Problems
I would be remiss not to mention common problems that might arise in any attempt to integrate videogames into a composition classroom. Ultimately, however, the type and difficulty of problems will vary according to situation and setting. By any means, I do not wish to downplay these difficulties, but I do want to suggest that they are often possible to overcome. To this end, I will provide a quick explanation of the problem and an equally quick comment on a possible solution.
Cost/Technology Barrier: Out of any claim against the use of videogames in the composition classroom, this is perhaps the most sustained and intractable: it will almost certainly cost money. Games cost money. Computers or consoles to play them on cost more money. Not all students have access to the same technologies, so affordances would need to be made. Ideally, classes that used videogames would be taught in technology classrooms like what we have here at Wayne State, where each student has access to a computer. Still, this would not mitigate the cost of the games themselves. Possible workarounds to this problem include: having the students work in groups (few copies of games), allowing students to interact with various games they already own (though this might cause some coordination difficulties), using free games (though these are often less complex), or developing games (though this takes a good deal of expertise and time). Ultimately, there is no single solution for this endemic problem. Rather individual instructors will have to evaluate this aspect according to their situation.
Selection of Games: So, let's say you have a situation where you can feasibly use videogames, how do you choose the game you want to use? This isn't an easy decision.
First of all, there is a common refrain that girls like different games than boys. Whereas this isn't a problem with books in the classroom, it might actually affect student engagement with a videogame (which is a primary goal of this pedagogy). This problem is likely overblown because
it isn't necessarily true (it does seem like an awfully sexist idea)
there are games that reach across a wide population of interests.
Also, the key to use of videogames isn't necessarily to give students entertainment that they would otherwise seek outside of the classroom, but to make them critically address a media that they commonly use.
Violence/Sexism in Games: The divide between male and female games is often further described in this way: girls don't like games with killing. Whether or not this is true, it raises the question of what type of game is appropriate for a classroom environment. Of course, being college teachers, we have a lot more leeway on this front (I've shown movies with brief nudity in class before and never gotten a complaint--though I did, of course, warn the students days beforehand). But let me offer a few examples of games that might cross that threshold:
In God of War III, the hero, Kratos, who the players control, has sex with Aphrodite. The scene involves
a lot of
nudity (though no actual depiction of the sex).In a more disturbing moment, Modern Warfare II includes a mission where the player, playing as an undercover agent working with a Russian terrorist group, runs through an airport murdering bystanders.
The important thing about these examples is that they are both mainstream and popular games. The primary solution is for teachers to be familiar with the entire content of the game before making a choice.
Passive Play: Typically, games are played passively, so it can be somewhat difficult to have students move towards a more active, critical method of play while still maintaining engagement. I can remember the first time I really made sure that I was playing a game actively--that is, while playing, thinking critically both about the game and its connections to a wider social sphere. Loading screens were now free time to scrawl down a few quick notes so that I wouldn't forget anything during the next level. And the pause button became my best friend. It is a much slower going (and honestly more tiring) to play a game this way, but it is the only way to get past obvious connections. Fortunately, certain games might be able to encourage this method. Games built around critical problem solving might be slow paced enough and also already encourage a form of deep thinking. Social realism games, as discussed by Alex Galloway in Gaming: Essays on Algorithmic Culture (discussed more in Gamic Action), can tie players to representations of life that reflect their own experience, thus inviting a comparison between representation and real life. And different kinds of epistemic or serious games might raise a similar concern about representation.
Reductive Use: Reductive use refers to the integration of games into a classroom without respecting the complexity and multivalence of the medium. This is instead a common theme of criticism through most of the methods of integration. The basic idea is that games are complex objects and that they require complex methods in order to capture the possibilities of their use. It isn't uncommon for a proponent of game integration to criticize the methods of another like-minded innovator as reductive. Moving through the different sections, you'll notice this issue arise again and again in different contexts (including my reviews of others' lesson plans). It seems like this criticism isn't going anywhere soon.
Additional Resource
Rice, John. "New Media Resistance: Barriers to Implementation of Computer Video Games in the Classroom." Jl. of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia (2007) 16(3), 249-261.
In this article, Rice discusses six possible barriers to the educational use of videogames including: "negative perceptions toward video games as educational components; the difficulty of providing state of the art graphics in educational video games; a lack of adequate computing hardware in the classrooms to run advanced video games; a school day divided by short class periods which hindered long term engagement in complex games; a lack of real world affordances; and a lack of alignment to state standards" (249).