#10

Virtual Realities and Learning

Is the video game really worthwhile for people to invest so much time into? Many people of all ages are now entering these virtual digital worlds, sometimes spending hours, days, and months on a quest or fighting a battle instead of pursuing other hobbies. Instead of reading, people are spending over 70 hours in just a few weeks to beat games such as Final Fantasy and other role playing games. Are video games a waste of time and energy that could be spent learning? Are video games “bad?”

One position believes video games to be needless diversions. Upon observing gameplay, it is easy for a parent to assume their children aren’t learning anything worthwhile, as there isn’t specific content presented. Since children aren’t reading or solving math problems, video games appear to the parent as very non-academic activities. In school, concepts learned are clearly defined, as children improve skills such as comprehension and problem solving. It is easy for a parent to assume their child is learning if there is direct flow of facts and terms presented, rather than expecting their child to learn from a series of button pushes in front of a television screen. Additionally, video game time takes away time that could be spent cultivating other skills, studying, or social interaction. Instead of cultivating these obviously valuable skills, some believe the user will adopt violent, aggressive, and antisocial behaviors from a programmed virtual killing machine inside a realistic, irrelevant world.

Certainly, the argument that video games are a waste of time is valid. Indeed, video games were obsessively played by the Columbine assassins Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold (Associated Press, 2002). If violence in a video game leads to compulsive violence in the real world, why should parents allow their children to play them, and also, why should stores even market and sell such dangerous killing tools? It is clear to see the future potentials of these shooter games to fall into the hands of other killers, and feed their desires to hurt and steal, as explained by gamers’ parents interviewed in an article in the Boston Globe, parents who perceive video games as “bad”: “I don’t think it’s good for them, the violence, the obsession…” (Associated Press, 2007). Certainly, in some contexts, video games are “bad,” as a form of media that negatively affects a person. As far as other games concern, do they even really teach useful skills to make playing them worthwhile as opposed to reading a book or sitting in a classroom?

In spite of other arguments, there is another position, a position based on new research and evidence to suggest that video games can be a beneficial learning tool. As our world becomes more technological, different methods of learning are available to today’s population than what was available in the past. Theories of learning are embedded in “good” video games, according to James Paul Gee in his work What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. “Good” video games, can still teach players’ social abilities, as video games are inherently social tools. Games can also be used to extend experience to unprecedented situations, and create new realms for players to solve problems. “Good” games also employ classical narrative techniques in sophisticated interactive storylines, when the player’s actions affect the outcome of the game. Is it a wonder students would prefer to take this sophisticated learning method over the traditional methods of memorizing facts and terms in the classroom that aren’t nearly as challenging nor engaging?

One benefit schools appear to have that video games lack is direct social interaction. However, video games are inherently social and can still teach players social skills through role playing and group problem solving. Shooter games, typically thought to teach players to use war to solve problems, actually teach group social skills otherwise, according to Gee, “As realistic forms of conversation become more computationally possible (a very hard task), I predict that shooting will be less important and talking more important in many games, even shooter games. Even now, many shooting games stress stealth, story, and social interaction more than they used to” (Gee 10). Some of the most popular shooter games, such as Halo, have transcended the console and become an online adventure where players can interact in different situations together, unrestricted by how far in distance the players may be from each other physically around the globe.

Additionally within the social realm, video games encourage identity work as people play as new characters. This topic has also been examined by literacy specialists, such as JoAnn Griffin, who studied relational gaming. In Griffin’s essay, Relationship Gaming and Identity: Stephanie and Josh, she describes how the game Tiger Woods Golf 2004 encourages the dynamics of their relationship. Stephanie, drawn to the create-a-character component of the game, creates her own identity as a feminine miniskirt-wearing golfer. The identity creation component of the game makes gaming more accessible to Stephanie, who wants to be herself but still “one of the guys” (Griffin 136). In this way, Stephanie participates with her boyfriend Josh in the game, interacting and competing with him, but also depending on him to play the difficult parts of the game for her. Therefore, the golfing game becomes a situation where Stephanie and Josh can engage each other and grow relationally.

Engaging games are becoming more prevalent in the gaming sphere. Interaction with the machine and other players are critical is games such as Dance Dance Revolution (DDR) or games for the Wii console. Players are not only engaged mentally to the information conveyed on the screen, but also to the physical movements required of their reactions. From these types of games, players learn motor coordination under specific time constraints, as they listen to the beat of the music and watch the corresponding screen commands tell them where to step when playing DDR. A player’s “dancing” is judged by their accuracy, timing, and consistency.

Other engaging situations also are caused by video games’ careful plotting in narrational stories. These stories are special and worthwhile because they are different than their printed counterparts because they allow readers to transcend reality and allow for them to have rich virtual experiences impossible in the real world and within lifetimes. From navigating a spaceship to dealing with an upsurge of alien mutants, these experiences become available to the user whose real life may be grounded in cubicle pencil-pushing office jobs as one can be. These stories are also special and worthwhile to the video game because they allow for a player’s actions to directly affect the consequences, while printed stories don’t explicitly allow for the reader to directly engage with the text.

Also, video game story narratives also employ traditional plot techniques. The real difference is that the printed story already has a fixed destination, while the video game relies on the players’ skill, determination, and knowledge in order to determine the outcome of the game. At the end of each level, players typically expect to fight a “boss,” or a more significant battle than the smaller ones spread throughout. The “boss” is a kind of test to the player’s skills, requiring certain knowledge in order to pass. Players are tested on skills such as operating a tool within a certain time frame and also strategically manipulating their strengths and weaknesses for favorable outcomes.

While not content-based, these literacies are worthwhile problem-solving skills valuable in the real world, valuable to teachers, coaches, employers, and friends.

However, the intersection of video games and the real world is a tricky problem. Whether or not violent video games contributed to the tragic event at Columbine is true or not, it is difficult to prove that video games alone caused the event. Perhaps the Columbine shooters took the video game to an unhealthy level, using it as an outlet to cultivate their anger and frustration. Perhaps this event can be used to show that video games, if used in moderation (as with other activities) and also in the way game designers intended, can actually be a healthy, worthwhile learning tool.

The claim that video games can be “bad,” or wasteful in terms of what the user is learning (in specific content) are definitely valid, but another position also argues successfully that these games can be “good,” or beneficial if used alongside other learning dimensions such as the classroom, studies, interactions with friends, and other activities such as reading. As with many activities, too much of one thing can be harmful, as one needs to grow and learn a variety of ways. Still, video games can supplement different types of skills, knowledge, and literacies made possible by virtual experiences unavailable in the real world.

Works Cited

Associated Press, "A generational divide over video games." The Boston Globe.

14 Nov 2007. The Boston Globe. 27 Nov 2007 .

Associated Press. "Columbine Lawsuit against makers of video games."

freedomforum.org. 5 Mar 2002. Freedom Forum. 27 Nov 2007 .

Gee, James Paul. What video games have to teach us about learning and

literacy. Hampshire: Palgrove Macmillan, 2003.

Griffin, Joann. "Relationship Gaming and Identity: Stephanie and Josh." Gaming

Lives in the Twenty-First Century. 2007. Cynthia L. Selfe. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.

#9

Robert Kaplan best defines “Contrastive Rhetoric” in saying that “CR assumes that languages differ not only in phonological, morphological, and grammatical features, but in the kinds of genres available to their speakers for the organization of discourse and in the rhetorical (and syntactic) features that co-occur with those genres.” Kaplan uses this idea of CR to explain the idea that there are differences in what may be discussed, who has the authority to speak/write, what forms writing takes, what is evidence, and what arrangements of evidence are appealing throughout discourse communities. For example, he tells how abortion in Finland is exclusively a medical topic, while in America it is primarily referenced as a political topic. CR is also demonstrated by our assumed ideas of what forms writing takes, according to Kaplan, since a poetical sonnet cannot be used to convey cooking recipes.

Accordingly, Sherman Alexie’s piece “I hated tonto (and still do)” is an example of contrastive rhetoric due to its exploration of Kaplan’s ideas: Who has the ability to speak/write; and What arrangement of evidence is likely to appeal to readers?

Alexie explores the first question in his writing by discussing the differences in the two discourse communities he personally experienced: the Native American Indian discourse community and the discourse communities of white American media. White American media had authority to tell these epic stories of blue-eyed Indians speaking in monosyllables, and the Indian discourse community had no apparent authority to add to the discussion. Additionally, Alexie explores the second question by showing how the White American media used appealing stereotypes of Indians as evidence of the nature of Native Americans. The White American portrayals of Indians, played by white men, were still preferred and acceptable to many Americans, including Alexie.