10/05/2026
What if we stopped dividing games into two categories: “educational” and “not educational”?
A game does not need to be designed for a classroom to teach something valuable.
Many games ask players to practice skills we say we want young people to develop: critical thinking, collaboration, communication, problem-solving, adaptability, strategic decision-making, and systems thinking.
The better question may be:
What does a player have to do in order to succeed at this game?
That shift matters.
It moves us away from looking only for games with explicit learning objectives and toward recognizing the learning already happening through play.
A cooperative game can teach communication.
A strategy game can teach resource management and tradeoffs.
A social deduction game can sharpen observation, persuasion, and perspective-taking.
None of those lessons need to appear on the box for them to be real.
If we want to take games seriously as tools for learning, we may need to broaden our definition of what an “educational game” looks like.
What skills have you seen people develop through games that weren’t designed for education?
https://www.gamersengaged.org/blog/games-as-education-learning-without-realizing-were-learning