Canadian Study Finds Games Useful Educational Tools

Canadian Study Finds Games Useful Educational Tools

November 19, 2009

A new Canadian study has tried to take an objective look at video games as learning tools, particularly since the medium is so popular among children and teens.

Under the headline "The Video Game Debate: Bad for Behaviour, Good for Learning?", the Canadian Council of Learning article cites several sources for its analysis, going back as far as 1991. It begins by acknowledging the popualrity of video games (citing U.S. numbers) as well as looking at whether video games can be helpful or harmful.

While some studies seem to go in with predetermined conclusions, this one seems to sit on the fence in its early analysis:

Frequent and unrestricted use of recreational video games may compromise academic performance. Several studies have shown that students of all ages who spend more time playing video games have lower grades than their peers who devote less time to video gaming. This type of correlation should be interpreted cautiously: while research implies that playing video games causes students to perform poorly in school—it could also be the case that students who do poorly in school are more inclined to play video games. Interpretive issues aside, devoting long hours to recreational video game playing clearly does not contribute to academic achievement. (Ed.: emphasis added)

While the study acknowledges the potential tie to violence and aggression, the opposite was also studied, citing video game advocate James Paul Gee's argument that video game players become engaged in powerful forms of learning because:

  • They engage players in a problem-solving cycle similar to that in experimental science, based on hypothesis, experimentation, deduction and renewed experimentation.
  • Players can customize games to suit their learning styles, encouraging creativity (e.g., designing new skate parks in Tony Hawk skateboard games).
  • Players are able to view the world through multiple identities.
  • Players are encouraged to take risks and try new things.

The study goes on to examine various types of video games and discuss their possible usefulness as educational tools. In the end, the article concludes:

The tremendous popularity of video games means they have enormous potential as learning tools that capture students’ attention and fire their imaginations. Harnessing that potential requires careful attention to design features and appropriate training for teachers. The understanding of links between video games and learning is still very much at a nascent stage both with regards to game design and effective delivery. As video games in education are gaining attention, it becomes more and more critical to understand why and how games can affect students.

The study comes at a time when Canadian Heritage has funded $375,000 for the creation of a video game and web site to teach "First Nation" youth about their heritage. Tracy Lavin, principle researcher for the CCL article, said:

"It is important to utilize all the resources at our disposal to enhance student learning in any setting. It makes sense to draw on students' fascination with video games in order to expand their learning opportunities and improve their learning outcomes."

The Canadian Heritage game is in open beta and is being developed by BlackCherry Digital Media.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Re: Canadian Study Finds Games Useful Educational Tools

One question, who was the study done by?

Two question, what was the purpose of the study?

Three question, why did they only focus on kids and not adults who have grown up with games as a clue to future reference?

 

People like these people only seem to be interested in Videogames only when it has educational value, I feel personally this is a really dangerous precedence and really inaccurate when you take in how someone can take this study and then twist it into how kids playing violent games are being taught how to kill.

It has happened before and until people start questioning the weakness of these studies it is mostly going to end up being us gamers being portrayed negatively in the end.

 

 

Re: Canadian Study Finds Games Useful Educational Tools

The only game I have ever learned anything from was the various Shin Megami Tensei ones (via Demon/Persona Compendium)

Re: Canadian Study Finds Games Useful Educational Tools

I was playing video games during high school & still managed to keep A's & B's. That study is a load of crap. It's b/c I balanced out my study from my games. Same goes for me going to college. I am still making a 3.0 gpa & playing games. Again that study is crap. Maybe they should integrate ADD & ADHD into this study. My brother has ADD & played video games a lot & watched a lot of tv compared to him going to school in middle school & high school he was doing poorly. I honestly think I have ADHD too, but I was never diagnosed w/it nor ADD either. 

I bet they never did studies on these kids that had ADD or ADHD problems or bipolar. It doesn't say. Or they overlooked it.

 

 

 

"It's better to be hated for who you are, then be loved for who you are not." - Montgomery Gentry

Re: Canadian Study Finds Games Useful Educational Tools

Kinda of hard to take non-existant factors into a study without making the study bad.

ECA IconA PUBLICATION OF THE ECA RSS IconSUBSCRIBE User LoginLOGIN / REGISTER

Crispy Gamer




       

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 03/18/10 at 12:07pm
JDKJ: No, I did you the favor and said it for you.
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:06pm
Valdearg: What I said was while I may have implied long term accuraccy, and that might have been incorrect, my greater point that the CBO report calculated reduced deficits, expanded coverage, and lower costs is still 100% accurate. :D
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:06pm
Valdearg: Like any good politician, I don't believe I said "I was incorrect." :P
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:02pm
JDKJ: If you'd said "I was incorrect" 10 shouts ago, I'd have quit twisting your arm to get you see the obvious 10 shouts ago.
Posted 03/18/10 at 12:00pm
JDKJ: You were they one assuming 100% accuracy. In all caps, no less.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:59am
Valdearg: Yes, my implication that the long term estimates were facts was incorrect, but the short term calculations are absolutely facts, and even the long term estimates are still useful in attempting to determine exactly what will happen with the bill.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:58am
Valdearg: I do. The Short term costs are actually calculated facts. The long term estimates aren't necessarily 100% accurate, but to assume that they can't possibly be accurate because someone said they might not be 100% accurate is also wrong.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:57am
JDKJ: When someone says, "I could be wrong but, as best as I can tell, X," X ain't a fact.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:53am
JDKJ: It's too early in the morning for you to be deaf, blind, and dumb drunk. A "my best guestimate" can't be a fact. Don't you understand the difference between the two?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:41am
Valdearg: By how much depends on variables that can't necessarily be predicted at this point in time. And yes, those Facts are accurate only so far into the future, but those estimates can certainly be used to support this measure.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:40am
Valdearg: And I'm saying, as far as the CBO report goes, the facts that it does put forward are deficit reduction, reducing costs, and expanding costs. Those ARE facts.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:30am
JDKJ: You were the one championing a qualified estimate as an indisputable fact. I'm merely pointing out that it's far from indisputable. So says the estimator.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:27am
Valdearg: Or are you only breaking that argument out because the CBO says that this bill is a good thing for our deficit?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:27am
JDKJ: The CBO says that, to the extent it is possible to accurately predict defict reduction over the long term, it is likely to reduce the deficit. That's your idea of "a fact that don't lie?"
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:26am
Valdearg: Would you be singing the same tune if the CBO came back saying that the bill will likely double the deficit in 20 years??
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:26am
Valdearg: @JDKJ: Just because there is a margin of error doesn't mean that the numbers aren't at least psudo-accurate.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:25am
Valdearg: The point is that the bill reduces costs, expands coverage, and reduces the deficit.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:24am
JDKJ: So why are you off and running with "facts and numbers don't lie" when the very author of the facts and numbers is acknowledging that their facts and numbers could quite easily be wrong?
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:23am
Valdearg: @JDKJ: Indeed, but the 10 year is also showing a deficit reduction, and that's more accurate.
Posted 03/18/10 at 11:19am
JDKJ: Val': Isn't the CBO saying at the same time that predicting the long term deficit reduction effect isn't anywhere near an exact science? And that its prediction should be taken with that understanding?
Login or register to post shouts