First of all, let’s talk about the constructivist approach to learning. The basic premise is that we gather our knowledge through our experiences. There are several pathways to learn the same thing so the traditional “I talk and you listen” approach is not applicable here. In a constructivist classroom, the students may come up with their own questions and thus it may alter the direction of curriculum learned. Learning is messy and complex, less emphasis is placed on formal evaluations and more on self-evaluation. The constructivist approach is learner centered. So the question is, “can this constructivist approach be applied to computer games”?In one way I say yes, computer games generally do follow this approach, but from another aspect I think it’s a pretty tricky accomplishment. Let me explain. The “yes” part of me thinks the act of playing computer games conforms to the constructivist approach. You become engaged in a game, providing you with an actual experience. We often play such games by choice; they internally motivate us and can provide immediate feedback which leads to self analysis. Constructivists encourage group work, that can easily be accomplished there are plenty multi-player games out there.
Now, on the other hand, can the game itself possess the constructivist qualities? This is a little tougher, although not impossible. The hard part is creating a game with the flexibility to let the player steer. This means the game must have a lot of possibilities even for a much focused topic. I would almost consider this on the way to Artificial Intelligence (AI). Where the game learns about the player and does stuff accordingly.
Fu-Hsing Tsai, Kuang-Chao Yu and Hsien-Sheng Hsiao wrote a paper and have proposed a game based learning model for designing a constructivist learning environment in online games. Their model appears valid and the explanations make sense but I feel they've missed the breadth and depth that the game maker would need to implement in order to fully follow the constructive approach. The game would have to build on the learners experiences and consider the learners point of view for subsequent levels. It is possible, but the game becomes so much more complex.
Photo courtesy of http://www.etc.edu.cn/eet/articles/learntheory/start.htm
You hit on a real dilemma for game designers. In the end, games can accommodate learner preferences and even adapt to their input, but it is really difficult to make a game responsive enough to support anything a learner might come up with to build unique learning. It all comes down to what you want to call "constructivist", I guess, and certainly your understanding of the idea is richer and deeper than some of the people designing games right now.
ReplyDeleteOf course, there are myriad things that games can contribute to learning, whether or not they happen to be constructivist in their design. If a learner is using a game as part of an array of resources to build personal, unique and meaningful learning, then we would have to conclude that even a very rigid game can make a contribution to a learner. And our understanding of constructivism is that it is the learner who is making meaning - not the resources. So the best our resources can do is be designed in a way that recognizes this, and supports the learner in making meaning.