You are using an outdated browser. Please upgrade your browser to improve your experience.

Connected Learning Alliance Logo
  • About Connected Learning
  • Who we are
  • Resources
  • Publications
  • Blog
  • Get Connected
December 8, 2009

On Gaming, Politics, and Reform

Author

Elizabeth Losh
Categories: Civic Engagement, Edtech
educators working around conference table

As the new year rolls around, like many political science professors, Kareem Crayton is thinking about the possible repercussions of next year’s 2010 census and what he calls the “opening skirmishes” of the partisan fight over “who’s going to be counted” and where the boundaries of congressional districts should be drawn for the next decade.  However, since working on the civic education website, The Redistricting Game, with a team of interactive media designers at the University of Southern California, Crayton’s attitudes about collaboration within the academy and participation in broader political conversations probably differ somewhat from those of his more traditional peers who still communicate their ideas about systems of representative democracy only through scholarly publication in print media.  Crayton suggests that The Redistricting Game could also inspire average voters to play a more creative role in legislative problem-solving.  “All the ideas about transforming our political system don’t need to emanate from the state house or the university.” As the game evolved, Crayton was more than an outside subject matter expert, because the team consulted him throughout the process of modeling his research as a playable simulation.  “It was interesting to learn how people from another discipline, software design, go about creating their products,” Crayton explains.  “They were people who knew a lot about software, and I was the person who contributed expertise about redistricting.” 

Getting Real-world Politics into A Virtual Game
This collaboration among “very different approaches” wasn’t always easy.  When it came to the best way to change the districting system, “I don’t think we ever unanimously agreed about the best approach to drawing districts.”  Project Lead Chris Swain thought that the fairest and most elegant solution would be to use the shortest-splitline algorithm, but Crayton cautions that “messy politics” can’t always be translated  into “aesthetically pretty or mathematically appealing districts” of the kind favored by game designers and software engineers.  “That’s not to say that computer programs can’t be helpful, but at the end of the day hard decisions still have to be made that disappoint one interest or another.”  Nonetheless, Crayton hopes that if the game stimulates the same impassioned conversations that took place in the development process, people will feel “treated fairly enough that they want to play again,” because the team had successfully managed to “operationalize a system that we disagree about.”  

Creating computer games to promote civic education has been funded by a number of universities, philanthropic organizations, and public broadcasting channels.  In recent years, game theorists and game designers have created a number of educational games about political and legal systems.  For example, developers at MIT worked to create Revolution to dramatize how our eighteenth century forebears made political choices that led to the overthrow of colonial rule, James Paul Gee collaborated with former Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Connor to create a series of games called Our Courts, and award-winning game designer Tracy Fullerton has developed Participation Nation to explain the  constitutional issues relevant to the civil rights movement.   

Playing the Villain
Although all these civic education computer games show complex conflicts between different political and legal stakeholders, The Redistricting Game is unique in having the player actually assume what would seem to be the position of a citizenship villain.  Players win points in the game by taking the role of a manipulative redistricting consultant who attempts to game the political system to favor one party’s side and help them consolidate power.  

Crayton defends casting the player in a role that would seem to be a “bad guy,” because it allows the game’s users to be “in the mind of a person writing new laws or making new districts” to provide more “understanding of how people associated with elected offices veer off the road of accountability and transparency” and to see the fact that initial purposes may not be as corrupt as the ultimate outcome.  Besides, he insists, “You can’t know what’s fair unless you know what’s unfair.”

Nonetheless, Crayton wants to make sure that educators understand the limits of games, because they can’t represent all the aspects of an “opaque and complex system.”  Furthermore, he notes, “a game has an end, you push things around, and you don’t have to cooperate with a lot of other people.”  Because real reformers “need to convince other people,” there is no “silver bullet to solve an impasse,” as there might be when tackling difficult obstacles in a game.  Crayton argues that games may lead people to get “actively engaged in the discussion,” but the “same problem” of the person having the right to vote but not actually getting to the polls exists, since political intentions don’t always lead to political actions.

Next: Privacy, Preferences, and Politics
What’s the next big issue for digital media and learning when it comes to political participation?  Crayton reminds us that “in our increasingly digitized world, private behavior may be used to indicate ideological views” when drawing voter districts, as political parties begin to create elaborate computerized databases with highly granular information about the products we buy, the websites we visit, and the nodes in our social networks.   Because online citizens should realize that data is being collected about their preferences constantly, whether at the grocery store or on Amazon.com, this kind of monitoring should probably come as no surprise.  Besides, Crayton is skeptical that any Big Brother snooping scenario would be infallible, particularly since the most reliable predictor of political behavior is still “where you live.”   “Politicians have always gathered information on their constituents; now they are just aided with computers.”  Finally, Crayton observes that “these are all just predictive models,” and “even the best political operatives are going to be wrong sometimes.”  

Related Posts

A young Black boy with glasses types and sits in front of a large computer monitor.

November 1, 2022 Education During COVID: The Voice Of Teachers Across Canada and the US

September 12, 2022 Harnessing Video Games to Cultivate Social and Emotional Learning

colorful renderings of a phone, a book, a laptop, and a cute robot on a gray background

August 31, 2022 Catch What You Missed, Get Inspired, and Dive Into Connected Learning Projects with Videos from the 2022 Connected Learning Summit

Categories

  • Civic Engagement
  • Connected Learning
  • Critical Perspectives
  • Digital Citizenship
  • Digital Learning
  • Edtech
  • Educational Practice
  • Equity
  • Featured
  • HX
  • New Trends
  • Research
  • Youth Well-Being

Blog Archive

  • 2023
    • 2022
      • January 2022
      • February 2022
      • April 2022
      • May 2022
      • June 2022
      • July 2022
      • August 2022
      • September 2022
      • October 2022
      • November 2022
      • December 2022
    • 2021
      • January 2021
      • February 2021
      • March 2021
      • April 2021
      • May 2021
      • June 2021
      • July 2021
      • August 2021
      • September 2021
      • October 2021
      • November 2021
      • December 2021
    • 2020
      • January 2020
      • February 2020
      • March 2020
      • April 2020
      • May 2020
      • June 2020
      • July 2020
      • August 2020
      • September 2020
      • October 2020
      • November 2020
      • December 2020
    • 2019
      • January 2019
      • February 2019
      • March 2019
      • April 2019
      • May 2019
      • June 2019
      • July 2019
      • August 2019
      • September 2019
      • October 2019
      • November 2019
      • December 2019
    • 2018
      • January 2018
      • February 2018
      • March 2018
      • April 2018
      • May 2018
      • June 2018
      • July 2018
      • August 2018
      • September 2018
      • October 2018
      • November 2018
      • December 2018
    • 2017
      • January 2017
      • February 2017
      • March 2017
      • April 2017
      • May 2017
      • June 2017
      • July 2017
      • August 2017
      • September 2017
      • October 2017
      • November 2017
      • December 2017
    • 2016
      • January 2016
      • February 2016
      • March 2016
      • April 2016
      • May 2016
      • June 2016
      • July 2016
      • August 2016
      • September 2016
      • October 2016
      • November 2016
      • December 2016
    • 2015
      • January 2015
      • February 2015
      • March 2015
      • April 2015
      • May 2015
      • June 2015
      • July 2015
      • August 2015
      • September 2015
      • October 2015
      • November 2015
      • December 2015
    • 2014
      • January 2014
      • February 2014
      • March 2014
      • April 2014
      • May 2014
      • June 2014
      • July 2014
      • August 2014
      • September 2014
      • October 2014
      • November 2014
      • December 2014
    • 2013
      • January 2013
      • February 2013
      • March 2013
      • April 2013
      • May 2013
      • June 2013
      • July 2013
      • August 2013
      • September 2013
      • October 2013
      • November 2013
      • December 2013
    • 2012
      • January 2012
      • February 2012
      • March 2012
      • April 2012
      • May 2012
      • June 2012
      • July 2012
      • August 2012
      • September 2012
      • October 2012
      • November 2012
      • December 2012
    • 2011
      • January 2011
      • February 2011
      • March 2011
      • April 2011
      • May 2011
      • June 2011
      • July 2011
      • August 2011
      • September 2011
      • October 2011
      • November 2011
      • December 2011
    • 2010
      • January 2010
      • February 2010
      • March 2010
      • April 2010
      • May 2010
      • June 2010
      • July 2010
      • August 2010
      • September 2010
      • October 2010
      • November 2010
      • December 2010
    • 2009
      • October 2009
      • November 2009
      • December 2009

    Subscribe to our newsletter to stay up-to-date with our latest news and information.

    • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
    • Connected Learning in Teaching Practice
    • Connected Learning Research Network
    • Connected Learning in Libraries
    • Connected Educators
    • Connected Courses
    • Connected Civics
    • Institute of Play

    • Contact
    • Terms of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Work With Us
    • Media
    • Write for Us
    • People
    • Newsletter
    • CLRN
    • CL Summit
    • CL Lab