Barbara Ganley offers these two fine quotes from a James Paul Gee book, concerning schooling versus computer games:
"In today's schools many instructed processes, not least those connected to learning to read, involve practicing skills outside any contexts in which they are used by people who are adept at those skills (e.g. good readers). If this is how children had to learn to play a computer or video game--and, remember, these games are often very long and quite challenging--the games industry would go broke."
....
"...as schools turn reading into an instructed process, today's children see more and more powerful instances of cultural learning in their everyday lives in things like Pokemom and computer games. Modern high-tech society--thanks to its media, technology, and creative capitalists---gets better and better at creating powerful cultural learning processes. Schools do not."
(emphases added)
Very provocative, exciting writing. So far this sort of comparison tends to leave higher ed audiences unmoved - I usually try the "what can we learn from computer games?" angle, as per another Gee work (2003).
This excerpt is from a larger discussion about "affiliation spaces," which reminds me of, among other things, anarchist polities, self-organizing communities, Hakim Bey's temporary autonomous zones (1985), P.M.'s bolo'bolo... This is the kind of social learning I was dreaming about when I had higher hopes for m-learning (2004).
Such spaces are one thing I'm looking for as I read Vinge's latest, Rainbows End.
Hm, I should snag this other Gee book. Inter-library loan ahoy!
Recent Comments