Check out my website:

For the Love of Physics

Video Games - Thinking Laterally Not Linearly ! Really?

It is interesting to read how Gee analyzes, why video games capture interests more than learning at school. I agree to disagree with some of the things he says.
Although  video games are more popular with children than school books, because of the identity, agency, control, interaction, low risk of failing etc., one of the major attractions according to me is the unpredictability. Every time one plays the game there is a certain amount of surprise factor involved which twists and turns the game making it more appealing to the players. The same kind of thrill is obtained when one plays soccer or any team sport. But the video games offer a low probability of loosing and even if one loses , it doesn't matter - you can start over with out having to hear from coach.
So one of the major reasons a child might be willing to play video games as opposed to soccer is the thrill of winning without having to do much practice or without having to see failures.
As far as the lateral thinking that video games offer ( according to Gee) - I am not sure if  the domain into which the thinking extends laterally is wide and significant at all. One might be thinking about the strategies - but only with in a limited domain. Lets compare a Wii Mario Cart with Algebraic Equations. When you play Mario Cart, there are only limited number of actions that player can perform, but the scenarios that the game simulates could extend to almost infinity.So what a player learns is only limited. Its like giving a student to solve y=mx+c with infinite number of possible combinations of 'm' and 'c'. Imagine giving a student 100 problems with different values of 'm' and 'c' - how much 'learning' is happening here? This is similar to video games. Lateral thinking is more for the game designers than for the players in such a case. I think, schools do not linearly focus on 'goal', unlike what Gee says. If students are enticed with goals and benefits of the goals every step of the way, they would be more willing to work harder than now. Working with Scarlett  students, I feel that they are not seeing a 'purpose' in learning.. their purpose of being able to perform important cognitive tasks are not clear to them. Many students seem to have abilities but do not seem to attach those abilities to any value or purpose.
I think if we adapt the video game concept to regular classroom teaching,
-making the learning thrilling,
-setting every day goals that are nearly tanglible and certainly realizable, and
-also showing students the bigger picture of purpose of learning frequently
we can get the students back into the classrooms in real sense.

Smarter Balance Assessment needs to be little more smart

Smarter Balance is a state-led consortium to develop new online assessment tool for Common Core State Standards. Michigan legislature is supporting to implement this tool during 2014-15 school year for the first time. It is not only surprising but scary in some sense to provide an assessment tool  that is remotely user friendly with clumsy interface to school children. I am also surprised to read that this consortium is led by assessment professionals from 26 states, more than half the country. However, smartly the assessment questions in Math and English might have been designed, the tool that presents these seemingly smart assessment questions to school children should be far more intuitive than what it is now. Smarter Balance falls way short in this regard.
That brings to question why would a State like Michigan decide to subject its students to this?
According to American Community Survey, approximately 32.43% of Michigan's population has only earned an Associates Degree. Michigan has a lower percentage of people with a Bachelor's Degree than the United States. With the state of affairs like this, why would the State scare away its students from  aspiring for higher education by implementing assessment tools like these.
Simple paper based examination gives students  an idea about required time allocation per question when looking at  question paper in its entirety. There is less cognitive overload involved when dealing set of papers which one can flip, turn, do rough work on and revise. Apart from being straining to eyes, these tests seem to provide extra burden to brain simply because of its user unfriendliness. That is not to say, all computer based assessment tools are same.  There are quite a few of them that are very easy to navigate and answer  like  ALEKS and IXL. These are membership based online training and assessment materials that only privileged few can afford. Is Michigan Department of education aware of latest standards in human-computer interaction? Why is there no interest in providing Michigan students the cutting edge technological advantage ? Or at least leave them alone with paper based assessment which is far superior to the proposed computer based test.

Learning by Doing & "Communities of Practice"

Dewey's views about learning by doing and 'experience' being central to learning is truly modernistic, especially given the fact that he formulated his notions much before the advent of ipads, apps and other abundant learning mediums we have today. Dewey also stressed the importance of instructor lead learning focusing on what he called the three elements of education i.e. school, society and children. A good mix of traditional values and truly useful modern approach to learning is what makes Dewey's principles of Education Technology unique and fascinating. Dismissing the objectivists teaching approach of didactic transfer of knowledge as 'relatively technical and superficial' he emphasized on learning by doing. He made a call for a 'linking science' to bridge theory and practice in the field of education.