(first posted on 5 Jan 2004)

People in general learn using either or both of three methods: by free choice, by necessity, or by force. Obviously someone will learn the most when (s)he learns by choice, because presumably then one is actually interested in the topic. I distinguish choice from necessity in the following ways. When someone chooses to learn something, or to do anything in general, I refer to a choice that is made solely on the interest the individual has in the particular topic, regardless of circumstances. Now the chosen topic may very well be beneficial in some ways, but the individual is by no means required to make the choice, nor does the particular choice have foreseeable and immediate positive consequences.

What I mean by necessity then, is when one makes a choice that he/she wouldn’t necessarily make otherwise or under other circumstances, but something that is chosen perhaps out of some number of other topics.

A person may be just as interested in the necessary topic as he is in the chosen one, because the choice might very well be what the person is interested in. For example to graduate from college, one needs to take a certain number of courses and fulfill a number of requirements. Now some of these will be chosen due more to necessity than others. If one needs to fulfill the art requirement, and there are only a handful of possible courses, then the person must take a course that he might not want to take but has to. But the student must also complete a number of courses in his major department. Now assuming the student freely chose the major based on interest, then one can assume that there will be some courses offered in which the student will be intrinsically interested and therefore will choose by necessity-as he needs to take SOME course-but the selection will also be the one freely chosen based on interest.

In either of these two situations-selection by free will or by necessity-the individual has the potential to be equally interested in the subject matter. The goal of education therefore is twofold: to instill proper values and sufficient knowledge in an individual so that he is able to contribute to society, but just as importantly to instill a keen interest in particular topics in the person, that he may freely choose to learn independently of force or necessity, and therefore enjoy his own time, experiences, and life more than otherwise.

Now educators understand the need to teach these ideas to students, but there are several limiting factors that filter and distort these idealistic notions into sometimes useless and vain efforts. For one there is the issue of student interest. Also, a given student will not learn equally well from the same teacher; many factors come into play, socially, economically, and personally. But aside from the student, the teacher encounters issues as well. He cannot possibly affect each student in the same way even discounting the previous limitations. And some sections of a class will learn different things than another section, simply because the purity of the ideas cannot be replicated.

So there are three primary issues to contend with when dealing with education: student interest, student-teacher interactions, and the abilities of the teacher. To overcome these problems, we need to motivate and incentivitize the student, eliminate negative or adverse student-teacher interactions, and somehow replicate as best as possible the efforts of the teacher. A decent approximation of the third issue is to have all students attend a single section of class. This will guarantee that the teacher can discuss the same issues for everyone, but the obvious limitations here are student-teacher ratio and that fact that this can only be done per term, per year. An education spans several years, if not decades, and over time a particular school’s offerings change as teachers come and go, and curriculums change. What would be nice is if any given student could receive the same education regardless of these circumstantial issues.

What if every student could receive a first class education, with a several-to-one faculty-to-student ratio, no real constraints against learning (except time itself), and best of all, complete interest in the subject matter? That would be something.

I propose that we further explore the possibility that computers can assist in this area. I believe that an application, extremely modular in design, with superior artificial intelligence and capabilities, working together with all the resources available currently today - Internet, teachers, family, etc - would help fill in where our current educational system lacks. The key to the door however, is related to what interests people, and for kids, which is the first concern, what kinds of games they like to play. If you can find a way to teach a topic that interests and motivates someone to pursue that topic, that is a winner. Why do children want to play games, especially video games, so badly? Simply because the games are fun, they interest the kids, and provide incentives in terms of a childlike economy - respect among friends and confidence in that area of expertise, namely the game at hand.

What if these incentives went further than mere child’s play…and into the real world? What if the children of this country could be as addicted to learning as they are to the latest video games? I believe they can.

A good goal is to produce a series of small games, each of which illustrates and attempts to teach a certain skill, topic, or idea, but more importantly that engages the child to learn and remember the lessons and rules involved - and be able to carry them into real world experience.

The first lessons could be simple, teaching young children around the age of 3. - learning a basic vocabulary, - basic arithmetic - simple geometry - shapes - colors - time