degree. There are many things that can be learned from games and there are many skills that can be acquired from games, but when people start to become addicted to them that I believe problems arise. I believe that good teaching requires different forms of learning which can involve the use of good computer and video games, the teacher would need to make sure the games were actually beneficial though. I could using scratch as a way to allow my students to release their creativity. They could both type things, expressing what they have learned in an English class, whether it be new vocabulary, a poem or something else, but students could also express their creative, artistic sides. Especially is a specific rubric is given, students Scratch projects could be viewed as "missions" and it would be very easy to turn it into a learning game.
ReplyDeleteGee's argument is that well designed video and computer games have a lot of merit as educational tools. I definitely agree with his opinion. It's very true that "too often, students in schools consume, but do not produce, knowledge," but the use of video games could allow students to be active participants in the learning process. I have played a lot of games that require critical thinking, problem solving, strategizing and creativity. I think that students should have the opportunity to play educational video games and use programs like scratch often. Students could use scratch in my classroom in many ways. For science they could use scratch to demonstrate one of the many processes they will learn about such as photosynthesis or the water cycle. There are also many possibilities in math and music using scratch, such as a game solving equations or building a melody.
ReplyDeleteHis argument was that good computer and video games allow people to re-create themselves in new worlds and achieve recreation and deep learning at one and the same time. I definitely agree with him. Schools should allow students to play a limited amount of video games. They get to interact with other students, engage in critical thinking, and use problem-solving strategies. This goes along with my personal view on what good teaching is. I believe that teachers should teach students by what ever means are necessary. The students need to be enjoying what they are learning because they will interact and learn more. Programs like scratch are a good tool for teachers and students. The teachers get to integrate technology and scratch allows students to play the educational games and modify them. Overall the more technology the better!
ReplyDeleteHis argument was that good computer and video games allow people to re-create themselves in new worlds and achieve recreation and deep learning at one and the same time. I definitely agree with him. Schools should allow students to play a limited amount of video games. They get to interact with other students, engage in critical thinking, and use problem-solving strategies. This goes along with my personal view on what good teaching is. I believe that teachers should teach students by what ever means are necessary. The students need to be enjoying what they are learning because they will interact and learn more. Programs like scratch are a good tool for teachers and students. The teachers get to integrate technology and scratch allows students to play the educational games and modify them. Overall the more technology the better!
ReplyDeleteWhat is Gee's fundamental argument?
ReplyDelete"I argue that schools, workplaces, families, and academic researchers have a lot to learn about learning from good computer and video games.'
What do agree or disagree with?
Video games are a great learning to tool that increase creativity, work with problem solving skills, and introduce new information.
How does it impact what you believe about good teaching?
Good teaching can involve being open to new ideas to find just another way for students to learn.
How can a program like SCRATCH be used in your classroom?
Asking students to design a game for their classmates to play for learning purposes will
1) help the student learn the information involved in the game
and
2) help familiarize the student with computers and technology
Gee's argument about kids learning from video games was very interesting. For the most part I can see how video games give students a chance to control what they are doing and be more of a producer more than a consumer so with that aspect I agree with Gee. If a classroom setting you want students to produce and not just consume everything that is being taught. So in a way video gaming would be productive method of teaching. although I think there should be certain restrictions to this. To much fun and not info informational learning can be a bad thing. It just shows me that technology such as video gaming can be intergrated into a lesson but does not mean it has to be the core of the lesson. This is where scratch can be brought in to help or assist with a lesson. You could use scratch to help strengthen a lesson and give it more support. Overall, it was an interesting topic and worth reading. It makes you think about the way teaching has changed with the technology that is more widely acepted as teaching aides.
ReplyDeleteGee's fundamental argument is that society is taking the wrong approach to the world of gaming. Gee argues video games enhance learning. He states that the material is not dated like many texts and that it remains challenging. Gee argues that the games are engaging students to be "...producers and not just consumers".
ReplyDeleteOverall, I believe that Gee's fundamental argument is sound. He challenges educators to think outside the box and I believe that would benefit learning all around. However, I think it is important to note that everything is always best in moderation. I do not think a video game is the way to teach everything, but I definitely agree that it engages students in a different type of learning that would be very beneficial. For example, Gee points out that multiplayer video games can be a collaborative learning experience.
I believe that the Scratch program would be a good compromise between the gaming world of Gee and the classroom. I would use the Scratch program to allow students to work in teams to visually recreate a concept such as supply and demand. I think that Scratch is a wonderful alternative to traditional assessments especially if they are dealing with complex concepts.
Sherri, you have made some outstanding points. I would have to agree with you about teaching a work ethic. I think it is very important for children to learn that everything is not a game and everything isn't done for a reward. However, I do believe that you are, also, aware of the importance and benefits of incorporating such things as Scratch into your classroom. Hooray!
ReplyDeleteGee feels that computer and video games should influence the schools, families, and workplaces in taht they allow learning in a whole new way. Games and game technologies can help inhance learning by allowing you to think of strategies to a make it to a higher level. Gee feels that gaming grags the attention of the students unlike a classroom subject. He feels this way because the students get to interact in playing the game along with learning how to beat it.
ReplyDeleteI, on the other hand, do not agree with all that he has said. I feel that gaming may even get in the way of learning. Games have a tendancy to become addictive expecially in children. They get so focused on trying to beat the levels and it is all that they can focus on. Gaming is a huge problem in America today causing physical inactivity which leads to obesity. Also, some students that play video games will neglect their school work in order to play the game. Some students may also loose their sense of reality. I would not allow my students to use video games as a learning tool. I feel that using gaming such as Tag and Leap Frog would be a great way to integrade learning and gaming, because they are educational games and would help build congnitive thinking.
There are games online that can be used as learning tool such as scratch. I would use scratch in my classroom if I could figure it out. I think it is a great way to use technology in the classroom. The games are created by the teacher and are based on the subject area that is being taught in the classroom.
Gee is arguing that video games can be a good form of education especially in science and many other areas. I agree with the fact that getting the children in a more playful and different mindset could diffidently get them to look at learning in a different way and get the children to learn the material better than if we as teachers were going to do a lesson as. I do feel that putting some games into teaching can definitely be beneficially to some students and help them understand the material. I am still not totally sold on using it in the class room but we will see. I think Scratch could be used for my students in reports that they have to teach to the class or better understand. I though wouldn’t use scratch till I become more comfortable with it and understood it enough to teach my students about
ReplyDeleteI agree with Gee's fundamental argument. If a game is too easy the player is not going to be interested in it for long, on the other hand, if it is too difficult the player may give up. There has to be a "happy medium". The same goes for school work learning, if the material is too easy for the student, he or she is going to become bored with it, but if it is too hard they are not going to understand and learn the concept. I think with good teaching, you have to find the in-between that keeps the students interested in the material they are being taught but also not make it difficult enough that they are not understanding and giving up easily. A good teacher will find that middle ground for the students which will help them learn all the material and also allow them to have fun with the material. Video games can be used as a supplementary material to help children learn concepts. While it can be used to help it should be be the sole material used for teaching, only as a supplementary aid.
ReplyDeleteA program like Scratch could be used in the classroom to let the students learn the material by interacting with the projects. After trying to work with Scratch, it is a little difficult and I would definately suggest the teacher preparing all the Scratch work and then allowing students to view it.
His argument was that good computer and video games allow people to re-create themselves in new worlds and achieve recreation and deep learning at one and the same time. I definitely agree with him. Schools should allow students to play a limited amount of video games. They get to interact with other students, engage in critical thinking, and use problem-solving strategies. This goes along with my personal view on what good teaching is. I believe that teachers should teach students by what ever means are necessary. The students need to be enjoying what they are learning because they will interact and learn more. Programs like scratch are a good tool for teachers and students. The teachers get to integrate technology and scratch allows students to play the educational games and modify them. Overall the more technology the better!
ReplyDeleteGee postulates that todays games and game designs incorportate sound cognitive learning principles that engage today's learners. I would tend to agree that children today do learn in ways tied to technology and that involving a student in both the active play of games which involve sound learning principles and having them create projects (technology/gaming/media) will perpetuate a desire for them to learn and understand. Today games are massive social interaction events that millions of players engage in, although not all players are morally or ethically guided, this also creates a situation in which a child can grow to understand the dangers of social interaction and become more selective in relationships both online and personally.
ReplyDeleteAgain, Scratch is a good example of how students can engage in and create learning experiences that suit today's technology driven learning.
Gee's fundamental argument is that good video and computer games can be a great learning tool. He feels that the games give information as needed, not way before or way after. He also feels that they help with critical thinking, problem solving, and collaboration. I agree with all these points and feel that educational games could be used in the classroom for free time or as supplemental instruction but not for a complete lesson. The bad thing about computer/video games is that children become addicted to them and will expect to play them all the time. I think moderation would be okay because teachers should be able to think outside the box and incorporate different things to their lessons to keep their students interested and motivated. I would use them in my classroom. Scratch would be a program that I would also use in my classroom. I would allow my students to team up and modify the games like we did in class to get them comfortable with the technology. I would have to get comfortable with the website myself, so I can make helpful suggestions and be beneficial to my students.
ReplyDeleteThank-you so much for all your insightful comments about the value of video games and education. Many of you made excellent points about the usefulness of video games to supplement teaching or to support critical thinking and problem solving skills. I think most of the trepidation about using video games in the classroom is warranted. Games can be addicting, isolating, and contribute to unhealthy lifestyles. However I do not think Gee major argument was that students should play video games all day at school. His fundamental argument is that good games are designed in ways that good classroom instruction should be designed. That is: skills should be taught in their context of use not isolated as skill set on worksheets. Tasks should be deigned to meet individual needs so that they are challenging yet not overwhelming and students should be creating meaningful products and engaged in activities that make them proud of their abilities. Personally, I think these things can be done without the use of computers, video games or other digital technologies! What Gee point is that we can make schools more effective if we can design our instruction that gets students engaged and motivated to learn just like video games do. I think SCRATCH can help teachers design highly engaging learning environments. When teachers allow students to use SCRATCH to design a model of how a natural phenomenon works they are giving students opportunity to use skills in a meaningful context. SCRATCH is designed to meet the needs of individual learners and allows them to create a product they can be proud of.
ReplyDeleteGee's fundamental argument is that well designed games can be very helpful in the learning process. He feels that children who are challenged by games will do better than those who have never played them. Gee believes that parents, educators, and researchers have alot to learn to be able to understand the full impact games can have on students. I agree that games can be beneficial to students if they are specifically designed for that. I feel that there are many games out there that could hinder a childs understanding. I think to be a good teacher, he/she must engage with their students. They must be there for the student in different aspects (not just the basic educational level). This would take away from the student/teacher relationship if they are playing some type of game most of the time. A program like SCRATCH could be used to support or reinforce a lesson the students have been currently learning in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteGee's fundamental argument is that games can be a positive impact on a student life, they can be educational. "Good learning in games is a capitalist driven Darwinian process of selection of the fittest." Meaning if you put a challanging game out there for people to work with they learn from it moving on to harder levels. I think this article is right on the money and I agree with everything it stands for. The article claims it is hard to get people often young people to learn and master something that is long and challenging. I find this to be true, but if you can relate to them they become more interested and it makes it easier for them to understand your ways and want to do what you have in mind for them. Like a game thats not their "style." This article has a positive impact on my theory of good teaching. I feel like students learn better interacting with each other like working in groups or hands on activities. Gaming falls in both of these catagories, having a little competition to see who gets the highest score usually makes a child want to try harder, not only that but they get bragging rights. :) Scratch is a good way for students to take todays technology and use it to learn as to just "play"
ReplyDeleteRight on Yolanda!
ReplyDelete