THE CASE FOR GAMING IN LIBRARIES

INTRODUCTION

In 2005, the Public Library of Charlotte and Mecklenburg County purchased Xboxes as a way of drawing young people to the library, and was probably the first library anywhere to do so (Xbox, 2005). What could they have possibly been thinking? Were they really that determined to get more geeks into their library?

Actually, computer gamers cannot be so easily stereotyped. In fact, most North American teenagers play computer games nowadays. Nearly 70% of all Canadian high school students play at least once a week (Statistics Canada, 2006), and 73% of American boys aged 8 to 10 play at least 90 minutes a day (Barack, 2005). If all of these boys are geeks, then geeks must be the new norm, since they outnumber the non-geeks by almost 3-to-1. And it is not just the boys anymore: 41% of online gamers are female (Delneo, 2005). Nor is gaming by any means limited to kids: the average age of video gamers is just under 30 (Delneo, 2005). Nearly two-thirds of gamers are over the age of 18 (King & Borland, 2003). About 80% of Americans under the age of 30 have played video games at one time or another (Beck & Wade, 2005).

Another misconception about computer gaming is that it is nothing more than frivolous amusement. Amusing it certainly is; teenagers would not be doing it so much if it was not. But there is now a growing amount of evidence that computer gaming develops important skills for young people, and that some of these skills, such as critical thinking and problem-solving, are academically valuable (Johnson, 2006; Delneo, 2005, Prensky, 2005). There has been a tendency in the last few years for some librarians and educators to reconsider the effect of computer games on the learning and literacy of children and teens (VanLeer, 2005). This is the subject of this paper: it will be argued here, and supported with compelling evidence, that computer gaming actually enhances learning and information literacy for young people, and should therefore be supported materially and philosophically by libraries. Some of the myths surrounding gaming will be discussed and, for the most part, debunked.

GAMING MYTH #1: THE CONTENT OF COMPUTER
GAMES IS PRIMARILY VIOLENT AND/OR LEWD

There have been, and many circles there still are, tendencies to demonize computer games as detrimental to the proper moral development of young people. After two disturbed Colorado teenagers gunned down their fellow students at Columbine High School in 1999, it was widely publicized that the two shooters played violent computer games, although no one was ever able to establish a causal link between the games and the shootings (King & Borland, 2003). Notoriety of one form or another is usually what brings the games to the attention of parents’ and other concerned non-gamers. In the summer of 2005, for example, the game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas was withdrawn from store shelves when it was revealed that gamers could put a graphic sex scene into the game by downloading an easily available Internet patch (Chapman, 2005). The Grand Theft Auto game franchise had also been previously criticized by parents’ groups for its violent content. In the game, players can intentionally run over pedestrians or murder hookers, although the savvy player learns to avoid doing this sort of thing because it impedes the player’s ability to complete the game: committing these crimes only causes more police to pursue the player, who is trying to escape with a stolen car (Chapman). Perhaps the underlying message here is that unnecessary violence does nobody any good.

But the truth is that it is a mistake to tar all games with the same brush. Sweeping generalizations are meaningless because there are simply too many different genres of games, and too many different games within each genre. Gratuitous sex or violence are not features of most games; in fact, some continuously popular games, such as Tetris or the SimCity series, have no content that is even remotely violent or lascivious (Johnson, 2005). Game genres include action, adventure, puzzle, driving, role-playing, simulation, sports, and strategy games (Wilson, 2005). Because of this, parents and librarians must evaluate each game individually before deciding whether or not it is suitable for inclusion in the home or library.

GAMING MYTH #2: COMPUTER GAMES DO NOT
REQUIRE OR ENCOURAGE LEARNING.

Johnson (2005), Prensky (2005), Delneo (2005) and Beck & Wade (2004) all argue that interactive video games actually improve the problem-solving skills of young people, who are often unaware that this is happening. Most games allow users to repeatedly approach a problem until, through trial-and-error, it is eventually solved. This student has played the first-person shooting game Half Life, and can personally confirm that players must think their way through many of the game’s scenarios; progression to the game’s next level is impossible without some problem-solving. Concerns that gaming shortens attention spans are also unfounded; in fact, players frequently must concentrate on a single problem for an extended period of time, sometimes even for hours, and solve the problem only through persistence and creativity (Beck & Wade; Johnson). With some games it is impossible for the player not to either learn something or develop one or more learning skills (Johnson).
The notion that computer games are mindless entertainment is manifestly unsupportable. Many games require elaborate strategies to play. A game like Rise of Nations, in which players must run an entire country over the course of 6,000 years, cannot be played without the use of long-term strategic thinking (Rosevear, 2006). (Incidentally, telling your kids that they were not allowed to play Rise of Nations would make as much sense as telling them that they were not allowed to play chess.) Many games, even the mayhem-filled shooting games like Quake, Doom, or Half-Life, force players not only to think but also to make instantaneous decisions; in effect, the games teach kids how to think (Rice, 2007; Johnson, 2005; Beck & Wade, 2004). There is evidence that suggests gaming even encourages reluctant readers to learn (Maxwell, 2005).

There is also the frustration paradox: in some games, there are periods of play in which players are frustrated rather than amused. This occurs during the longer and more complex quest games, which may take players as long as 100 play-hours to complete. Players of Half Life, The Legend of Zelda and other quest games report that there are points in the games when they become exasperated because they are unable to solve the problems they need to solve in order to progress to the next level (Johnson, 2005; Rice, 2007). Numerous websites, such as Universal Hint System or Gamespot NES, offer game hints and cheat codes to help players get through the levels they find the most difficult (UHS, 2007; Gamespot, 2007). Yet rather than being deterred by such difficulty, gamers actually prefer games that make them work hard to solve problems, and are extremely gratified when they finally do solve them: it is this gratification that makes them persist, sometimes for hours, until they finally do figure out what to do (Johnson). Ideally, gamers want challenges that are difficult but not impossible; games that alternately fascinate and frustrate players actually increase their levels of engagement and provide greater opportunities to develop modes of thinking (Rice).

GAMING MYTH #3: GAMING, AS A VISUAL MEDIUM, DOES NOT ENCOURAGE OR DEVELOP LITERACY

When VanLeer (2006) assessed the role-playing computer game World of Warcraft (WoW) in the context of ACRL Information Literacy Standards (2007), she found that the game actually met most of the standards. WoW requires players to determine their own information needs, access the information effectively, critically evaluate the information, and then use the information for a specific purpose. As with many other games, WoW players must intake a copious amount of detail just to learn the game. In the Pokemon games, popular among younger children, players learn how to access, browse, and select information from a database as part of game play (Prensky, 2005). Phoenix Wright, Ace Attorney develops reading comprehension because it requires players to role-play as lawyers and solve crimes (Rosevear, 2006). In the collaborative role-playing game Lineage, in which literally thousands of players simultaneously participate in a single online game, players actually have to do research in order to play; they must manage virtual resources, plan strategies, and even do a fair bit of writing with their team members before they can fully participate in the game (Squire & Steinkuehler, 2005).

Gaming sometimes even spurs interest in traditional literacy. The notorious Grand Theft Auto games are complex enough that their official strategy guides, which are books that are not included when the game itself is purchased, have sold over 1.5 million copies (Johnson, 2005). Libraries that host gaming events report that the gamers sometimes go into the stacks to look for books (Schmidt, 2006). Squire & Steinkuehler (2005) have informally polled kids they encountered through library gaming events, and claim that fully half of them have sought books after having their interest piqued by a computer game. Games based on historical subjects seem to particularly encourage such serendipitous interest. Three such games are Age of Empires, which is based on the warfare, strategy, and diplomacy of ancient and medieval history; Rome: Total War, in which players take on the roles of prominent Romans, such as Julius Caesar or Scipio Africanus, and manage the warfare activities and civil government of parts of the Roman Empire, and even reenact historical battles such as the Battle of Alesia or the Battle of Zama; and the Civilization series, in which players start a rudimentary civilization in the year 4000 B.C. and have to manage its defense, economy, food supplies, and basic survival to the present day. Squire & Steinkuehler report that virtually every student they have encountered who has played any of these three games has gone to the library to find books to help them understand the games’ subject matter better.

CONCLUSIONS

Whether we who work in public libraries like it or not, we must accept that the millennial generation (those born after 1980) is unlike any generation that preceded it. Their minds have developed differently. Their inundation from childhood with digital-based learning and interactive communications technologies has made them active (as opposed to passive) learners; they are accustomed to multitasking and receiving information non-sequentially; they are graphics-oriented rather than text-oriented; and they are accustomed to being interconnected as they learn (Prensky, 2005). They also have distinctive attitudes towards new technologies, which they approach with curiosity and interest, unlike many of their parents’ generation who view new technologies with trepidation and dread (Prensky). Yet our educational systems for the most part do not reflect these changes in the way young learners process information. In fact, millennials learn so differently from their parents that today’s kids “are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach.” (Prensky, 2005, p. 98.) Traditional, pedantic teaching methods are ineffective for today’s teens, and libraries that do not adjust to this reality are in danger of losing the millennial generation altogether (Doshi, 2006). It is vital to communicate with young people in their own language. “We should quit force-feeding information literacy to students,’ writes Doshi (2006, p. 17), “on our own finicky terms.” This ultimately requires us to remember that the libraries we run are for our customers, both present and future, and not for ourselves. The fiscal reality is that many millennials are now part of the workforce, which means they have also begun contributing to the taxation system from which most public libraries are funded. Some are also old enough to be librarians, and will soon be participating in library management.

We are actually in the midst of a cultural revolution (Doshi, 2006), which will undoubtedly create challenges for librarians as they scramble to adjust to changes, but then again, has it not always been essential for librarians to be adaptable? But we must also recognize that the challenges are accompanied by unparalleled opportunities to engage young people (Doshi). Instead of presuming that computer games have little or no positive effect on learning, or that their sole effect is negative, libraries should somehow try to include them on the information literacy buffet table. No one is suggesting that libraries be turned into arcades, but instead of demonizing gaming, librarians should consider its potential for engaging students in a manner that is relevant and recognizable to them. Their interest in gaming is a means of teaching information literacy (Doshi). Librarians & educators have long used games as instructional tools: computer games can be viewed as simply the next evolutionary stage of an established practice (VanLeer, 2006). It is now possible for libraries to use virtual world gaming technology to make library usage tutorials that are online, interactive, memorable, and enjoyable for young people; with the availability of open source software, the cost is not nearly as high as you might expect (Hawkins & Brynko, 2006).

Libraries can take the initiative in supporting gaming in several different ways. Here is a partial list of actions that some libraries have already taken to support gaming culture.

• Libraries can circulate PC, Xbox, PlayStation and other console games the same way they circulate DVD’s and music CD’s. While it is true that parents would complain about the perceived effects certain games might have on their children, libraries can control which games they provide. Controversial ones like the Grand Theft Auto series can be avoided, while brainier games like Civilization 3 and Rome: Total War can be included. Parents might even be offered input into which games the library should offer; this would give libraries an opportunity to show parents that their concerns are important.

• Libraries can load gaming software onto their public computer terminals. Again, libraries have total control over which games they provide. Admittedly, this could potentially cause problems: contrary to earlier beliefs that video games were nonsocial, the opposite actually appears to be true (Delneo, 2005). Kids frequently want to play games in groups and their talk can disturb non-gaming patrons at nearby computers who are trying to get work done. The ideal solution is to locate the gaming computers in a separate area, preferably one that is sound-proof and that can be monitored by library staff. Non-computer games, such as chess and board games, can also be provided at these library gaming centres.

• Libraries can host gaming tournaments and give out prizes to the winners. Libraries that have done this report good turnouts that give young people positive associations with the library (Wilson, 2005; Schmidt, 2006). One advantage most libraries have over home computers is big screen capability: most libraries already have LCD projectors that they use for PowerPoint presentations, and can use these with computer games to give kids a visual spectacle that they cannot get at home.


There is also a concern that computer games contribute to a sedentary lifestyle that will have horrendous long-term effects on the general health of young people. This, combined with poor eating habits, could make millennials the first generation in history whose life expectancies will be shorter than those of their parents (Galloway & Lauzon, 2006). In Canada, obesity in young people aged 12 to 17 has tripled since 1979 (Statistics Canada, 2005). In the United States, the statistics are frighteningly similar, with obesity also tripling for young people between the ages of 12 and 19 since the late 1970’s (U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services, 2007). While it is not the games themselves that are unhealthy, there appears to be a causal relationship between obesity and “screen time,” which includes playing computer games, watching TV or movies, and working on computers (Statistics Canada, 2004). Even so, it is difficult to specifically blame gaming for the fatness of the kids. Dance Dance Revolution is a popular video game that requires players to repeat dance moves, to move physically, but it is unreasonable to expect a game, or an entire genre of games, to take the place of proactive lifestyle education. And such education is absolutely essential today, because computer games are going to be with us for a long, long time.


REFERENCE LIST

Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL). (2007). Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education. Retrieved Feb. 5, 2007 from http://www.ala.org/ACRLPrinterTemplate.cfm?Section=acrlstandards&Template=/ContentManagement/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=105342#stan.

Barack, L. (2005). Gaming at your library. School Library Journal. 51(7). 22.

Beck, J.C., and Wade, M. (2004). Got game: how the gaming generation is reshaping business forever. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

Chapman, P. (2005, Jul. 25, p. 1). Grand Theft Auto controversy a marketers’ dream. CanWest News. Retrieved Feb. 5, 2007 from http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=874636661&SrchMode=1&sid=2&Fmt=3&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=PQD&TS=1170733957&clientId=64067.

Delneo, C. (2005). Gaming for tech-savvy teens. Young Adult Library Services. 3(3). 34-8.

Doshi, A. (2006). How gaming could improve information literacy. Computers in Libraries. 26(5). 14-7.

Galloway, B., & Lauzon, A. (2006). I can’t dance without arrows: getting active @your library with video game programs. Young Adult Library Services. 4(4). 20-5.

Gamespot NES website. (2007). The Legend of Zelda page. Retrieved Feb. 11, 2007 from http://www.gamespot.com/nes/adventure/legendofzelda/index.html.

Hawkins, D.T., & Brynko, B. (2006). Gaming: the next hot technology for libraries? Information Today. 23(6). 1, 51.

Johnson, S. (2006). Everything bad is good for you: how today’s popular culture is actually making us smarter. New York: Riverhead Books.

King, B., & Borland, J. (2003). Dungeons and dreamers: the rise of computer game culture from geek to chic. New York: McGraw-Hill/Osborne.

Maxwell, D.J. (2005). Gaming is a powerful teaching and learning strategy. School Library Media Activities Monthly. 22(3). 28-30.

Prensky, M. (2005). Computer games and learning: digital game-based learning. In J. Raessens & J. Goldstein, eds., Handbook of computer game studies. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. 97-122.

Rice, J.W. (2007). Assessing higher order thinking in video games. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education. 15(1). 87-100.

Rosevear, J. (2006). What kids can learn from video games. Instructor (1999) 116(1). 73.

Schmidt, A. (2006). Are you game? School Library Journal. 52(6). 52-4.

Squire, K., & Steinkuehler, C. (2005). Meet the gamers. Library Journal. 130(7). 38-41.

Statistics Canada. (2005). Canadian community health survey: obesity among children and adults. Retrieved Feb. 12, 2007 from http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/050706/d050706a.htm.

Statistics Canada. (2006). Census at school: engaging students in statistics. Retrieved Feb. 12, 2006 from http://www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/81-004-XIE/2005005/census.htm#table9.

Statistics Canada. (2004). Overweight and obesity among children and youth. Retrieved Feb. 12, 2007 from http://www.statcan.ca/bsolc/english/bsolc?catno=82-003-X20050039277.

U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services, Centers for Disease Control. (2007). Overweight and Obesity page. Retrieved Feb. 12, 2007 from http://www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/obesity/.

Universal Hint System (UHS). 2007. Half Life hints. Retrieved Feb. 11, 2007 from http://www.uhs-hints.com/uhsweb/halflife.phtml.

VanLeer, Lynn. (2006). Interactive gaming vs. library tutorials for information literacy: a resource guide. Indiana Libraries. 25(4). 52-5.

Wilson, H. (2005). Gaming for librarians: an introduction. Voice of Youth Advocates. 27(6). 446-9.

(2005). Xbox marks the spot. American Libraries. 20.