The subject of games and gaming has been in my thoughts and
conversations often over the past few months. Which games benefit kids;
which ones can 'make learning fun'?
When
people first find unschooling, a common theme presented is that we
learn through games or that unschooling is about finding ways to *make
learning fun* . I get that saying we have fun learning is to counter
the idea that we spend our days forcing our kids to learn a curriculum
around the kitchen table. I understand the appeal of games as learning
tools to make the point that learning need not be drudgery, that even
when it looks like all we do is play all day, learning really is
happening. Sometimes, it's tempting to make that argument to convince
others -- extended family, in-laws, friends who kids attend school,
neighbors, etc -- that we really are responsible parents.
Today
I was part of a conversation about learning games; someone asked about
'fun games to help learn grammar'. At first I groaned, because I'm a
lover of words and a lifelong grammar geek. Around our house, words are
fun, whether we're making puns (Gary is the master of bad puns!)
playing with double entendres, singing songs, or telling stories or
bawdy jokes. The very idea that one would need a game to make grammar
fun is laughable!
I understand how people get confused about the topic, though. Anyone who went to school got the idea that some particular subject was both essential and no fun to learn. For me it was math. Really, though, that makes learning much more complicated than it needs to be, and we risk sucking the fun out of playing games. Games are designed to be fun. When learning happens to happen along the way to enjoying or becoming good at a game, that's a bonus. I say when not if, because you will learn something, even if it's not about the actual game -- we're big story tellers while games are played and many own childhood memories, as well as my kids' current stories, are shared over games.
I understand how people get confused about the topic, though. Anyone who went to school got the idea that some particular subject was both essential and no fun to learn. For me it was math. Really, though, that makes learning much more complicated than it needs to be, and we risk sucking the fun out of playing games. Games are designed to be fun. When learning happens to happen along the way to enjoying or becoming good at a game, that's a bonus. I say when not if, because you will learn something, even if it's not about the actual game -- we're big story tellers while games are played and many own childhood memories, as well as my kids' current stories, are shared over games.
Learning as the purpose of a game? I think that's just plain dishonest.The
idea of *games that teach (insert subject here)* has always bothered
me. When we do that we're separating out certain parts of life into
subject matter, and assuming that one or another is hard to learn, so
it's necessary to *make it fun*. We're saying that this particular
subject is not only hard to learn, but it's no fun at all, so we need to
invent a *game* to sneak some learning into our kids. We're saying
that we don't trust our child will embrace learning something new.
Usually, that's a sign that what we think our child needs to learn isn't
truly necessary to his life. After all, if you're enjoying the way you
spend your days, and you hit a point where you need more knowledge to
continue your enjoyment, why wouldn't you want to learn that?
Several years ago, when Andy was 8 and Dan 4, I bought a couple of Mad Libs books, before a road trip thinking it would make a fun ice-breaker for the cousins (my sister's kids were 12 & 7 then).
We were at my sister's when I asked if anyone wanted to play Mad Libs with me, because I LOVE Mad Libs. Andy asked, "what's Mad Libs?" Before I could answer, my sister said "it's a game that helps you learn parts of speech." Gee, thanks. I could feel the fun being sucked out of the room. And with it my kid's trust. It was no surprise to me when no one wanted to play Mad Libs.
It was several years before I found anyone who would play Mad Libs with me. Andy had no interest in playing a *game* created to teach him something. We are people who love words, and we're grammar geeks, so words are fun in every other part of our life, but he wasn't going to play that game.
About a year ago, Dan discovered the Mad Libs books, and his best friend's Mom also had some around, so the kids played those. Now we play Mad Libs every so often, and even Andy joins and has fun. It makes me sad to think we missed 3 yrs of Mad Libs fun. Sadder, though, is that for some time after that day, Andy was suspicious of any new game I tried to introduce, worried that each one was just a pretext for some kind of learning I thought he needed.
If something comes naturally, then just let it flow and along the way other necessary learning will follow, just like a big sticky ball of knowledge -- often wrapped up with exciting trivia from our full day-to-day lives. It's dishonest to construct or choose a game specifically to teach a child a particular skill that you or someone else think a child needs to know. Be honest, be real, play games for the fun of it.
2 comments:
I'm glad you turned this into a blog post. I wanted to tell you that I'm sad that you lost that time because of a fear that you were trying to be sneaky. I'm also sorry that someone really only saw MadLibs as a way to learn grammar.
This topic is one that is near and dear to my heart because of my history with it. You make good points in the opening of your post, about how talking about learning being fun often has to do with trying to explain to other people what we do.
When I was a kid, my Mom worked for the school district. She had started as a volunteer, designing and making "learning games." They were beautiful. She'd come up with an idea and make board games with delightful little drawings. I wish I had one of them. They were lovely works of art.
She had this idea that if you made learning "fun" then you could "teach kids anything."
Years later, she saw some research- I wish I could remember where- that was done on kids in schools and "learning games." For years, teachers used them to "give the kids a break" and make it seem like they were "just playing" and they received a very positive response to all the games. Kids loved them and would ask to play them.
Turns out, when given complete freedom of choice of what to do, NONE of the children in the study chose those games. They only "loved" them and chose them WHEN THE ALTERNATIVE WAS WORSE. As in, only when it got them out of "regular" schoolwork.
I found that very interesting. So did my Mom.
She stopped making the board games- but she was never able to let go of the concept of "making a game out of it."
I'm not surprised to hear the results of the study where kids only chose learning games when it got them out of regular school work.
Last week I saw an article online about Skinner's early research, where he *proved* that rats would almost always choose drugs over food. Later someone re-ran the study, only this time they offered the rats other things like toys and the rats lived in comfortable cages. Of course, the now-happier rats chose food over drugs!
I've always been bothered by the idea that we'd have to MAKE learning fun.
Thanks for sharing your Mom's story!
Post a Comment