Gamification of the classroom-syllabus

“If you are a gamer, it’s time to get over any regret you might feel about spending so much time playing games.  You have not been wasting your time.  You have been building up a wealth of virtual experience that… can teach you about your true self: What your core strengths are, what really motivates you, and what make you happiest.”

 –Jane McGonigal from Reality is Broken (2011, p.12)

Students today literally learn differently than we did even a generation ago.  The problem is we use “yesterday’s education for tomorrow’s [students]. Where is the programming, the genomics, the bioethics, the nanotech—the stuff of their time? It’s not there. Not even once a week on Fridays” (Prensky, 2005, p. 62).  Teachers of all levels of education are losing the interest of students because the way subjects are taught does not stimulate these new thinkers.   Educators must start looking at how students learn, and why they are learning when learning happens. Before we can discuss how to best instruct this new generation, we must understand a part of the everyday interests of this newer group.

Just like any commerce industry, the public knows that games make money.  However, it might not be obvious that the gaming industry is responsible for 25.1 billion dollars spent just in the United States (Entertainment Software Association [ESA], 2011).  People not only buy games, which is where the majority of the money is spent, but they also buy the platforms as well as accessories.  According to the Entertainment Software Association, the average player is 37 years old and has been playing for 12 years (ESA, 2011, p. 2, 4).  Part of the reason that the gaming industry commands so much money from our economy is because games are now marketed towards both men and women, with women making up a surprising 42 percent of all gamers.  Families also play together meaning that games influence entire households instead of just the individual (ESA, 2011). Mobile gaming has also expanded how we interact with games.  As a new handheld platform, phones allow for constant connectivity to not only social networks, but also to games. “65 percent of the 2 billion apps downloaded are games” reports Brian Chen of the Apple app store (2009, p. 1).  We cannot escape that games are a huge part of our lives, and our collective culture. 

The draw to experience culture is why 97 percent of youth play computer or video games, and the average player has been playing for almost half of his/her life (McGonigal, 2011).  The United States boasts over 183 million active gamers, which out ranks any other country besides China at 200 million gamers.  Games are becoming the number one pastime in America.  The average player spends an average of 13 hours a week, with hardcore gamers spending up to 45 hours a week in virtual worlds (McGonigal, 2011, pp. 3-4).  Players no longer uphold the stereotype of a 40 year old virgin playing in his parent’s basements. 

Players hold down normal jobs, have families, and maintain lives outside of the games, but choose to spend down time getting a particular type of fulfillment in a game that is not provided in the real world.  The real world, for these players is progressively lacking something.  McGonigal (2011), states “to understand the future, you have to look back at least twice as far as you’re looking ahead” (p. 5).  If we look at gaming in history, there is evidence that before the time of Egyptians, people were using games to help distract from hunger.  Half of life was spent playing games in order to keep hungry minds occupied and as modern people seem to be doing something similar.  However, while players today are not trying to keep minds off hungry bellies, they are also trying to feed a very real part of themselves that is starving, and games are feeding players in a way that cannot be replicated in real life.  McGonigal says it best: “Reality is broken” [emphasis added].  Players, including myself, have escaped to an “in-game” situation to not simply avoid the real world, but to search for something that is lacking from everyday life.   Not so long ago, gaming was considered to be an “escapist” way of dealing with life’s problems. McGonigal is quick to caution those who might write off games as unworthy, unproductive or a waste of time.  The public is finding that the activities required for normal daily life do not challenge, excite or enthrall anymore.  Many people play games for hours a week without realizing that they fit into the “gamer” profile.  Within six weeks of its launch, the app Draw Something is a great example of how nontraditional gamers are experiencing games on a level they might not realize. “The app has generated about 2 billion drawings and is still being played daily by more than half of its users, who are exchanging pictures at a rate of 2,000 to 3,000 a second. And Draw Something, which is adding more than 1 million users a day” ("Draw Something Stats," 2012, p. 1).  People turn to games such as World of Warcraft for raiding opportunities in order to play out their true management skills; The Sims for the creativity and god-like control; Halo 3 for the social interaction with other players. While the average player is 32 years old, the workplace is not the only place where this hunger or brokenness is experienced. The classroom is also a place where students feel unfulfilled, lose motivation and generally feel disconnected from the educational process. Gamification might be a way to combat these problems in the classroom.

Gamification is a new idea that employs game mechanics, techniques and theory in areas that traditionally are not set up like a game.  Another way of looking at gamification is experiencing “game play” in a non-game setting.  This has taken shape with gamified apps like Foursquare, where "player" are able to earn points, badges and “mayorships” of businesses, home and other points of interest when letting friends and the company that they are "checked in" or visiting.  Facebook is probably the largest used collection of gamified application, with Farmville holding down 29.7 million (and growing) active users per month (Cashmore, 2010).  There are even apps to help encourage people to finish daily and tedious chores such as Chorewars and EpicWin (Lee & Hammer, 2011). Applications like these work to improve the “quality of life, to prevent suffering, and to create real, widespread happiness” (McGonigal, 2011, p. 10), while being simple, pervasive, and easy to use.  It is easy to see the success with gamification for large companies, and is therefore common sense to believe that it could work within the classroom as well.

While some see potential in the idea of gamification, others believe that the idea is too connected with capitalization to carry any real merit. 

Gamification is easy. It offers simple, repeatable approaches in which benefit, honor, and aesthetics are less important than facility. For the consultants and the startups, that means selling the same bullshit in book, workshop, platform, or API form over and over again, at limited incremental cost. It ticks a box. Social media strategy? Check. Games strategy? Check. (Bogost, 2011, para. 8)

For Bogost, gamification offers little real reward, and generally has little substance.  In many applications, gamification has been watered down to little more than a fill in the blank reward system.  Websites such as Badgeville and Lithium offer companies the ability to insert their products in to pre-arranged systems that produce monetary gains for little work. If gamification is used like this in the classroom, it will be just as empty.  Plug and play can be used in the way of a flexible syllabus, but the initial process of gamification must have meaning, and not just function as a way to gain empty results.  So I have carefully crafted a syllabus that has the potential to be plug and play.  Because it is based on World of Warcraft, an already successful game that has proven to motivate its players, I believe the syllabus has potential.

Gamified Syllabus:

Description:                                                                            

This class will focus on the basics of communication studies through a lens of computer game.  This gamified classroom is a space that takes game mechanics, strategies and theories and applies them to each assignment.
Format 

This class is designed to be a MMORPG (Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game) type game experience. However due to the limitations in the class, this class will be minimally multiplayer and will consist of both online and offline components, all which are meant to help to simulate the effects of online game play.

In-class time is divided between exploration (lecture), and Guild chat (discussion).

Out of class time is divided (at the choice of the individual character) between Quests (small individual assignments, presentations and research papers), Raids (Large group assignments and Large group presentations), and Gathering/Crafting (quizzes and tests)

The first day of class, students should be prepared to come to class with an avatar (a virtual representation of who the student wants to be in class), as well as a name for the avatar. First assignment will be to come to class with a backstory (narrative of at least 250 words) explaining who the avatar is and how they came to be that way and how the avatar fits into a group situation.  Worth 30 points credit/no credit.

Everyone will start the semester as a Level 1 avatar.  Unlike a normal classroom, grades are measured in experience points (XP).  It is possible for everyone in the class to reach a level 12, though if the student is not committed to quality work, then she/he must be committed to an overwhelming quantity of work:

Level	XP*	Letter Grade
Level Twelve	1860	A
Level Eleven	1800	A-
Level Ten	1740	B+
Level Nine	1660	B
Level Eight	1600	B-
Level Seven	1540	C+
Level Six	1460	C
Level Five	1400	C-
Level Four	1340	D+
Level Three	1260	D
Level Two	1200	D-
Level One	0-1199	F

*Levels are out of 2000 points.  XP is gained by completing Quests, Raids, Crafting/Gathering, and Guild Chat.

Quests:

Individual Research paper: 10-15 page research paper worth up to 700 points (Due at week 10).

*repeatable for points*

Individual Presentation: 15-20 minute presentation worth up to 500 points (Due at week 10).

*repeatable for points*

Individual Discussion Facilitation: Lead a discussion for 30 minutes for up to 100 points (Due between weeks 10-15).

Guild Chat:

Avatars are required to participate in classroom discussion and online discussion.  Participation is worth up to 50 points and up to 2.5 % of your overall grade.  Online postings about the reading will be posted by 10pm the day before class using online medium of the teacher’s choice.

Crafting/Gathering:

Quizzes: Each week (1-16) there will be an up to 15 point multiple choice quiz (worth up to 12% of the final grade).

Students are required to “craft” their own quiz each week.  The first week is done by the instructor in order to give concrete examples of each type of question.  Each quiz will include one question from each of the five levels of Bloom’s taxonomy to ensure cognitive learning for each chapter or reading.

Knowledge: Surface level questions that express/explain overall ideas from the reading.

Application: A question that shows application of student’s/avatar’s experiences to core concepts in the reading.

Analysis: A compare/contrast application of two concepts from the reading.

Synthesis: A question that uses a previously discussed concept from the class to relate to the current reading.

Evaluation: A question that requires the student to choose and evaluate a direct quote of their choosing, and explain why they agree or disagree (Johnson, p. 36)

Each question is worth 3 points. 1 point is for the construction of a question that follows one of the five levels. 2 points is for a thoughtful and correct answer to the question.

Exams: Three exams will be given (at 5 week worth up to 300pts, 10 weeks worth up to 400pts and 15 weeks worth up to 500pts). 

These exams are crafted by the teacher partially from exemplary questions from students’ quizzes.

Raids:

Large Group Research Paper: 25 page research paper worth up to 500 points (Due at week 10) *repeatable for points*

Large Group Presentation: 25-30 minute presentation worth up to 400 points (Due at week 10) *repeatable for points*

Large Group Discussion Facilitation: Lead a discussion for 60 minutes worth up to 300 points (Due between weeks 10-15)

These projects are similar to the individual projects in nature, and follow the same guidelines.

*For each group project there will be a separate anonymous questionnaire with a range of points for the other group members.  Points will be awarded according to which avatar gets the most votes for (Can assign positions 3, 4 and 5 to more than one avatar)*:

1.     Raid Leader 100 pts.
2.     Tank 75 pts.
3.     Healer 50 pts.
4.     DPS 25 pts.
5.     Needs a Rez 0 pts.

End Game:

Each player is required to write a reflection paper addressing both concepts covered in the class, as well as the gamification of the classroom.  Content will be graded for class concepts, but a review of gamification is opinion based and will only be graded on spelling and grammar.  Must be between 3-5 pages.  Worth up to 100 pts.

Points are deducted for errors in spelling and grammar.  Proof read your work carefully and please see grade sheet for detailed list of what is required for all papers.

Quests that are *repeatable for points* are quests that can be done a second time (with significant and substantial revisions) with permission from instructor.

Attendance and Conduct

Attend every class.  What you miss is important and is not covered in the book.  Just as with a game, experience is everything.  Missed work is YOUR responsibility.  Assignments must be turned in on time whether you miss class or not.

This syllabus is an idea of what could be in a classroom.  I have no way of implementing this yet, but plan on trying to adapting it for my public speaking classes for next semester.  I also plan on talking to other teachers in the communication studies to see if this syllabus can be implemented in one of the new media studies classes.  I believe that this syllabus has the potential to be a great asset for any class, and I hope to find other ways of sharing/showing this idea with others.
References

Bogost, I. (2011). Gamification is bullshit. Retrieved from http://www.bogost.com/blog/gamification_is_bullshit.shtml

Cashmore, P. (2010). Farmville surpasses 80 million users. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2010/02/20/farmville-80-million-users/-users/

Chen, B. X. (2009). Apple’s App Store Hits Six Digits; How Many Apps Do You Need? Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2009/11/appstore/

Draw Something Stats: Users Exchanging 2,000 to 3,000 Pictures Every Second. (2012). Retrieved from http://statspotting.com/2012/03/draw-something-stats-users-exchanging-2000-to-3000-pictures-every-second/

Entertainment Software Association. (2011). Essential Facts About The Computer and Video Game Industry. Retrieved from http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_EF_2011.pdf

Johnson, D. I. (2007, April). Using Out-of-Class Quizzes to Promote Cognitive Engagement. Communication Teacher, 21(2), 35-38.

Lee, J. J., & Hammer, J. (2011). Gamification in Education: What, How, Why Bother? Academic Exchange Quarterly, 15(2), 1-5.

McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world. New York, NY: Penguin Press.

Prensky, M. (2005). Engage me or enrage me: What today’s learners demand. Educausereview, 60-64.