[game_edu] "Identifying a Good Game School"

[Roberts, Scott]

I don't disagree with Jose's complaints about the article (especially #4, which in general drives me crazy).  I think that the positives of the article outweigh the negatives though.  

Scott





-----Original Message-----
From: game_edu-bounces at igda.org [mailto:game_edu-bounces at igda.org] On Behalf Of Jose P. Zagal
Sent: Friday, April 02, 2010 3:37 PM
To: IGDA Game Education Listserv
Subject: Re: [game_edu] "Identifying a Good Game School"

Hi,

I'm sorry, but I guess I can't agree with many of the earlier comments 
regarding the "Identifying a Good Game School" article. While the 
article certainly has some genuinely wonderful advice (I would single 
out the advice on accreditation and IP ownership as exemplars in this 
case), I am deeply concerned by other aspects of the article.

This article, in its language, tone, and examples, perpetuates and 
strengthens a misguided view of what it means to get an education that 
is worrisome and potentially damaging. In particular, it supports the 
following notions:

1. Students know what's best for their education.

2. Research-focused institutions have poor teaching.

3. Research-focused institutions (or "career academics"), have no impact 
or relation to the game industry.

4. The goal of a university education is to get a job.

5. Entrepreneurship is what you do when you can't get a job.
(and a university education can't prepare you for entrepreneurship)

6. If it isn't obviously related to games, it's useless to a games 
education.


--
José P. Zagal
Assistant Professor
College of Computing and Digital Media
DePaul University

http://www.ludoliteracy.com/
http://facsrv.cs.depaul.edu/~jzagal

_______________________________________________
game_edu mailing list
game_edu at igda.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu