Why can't learning be fun?

I just ran across a new book/game series by Rick Riordan called "39 Clues." Riordan is a middle school teacher who has designed a series of books that has been tied to an interactive on line game that builds on the interest middle school students have for both gaming and social networks. It appears to be a good way to get the next generation interested in reading, critical thinking, and problem solving in a fun way.

Now, I am actually surprised that I have not heard of this series: neither negative or positive. I would have thought it would be an instant hit from all the Webkins fans or seen as the next threat to the educational system by educators who still choose Ethan Frome as required reading.

Bringing Fun into Education (regardless of age)

I have seen my own kids become interested in history, math, and even engineering through playing computer games. I know it is rarely used in their schools, but I see the role games can play in helping students learn to problem solve, think critically, and even learn content and skills. Both Karyn Romeis and Ken Allen have written good posts in the past about its potential.

However, as I begin to think about the possibilities of learning from games and social networks, I can't get past the barrier of convincing company executives of allowing their workers some periods of fun as they learn. I can hear the complaints now: How do we justify investments in games to our stakeholders? It's play, not learning. How will that help their productivity? Can you give us the numbers on that? This is work, not recreational time.

If we look at the track, though, of some of the more successful students in a school, we will see that many have extra-curricular activities that give them the skills they need in the workplace (group work, critical thinking, strategies, interpersonal communication, task management). So why aren't we creating more "fun" elearning activities such as those used in second life? Because it is an uphill battle to convince society that "fun" and "playing" have a role in learning.

Not a New Debate

You need only read Dewey's and Taylor's works to see that this debate has been around for decades. For some reason, I will never understand, Taylor's theories that basically equate humans to automatons, seems to win out when investment decisions are made. Perhaps that is because it is easier to measure quantitatively than qualitatively. I also wonder if management is afraid to make workers too content and/or lacking in discipline. Related to this is what to do about the parts of a job that are not fun or exciting? Such as report writing, weekly meetings, resolving personal conflicts, and taking care of daily routine tasks that can become tedious.

I think there is definitely new possibilities into make learning more enjoyable. But first we must achieve the Mount Everest task of convincing management and workers that learning can be fun.