Teacher Develops Game To Make History Interesting

[Veylon]

Heh. I can imagine poor Van Dunk freezing his ass off at Valley Forge, counting the days until his enlistment's up.

Only a week until the New Year and he can go home and forget this stupid war. But what's this? Marching orders in the middle of winter? Can't General Washington just admit it's over and give up with some dignity? But no, now we gotta have one last hurrah so he can look tough in front of the bloody useless Congress. Damn it George!

 

[Darth_Dude]

I have two words for you all.


Oregon Trail.



Hell, I'm not even American and I still love that game and the history of the whole Manifest Destiny, westward-ho kinda thing. It sounds incredibly adventurous and, despite the dangers and the hardship, it is the kind of thing I would attempt were I alive at such a time.

Imagine it - travelling a looooong road, through barely known lands, past treacherous rivers and perilous mountain passes. At the end, the opportunity to stake a claim in a new world; to provide for your family and your descendants. To, essentially, establish a new country.

Don't forget murdering all the Natives and stealing their land.

Hey,hey, we never murdered anyone, they just refused to move and we exercised a more aggressive form of eminent domain.

I see what you did there....

 

[xXAsherahXx]

There's no other subject I suck up more than history. I breezed through AP Euro and AP US History without much of an effort and I'm doing the same with Government (although that isn't really history). I was thinking of majoring or minoring in that for college.

 

[Baresark]

The whole problem with learning that period in American History is not that it's uninteresting, it's that we were taught that same period every single year from like 4th grade on. It is boring because people get tired of hearing the same stories over and over again. The shit part is that it's always taught so poorly, it may as well be new every year.

History is made boring up until we are taught history other than American history. That is the problem.

 

[Nickolai77]

I think this is a really good idea. Mainly because, if the kid's learn anything from it, it's that history isn't a simple case of good guys versus bad guys as is portrayed in popular history. I dare say there are some pop history text books which portray the American Revolution as something which all Americans united under the hero George Washington against the wicked British- as is the way with how history is imagined. With this learning program, with kids saying they would have fought with the loyalists, shows them how history is lot more complicated than how they otherwise may have been taught.

The whole problem with learning that period in American History is not that it's uninteresting, it's that we were taught that same period every single year from like 4th grade on. It is boring because people get tired of hearing the same stories over and over again. The shit part is that it's always taught so poorly, it may as well be new every year.

History is made boring up until we are taught history other than American history. That is the problem.

In Britain we have the opposite problem, we have more history than we know what do with so massive and vital chunks are left out of the history curriculum. You occasionally get threads here asking what Brit's think about the American war of independence/war of 1812- and the answer is always not much, we simply aren't taught about those wars.

 

[VoidWanderer]

And after reading that article I realize that the Escapist needs a like button!

 

[LadyDeadly]

I might be a bit sore that i had to learn about history in a dry text book, but i think this is an awesome teaching tool! I hope more teachers use it!

 

[standokan]

History needed to be more interesting than it is now? Boy do I sound like a nerd...

I agree wholeheartedly my friend, and all it takes to make history interesting for those who think it isn't is a good teacher. Honestly, the only reason I like history as much as I do is that I had a great teacher for it.

 

[immortalfrieza]

Interesting idea, but the real question is: Can this game also manage to make history relevant?

This is pretty much what I was going to say. While other classes at least have a use up to a point, History (along with Gym) has no relevance to practically everybody. How many people are going to get a job involving history? Next to none, and those few that do go to College to learn what they actually need for said job.

OT: This game reminds me of Oregon Trail, Number Munchers, those games I played back in Elementary. From my experience with those I can tell you, turning a class subject into a video game doesn't really teach people anything unless it has practical application. In fact, nobody learns anything unless whatever they're being taught has practical application on a frequent basis. I can barely remember ANYTHING about the Revolutionary War or any other history subject anymore, and that's because I have no reason to remember it.

 

[ThatLankyBastard]

I remember my history teacher did this with WW2. He split the students into various countries (I was Russia... Fuck yeah!), gave them all stats (like army and navy strength, resources, etc.), and said that if we can resolve the situation without going to war we can get 100% in the class...

Unfortunately, it was set up so it was impossible to not go to war. the conditions for each countries "victory-through-peace" were inter tangled enough so, although not obvious, no one could be attained without violating another. Afterwards however, he just let us have a war to see who would win! The British-Russian forces decimated the world through trickery, deceit and (presumably) the black arts...

 

[Metalrocks]

damn, i wish my teacher would come up with this idea over 10 years ago, but the problem is, he is a damn pacifist and would not even allow any kind of violence. doesnt matter if its history or not.

what about the age of empire games? i have learned a lot from them. especially AoE 2.

 

[Warped_Ghost]

History needed to be more interesting than it is now? Boy do I sound like a nerd...

I second this.

 

[Rainboq]

So.... End of the road, huh, Vansau? Your stuff's been good reading. Will we be seeing you somewhere else around the net?

Yeah, I'll still kick around the forums. I got a new job at Inside Social Games, so you can find me there on Monday. Thanks for the kind words!

We shall miss you on this site, take care and good luck!

OT: Kudos to him for the endeavour, I'd love to see more follow suit.

 

[Vault Citizen]

These games can be fun, one of the moral choices I remember most from a game was in one of such game.

 

[Commissar Sae]

Interesting idea, but the real question is: Can this game also manage to make history relevant?

This is pretty much what I was going to say. While other classes at least have a use up to a point, History (along with Gym) has no relevance to practically everybody. How many people are going to get a job involving history? Next to none, and those few that do go to College to learn what they actually need for said job.

OT: This game reminds me of Oregon Trail, Number Munchers, those games I played back in Elementary. From my experience with those I can tell you, turning a class subject into a video game doesn't really teach people anything unless it has practical application. In fact, nobody learns anything unless whatever they're being taught has practical application on a frequent basis. I can barely remember ANYTHING about the Revolutionary War or any other history subject anymore, and that's because I have no reason to remember it.

General knowledge is fairly important to most jobs. Most history classes actually have a hidden importance. They teach you how to do research and develop your ability to think in different ways. So is knowing why the American revolution was fought particularly relevant, no. Is understanding how to look at various events and seeing different variables beyond the obvious useful, of course. I can't remember the exact numbers but most successful CEOs actually have a background in the humanities rather than business, since it allows them to think outside the limitations of the business models that are drilled into them.

In sum: an accountant will know how to crunch numbers, but no necessarily the reason why hes doing it.

 

[Stoneface]

This sound awesome! History cant be taught as just dates and names, you have to create stories that have some context and that students can related to, or at least find interesting. Minor historical point though: the idea that many loyalists in New Jersey joined out of fear of being killed by the British is rubbish, more American colonists were killed, beaten and coerced by the Continental forces than by the British, who knew how badly they needed to retain American public support.

 

[Gatx]

Teachers are always thinking that they have to make dry subjects interesting for students, but it's completely the wrong view.

If they view the subject as dry, then naturally that's what's going to get communicated to them. They need to have passion for the subject. Then it's not so much a matter of making the subject interesting as it is just a matter of showing students how interesting the subject already is.

Having said that, I think this is a wonderful idea.

I disagree, it doesn't matter how passionate the teacher is if the students find it boring. It's like listening to a fanboy chatter on about their favorite videogame franchise that you have no interest in. Therefore it's the teacher's job to MAKE the subject interesting for the students.

 

[Fijiman]

I have two words for you all.


Oregon Trail.

I have heard about that game for years now, but I've yet to either see or play it. Mostly because I can't be bothered to look it up.

I think that this guy should continue making games like this. Who knows, maybe one day a majority of schools will be using his games to teach instead of doing it the old fashioned way.

 

[dobahci]

I disagree, it doesn't matter how passionate the teacher is if the students find it boring. It's like listening to a fanboy chatter on about their favorite videogame franchise that you have no interest in. Therefore it's the teacher's job to MAKE the subject interesting for the students.

I think that's misunderstanding just how much influence teachers have over their students.

Students are young and pliable. What they find interesting is partially inherent, but it's also partially based upon what they see around them. Peer pressure, environmental factors. If a school has beautiful athletic facilities and a really rundown, shitty-looking, ill-equipped chemistry lab, which will the student tend to gravitate towards? Between science and athletics, it'll be pretty obvious to the student which is considered a higher priority for the school, and more worthy of respect, prestige, and funding.

The issue I think isn't so much one of some subjects being inherently boring as that schools often create an environment in which students are basically taught to think of those subjects as boring.

I come at this from the perspective of someone who has privately tutored math and science to college athletes, and heard them say, "Wow, this math stuff isn't all that hard after all, and some of it is even interesting! Why didn't any of my teachers ever show me this?"

 

[NewYork_Comedian]

Choosing Sides sounds like a great way to make history interesting for students, and it also doesn't sound like Allocco is finished making educational videogames. The man has stated that he wants to create more games that put students in "key moments" of American history.

It's a neat way to get kids thinking about the issues... but two days is a lot of time to spend on such a small part of the material.

Now, I think it's good what he's done, sure. It makes a nice lead-in to a unit on the American Revolution... but we shouldn't confuse something like this with "teaching," in the same way we shouldn't confuse flavor with nutrition.

I think what this should show people is that, while beneficial, it's simply not the most efficient use of time. This isn't something that is sustainable for long-range instruction, as long as we're still expected to deliver the same horrifically bloated curriculum. We would need 500 days a year to cover it all at this pace.

I foresee a lot of people pointing to this as an example of how teachers should "change their methods." I see it being used more to criticize teachers than to look at the total situation. But teachers aren't the ones making the bad decisions right now. Some things to keep in mind:

1. Teachers are often paralyzed by the weight of the "standard course of study." Why should 5th graders know what a dodecagon is? Why do 6th graders need to learn the nitrogen cycle? They shouldn't, but we have to teach it, and that's time we lose reinforcing more relevant and useful stuff. We're forced to teach "a mile wide, but an inch deep."

2. The standard course of study is set by the test, despite the assurance that it's the other way around. And we don't write the tests. We don't even get asked. Multiple choice? Worst way to measure learning... but it's quick and easy to grade, as well as cheaper, so that's what is pushed on us.

3. Areas like history are still, by and large, not tested. Thankfully, that gives them a little more flexibility (for now) to innovate. That should be the lesson: when you give teachers control over what and how they teach, they do great stuff.

4. It would be just as wrong to force this method on every classroom, too. Our problem in education right now is that as soon as a higher-up notices something that works for one person in one classroom, they immediately begin over-applying it to everyone -- the belief seems to be that there are a million ways to learn, but only one way to teach (somehow).

I think you would appreciate this lecture.


OT: I personally love history (see the hours Ive clocked into the Total War/Civilization series), and I would definitively like to try out this game if I ever get the chance.