ENGL 895: Embodied Cognition – Learning Paper Thoughts

I’m interested in gamification, particularly in regard to pedagogy. Video games are wildly successful, capturing audiences that range from age 5-45. In fact, the average of a gamer is 35 years old and has been playing games for years. I grew up playing games (I started with the original Atari), and my husband spends most of his time playing his PS3 (much to my chagrin). Clearly, video games are good at what they do, and what they do is promote learning. 

Education and the academy are supposed to promote learning, but I don’t think they do it all that well. At least I know that the students I receive (those required to take general education writing courses) are largely disenchanted with the system of education. Therefore, I’m trying to find ways to make my classes more like video games – more engaging, more interactive, more exciting. 

James Paul Gee, a big name in video game pedagogy, argues that there are certain learning principles that good games incorporate: identity, interaction, production, risk taking, customization, agency, well-ordered problems, challenge and consolidation, “just-in-time” and “on-demand,” situated meanings, pleasantly frustrating, system thinking, explore/think laterally/rethink goals, smart tools and distributed knowledge, cross-functional teams, and performance before competence. 

There are many features here that are interesting for game designers and course designers (teachers) alike, and they align with many theories/findings on the way our brains work and learn. I’d like to explore the potential connections below: 

For identity, I want to explore the role of the avatar that is either adopted or created in video games. I’m not sure how to connect this, but part of my interest is in exploring how virtual reality recreates an embodied experience. You “feel” like you’re there. I can see possible connections to Damasio and “feelings vs. emotions” here. I also recall Dreyfus (I think?) and his description of virtual reality. 

For “just in time” and “on-demand,” Gee argues that video games provide text tutorials “just in time,” that is, when the gamer has reached a point where that information is necessary to proceed. He argues that textbooks fail because the information isn’t relevant to the students until much later in their process. I’d like to connect this to our reading in Buzsaki who discusses written procedures in navigational exercises as media for learning and performing. I can’t quite remember, but I believe he makes a point about the brain’s process for automating a practice that might resonate with this idea. 

For interaction, I’d like to draw connections to Cozolino’s social brain and explore how video games are structured in ways that invite collaboration and how that collaboration promotes learning. 

For situated meanings, Gee argues that people understand concepts, like words and their meanings, best when they can connect them to a specific experiences, and games do this well. I’d like to explore what Barsalou says about this. 

For “pleasantly frustrating,” I’d like to explore some of the emotions surrounding the learning process, such as frustration and confidence. I’d like to explore diSessa’s work in this area and see if I can make a connection to Damasio. 

I can see this going in many more directions, but here’s where I’ve started. I welcome any suggestions.