Blog - David Helkowski
index

Should gaming be a gradeschool subject/sport?

I recently read a post on LinkedIn broadly proclaiming "esports will overtake basketball". My immediate reaction to this was that that is entirely rubbish, and I responded jokingly making fun of the idea. As you might expect, there was a mixed reaction to that.

Some few people upvoted my response. The majority of responders criticized me and said that I should take esports more seriously and that it absolutely will become a school sports.

I stand by my original reaction that esports becoming a school sport is nonsense. I could see that it may happen, but I think if and when it does that it will be a tradgedy and will ultimately be deterimental to the wellfare of children educated in such a manner.

Rather than just leave it at this I feel obligated to explain why I think this way, and why I think it is a sound defensible position to take.

I have formulated the following list of questions about esports to help probe the different aspects of esports:

  1. What is a sport?
  2. What is a sport in relation to k-12 schooling in the USA?
  3. What is a sport in relation to higher level education in the USA?
  4. Is education radically different in other countries compared to the USA?
  5. Should the USA follow global trends when it comes to schooling?
  6. What is the purpose of k-12 schooling?
  7. Is gaming ability valuable to humanity?
  8. Is gaming detrimental to the development of children?
  9. What sort of games are educational?
  10. What sort of games are beneficial to the mind?
  11. What sort of games are detrimental to the mind?
  12. Are video games radically different from games generally?
  13. Should children be encouraged to study a video game like they study the violin?
  14. Do video games containing violence encourage violence?
  15. Do children replicate behavior and ideas they are exposed to?
  16. Are children today desensitized to violence and anti-social concepts?

I will address each of the above questions in turn. You can likely see where I am going with this just from the list of questions themselves.

What is a sport?

Rather than bore you with dictionary definitions of the word sport, I will simply relay what I view a sport to be. Your definition may not match. I share this definition to help frame the rest of the discussion.

A sport is an activity where you compete with others in a structured way following a well-known set of rules that remain stable over long time periods.

Sports generally have the following features:

Given this definition, e-sports are current a sport. There may be some wiggle room in regard to certain video games participated in, due to the definition that years are required to excel at the sport. I believe certain video games that are played in e-sports events require little actual skill and there are players who have become experts at it in less than a single year of "training".

You may disagree with my definition of the word sport. There is no issue here. I can only relate my view on the topic, based on my definition and belief of what the words mean and why they came to be. If you view it differently, it is likely due to a difference in the way you view the concepts.

What is a sport in relation to k-12 schooling in the USA?

I will preface my thoughts on this with the following:

I believe that sports in k-12 schools are determined and chosen for the following purposes:

Given this, I don't believe that video games should be a "sport" in school.

I don't believe that video games generally and broadly "aid in development" of the human mind. There are specific games that can do so, for a time, but I don't believe the vast majority of video games, played long term, contribute to the development of the mind.

I could believe that rotating playment of a variety of video games could be beneficial to the mind, but not specific games played long term.

I also don't believe that video games generally teach quality life principles. Some video games have stories, and those stories, like books, can contain valuable life principles. I'd even go so far as to say that those principles could be learned better by playing the video game than by reading a book on the concept. That said, the lesson is learned upon completion of the game. Repeatedly playing the same game as a sport does not continue to teach the lesson more deeply.

I would argue also that a large number of video games teach anti-quality life principles. That is, what is learned from video games is often destructive to the mind and to the quality level of contribution to modern productive healthy society.

What is a sport in relation to higher level education in the USA?

I view sports at the high education level differently from k-12 for the following reasons:

  1. Typically those in higher education are older and more mature.
  2. Higher level education in the USA is not mandatory
  3. Higher level education in the USA is mostly not paid for by taxes ( though sometimes is... )

This makes a difference about whether it is reasonable to teach or offer classes on esports at this level.

If people wish to study becoming skilled at video games, and are willing to pay for it, then I see no reason why they should not be allowed to do so. Anything that people might wish to learn about or gain skill at should be allowed to become a college degree.

This does not mean that such degrees will be useful, nor that they are valuable to society. It simply means that people wish to learn and excel at these things. Our country was founded on freedom, and still has some small freedoms available, so I'm a fan of allowing freedom in higher education.

Why then do I not think it should happen also in k-12?

Because I don't think our tax dollars should be funding the "creation" of skilled "video game players". I'll get into why exactly I think this further down.

Because of this, I also don't believe that scholarships funded by the government ( taxes ) should be able to be applied to the pursuit of degrees centered around video games.

Is education radically different in other countries compared to the USA?

I ask this question because it has been pointed out that various other countries are embracing esports in different ways than the USA is currently. Supposing another country were to integrate video games into their gradeschool curriculumn, does that mean that the USA should also? Suppose another country refuses to use video games in any way in their curriculmn, is that evidence we also should avoid it?

I think that the USA does have a unique and distinct schooling methodology compared to other countries. What other countries do and how they educate their children does not mean offhand that we should follow suit. We can perhaps learn from other methods and adopt some portion of what they do if it makes sense with how our schools operate, but it does not make sense to integrate ideas that are incompatible or outright opposed to our current methods.

Should the USA follow global trends when it comes to schooling?

No. The USA should pay attention to what other school systems globally are doing and learn from their successes and failures, but the USA should do what we determine is best for our systems and societal structure.

What is the purpose of k-12 schooling?

I don't think the purpose of sports differs from the point generally of schooling, so I will simply repeat the purposes above:

Is gaming ability valuable to humanity?

I don't think this question can be answered directly without first establishing what "value" is, and some method of evaluating if something is "valuable" to humanity.

Also, some may disagree with this question itself, because it is phrased from a humanistic view. From a religious perspective the question would become: "Is gaming ability valuable to our ultimate purpose on earth?"

I personally view both questions as equal, because the value that we can have is the value that effects our time while alive here on earth, and the effects upon future generations of people. I won't speculate or debate whether video games are "moral from a religous perspective" here.

I think that things of value will have some of the following attributes:

I'll evaluate gaming on each of these points.

Do video games reduce the effort needed to have a quality existence?

No. I don't see that video games make life easier in any meaningful way. They can perhaps train the mind to handle complex mental tasks better, and that in turn could lead to inventions and improvements, but it is a secondary effect that I believe could be accomplished better through other methods. ( classical school subjects )

Do video games increasae diversity of thought and/or feeling?

Yes. Video games are often artistic in new and inventive ways. In this sense one could visualize video games as a meaningful artistic subject. As a sport? Not so much.

Do video games reduce some negative aspect of life?

They certainly relieve boredom, but in am unproductive way. I would argue it would be far better if time wiled away playing video games was instead spent doing something productive to improve the world for all of us.

Do video games increase happiness of people?

To an extent. Video games can be frustrating as well and induce anger. Also, after playing "too much" video games, they can become boring and simply be an addiction. One can become "jaded" to the happiness induced by having fun playing games.

Essentially: Yes, but in moderation.

Do video games enable people to be more effective in their pursuits?

No. Video games for the most part take away time that could be spent refining oneself and your abilities.

To summarize the value of games to humanity: They are fun and artistically valuable, but drain energy and time that could be directly spent improving life. In moderation, they are valuable. In excess, they are destructive. I believe that for children, they do more harm than good because children are poor at moderating their usage of them. For adults, in moderation, I think video games are meaningful because they reduce stress and increase happiness. It is possible for video games to be net valuable to humanity, but we have no measures in place in society to ensure this.