Rating: 
Summary: Teachers and Administrators should read this book.
Review: As a science teacher, I have asked myself (as Gee points out...many teachers and parents do) why it is that the same students who sit listlessly in my classroom will go home and spend upwards of 8 hours engaged in frusterating video-game play.
Gee effectively answers this question and makes a strong case in favor of video games being agents of learning (like recreational reading) as opposed to mindless entertainment (like really dumb movies).
I would strongly advocate teachers and administrators reflect on the question posed by the title of this book...and check out some of the answers Gee offers.
Rating:
Summary: Good Book--Points to important learning methods
Review: I am going to give away my age by saying I bought this book because I am interested in pedagogy. I worked in the public school system years ago and there then seemed to a real interest in teaching methods. By that I mean in how you actually teach someone something-not demonstrated by a test, but rather by a change in attitude or behavior.
In this book, Gee gets near to describing-or I should say "extracting"-a pedagogy from the learning methods designed into some video games. As far as it goes, he makes a clear and compelling case. I would like to see him go further and define a new pedagogy for public education. It seems to me that technology advocates dwell too much on the potential value of video games technology being brought into schools. I like the ideas Gee presents for bringing the underlying methodologies of the games into education. The need in schools is not for better software but for better results.
Rating:
Summary: Celebrating Games
Review: I am involved with the entertainment industry and so I have seen first hand the impact of video games. Gee's book is about the ways in which good video games incorporate good learning principles, that is, how good games get themselves learned well and make learning part of the fun and engagement of playing.
This is so, as Gee claims, because if games can't be learned well or cease early on to involve any interesting learning, they will not sell well, either because they are unplayable by lots of players or boring. He also argues that the sorts of learning principles good games incorporate are well supported by contemporary research in cognitive science, the science that studies human learning.
I liked the fact that the book is based on his own game playing (an enterprise he came to late in life) and his own research in linguistics and education.
I noted the one negative review on this site, that ironically, comments on the only part of the book where Gee is reporting on an interview he conducted with a young gamer, not his own gaming. This has little to do with the main point of the chapter, which is that young people, even those challenged in school, often draw on a rich array of social resources to learn and game deeply and well when they are playing video games.
Gee's book is a ground-breaking integration of cognitive science and game studies. It is a celebration of games and gaming and of human learning when it is set free of the sorts of strictures that one finds in schools that stress drill-and-kill.
Rating: 
Summary: Facts in spots are wrong, brings up credibility issue
Review: I bought this book with high hopes, being a teacher, and an avid video game player. When I got the book, I immediately turned to the chapter which talked about Everquest (having played Everquest since its beginning until late last year). Imagine my surprise when I found an extreme amount of errors in how he describes things that happen in the game. For example, he says that when a player dies, the corpse drops to the ground spilling all the objects it was carrying and the player comes back in a weaker form with worse armor. This never happened even in the early stages of Everquest. Besides, the publication date is 2003 regardless.
That was one such example of many I can cite from that chapter, but that brings up credibility issues for me in reading any further in the book. If that chapter's facts are wrong, then how do I know that other facts in other chapters are correct?
Rating:
Summary: brilliant
Review: I read through the entire book today, enthralled that an academic of the same generation as my parents finally "got" what made videogames (focusing on action, adventure, and rpg games) a fascinating medium both for players and creators. Furthermore, the author was then able to apply this knowledge to his area of expertise, educational theory. I knew videogames could be art, I knew that as simulations they could be political, but I never quite saw what seems to me perfectly obvious now, that good videogames of almost every variety teach us how to think and learn, and that they do this much better than our school system.This book should be loved by anyone with a strong interest in videogame theory or educational theory, as it impressively doesn't simplify either area to fit the demands of the other. I also applaud the organization of the book, as each section centers around a few key concepts of educational theory which are repeated in the appendix giving everyone who has read the book an easy way to recall the '36 learning principles'.
Rating:
Summary: For cross disciplinarians it ties in some solid leads
Review: It digs deeper in the trench than Prensky to suggest why learning is intimately tied to games (hybrid learning the philosopher Sterelny calls it) and gives those of us who are not ludologists links between cognitive science and 3d entertainment media that are verifiable.
I am all for prescriptive work that ties in the above and above all reads well not dryly. I read this just after Bartle's book (which is interesting from another angle, especially on experiential realism, but not so polemic) and if you are interested in this tangent (you thought it was wrong but..) then I think you will enjoy this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Good theory of education, vague video game argument
Review: The book is primarily a criticism of 'traditional' school-based learning methodologies, using observations of children playing video games and the author's own play sessions as representative examples of the 36 principles of good learning he describes. He uses primarily 3d shooters and RPGs as his examples of 'good' video games (meaning that they encourage learning things about and within the world of the game). The author defines and conceptualizes his principles of learning and contrasts it with the school-based education process, noting the vast differences between the two. On this topic of criticism of school-based education, the author makes a strong argument. His second argument, that these principles missing in school are demonstrably present in video games, is very vague and unfulfilling. The author often stresses elements of learning that can easily be found everywhere in life and social activity and in other forms of media, not just in video games. One point he makes in the middle of the book about incremental difficulty and the player's dynamic 'regime of competence' was a good topic consistent with video game design (although easily found in other places, such as golf handicaps), but it was not good enough to warrant his emphasis on video games in the other ~150 pages of the book. He repeatedly mentions that kids enjoy playing video games but don't enjoy learning in school and suggests that school should be like playing a video game, but he leaves it at that. Because he focuses on the process of learning and assumes videogame content and classroom content to be of an equal nature, the burning question of how to make learning calculus equations as fun and desirable to learn as advanced combat strategies to annihilate your friends in Starcraft remains unfortunately beyond the scope of this book. If the intention of the book was to show that video games have the capability to encourage learning of arbitrary content, it succeeded. However, watching TV or movies or playing non-video games with your peers can be just as conducive to learning (and, depending on the content, just as mind-numbing). Having been weaned on Mario and Zelda myself and already appreciating the incredible complexity and carefully tuned learning curve of videogames, this book was somewhat interesting for its general theory of education but not as thought-provoking regarding video game theory as I had hoped. This book is probably a better read for older generations that didn't have video games as an integral source of learning during their formative years and have as a result never taken them seriously.
Rating:
Summary: Ambitious attempt
Review: The book is well worth a read but for researchers/academics within games and learning it lacks references to important research. Still the book has interesting discussions and draw on educational theory that is well used.
The book seemed a bit weak to me in the sense that a lot of the principles apply to all areas of human life, and is not as such a special property of computer games. Also it shines through that the author likes certain game genres (adventure, RPG, action).
Rating:
Summary: a compelling new perspective on videogames
Review: This book offers a perspective on videogaming that is novel and thought-provoking. I am a (young) baby-boomer, and therefore a digital immigrant, according to Gee. Videogames were not a part of my youth, and my opinions have been shaped by the popular critiques of such games for their violence and misogyny. Frankly, I had the impression that videogames were at best, mindnumbing entertainment, and at worst, yet another reflection of the general malaise of our self-absorbed, thrill-seeking society. Accordingly, I was intrigued by the title of the book, which claims that videogaming might offer some useful insights into learning and literacy.
I must admit, I was skeptical at first, but I quickly became convinced by Gee's arguments about the deep nature of learning supported by videogaming. His arguments are supported by extensive examples of actual games that, believe it or not, Gee has played himself. Gee is a linguist, and he uses some concepts that are unfamiliar to a general audience, but I can assure potential readers that he explains these concepts in a clear and accessible manner. (I was even able to describe a "semiotic domain" to a friend after reading this book.)
One reason for my interest in the book is that I design e-learning curricula for professional training and higher education. Gee's book has suggested to me many ways in which we might improve the delivery of e-learning, making it less like "school" and more like a compelling, "real-world" experience. I have even started playing videogames myself, and I can attest to credibility of Gee's analyses (particularly the part about how difficult these games can be!). I strongly recommend this book to other baby-boomers, educators, and anyone who wants a fresh perspective on this unfairly maligned aspect of popular culture.
Rating:
Summary: Also recommended
Review: This is an excellent book; I learnt a great deal from it.
If this interests you, look at Raph Koster's "Theory of Fun for Game Design" as well...
|
