The Group Games Model of Learning by Gary Schwartz
Games are a natural group form. They provide personal, wholehearted, unselfconscious involvement in activities that allow us to feel free to absorb and integrate our experiences and add them to our growing knowledge of ourselves.
The best example of this educational model is the work of Viola Spolin, who began her work with children in 1924 at Neva Boyd’s school for playground workers and then as a supervisor of creative drama for the Chicago WPA recreational project in the 1930’s. There she began to develop simple games and exercises to solve the complicated problems of the theater. She termed this system of learning “Theater Games.” Her work with these games led to the formation of the very first improvising acting company in the U.S.: The Second City (founded by her son Paul Sills and David Shepard) and provided a codified system of learning for every improvisational company ever since.
Games as Teachers
The vitality of the game lies in the creative process of playing it . . . The discipline of making judgments, often instantaneously, and of acting upon them within a static frame of reference, i.e. the verbalized rules, is unique to the playing of games. While the game is an imaginatively set up structure into which the players project themselves psychologically, they act consistently with the demands of the situation, and thereby subject themselves to the self-imposed discipline, which involves many aspects of social behavior. (Neva L. Boyd, Handbook of Traditional Games, H. T. Fitzsimmons Company, Chicago, 1945)
We learn through experience and every new experience transforms us. We call it growth. Conditioning is the repetition of experience. As we begin to experience the world from birth, learning takes place by interacting with the environment through crawling to walking, collecting sounds to piecing together language to interacting with others.
Play is the platform that marks the greatest period of learning in childhood and can be defined as the solving of problems requiring total mind/body-involvement with the environment. Games are natural structures requiring play and learning takes place as a byproduct of play. As we learn from games, we continue to make games more complex in search of new experiences.
Games teach a variety of skills. From tidily-winks to chess, our whole being is thrust into activity, requiring action, consequence, and interaction. The mind and body work together to solve the present time – right now problem. Intuition develops as present time gives us access to the spontaneous understanding of what to do at that moment, and the experience gained in play is totally the players’. Lectures or intellectual knowledge of the experience is no substitute for the experience itself.
When using play as learning, a teacher’s role is one of facilitation and coaching. Teachers can provide a context for play by creating games that match the curriculum and more importantly the needs of the students. How students play provides clues to gaps in learning and there are always other games that address those gaps.
Direct Experience
Direct experience is total contact with the environment, untainted by judgment or comparing it to similar experiences. Therefore, we cannot experience anything fully while commenting on it. Our attempts to understand our experience while we are having an experience shut off all contact with the experience itself.
Playing a game is psychologically different in degree but not in kind from dramatic acting. The ability to create a situation imaginatively and to play a role in it is a tremendous experience, a sort of vacation from one’s everyday self and the routine of everyday living. We observe that this psychological freedom creates a condition in which strain and conflict are dissolved and potentialities are released in the spontaneous effort to meet the demands of the situation. (Neva L. Boyd, quoted in Spolin, Viola, (1999) Improvisation for the Theater, 3rd Edition, Evanston, IL, Northwestern University Press, p. 5. )
When a player meets the problems faced in the actual playing of a game – restricted by the agreed-upon rules, accepting them as the boundaries within which to play – energy builds and the player is free to respond however he/she wants within this structure, spontaneously. That energy and tension are ‘fun’. With no outside authority telling the player what to do or how to do it, the player uses self-discipline and tries his or her best to solve the problem with enthusiasm and mutual trust of the rest of the players. When it’s fun true learning occurs.
Viola Spolin’s very first exercise, “Exposure,” introduces players to the idea of focus and how focus allows us to lose our self-consciousness. The game consists of a group of onstage players and a group of audience players. The first group goes up and stands in front of the audience. They are told to “do nothing.” The coach urges them to consider doing nothing at all and ” watch while you do nothing.” Those onstage will soon become uncomfortable. Some will giggle, others will freeze while others appear to sleep or be nonchalant. Once all have exhibited signs of discomfort ask them to accomplish some simple but absorbing tasks such as counting all the floor tiles or floorboards. They are to keep counting until asked to stop. Recounting is ok. When they have lost their self-consciousness they will do whatever it takes to get an accurate count. Crawl on the floor. Count one way and then multiply by the other. They will be absorbed in the task. Then switch groups before you debrief the experience.
In the debriefing, ask the group about their responses in doing nothing and how they felt versus being asked to count items in the room. Some will say, “I wondered what you wanted us to do when you told us to do nothing” or “My mind went numb” or “I felt tense” or “I felt sleepy.” Without too much belaboring or intellectualizing find out if they felt better doing something than not doing anything. The audience will probably respond by saying they looked more comfortable doing something, often not realizing they are describing their experience. It becomes evident that a strong focus makes us feel better on stage.
Then play tag. This game has a strong focus and there is no need to tell students, ‘Let’s practice group awareness, agility, strategy and role switching!” All you say is “Not it!” and they respond instantly with “Not it, not it!” until “it” is chosen. Then they play. The skills are inherent in the fun.
Before we can play we must feel free to do so.
In other learning models, “how to do it” is often stressed. Examples are given to be copied or simulated and any effort to solve the problem in a way not dictated by former examples is not encouraged. Rote learning without application alienates the student from the fun of learning so that direct experience cannot take place. Students then rely on authority to tell them “how they are doing.”
Approval and Disapproval
Authoritarian learning is based on an invisible norm so that the game becomes “please authority and gain the grade,” i.e. approval or at the very least, avoid disapproval. This may lead to conformity or rebellion. The student seeks to please authority or hide from authority or invents a way to try to defeat or defy the system in the quest for personal identity. Controlling behavior and attitude become the new game between teacher and student. Bribes, rewards, and punishments are used. Personal freedom is diminished and joyful direct experience of solving problems for the fun of it is lost.
Traditional learning models usually regulate effort and label it on a scale of good to bad. Spolin called this “The Approval/Disapproval Syndrome.”Abandoned to the whims of others, we must wander daily through the wish to be loved and the fear of rejection before we can be productive. Categorized “good” or “bad” from birth (a “good” baby does not cry too much) we become so enmeshed with the tenuous threads of approval/disapproval that we are creatively paralyzed. We see with others’ eyes and smell with others’ noses.
Having thus to look to others to tell us where we are, who we are, and what is happening results in a serious (almost total) loss of personal experiencing. We lose the ability to be organically involved in a problem, and in a disconnected way, we function with only parts of our total selves. We do not know our own substance, and in the attempt to live through (or avoid living through) the eyes of others, self-identity is obscured . . . Trying to save ourselves from attack, we build a mighty fortress and are timid, or we fight each time we venture forth. Some in striving with approval/disapproval develop egocentricity and exhibitionism; some give up and simply go along. Others, like Elsa in the fairy tale, are forever knocking on windows, jingling their chain of bells, and wailing, “Who am I?” In all cases, contact with the environment is distorted. Self-discovery and other exploratory traits tend to become atrophied. Trying to be “good” and avoiding “bad” or being “bad” because one can’t be “good” develops into a way of life for those needing approval/disapproval from authority—and the investigation and solving of problems becomes of secondary importance. (Viola Spolin, Improvisation for the Theater, Chicago, Northwestern University Press, 1963)
Teachers as Coaches and Fellow Players
A coach is not a tyrant or an authority figure, but rather a respected fellow player with extra skills needed to play one’s best. One of the best ways to achieve the trust and respect of students is to play with them in games. Some teachers fear this diminishes their authority. They fear to risk looking less professional or silly. The risk of failing in front of students or looking less capable in the eyes of their students is anathema to some teachers. If a teacher can joyfully commit to playing with his or her students – win, lose or draw – a relationship of trust emerges. Creating a positive and supportive environment allows students to feel comfortable outside of the game to ask questions freely and communication lines open up between students and teachers.
Play “Explosion Tag” with your students. A game where when you are tagged, you must “explode” in voice and body to let everyone know you are it. Then you can chase down another player who must then “explode.” It will appeal even to the shyest and most withdrawn for it is part of the game. It works best if you play too and explode too when tagged. Peerage develops as you enter the game as a player. Students can see you in this light and a new relationship between student and teacher develops.
Try playing “Who started the Motion,” a game in which one person leaves the room while the rest of the group chooses a leader and then everyone must stand in a circle and mirror the leader’s movements, trying to hide who is leading the motion. The player outside then is called in and asked not to guess but to find the leader. He or she is given three chances. Failing to discover the leader allows the leader to choose the next one out. Successfully finding out the leader makes the leader the next one out of the room. It’s more fun to be a part of the game rather than observe it from the sidelines as a teacher when you can. You can coach while playing. You might suggest “Hide the leader” or “Looking directly at the leader reveals him/her, ” or “Copying is not mirroring!” or “Mirrors hide the leader! Copying reveals the leader!” or “Mirror from the corner of your eye.” These are comments that help those who need it to focus more fully on the task. Singling out or stopping the game to demonstrate mirror vs. copying stop the flow and fun. Side coaching while playing aids the game.
A coach must literally play for each player (from the sidelines or within certain games) with an understanding of the experience the player may be having. An understanding comes from playing the game. For example, a basketball coach is continually shouting coaches during the play. Calling out from the sidelines assists the player to play more fully. A player does not stop to acknowledge the coach; he or she cannot stop. Calling out is not instruction but an aid. The player might need encouragement or a second pair of eyes to widen the picture. “Look to your left!” “Faster!” “Now!” help the player to play more fully.
Teachers must be aware that culturally students look to them for approval. A comment like, “How would you like me to do it?” from a student signals fear and dependency. If you set up a game like “Hide and Seek” and the student asks you, “Where should I hide?” that student is focused on making sure the hiding place is approved by the teacher. He has lost all initiative. If you tell the student, “Try over there, behind the desk” or some other place, you cripple that student’s ability to play the game. Your experience supplants the child’s. Resist the urge is to solve the problem for the students. Rather let them play and see what happens, being there to help.
Become a fellow player with your students. Create trust. Developing expertise and wider experience are then welcomed as aids to playing more fully. An ideal goal involves being present and alert to yourself, others, and the world around you. It’s the ‘Game of Life.” Helping others achieve this state of grace is ultimately the job and art of teaching.
About the author
Gary Schwartz an accomplished actor and comedian and worked for 25 years in film and television. He was the director of The Spolin Players, a group of established actors (including Dan Castellaneta, the voice of Homer Simpson) performing Improv in Los Angeles since 1988. He is the protégé of the late Viola Spolin, widely known as the mother of Improvisation. Gary began his association with Spolin in 1979 and has taught scores of Spolin Games workshops and assisted her in many workshops as well. He lives in North Bend, WA
©July 2006
