Thanks to everyone who responded to the first blog! Keep it up. Also, feel free to "follow" the blog for updates. :)
(Begins Oct 29 - Ends Nov 5)
Read Ender's Game, Chapters 3 and 4, and respond to these questions:
Chapter 3, 4:
1) What games are mentioned in Chapters 3 and 4? What games are being played in Chapters 3 and 4? What is the goal? What are the stakes? What is the scope?
2) Are games a suitable way of teaching and instruction? Are games the best way to teach and instruct? Should games be serious? Should they be fun? At what point is a game not a game?
This is Kevin Lam.
ReplyDeleteGames that are mentioned in the chapters are ones of training kids to be soldiers. War games in battle rooms to learn strategy, tactics, and leadership. The goal was to win and nobody gets hurt but winning and losing was everything so i guess reputation between other students.
I think games are a good way to teach especially in this kind of scenario because then your building experience in the most realistic way. I think in this case the games should be taken seriously because its obviously for training to survive but in general I think its good to have an option. As for being fun I think its the same situation for whether it should be serious or not. I think it doesnt become a game when it gets too serious and lives are at stake.
Chapters 3 & 4
ReplyDelete1.)Battle Room / War Games are being played.
War games, to teach and train the students to be soldiers.
To have the students become great soldiers, to fight against the buggers.
Humanity, the end of humankind.
2.)Yes, as long as the student is applying themselves.
Yes, providing the student is really learning.
No, but in this scenario it should be because of the need to survive.
Yes, otherwise it would be a game.
When someone gets hurt.
1) The battle room games and war games.
ReplyDeleteThe war games are being played out by students.
The goal is to teach students about strategy and tactics.
2) Games are already used to teach students, as they have been for decades, and I would say as history has proven that yes they are suitable.
Best, maybe. It depends on the student whether or not games are the "best" and most appropriate avenue for learning.
Games can simply be. Fun and seriousness are measured by the player, all of these traits are placed upon the game by the applicant, designers may try to label them in some futile attempt to organize it into a category or use as a way to drive toward a goal of being fun or serious but it is really not up to them.
When one stops playing it.
DAVID SHORT
ReplyDelete1)The games mentioned in the two chapters were games of tactical war. The goal was to teach the students tactical skills and train them to be competetive. This would help them keep their heads on straight during a real war.
2)I think games are a very useful tool, and they can very easily be used to teach a certain skill. I'm sure they aren't the best way to educate, but they are perfectly capable of getting the job done. Educational games should harnest both seriousness and fun in order to serve their purpose. A game is no longer a game when it loses the interest of its players.
1)The games mentioned are the battle room and war games. These are used to teach the students strategies and tactics. The goal is too win and the students are always being evaluated. If the fail they will flunk out. These games are very important since it will simulate the war against the buggers.
ReplyDelete2)I think games are the best way to teach something to a student. These games are made to simulate war, tactics and strategies. The reason games are so effective is because it engages the player making the student want to win which in turns makes the player apply himself to the best of his ability.
Josh Halford
ReplyDelete1.) The games mentioned are the war games at the school Ender ends up going to. You could consider the events on the launch a game that Graff is playing. His goal was to isolate Ender from the other children by making him seem like a teacher's pet. The stakes would be finding out if Ender is "the one" that he and Anderson are speaking of at the end of Chapter 4.
2.) Games are a good way to teach as they allow the process of learning, something which can be dry and tedious, to be fun and entertaining. To say they are the best way to teach would depend on who is being taught and how responsive they are to it. Whether they should be serious or fun would depend on the context in which they are being used. Teaching for military purposes would obviously be more serious as it involves destroying your opponents. A game is not a game when the stakes transcend the abstract ideals of winning and losing and involve true to life consequences such as life and death.
1 the games played were war games and battle room. the point is to teach them strategy.
ReplyDelete2games are an excellent way to teach and instruct, the only downside is not many have been able to incorporate teaching and fun at the same time. most of the time the game is that you get asked a question you answer correctly and you get something good or better. if i game is serious then its not very much fun at all
1) War games and such are in chapter 3-4. The games are to train the young students and Ender. The stakes are not very high yet, but if a student doesn't perform well they would eventually flunk out. The small games the students play now will eventually help them stay alive when it comes to the real war in the Future. So the value of the skills to protect and or help the children in the war are highly at stake in a way.
ReplyDelete2) Games can be a great/Fun way to learn. Games probably work best with younger people in order to keep their attention. Games can be serious, but are most often fun. Some children will take games seriously and if they don't do well and such they may become upset. A Game is not a game once the stakes become to high.
1) There are the battle games that the students play against each other, as well as a battle game they play against the computer. The goal is the same; to beat the opponent in a simulated battle sequence.
ReplyDeleteThe stakes are life or death in terms of the game, as well as the respect of other students since the scores are displayed in the cafeteria.
2) Games are a very effective and suitable way to teach because they engage the students in a fun activity that usually applies to what they are learning in a fun way rather than just being force-fed the information.
They can be a very good way to teach, but there are too many different subjects and ways of teaching them for me to say that games are THE best way to teach. On top of that, everyone learns a different way and games may not work for some people.
Games for educational purposes should be fun but also have enough rules to keep it from getting out of hand or deviating from the subject.
It is no longer a game when the students are not allowed any imagination or creativity into the experience, or when they are forced to play a particular way.
The war games are mentioned in chapter 3 and 4 and the battle room. Since there are only children its not so much for money or power but more for recognition. The scores are posted in the cafeteria so the students see how everybody did wich is more incentive for them still to do better.
ReplyDeleteI think games are a suitable way of teaching. maybe not always the best but effective none the less. Games can be serious but i think for people to see them as games and not as a lesson they should be fun... games definitly stop being games when they stop being fun, because that is the definition of a game to entertain ones self while persuing a specific goal
Survival and strategy…
ReplyDeleteThe survival is a soldier training game; and the strategy is a war game, like stratego.
The stakes are the hopes of winning. You fail = loss of expectations for winning.
I think games are a very useful tool to teach. If your competitive, then they could be serious, but not to the extend where they become less fun.
The games mentioned in the two chapters were games of tactical war. The goal was to teach the students tactical skills and train them to be competetive. This would help them keep their heads on straight during a real war
ReplyDeleteGames can be serious but i think for people to see them as games and not as a lesson they should be fun,if a game is too serious then its not very much fun at all
The games mentioned in the two chapters were War games made as mock games. "All boys are organized into armies day after day, in zero gravity." Nobody gets hurt, but the stakes are either you win or you lose.
ReplyDeletei believe that games are a very suitable way of teaching.I do believe that games are a better way for instruction and teaching because it allows the player to build skills by overcoming a steady stream of goals. The payoff of completing a goal acts as a motivator for a more difficult level. Games should be fun in order to be interesting. The seriousness of games should stay hidden from the player.