After reading Chapter 5, I tended to agree with the authors about problem-based instruction. I do think it is critical to teach students how to solve real-world based problems and I also think it is a good idea to anchor a unit in a concept or a single thing so as to have it as a reference point. However, it seems to me as if these suggestions are operated under the assumption that teachers can just do whatever they want in the classroom and everyone agrees with them and that there are no restraints whatsoever. This leads me to Prensky's lecture. Personally, I found it patently offensive. He based his lecture on three points: that students learn via engagement, that students in turn become used to that engagement and expect it, and that engagement should be the number one priority for teachers, even at the expense of the curriculum. I agree with him when he says that students learn best when they are engaged, but I disagree with everything else he says, pretty much to the word. I think what he is advocating is defeatist in nature. In a sense, he is saying that sense kids enjoy video games, we should make the video games the curriculum. I think this is a terrible lesson to teach kids from the offset. The real world is not going to cater to them. They are going to have to do things they do not want to do. Life is not a video game. He said it himself, video game designers make their games because they want to sell them, and to do that they have to make them interesting. Kids play video games because they are fun. While I do agree that students should be engaged in what they learn in school, I don't think that using video games is the answer. No matter what we do, we cannot possibly make a compulsory education system fun for everyone. Instead, we should focus more on what Norton and Wiburg advocate which seems to be more of a problem solving approach with real world applications. Learning how to find the best equipment for your level 15 wizard so you can kill a dragon is not a life skill. When you decide to get a job in the real world, you will probably wish you had learned how to communicate with people effectively instead of how to beat Bowser at the end. However, I am not saying video games are bad. I play video games all the time... at home... for fun. Video games can be educational and you can learn a lot from them, but that learning should be done at home in your own free time. Also, I tend to wonder what Prensky would think of people who don't find video games fun and do not want to learn that way? Should we just kick them to the curb? He probably would not like that, because then he would not be able to sell his teacher-replacing algebra video game.