 |
| Click to hear podcast |
Though not considered
risky, what about more structured play devices such as board and video games?
Why are children attracted to them and what benefits are derived?
Board and
video games
Dr. Silvia Bunge, a neuroscientist, obtained permission from the Oakland,
California school district to coordinate seventy-five-minute after-school game
sessions twice a week. The sample of children in the Bunge investigation came
from a poor demographic with average IQ scores of ninety.
Bunge and her graduate
students were trying to determine if reasoning ability would improve from a
regimen of these activities using a standardized measuring instrument before
and after eight weeks. Unexpectedly, the average reasoning score for the
seventeen 7-9-year-olds (ten boys and seven girls) improved thirty-two percent!2
The group also enlisted
another group of 7-9-year-olds (eight boys and three girls) in a similar time
window to ascertain increments in an entirely different brain function:
processing speed. That group's improvement after eight weeks went up
twenty-seven percent.
So, what were these
special activities that elicited such enormous gains in brain function? They
were predominantly card, board, and video games! For the reasoning aspect, they
used the card games "SET", "Push Hour", and
"Qwirkle". For the speed
processing phase, they used the card games "Spoons" and
"Speed" and the board games "Blink" and
"Perfection".
The investigators were
trying to ascertain if card, board, and video games would improve specific
brain functions (reasoning and speed processing). While educators are more
concerned about the mastery of content areas in our children, Bunge was triggering a
different assortment of brain-related functions independently: reasoning and
speed processing. Bunge concluded:
"All parts of intelligence are malleable.
They're all in the brain, and all of the brain shows plasticity".2
Several researchers
have weighed in on the efficacy of old-fashion board game inclusion in the
classroom and find them to be an effective means to transmit or review content.
Could the Bunge result substantiate
this claim?
Improving reasoning or
speed processing in the brain many percentage points in just eight weeks is
impressive using just board, card, and video games. Would the incorporation of
such old-fashion amusements be a relevant tool in a classroom, that is, can
cognitive development witnessed by the Bunge team occur in the
major disciplines: mathematics, science, social studies, English, and world
languages?
Board and
video games affect behavior
We've all played board
and card games, and from the educational perspective, note that they provide a
level of engagement that enhances these important cognitive and social
functions:3,4,5
· Play by a set of rules
and procedures.
· Sustain concentration and develop attention
span.
· Derive enjoyment and thrill.
· Cooperate with others by waiting for the
next turn.
· Retain information.
· Strategize.
· Communicate moves and intentions.
· Make choices and take risks.
· Perform a task to completion.
· Incorporate various
levels in Bloom's taxonomy: Recall, Interpret, Implement, Analyze, Evaluate, Create
Though board games on
the general market are not likely to teach factoring polynomials, they
nevertheless touch base with the above list of skills. Educators would be
pleased to have their charges manifest them in their classes. Play is natural for
children because it stimulates the pleasure center in the brain
through the release of dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with
keeping the person focused on a task to its completion.
The brain and
games
Activation occurs at
several levels in this study. For one, the interaction with classmates set off
this process, and itself was a reward. Secondly, games provided immediate feedback as each move was
made, and the anticipation of a reward sustained the dopamine release, which
helped the children maintain attention. Along the way, the above-bulleted
processes were incorporated, a win-win situation from an educator's
perspective.
It is the same
neurotransmitter progression through
the brain that transpires when people compete in chess, play a musical
instrument, complete a puzzle, or participate in a sport.
The routine of a
teacher directing the flow of content through a lecture does not provide the
rapidity of feedback like a game because
the child is primarily using the auditory faculty as the information is voiced
or written on the board, following the train of logic presented by the teacher.
That in and of itself is not bad but is slow compared to a board game. The
question is how much retention occurs when the balance of a classroom period,
or a school day for that matter, focuses almost entirely on a teacher's vocal
and chalk renderings?
For content to be
meaningful it must not only be retained in the short-term, newly acquired,
memory area of the brain (the hippocampus) but also linked to the content-relevant memory area, the
patterns established in the prefrontal cortex, to have a context, to be understood, and of course
retained.
The issue is the limitation of such a teaching style in the
grand scheme in a school complex, because while some students are quite adept
at making that connection many are not and retain only a fraction of the
information presented.
Games in
classrooms
The question arises: is
it feasible for teachers to implement gaming in a class to facilitate content
and maximize the benefits listed above?
Certainly, using any of the popular commercial board games (including
"Scrabble", "Monopoly", "Risk", "Clue",
and "Mastermind") should improve specific cognitive functions, but
parents and administrators may not find them acceptable if that is the staple
in a teacher's lessons. As I mentioned above, targeted cognitive skill
development promotes the neurogenesis for designated
skills practiced often with little carry over to other abilities. In the Bunge study, they were not
relevant to most subjects in school, commercial board games that will not
impact mastery of designated content areas in a teacher's curriculum. However, can the
board games be content specific and serve a purpose in a course?
Many downloadable sites
are available with a broad range of templates like the commercial games and can
be edited to suit a teacher's needs. Some are content specific, too. Several
teachers have modified the commercial games to their specific subject and
posted them online for broad use.
The games can be adapted
to use their pieces, cards, and board layouts to perform any number of tasks
along with the rolling of dice or movement of an icon. In other words, the
specific tasks associated with your course can be performed in a game format to
move icons or accumulate items either by the prompts listed on the board or on
a card. Here are tasks used routinely in classes but can be adapted to an
aspect of a board game:
· State an answer to a question
· Solve a math problem
· Write one or more sentences using proper
grammar.
· Evaluate a written piece.
· Multiple Choice
· Fill in the blank
· True or False
Early
nurturance is crucial
If you believe that
early nurturance is important for a child's overall brain develop…. you are
correct. In fact, Martha Farah, director of the center for neuroscience and
society at the University of Pennsylvania, considered the matter by doing a
twenty-year study of sixty-four children. She examined surveys at various
intervals of their home lives as well as brain scans at ages seventeen through
nineteen. She looked at factors such as quantity of books in the home, toys
that emphasized learning about colors, numbers, shapes, as well as musical
instruments to compile a score of "parental nurturance". What did she
conclude?
Cognitive stimulation at age four was the major determinant in the development of the layer of gray matter in the cortex fifteen years later! The region most affected was semantic memory, processing word meanings, and general knowledge about the world. Moreover, the scans correlated thinner cortex with higher language comprehension. She, as many suspect, recognized sensitive periods in the early years that shape the overall development of a child's cognition.6
Cognitive stimulation at age four was the major determinant in the development of the layer of gray matter in the cortex fifteen years later! The region most affected was semantic memory, processing word meanings, and general knowledge about the world. Moreover, the scans correlated thinner cortex with higher language comprehension. She, as many suspect, recognized sensitive periods in the early years that shape the overall development of a child's cognition.6
To educators
The Bunge team saw an
incredible spike in reasoning and speed processing by simply allowing the
Oakland children to play card and board games. Such increases occurred when
those students were spending just twenty hours on games compared to one hundred
sixty hours of classroom instruction. While these were, for the most part, not
transferable skills between both areas, it proved that those targeted functions
improved significantly. You can decide on the content and skill to be mastered
when devising a game. Let dopamine do the rest.
Our current generation
of students is immersed in a technology that lures them continuously. It has
added the element of immediate gratification in the sphere of stimuli for
children, and schools are contending with this wave of information management
and attentiveness to rapid information
flow of social media blurbs and texting. It is my opinion that educators should
take advantage of the amusement quality of card, board, and video games since
they validate students as
competent strategists. How? Through continuous feedback, cooperation,
attentiveness, and transference of knowledge. Build a collection over
the years and have a tool that will stimulate greater assimilation of content
and higher thinking skills.
The game format
empowers children and coincides with what Frymier, Shulman, and Houser assert:
“The more impact individuals believe they have, the more internal motivation
they should feel, personal involvement and self-efficacy, [as well as] a more
positive attitude toward the course content and instructor.”8
In addition, students
have a better attention span after recess, particularly when it is an unstructured break. They
"seem to facilitate school learning, as well as more general social
competence and adjustment to school".7
To parents
Commercial board games may not have content
relevance but are nevertheless excellent cognitive enhancers that carryover in
other ways, particularly in the areas of concentration span, strategizing,
cooperating, and taking risks. The expense is trivial when you consider the
potential brain development that transpires. Do not hesitate to purchase more
sophisticated games as your child becomes game-savvy. Enter them in tournaments
in your area. Play with them, too.
References
1. Kennair, L.,
Sandseter E., (2011). Children’s Risky Play from an Evolutionary Perspective:
The Anti-Phobic Effects of Thrilling Experiences, Evolutionary Psychology, Volume 9(2).
257-284.
2. Bunge, S.,
Mackey, Hill, Stone, (May 2011).
Differential effects of reasoning and speed training in children, Developmental Science, Volume 14, Issue 3,
pages 582–590.
3. Salies, T.
G. (2002). Simulations/gaming in the EAP writing class:
Benefits and drawbacks. Simulation &
Gaming, 33(3), 316-329.
4. Gobet, F, de
Voogt, A., and Retschitzk, J., (2001). Moves
in mind: The psychology of board games. Psychology Press.
5. Franklin, S.,
Peat, M., and Lewis, A., (2003). Non-traditional interventions to stimulate
discussion: the use of games and puzzles. Journal
of Biological Science.
6. Avants, B.A.,
Hackman, D.A., Betancourt, L.M., Lawson, G.M., Hurt, H. & Farah, M.J. (2015).
Relation of Childhood Home
Environment to Cortical Thickness in Late Adolescence: Specificity of
Experience and Timing. Public
Library of Science One (PLoSOne), 10(10), e0138217.
7. Anthony D.
Pellegrini, A., Mahwah, N., L. Erlbaum, L., (2005). Recess: its role in education and development, Psychology Press.
8. Frymier, A. B.,
Shulman, G. M., and Houser, M. (1996). The development of a learner empowerment
measure. Communication Education, 45 (3), 181-199.
