School using GTA IV as an education tool... lol

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3178742

Yeah you heard right: a school is using GTAIV as a tool to teach children the difference between right and wrong. Basically the teacher shows them Niko running people over with a car and says "This is wrong!". I can see the children laughing at the scene.

What do you guys think, is this a valid way to teach right and wrong? Showing a videogame and comparing it to reality? Aren't they crossing the line and making children belive what they see on screen is real and actually happens out there?

SAMM calls the workshops "Get Real," and they use everything from Grand Theft Auto screenshots to Itchy and Scratchy clips from The Simpsons to educate kids about good and bad behavior. These images are mixed with flashcards featuring real-life photos of intoxicated adults and arguing parents, and the students are asked to differentiate between the good, the bad, the real, and the unreal.

Making kids understand the difference between reality and fiction seems like a good idea to me.

I'd be asking teacher when it was my turn to play.

SAMM calls the workshops "Get Real," and they use everything from Grand Theft Auto screenshots to Itchy and Scratchy clips from The Simpsons to educate kids about good and bad behavior. These images are mixed with flashcards featuring real-life photos of intoxicated adults and arguing parents, and the students are asked to differentiate between the good, the bad, the real, and the unreal.

Making kids understand the difference between reality and fiction seems like a good idea to me.

UpInFlames

All that is going to do is make kids want to play the game even more, probably...

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

SAMM calls the workshops "Get Real," and they use everything from Grand Theft Auto screenshots to Itchy and Scratchy clips from The Simpsons to educate kids about good and bad behavior. These images are mixed with flashcards featuring real-life photos of intoxicated adults and arguing parents, and the students are asked to differentiate between the good, the bad, the real, and the unreal.

Making kids understand the difference between reality and fiction seems like a good idea to me.

Black_Knight_00

But that's ok because fictional violence is cool and fun. It's when nutjobs start equating fiction with reality that the real problems begin.

Most kids already know the difference. I grew up watching horror movies with my uncle, playing N.A.R.C and Mortal Combat, and reading Stephen King books. Somehow I still knew that the stuff in these materials were fictional, and to do them for real would be a bad move. Only takes one time getting hit in the head with a stick or falling out of a tree to know that...anyone who cant tell the difference by the age of 8 is prolly a little slow on the uptake anyway, or deeply disturbed

For some good fun, check out Penn & Tellers BS take on video games. Spoiler: they let a 10 year old shoot an assault rifle!!

http://www.wisevid.com/gateway.php?viewkey=jk2bukzbugecqgg26262

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"][QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

SAMM calls the workshops "Get Real," and they use everything from Grand Theft Auto screenshots to Itchy and Scratchy clips from The Simpsons to educate kids about good and bad behavior. These images are mixed with flashcards featuring real-life photos of intoxicated adults and arguing parents, and the students are asked to differentiate between the good, the bad, the real, and the unreal.

Making kids understand the difference between reality and fiction seems like a good idea to me.

UpInFlames

But that's ok because fictional violence is cool and fun. It's when nutjobs start equating fiction with reality that the real problems begin.

Christ. I don't agree with it, simply because videogame violence (and especially Itchy and Scratchy) is portrayed in such an unrealistic, humorous and over the top manner as to give a wildly inaccurate impression of what constitutes real violence. It's like showing pornography to try to show what love is. Let the parents deal with it.

The big question is how do games come out of this and why are they being used in the first place? I'm still trying to figure out if these teachers go like: "Here's a screenshot of a GTA guy stealing a virtual car. Now here's a photo of a real criminal stealing a real car. Virtual is ok, but real is bad!". Why not skip the game altogether and just show them the real life photos? The other hypothesis is they are trying to blame the game as usual. I don't know, am I missing the point here?Black_Knight_00

Kotaku did a story on this too: http://kotaku.com/5513473/grand-theft-auto-used-to-steer-children-away-from-violence-thats-newSupport .

From Kotaku article: branch chairman Gaynor Bell explains there are methods behind this madness."They (children) see violence so often in their daily lives that they are desensitized to it and cannot really appreciate the consequences of picking up a hatchet and swinging it around. This is all about showing them that if they put a knife in someone, that person will die and they will end up in jail. It is getting the message over to them about what's real and what isn't."

Sounds like they show the kids images of video game violence that has unrealistic results, then discuss what would happen in real life if a person did the same thing the video game character did. If that is what they are doing I think that is an excellent idea. Its good to remind kids that there are no checkpoints or health packs in real life.

As for the blame game – Bell is quoted in the article as saying: "The kids these days are just getting worse and worse and I blame the mums and dads. They just don't teach their kids respect any more. They don't teach them what's right and what's wrong which is exactly what we're trying to do with this programme." So it doesn't sound like they are blaming games.

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]The big question is how do games come out of this and why are they being used in the first place? I'm still trying to figure out if these teachers go like: "Here's a screenshot of a GTA guy stealing a virtual car. Now here's a photo of a real criminal stealing a real car. Virtual is ok, but real is bad!". Why not skip the game altogether and just show them the real life photos? The other hypothesis is they are trying to blame the game as usual. I don't know, am I missing the point here?Solori

Kotaku did a story on this too: http://kotaku.com/5513473/grand-theft-auto-used-to-steer-children-away-from-violence-thats-newSupport .

From Kotaku article: branch chairman Gaynor Bell explains there are methods behind this madness."They (children) see violence so often in their daily lives that they are desensitized to it and cannot really appreciate the consequences of picking up a hatchet and swinging it around. This is all about showing them that if they put a knife in someone, that person will die and they will end up in jail. It is getting the message over to them about what's real and what isn't."

Sounds like they show the kids images of video game violence that has unrealistic results, then discuss what would happen in real life if a person did the same thing the video game character did. If that is what they are doing I think that is an excellent idea. Its good to remind kids that there are no checkpoints or health packs in real life.

As for the blame game – Bell is quoted in the article as saying: "The kids these days are just getting worse and worse and I blame the mums and dads. They just don't teach their kids respect any more. They don't teach them what's right and what's wrong which is exactly what we're trying to do with this programme." So it doesn't sound like they are blaming games.

hahaha , id tell the teacher hand me that , , ill show you whats wrong -goes to the bank robbery mission jhahhah

Well, if they are using the process you imply, it may be a valid idea, although children must have become really stupid since I last checked. I mean, I grew up without anyone telling me the difference between TV and reality and I figured it out by myself. Maybe parents have really become dramatically inadequate as Bell says. As for the "omg, games are desensitizing our kids" thing, let me bring out my old riff: the ESRB should be law and enforced, that way we'd have far less kids playing adult-oriented games and we'd finally get the PTA buzzards off our favorite hobby. Two birds with one stone.Black_Knight_00

Before writing kids off as "really stupid" and parents as "dramatically inadequate," try to remember that the kids and parents of today are living in a world where technology has dramatically increased access to violent images/ideas and violent images/ideas are accepted as the norm in mainstream entertainment. When you talk about even just 10 years ago, we didn't have things like youtube and we would never had had a show like Dexter. Instead of seeing the kids and parents as stupid and inadequate, I see them more as being overwhelmed.

Does that mean the ESRB should be "law and enforced"? Hell no. It may be harder to raise a kid today, but it is definitely not impossible or even close to being impossible. Just giving up and letting a bunch of political flunkies control what kids can and cannot play is a very, very, very bad idea. Parents are the best people to raise their own kids, not some group of political flunkies.

[QUOTE="Black_Knight_00"]Well, if they are using the process you imply, it may be a valid idea, although children must have become really stupid since I last checked. I mean, I grew up without anyone telling me the difference between TV and reality and I figured it out by myself. Maybe parents have really become dramatically inadequate as Bell says. As for the "omg, games are desensitizing our kids" thing, let me bring out my old riff: the ESRB should be law and enforced, that way we'd have far less kids playing adult-oriented games and we'd finally get the PTA buzzards off our favorite hobby. Two birds with one stone.Solori

Before writing kids off as "really stupid" and parents as "dramatically inadequate," try to remember that the kids and parents of today are living in a world where technology has dramatically increased access to violent images/ideas and violent images/ideas are accepted as the norm in mainstream entertainment. When you talk about even just 10 years ago, we didn't have things like youtube and we would never had had a show like Dexter. Instead of seeing the kids and parents as stupid and inadequate, I see them more as being overwhelmed.

Does that mean the ESRB should be "law and enforced"? Hell no. It may be harder to raise a kid today, but it is definitely not impossible or even close to being impossible. Just giving up and letting a bunch of political flunkies control what kids can and cannot play is a very, very, very bad idea. Parents are the best people to raise their own kids, not some group of political flunkies.

What do you guys think, is this a valid way to teach right and wrong? Showing a videogame and comparing it to reality? Aren't they crossing the line and making children belive what they see on screen is real and actually happens out there?Black_Knight_00

10-11 year olds is like, year 6 (or grade6 for americans) right? Well. If i was in that class i'd be laughing with my friends, not seeing it as "right" or "wrong", hell, if you're 10 and you can't tell the difference between right or wrong then they never will, we will laugh at someone falling over or getting hurt but we know it's wrong really. We will laugh at killing pedestrians in games because we can and we will.

Calling children rude and immature because they play these games is like saying that the developers are sick and twisted for giving you the ability to.

I think i tried to explain too much :P

Before writing kids off as "really stupid" and parents as "dramatically inadequate," try to remember that the kids and parents of today are living in a world where technology has dramatically increased access to violent images/ideas and violent images/ideas are accepted as the norm in mainstream entertainment. When you talk about even just 10 years ago, we didn't have things like youtube and we would never had had a show like Dexter. Instead of seeing the kids and parents as stupid and inadequate, I see them more as being overwhelmed.

Solori

I disagree completely. I was of that age about 18 years ago, and we definitely had media on par with whats out there today. The games were too rudimentary to be as graphic as they are today, but the themes were still brutal, and movies and books more than made up for that. This was the day of Body Count, afterall...I remember watching Candyman when I was like 10, and that movie was seriously $##@ed up. It wasnt on primetime, granted, but graphic materials "meant for adults" have been around since the pulp fiction days, and older people have always thought it was going to corrupt the sweet minds of the helpless children who inevitibly get their hands on them. This same cycle of "whats out now is so much worse than what we saw when we were kids" has been going on for years in all sorts of areas of life. Music (first elvis, then ice-t), games, movies, even books (the first media to be banned because of questionable content)......Its a bunch of crap. Give your kids the credit they deserve. Theyre smarter than you, so if you can tell the difference, theyll pick up on it.

Do they also use a hooker (in gta) to illustrate sex ed? lolgmer01

Violence aside, I think the GTA games could very well be used in any social sciences class, with its satire of modern western culture. SteelAttack

[QUOTE="gmer01"]Do they also use a hooker (in gta) to illustrate sex ed? lolmuthsera666

This will only encourage kids to play more games.

[QUOTE="gmer01"]Do they also use a hooker (in gta) to illustrate sex ed? lolmuthsera666

Someone hasn't played Grand Theft Auto IV. :P

[QUOTE="muthsera666"][QUOTE="gmer01"]Do they also use a hooker (in gta) to illustrate sex ed? lolUpInFlames