Education or Edu-tainment?

As one who has written often about the value of play as a medium for learning and development, I have long been a proponent of "playful" learning experiences. Ideal playful learning experiences allow children some control over the ways they learn, motivate them to learn based on personal interests, and "bend" reality so that taking the risks inherent in learning has no long-term negative consequences. I once developed a schema of play and learning for teachers to use that connected different types of learning to different types of play (Bergen, 1998). The schema included a category called "work disguised as play," which is the way teachers often try to help children learn required skills that have little inherent interest and meaning for them. For example, playing a counting or adding game is a traditional example of teachers' efforts to make learning math palatable.

I urge teachers to be honest about labeling work as "play" or "game." Do not pretend that these activities are "really" play; instead, tell children that they are ways to make learning required information more fun. Remember, if the work-play experience is devoid of some level of child control, motivation, and reality-bending, children will not consider it to be playful. Recent research shows that children are not fooled by work disguised as play (Fein & Wiltz, 1998; Marshall, 1994). They distinguish between what they have to do and what they choose to do, even if the label "play" is used by the teacher on the "have to's." As one child put it, "It's play if you don't have to finish!"

The Lego/Logo program was an early attempt to use technology to make science learning more hands-on and playful. Schools bought complete kits, with directions for helping children build such structures as a drawbridge, temperature-controlled greenhouse, walking dinosaur, and motorized car from Lego bricks, and then write computer programs using Logo to make the structures operate.

A teacher of 6th-grade science and I collaborated on a research project to see what the 6th-graders were learning from this technology and whether they thought the experience could be called play or work (Smith & Bergen, 2000). In general, the projects held students' interest and they were able to complete them successfully. However, when they rated the activity on a scale of 1-6 as to whether it was more like play (1) or more like work (6), their overall mean was 4.02; in other words, they tended to believe the activity was more like work than play.

While they identified building structures with Legos as a play-like element, they found following exact procedures to get the structures to function and taking tests to be like work. The 6th-graders thought it would have been more play-like with easier projects and if "you got to build projects you pick yourself."

One of the most interesting things to me about the technology revolution is that teachers now have the capacity to introduce playful elements into many more learning experiences through computer software programs and Internet exploration. Children usually have some ability to control the learning process when using technology, and so they are often highly motivated to use the technology. Because most of this technology simulates the "real thing," the ability to bend reality and make mistakes "consequence-free" is one of its most useful aspects. Long ago, Skinner (1968) invented a "teaching machine" based on the idea that learning occurred best when there was immediate feedback and positive reinforcement. Present-day technology-based learning programs often follow similar guidelines within a context of fun.

Kafai (1998) says that the reason some of these computer games are so "addictive" is that they combine all three types of play: practice play, symbolic play, and game play. Practice play involves self-directed repetition and elaboration of actions until they are mastered. Symbolic play allows the child to enter into the world of "what if," where the risks are only imaginary and the child is powerful. Game play provides challenge and competition, either with a peer, with oneself, or with imaginary opponents; if one loses the game, one only has to turn off the computer or start over.

Most teachers, however, are still of the opinion that both play and technology are nice "additions" to the curriculum, but that learning of any real consequence requires hard work, and that the work itself has an inherent value. In other words, even if many of the things children learn in school through work could be learned through playful, technology-assisted learning, most adults would still look askance at such a curriculum. In the present climate of "academic" pressures on preschool children, even preschool teachers no longer feel comfortable promoting a play curriculum.

The evidence is mounting, however, that the future of schooling may be tied more closely to play than to work. A publication of the World Future Society (Olesen, 1996), which cites the top 10 technological changes that will occur in society during the next decade, describes the emergence of what the author calls "Edu-tainment." Olesen says that most learning in the future will occur though a technologically mediated learning/ enjoyment combination of experiences, and that the children of the future will expect to enjoy educational experiences.

On their Web page, the Parents' Choice Foundation (www.parentschoice.org) reviews what they consider the best software currently available for children, and the term "edu-tainment" is mentioned a number of times. It seems the futurists are a little behind the times! Edu-tainment has already arrived! As Executive Director Claire S. Green states, "Our winners entertain, nurture, enlighten, and challenge children in ways not dreamt of even a decade ago."

Implications for Teaching

Olesen's article implies that schools eventually may no longer be the site for learning, because the edu-tainment technology can be used independently by students in any setting. Perhaps to keep schools viable, teachers will have to reevaluate their approach and, instead of spending so much time directly teaching basic information, they will have to relegate it to the new "teaching machines" that allow students to playfully practice skills to reach mastery, create and control simulated worlds, and increase their levels of challenge according to their individual needs. Teachers then could focus more of their time on developing students' critical thinking, social skills, sense of empathy, community involvement, respect for diversity, and interpersonal communication.

Software Resources

* Mindtwister Math (Parents' Choice Gold Medal), Edmark Corporation ($49.95) (www.edmark.com). This "fast-action and fun" review of 3rd- and 4th-grade mathematics provides quizzes in a game-show format hosted by twins Max and Nina. More than one child can play at a time; each contest has a theme and focuses on particular basic math concepts. The emphasis is on quick answers, thus giving students the "practice to mastery" experience.

* Math Arena (Parents' Choice Silver Medal), Sunburst Technology ($89.95) (www.sunburst.com). This software, for 8- to 12-year-olds, claims it has "the most math skill tests in a single edu-tainment title." There are three competition modes and a wide variety of games. Up to three students can play games that range from Array Reversal, which asks players to recognize grid multiples and compute areas, to Budget Breaker, which asks players to indicate when they estimate that a cash register's running total has exceeded $10. The innovative games help students learn math in a "fun and furious" way.

* Space Academy GX-1 (Parents' Choice Gold Medal), Edmark ($59.95). In this game, players "travel" to a space station orbiting Earth, where they investigate problem-solving missions, conduct space experiments, and analyze data to make decisions. Four modules cover national science standards and state norms. This software, for children ages 9 to 11, was designed by teachers.

* The New Way Things Work and Pinball Science, DK ($59.95; $49.95 for school versions) (www. dk.com). These Internet-interactive programs for grades 3 and up show science as a lively and interesting field. The first (The New Way Things Work) shows 22 basic principles of science accessed through a "virtual landscape." The second (Pinball Science) helps students use scientific principles to build their own pinball games. It covers topics such as energy, friction, gravity, and magnetic force.

* I Love Spelling! DK ($49.95, school version). More than 50 spelling-pattern word groups and 5,000 words, graded by difficulty level, can be learned in six exciting spelling games. The games can be customized by children, grades 2 to 5, to meet their individual needs. "I Love" programs in other content areas are also available.

* PrezQuest, Flying Rhinoceros ($29.95) (www.prezquest.com). This program, for students grades 3-6, "immerses students in presidential lore." Students have to locate missing presidents by using historical information. This software is a good "curriculum enhancement."

* 3D Ultra Lionel Train Town (Parents' Choice Silver Medal), Sierra On- Line ($19.95) (www.sierra.com). This software, for ages 6 and up, is entertaining and fast-paced, with a tutorial that helps younger children. The virtual model train game allows players to control replicas of actual Lionel trains, and puts players in a variety of situations in which they can problem solve increasingly difficult jobs. The program has detailed graphics of actual engines and "cool sounds." There are no obvious learning goals; given young children's interest in trains, however, this should be popular.

* Lego (www.lego.com). There are many versions of Lego robotics now available that build on the earlier Lego/Logo idea. Search the company's site for examples.

References

Bergen, D. (Ed.). (1998). Readings from play as a medium for learning and development. Olney, MD: Association for Childhood Education International.

Fein, G. G., & Wiltz, N. W. (1998). Play as children see it. In D. P. Fromberg & D. Bergen (Eds.), Play from birth to twelve and beyond: Contexts, perspectives, and meanings (pp. 37-49). New York: Garland Press.

Kafai, Y. B. (1998). Play and technology: Revised realities and potential perspectives. In D. P. Fromberg & D. Bergen (Eds.), Play from birth to twelve and beyond: Contexts, perspectives, and meanings (pp. 93-100). New York: Garland Press.

Marshall, H. H. (1994). Children's understanding of academic tasks: Work, play, or learning. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 9, 35-46.

Olesen, D. E. (1996). The top ten technologies for the next ten years. In E. Cornish (Ed.), Exploring your future. Bethesda, MD: World Future Society.

Skinner, B. F. (1968). Technology of teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Smith, S., & Bergen, D. (2000, July). Scientific learning through Lego-Logo: Is it work or play? Paper presented at the 16th ISSBD Annual Meeting, Beijing, PRC.