Quote: “Up to and through the better part of the twentieth century, regarding knowledge as a static, easily transmitted what made sense, and it was the primary principle we used to shape our understanding of learning and education.” (p. 91). I understand what they’re getting at, but I think this shortchanges a great deal of twentieth-century teachers and students. Learning within schools may have been focused on this type of knowledge, but there was plenty of learning going on outside of schools: values, culture, handcrafts, trades, etc., in which the learning was exactly the type of learning the authors promote in this book. It seems to me that this was particularly true in areas in which literacy/reading were not involved.
Question: Again, the portion of page 94 that talks about traditional approaches that overlook learning through hands-on activities seems to ignore the fact that, historically, hands-on activities were the only way that many things were passed down through the generations.
Connection: Talking about knowing where to find information, as opposed to having the information stockpiled, (p. 93), makes me think of the libraries that contained information before, during, and after the technology revolution. These libraries were my sources for all the information I could ever need. If I didn’t know how to find what I wanted, a librarian did. And, my ability to use this resource was a necessary skill set. This doesn’t seem so different to me from the internet - it’s just in a different form.
Epiphany: “Riddles make sense only retroactively.” (p. 98). I love this idea! I never thought about it before, but this is exactly how riddles work!
Chapter 8
Quote: “As people start to play in their environment, they rediscover the different possibilities opened up by those gaps. That rediscovery causes a shift in perspective, where the process of knowing stops being about one’s relationship to others and becomes about one’s relationship to the environment.” (p. 102). This is an interesting assessment of the progression they are describing. I’m not sure I can separate the social out from the environmental that much. They seem too enmeshed to me, at least in the online gaming world the authors describe.
Question: The assertion that “the relationship between people and their environments is rich, complex, and changing” (p. 103) is really at the core of everything we do as teachers, isn’t it? Isn’t it is exactly the complexity of the people, the complexity of the environments, and the exponential complexity caused when they interact that keeps us always searching for a new way to explain and a new way to open students up to learning?
Connection: The book uses the phrase “indwelling” to describe a certain type of presence in the digital world (p. 101), but this wasn’t really speaking to me until I read Staci Henry’s blog, which described this as the difference between looking in from the outside and actually learning from the inside. Now, this makes more sense to me.
Epiphany: “Geeking out involves learning to navigate esoteric domains.” (p. 104). What an evocative image!
Chapter 9
Quote: “Solutions are not discovered so much as they are organically grown.” (p. 110). Learning in this type of environment would certainly lead to some amazing solutions!
Question:The authors describe MMO’s as an ideal learning collective. (p.107). But where does this leave teachers and schools? Can we duplicate the culture of MMO’s in a classroom? Isn’t it the very fact that these games are labeled “play” that draws people in? And, somehow, this is heightened by the player’s passion for the elements of the games: competition, battles, quests, etc. Can we replicate this passion in a classroom? If so, how?
Connection: The book ends with the statement: “And where imaginations play, learning happens.” (p. 118). This is an exciting mandate for the future, although it may not be terribly practical. The authors have certainly made a good case for the fact that learning occurs in play; but the practical implications of this are left to the reader. So, where does this take me as a teaching candidate? It certainly reinforces my belief that games involve learning, and that whenever possible I should attempt to use a gaming approach. But, it also leaves open a number of questions about which aspects of gaming produce the best learning, what to do when a student hasn’t discovered a passion, and how to replicate a culture of learning within the average classroom.
Epiphany: “The key to questing is not typical problem solving. It is innovation.” (p. 114). I think that “typical problem solving” usually involves innovation, as well. It may be innovation that has entered into a well-worn pattern of processes, but it is still coming up with something new.