Tried "Gamification" in my classroom.(Check updated post 283 for User Group info, it's now ready)

[Littlee300]

snip

Is behaviorism bad because it gives off an enorphin (or whatever it is) to your body? Thats like saying we should ban sex. Besides this is for education, not to get your Farmville crops done.

 

[Chiefwakka]

Just read through the newest bit of input from this morning, again, thank you very much (was also pointed out I misspelled gamification in my title, I guess that's good to know lol). Today is a research day for me as I hash out what I did yesterday and begin planning for different methods. Tomorrow I'll be heading back to these two classes and will try out the tweaks.

I'm still waiting for a reply from my friend for his camera. Think I might just surprise him at his house since he's too lazy to pick up his cell

I'll update this thread later today and I will note this said update on my thread title to let everyone know what I'll be doing next.

 

[Crazy_Man_42]

This should be implmented into every classroom because lets face it the kids are getting worse each year and it's not getting better.

This experiment shows something that rarely but mainly never happens in a classroom. I'm in my Senior year with about 1 month left of school and I know that the grades below me are terrible at being silent and following the rules. The junior class got our Ipod rights and Phone rights during lunch time taken away. Taking a class with them is terrible and seeing the grades below them I see it getting worse the further down you go. The system we have now is not working, the kids aren't afraid because they feel invincible that no one can touch them because of money and their parents. This system makes them have to behave to be rewarded. Yes its a skinner box but right now its the best option to make kids actually behave in class and do what they are suppose to do.

I should tell my band teacher about this maybe we can actually have a day where the students aren't talking all the time.

 

[similar.squirrel]

It's still just applied behaviourism, gamification just refined it. Seriously, we should be leaving behaviourism behind, not improving it.

I don't see why. The only real danger here is that the students will build up a 'tolerance' to positive reinforcement, but that can be circumvented by being creative. Eventually, these Pavlovian reflexes can be assimilated to the point where the removal of the trigger element will leave the behavioural pattern unaffected.

Looking at these situations on a 'molecular' basis can be hugely beneficial, if the principles are applied correctly. We ain't nothin' but animals, and there's no shame in catering to that unless it actively contributes to some kind of devolution.

This is what I picked up from my ex while she was researching a psychology assignment, anyway. I'm by no means qualified in any of these subjects, but I'm quite interested in ethology and stuff.

Also, I'm stealing that picture.

 

[ChocoFace]

Even though this is interesting and i applaud you, there will be bumps in the road.
I think just giving kids candy day in day out is not the best way to go about. Don't ask me what is, though.

 

[Venereus]

snip

Is behaviorism bad because it gives off an enorphin (or whatever it is) to your body? Thats like saying we should ban sex. Besides this is for education, not to get your Farmville crops done.

No, it's bad because it actively ignores all those things it can't explain: the inner workings of the mind, like creativity and volition, don't matter. For behaviorism we're all passive beings, subdued to our environment, instead of active agents free to modify the world around us, able to stand our ground against society's problems. For decades now we've had better and more empowering ways to understand psychology and education, yet behariorism remains.

Anything that make us feel good is a good thing? Even ignoring your strawman about sex, that's just wrong. Panem et circenses [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses], think again.

And what are you trying to say with "besides this is for education, not to get your Farmville crops done"? That when it comes to education the ends justify the means? That education should be forced upon people? Paulo Freire [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paulo_Freire] would like a word with you.

 

[Venereus]

It's still just applied behaviourism, gamification just refined it. Seriously, we should be leaving behaviourism behind, not improving it.

I don't see why. The only real danger here is that the students will build up a 'tolerance' to positive reinforcement, but that can be circumvented by being creative. Eventually, these Pavlovian reflexes can be assimilated to the point where the removal of the trigger element will leave the behavioural pattern unaffected.

Looking at these situations on a 'molecular' basis can be hugely beneficial, if the principles are applied correctly. We ain't nothin' but animals, and there's no shame in catering to that unless it actively contributes to some kind of devolution.

This is what I picked up from my ex while she was researching a psychology assignment, anyway. I'm by no means qualified in any of these subjects, but I'm quite interested in ethology and stuff.

Also, I'm stealing that picture.

Issues within behaviorism, like tolerance, are hardly the worst of it's problems.

Again, reductionist approaches are shortsighted. We are more than what neuroscience can explain.

I'm appalled at how many see nothing wrong with it. So it's bad when a big Corporation screws people (as seen in other threads), but when education is used to turn us into the passive beings that get used to it and just put up with it, it's awwwright. WTF?

 

[IvoryTowerGamer]

Sorry if the following rambles on a bit. It's pretty late here, but I really wanted to post this before I went to bed.

snip

Great job! I've been trying to include some gamification into my own classes for the last two and a half years or so. I haven't been as methodological as you are about it (IE no control group; no formal record of each activity I've done and how effective it was), but if you don't mind that I'd be happy to share with you what I've found:



Apologies in advance if this comes off as preachy or condescending. I know sometimes my writing can come off that way, but it's really not my intent at all. I'm just really excited about having another teacher to talk to about this =).

IMO your lesson turned out so well due to the following reasons:

Clarity: By explaining the rules through achievements, the students instantly knew what needed to be done in order to get the prize. They also had a clear goal for the day. Contrast that with how rules are normally explained to a class (if at all) and how vague the consequences/rewards usually are.

Choice: Since you gave them "optional" achievements instead of rules, it seemed like it was up to the students whether or not they wanted to participate. This is probably the most useful technique I've learned since starting to "gamify" my classes. Students are much more likely to complete a task if it is framed as a choice rather than an order.

Instant Feedback: When the girl lost her achievement she knew exactly what was expected of her and how she could redeem herself. Under normal circumstances, a child doesn't know how much they can get away with. IE "If I whisper in class all that happens is the teachertells me to be quiet. I don't know at what point I'll get a detention/sent to the principal's office, so I might as well keep trying until a threat is made".

2) this system worked on the principles of bribery. the children were getting a reward for doing what they were meant to do in the first place. if you a permanent teacher for the class, all day achievements/all week achievements would be a much cheaper way of doing this.

Yes, as a sub I can offer immediate rewards since I probably won't see that class again, but in a running classroom over the course of a year these achievements would have to carry along over long periods of weeks/months. And yes, I'll have to tone down the rewards a little bit and see if just riding the system itself will do the trick.

3) my biggest concern is that these kids may have been interested because it was something new. the novelty of the idea may wear off eventually.

Indeed. I'm going back to this said class on Thursday and I will be changing the pace a little bit and will record my findings to address this very concern.

You're right to be concerned about the novelty/bribery aspects of the lesson. I think that's part of the reason your lesson was so effective was due to the above. Here's my own experience with those two problems and how I solved it.

"Video gamey" elements like achievements and point systems work well in the beginning, but they quickly become boring and "lame", particularly with older students. When this happened, I started nonchalantly phasing them out, and I tried moving on to more intrinsic reward systems (see below).

My advice: Blatantly "video gamey" rewards are best used in the beginning when you need to quickly get the kid's attention. They are best phased out before they become uncool and you start seeing kids breaking rules just to stand out.

Bribery: I recently read an article about this that sums up my own findings: http://behaviourguru.blogspot.com/2011/01/game-over-perils-of-gamifying-classroom.html The gist of it is that using too many extrinsic rewards (IE candy, stickers, toys, etc.) teaches children that something is only worth doing when they "get something" in return. Of course real life doesn't operate like this, and there are many intrinsic rewards for good behavior. Adults know the intrinsic rewards of watching an in-class movie silently is that A) the teacher will respect you more B) you will hear information you will need for a later assignment.

So lately I try to use extrinsic rewards sparingly. I still have specially designated "sticker days" where students can get stickers for good behavior, but they are still expected to behave well even when there is no reward. When students ask "why should I do this if I'm not getting a sticker today?" I tell them what the intrinsic reward of the activity is.

Of course, my students are also a few years younger than the ones you teach. I'm not sure how effective it would be to explain the intangible rewards of something to a student that might already be disillusioned with education.

Say I go beyond candies and go into privileges. One suggestion I received (and I'm still pondering it, but it's in the notes) is that achievements will give you a certain ranking and that said ranking will allow you to do things. Like say, "S-Class" ranking will allow a student to text WHILE doing an assignment (assuming he/she does well and retains the knowledge). Which cool kid would you wanna be then? You are correct, I have to expand the concept of Gamification and I shall take it to new realms...as a gamer I know what makes these kids tick and I intend to work it to their advantage.

Uh oh, somebody busting out the WoW abilities...GO GO ROGUE/Shaman combo That's actually not a bad idea though. May have to phrase it differently, but being able to do something, like get out of a homework assignment would be good. I subbed for a teacher who handed out "get out of homework free" cards and I had a few kids hand those to me. When I was in the lounge that day I was told by another teacher that some students actually went to the effort to forge counterfeit cards.

They were all serious and dissing on the teacher (from their tone) and I just laughed and said, "heck that takes initiative, you know hard it is to teach that today? I salute her for that alone."

Actually this is probably the best way to go with rewards. Personally, I like to call them "freedoms" because "privileges" sounds too stuffy for most kids.

It goes hand in hand with what I was talking about earlier with making things into a choice rather an order. For example, give students a sheet of 50 math problems, and tell them if they get 18 out of the first 20 correct they don't have to do the rest of the sheet and they can use the rest of the period for quiet free time. Tell them to remember that if they don't get the 18 correct they have to do all 50 problems, so it's really important they check their work. Also, if they are cheat or are disruptive during their free time they have to do all 50 problems.

Ahhh, that's a good point. I think a ranking system could work, but maybe tweak it being on the bottom doesn't take your self-esteem for give it a kick in the jimmy, Lord knows kids get enough of that everyday

I've found that ranking works best if:

You only list the top 30% or so. This way those at the bottom don't get self-conscious.

You attach a highly desirable reward to getting listed. This ensures that the ranking doesn't become a "who's the nerdiest" type of thing.

The list resets often, and no child should feel like it's impossible to get a good rank. IE if the list lasts a semester and there is a great divide between those at the top and bottom, a child might feel like there is no point in even trying anymore.

The criteria for earning points are clear and objective. If it looks like there is favoritism going on the lower students will quickly give up.

Basically those at the bottom should always feel like they have a chance.

Gamicification = knowing where the goalposts are and communicating expectations and objectives.

They tried that when I was in primary school to do with brushing out teeth. It didn't work. Once you realise that after getting to level 2 that there's 78 more levels to get through it becomes a chore not a fun activity. I'd just rather brush my teeth for the reasons my mum told me rather than some chart.
Some MMOs can be described as 'jobs' (griding for lootz, xps, gear whatever), they're addictive not engaging

Gamerfication might work on dumb kids. It wont work on kids who don't care or kids who are smart enough to see the 'childisness' of it, let alone the pointlessnees. If you're not in it for its own reward why are you in it?
Besides the satisfaction level of things like a bookface game is so low that it leads people coming back for more - hence it is addicitve, not motiviational.

I bolded the top part because it's a great description of what real gamification is about--making goals and expectations clear. It's not about attaching arbitrary points or score systems to get people motivated. As you mentioned, students quickly wise up if you're just using gamification to "trick" them into learning.

It might be worth taking this to TED talks!

A great idea. I teach English in Mexico and am really interested in trying something similar. We are going to start a Blog and I wonder if it would be ok to use your OP as an entry.

Gamification works amazingly for ESL!

So, back to applied game theory. I suspect we'll see the same thing here. It will see a meteoric rise, then a moderately rapid but largely unnoticed decay, with a hint of frustration thrown in.

Doesn't mean I'm not a believer that game theory in education can cause good. Quite the contrary in fact; I'm a firm believer, especially considering that selection bias (no sleep due to a Maple Story addiction?) often renders the poorest students the ones most susceptible to these methods. But still, I'd be afraid to put everything on the line on these methods.

Regardless of the outcome, I believe small bits of game theory woven into a classroom will never cease to cause results, even if the larger scale things ultimately become cliche or abused to saturation.

I think the burnout occurs when people use gamification to simply turn something into a game. IE by adding an arbitrary point system or a totally unrelated rpg meta-narrative to their lesson plan.

IMO gamification works best when people use principles of video game design to make their existing lessons more engaging, easier to understand, and more rewarding. Few people realize that probably 80-90% of game design is about the above, and that much of the fun of video games comes from the process of learning and mastering new mechanics.

I actually started writing a paper about this after seeing the EC episode last week. If people are interested maybe I can post it here when I finish it.

 

[beefpelican]

As a substitute teacher I have to overcome certain obstacles to get a class motivated.

I'm currently studying to be a teacher, and I've started student teacher rotations. I can definitely confirm that temporary teachers have to work for every scrap of respect they can get. Good work finding a way to manage a class. My one question is whether it would work on a longer time period. I feel like students get wise to plots very quickly.

http://www.alfiekohn.org/books/pbr.htm would be an interesting read on the matter.
Imo enthusiasm, understanding, passion and methodology goes a long way in the kind of quality and experience on "teaching" and having a lasting impression on an individual while meta-games might offer nice short-term games... they're just that, meta-games and do not stimulate a better learning experience.

Thanks for the advice

 

[Chiefwakka]

snip

I am running in and out of the house right now, but I wanted to take a moment to address your excellent post.

I just came back from a meeting with the teacher whose class I will be trying these methods on. We're both cleat that anything done is going to be done within the context of the lesson itself. As I was reading this thread, I realized that I have to be careful and not get overzealous. We're at the tail-end of the school year, so really my goals should not include a breaking down of educational barriers. I have drafted a goal that I am going to go out and refine, that I think might simply this topic a bit. There are so many possibilities with gamification, but there's no way I'm going to get em all in a 2-month period.

So, baby steps really. I'll elaborate what I mean on this first step later this evening.

Thank you for your input and you're right, we have to narrow down our goals so that we can make gamification practical.

 

[Krion_Vark]

*SNIP*

Here is the thing I think you should try next time. DO NOT write down your expectations and say if you listen to me I will throw candy at you. I can almost guarantee that it will be the same outcome as the one where you wrote down the things as "achievements". Unless you are subbing in Elementary School or an ESL class I can tell you that WORDS are just fine to get your point across they understand it just fine.

Also you didn't say what grade you were subbing for.

 

[AnAngryMoose]

Nice job! Glad it worked out and I was really excited to read that. If and when you do get that documentary done, be sure to post it right here on the Escapist! I'm sure we'd love to see this in action. Wish my teachers fed me for being quiet.

 

[Zaverexus]

Awesome, make sure to post that documentary

 

[timeadept]

-snip-

Well the results speak for themselves. I'm just unsure about the value of using a physical reward (like candy). My fear is that when a tangible reward is involved, it's only natural to look for loopholes. You risk separating the goal of learning and the goal of reward, and making them separate things. The ultimate application of this would keep thous two goals the same. You might consider trying psychological rewards alone. After all, that's all the achievements are in games, acknowledgment of our success (and implied acknowledgment of our effort).

But yes, as a pure application of the theory, i think you've shown that gameification definitely has potential.

 

[Emurlahn]

This is pretty awesome, let's hope your research gets implemented before my (potential) kids have to start school.

 

[Venereus]

Issues within behaviorism, like tolerance, are hardly the worst of it's problems.

Again, reductionist approaches are shortsighted. We are more than what neuroscience can explain.

I'm appalled at how many see nothing wrong with it. So it's bad when a big Corporation screws people (as seen in other threads), but when education is used to turn us into the passive beings that get used to it and just put up with it, it's awwwright. WTF?

Exactly. Because it's EDUCATION. Everybody can benefit from a lifetime of higher learning. Tell me, what about comprehension and understanding is specifically wrong? At some point, you'd become knowledgeable enough about the techniques being used to condition you into enjoying learning. And I'd be willing to wager that, by that point, you wouldn't care. You'd be happy to continue your education for education's sake, and just grin at the little extra motivators.

"Get used to it and put up with it." That's not the way you should be viewing learning and education, but you do. Which is just behaviorism applied in the opposite direction. You've been conditioned by your friends, your environment, and other factors to believe that there are more worthwhile endeavors you could be spending your time on. But that's rarely the case.

 

[Professor Ardwulf]

Chief - Brian - this was an inspirational read. Keep it up.

 

[Leemaster777]

You know, I'm thinking of becoming an english teacher myself, and I found that Gamification video quite interesting as well.

I was planning to try this out when it came time to teach for myself, but you've beaten me to the punch.

Glad to see this kind of thing works.

 

[pixiejedi]

As a former employee at a Colorado school district, good luck with getting parents and students on camera for the documentary. I had the hardest time getting permission when I needed it (man kids families have some drama with restraining orders and the like).

Other then that I loved the article, I should show this to my former coworkers as an excellent incentive model.