Videogames can convey knowledge, there is no doubt. This does not per se make them better than other teaching and learning tools used in the classroom. But their playful, procedural and (virtual-)spatial nature allows for a participatory way of knowledge transfer that distinguishes videogames from other analogue materials and digital applications – and that can complement them meaningfully.
However, learning games as a subcategory of “serious games”, in my opinion, have so far only scratched the surface of the inherent potential of videogames. Especially learning games that have particularly been developed for students and are based on school curricula are rather learning applications with mere gamification elements that do not use the basic characteristics of a computer game at all.
Back in my school days, for example, there was the educational game collection “Addy” for various school subjects and grades. Here, the learning contents were to be presented in a playful manner by the alien Addy. The players could interact with various objects in his spaceship and from there get to the learning contents.
But: The actual tasks that were supposed to impart knowledge could have exactly been taken from school textbooks – only to be solved not analogously with a pen on paper, but instead digitally with a mouse and keyboard. Sure, there were some gamification elements such as the automatic awarding of points, but the actual learning through the playful exploration of a virtual environment did not take place.
Even worse: As a “reward” between tasks, students were allowed to turn to trivial mini-games that had nothing to do with the actual learning content. I think this separation is not only wasted potential, but simply wrong: By this, playing games is framed as a meaningless waste of time, while actual learning is connoted with unpleasant work.
Addy’s spaceship 
Learning via simple text 
Tasks like from a textbook 
Trivial minigames
Well-done learning games or serious games have exactly the opposite effect and use the playful elements to connect learning with fun and curiosity in a meaningful way.
Even if learning games may not be able to compete with their big siblings from the entertainment industry (especially not in terms of budget), they should at least resemble them in the basic principles and be so interesting and fun that they are played out of intrinsic motivation regardless of the extrinsic purpose of learning. At best, they put players into the state of flow which is typical for videogames, so that the actual learning takes place alongside enjoying playing.
What distinguishes videogames from other teaching and learning materials?
Let us first list some distinct characteristics that make videogames different from other materials and applications:
- Multi-layered participativity in contrast to simple interactivity: Through complex and affective participation possibilities, players become a part of the virtual environment instead of merely interacting with certain machine elements according to a simple stimulus-response scheme.
- Spatiality: Players usually have the possibility to navigate through and explore a virtual space. This space does not have to be complex or three-dimensional – not even necessarily visual, as demonstrated by text adventures that only appeal to the player’s imagination.
- Immersion: Both of the above – often in combination with a narrative – can lead to an “immersion” in the digital world, to a temporary forgetting of the real outside world.
- Procedurality and adaptation: As software, videogames are subject to data processing. This means they follow rules that were previously written down in the source code. This rule-based nature means that educational games can adapt flexibly to the level of knowledge, ability and/or progress of the students at any time.
These aspects lead to the fact that videogames can simulate processes of any kind as well as real places and events, and thus make them tangible to a certain extent. Through videogames, experiences can be conveyed that would otherwise not be possible, or only with great effort.
Exploring a volcano? Accompanying a meal through the human body? Trying out conquest strategies of the Roman Empire? Videogames can bring all these experiences into the classroom.
And not only that: Playing lies in the nature of humans and animals, so it is the most didactic method in the world, to put it simply. Children learn through play by exploring and constructing reality. Playing gives them the opportunity to try out things without any danger or fear of making mistakes, and to pursue their curiosity and their urge to discover. In play, they practise and repeat their knowledge and skills so that they can apply them in real-life situations in the future.
Videogames make all this possible, especially in relation to the specific learning contents of school curricula in a way analogue games could only do rudimentarily. This does not mean they should replace analogue playing or other forms of knowledge transfer, but they would complement them as part of school lessons.
Besides, it should be noted that the frequent playing of digital games also offers other proven benefits, such as improving hand-eye coordination, reaction speed, spatial thinking or the ability to solve complex tasks – depending on the genre played. But these rather peripheral effects are not to be considered any further here.
Learning games and serious games in the classroom
In order to understand that videogames are suitable for knowledge transfer in the classroom, let us first take a brief look at what forms of knowledge actually are there. Scientific research knows many different subdivisions, but I would like to follow the taxonomy of the cognitive psychologists de Jong and Ferguson-Hessler. According to them, there are the following types of knowledge:
- situational knowledge: Knowledge about typical problems and processes in certain situations and domains.
- conceptual-semantic knowledge: this includes all knowledge about facts, concepts and principles
- procedural knowledge: knowledge about actions and processes of a physical or abstract nature
- strategic-metacognitive knowledge: this “knowledge about knowledge” is on a reflective meta-level, i.e. it is about your own cross-situational learning and problem-solving strategies.
In school, all four forms of knowledge are taught, but conceptual-semantic knowledge probably plays the biggest role, followed by strategic-metacognitive knowledge. As we have learned, videogames have all the necessary features to convey and support these types of knowledge. They can simulate situations, present factual knowledge vividly, make processes tangible and promote strategic thinking.
However, learning games that are to be used in school are not only about the pure transfer of knowledge. They have to be integrated into the lesson in a didactically meaningful way, which is why game developers are dependent on the cooperation with teachers and should have a basic understanding of the structure of a lesson.
For example, the game must introduce the topic and tie in with the students’ existing prior knowledge. Ideally, it should be a multiplayer game in which groups of students have to help each other and take opposing positions. In addition, the students should be motivated to also talk about the learning contents outside of the game, so that they can summarise what they have learned in their own words and encounter socio-cognitive dissonances that lead to a meaningful “aha” reaction while discussing the topic with their classmates.
These are just a few aspects that have to be considered when creating learning games for the classroom. What genre should a game have to best present certain subjects? How should the game’s world be structured according to the learning content? When and how should assistance be provided by the game? What should a multiplayer mode look like? Which game rules make which real-world statements?
On this blog I try to explore many of these aspects in order to help both developers of educational games and teachers to integrate games into school in a meaningful way. The disciplines of psychology of learning, rhetoric and game studies serve as a foundation for answering all these questions, and I will also present their basics here. So stay tuned!
My entire master’s thesis, in which I developed a rhetorical guide for developers of learning games specifically for the classroom, will soon be downloadable in its entirety in an updated version (probably only in German).
There is still a long way to go before videogames find their way into the curricula. However, if educational games are developed specifically for school and are continually improved on the basis of broad studies, it may be possible in the future – with the help of a committed and open-minded teaching community – to convince the ministries of education to recognise and include digital learning games as useful teaching materials. Then the creation of serious games will also become (financially) more attractive for developers, and this will make videogames serve not only entertainment in the future, but also one of the highest goods of humanity: the transfer of knowledge.
Note: Also videogames from the entertainment industry should be discussed in school lessons to support the students in developing a comprehensive media competence, and to assist them in correctly understanding the concepts of videogames, their genres and narratives.
Sources (among others):
- Bogost, Ian (2007): Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames. New York: MIT Press.
- de Jong, Ton / Ferguson-Hessler, Monica G. M. (1996): Types and Qualities of Knowledge. In: Educational Psychologist. Bd. 31, Ausg. 2. London: Routledge. 105–113.
- McGonigal, Jane (2012): Besser als die Wirklichkeit! Warum wir von Computerspielen profitieren und wie sie die Welt verändern. München: Wilhelm Heyne Verlag.
- Mogel, Hans (2008): Psychologie des Kinderspiels. Von den frühesten Spielen bis zum Computerspiel. 3., erw. Aufl. Heidelberg: Springer Medizin Verlag.
- Murray, Janet H. (1999): Hamlet on the Holodeck. The Future of Narrative in Cyberspace. 2. Aufl. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
- Seidel, Tina et al. (2014): Pädagogische Psychologie. 6., vollst. überarb. Aufl. Tina Seidel und Andreas Knapp (Hrsg.). Weinheim / Basel: Beltz.