Getting Girls Into Games

In the article Getting Girls Into Games, Education Week writer Katie Ash notes the relationship between digital gaming and STEM subjects in school. Both have traditionally been disproportionately filled by boys and men. Today there are an increasing number of girls and women interested in STEM subjects and gaming. Although more girls are playing games, few are designing them. In order to encourage this growth researchers have been studying “what aspects of gaming engage girls” (Ash, 2009, para1). They have found that in general boys and girls play for different reasons. Girls tend to enjoy games they see a purpose in. For example they play to enjoy a social component. Boys tend not to need this as strongly. Girls also enjoy games with storylines and games that allow for more interaction with character and environment. Boys tend to be drawn to games where the emphasis is more on violence.

Efforts are being made to include girls within the gaming community in the hopes that this will draw them into STEM fields. Jill Denner, a senior research associate for the Scotts Valley California based ETR Associates, has created Girl Game Company. ETR is a non-profit organization that aims to promote health and education within communities. Girl Game Company works in schools throughout San Francisco as an after school program that simulates the experiences of working for a game company. Carl Pennypacker is an astrophysicist at the University of California, Berkeley. He created Universe Quest Game, also an after school program that helps middle aged girls create games.

I think their work is important. We need balance and diversity within our careers and schools not simply to achieve equality in numbers between male and female bodies, but because of what both men and women have to contribute. Of concern to me though was a quote by Denner: “[Middle School] is a critical period for identity formation, so catching them while they’re making decisions about classes and careers, and who they are, is important, especially for catching people who aren’t going to naturally choose that path” (para 9). It is important regardless of gender to expose children and young adults to different career possibilities, but I do not believe this should be done at the expense of what they would “naturally choose”. Whether coercion takes place while directing students away from fields and academic subjects, or in an effort to steer them into fields and academic subjects, coercion is coercion. It is not our job as educators and parents to form children’s identities for them, but rather to value the gifts they already have and support them in this process. There should be less concern about coercing girls into gaming, and more concern about what they naturally want to do. Perhaps their own inclinations are enough, and left to their own inclinations they could find a new use for the technology and academic subjects we currently employ for games boys are interested in.

Ash, K. (2009, September 23). Getting Girls Into Games. Education Week: Digital Directions. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/dd/articles/2009/09/23/01girlsgames.h03.html?qs=technology+diversity

Teaching GPS Technology in Nature Education Programs

Fascinated by Richard Louv’s work and his suggestion that technology can be used to connect children to the natural world rather than prevent it I decided to do additional research. I wanted concrete examples of how this could be done since admittedly I have been accustomed to blaming technology for humanity’s break from the natural world. This brought me to Virginia Bourdeau’s article in Camping Magazine. Bourdeau is the Oregon State University 4-H Youth Development Specialist for Camping and Natural Science Education. In her article, she to admits to harboring skepticism towards technology in the past, and was not enthusiastic when her director decided she was going to develop a training program that would teach counselors and campers how to use GPS systems. I was intrigued.

Her program was multidisciplinary, place based (rather than from a book or computer in a classroom), and could be adapted to children of various grade levels. In the activities designed to teach the children she exposes them to science, geography, technology, natural science, and mathematics lessons. To begin, she gives lessons on how to read maps and compasses. This ensures that children understand the information that is in a GPS system. In order to understand satellites she uses a globe and flashlights. The beams, along with a lesson on radio waves and atomic clocks helps the students understand how satellites and GPS units can track. She also teaches them longitude and latitude on topographic maps. Once all the above is understood they move to the outdoors. Once outside they learn how to program waypoints. They work in team activities on natural science projects such as tree identification while learning how to do this. They then use their GPS units in conjunction with software programs to make “you are here” site maps.

Needless to say I am impressed. With Bourdeau children are learning how to use technological tools while they are learning about their natural environment. Rather than learning about nature through representations of nature, they are immersed in it. Additionally, the skills they are learning can be used beyond the educational setting. I wish I would have gone to her camp.

Bourdeau, V. (May, 2010). Teaching GPS Technology in Nature Education Programs. Camping Magazine. Retrieved from http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1249/is_6_80/ai_n24216198/

Techno Naturalists

In his article Techno-Naturalists, author and nature advocate Richard Louv reminds readers that technology isn’t just a computer, a software program, or a wireless gadget. He points out that we have been using technology long before the advent of the digital age. “A fishing rod is technology” (Louv). He continues the discussion by suggesting that rather than necessarily being the antithesis of nature, technology can also be used as an entry tool into nature. Examples he gives are “geo-caching, or wildlife photographing with…digital cameras, or collecting pond samples” (Louv, 2010, para 1).

He does include a caution. “Any gadget can distract from nature. A person can become so transfixed by the camera screen that they never look past it to see the stream” (para 6). In effect, what we are doing, is watching the gadget rather than the world around us. Yet the digital world and our fascination with technology are here to stay. Louv suggests this be used to increase children’s fascination with nature at the same time. Rather than using technology to focus their attention on virtual worlds, he suggests using technology as a way of encouraging children to study and become fascinated with the natural world. Children can use technological tools to document their exploration of natural life, catalog what they have seen, and use this for further study.

I am a big fan of Richard Louv, and love his book Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder. He has been documenting children’s waning relationship with the natural world and the resulting consequences for many decades. I felt that this article was important because of his approach to technology. He is not against it. He can see that it is a strong presence in our lives and always has been. Suggesting we use it to rekindle some of our broken connections to the natural world makes good sense. The natural world gives rise to all that we need in order to survive, and has given rise to us. There is an immediacy of experience that we can be conscious of. This experience arises out of the relationship between our senses and that from which we have arisen from. When all of our attention is attuned to that which is digital or mechanical we run the risk of losing this awareness. Yet technology does not need to be the antithesis of nature. It can be another way we explore the world we live in.

Louv, R. (May, 2010). Techno-Naturalists. Field Notes from the Future: Tracking the Movement to Connect People and Nature. Retrieved from http://www.childrenandnature.org/blog/

Evaluating Assistive Technology

In his article “Evaluating Assistive Technology,” Andrew Beigel, Ph.D. suggests a different approach to linking students with learning disabilities with assistive technologies. Traditionally technology is matched to children. Beigel says kids should be matched to technology. He believes this approach is more appropriate because it is more likely to find technology for children “that’s developmentally and age-appropriate” (Beigel, 2004, para 1).

Beigel is a former assistant professor of education and coordinator of the inclusion program at the State University of New York. His article begins with the quote: “Assistive technology is more than the device” (para 1). In order to insure that children are being coupled with assistive technology that is right for them, Beigel offers a three step process. He believes that if IEP teams should conduct full-scale assessments, assess the environments the student is in, and make an effort to determine the kinds of technology that match a student’s interest so that they are more likely to find technology that the child will use (para 3). When IEP teams simply pick assistive technology because they know it is designed to work with a specific learning disability they run the risk of picking something that is too cumbersome, too complicated for comfortable use, or something that a child might be embarrassed to use.

I like Beigel’s approach. It would be difficult to overstate the importance of assistive technology. It has provided classroom learning opportunities for many children who would not have been able to do so otherwise. Yet to do so without seeing the child could send the wrong message. It is the child that is of value, not the disability, and to consider what he or she would like as a part of the decision making process is empowering and thoughtful.

Beigel, A. (February, 2004). Evaluating Assistive Technology. Scholastic Instructor. Retrieved from http://www2.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=215&FullBreadCrumb=%3Ca+href%3D%22http%3A%2F%2Fwww2.scholastic.com%2Fbrowse%2Fsearch%2F%3Fquery%3Dtechnology%26Ntt%3Dtechnology%26Ntk%3DSCHL30_SI%26Ntx%3Dmode%2Bmatchallpartial%26N%3D0%26_N%3Dfff%22+class%3D%22endecaAll%22%3EAll+Results%3C%2Fa%3E

The New Bibliophobes

In his article The New Bibliophobes, Emory University English professor Mark Bauerlein documents the rise of a contrary attitude to reading in the teen and young adult population. Citing research done by the Chronicle of Higher Education, the National Endowment for the Arts, and data by the National Assessment of Education Progress he describes this withdrawal from books. The prevailing opinion of today’s youth is that a rise in digital devices has rendered books obsolete. Many now view book literacy as a lesser form of literacy.

He continues his discussion by identifying one of the reasons this occurs.
"With the advent of the Digital Age, teens have more diversions at hand than they did before. The laptop, iPhone, video game, and Photoshop pull eyes and ears away from other diversions. The National School Boards Association estimates social networking time at nine hours per week, and Nielsen reports that teens average 2,272 text messages per month. Television time remains high (the American Time Use Survey rates it as still the most popular activity for fifteen-to nineteen-year-olds), so digital tools take minutes from elsewhere. Books and reading inevitably go down"(Bauerlein, 2008, p.88).

He also notes how this contrary attitude is often supported by prominent figures not only in our media culture, but in education as well. Randy Bomer, a former president of the National Council of Teachers of English argued that adolescents are the experts in emerging forms of information and even suggested that this awareness gave them “vast reserves of knowledge about how what they are watching now exists in dialogue with older stories, characters, and forms” (p. 88).

Bauerlein disagrees, but acknowledges that Bomer’s ideas encapsulate arguments that the nature of literacy has changed. Many people feel “that the import of books and the practice of literacy themselves have changed, and we should recognize a new order of reading and text in the world” (p. 89). E-literacy, it is argued has replaced the need for academic literacy. For example spelling and synonyms are unnecessary because those tools are available on a computer. Proponents of this position argue this is what it takes to make it in the digital (modern) marketplace. Students who have this literacy will know how to navigate the digitization of business and the practices it will require.

The author asks the following questions in response: “If the young have acquired so much digital proficiency, and if digital technology exercises their intellectual faculties so well, then why haven’t knowledge and skill levels risen accordingly? If the Information Age solicits quicker and savvier literacies, why do so many entrants into college and work end up in remediation” (p.91)?

I would like to see the author extend his response. Proponents of e-literacy could simply argue that students and workers are being measured or reviewed with outdate metrics. What is not questioned here is the fundamental position that anything digital or technological is inherently superior. What is being cultivated in the guise of a progressive modernity is an increasing reliance upon external devices as a way of interacting and extending oneself into the world. A rich and varied range of existential experience is being largely ignored in favor of technocratic tools that focus and utilize consciousness in very specific ways. If we only elevate the technocratic tools we devalue a large portion of our humanistic heritage. We lose our connection to the natural world, to the value of interpersonal relationships, to right brain qualities, and to the archetypal/mystical realms of the psyche. If we can’t see the value in reading a book for pleasure, how can we expect to teach our children the value of being able to sit with another? Being physically present and supporting with voice and touch is not the same as sending a note on facebook. Few would argue that it is, yet we don’t apply this same form of questioning when people suggest that in light of emerging technologies, books no longer have a role. Technology and e-literacy are of tremendous value. Students should be given an opportunity to learn how to utilize technology. This does not mean, however, that more traditional forms have ceased to be of value. Perhaps, rather than the polarized stance many have taken, it would be more appropriate to suggest that students learn both forms of literacy. I suggest this, not to simplify the contention between polar opinions, but rather becuase both have value that can be of benefit to our children.

Bauemerlein, M. (2008). The New Bibliophobes. Educational Horizons, 88 (2), 84-91).

Going From STEM to STEAM: The Arts Have a Role in America’s Future, Too

Joseph Piro, an associate professor of curriculum and instruction in the school of education at Long Island University, conducted research suggesting that contrary to popular belief, art curriculum complements instruction in science and technology. He reviewed the influence music training has on the development of literacy skills. He looked specifically at vocabulary and verbal sequencing:


The outcome of one of [his] studies indicated that the fusion of scaffolded music instruction with a balanced literacy program from kindergarten to 2nd grade resulted in superior cognitive performance in those students who were musically trained, when compared with those students who were not (“Education Week”, 2010, p.29).

He also notes that musical training has positive effects on spatial sequencing, verbal ability, and nonverbal reasoning. In an effort to curtail us-against-them arguments and achieve a more synergistic balance between the arts and sciences he examined additional studies in his article. Involvement in visual arts has been shown to “intensify students’ observational powers and analytic prowess…and result in better questioning skills and an understanding that problems can have multiple answers” (p.28).

He feels that a more synergistic approach to the long term debate between art and science, and now art and technology, will better address the concerns that many people have about educational curriculum. Much of the support the Obama administration as well as previous administrations are offering for science and technology is based on the belief that the “United States is becoming less competitive and secure, that we are losing our global-leader status in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) fields” (p.28). Piro notes the large ratio of the nation’s work force that is involved in the arts. This population generates $70 billion in income annually. Including arts within the STEM focus not only supports this industry, but reaches many types of learners who have the potential to assist in the development of the arts as well as the sciences. He argues that a more comprehensive education can only assist with the goals current and past administrations have outlined. STEM should be changed to STEAM to include the arts.

I appreciate Piro’s position. Either or arguments tend to alienate both polarities of an issue and block creative comprehensive solutions. Therefore making an effort to bridge this gap in the stalemate between art and technology is important. The two fields can be of assistance to one another. I would go further than Piro, however, and state that art education need not be teleological in order to be of value. There are learners that need and can benefit from it, therefore it is of value. Furthermore, art need not be taught for the purpose of training minds to produce military, commercial, or industrial goods in order to be of value. Creativity, aesthetic sensibilities and appreciation, higher spatial reasoning skills, sensory awareness, and many other benefits of art have cultural value that are not easily measured. Few would argue, though, that these are skills that they would not want their children to have.

Piro, J. (2010, March 10th). Going From STEM to STEAM: The Arts Have a Role in America’s Future, Too. Education Week: American Education’s Newspaper of Record, 29 (24), 28-30.

Study: Library Computers Serve Key Ed. Role

The April 7th edition of Education Week ran an article about the use of library computers. The study was funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. It was conducted at the University of Washington’s information school and was designed to discern the demographics of library use as well as what library technology is being used for.


This study was featured in Education Week, because the 77 million people in the United States using library computers are not only searching for jobs, communicating with friends, or banking. They are doing homework. Young people are the biggest users regardless of demographic groups. “Nearly half the nation’s 14 to 18 year-olds—about 11.8 million people—reported having used a library computer last year, and a quarter of teenagers used a library computer at least once a week” (“Education Week”,2010, p.10).

Families living below the poverty line—families of four with a household income of $22,000 or less—continue to log the highest use, yet the study revealed that use is widespread among demographic groups. Researchers used random national telephone surveys, in person interviews, and online surveys to gather data. The study “confirms what public libraries have been saying as they compete for public dollars to expand their services and high-speed Internet access: Library use by the general public is widespread and not just among poor people” (“Education Week”,2010, p. 10).



Education Week: American Education’s Newspaper of Record (April 7th ed.).(2010). Bethesda, MD: Editorial Projects in Education Inc.

All Good Things in Moderation

In his article “Take Back the Afternoon: Preserving the Landscape of Childhood In Spite of Computers,” David Sobel argues for moderation in our approach to the use of technology in the classroom. He notes that when children are on computers they are not doing something else, and lists some of the advantages and disadvantages of computer time as a way of pointing out a need for a more balanced use of computers in children’s lives.


Excessive use of computers can inhibit social interaction. Sitting in a static position passively receiving digital images prevents children from participating in neighborhood games outside where they are engaging gross motor and fine motor skills, social skills, imaginative play, and exploration of the natural world. According to Sobel (2004), “It is in this engagement between the limbs of the body and the bones of the earth where true balance and centeredness emerge.” In other words, interacting with ones environment helps instill a relationship to the natural world that cannot be felt or experienced in the interaction with a computer. Computers invite children to stay in their heads, reinforcing the sense of mind-as-computer, rather than experiencing oneself as a living organism.

On the other hand children enjoy the “interactivity and dynamic immediacy of good software” (Sobel, 2004). Sobel notes that there is software that encourages the development of higher thinking skills. Additionally computers provide educational opportunities that would not be available otherwise. For example, students can sit and be passive recipients of a geology lesson, or they can chat with students of another country in real time.

Moderation is Sobel’s answer. He feels that computers should follow good instruction rather than lead. He believes place based education is the solution to many of the classroom problems teachers face, not computers, but that computers should assist in this. Students need to experience the application of skills being taught. Their lessons need to be grounded in interactions with their communities. “The sophisticated processes of critical thinking, problem-solving and kinesthetic coordination appropriately mature out of children's interaction with concrete materials, caring adults and thoughtfully managed groups of peers” (Sobel, 2004). Computers can assist them with this. As an example Sobel describes the efforts of a 4th grade class in San Anselmo, California to protect an endangered species. In order to initiate a campaign to save the freshwater shrimp in their area, students used computers to create newsletters as well as to research habitat restoration. Computers became a classroom tool rather than a form of instruction.



Sobel, D. (2004). Take Back the Afternoon: Preserving the Landscape of Childhood In Spite of Computers. New Horizons for Learning. Retrieved from http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/technology/sobel.htm