Positive Link Between Video Games and Academic Performance, Study Suggests (theguardian.com) 100
Here's another report reaffirming that playing online video games doesn't necessarily hinder one with their grades. According to an analysis of data from over 12,000 high school students in Australia, children who play online video games tend to do better in academic science, maths and reading tests. The study says kids who played online games almost every day scored 15 points above average in maths and reading tests and 17 points above average in science. "The analysis shows that those students who play online video games obtain higher scores on Pisa (Program for International Student Assessment -- internationally recognized tests that are administered by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)) tests, all other things being equal," said Alberto Posso, from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology whp analyzed the data. "When you play online games you're solving puzzles to move to the next level and that involves using some of the general knowledge and skills in maths, reading and science that you've been taught during the day." The Guardian reports: The cause of the association between game playing and academic success is not clear from the research. It is possible that children who are gifted at maths, science and reading are more likely to play online games. Alternatively, it could be that more proficient students work more efficiently, and therefore have more free time, making online gaming a marker of possible academic ability rather than something that actively boosts performance. Posso also looked at the correlation between social media use and Pisa scores. He concluded that users of sites such as Facebook and Twitter were more likely to score 4% lower on average, and the more frequent the social networking usage, the bigger the difference. 78% of the teenagers said they used social networks every day. Other studies have found a link between heavy users of social networking and a low attention span, which is also linked to poorer academic performance, but the evidence is less than conclusive.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: Hell (Score:1)
"Academic performance" is only paying attention to that part of the body of knowledge that will appear on the tests on Fridays and the Final.
Being a good little pupil is what it's about. Lord help anybody attending the lecture who is actually interested and asks the professor a question about the subject that won't be on the test.
Re: (Score:2)
Not always. Sometimes academic performance is tied to your ability not only to remember the necessary elements that you had read and heard, but the ability to learn how to make intuitive deductions from information that may be wholly new and different from anything that you did in class or may have read if you only read what the prof had instructed. I would argue tha
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
"Academic performance" is only paying attention to that part of the body of knowledge that will appear on the tests on Fridays and the Final.
Most of the professors I know are, or at least started out, genuinely interested in seeing student absorb new information and gain new skills. An incessant barrage of "Will this be on the test?" and "What should I know for the test?" type questions gets them trained pretty quickly to cater to those students who only care about the test. Other students hear mostly questions related to what's going to be on the test. It all sets up a horribly pathological positive feedback loop where once-enthusiastic teac
Re: (Score:2)
If the critical things to know, and "what is on the test" are not the same, maybe the prof should re-write the test.
If a student asks "Will this be on the test?", a good answer is "Anything covered in class or in homework assignments may be on the test."
Re: (Score:2)
Or it could be that kids whose parents can afford to buy them a high end gaming rig have other advantages in life as well.
Why online? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"When you play online games you're solving puzzles to move to the next level and that involves using some of the general knowledge and skills in maths, reading and science that you've been taught during the day."
There are relatively few online games which involve "solving puzzles to move to the next level". I can think of a handful; Portal 2, for instance. But games which emphasise traditional problem-solving skills tend to
Re: Why online? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
There are relatively few online games which involve "solving puzzles to move to the next level".
It is an incredibly retarded sentence, but it's really fairly accurate if you are willing to give a little. In order to advance there are all kinds of problems to be solved, ranging from figuring out the GUI to where to go and what to do when you get there. On the other hand, most of these "puzzles" are simple AF. Most of them won't teach you anything, not even coordination, and certainly not cooperation. But don't imagine that kids don't learn anything by for example learning to go on successful raids. The
Re: (Score:1)
There are relatively few online games which involve "solving puzzles to move to the next level".
I agree, unless they're talking about specific types of online games (eg, Lumosity). I think it's much more important that games - online or not - encourage you to focus on one activity for an extended period. Much different than, say, television, which gives you at most 8 minutes before a commercial break. Online games may have a more extended pseudo-narrative, covering several levels or encounters. Focus. Long-term memory. Those sound like good academic skills.
MMORPG (Score:2)
There are relatively few online games which involve "solving puzzles to move to the next level". I can think of a handful; Portal 2, for instance.
and the huge mass of MMORPGs and the like.
They require some reading skill (gotta see if there's something of interest in all those dialogs. Like some quest clue, etc.)
They require also some basic math (quickly making estimations about all the characters' stats everywhere).
Okay, it's REALLY not as complex as the puzzle solving you're thinking about, but it's enough to encourage a bit of reading and writing, and that is the markers in PISA that are reported in the summary.
So according to that interpretation,
Re: (Score:1)
It probably makes a difference because poorer students don't have access to online video games which are generally more expensive. So they are re-measuring the well established fact that wealthier students tend to do better academically.
Wealth correlation (Score:3, Insightful)
Another likely explanation is the parents' income level. Poor students tend not to be able to afford online gaming and also do less well in school.
Re: (Score:2)
Poor students tend to do worse in school due to other reasons than "not playing video games." If you're not sure where your next meal will come from, if your parents will have a job when you get home, or even if you'll have a home to go home to, you will be worrying a lot more about things other than an upcoming test or completing a homework assignment. Much of the "our country is doing poorly on tests" could be fixed by addressing poverty. (Another part could be "fixed" by realizing that many other coun
stop the college for all push & have more vo-t (Score:5, Insightful)
stop the college for all push & have more vo-tech you know like Germany. Germany has good workers rights and Germany has a lower percentage of students go on to college (that is a good thing as they are learning real skills and not years of filler and fluff at a high cost.
Re: (Score:2)
That might work, but I was talking more about elementary through high school. In the US, we all but assume that everyone will be educated through high school level. In other countries, depending on where you live or what your "station" in life is, you might not even get elementary school education. You might go right into a vocational training school or might not get schooling at all. Likewise if you have some kind of disability that impairs your learning. So other countries can make sure that the tests s
Re: (Score:2)
Also the teach the test idea needs to go away.
https://www.washingtonpost.com... [washingtonpost.com]
Re: (Score:2)
We've been refusing the tests for our kids for years. It doesn't eliminate "teach to the test" but if enough parents do it, the test results will be useless* and over-testing might be backed away from.
* Arguably, the tests are already useless but the proponents of the tests insist they need this data and insist that testing kids more and more is the only way to collect this data. John Oliver covered it [youtube.com] better than I ever could in a single comment.
what about when the people can't pay there loans (Score:2)
what about when the people can't pay there loans and just default?
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say if they don't know the difference between "their" and "there" then they should sue the college for giving them passing grades.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you can default on student loans. I'm pretty sure that in the US even bankruptcy can't free you from student loan debt.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least make the private student loans be able to be wiped out in bankruptcy.
The banks and schools need to have skin in game to help drive costs down.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Cheap is relative. If I can't afford a car, I'm not likely to buy a laptop, or internet service. In 2013, approximately 25% of the U.S. didn't even have internet service at home.
Re: Wealth correlation (Score:1)
If I can't afford a car I will live in an area where I don't need one. And incidentally, that is probably an urban area where there is likely to be lots of free wifi and lots of places to obtain affordable laptops and tablets.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If I can't afford a car I will live in an area where I don't need one. And incidentally, that is probably an urban area where there is likely to be lots of free wifi and lots of places to obtain affordable laptops and tablets.
No, you'll live right where you always did because you can't afford to fucking move. And there's no a lot of free wifi in the slums, but clearly you don't know.
Re: (Score:1)
I live in a town with a population of 25,000. Actually I live in the country on the outskirts of that town. Low taxes, reasonable cost of living, and five acres of land for under $800 a month mortgage. It's pretty nice, and very affordable, and I could ride a bicycle to three or four wifi hotspots.
I probably shouldn't have phrased it 'Urban' in my initial comment. Who wants to live in a shitty big city??? The Internet has flattened the world. You don't need to live in high density areas unless your an
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not disagreeing that the expense of living in the city is too high. What I'm telling you is that many poor simply can't afford to move out. And those that can, might have to find new jobs. Or be in need of a family support structure. I see so much of this here from people who simply haven't been through it to understand..."just move"...it's not that simple. I grew up with my single mom, renting apartments in Detroit, back in '58-72. We wouldn't have been able to escape if it hadn't been for the ge
Re:Wealth correlation (Score:5, Informative)
Another likely explanation is the parents' income level.
Gee, why didn't the researchers think of that? Oh wait, they did:
Not surprisingly, however, students who spent more time on their homework performed better.
Turning to household-level characteristics, students from wealthier households were found to score lower in math, reading, and science, controlling for other factors. This is a surprising result given that children from wealthier households generally have access to more cultural capital and are thus expected to do better in school.
The tables indicate that children from households with employed, educated, or more skilled parents performed better in all three subjects. The impact of parents’ educational and occupational status on children’s academic achievement is widely accepted in the literature. Finally, children who live with their families were also found to perform better
Children who have responsible and involved parents learn how to prioritize their time toward a goal of long term success. No surprise there.
Re: (Score:2)
Another likely explanation is the parents' income level.
Gee, why didn't the researchers think of that? Oh wait, they did:
...
Turning to household-level characteristics, students from wealthier households were found to
score lower in math, reading, and science, controlling for other factors.
But that's only one way to analyze the wealth factor. For example, simply discounting the poor students skews the aggregate statistics of the total vs. minus-poor populations. What would be much more interesting would be to directly compare the performance among poor, middle-class, and wealthy populations. If this study were done in the US, the poor students would be playing games at the libraries and might not be counted, for example. Not including that population skews the results.
If there were a posi
Re: (Score:1)
Not to mention that intelligence is inheritable.
Oh I forgot that we're not supposed to say that.
Re: (Score:2)
Probably, one of the major indicators it seems.
Could also be an indication of competitive people, who might have a portion be just as competitive academically.
Could also be that many online games have portions that might involve doing some math to figure out optimal DPS configurations, or creative parts that might attract that sort.
Could also be just an indicator some have easy access to a computer and Google.
I know back when I was a kid playing computer games and going "online" (BBS), required actually lea
"Take that Mom and Dad!" (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
... which I yelled from my dimly lit basement bedroom in their house that I've been living at for 35 years.
Because you flunked out of college and can't hold a job due to the World of Warcrack addiction.
Re: (Score:3)
... which I yelled from my dimly lit basement bedroom in their house that I've been living at for 35 years.
Because you flunked out of college and can't hold a job due to the World of Warcrack addiction.
Just a data point, I know this is the stereotype, and maybe I'm an exception, but I've played WOW since it was in beta, and still manage to have a family, and a job managing ~50 engineers. But then, I probably average a couple hrs./night....not much different from someone who watches that much TV.
Re: "Take that Mom and Dad!" (Score:1)
Mentioning the TV thing is a great retort to non-gamer vanillas and pinks. A good way to take it further is to explain to them that you play a character in the 'TV show' that you regularly 'watch'.
Binge watching (Score:2)
And that's a very good example.
In the world of TV, you also have people who only casually watch some movie from time to time.
You also have people who follow their favourite TV shows and discuss the next morning what was on yesterday's GoT episode, but beside that have a pretty normal life.
And binge watchers who feel the need to watch all the episode of all seasons of some show they've discovered on Netflix. To they point that they don't even go out of their home.
(And binge watching, and raid players are lik
Re: (Score:1)
It depends on one's life goals.
For some people, their primary occupation may be 'Raid Leader in an MMORPG.' For other people, their 'career' is more important. The Raid Leader works a shit job to have enough money to live on. The 'career' person might play an MMORPG a few nights a week for a couple hours.
When they step out into the 'Real World' the career person might order a burger from the Raid Leader who runs the raid he participates in on Saturday afternoons.
It's all good. What constitutes 'bad habi
Bad habits (Score:2)
What constitutes 'bad habits'? Is it a bad habit to work 10 hours a day in an office to 'get ahead' and neglect other parts of life?
It happens that medecine has a very clear definition of 'bad habits' and 'addiction':
it starts at the point where the "bad habit" takes over your life, where it prevents you to lead a normal life, where it takes so much place that it is detrimental to the rest of your life.
(with a bunch of technical questions that can help pin-point existing problems...)
So to go back to your exemple:
- is the Raid Leader happy with his life? is he able to find a balance he's comfortable with between his passion and his life?
From the article... (Score:3, Insightful)
"It is possible that children who are gifted at maths, science and reading are more likely to play online games."
I'd say this is the mostly likely truth here.
Re: (Score:1)
I can't say for sure because all I know about this research is what I read in the summary, but I too would like to interpret the results in the way that portrays me personally in the best possible light.
Note to my students... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Too late! I just threw all my books into the incinerator.
Wait, do people still have incinerators?
Re: (Score:2)
interesting result.. (Score:2, Insightful)
No duh (Score:2, Insightful)
People that play computer games tend to be:
1) Computer literate = average or greater intelligence and having the skills to self-teach technological skills.
2) Not dirt poor = having the many advantages of the middle class life.
3) Not have parents that are tyrannical puritans that discourage kids from learning.
Re: (Score:3)
10-15 years ago, you'd have been correct. These days, however, "online gaming" is often just going to mean "Call of Duty via Xbox Live" and the cost barriers-to-entry are very low indeed (and the console may well be acting as a substitute-parent).
The snarky part of me wonders whether the correlation isn't in fact between academic performance and "not playing many traditional sports".
Re: (Score:2)
The snarky part of me wonders whether the correlation isn't in fact between academic performance and "not playing many traditional sports".
If true, it's probably not just sports, but organized social activities in general. Yes, it's a stereotype, but there's probably a greater percentage of introverts, "loner"-types, etc. in those who play video games frequently. In the past the extroverts and socially adept folks would be participating in all sorts of organized activities after school, and then going out with friends for a meal or something. Nowadays they probably spend some of that time on Facebook and texting, which also takes up time.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure what schools you are talking about but many high schools have a minimum academics requirements and the larger the student body the more likely those academics requirements will be more strict.
Re: (Score:2)
If you would allow me to perhaps put a finer point on your words...
1) They TEND to be more computer literate. BELIEVE (like most people) they are more intelligent than average and are thought to self-learn. (myth but all humans self-teach to some degree)
2) Come from a wide variety of socioeconomic backgrounds as computers are inexpensive these days are are not the domain of the privileged for some time now. The advantage is thus null and void as this is not a "thing" in the western world. - the differen
Not causation and all that (Score:3)
While I’m sure that playing problem-solving games hones problem solving skills, just making your kids play games isn’t going to make them math geniuses. In fact, for most kids, it would probably just make them waste time. Rather, it is an instinctive interest in puzzles that makes some people interested in games *and* STEM subjects.
And this link is going to just be statistical. I do computer engineering, and I have side interests in math, physics, linguistics, etc. But I really don’t like most video games. My wife has degrees in english, history, and law, and she kicks my butt at every game we play.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
While I’m sure that playing problem-solving games hones problem solving skills, just making your kids play games isn’t going to make them math geniuses. In fact, for most kids, it would probably just make them waste time. Rather, it is an instinctive interest in puzzles that makes some people interested in games *and* STEM subjects.
And this link is going to just be statistical. I do computer engineering, and I have side interests in math, physics, linguistics, etc. But I really don’t like most video games. My wife has degrees in english, history, and law, and she kicks my butt at every game we play.
You are right, of course. Making your kids play video games may or may not make them smarter.
What I think is the important part is that letting your kids play video games will not make them stupid (on average).
I love these kinds of articles (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
All the evidence I need (Score:1)
Needs more Variables; But Still a Good Base. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
W.T.F.???? It is Math people. It is not plural. Sciences sure but not Maths. Maybe the OP should play more video games. Oh, and the reason there is a strong correlation is because it isn't the game that is "making" the kids smarter. It is that the smarter kids are house bound nerds who never go out and party with their friends. They are introverts and have no other social options other than on-line gaming.
You need to travel a bit more. There is a place in this world where English was created, rather than imported and they contract mathematics to maths.
Enjoyment vs obedience (Score:2)
Kids play games because they enjoy them; games involve abstract problem solving in various guises; kids thus learn to enjoy abstract problem solving, and practice it more. This then spills over into academic disciplines which harness similar skills as those the games reward. This is hardly new: chess was invented to teach strategy, as was go. People who play strategy games and enjoy them are most likely better than those who don't, all else being equal.
If you are motivated only by the avoidance of exam fail
Eve Online (Score:2)
I wonder how much of this research is being influenced by Eve Online, and it's insanely huge and complex market.
Gym Class (Score:1)
They probably get lower grades in gym class, though.
In 10 years the dude from High School who had the lettersman jacket will be selling used cars, of course.
Causation is Correlation! (Score:2)
It's nice to know that academic success causes video games. There is supporting evidence. Square Enix, EA, Rockstar and other video game makers did not exist until after universities were invented.