[Edu] Curriculum and Cooperative games

[miyu]

Sue,
   I will 100% agree the issues are larger than we give them credit for. I
guess LOTR never bothered me at all and I considered it part of this
non-confrontational game style due to it's theme. It is almost religious in
it's mythos of good triumphing over evil and the evil in LOTR is pure evil.
It's not a bad human it's pure evil.  I do however recognize that my adult
understanding of the novels and the world that was designed behind the
novels heavily colors my perception of the series.
   I do however feel that it would be a losing battle to get kids to enjoy a
game where there is no competition nor sense of struggle against a greater
"enemy."  It seems like it would go against our very biological drive
territoriality and competition.  I think this is especially dangerous when
looking at games for young men.  The competitive drive is so strong and if
the only outlet is in the physical realm (how we deify our athletes for
example) we do limit ourselves to a very confrontational warlike culture.
Once again I go back to my example of Go.  If a player sets his sights at
destroying all the opponent's pieces they will lose.  You can never
eliminate your opponent in the game - instead you have to struggle to divide
the board and territory between the two of you hopefully in a manner that is
beneficial.  Yes, I can see how one would perceive the game as teaching the
players to take advantage of their opponent's weaknesses and capitalize upon
them but instead the focus can be shifted on the sharing of the space.  This
alone runs contrary to much of our culture and is anathema to the very basis
of our sports consumed by the general public.
   I also don't want anyone to think I'm this gun-toting warmonger. I am a
pacifist and a complete hippy.  My natural urge to compete and react
forcefully to things in an almost feudal fashion is something I have
struggled with all my life.  Years of martial arts taught me to respect
other people as well as the damage that can be done when violence rears its
head.  I think if someone had tried to hook me into a non-competitive game
where the whole party won or lost together and there wasn't an "enemy"
being confronted they would have failed.  Even now, I'm not sure I could be
too convinced to dedicate much time to such an endeavor due to it feeling
like it goes so very against my nature and sense of what is fun.
   So what I focus on in my game club is getting the kids to understand that
losing is not something to fear and hate but instead should be embraced as
an opportunity to improve.  Winning does not make you better than your
opponent, instead it means you need to figure out how to handicap yourself
in the future until you eventually achieve a situation where each player
wins half the time - this increases the opportunity to learn as well as the
challenge.  I also pretty closely monitor trash talk and nip that in the
bud.  If one kid appears to be picked on a little bit within the context of
one game then I will speak with the group as a whole (a reminder of the
respect we show one another within the club) and then do something in the
future to make that child a star.  I might print up the rules to some game
that uses pyramids and teach it to that individual child.  She then will
becomes the "expert"  in that game and be responsible for teaching others.
Their name also goes up on my board under a particular game as one of the
kids designated a teacher of that game.
    So far I have only had a couple problem behaviors to be addressed.  They
did arise though when playing Bang! which is probably one of the more
competitive games.  Oddly enough during Hex Hex (which is very
stab-your-friend-in-the-back) everyone behaved like ladies and gentleman.
Most likely because there are so many opportunities to reduce someone's
score they played it very carefully.  Perhaps it was the 1950's principle of
MAD in action.

                              -Ryan

On 4/5/07, Smithhemb at aol.com <Smithhemb at aol.com> wrote:
>
>  There's the rub.  I don't see how a cooperative game that designates all
> of the players as "good" and urges them to work together to triumph over an
> unembodied evil does anything to dismantle our war culture.  It's an
> us-against-them with "them" logic in which "they" lack humanity and "we"
> must suppress internal divisions and urge self-sacrifice.  Sounds like the
> stuff wars are made of.
>
> As for games in which all players win or lose, an 8 year old friend of
> mine had a really interesting perspective:  "I don't care if I win," she
> said.  "It's fun for me when my friends win.  But why play a game where no
> one will win?"  After which she refused to play Break the Safe a game whose
> cooperative (beat-the-clock) mechanism I've often seen bring out real
> bossiness and power struggles among young players.  Once everything you do
> affects whether or not I succeed, the logic goes, I have a
> legitimate interest (and should have a say) in what you do and I want to
> make sure you don't screw up.  This logic can involve identifying the
> presumed weakest link and bullying that person into following the will of
> the majority and/or designating a leader who calls the shots.
>
> In short, I think these issues are much more complicated than we're giving
> them credit for.
>
> Sue Hemberger
> Washington, DC
>



-- 
Ora, lege, lege, lege, relege, labora et invenies.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.looneylabs.com/pipermail/edu/attachments/20070405/b3dd00c0/attachment-0001.htm