A Course Is Not a Game, Even If It Is Gameful

Gamification gets no respect - or, at least, not much respect. Most teachers still say that "learning shouldn't be a game." Some even say "learning shouldn't be fun." But gamification isn't about making coursework a game as much as it is using game tools and strategies in learning.

A wise conference presenter once told me that, "If your faculty are opposed to gamification, call it 'simulations.' They understand those and it's easier to get grants for them."

Whether or not that is true, using gaming techniques in higher education has arrived. Simple game tools like the use of points, missions, badges and leaderboards can be effective, especially in online environments.

Much of the research into gaming theory or "gamification" in education centers on trying to increase student engagement and motivation. It's tempting to think that the student who can't focus on an assignment for 20 minutes, but who can play a videogame for 4 hours straight, might be more engaged in an assignment that is more like that game.

What if the classroom was more like a video game? A professor at the University of Michigan is using gaming to develop GradeCraft. It is a learning-management system that lets instructors organize their courses in a “gameful” way.

One gaming technique it uses is allowing students to choose their own path through a course, selecting the assignments that interest and challenge them. 

Most courses don't offer chances to make mistakes without penalties. Yes, games have penalties too, but in most games risks don’t come with serious consequences. It is more likely that you will have to repeat a level. In other words, you learn by practicing, revising and trying again.




Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

Comments

Display comments as Linear | Threaded

No comments

The author does not allow comments to this entry