RES 9010

Social Impact Games as Tools for Human Rights Education

Essay 2

By

Rebecca Joy Norlander

For RES 9020

Presented to Dr. George Kent

(Essay Supervisor)

November 2011

Saybrook University

San Francisco, California

iv

Abstract

While video games have not traditionally been associated with the goal of promoting human rights values, social impact games refer to a new genre of online games that engage people in real-world social justice initiatives. These digital games can be incorporated into classroom activities, opening up new possibilities for human rights education. This essay can be used as a guide for educators wanting to incorporate gaming as a tool for teaching about human rights issues. The organization Games for Change, or G4C, advances this type of gaming and can be a valuable resource for educators. Two G4C games Darfur is Dying and Participatory Chinatown have been chosen as illustrations.

While there are many advantages, classroom game play should be approached with caution. Participatory learning strategies that fully engage students are vital for educators who want to build students skills and cultivate attitudes based on human rights principles. However, not all of the effects of online gaming are beneficial. This essay considers both the positive and negative potential of social impact games.

Contents

List of Figuresiv

Introduction1

ObjectiveS of human rights EDUCATORS3

The Nature of Rights3

United Nations Support for Human Rights Education3

Diversity of Human Rights Educators4

Three Learning Components5

Assessing Learning Impacts5

Games for change7

The Games8

Selection and Implementation9

Support11

Darfur is Dying13

Participatory Chinatown16

BENEFITS19

Improved Student Learning of Information19

Increased Active Involvement20

Skill-Building21

CHALLENGES22

Overcoming Negative Stereotypes22

The Risk of Othering22

Conclusion25

References27

List of Figures

Figure 1: Screenshot: Human Rights Game Database9

Figure 2: Screenshot: Games for Change Resource Center11

Figure 3: Screenshot: Games for Change Google Group12

Figure 4: Screenshot: Meetup Everywhere Map13

Figure 5: Screenshot: Choosing a Darfurian Avatar14

Figure 6: Screenshot: Life in a Refugee Camp14

Figure 7: Screenshot: Scene from Participatory Chinatown17

Introduction

Following the devastating Haitian earthquake in 2009, video game developer Zynga teamed up with the World Food Programme and raised in excess of 1.5 million dollars to donate to relief efforts (Hameed, 2010). Players of Zyngas popular Farmville and other online games were able to purchase virtual goods that would advance their online game play, using actual currency to benefit a philanthropic cause. This integration of virtual game play and real-world consequences is significant. Evidence has begun to mount in support of the claim that video games are able to increase awareness of human rights issues and engage players in initiatives extending beyond the virtual realm (Whittemore, 2010).

A 2008 study found that in the United States, 97% of teens ages 12-17 play computer, web, portable, or console games typically for at least and hour per day (Pew Internet & American Life Project, 2008, p. i). Many of these games portray graphic violence, and employ tactics in direct opposition to human rights values. Yet amidst this overall increase in the popularity of digital gaming, there has been a growing interest in a particular genre known alternatively as social impact games, serious games, games for social change, or serious and persuasive digital-games (SPD-games) and their potential use as pedagogical tools (Keeble, 2008; Dahya, 2008). The ever-increasing popularity of videogames combined with the now-more-recognized learning potentials of gameplay, has led scholars, game designers, corporate groups, and social activists to begin creating videogames for the purpose of social action and change (Dahya, 2008, p. 1).

Traditionally, human rights educators have used non-digital techniques to achieve high levels of student engagement and cultivate human rights values. New technology offers educators an expanding toolkit for human rights education (HRE), but these new tools present challenges that deserve careful consideration.

This essay provides a brief survey of HRE and explores the potential for educators to use resources provided by Games for Change an organization known in the gaming community as G4C as one way of introducing a meaningful HRE experience to students. Two games are used here to illustrate how digital games can be used in HRE curricula. I have devised sample lesson plans based on each game to assist educators in using G4C resources in their classes. Both benefits and challenges of video game-based HRE are discussed.

This essay is intended for high school social studies teachers who want to introduce aspects of human rights into their courses. It does not address HRE in community-based, non-governmental, or not-for-profit organizations, although G4C collaborates with partners working in these sectors. Suggestions included in this essay allow for flexibility and can be easily tailored according to context. Learning activities are always open to adaptation by instructors and students working together to suit local needs and respect cultural traditions. The specific games discussed may be tailored to suit the needs of younger or older students as well, broadening the target audience.

Objectives of Human Rights Educators

The Nature of Rights

The meaning of the word right depends on the context of its use. A fundamental distinction sets human rights apart from other rights (Kent, 2010, pp. 155-6). The human rights discussed in this essay are assumed to be those supported by international law, universally applicable to all human beings, and primarily concerned with promoting human dignity. Human rights are inalienable, indivisible, nondiscriminatory and interdependent (Human Rights Resource Center, 2000). Not all rights are human rights. If one has a human right, one can make a claim that the government and others must do or desist from doing specific things to further human dignity (Kent, 2010, p. 156).

Like any other rights systems, human rights systems consist of three main roles that come with specific responsibilities: the rights holders, the duty bearers, and the agents of accountability. The task of the agents of accountability is to make sure that those who have the duties carry out their obligations to those who have the rights (Kent, 2010, p. 158). One understanding of the function of HRE is to provide a way for rights holders, duty bearers, and agents of accountability to better understand their own and others roles. Education is essential because human rights are not just about delivering goods and services, but rather they are about involving people in an ongoing collaborative process in their respective contexts. Human rights education should include "strong local components" (Kent, 2011, p. 160) and recognize that the core value is not delivery but dignity.

United Nations Support for Human Rights EducationThe United Nations Decade for Human Rights Education (UNDHRE) began in 1995 and lasted until 2004. The United Nations General Assembly (1996) outlined the objectives of the UNDHRE, urging educational agencies to intensify their efforts to establish and implement programmes of human rights education (p. 2). However, the 10-year period proved an insufficient amount of time for establishing a foundation for HRE, as many objectives remained unmet (Print, Ugarte, Naval, & Mihr, 2008). Subsequently, the World Programme for Human Rights Education (WPHRE) was initiated in 2005 as a continuation of the work begun during the UNDHRE. According to the World Programme, HRE should encompass:

(a) Knowledge and skills learning about human rights and mechanisms, as well as acquiring skills to apply them in a practical way in daily life; and

(b) Values, attitudes and behaviour developing values and reinforcing attitudes and behaviour which uphold human rights. (UNGA, 2010, p. 4)

The WPHRE advises educators to encourage analysis of chronic and emerging human rights problems which would lead to responses and solutions consistent with human rights standards [and] empower communities and individuals to identify their human rights needs and to claim them effectively (UNGA, 2010, p. 6) Educators who share these objectives can achieve them by thoughtfully incorporating online games into their curriculum design.

Diversity of Human Rights Educators

No single definition of HRE exists, nor do educators always agree about how to implement HRE in the classroom (Flowers, 2003). Governmental bodies, non-governmental organizations, and academics differ in their approaches to teaching human rights law and principles. A lack of consensus about the objectives of HRE makes it more difficult to define and measure students success. Yet support for incorporating digital technology into education initiatives is growing, due to its potential to transform pedagogy and the creation of knowledge (United Nations Educational, Cultural and Scientific Organization, 2011, p.1). Although there is no consensus as yet regarding the actual benefits of technology in ensuring quality learning, [information and communication technologies] are increasingly seen as an integral part of modern education systems (p. 1).

Three Learning Components

Following the work of Sprenger (2005) on conflict transformation, the process of educating for human rights should engage various parts of the brain cognitive, procedural and emotional. The cognitive function allows for facts and information to be received and understood conceptually. The procedural component facilitates the acquisition of new skills. During presentations and discussion mainly the cognitive area is being fed. Only through exercise is the procedural area activated (p. 4). The third area of engagement is emotional, which helps link learning with experience and evaluate the process of education through critical analysis and reflection. Digital games can assist human rights educators in integrating these three learning components.

Assessing Learning Impacts

Thoughtfully designed games may be able to help bridge learning in a classroom with real-life scenarios, prompting students to think critically about how to effect social change in support of human rights. Many questions remain, however, about how to evaluate video games impact on the educational process. How can skills be measured and human rights learning assessed? How does an educator know when students views of human rights principles have shifted? Can causality linking a change in values or behavior to the experience of playing games -- be demonstrated? Effective monitoring and evaluation of digital game-based learning is not yet widely available, making it difficult to determine effective strategies (Keeble, 2008). While many educators and game-designers share an enthusiasm about the potential of games for social change, most of the evidence that game play affects offline behavior is anecdotal (Faris, 2010). A number of skeptics still doubt that increased gaming will result in concrete action beyond the digital realm (Sydell, 2011). The practice of implementing digital games as a component of human rights teaching and learning is too recent for data to exist concerning its effectiveness, even if ways of measuring success could be designed.

Games for Change

For many educators, real-world action and advocacy are desirable outcomes of HRE. Learners can benefit from setting goals and developing strategic ways of achieving them through action-oriented HRE (Tibbits, 2008). Games for Change presents a compelling tool for promoting human rights action that extends beyond the classroom.

Since 2004, G4C has been developing and supporting digital games with a social justice framework, where game players are educated about social ills and engaged in ways to address injustices. The driving force behind these games, and the intended outcome of gameplay, is to encourage users to learn about, be aware of, and act responsibly towards social and humanitarian problems (Dahya, 2008, p. 1). As a joint venture between different sectors including governments, media, education and the gaming industry G4C develops and hosts a platform for games that aim to increase awareness and prompt action around a host of human rights concerns.

Each year, a conference brings together the G4C community to showcase new games and gather leaders from government, corporations, civil society, media, academia and the gaming industry to explore the increasing real-world impact of digital games as an agent for social change (Games for Change, 2011b, para. 1). Based in New York, G4C has additional chapters in Asia, Europe and Latin America, giving the organization a global reach as it continues to integrate and support a rapidly growing community. This community is concerned with developing and promoting high-quality games that people find compelling both for the enjoyment of playing as well as the value in raising awareness of various social change initiatives.

The games discussed in this essay all use digital graphic representation and are accessed on a computer or other digital device. While they may be referred to as video games they do not require a television, video equipment or a gaming console. All can be downloaded easily using an Internet connection, many for free or at minimal cost. Many social impact games include lesson plans, discussion guides, or links to advocacy projects that assist teachers in integrating the game-play experience into curriculum, ensuring that they serve as meaningful tools to further the educational process offline.

The Games

Games for Change (G4C) has brought together just under one hundred online digital games, spanning a wide array of social justice and human rights issues. The games are organized in a database[footnoteRef:2] according to age appropriateness and topic. A category labeled Human Rights includes games built around specific concerns, such as ICED: I Can End Deportation (unfair immigration laws); Sweatshop (offshore manufacturing); and Inside the Haiti Earthquake (disaster humanitarian response). Figure 1 provides a visual representation of the database. Hovering the cursor over a particular icon brings up additional information about the game and a link to the site where the game can be played. [2: www.gamesforchange.org/play/]

Figure 1

Screenshot: Human Rights Game Database

Source: http://www.gamesforchange.org/game_categories/human-rights/

Selection and Implementation

With so many options from which to select, how should educators choose the best game for implementation? This process could entail a critical analysis of an educators own goals and objectives, means, and constraints. The selection process might be based upon answers to the following questions.

Goals and Objectives:

-What human rights concerns and principles do I hope to teach?

-Do I need a game that primarily teaches content or skills?

-How will skill acquisition be measured?

-Will learning be evaluated through written reflection, an advocacy project, or some other means?

-What is the offline value of this game? Will this be a useful tool for engaging students in offline human rights initiatives and campaigns?

Means:

-Do I have the educational resources I need to support a positive game-play experience? What supporting material is required?

-What technological skills are required for both students and facilitator? Might it be appropriate for some students to help others in playing the game, or learn together in groups?

-Is there a financial component to game-play or is it free to download and play?

Constraints:

-How long will the game take? Will learning occur entirely in the classroom or also at students homes?

-Does the necessary infrastructure already exist in my school/classroom? How many computers are available and are they connected to the Internet?

-Is there resistance on the part of other teachers or administrators that might interfere with successful implementation?

The answers to these questions will vary significantly by educator and specific learning context, but may nonetheless assist in the process of game selection and implementation. Articulating goals, means, and constraints allows educators to identify when additional support and assistance are required.

Some teachers might want to use digital games that are not supported by their schools. Human rights educators can look for guidance to colleagues and other professionals who may have more experience with game-play in educational settings. Another tactic might be for students to play a role in selecting and implementing the games based on the human rights topics of most interest to them. Teachers and students could become familiar with game play simultaneously, discovering together a games advantages and drawbacks. This would allow for more active student engagement while diminishing potential teacher isolation and frustration.

Support

The growing popularity of social impact games makes it easy for educators to identify games corresponding to their respective curricular emphases and objectives, with a simple Internet search. In addition to maintaining a searchable database of games, G4C offers an additional layer of support for teachers. For assistance in planning, using and maximizing the benefit of social impact games, the G4C resource center (represented in Figure 2) offers blogs, videos, books, newsletters and other useful tools. These additional resources can aid educators who wish to increase their knowledge or improve their skills prior to implementing digital games in the classroom.

Figure 2

Screenshot: Games for Change Resource Center

Source: http://www.gamesforchange.org/learn/

The G4C Google Group represented in Figure 3 is an online discussion forum of over 1,000 active gamers with diverse backgrounds, professions, interests and experiences. This virtual space could serve as a valuable resource for educators wanting increased access to game designers and others in the G4C gaming community.

Figure 3

Screenshot: Games for Change Google Group

Source: http://groups.google.com/group/gamesforchange/

Additionally, teachers can attend G4C meetups events organized by social impact game enthusiasts bringing people together in physical space to share resources and exchange ideas. Since September, 2010, G4C meetups have occurred in 14 countries. The digital interactive map seen in Figure 4 provides information on meetups around the globe.

Figure 4

Screenshot: Meetup Everywhere Map

Source: http://www.gamesforchange.org/connect/

Darfur is Dying

Darfur is Dying, designed by students at the University of Southern California, is one example of an attempt to encourage offline activism through online game play (MTV Networks, 2008). Darfur is Dying was developed in partnership with the Reebok Human Rights Foundation and the International Crisis Group, with the input of humanitarian aid workers on the ground in Sudan. In the game, players choose an avatar (Figure 5) an icon or image that graphically represents the player and perform tasks that will keep them alive in a refugee camp (Figure 6) while under attack by Janjaweed militia.

Figure 5

Screenshot: Choosing a Darfurian Avatar

Source: http://www.darfurisdying.com/

Figure 6

Screenshot: Life in a Refugee Camp

Source: http://www.darfurisdying.com/

Darfur is Dying quickly went viral. In the first month alone, 700,000 people played, contributing to an increased awareness of situation in Darfur an extremely violent conflict resulting in the death of more than 400,000 people (Faris, 2010; MTV Networks, 2008). Links on the games website provide background information on the humanitarian crisis and offer players means of assisting the people of Darfur.

I have developed the following lesson plan to illustrate how this game could be implemented into high school social studies curriculum. The game itself has many valuable links that provide context as well as opportunities for action and advocacy. Ultimately, however, it is the educators responsibility to facilitate game play in a way that not only teaches human rights principles but also develops human rights values in the students.

Sample Lesson Plan Darfur is Dying

Objectives: Learn about the situation in Darfur; recognize the complexity of the refugee situation; research and participate in domestic/international advocacy campaigns; introduce legal and civil mechanisms for addressing humanitarian crises

Technical Details: Free, minimal bandwidth necessary

Time Allotted: Three one-hour class periods, spread out over a week-long period, plus time outside of class preparing final advocacy project

Schedule:

Day 1: Setting the Stage

Students have previously been given the following website with links to learn about the situation in Darfur: http://www.darfurisdying.com/background.html. They will be somewhat familiar with the crisis, but have been instructed not to play the game yet. Facilitator uses this class period to explain difficult concepts and terms, talk about the role of the International Criminal Court and ask students if they know about or have ever participated in advocacy campaigns, either on- or offline. An interactive pedagogy should be used to accomplish this stage of background learning, e.g., participatory discussion, small-group work, video and multimedia.

Day 2: Playing and Discussing the Game

Students visit the schools computer lab to play Darfur is Dying (30 minutes). They return to the classroom and in groups of five they discuss the experience, prompted by question notecards (What did you learn about the situation there? What do you think is the hardest part about being a refugee? What surprised you most about the refugee experience?) (30 minutes).

Homework: Students are given the following website and instructed to list ways to address the crisis and help Darfuris: http://www.darfurisdying.com/takeaction.html

Day 3: Advocacy and Action

Facilitator asks students to share suggestions for action and advocacy from the list they developed at home. A collective list is compiled on the board. Students discuss advantages and disadvantages of the various suggestions (i.e., Donating money is helpful, but since we are students we dont have much to contribute. Yes, but we could do a school-wide fundraiser). Students agree upon one tactic to put into action (e.g., letter-writing, making and distributing a video on YouTube, etc.) either as a class or in small groups.

Participatory Chinatown

The second illustration of a social impact game for human rights education is Participatory Chinatown. As virtual residents of Bostons Chinatown, players of Participatory Chinatown must find jobs and housing while encountering language barriers and other obstacles. Players collectively form an online initiative to help redesign the district. A scene from the game is depicted in Figure 7.

Figure 7

Screenshot: Scene from Participatory Chinatown

Source: www.participatorychinatown.org

The game showcases actual development sites, and comments made online are then communicated to real-world lawmakers by e-mail. Often, the knowledge that ones actions have real-world consequences increases the quality of feedback as well as the level of dedication to the game. In Participatory Chinatown, people are involved in creating their own community through a digital town hall environment and, in turn, representatives are better able to understand and meet the needs of their constituents.

Here is a lesson plan that suggests one way of using the game in a high school social studies course.

Sample Lesson Plan Participatory Chinatown

Objectives: Deepen understanding of complicated urban planning issues; design solutions to urban development challenges; address the challenges of an immigrant community;

Technical Details: Game is free but a registration/log-in is required. Not compatible with Mac. Must use Windows XP or more recent operating systems.

Time Allotted: Two hour-long class periods or one two-hour block

Schedule:

First Hour: Introducing and Playing the Game

Facilitator prints the list of 15 different avatars and cuts them into strips; each student selects an identity and must introduce him/herself to the group. Students work individually for 45 minutes playing game according to their identity, guided by the questions listed on the following site: http://www.participatorychinatown.org/conversation/

Second Hour: Reporting Back, Discussion, Application

Each student reports back to the group, briefly summarizing the experience. Group discussion follows, moderated by the facilitator.

Possible discussion questions include:

-What human rights concerns are addressed in this game?

-How does digital technology change democratic processes? How does the process represented in this game differ from traditional urban planning?

-Are there drawbacks to having this type of community participation and input?

-What other applications of this model can you think of for your own community?

Benefits

There are numerous benefits related to digital game-based learning. As described in the following sections, the major advantages are improved learning of information, increased active involvement, and skill-building. According to Dahya (2008), social impact games can provide a comprehensive representation of sociopolitical situations, where the player can learn information and ideologies, experience alternative lifestyles, engage with other interested community groups, and participate in movements for social change (p. 25).

Improved Student Learning of Information

Much of the benefit of using games in curriculum relates to their ability to increase student engagement in the learning process. Despite the diversity of HRE methodology, there is a surprising consistency in views concerning the importance of participatory education for developing human rights values, attitudes and skills (Tibbits, 2005; Asia-Pacific Regional Resource Center for Human Rights Education, 2004; Belisle & Sullivan, 2007). Indeed, nearly all formal literature associated with HRE will mention the importance of using participatory methods (Tibbits, 2005, p. 107). While the term participatory is somewhat vague, when used by educators it typically refers to a teaching pedagogy that prioritizes engaging learners in classroom activities that extend beyond a traditional, passive lecture format. According to Felicia Tibbits, co-founder and director of the non-profit Human Rights Education Association, there are multiple reasons why designing HRE curriculum and programs should stress participatory pedagogy:

The language of HRE speaks of being relevant to daily life and to employing methodologies that engage participants in the development of skills and attitudes as well as knowledge. The participatory approach is viewed as motivating, humanizing and ultimately practical, since this form of learning is linked more strongly with attitudinal or behavioral change than with a pure lecturing approach. (Tibbitts 2002, p. 162)

Digital games can be a motivator for student engagement simply because they offer an enjoyable and interesting experience that may not be as easily accessed in strictly non-digital educational venues. The experience of playing a game together can help students bond and use teamwork to solve problems, mimicking the real-world need for generating collaborative solutions. Games bring human rights concepts to life for students in a way that textbooks and lectures may not, connecting principles with current global challenges and problem solving strategies. Classroom game play also provides a starting point for conversation or debate both about the human rights issues as well as students experience of playing the game.

Increased Active Involvement

Beyond just being fun for students, some games increase motivation by linking action online to outcomes offline, as was the case with Zyngas Farmville. Game designers trust that players will be increasingly invested in the game experience if they perceive positive real-world consequences to altruistic behavior. This connection between education and concrete application is especially important for human rights educators trying to encourage action extending beyond classroom walls. Students are more interested in learning when they perceive a direct connection to their own personal concerns and if the learning has relevance for their families, friends and communities.

Social impact games can act as a bridge for this to occur, making school-based education less isolated and more relevant to students lives. The value of HRE is maximized when information about rights is combined with activities connected to real-world scenarios that are relevant to learners lives and experiences. Although students playing Darfur is Dying are not likely to be targets of a violent militia, becoming familiar with tools for advocacy is valuable insofar as similar tactics can be used to address rights issues faced by the students. Some games are built around issues of importance to citizens of the U.S. and may be more relevant to students. For example, Do I have a Right? explores the Bill of Rights and Energyville allows participants in a large industrialized city work toward a sustainable future by 2030.

Skill-Building

Skills developed through digital gaming have many useful real-world applications. Incorporating game play into curriculum can increase students ability to think critically about complex situations and develop creative problem-solving approaches to human rights issues. Games are particularly helpful for working out advocacy campaigns. Skill-development occurs not through isolated game play, but rather through a games integration in curriculum design, as demonstrated by the sample lesson plans offered in this essay.

Some teachers and students might wish to go beyond using games and explore the possibilities for designing them. Ever-increasing resources for game design are available that are easy-to-use and require no prior knowledge of coding (AgentSheets, 2011). Students could work in teams to design games and present them to the rest of the class. Time allowing, they could then actually build a prototype, submit the design to a contest, or apply for funding for further development. Problem solving exercises have been and will continue to be useful for teaching. Digital games are not the only option, but add another valuable resource to an educators toolkit.

Challenges

Incorporating G4C resources into education for human rights offers the potential for positive change, but the process is not without challenges. The potential advantages of gaming as a tool for HRE are tempered by significant challenges. Concerns relating to educators who may be unfamiliar with digital gaming and the difficulty of HRE evaluation and assessment have already been mentioned. Additional obstacles include negative assumptions of the value of video games and the mistaken belief that human rights is a concept applied to others rather than oneself and ones own community. As described in the following sections, the major challenges are negative stereotypes and the risk of othering.

Negative Stereotypes

Negative media attention often results in vilification of digital gaming (Keeble, 2008), rendering it an unlikely tool for education. Often, the term video games is used pejoratively, denoting an experience that is violent, aggressive and unrealistic, or simply a waste of time. The G4C community is working hard to overcome these stereotypes, but human rights educators wishing to incorporate online game play will surely encounter resistance from school administrators, parents and other educators. Many also perceive digital technology and games in particular as an intellectually inferior form of media when compared to more traditional sources like books, encyclopedias and journals.

The Risk of Othering

A limited or partial understanding of human rights can result in a disconnection from personal experience, rather than creating solidarity and a shared understanding of the human condition. Students may initially confuse human rights with issues of survival, limited to more basic concerns like food, water and shelter. Human rights educators might find that certain games like Darfur is Dying promote an attitude of othering whereby students in wealthy, privileged countries are taught to have pity on their less advantaged counterparts in a way that objectifies and dis-empowers those experiencing drastic violation of their rights. Unfortunately, this implicit demarcation between us and them is present in many G4C games. For example, in 3rd World Farmer, players figure out how to manage a farm in Africa when confronted by extreme poverty (3rd World Farmer Team, 2010). Ayiti: The Cost of Life another very successful game with a million plays in its first year - allows players to help a Haitian family deal with their impoverished situation by making decisions for them.

While game designers are simply trying to promote awareness and motivate people to act against social injustice, an attitude of condescension may be an unfortunate byproduct of gaming; i.e., we in the developed world should learn to save those who cannot save themselves. A more helpful mentality would be one where the worlds problems are seen as interconnected, requiring collaborative solutions, rather than reinforcing existing power inequalities in a way that is antithetical to the spirit of universal human dignity.

Advocacy efforts can be targeted at national governments even if the human rights violation is occurring elsewhere. For example, when using the game Darfur is Dying as a teaching tool, an educators goal could be petitioning the U.S. government to take a more active role, rather than focusing on the shortcomings of the Sudanese authorities. Students might call on high-income countries to provide resources not as a matter of charity, but as a duty under international human rights law.

The potential of othering does not necessarily eliminate a game for consideration as part of a HRE curriculum. As long as educators are aware of the dangers, an interesting conversation could occur about historical injustice and the culture of foreign aid, or about the various dimensions of human rights. It is the responsibility of the facilitator to integrate game-play in a way that highlights important aspects for the students respective situations, even when real-life concerns may be different than rights issues addressed in a particular game. Some games like Participatory Chinatown do foster social justice here in the United States. An educator might see benefit in incorporating a strategic diversity of games that reflect both the need for upholding human rights principles abroad as well as strengthening local initiatives.

Conclusion

Educators can be agents of social transformation by fostering students ability to analyze important social issues both in their own communities and worldwide. Benefits of incorporating social impacts games into HRE include improved student learning of information and more active involvement in real world issues, using new skills. If games are thoughtfully implemented they can help bridge learning occurring within a classroom with actual human rights challenges, prompting students to think critically about how to engender social change.

Social impact games for HRE present certain challenges for educators. Game-based learning has not been systematically assessed, making it difficult to determine effective strategies for teaching with games. The challenge is made more difficult by the lack of consensus about the objectives of HRE. Human rights educators should exercise caution when implementing social impact games in the classroom so as to minimize the risk of unintentionally fostering a harmful attitude of othering amongst students.

As a worldwide phenomenon whose influence will continue to grow, educators cannot afford to ignore the potential impact of digital gaming on society, as well as the significant human capital disappearing into virtual reality. We are creating a massive virtual silo of cognitive effort, emotional energy, and collective attention lavished on game worlds instead of on the real world (McGonigal, 2011, p. 3). Educators can benefit from channeling the energy and motivation behind gaming into creative problem solving for real-world challenges. Social impact games can help teachers and students cultivate skills necessary for leadership and problem solving at all levels of education.

Gaming offers new ways for educators to engage students and empower them to articulate and act on their own human rights concerns, but it has not yet been implemented or studied in depth. Human rights educators, bearing in mind opportunities as well as challenges as outlined in this essay, can benefit from using gaming resources, assisting learners in transforming human rights from the expression of abstract norms to the reality of their social, economic, cultural and political conditions (UNGA, 2010, p. 6).

References

3rd World Farmer Team (2010). 3rd world farmer [online game]. Retrieved from http://www.3rdworldfarmer.com/

AgentSheets (2011). Scalable game design. Retrieved from http://www.agentsheets.com/research/scalablegamedesign/index.html

Asia-Pacific Regional Resource Center for Human Rights Education (2004). Reclaiming voices: A study on participatory human rights education methodologies in the Asia Pacific. Retrieved from http://www.hrea.org/erc/Library/arrc04.pdf

Belisle, K. & Sullivan, E. (2007). Human rights and service-learning: Lesson plans and projects. New York: Amnesty International-USA and Human Rights Education Associates (HREA). Retrieved from http://www.hrea.org/index.php?doc_id=224

Dahya, N. (2008). Videogames for education and social change: Examining representation and learning in serious and persuasive digital-games. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. ( Publication No. AAT MR45929).

Faris, S. (2010, January 18). Can video games save the world? Time Magazine Online. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1952262,00.html

Flowers, N. (2003). What is human rights education? [Reprint]. Hamburg: Bertelsmann Verlag. Retrieved from http://www.hrea.org/erc/Library/curriculum_methodology/flowers03.pdf

Games for Change (2011a). Website. Retrieved from http://www.gamesforchange.org/

Games for Change (2011b). Human rights. Retrieved from http://www.gamesforchange.org/channels/human

Global Kids (2011). Ayiti: Cost of life [online game]. Retrieved from http://costoflife.ning.com/

Hameed, B. (2010, January 21). Zyngas Haiti fundraising efforts tops $1.5 million. Social Times. file://localhost/Retrieved from http/::socialtimes.com:zynga-haiti_b1736

Human Rights Resource Center (2000). The human rights education handbook: Effective practices for learning, action, and change. University of Minnesota. Retrieved from http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/edumat/hreduseries/hrhandbook/toc.html

Keeble, K. B. (2008). Digital gaming as a pedagogical tool among fourth and fifth grade children. (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 3304040)

Kent, G. (2010). Designing rights-based school feeding programs. Societies Without Borders, 5(2). Retrieved from http://societieswithoutborders.org/2011/02/26/designing-rights-based-school-feeding-programs/

Kent, G. (2011). Using the right to food to teach human rights. In Elvira Beracochea, Corey Weinstein, and Dabney Evans (Eds.) Rights-based approaches to public health. New York: Springer Publishers, 155-166.

McGonigal, J. (2011) You found me [blog]. Retrieved from http://janemcgonigal.com/

MTV Networks (2008). Darfur is Dying [online game]. Retrieved from http://www.darfurisdying.com/

Participatory Chinatown [online game] (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.participatorychinatown.org/

Pew Internet & American Life Project (2008, September 16). Teens, video games, and civics [report]. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2008/PIP_Teens_Games_and_Civics_Report_FINAL.pdf.pdf

Print, M., Ugarte, C., Naval, C. & Mihr, A. (2008, March). Moral and human rights education: The contribution of the United Nations. Journal of Moral Education, 37(1), 115-132. doi: 10.1080/03057240701803726

Sprenger, D. (2005). The training process: Achieving social impact by training individuals? How to make sure that training for conflict transformation has an impact on conflict transformation. Bergof Research Center for Constructive Conflict Management. Retrieved from http://www.berghof-handbook.net

Sydell, L. (2011, April 11). How to save the world, one video game at a time. NPR. Retrieved from http://www.npr.org/2011/04/11/135248010/how-to-save-the-world-one-video-game-at-a-time

Tibbits, F. (2002). Understanding what we do: Emerging models for human rights education. International Review of Education 48(3-4), 159-171.

Tibbits, F. (2008). Human rights education. In The encyclopedia of peace education. New York: Columbia University Press. Retrieved from http://www.tc.edu/centers/epe/PDF articles/Tibbitts_ch12_22feb08.pdf

Tibbits, F. (2005, May). Transformative learning and human rights education: Taking a closer look [editorial]. Intercultural Education, 16(2), 107-113. doi: 10.1080/14675980500133465

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (2011). Transforming education: The power of ICT policies. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002118/211842e.pdf

United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (1996, December 12). Human rights questions: Human rights questions, including alternative approaches for improving the effective enjoyment of human rights and fundamental freedoms [A/51/506/Add.1]. Retrieved from http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N97/008/02/PDF/N9700802.pdf?OpenElement

United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). (2010, July 27). Draft plan of action for the second phase (2010-2014) of the World Programme for Human Rights Education [A/HRC/15/2]. Retrieved from

Whittemore, N. (2010, January 11). The future of social change is...video games? Change.org. Retrieved from http://news.change.org/stories/the-future-of-social-change-isvideo-games