Educational games and toys for kids: Are they effective?

Throughout most of human history, children got little or no formal instruction. Instead, they learned by imitation, and by honing new skills through pretend play (Lancy 2008). Today, we know that play benefits brain development. It may promote problem-solving, too. And, as I explain elsewhere, certain types of fantasy play may help children develop better “executive function” skills, like the ability to stay focused.

But what about the toys that children play with? The board games and video games? Are there toys and games that make children into better students? Or better citizens?

Parents living in high-tech cultures are especially interested in toys that teach. But “smart” toys are a relatively recent invention. In fact, adult-designed toys are uncommon in non-industrial cultures, where children’s make-believe is mostly the reenactment of mundane, everyday adult activities (Power 2000).

By contrast, children living in complex, literate societies are often encouraged to engage in elaborate, pretend play, and that, says anthropologist David Lancy, makes sense: Such play might improve a child’s academic readiness, and enhance his or her long-term economic prospects (Lancy 2008).

So it seems reasonable to ask if toys can provide kids with meaningful educational experiences, and surely the answer is yes. For example, consider how intelligence is measured in standardized tests. In his book, Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count, psychologist Richard Nisbett notes that Raven’s progressive matrices — an intelligence test often touted as “culture-free” — is steeped in culture (Nisbett 2009). Take a look at a typical question (pictured here).

Test takers are meant to look at the first two rows and identify the pattern. Next, they looks at the bottom row. What should come next — in the empty box?

If we grant that people perform better when they are familiar with a task, then clearly there are experiences that can help us solve this problem. A test-taker will have an advantage if he or she is familiar with

regular geometric shapes

analog clocks and clockwise movement

the idea that gradual, stepwise changes can be depicted by a sequence of images

the assumption that it’s okay to generalize a rule from only two prior examples

You can probably think of more. But the point is this: Each of these elements must be learned, and some people—including virtually all of our ancestors—didn’t learn them.