Why Microsoft’s Minecraft probably isn’t the solution

There are two related reasons why using Minecraft as a teaching tool is unlikely to be very effective.

The first reason is that it relies on a folk theory of motivation that probably isn’t true. We assume that by providing a motivating hook like Minecraft, we will get students interested in a subject like geography and they will then learn more geography. In terms of interest theory, we are relying on situational interest – an interest in the particular tasks that we ask students to complete – to lead to personal interest –  a long-term interest in geography.

The flaw in this idea is that we have done nothing to foster a love of ox-bow lakes or flood plains. We’ve not made the geography more inherently interesting – we’ve switched it for something else.

A really useful study took place in Canada that tracked long-term motivation and achievement of Canadian maths students. It found that the level of motivation in Grade 2 did not affect achievement in Grade 4. However it did find that the level of achievement in Grade 2 positively affected Motivation in Grade 4. So if you want students to develop long-term motivation – perhaps a personal interest – in a subject that the best thing to do is help them to master it.

This is not a new idea. A key plank of self-determination theory is competence – getting better at something is motivating.

The second problem with Minecraft is that is seems less likely to lead to mastery of the subject than other teaching methods. It is hard to make the game-play of something like Minecraft coincide with exactly what you want students to learn. The question that needs to be asked is whether the narrative element of the game is intrinsic to the learning or a motivational bolt-on.

If it’s the latter then it is likely to lead to less learning. Think of asking students to complete a poster on erosion – without additional guidance, you will have some students who spend all their time beautifully rendering the word ‘erosion’ as a title and no time thinking about the concept. Similarly, in a Minecraft learning environment, you will have students manipulating blocks and doing cool things largely unaware of the wider point about climate change that they are supposed to be learning.

This idea seems to have been confirmed by research. In a series of experiments, Deanne Adams and colleagues found that learning concepts from a narrative game was actually less effective than being taught those same concepts through a slide-show (of all things). They also found that removing the narrative component of the games had little effect. The games were less effective teaching strategies.

This should not lead us to abandon all computer games as learning tools. Instead, we need to ensure that they cause students to think about the concepts that we want to learn rather than something additional and irrelevant. A quizzing app, for instance, could work extremely well for retrieval practice. A driving simulator might help improve driving skills. The point is that you need to spend the game-play engaged mainly in the thing you are trying to learn.

Advertisements

4 Comments on “Why Microsoft’s Minecraft probably isn’t the solution”

  1. Greg,

    Thanks for the great, level-headed post amid all the controversy.

    Like you argue, “It is hard to make the game-play of something like Minecraft coincide with exactly what you want students to learn.” I dare to differ a bit on generalizing this but agree 100% on the point that actions in games (game mechanics) need to align with the learning goals. Otherwise, the gaming aspect is going to feel disconnected and indeed, a gimmick to grab at students’ attention.

    However, there are some great examples of people effectively doing this with Minecraft. They have aligned the game with topics like Japanese poetry, quantum mechanics, programming and history: services.minecraftedu.com/worlds/

    The thing with Minecraft and many sandbox games is that the gameplay isn’t limited to a predefined pattern. This is both a blessing and a curse, as just about anything is possible but it nothing happens on its own. Minecraft isn’t a textbook, it’s the empty poster you start working on. Neither is educational on their own but both have the possibility to be that.

    I’m a strong advocate of using games in classrooms but I share the same concerns. My fear is that using games as gimmicks will prevent us from seeing them as the tools they can be. In fact, I blogged about this exact same topic for a gamification company last week: https://www.classcraft.com/blog/features/games-learning/

    -Mikael

  2. I really appreciate this critique of Minecraft. Its really great to hear a solid, research-based critique instead of someone just praising Minecraft for how engaging it is, and mistaking that engagement for learning goal achievement. Your link to Adams study seems to be broken, but I think you mean to this study, yes?
    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232533283_Narrative_Games_for_Learning_Testing_the_Discovery_and_Narrative_Hypotheses


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s