Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker as Stealthy Model for Education Reform

100_0503
Friday, June 25, 2010

Editor's note: Educators, take note: Turns out that portable system little Johnny hides under his desk may actually provide valuable insights on how to teach students. Jeremy details how Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker could make you a better teacher. -Brett


Discussions of modern game design require developers to become more aware of their inner teacher, taking into account how players learn as they progress through a game. So it’s no surprise that many recent design sensibilities make use of concepts similar to those found in recent education reform movements. Making tutorials more organic is comparable to creating assessments that test students’ abilities in more practical situations than paper tests.

Unfortunately, we never see the flow of inspiration in the other direction. But if we look closely enough, games like Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker can model ways to improve curriculum and assessment.

 

Making the connection between education reform and Peace Walker requires a little imagination. The usual Metal Gear premise of sneaking around the levels to complete objectives is still in play. However, the structure of the game compartmentalizes the objectives into individual missions. Players can use any method to get through the levels as long as it works, whether they use a stealthy, non-lethal approach or a more action-oriented one. At the end of each mission, the game assigns a grade based on a number of determinants, such as number of times spotted.

Though these grades do try to push players to be stealthy, stealth is not required to finish the game. And if you do go the stealthy route, there are many different options available. Close-quarters combat allows for both quick takedowns and interrogations, while the stun rod tends to be more discrete. The tranquilizer gun works well at a distance and has a limited silencer, but the sniper rifle variety can shoot at a longer range. And that’s not even taking into account the research and development mechanic that forces you to make choices on what tools will be available. In short, the game encourages players to explore its systems in order to develop their own individual approach.

This same principle has been explored in educational psychology theory. Known as individual constructivism, it focuses on how people construct their knowledge as opposed to what the end result is. People take previous knowledge, outside stimuli, and relevant data surrounding the current problem and form their own methods for solving it.

The traditional way of teaching students how to add two-digit numbers together is to line them up and add the columns from right to left, carrying any tens digit results over to the next column. However, not everyone ends up doing it this way later in life. Some use methods that start from the left while others utilize estimation. Many teachers only teach the first method as the only “correct” one when, in fact, there are many different ways to come to the correct answer. And while the correct answer is important, the way which individual students find the answer is where you can truly see if a student has fully understood a concept. If a student can give a mathematically sound explanation of his or her method, then it is valid.

But Peace Walker goes beyond merely mirroring constructivism. The very fact that it is a game gives it an innate advantage over current assessment methods. Paper tests have been the default assessment for well over a decade in classrooms. However, many criticize this method for not properly providing insight into how students apply knowledge to practical situations.

Games, on the other hand, are intrinsically active affairs. Imagine if you had to take a test on effective strategies for fighting a boss instead of fighting the boss itself. When you think in terms of games, this is a ridiculous notion. You’re supposed to take action in games, not describe what you learned up until that point. Bosses are a culmination of your developed skills and knowledge from what came before, much like every programmed instance in a game. You prove your skills have progressed by using them. Imagine if schools did this in place of paper tests.

In fact, this is another educational theory concept, known as performance-based assessment. While many champion this approach, paper tests have become so entrenched in the system that it's had a hard time gaining traction. But all one has to do is point at how games achieve this. The game teaches you how to play in the beginning, builds more complex systems on top of the previous ones as you progress, and provides progressively harder challenges to test your abilities. Looked at this way, games are both curriculum and assessment in one neat package.

Peace Walker is not purely an exercise in systems mastery, either. There is a wealth of ancillary materials in the game for players to view if they so choose. In addition to the optional missions, there are a number of audio files which both provide hints for completing objectives and flesh out the background of the characters and story.

This last part is key, as the story takes place within the real world’s history, albeit with a few fictional additions. Most strikingly, while the Metal Gear games have always drawn from major historical touchstones, Peace Walker taps a relatively underrepresented segment of world history: Central America.

The game takes place in both Costa Rica and Nicaragua, with illuminating background information to match. One can learn about how Costa Rica abolished its army, of the long struggle in Nicaragua between revolutionary Augusto Sandino and the U.S.-backed Somoza family, and a detailed history of Che Guevara.

All of these files are optional, but they can create valuable learning opportunities, which are enriched by the game itself. Creating a learning environment beyond lectures and homework means providing optional materials that students can delve into depending on their interests. The fact that this game can utilize this method to teach players some oft-neglected history is proof that it works.

Before we get too reductive with this analysis, we must realize the reality of our current educational system. Funding is a major problem for many schools, and providing performance-based assessments tends to be expensive. And as much as reformers espouse more organic testing, the truth is that no one approach will magically fix things. It’s going to take smart analysis of individual classrooms and students to see what will work for what situation.

But games at large, including Peace Walker, provide insight into how game design can improve teaching methodology and curriculum building. As unlikely as games seem to be as models for educational reform, teachers would do well to pay attention to how designers teach players.

 
Problem? Report this post
JEREMY SIGNOR'S SPONSOR
Comments (4)
Default_picture
June 26, 2010

 

...and the dumbing down of US education continues.   Game Journalists really need to get this through their head:  There is a difference between games that are designed specifically with education in mind, and games that use education as a fancy back drop for their story.  A video *game* based on historic event's, mythology, and classic literature does not offer the same amount of education as the actual book, and video game designer’s definitely should not replace real life historians, scholars, and writers that spend years researching, studying or creating their respectable subject. 

Let's also remember games that are meant for entertainment are usually subjected to the creator's personal opinion, and not so much as proven facts.  I don't ever recall Kojima making a MG that was based on the atrocities that the Japanese government committed to the Koreans and Chinese during WW2 when the Emperor decided he wanted a bit of elbowroom….  Do you?

Default_picture
June 26, 2010

John and Jeremy's points are *not* mutually exclusive. I choose to believe that Jeremy makes the point of emphasizing modern game design approaches and techniques as a tool to integrate with the scholarly content and academic aspiration to truth that John seems inflamed over.

I'd put it this way, as a hypothetical system: bring game designers together with other artists as well as psychologists and neuroscientists as a primary team for developing general methods and techniques to train minds (you might say indoctrinate, I'm not moralizing here). The psychologists and neuroscientists can check the effectiveness of proposed general principles. Let's call this group the glass group, for purpose of analogy.

Then bring in your scholars and academics or anyone else with a body of facts, techniques, and frameworks/philosophies to teach to come up with the checklist of things they need students to learn as well as a list of ways to demonstrate that students learned each item sufficiently.Let's call this group the water group.

Now, while the two groups can prepare separately, eventually they need to come together to forge a properly integrated product. For one, the glass group sets about designing some variations on general-purpose vessels and doodads to make the vessels deliver their contents, but they need to be sure not to try to fill those vessels with information outside of their immediate expertise.

Second, the water group has through tradition and peer review determined what is important for them to pass on and discuss with newer generations, but given the current torrent of new opinions, theories, and facts, the sheer breadth and depth of what humanity thinks it knows, the water group may need to "outsource" its teaching methodology and tool design to the glass group which seems to specialize in that design.

However, the water group does need to communicate with the glass group on specific projects and bodies of teachable content to provide the most appropriate method to deliver specific content, while the glass gropu needs to have an idea of what kind of content is considered important so it can have some direction in its effort to develop a body of principles. Even at the simplest interaction, the scholars and academics can discuss the methods they used to learn what they have learned, and the game designers and artists can develop ways to embed those techniques into "entertaining" game mechanics, while the scientists find ways to confirm or even enhance those methods, and maybe all three can even develop new effective techniques together.

Along the way you can have other people chiming in, like marketers and politicians, executives and school administrators, modulating the media/delivery method or the content/material, but let's keep this model simple.

In this day and age of broad and deep knowledge from the arts and humanities to science and engineering, even sport and war, education is as much a specialized field of study and expertise as 20th century American history or differential calculus. And while it makes some sense that people who have learned the material should theoretically be capable of teaching their methods to learn the material, this does not exclude the possibility of "making the process better" by bringing in a more dedicated general approach to the development of educational techniques and tools.

Finally, let's not limit ourselves to thinking of games as entertainment. Heck, I hear in ancient Greece and even in some circles today, philosophical discussion, scholarly debate, and even research and peer review are all closer to recreation than work (with pay and prestige merely being practical bonuses). Games like anything human beings in the "normal" range between rational and insane are capable of being used for recreation or useful work. But, it's the responsibility of producers, consumers, and those at the periphery to ensure that games are applied in the ways that benefits them best, whether that is purely for "entertainment", or "education", or "employment", or whatever.

By the way, if you're more of a believer in the selfishness and subjectivity of human nature, then you can take the same groups I laid out above and imagine them arguing how their areas of expertise fit into education, and hopefully through some kind of check/balance or other governance something that works "good enough" plops out.

====

Shoot, I forgot to mention: a bit of a can of worms opened up by bringing up Central America, or any real-world historical time and place in an industry naturally assumed to emphasize entertainment over scholarship. It's one thing to go "Carmen Sandiego" or even "Caesar III" to aspire to academic accuracy in the info files (despite lacking citation, etc., at least they had senses of "factness" to them that were kept separate from their gameplay), but weaving in historical events with fictional ones makes for a dicey education.

I think I've heard of a term "gumping" which might fit: as in Forrest Gump, weaving fiction into real documented events; while the movie has some appeal for highlighting a scant few events in American post-WWII experience, it must only be used as a secondary tool to a proper text or documentary for setting the facts straight. On the other hand, if teachers, academics, scholars, etc. could figure out how to weave media savvy with content without students mixing up the two, then there might be something useful there for education.

(Please ignore my comment box below; forgot I could edit these comments now; merged it into this box).

Default_picture
June 26, 2010

(merged with above box)

100_0503
June 26, 2010

I wasn't actually advocating the use of Peace Walker or other mainstream games as lessons themselves. That's kind of silly for reasons already stated. I wasn't even really talking about educational games. That's a separate topic. I was looking at the parallels between game design and elements of educational reform by analyzing a game. (Peace Walker was just what I happened to be playing at the time. I could have just as easily used another game that provides options for this piece.) The game industry's more organic approach to game tutorials works because it isn't simply throwing facts at you without context. You're allowed to attach knowledge with context. That's the main takeaway I want teachers to have: Practical applications for knowledge taught as they're learning the knowledge itself.

Re: Gumping: Again, I wasn't really advocating using a game with fake history mixed with real history in the classroom. Something like a simulation would work better for classrooms: Provide a real situation within the simulated world where students would have to construct knowledge by exploring the world and using it in these situations in ways in which it would mirror how they would use it in the real world. But again, that fits into the topic of educational games, which is beyond the bounds of this article. Perhaps someday I can explore that in another article.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.