Why?
As discussed elsewhere in this website, I feel like one of the best reasons that we have for moving towards a game-integrated pedagogy
is a desire to make our learning environments more like those of games. I have opened both of the past two semesters by referring my students to Gee's short article "Good Video Games and Good Learning." I do this to tell them that this type of pedagogy is my goal, that while we may not always achieve everything it suggests, we will continue to strive towards this type of customization, responsive, safe, networked, and sometimes frustrating environment. I tell them that I'll need their help in getting to this place, that I can't do it on my own. And
honestly, the worst response I've ever gotten to this goal is: Gee's kinda naive because that's just not how the world works.
And this kind of response only makes me want to use games more. It makes me worried about what students are coming to expect out of education, and it makes me worried about what they expect from my writing class. From the start, I've said that part of my reason for adopting this kind of pedagogy is to find a way to engage students, to excite them about what we are doing in class. However, I still don't see this as a driving reason, as something that we can hang our hats on. In fact, I was questioned by my faculty advisor when I first brought up the idea of doing this type of pedagogy. He sat me down and asked me "Why?" I gave him my typical long-winded answer and I could see him visibly relax the farther I got into it. At the end, he told me that he was glad to hear that I had thought it out, that I had more reasons than just making students happy (more on this as a problem later). And I agree with him up to the point where I wonder what we accomplish by doing everything just like we always have. I need a way to break students out of this current-traditional rhetoric rut that they've been driven into and, while it won't always work, I do see game-integrated pedagogies as harboring the possibility of a step in the right direction. So defamiliarization matters (or call it engagement or whatever else you will).
But I actually argued another line to my faculty advisor. I told him all about how game represent many of the same things that we already want to speak about in composition. This is why I think that game-integrated pedagogies can move beyond simple "theming" exercises for composition courses. As I discuss in my framework for integration that I call the Five Levels, games can actually enter into our pedagogies naturally. But more on that in the next section.
Summary
Gee's learning principles show us an effective way to teach
We can defamiliarize students' from their expectations of a writing class
From discourse communities to design to critical analysis, gaming naturally fits with modern composition pedagogies