CHICAGO – Seven million students and 72,000 teachers are using video games in their social studies classrooms-through registration with the non-profit online education project iCivics. According to executive director of iCivics, Louise Dube, fifty percent of middle schools use iCivics to reinforce their civics common core curriculum because “it’s free and will always remain so,” but also because it represents the new frontier in the intersection of technology and learning.

Greg Toppo, the national K-12 education reporter for USA Today and author ofThe Game Believes in You: How Digital Play Can Make Our Kids Smarter, said, “When you think about games, you are confronted with the necessity to think about learning.” No matter the subject of a video game, the objective is to figure out a complex situation and improve at something. This model is now used beyond the entertainment sphere. iCivics has over twenty online games and hundreds of accompanying lesson plans curated to curriculum requirements of each state.

Anyone can visit icivics.org for instant access to games and lesson plans. In the game Do I Have a Right? the player runs their own law firm. Students learn about the content of the U.S. Constitution by deciding if, why, and how they can help each client that visits their firm. Examples range from a client that was searched without reason by a cop to a client who wants to knock their neighbor’s house over to expand their backyard. Success in the game is predicated on how well the student knows the rights of American citizens, how well they match citizens with the correct lawyer, and their ability to balance multiple clients at a time. Other game topics include federal, state and local government, citizenship, and international affairs.

Jim Gee, a professor of Literacy Studies at Arizona State University, said these games “revolutionize pedagogy” because they give the learner large amounts of feedback. Throughout iCivics games, the player is informed about the reason behind their error each time they make an incorrect move. These are not Call-of-Duty-type video games. The game interface is less complex, and there is a lot of reading involved as thought bubbles pop up to explain each action and next possible steps.

But many teachers find reasons beyond functionality to use digital technology in the classroom. Nancy Nassr, a middle school digital learning teacher in Chicago, explained that video games in the classroom are about ownership. They implicate the student in what they’re learning and provide them with a robust context in which to understand the information they study—something impossible to do with every student in large classrooms before digital technology.

However, the education is not limited to the game alone. The lesson plans are intended to create probing questions for students before, during, and after the game. “Every lesson should include a debrief,” said Nassr. Student participation leads to ownership of the material; the game is supposed to be a parable that sparks a bigger conversation in the classroom. Nassr also noted that the use of digital learning games has helped her, and other teachers, evoke engagement from students that tend to be apathetic towards the material.

As this new frontier in digital learning presses onward, the question from parents and teachers is: Does it actually work? Don’t our kids spend enough time with their eyes glued to computer screens? A study done by Baylor University on 250 students for The Journal of Social Studies Research, showed that iCivics-using fourth graders scored an average of 10 points higher on civics tests and fifth through eighth graders increased their scores by five points after playing the game. Arizona State University, SRI International and, Tufts University conducted similar studies that found similar results. All studies showed improved test scores and increased confidence in knowledge of the material from students who used iCivics.

While this style of digital learning shows success and potential, a few philosophical questions still remain. Dube said that iCivics games should be evaluated by whether or not they “create the kinds of thinkers we want.” Similarly, Allen Turner, a game designer for ChicagoQuest, said these games are valuable because they “create meaning for the student beyond the information.” But is there a universal understanding or clear vision of the kinds of thinkers we want? Who is the curator of the “meaning” students will engage. (Although, the same question could be asked of textbooks and other older learning methods.)

According to their website, the iCivics mission is: “We envision a nation where all young Americans are prepared for active and intelligent citizenship. To support this vision, iCivics empowers teachers with effective and engaging resources to develop the next generation of citizens.” But the method and practice of using technology in the classroom is still widely debated and rapidly evolving. As of now, there is no clear metric for what kinds of citizens digital learning will produce.

There is also no reliable way of knowing if these students have digested a well-rounded civics education or if they have learned how to beat a game. The team at iCivics would likely posit that the two are intertwined—you’ve digested the information when you’ve won the game. Nassr puts the responsibility with game designers and teachers, saying it’s their job to set clear learning goals from the initial design to the execution and debrief of each game. As digital learning continues to pervade the classroom, teachers, students and parents are learning how to navigate these new initiatives.

Calhoun is a recent graduate of The King’s College in New York City and a contributor to WiredAcademic. She reported this story at the Education Writer’s Association annual meeting in Chicago.