Posts Tagged ‘gamification’
I had questions that I could not address in the limited time during my keynote as well as the panel at the end of the conference. These were from the pre-conference poll.
I wish to address these questions, but I will focus only on questions that I understand.
How to tie in GBL with small-wins or short-term rewards?
I have no idea how to do this with GBL because I have not implemented GBL with this design or intent. Nor will I ever. During the keynote I described how games could be integrated to focus on thinking skills, attitudes, values, and intrinsic motivation. These take time to develop and I would rather invest in these.
How would I use this technique if the University has a set of rules I have to follow and present?
The university (or partner university in your case) is unlikely to have rules about pedagogy. If it did, that is not a university that is looking to serve for today and tomorrow.
You know the content, context, and your learners best. The WHAT of a prescribed curriculum might be very full. The HOW is your responsibility and limited by your creativity.
Must it be IT based?
The “it” could be games or gamification. Both could be enabled with current technology or not. I gave examples of both during the keynote, so I have addressed that part of the question.
Here is the other part: ICT is a more current term than IT since the former is often more interactive and multi-way while the latter is more transmissive and about regulations.
What types of subjects are suitable for game based learning?
Any and all of them are suitable, especially if you do not limit yourself to content-based learning and expand the possibilities to include critical and creative thinking, socio-emotional learning, soft skills, attitudes and values, etc.
Can Gamification ideas be implemented not through a game but just mere teaching activity?
Gamification does not employ games; it uses deconstructed elements of games, e.g., points, levelling up, leaderboards.
Your question seems to hint at game-like instruction. There are strategies like putting the problem (assessment) first or early, and focusing on just-in-time learning instead of just-in-case front loading.
I would like to try this approach but I am afraid it might take up a lot of the class time. How do I go about it without sacrificing too much of the contact time?
Can you have a cake and not eat it? 😉
Something has to give and if it comes to that, you might have to use your judgement to see what to push out in order include something else.
How viable would it be to introduce gamification within a primary/secondary school classroom? The aim is to use gaming elements to increase engagement between the students and the teacher.
It is certainly viable, as apparent by the number of vendors and parties outside of schooling and higher education who want to do this.
Unfortunately, these groups sell you on the low-hanging fruit of “increased engagement”. Do not play this game because this is not why any technology-mediated strategy should be used.
Trying to engage is like trying to take control of light switches: You try to flip them on so that your students see the light. But they are just as easy to switch off or learners can move on to something else.
Engagement is something you do to try to help your students; empowerment is something you pass to students so they help everyone. By all means engage, but do not forget to empower. Vendors might tell you how to engage with gamification; I would rather see learners empowered by game-based learning.
how to know which game is appropirate [sic] for teaching when we don’t game?
You do not and cannot know. So play!
My replies to these questions might have a perceived tone. I assure the askers that my replies come from a good place and with good intent: I want us to collectively change and improve our practice.
Participants of the session observed how the panel and I approached the Q&A. The same tone and concern should be applied here.
I deliver a keynote this morning and am part of a panel in the afternoon on the broad topics of game-based learning (GBL) and gamification.
My keynote is about an hour long, but the messages, cases, and experiences boil down to these points:
- There are overlaps between GBL and gamification, but there are also distinctions. Educators who are thinking of implementing GBL strategies or gamifying experiences should know what these are so that they do this well and do it right.
- They need to do this because others have gone before them by conducting research and reflecting on critical practice. Not only should they stand on the shoulders of giants by giving credit where it is due, those that do not know their history are also doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.
My keynote will merely skim the surface and probe the waters at strategic points, so I provide some readings in this curated list.
I plan on using a few go-to tools and one infrequent one.
I am opting not to use Google Presentation’s new Q&A tool because I want a more active backchannel. I also have some good questions from participants thanks to a pre-conference poll I conducted with Google Forms.
The tool I use strategically is AirServer. Most institutional wifi systems block it and I resort to bringing my own mifi device. But the room walls are often thick and/or the venues recessed deep enough to prevent good 3G or 4G signals. This time I might have a workaround thanks to some helpful folk at the venue.
I use AirServer only when it is sound to do so. In this case, I want to show real mobile games and a gamification app in real time. I have static screen captures as backups, but these are about as effective as looking at movie stills instead of the movie itself.
I plan on backchannelling the event on Twitter after I am done speaking and the organiser has decided on the hashtag #simgeconf. I almost abandoned TodaysMeet in favour of just using Twitter. But something tells me that the attendees are not quite ready for Twitter.
Imagine this. Badges for tweeting. For adults.
Now imagine no more because here is an example.
This models the wrong way to plan a social learning endeavour. It also provides a bad example of implementing such a plan. Worse still, it perpetuates a bad practice of making extrinsic what should be intrinsically motivating.
This is one way — and a common one at that — of how gamification goes wrong.
I was prompted to write this as I was part of two recent Twitter conversations that revealed how some teachers still confuse game-based learning (GBL) with gamification.
There are several differences and I will just mention two fundamental ones. I am also going to mean video game-based learning when I make reference to GBL.
First, gamification relies on game mechanics. This could mean using the element of competition with leaderboards, collecting points or badges, levelling up, and so on. Learners are not actually playing a game; the teacher has not actually designed a game. They are all using elements or strategies that are game-like.
As its name implies, GBL requires the integration of at least one game for learning. It might be a mobile game, console game, desktop game, online game, serious game, off-the-shelf game, etc. Learners must play an actual game.
Second, I think that gamification is largely extrinsic. A teacher wants his/her students to do something and there is a reward system to get them to complete tasks. A student may not want to do those things, but the incentives are tempting or motivating.
GBL is both extrinsically and intrinsically motivating. But I would argue that if the games are carefully chosen and the activities are managed well, the motivation for playing and learning becomes intrinsic. The students play and learn not because they have to but because they want to.
I should also point out a potential pitfall of poorly designed gamification and GBL. Students may not actually learn what you want them to learn (typically content). With gamification, students might value the incentives over the content; with GBL the immersive play might be the be-all and end-all.
One way to deal with this issue is to recognize that gamification and GBL do not guarantee the learning. The teacher will still need to facilitate activities that consolidate learning and get learners to reflect on their learning. To quote Dewey:
We do not learn from experiences; we learn from reflecting on experiences.
To do this in my teacher education classes, I rely on small group and whole class discussion, one-minute paper reflections, individual and collaborative writing in wikis, thought-capture with online stickies, just-in-time instruction, etc.
For further reading on gamification and GBL, I recommend this article at MindShift.
Oliver Quinlan, the creator of this YouTube video, titled it Learning From Games. His slide deck and a few notes are here.
In the video and slides, Quinlan provided content on four main points:
- Game-based learning
- Game-centred learning
- Game creation
There was lots of good stuff in the video. I particularly enjoyed the example of Howard-Jones’ work (2011). According to that study, the most activity in the brain occurs when there is only a 50% chance for success. However, in schooling, there is an 87% chance for getting rewards. Games designed with lower success rates are actually more appealing and generate the most brain activity than schooling!
If I had to nit-pick, I would argue that we do not just learn FROM games, but also WITH games. Learning from something has an old-school, delivery-oriented feel to it. Learning with games implies a dynamism between player, game, and related content that is more typical of off-the-shelf games.
Biology teacher, Paul Anderson, applied some video game strategies to his classes. He worked on the premises that:
- School can be fun
- Failure is OK and part of the learning process
- Learning can be structured like game levels to be challenging
The elements of his Biohazard Five class included lots of activities, a large question pool designed around mastery learning, a leaderboard, and iPads for access to Internet resources.
Best of all, Anderson shared what he learnt from his classroom experience:
- He did not provide enough scaffolding
- He did not require his students to read independently enough
- He added elements of socialization to drive the learning