h a l f b a k e r yRecalculations place it at 0.4999.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
I think young kids should be categorized based on personality/performance tests and then grouped accordingly. You can either put a kid into a group of equals, or a group of mixed, yada yada, change the way we do things, but that's not really what the idea is about.
I want to creat a video game that
pits child against his own intrinsic tastes, without him/her knowing it. As the child progresses through the game, the choices he makes, the performance he carries, will judge his ratings and profile at the end. This could be done for adults, too, but we comply easier with crazy personality tests and such.
Level one: a room with ten doors, each of a different color. Pick one to go into. (this preliminary distinction will have something to do with color favortism and personality, damned if your kid chooses the yellow door (schizos like yellow)).
Level two: Room full of same sex elders, pick one to talk to. Gauges bond preferences.
Level three: Room full of opposite sex elders, pick one to talk to. Gauges sexual orientation.
Level Four: IQ tests lying around, pick one to play. Not only will the performance indicate IQ, but the choice made will show intellectual preference, i.e. math, science, literature, etc.
On and on. Mixed tests, plot line, perhaps, to keep them interested... In the end, the child's personality and intellect will be sufficiently mapped and everyone will be happy to put high flying Jeorjina in a 5k playground while putting dumb Billy in the 500 dollar one. Hey, not everyone gets a cookie.
Later in life, you can use the results as fun drunk conversation, date talk commonalities, insults, etc. as everyone will have surely played the game.
And, can be added as a bonus to [radicalllama]'s book.
[link]
|
| |
I'm not so sure that judging 10-year-olds on 'sexual preference', but I like the general idea. One other worry: Who would admit what they got if they lost? |
|
| |
//Level three: Room full of opposite sex elders, pick one to talk to. Gauges sexual orientation.// |
|
| |
Heterosexual, prefers older mates. |
|
| |
There really shouldn't be a loser. The end result is a method for grouping children into more efficient compatible groups for a more engaging learning environment. Of course, this idea implies that there are optimal matching personality types for children. Perhaps, there is an optimal stratum: one bully, three snots, two rebels, one genius, two appeasers, and six bricks. Who knows. |
|
| |
I assume by "bricks," you mean "baked clay products for throwing at the genius while he runs away screaming and protecting his extra-cranial braces." 'Cuz that's what I remember about school, except that I couldn't afford the braces, so it was just a couple of coathangers superglued to my teeth. |
|
| |
I like it. As long as the IQ tests can be administered without a cultural bias, unlike every other IQ test in the world. |
|
| |
[Shapu], I meant bricks like mean kids, mean like median not pissy, median like statistics not highways, pissy like bitches not urine, bitches like assholes not dogs. |
|
| |
Admittedly, it will be difficult to eliminate cultural bias. It is a video game, after all. The kids will need to know how to play. |
|
| |
I sincerely doubt there's much correlation between the choices we make on video games and our real personalities. Fish from me for tasking computers with the responsibility of personal student attention. |
|
| |
I agree with [RS] - too many computers
in primary schools already. |
|
| |
There's an interesting idea here but I think
that it breaks down if taken too far. Take,
for example, the child that bullies others
in the game. Is that because they're a bully
in the real world? Is it because they are
bullied in real world and use this as an
outlet in the game? Or is it because they
know it's a game and are just playing it as
such. Besides, I like the colour yellow. |
|
| |
I'm boning this for reaching unwarranted conclusions about kids based on largely random choices that the kids make. It won't work - you just can't 'map' personality like that. It's a very interesting idea though and I doubt the kids would object. |
|
| |
Bun for you, your annotation about bricks is worthy of the annotation hall of fame, Your use of yada yada, change the way we do things is brilliant. |
|
| |
//Besides, I like the colour yellow.// |
|
| |
And would you like to talk about that, [st]? |
|
| |
Developing a perfect coorelation between behavioral traits and decisions made in a computer game will be impossible. But, I can't help but to have faith that something could be learned. |
|
| |
The first kids who use the program will be guinea pigs, their development will be studied, and changes will be made to both the video game and the analysis, accordingly. Slowly the game should mature, and reach a level of relevance. Wether that level is worth anything is unknown... |
|
| |
yada yada. <nods to [zeno], affirmatively> |
|
| |
You know, if you would use the categorizing for the kids benifit (finding out what peaks their interest, and then build in different subroutines for different interests) this is a marvellous idea. |
|
| |
[RayfordSteele] I think this idea is not about tasking computers with responsability for student attention but rather creating a loophole for parents who's children seem to be fixated with video games. (and face it, even if You don't want to buy a play station (tm) your mother or father probably will and this way you can at least give them a game that will help them improve). |
|
| |
It reminds me of a book I once read about a book that 'grew' as the child grew. In the end the child was able to crack a computer system (Turing based). Its subtitle was "a handbook for young ladies" but google gives crappy results on that search. |
|
| |
Yes, I read that book also, great book. |
|
| |
Is My Kid Super Mario Smart? |
|
| |
I dunno. There's simply no correlation between clicking a mouse button and making an active choice during play. I'd support anything that would get our kids outside, exploring their world in group activities or simple unstructured playtime rather than sitting at a computer desk sucking down Mountain Dew. Besides, an observant individual can pick up on these traits if they're looking. |
|
| |
In Ender's Game the military uses this technique to psychologically evaluate their child soldiers. |
|
| |
//Super Mario Is My Kid Smart?// If there
is any genetic component to intelligence,
then this question sort of answers itself. |
|
| |
[Susan]/[zeno] it was "The Diamond Age or, A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer" and was written by Neal Stephenson. Great book. |
|
| |
It needs to be about making money. Specifically, making money from the kid or his/her parents. Targeted advertisements are where it's at. The game would collect data about the kid and then at the advertising intervals (there would be advertising intervals, or even better - integrate the ads seamlessly into the game) there would be ads which would be tailored to the kids tastes. There would need to be a lot of psychology involved, but psychologists are cheap compared to ads which bounce off their targeted population. |
|
| |