TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 1

Tough Choice: Using Violent Video Games in the Classroom as a Teaching Tool for Improving

the Decision-Making Skills of High School Students

University of British Columbia

TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 2

Do you play violent video games? Do your friends? Your children? As a teacher, would

you let your students play them in class? What actually is a violent video game? Oxford

dictionary defines violence as behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or

kill someone or something. A violent video game is therefore any video game that contains one

or more violent scenes. The definition is simple, yet a sea of conflicting research and media

coverage has caused a divide in public on violent video games. However, many video games

containing violence contain it as one piece of a large web of complex game mechanics, or as a

method of adding tension or drama to a story much like in a novel. When chosen appropriately

these games are not only an acceptable form of entertainment but can act as an educational

technology. This paper will argue that violent video games, such as Starcraft, The Walking

Dead and Papers, Please, are a legitimate classroom teaching tool for developing

decision-making skills of high school students, especially decision-making skills involving

situations of moral ambiguity. The high school students considered are primarily those within the

Canadian school system. This argument will unfold through a discussion and research

background of the topic, and an exploration of how a variety of violent video games can improve

general decision-making skills even for morally complex dilemmas.

First, the following question should be discussed: Should violent video games be used in

the classroom as a teaching tool? Parents and educators shy away from violent video games due

to an assumption that they glorify violence, but this is simply not the case in general. Each game

must be considered individually, judged on its merits and appropriateness, like any classroom

material or educational technology. And, as John Dewey once advised, everything depends on

the way games are employed (Dewey, 1997). It is not enough to simply introduce a violent video
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 3

game into a classroom and assume it will be beneficial to students. The learning environment

must be considered and the game must fit somewhere within the curriculum guidelines. Finally,

we should choose games, and design their accompanying lessons, with an eye towards

facilitating desirable mental and moral growth (Dewey, 1997). Just because a video game

contains violence should not automatically negate its potential as a teaching tool. Be this as it

may, very few teachers in the world have used violent video games in their classrooms as a

teaching tool. This stance is likely due to conflicting research and media coverage on the topic,

and warrants its own discussion.

Video games have been given a bad reputation in the past, heavily due to news media

claiming that video games, especially those containing violence, increase the tendency of the

people playing them (the players) to become violent or aggressive. The truth is that we simply

have not reached a point in the research to make a definitive judgement of their effect on violent

behaviours. Research exists all along the spectrum, with conflicting results, making a definitive

overarching conclusion seemingly impossible. With no standardized test of the effect of

violent video games, each research team controls their own sets of variables during data

collection which results in conflicting conclusions.

For example, some researchers claim that playing interactive violent video games leads to

higher short-term aggression (Lin, 2013), with one team citing that playing violent video games

is a risk factor for future physically aggressive behaviour and that this effect exists across a

variety of cultures (Anderson et al., 2008). Meanwhile, other researchers have concluded the

opposite, concluding that video game consumption is associated with a decline in youth violence

rates (Maylie, 2015). A seemingly even greater number of researchers suggest no correlation,
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 4

finding that violent video game exposure was not found to be predictive of delinquency or

bullying (Ferguson, Olson, Kutner, & Warner, 2010), with one team of researchers stating that

the assumptions made by popular media and policymakers may be exaggerated at best and

erroneous at worst. These researchers concluded by stating that a causal link between video

games and violence is highly suspect (Gunter & Daly, 2012).

To muddy the waters further, the 2000s brought a sharp shift in tone from the news

articles covering media violence and aggression to more extreme, near-alarmist stances toward

more neutral conclusions. A supposed reason for this shift is that there are expert sources on both

side of the debate and journalists, in an effort to present an objective stance, consistently include

the other side of the coin no matter the stance of the research spurring the article (Martins et

al., 2013). This overall ambiguity in the areas coverage has led some researchers to advocate for

a critical debate on the subject based only on scientific evidence (Elson & Ferguson, 2014).

Although the scientific community nor general public cannot seem to agree on how

violent video games affect behaviour while speaking in generalities, enough literature exists

covering their positive effects on cognition to suggest they can be used as a classroom teaching

tool. Consider StarCraft, for example, a sci-fi real-time strategy game. In this game, players

build armies and vie for control of the battlefield, observe the battlefield from a top-down

perspective and issue orders to units in real time, while carefully managing the collection and

distribution of resources to military units and buildings (Blizzard, 2016). The game revolves

around producing massive armies to outwit and kill your opponents, making it a violent game,

yet it has clear potential as a powerful teaching tool. It could be used in history classes to study

the military strategies used in wars they are studying, in math classes to understand the statistics
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 5

of resource management, or and in economics classes to understand the dynamics of supply and

demand. In terms of psychological effects, studies have shown that StarCraft helps develop agile

decision-making by improving cognitive flexibility, which is essentially the ability of a person to

switch between one task or another (Glass, Maddox, & Love, 2013), or adapt to new and

unexpected conditions in the environment (Caas, Quesada, Antol, & Fajardo, 2003). It could

also be considered a quick game (games that ask a player to make many decisions extremely

quickly), which have been shown to strengthen a persons ability to translate sensory

information quickly into accurate decisions (Bower & News, 2010). The capability of real-time

strategy games to promote our ability to think on the fly, and learn from past mistakes (Glass,

Maddox, & Love, 2013), makes them a legitimate choice for helping students improve their

decision-making skills. When applied in an appropriate high school setting, the benefits of their

use far outweigh concerns over mild violent content.

While some games can help students make decisions about how to manage resources,

others can help them decide how to react in a situation of moral ambiguity. Research in this

specific area leaves much to be desired, as very few educators have used video games in this

context. The following discussion will argue that appropriately-chosen games should be used for

this purpose.

Quick games improve a gamers abilities in the cognitive domain of Blooms

taxonomy (Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia, 1964), but the best games to choose to bolster

decision-making skills for morally complex dilemmas are interactive, story-based video games.

Such games have been shown to appeal not only to cognitive domains but also to the affective

domains of the taxonomy, related to how we deal with things emotionally (Classroom Aid,
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 6

2013). As humans, we love stories. When educational materials are connected to an interactive

story, we give learners a tangible role within it where their actions have consequences. This

transforms the traditional learning process into a personalized experience which can improve

understanding of the material and solidify important concepts that may have otherwise been

beyond the grasp of students. Games containing violence as an organic component of the story

give students a chance to process the complicated feelings and emotions generated by them in a

safe space: the classroom. By avoiding graphic violence in class, we set up our students to

navigate this complicated side of society on their own. Plays such as Macbeth and novels such as

Lord of the Flies or Animal Farm contain numerous scenes of graphic violence, yet are

commonly taught in high schools classrooms across Canada. Using interactive, story-based video

games with a strong narrative in place of some of these violent novels would not only allow

students to explore similarly complex subject matter, but literally allow students to become part

of the narrative. This allows for an entirely new level of student engagement in the classroom,

and this exact teaching method has already been adopted by Tobias Staaby, a teacher at Nordahl

Grieg high school, Norway.

Tobias uses the video game The Walking Dead to teach classes in ethics. In this

adventure game, players assume the role of protagonist Lee Everett, the leader of a group of

survivors during a zombie outbreak. The narrative is heavily affected by dialogue choices and

actions performed by the player during key scenes, many of which are morally complex

dilemmas of which there is no best choice. Tobias displays the game in class on a projector

screen, a student plays through the game, and the class spectates. He introduces ethics theories

piece by piece, in pace with the narrative, and the game is paused during a dilemma. Students are
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 7

broken into groups to discuss the decision they would make in that situation. After discussions,

Tobias uses online polling software, such as Poll Everywhere, to tabulate viewpoints and

facilitate collective decision-making. The most highly-voted decision is chosen as Lees decision

in-game, this choice branches the narrative in a unique direction, and students must deal with any

ensuing consequences, good or bad. This process continues for each large decision in the game

(Darvasi, 2014).

Here I will provide an example of such an in-game decision, for context. One especially

emotional scene sees has a young kid, Duck, dying of a zombie bite that will eventually cause

him to turn, essentially becoming a zombie himself. Ducks parents do not want this fate for

their child, and so they take him into the woods to say their goodbyes with a plan shoot him

before he turns. Ducks mother, Katjaa, cant handle the grief and shoots herself, leaving Ducks

father, Kenny, who has been in denial until this point, to realize there is no longer any way to

save his son. Lee is stuck in the middle of this situation, resulting in a morally ambiguous

decision being placed in the hands of the students. There are three options. They can choose for

Lee to let Kenny shoot his own son and grieve this action forever. They can instead choose Lee

to shoot Duck, as no parent should ever have to kill their own child. Or, as a final choice, the

students can choose to allow Lee and Kenny to leave Duck to die alone in the woods, regretfully

allowing him to reanimate in the woods. Clearly there is no best decision here; all decisions are

brutal and heart-wrenching, yet a decision must be made.

Presenting such situations to a group of learners can allow students to consider opinions

and viewpoints they have never encountered before, without having to encounter such moral

dilemmas in their personal lives. In this light we see there is violence in this game, but it exists
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 8

within the context of a larger, emotional narrative similar to how violence exists in the novels

and plays referenced earlier. The difference here is that interactive video games, unlike novels,

appeal to every learning style; auditory, visual, kinesthetic, logical, social, verbal, or others.

Material that could have been given as a simple statement of fact by Tobias is transformed into a

personalized experience; students apply and practice learned ethics theories as opposed to simply

memorizing facts. The potential of violence to result from the decisions simply add an extra layer

of complexity to the dilemmas, spurring passionate classroom discussions. For teachers in

general, video games give us a practical space for exploring and understanding topics

(Classroom Aid, 2013). Furthermore, it is interesting to note that Tobias received no complaints

from parents; once the game was shown to them with the premise explained clearly, they were

entirely willing to support his initiative. For those concerned about the option for students to

choose Lee to engage in heinous behaviour, there is still hope. Several studies, as recent as 2014,

have shown that committing immoral behaviours in a video game elicits feelings of guilt in the

players who commit them, leading them to become more sensitive to the moral codes they

violated (Grizzard, Tamborini, Lewis, Wang, & Prabhu, 2014).

Helping students to make decisions in situations of moral ambiguity is not a common part

of Canadian K-12 schooling, yet video games exist as a natural medium for this teaching. Moral

issues are often a matter of fact as well as the attitudes of the interested parties, and to resolve or

work through these dilemmas is unlikely to depend on one special process of moral reasoning

(Bucciarelli, Khemlani, & Johnson-Laird, 2008). The complex nature of these situations of moral

ambiguity makes video games, as interactive multimedia tools, the perfect classroom tool for

helping students develop a varied skill set to deal with problems for which there is no clear, or
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 9

even correct, solution. The classroom acts as a safe space where students can encounter these

difficult choices and occasionally violent situations, develop their decision-making and

higher-order thinking skills, while, again, remaining one step removed from their personal lives

and keeping them safe from real world violence. Essentially the video games can be used as a

digital playground, not dissimilar to how Minecraft can teach real-world building skills, but this

playground is for teaching and learning decision-making skills.

Using Tobias as inspiration, I suggest another video game which could be used in the

classroom to improve the decision-making skills of students in morally ambiguous situations:

Papers, Please. This indie game focuses on the emotional toll of working as an immigration

officer in a bleak, dystopian, and fictional Eastern Bloc country in the 1980s, and as the added

benefit of mimicking event of recent history. It is the perfect game for practicing moral

decision-making under pressure. Each decision made has drastic consequences, although the

nature of the consequence is not always immediately apparent to the player, and no decision is

simple. The player must analyze immigration documents, looking for potential problems,

interrogate applicants, and decide whether to let them in the country or deny their access, all

under a strict time limit (Sooja, 2013). If you do well on a day, allowing just the right number of

immigrants through and refusing entry to others, you get 5 credits; credits are the games

currency. If you dont do well, you get nothing. Not making enough rent money means you fail

the game. No money for heat, or for your family will see them fall ill. Without money for

medication, theyll die. Yet making too much money causes government suspicion, leading to

confiscation of hard-earned credits. Every single second of the game forces you to make a moral

choice, and players simply have to do their level best to survive when every rule, and every new
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 10

game mechanic, works against them (Parker, 2014). The game mixes the benefits of quick

games, which likely improve basic visual processes, attention and vigilance, and executive

functioning (Eichenbaum, Bavelier, & Green, 2014), yet retains the affective domain benefits of

interactive story-based games due to the nature of the tasks given.

To argue this games potential for improve decision-making skills of students, some

morally ambiguous choices provided in-game should be discussed. For example, should you

refuse an immigrant lacking a vaccination certificate, or detain them? Detaining them would

afford you with credits, finally allowing you to purchase medicine for your sick child, but a

detainee risks death or worse. Or perhaps youve just let a man through, but his wife lacks the

proper papers. Do you refuse her access, single-handedly splitting the family apart forever, or

allow her access while subjecting yourself to a fine that leaves you unable to heat your

apartment? These are complex dilemmas that students would hopefully never encounter

otherwise, and they provide fertile ground for in-class discussions.

Papers, Please could be used as a jumping-off point for writing assignments and

discussions in a high school English class, or could be installed cheaply on laptops or iPads. An

individual assignment could take the form of being asked to complete up to a given day in the

game as homework, and to document their greatest moral struggle, returning to the following

class to discuss their dilemmas and emotions with classmates. A group assignment could involve

one student controlling the game while others aid their decision-making. A teacher-facilitated

debriefing session could allow students the chance to discuss why they did or did not agree with

the suggestions made by their classmates. Another assignment could be to give Papers, Please as

a companion game to the study of a novel such as Animal Farm, with its common themes of
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 11

communism in a dystopian world. Like Animal Farm, Papers, Please is not about violence;

violence is a natural result of the fictional world of the game.

Both Papers, Please and The Walking Dead contain scenes of violence and are therefore

considered to be violent video games, yet it is important not to disregard their potential to

provide genuinely unique, powerful, and memorable learning experiences to our students. An

appropriate choice of game by the teacher ensures that a games violent content is not glorified.

A well-informed teacher can choose the game based on its merits to their students, whether they

choose real-time strategy games to improve their students cognitive flexibility or choose

interactive, story-based games to allow students to work through complex moral dilemmas

individually or in groups. Not only do these game develop decision-making skills, they also

nurture empathy, an emotion many modern teenagers struggle with developing or understanding.

Games can be chosen so that the situations the games present allow students to process complex

themes in a safe space no more inappropriate, yet vastly more engaging, than reading a novel.

The scientific community and news media cannot agree on the general effects of violent

video games on our psychology. Violent video games have rarely been used in classrooms to

teach anything, so the road for teachers who are interested in this will be a difficult one, filled

with frustrating trial-and-error. Even so, teachers should appropriately-chosen video games are a

legitimate classroom teaching tool for developing decision-making skills of high school students,

regardless of whether the game contains scenes of violence.

TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 12

References

Anderson, C. A., Sakamoto, A., Gentile, D. A., Ihori, N., Shibuya, A., Yukawa, S., M. Naito, &

Kobayashi, K. (2008). Longitudinal effects of violent video games on aggression in Japan

and the United States. Pediatrics, 122(5), e1067e1072.

Blizzard. (2016). What is StarCraft II? Retrieved July 29, 2016, from

http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/game/guide/whats-sc2/

Bower, B., & News, S. (2010, September 13). Gamers better at fast decision-making. Retrieved

July 29, 2016, from Science, http://www.wired.com/2010/09/gamer-decisions/

Bucciarelli, M., Khemlani, S., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2008). The psychology of moral

reasoning.Judgement and Decision Making, 03(02), 121139.

Caas, J., Quesada, J., Antol, A., & Fajardo, I. (2003). Cognitive flexibility and adaptability to

environmental changes in dynamic complex problem-solving tasks. Ergonomics, 46(5),

482501. doi:10.1080/0014013031000061640

Classroom Aid. (2012, September 26). Interactive story-based learning makes learning Affective.

Retrieved July 29, 2016, from

http://classroom-aid.com/2012/09/26/interactive-story-based-learning-makes-learning-aff

ective/

Darvasi, P. (2014, July 15). Teaching ethics and narrative . . . With violent video games?

Retrieved July 29, 2016, from Game-Based Learning,

http://www.edutopia.org/blog/teaching-ethics-violent-video-games-paul-darvasi/
TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 13

Dewey, J. (1997). Experience and education. New York: Simon & Schuster Adult Publishing

Group.

Eichenbaum, A., Bavelier, D., & Green, C. S. (2014). Video Games: Play That Can Do Serious

Good. American Journal of Play, 07(01), 5072.

Elson, M., & Ferguson, C. J. (2014). Twenty-Five years of research on violence in digital games

and aggression. European Psychologist, 19(1), 3346. doi:10.1027/1016-9040/a000147

Ferguson, C. J., Olson, C. K., Kutner, L. A., & Warner, D. E. (2010). Violent video games,

catharsis seeking, bullying, and delinquency: A Multivariate analysis of effects. Crime &

Delinquency, 60(5), 764784. doi:10.1177/0011128710362201

Glass, B. D., Maddox, W. T., & Love, B. C. (2013). Real-time strategy game training:

Emergence of a cognitive flexibility trait. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e70350.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0070350

Grizzard, M., Tamborini, R., Lewis, R. J., Wang, L., & Prabhu, S. (2014). Being bad in a video

game can make us morally sensitive. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,

17(8), 499504. doi:10.1089/cyber.2013.0658

Gunter, W. D., & Daly, K. (2012). Causal or spurious: Using propensity score matching to

detangle the relationship between violent video games and violent behavior. Computers

in Human Behavior,28(4), 13481355. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.02.020

Krathwohl, D., Bloom, B., & Masia, B. (1964). Taxonomy of educational objectives. The

classification of educational goals, Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York: David

McKay Company, Inc.

TOUGH CHOICE: VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES IN THE CLASSROOM 14

Lin, J.-H. (2013). Identification matters: A moderated mediation model of media Interactivity,

character identification, and video game violence on aggression. Journal of

Communication, 63(4), 682702.

Martins, N., Weaver, A. J., Yeshua-Katz, D., Lewis, N. H., Tyree, N. E., & Jensen, J. D. (2013).

A content analysis of print news coverage of media violence and aggression research.

Journal of Communication, 63(6), 10701087. doi:10.1111/jcom.12052

Maylie, D. (2015, February 18). Violent media and real-world behavior: Historical data and

recent trends - journalists resource. Retrieved July 29, 2016, from Criminal Justice,

http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/culture/violent-media-real-world-behavior-h

istorical-data-recent-trends/

Parker, R. (2014). The art of papers, please. Retrieved July 29, 2016, from

http://www.firstpersonscholar.com/the-art-of-papers-please/

Sooja, J. (2013, December 2). Papers, please - game review. Retrieved July 29, 2016, from

https://www.commonsensemedia.org/game-reviews/papers-please/