Use of Paradox Games as Educational Tools

[GeheimnisMann]

How do you guys feel about this idea? Do you use or know anyone who uses games like Crusader Kings, Victoria, and Europa Universalis as an educational supplement or tool? I sense a lot of potential for these games in the education department, not the least of which relating to the fact that Paradox's history actually does begin with educational games (The Svea Rike series).

I actually see a lot of potential in a PDS-style game specifically tailored to educational usage with regards to both world history and geography. Playing the games casually already nets most players a HUGE increase in knowledge of geography and some semblance of world history, in many cases a lot better than what current history and geography curriculum can offer, as known by the old phrase "I learned more about x in Europa Universalis than I did in y class".

So can current PDS games be used in classes, or have the potential to? Do you guys think there's a potential for a (admittedly simplified) PDS-type game specifically designed to be for educational use?

 

[Kliwarrior]

I used CK2 and EU4 to show the political scenarios and its evolution during the centuries, of european middle age and renaissance, to my daughter.
(you know, starting with a giving bookmark and moving starting time showing what happens in the world).

 

[Augustus93]

No. It is like saying that something like the Blackadder should be used as educational tool to teach English history(or using Battlefield 1 to teach WW1 in history class, it is absurd idea). The starting scenarios are good and all, but as you play (and even the AI), it diverges very much. Soon you would find yourself with a class that think that there was an English king called Bogus John or something like that. They are more art than educational tools but more than anything, they are games.

 

[AlanC9]

OTOH, it's not a bad idea to teach kids about the process, rather than just the facts. History happened because particular people made particular choices -- and because of a lot of chance events.

 

[LiberiusX]

No. It is like saying that something like the Blackadder should be used as educational tool to teach English history(or using Battlefield 1 to teach WW1 in history class, it is absurd idea). The starting scenarios are good and all, but as you play (and even the AI), it diverges very much. Soon you would find yourself with a class that think that there was an English king called Bogus John or something like that. They are more art than educational tools but more than anything, they are games.

I think PDS titles provide a wonderful hook for getting otherwise disinterested people interested in the subject matter at hand.

Vicky has been responsible for my much deeper interest in the 19th century/WWI/Interwar Period

 

[Augustus93]

I think PDS titles provide a wonderful hook for getting otherwise disinterested people interested in the subject matter at hand.

Vicky has been responsible for my much deeper interest in the 19th century/WWI/Interwar Period

Oh yes, absolutely. But that is not really an educational tool, although if it gets your interest up and you start liking the subject and do independent research to find out more then it will definitely help with your acedamics (to a certain degree).

 

[Closet Skeleton]

The one area EU has definitely educated me in is geography. Its a good way to spend a lot of time staring at maps.

Which is why its quite important that all those still evident errors get fixed.

 

[RelVleDy]

It got me interested enough to watch documentaries on the Crusades, the Templars, Ganghis Khan, and other Medieval subject matter, so yea, I'd say it was definitely a hook in my case!

 

[schondetta]

Don't see why not. I played age of empires when it came out. I wa seven than. I have been interested in history ever since. same could be said of games like these. at least geo politically they try to be accurate. it's a good first step . then you can move on to the deeper stuff. college publications/lectures , source books.etc

 

[Tibi088]

It can be ised but instead of History for Geography. Can you in any other way get someone to stare at a map for hours? Even if that map isnt as accurate as it should be.

 

[GeheimnisMann]

I do agree Geography is absolutely the biggest educational aspect of the game as-is. But my idea/rhetorical is more about if Paradox made a Svea Rike-type game that covered more of the world.

Since not many people here have played Svea Rike presumably, then basically it was like EU, but if the map was focused solely on Scandinavia instead and every turn it provided historical information. But it wasn't so railroaded so as to force an outcome, giving it replayability and a fun factor that separates it from other edutainment. You played as different royal families of Sweden and the game would give you information about them and their influence on Swedish history accompanied by other more general information. Of course, it's an ancient game from the 90s and was nowhere near as refined as anything we have today, so it's a bit primitive by current comparisons. But an updated model applied to a whole map?

Imagine a game like Svea Rike spanning the globe, but because of the stronger focus on history, would obviously be simplified in the geography and governing aspect (Less focus on things like development, diplomacy, technology, etc) and more focus on choices that impacted the future of a nation, like a souped-up Svea Rike.

As it is now though, the game has a reasonable educational value in history too. There are events in the game that happen that are historical (Hundred Years War, English Civil War, etc), and the game has a strong focus more on modelling the reasons that a country becomes the way it is, which is invaluable in helping understand historical decisions. By putting the player in the ruler's chair, it forces the player to make decisions that impact their nation's growth and prosperity, and they can grasp better concepts like trade leagues, trade wars, religious leagues, etc. Crusader Kings helps learners understand politics in the medieval era much better, with things like royal marriages, plague, feudalism, being fairly decently modelled. As long as the concepts, however simplified, are there and understandable, it can make for much educational potential.

 

[Woifee]

Not a good idea. To addictive. Students will drop out in the thousands.

 

[The_Meme_Man]

Absolutely not, solely for the reason of it being a game. It is distracting, encourages alternate history thought, and the games themselves are still flawed enough to not truly represent the complexities of history. Pretty distracting from actual lessons. Unless a game is blatantly an educational tool on the box cover, I see with students that they'd spend more time talking about the game (if it is fun) or learning how to play the game better than actually learning the lesson. Even worse if the students aren't particularily gamers, because they may even see it as a waste of time.

Do Paradox games make you smarter, absolutely, but not in a classroom environment. A heavy gamer can be inspired to study history, think critically, consider cultural and ethical study, even be inspired to learn languages. But the classroom environment is not appropriate, as students (at least in America) go to school to pass tests, not become wise. Paradox games don't teach much in terms of facts compared to critical, subjective, or deductive thought. There is also still a stigma against the educational value of "fun" video games that people, even students, can find it laughable or redicilous.

Sorry to sound like a stick in the mud, but at least in this day and age, its more emphasized by rules and social norms to make education fun, than make fun educational. Maybe when "self enlightenment" becomes a virtue in schools instead of "aquire marketable skills", games like these can become homework.

 

[Featherbeak]

Definitely! Gamification of teaching is a great tool to have when teaching. I have used Vic II for a couple of my pupils. I used it for two kids who I didn't reach in a traditionally teaching situations. I gave them the task of uniting Germany and then write a paper on how they did and how their attempt differed from the historical creation of Germany. It's was more or less a success. They tried and tried again to unite Germany and they learned a lot of english and how Europe looked like during the 1900 century. They wrote a whole page, which is more then they written in ages. So I'm a very happy teacher! But the most importantly I got both games for free from Paradox when I asked them if I could use their game in my teaching.

I work as a teacher in Sweden, and teaches 12-15 year old kids.

 

[GeheimnisMann]

Definitely! Gamification of teaching is a great tool to have when teaching. I have used Vic II for a couple of my pupils. I used it for two kids who I didn't reach in a traditionally teaching situations. I gave them the task of uniting Germany and then write a paper on how they did and how their attempt differed from the historical creation of Germany. It's was more or less a success. They tried and tried again to unite Germany and they learned a lot of english and how Europe looked like during the 1900 century. They wrote a whole page, which is more then they written in ages. So I'm a very happy teacher! But the most importantly I got both games for free from Paradox when I asked them if I could use their game in my teaching.

I work as a teacher in Sweden, and teaches 12-15 year old kids.

This is actually a pretty good method. Using the game as a backdrop to learn about geopolitics of a particular time and then supplementing it with books or other lesson material as a basis for comparing and contrasting.

Absolutely not, solely for the reason of it being a game. It is distracting, encourages alternate history thought, and the games themselves are still flawed enough to not truly represent the complexities of history. Pretty distracting from actual lessons. Unless a game is blatantly an educational tool on the box cover, I see with students that they'd spend more time talking about the game (if it is fun) or learning how to play the game better than actually learning the lesson. Even worse if the students aren't particularily gamers, because they may even see it as a waste of time.

Do Paradox games make you smarter, absolutely, but not in a classroom environment. A heavy gamer can be inspired to study history, think critically, consider cultural and ethical study, even be inspired to learn languages. But the classroom environment is not appropriate, as students (at least in America) go to school to pass tests, not become wise. Paradox games don't teach much in terms of facts compared to critical, subjective, or deductive thought. There is also still a stigma against the educational value of "fun" video games that people, even students, can find it laughable or redicilous.

Sorry to sound like a stick in the mud, but at least in this day and age, its more emphasized by rules and social norms to make education fun, than make fun educational. Maybe when "self enlightenment" becomes a virtue in schools instead of "aquire marketable skills", games like these can become homework.

I do agree that using games as an educational tool won't work for everyone, and it is VERY dependent on individuals too and their interests and reactions to such methods. Some people learn better from plain text (myself included). However, many people learn better from hands-on or visual-audio stimulation, and it's important to recognise that everyone learns differently. What might work for one person might not be right for another. I've seen teachers use (I've even experienced this myself in classrooms when I went to grade school) video games as a way to teach things to kids.

What's important to note is that you don't have to necessarily teach the bare facts, but the concepts behind ways of thinking. Encouraging alternate history thinking is absolutely a crucial part of education in history, because that's the kind of thinking that leads a person to ask, "Why did x happen, and what could have been done to prevent it?" Alternate history thinking has always been something people have found interest in, and teaching it helps critical thinking skills that can be important for kids to learn. The games I played for education in school weren't even always historically accurate, some were straight-up fictional, but they were used as a lesson supplement as we had to think about the reasons behind things. In one case we played an MMORPG (albeit a fairly primitive one, this having been 11+ years ago) the name of which I can't remember since I never had much interest in this way of learning (But now I recognise its value). And while they're not always accurate, PDS games (Minus maybe EU series) are deep enough and each with their own particular focus that you can get certain concepts across well enough provided you also give historical context and not just use the game by itself.

Consider this: Movies are used to teach in schools too, and not just documentaries either. Straight-up action movies. When I was in high school we watched Apocalypse Now, The Patriot, Braveheart, movies that are in no way historically accurate. But they're used as a supplementary material to gain the student's interest and oftentimes tests are given with questions like "Remembering what you learned in Chapter XIX, why do you think X Character did the actions they did after Y Event in Movie?"

So while I will agree that games as edutainment aren't for everyone, I believe they have just as much potential if we can use Hollywood movies as supplementary material too, which can arguably give wrong information (which teachers usually correct during the film itself).

 

[Aries666]

Do Paradox games make you smarter, absolutely, but not in a classroom environment. A heavy gamer can be inspired to study history, think critically, consider cultural and ethical study, even be inspired to learn languages. But the classroom environment is not appropriate, as students (at least in America) go to school to pass tests, not become wise. Paradox games don't teach much in terms of facts compared to critical, subjective, or deductive thought. There is also still a stigma against the educational value of "fun" video games that people, even students, can find it laughable or redicilous.

Sorry to sound like a stick in the mud, but at least in this day and age, its more emphasized by rules and social norms to make education fun, than make fun educational. Maybe when "self enlightenment" becomes a virtue in schools instead of "aquire marketable skills", games like these can become homework.

It's a pretty sad indictment of many education systems that 19th century rote learning is still the way things are done despite the fact that this is utterly inadequate training for 21st century jobs. Working in higher education it's always frustrating when students come to my lab and utterly lack critical thinking or an ability to apply their knowledge to solve related problems, and don't even get me started on their basic literacy and numeracy. I genuinely believe a seismic shift in educational methods is required so that students gain valuable work skills at an early age, I mean when was the last time you needed to recite the names of the textile machines in an 18th century cotton mill! My point is that diversification in teaching methods is a good thing, not every kid may respond to being taught through a game but not every kid responds to Victorian style fact learning either.

 

[The_Meme_Man]

It's a pretty sad indictment of many education systems that 19th century rote learning is still the way things are done despite the fact that this is utterly inadequate training for 21st century jobs. Working in higher education it's always frustrating when students come to my lab and utterly lack critical thinking or an ability to apply their knowledge to solve related problems, and don't even get me started on their basic literacy and numeracy. I genuinely believe a seismic shift in educational methods is required so that students gain valuable work skills at an early age, I mean when was the last time you needed to recite the names of the textile machines in an 18th century cotton mill! My point is that diversification in teaching methods is a good thing, not every kid may respond to being taught through a game but not every kid responds to Victorian style fact learning either.

Right, but first the education system needs to change. As long as people are still convinced that test taking is the way schools should work, and Asian schools continuously reinforcing the belief with high grades, it will remain the way it is. However video games are still a very young form of media, and if education stays the same the media surely won't. I give it 50 years, video games in some way or another will be crucial in the school setting.

 

[Immortal Impi]

Oh yes, absolutely. But that is not really an educational tool, although if it gets your interest up and you start liking the subject and do independent research to find out more then it will definitely help with your acedamics (to a certain degree).

I don't think you understand just how much the geographical dimension of paradox games aids learning. I've seen students who are otherwise historically illiterate who not only know what the Teutonic Order is, but know the title of its leaders and that it's a monastic order, that not only know that Poland-Lithuania exists but that it was a union.

I don't think most of the people posting in this thread against Paradox games as educational tools are really aware of the level of historical illiteracy among students, even University History students. You don't need to give it to students, but you could carefully design your own scenarios or use mods. For example, the Historical Additions Mod is a much better and more detailed (and interactive map) that a lecturer could use during class than a normal shitty map of Europe in 1444 (which rarely shows much). Voltaire's Nightmare has almost every single more than estate level German state in its own map.

These kinds of visual things can give you the scale and sense of things. Students can much better understand what a personal union actually is, because many have confusion about how it works. They can better understand the actual states in these periods. They can visualize things in a way that makes connections with the rest of their understanding.

I mean yes, if you just throw kids into a game of Vanilla EU4 and say have fun, write a paper on France in one week, then you'll get bad results. But as a supplemental tool I think people are deeply underestimating how even the gamified mechanics of Paradox games can deeply expand the intuitive understanding of history for undergraduate and high school students in a way that engages them. Someone playing in an area may start to ask questions about their favorite nation, or perhaps better appreciate the complexity of the HRE (whose mechanics, while imperfect in the game, do a better job of explaining it than a lecturer can through simple words).

 

[The_Meme_Man]

I don't think you understand just how much the geographical dimension of paradox games aids learning. I've seen students who are otherwise historically illiterate who not only know what the Teutonic Order is, but know the title of its leaders and that it's a monastic order, that not only know that Poland-Lithuania exists but that it was a union.

I don't think most of the people posting in this thread against Paradox games as educational tools are really aware of the level of historical illiteracy among students, even University History students. You don't need to give it to students, but you could carefully design your own scenarios or use mods. For example, the Historical Additions Mod is a much better and more detailed (and interactive map) that a lecturer could use during class than a normal shitty map of Europe in 1444 (which rarely shows much). Voltaire's Nightmare has almost every single more than estate level German state in its own map.

These kinds of visual things can give you the scale and sense of things. Students can much better understand what a personal union actually is, because many have confusion about how it works. They can better understand the actual states in these periods. They can visualize things in a way that makes connections with the rest of their understanding.

I mean yes, if you just throw kids into a game of Vanilla EU4 and say have fun, write a paper on France in one week, then you'll get bad results. But as a supplemental tool I think people are deeply underestimating how even the gamified mechanics of Paradox games can deeply expand the intuitive understanding of history for undergraduate and high school students in a way that engages them. Someone playing in an area may start to ask questions about their favorite nation, or perhaps better appreciate the complexity of the HRE (whose mechanics, while imperfect in the game, do a better job of explaining it than a lecturer can through simple words).

It's less that Paradox games aren't good for teaching (frankly I think lots of video games are, and video games WILL be the way education works in the upcoming centuries) and more the society we live in.

The atrocious statistics of American students not being able to name the 50 states or something is all about the students not giving a damn. There is this belief that Geography, History, Culture, and even FOREIGN LANGUAGES are wastes of education compared to STEM fields. It infuriates me, considering scientific educations don't guarantee jobs, and you can find jobs with a more cultural-study background if you are talented and smart about where you look. Hell, it's skills like being able to read and write, being able to speak coherently, being able to present facts, being a hard worker, open to new information, being able to work with other people (better yet if you can with foreigners), and mathematical skills that guarantee jobs. Everything afterwards, learning physics chemistry or biology, or even geography and history, is just secondary to get some knowledge to one's name.

Maybe this is where the education system should change. Prioritize that disciplined and strict learning for the education of practical skills like writing, speaking, presenting, math, and world languages, and we could be more open to the possibilities of video games in education when we finally get back in the mindset of "Learning to become smarter" instead of "learning to become a commodity". Paradox games to show maps and political progressions, video games that visually represent mathematical models, virtual labs, etc. And it's not like this neglect of historical and cultural studies is reinforcing ill conceived views of world cultures and foreign peoples in both extremes (oh wait).

Maybe my stance isn't "no" and more like "no....not yet". Games like these at the very least can be better uses of time for children than Call of Duty, and are the kind of games that should break the "video games are a waste of time" stigma.

 

[Augustus93]

Teaching will be dead in the incoming centuries. We will learn everything that we want in an instance. They are already experimenting with technologies that would enable that.