Handheld Learning - learning with mobile and ubiquitous technologies

In a time where we look towards the impact of consumer electronics to support teaching and learning i.e. engaging in learning via the Wii, Playstation, Xbox, PSP, Nintendo DS etc – why is it that our TV’s now advertise a new computer came called ‘Bully: Scholarship Edition’ a game where you actually play a bully in a school! Firstly, who designed this game and why the Hell were they not sacked before the idea became a reality! Also, as the likes of Sony begin to enter the education market, is there no-one who feels they should have some level of responsibility for the impact of computer games on today’s learners. There has obviously been debate in the past as to the nature of violent games with an increasing focus on war, violent behaviour etc – however, these such games tend to be far fetched and move the player beyond the obvious realities. A game situated in school with a student who bullies other students and is abusive towards teaching staff actually sets a scene not so dissimilar to the everyday lives of our learners and surely this has to have an impact!
Perhaps I am just getting old! but just wondered what other people’s thoughts were especially as schools begin to provide or encourage use of the very same infrastructures for teaching and learning.

The Daily Mail (On Sunday) have entered the debate in preparation for the release of the Byron Review with the headline that "Parents shouldn't let children play video games in their bedroom" and urges parental surveillance and monitoring here.

On this basis it might be sensible to keep reading books, comics, the use of home science kits, arts and crafts (scissors and needles) doing their revision, etc all on the kitchen table or in the living room. After all, young people should probably become accustomed to accepting a lifetime of surveillance. It's a shame that, particularly in the inner cities, it is no longer regarded as safe for children to play unsupervised in our parks or streets. Games provide hours of safe social engagement and amusement for children at home rather than sitting passively in front of TV re-runs and force-fed cartoons from state licensed merchandising portals.

I wonder what parents used to do before without the government prescribed user manual for bringing-up kids 

A further article in the, inappropriately named, Independent paper can be found here. 

I doubt anyone would disagree that a clearly understood certification for games as in films is necessary (although there has been one for years!) but I do believe that parents aren't as daft as this government and some sections of the media would have you believe. Given that the traditional "hardcore" gaming demographic is 18-34 year-old males much of this reporting is simply good for selling newspapers and stimulating moral panic amongst those who have yet to enter the 21st Century. The success of new gaming software that has found new audiences amongst much younger and older generations has demonstrated that not everybody is interested in beat 'em up's or first person shooting games.