What’s worth knowing
At least according to a leader in this week’s Economist (subscription required):
A mastery of languages is not the only accomplishment that every child might like to have when leaving school, or even the only one that society might like to bestow upon those it tries to educate. Physics and chemistry are similarly going out of fashion in Britain, and who is to gainsay the value of knowing the laws of thermodynamics and the place of polonium in the periodic table? A little knowledge of history would be enormously beneficial, especially to would-be politicians who believe they can sort out Afghanistan or the Middle East with a simple invasion or two.
Others would benefit hugely if they left school able to carry out some basic plumbing, or to fix their computer, or merely to fill in a tax return or benefits form. And then there are the more traditional attributes of a decent education, such as judgment, manners, elementary morals, the ability to get on with other people, the capacity to recite from memory a small anthology of English verse, and the ability to think and to express oneself’”in English, for a start. Some might add a respectable grounding in Latin and Greek, a stern respect for the injunction never to play a cross bat to a straight ball at cricket, and the ability to flick an ink pellet of well-judged saturation.
An interesting list, particularly since there are both things children should “know”–although without much explanation as to why one should know them–as well as things they should be able to actually do. The list has a distinctly national flavor (or perhaps I should say flavour) and is from a piece on whether study of foreign languages should be required in british schools. But the point that what is worth learning needs to be discussed as more than just “mastery of basic reading and writing” is an excellent one, and one that needs to be at the senter of any discussion of games in education, epistemic or otherwise.
On the cover of Time
In the latest issue of Time Magazine the cover story (free with ad view) is “How to Build a Student for the 21st Century?”
I’m looking at writing an op-ed in response, given that my book addresses many of the issues in the article head-on. For example, the article says:
This is a story about the big public conversation the nation is not having about education, the one that will ultimately determine not merely whether some fraction of our children get “left behind” but also whether an entire generation of kids will fail to make the grade in the global economy because they can’t think their way through abstract problems, work in teams, distinguish good information from bad or speak a language other than English.
Eat your spinach
The Liemandt Foundation announced the winning games from the “Hidden Agenda” educational video game development contest.
As one report (originally available at: http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/061205/20061205005709.html) put it:
The games… were designed to be as entertaining as today’s top games, but with a twist – they “secretly” teach middle school subjects such as science and math.
I think having an educational video game contest is great. Even better to release them (originally available at: http://www.hagames.com/) (as the contest does) for free on a website. It’s the word “secretly” that’s a little troubling.
Physical Activities for Engineers
Our research group is busy testing the four physical activities that are built into the storyboard of the Digital Zoo version that will run next spring. These activities are designed to support the physics concepts that the young engineers will encounter as they work with Sodaconstructor. Most recently, Aran presented the epistemic games group with the challenge: build a structure using marshmallows and straws that is at least four inches high and can support a mass (we used a notebook) for as long as possible. Guess which one Professor Shaffer built?
On a desert island
I am sitting at the airport waiting to travel home from a National Science Foundation meeting. there were a hundred researchers there, all working on cutting-edge science and technology education. but for for some reason the conference orgaizers had chosen a hotel where the wireless internet was too weak to let people use their laptops during the meeting.
now perhaps this was a good thing, as this meant people couldn’t check their email or surf the web during presentations. but what struck me was that everyone’s response was to complain that they couldn’ get anything done during the meeting. they had their computers, but few people had them open. they werenearly useless without an internet connection, aparently.
in other words, when these very comeptent professionals were on a proverbial desert island, they simply stopped working.
could they have accomplished something? perhaps. but working as a professional means using professional tools–which is why epistemic games use real professional tools.
in contrast with what happens in many classrooms (and here I’m thinking particulary, though not exclusively, about some mathematics classes) where the emphasis is on learning to work “on your own” because you “might not have a [fill in the blank: computer, or calculator] some day.”
because most of these professionals had, in fact, been trained without computers. but they still couldn’t accomplish much without them.
FULL DISCLOSURE: my computer was closed too, and this is being written–painstakingly and awash in typos, from a palm pilot….
