It would be immensely helpful if we could measure the impact of games in the classroom
to assess their effectiveness as teaching tools.
Fortunately, somebody went and did that already.
♪ [Extra Credits theme] ♪
Over the course of his work with Games For Good,
James has often spoken with the folks at Filament Games,
a company that not only creates educational games,
but actually works on the much harder task of making games that are classroom ready.
Now, here on Extra Credits,
we often talk about what good games could do in the classroom,
but they're actually making games that live up to the almost impossible standard
of fitting the curriculum currently mandated for schools,
so that a teacher could use them in the classroom right now, today,
without worrying that it might not meet all the required standards.
Last time James talked to them,
he spoke about how important getting real, concrete data
on the efficacy of games in the classroom was to his work,
and, to his surprise,
they told him that they had recently finished just such a study.
So it is with their help and thanks to their hard work,
that we are able to talk about it on the show today -
to spread the word and, hopefully, to encourage others to pursue similar studies.
In a previous episode about games' literacy in the classroom,
we discussed the barriers that exist to widespread classroom adoption of games,
focusing on the importance of promoting literacy and game mechanics and terminology to educators.
Today, I want to focus on what happens when we move past those barriers,
and explain why games are so important for education in the process.
The first and most obvious answer to the question of:
"Why games for education?"
is that the current educational environment practically begs for games content.
Trends like the mandate for 21st century skills,
one-to-one programs, the maker movement,
project-based learning, and personalized learning
are all concepts that are complex enough to deserve their own episodes,
but, in short, each of these trends is oriented towards preparing students
for a working world that demands teamwork,
an understanding of technology,
and self motivation.
And there's tons of research to show that learning games work,
but games are only a part of the equation.
Teachers are the other core piece.
There was a great article on this in the Journal of Educational Psychology, but, short version:
When we think about games in the classroom, we *have* to think about teachers,
because teachers are designing the experiences their students have every day.
It's up to the teacher to create or select instructional tools
and decide how best to incorporate them into their lessons.
These decisions are as important, maybe more important,
than the qualities of the particular tools involved.
Using games can improve learning under a variety of circumstances,
but the greatest games have been achieved by teachers who surround students game experiences
with additional support and instruction.
So, for the folks at Filament, curricula was the first and most obvious feature to wrap around the games,
making it easier for the teacher to bring games into the classroom
by providing teachers with an obvious place to insert games into their current curriculum.
Then, to couple that with the other advantage games have for teachers,
their next priority feature was metrics.
They created a way for teachers to get a more in depth look into how each student was learning.
After all, normally a teacher only gets to see the end result of the student's homework.
But games can record everything along the way,
providing a lot more information about how and where a student may struggle.
Then, with all of this in place, they reached out to Sun Prairie School District in Wisconsin,
which deployed the Filament Learning Games library across their entire district.
They worked with Mary Headington,
a fantastic teacher who was eager to help them study
how one game from the Filament Learning Library made a difference in her classroom.
Because, truth is, even though we all believe -
and I would even say know - that games have incredible potential as learning tools -
I mean, James has seen it, Filament has seen it -
without hard data about they can be applied *right now* in classrooms,
it's really hard to get major institutions to adopt them.
Besides, without this data, as much as we know that games can help,
we don't know exactly how to refine our games, where our assumptions may be wrong,
or exactly how we can better integrate games into the classroom.
So getting that data is what Filament set out to do,
which brings us back to the study with Mary Headington.
The game she used is called
Planet Mechanic -
a sandbox light simulation of the Sun, Earth, Moon system,
in which students can manipulate planetary bodies to see the impact those manipulations have
on the ground level planetary conditions.
Students can adjust features like atmosphere, tilt, rotation and lunar cycles
to change temperature, atmospheric pressure, and time on the planet.
These are concepts that are pretty challenging to grasp without a tangible representation,
and the game makes them more digestible and accessible to students.
For her study, Mary had all of her students take a pre-assessment
to test their current knowledge of the content in the game.
She then split her students into three sections:
a section where students would only play the game,
a section where students would only receive traditional instruction from her,
and a section where students would play both the game
and supplement that gameplay with traditional instruction.
Each section used the same amount of class time,
and the sections that received direct instruction from Mary
were tasked with a variety of supplemental activities.
Students viewed interactive visualizations, drew diagrams,
and used hands-on models of the Earth and Sun to reinforce their learning.
And afterwards, all three sections took another post-assessment.
The results might surprise you.
The scores of students who only played the game
were almost flat.
The average grades for this group went up by .1%.
Students who only received traditional instruction fared considerably better,
scores went up by an average of 6%,
showing strong growth between the pre- and post-test,
thanks to Mary's skilled guidance.
But the students who played the game *and* received traditional instruction?
For those students, the average scores went up by a whopping
ten percent - a full letter grade.
So what does this indicate about the place of games in the classroom?
These results verify that the teacher's role in guiding the classroom is as crucial as ever,
with the games acting as a force multiplier for her instruction.
This is how we need to view games for learning:
a pedagogical force multiplier.
I guess I should explain that.
A force multiplier refers to some factor that increases or multiplies effectiveness.
In the context of the classroom, a learning game takes the content we deliver to students
and amplifies their engagement, investment, and retention.
The results of the study are clear:
without the educator's critical role in the classroom, the game as a stand alone tool doesn't suffice.
But, with an educator's guidance, the game helps the educator
to exceed the results that they would get in the absence of that game.
And Mary had her own thoughts to share on what games accomplished for her students.
She said, "Games are never going to replace the teacher.
But games *are* changing how the teacher teaches.
Traditional instruction focuses on providing students with the information we want them to know
and then delivering it in a controlled manner.
But in this study, we witnessed students struggling with the concept and then determine what they needed to know.
They then used this information to direct their own personalized learning."
This looks different for each student.
Some students chose to conference with the teacher.
Some looked to classroom resources and Internet links,
while others went out on their own in search of the information.
These skills teach students *how* to learn, as opposed to being told *what* to learn.
If we provide situations for students to continually practice these skills,
especially in a game environment,
we will find that their motivation and thirst for knowledge increases.
Teachers are finding that education is becoming more of a partnership with the student.
and games foster that dynamic.
As we move more and more rapidly toward a future that
suffuses technology into every aspect of our lives,
the idea that video games can serve as a foundational tool for instruction
will become increasingly mainstream.
Filament is trying to do their part to lay the groundwork for an era of classroom content
that includes video games by default,
but they need help from the communities that serve as stakeholders for school districts.
If you want to see your local school district adopt a game based learning program,
get involved and advocate for more forward facing programs in your community.
Schools really need that community support to justify the hardware and software purchases
that equip their students for the future.
If they're past the hardware adoption point, and are ready to look at content,
point them to the Filament Games District Implementation Guide.
We've put a link down below.
It's a free resource that helps administrators wrap their heads around
adding game based learning to their curricula offerings.
It's a pretty easy argument to make.
[Outro music starts playing] Our success as a country depends on a well functioning and effective educational system.
It's on us to fill that system with forward facing programs like game based learning
that help to maximize our students' acheivement
and to pave their way to success in the modern world.
Thank you for watching, and we'll see you next week.
♪ [Outro music] ♪