I teach young learners aged from 6 to 10 years old in a language school in Brazil. All of them arrive 10 to 15 minutes before the classes and spend this time in the school computer lab. I like to spend some of this time with them because it is a good opportunity to check what they are doing and practice the language in a casual environment. As all of them play computer games, I sit next to them and observe. From these observations, I realised that if they fail at whatever game they are playing at that moment, they always go back and try again until they learn the strategies, concepts and skills to ‘win!’ Then, when they achieve those goals, they set new ones and come back for more. I also realised that games should give us teachers the tools to engage student learning in ways that reflect what we know about motivation, achievement, and actual learning itself. So, what is it about games? Shernoff & Csikszentmihalyi, in their chapter Flow in Schools Revisited, point out that enjoyment and interest in school are good predictors of student success. They propose that an ideal learning environment presents challenging and relevant activities that allow students to feel confident and in control; promotes both concentration and enjoyment; is intrinsically satisfying in the short term while building a foundation of skills and interests; involves both intellect and feeling; and requires effort and yet feels like play. This is just like a game! Games also work in what is called the zone of proximal development. The zone of proximal development is the gap between what a learner has already mastered and what they can achieve when provided with educational support – guidance, persistence, and encouragement. It is a concept introduced by Lev Vygotsky (1896 – 1934). I have always believed that real learning happens when you are having fun. It does not mean that learning is not hard work – it is! But it can be both fun and challenging, just like a game. With games, players (learners) are challenged, so they persist, plan better for the next time, and then learn. Every time we learn something new, there is a discharge of dopamine in our brains so that the hard work of learning is intrinsically rewarded. There is no need for extrinsic rewards, which in my opinion, hinder creativity. Finally, games encourage trial and failure. All people who play games fail more than they succeed, but it only means that a certain approach failed, not the player (learner). They know that if they keep trying, they will find other approaches that will succeed, and they can advance and keep playing. They know they will only succeed if they try, and they engage in a game for the challenge and enjoyment, measuring achievement and competence, not grades. Isn’t this what we want from our learners? References: Shernoff, D. J., Abdi, B., Anderson, B., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). Flow in schools revisited: Cultivating engaged learners and optimal learning environments. In Furlong, R. Gilman & S. Huebner (Eds.) Handbook of Positive Psychology in Schools, 2nd edition, pp. 211-226. New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 108 - 121.
0 Comments
|
ArchivesCategories |