Skip to main content

The Forbes article "The Video Game Blurs the Line Between Education and Entertainment" describes game-based learning. Is this a passing fad or...

This 2014 article by Jordan Shapiro focuses on products made by Amplify Learning, a company specializing in digital products designed to integrate technology with educational goals. Shapiro admits some skepticism about this fad of “edutainment,” but the article largely praises game-based learning and Amplify’s products specifically. The CEO of Amplify, Joe Klein, comments that the value of these products lies in students using them in their free time when they would otherwise be playing non-educational games. The company recruits game developers from the commercial world, knowing that if a game is not fun, the user will not continue to play, and all educational value will be lost.


Shapiro cites as a benefit that many of these games are designed for students to learn through exploration, experimentation, repetition, and trial and error. These formats are supported by current research on best practices in education. More and more school districts are implementing curriculum and instructional models that follow a similar exploratory approach. For example, the district where I teach, Rogers Public Schools in Arkansas, has adopted a math curriculum that focuses on mathematical practices and the inquiry process. Games that support rigorous content learning through engagement and fun will likely continue to transform how students learn.


Game-based learning will not replace more traditional learning modes but complement them as companies continue to develop better products to meet students’ needs. Educators have already seen how emerging forms of technology can be adapted for use both in school and beyond classroom walls.


For more information, see Edutopia’s collection of articles on game-based learning cited below. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.
Post a Comment
Read more