I’ve been reading Eric Klopfer’s new book “Augmented Learning”.  Its about the use of mobile games in the classroom with the goal of imparting soft skills such as sustained reasoning, collaboration, anticipating change and abstract thinking about information technology.  I’m up to chapter three and so far it is very interesting albeit currently strongly focussed on the U.S. approach to education and educational policy.

What I found … interesting .. or maybe at times frustrating … was the need to defend the word “game” as a blacklisted activity in the classroom.  Apparently schools, some teachers and parents in the USA immediately consider “game” to translate into “ultra violent computer/video game”.  However, games have been used in the classroom for as long as there have been classrooms.  Before computers there were board, card, dice and other forms of games used in the classroom to engage students.

I found the need for Klopfer to define and defend the word “game” quite a drawn out section of chapter one and chapter two.  Though it is obvious from reading this that his research team has had quite a battle getting computer games accepted in the classroom as a viable teaching medium.

I began this post with the intention of giving my own definition of game.  But I’m not sure that is particularly important.  Whether we call them games, simulations, explorations or virtual environments, ultimately our goal is to engage students and provide them with educational opportunities beyond the traditional classroom.  How the term “game” is perceived is just symmantics.  We could debate its definition until we are blue in the face. What matters is how we are using information technology to enhance the teaching and learning experience.  What you call it …. well “Augmented Learning” is a start.