Gamifying Education

[ShadowHM]

One of my sons is studying to become a high school teacher. He shared the video linked to below with me. It offers some interesting ideas on how to improve the way we deliver education. Enjoy!

Extra Credits: Gamifying Education

[Tal]

Thanks for posting that ShadowHM - I did enjoy it. Now to figure out how to incorporate it into education for my daughter...

[kandrathe]

Very cool. I'll pass it around my education friends.

I'll share this one I stumbled across last week -- http://prezi.com/aww2hjfyil0u/math-is-not-linear/

[NuurAbSaal]

Thanks for the link, I found the video not only very interesting but also got a couple of chuckles out of it .

take care
Tarabulus

[--Pete]

Hi,

He shared the video linked to below with me. It offers some interesting ideas on how to improve the way we deliver education.

I'll share this one I stumbled across last week --

Both are very interesting and each has some good points. And both fall way short of the reality of what could and should be changed if we really want a good, modern, educational system.

Just two examples:

1. Grades

I like the idea of making grades the accumulation of points rather than the loss. I actually had a PE course (swimming) at GaTech that was graded that way. There were a bunch of accomplishments, each at different levels. For example, tread water with a 50 pound weight tied to your feet was an accomplishment. You could do it at the 20, 30, 40, or 50 minute level. You could try it multiple times, and got achievement points for your best effort. The minimum passing score was the total of the minimum achievement points in each accomplishment. You could pass even if you failed to get any points for some accomplishments if you got more than the minimum on others. A 4.0 was hitting the max on all.

As much as I like that, I still think grades are wrong. In the words of Yoda, "Try not. Do or do not, there is no try." Grades are a measure of the success of a try. "Well, you jumped 90% of the abyss. You're dead, but your effort earns you a B". Break topics into small chunks, and only allow progression when there is progress. Ideally, every day should be a chunk, and every day should be succeed or repeat. But it has to be by topic and it has to be in short chunks.

Get rid of grades. Establish a feedback loop where performance determines progression and a certain amount of progression opens the door to further advancement.

2 Spiral versus linear teaching

It is much easier to partition a subject linearly. Ancient history, Greek history, Roman history, medieval, renaissance, etc. etc. You simply write the pieces in a language and manner suitable for the age at which you plan to teach them. And, of course, you keep all the unsupported legends and nonsense that has been propagated to children in the past.

In the spiral approach, you teach the whole subject on each loop of the spiral. Early loops are simplified and presented at the appropriate level for the students. Later loops add depth, understanding, detail. So, for instance, in an early loop, that Charlemagne was crowned emperor of the Holy Roman Empire by Leo III on Christmas 800 is covered. The flow of events to and from this point is the structure supporting the event. On a second turn of the spiral, maybe a few years later in the curriculum, the motivations of the pope and the reasons why Charlemagne wasn't happy about it could be introduced. And, eventually, the point that (as Eugen Weber points out) it wasn't holy, or Roman, or even an empire can be presented.

The liner approach leaves people with childish notions. They are often better off forgetting what was taught on the premise that ignorance is preferable to misinformation. The spiral approach has the advantage of keeping the previous knowledge and building on it. Thus, in literature, one can spiral from "hero", to "main character", to "protagonist" -- each a concept containing the previous concepts but at a more intricate level.

Yes, there is so much that can be done to improve education. Much of it is free. Much of it is being used in what our society seems to consider more important than an educated population -- good sports teams and figures. While an English teacher is expected to grade a paper and go on, a coach makes his charges repeat something till they get it right. A math teacher returns the graded homework, and the students go on whether they got it right or not. A golf instructor will never let you quit until you get a good shot -- he forces you to leave with the memory of how to do it right.

But that's OK. As long as our schools are decent breeding grounds for professional athletes, who can ask for more.

--Pete

[Kevin]

I knew my educational experience was different from a lot of other folks, but the grades as points was pretty much standard for me in most of my high school classes, and a lot of my college courses as well. There generally weren't "levels" but I knew there would be a total of 1750 points available in my English class, tests would account for 800 of those, there were some extra credit opportunities, etc. There were group and class projects that generated points. You needed 93% of the total points for an A (so I needed to get 1645 points somehow in that English class). Though in college it was generally the 90-80-70-60 scale. High school was 93-86-78-70.

Curves happened only in a few classes where it made sense to grade competitively. In a class like algebra, it is in fact possible for everyone in the class to demonstrate perfect understanding of the material, and everyone should get an A. Most of the other times I ran into a curve were actually more of a normalization. Though I did have a calculus class, that had a common final pulled from questions written by each professor, that got graded on a curve, but that was after the final. The regular tests were not common, they were written by each teacher. My section had harder tests. Pretty much everyone in my 30 student section believed this, without a curve the highest grade anyone in our class had was a B (a low B at that). The final was worth 200 points. 210 students took the final. The top 15 scores were students in my section (I was 10th with a score of 190, I carried a sign wrong on one problem, and made a stupid mistake on another). 20 of the top 30 scores were from my section, the lowest anyone from our section got was a 150. We convinced the professor that, yes we did indeed know the material, and that his tests had been harder. The questions from my professor on the final were also the most missed questions on the final. I went into the final with a C, I left with an A. That was still a bizarre class.

[[wcip]Angel]

Break topics into small chunks, and only allow progression when there is progress. Ideally, every day should be a chunk, and every day should be succeed or repeat. But it has to be by topic and it has to be in short chunks.

2 problems:

1. In a class of 30 kids, 20 will understand what you're talking about, 5 will get most of it, and 5 will be clueless. Do you advance or repeat? Which kids do you ignore?

2. By repeating chunks of information because 'it didn't set it in' that day makes planning a semester nightmarish. Also, you'll never be able to get through the curriculum by repeating all the chunks of information the students didn't understand.

Get rid of grades. Establish a feedback loop where performance determines progression and a certain amount of progression opens the door to further advancement.

This would establish a system where kids who come from an enlightened home (well educated, intelligent parents who help their children and supply them with necessary learning tools, books, computers, etc) will advance while students who come from a poor background, a broken home, a family where parents dont give a shit about their kids, will be forever "left behind". Class society will perpetuate. I'm not a socialist, even though I sound like one here.

The spiral approach has the advantage of keeping the previous knowledge and building on it. Thus, in literature, one can spiral from "hero", to "main character", to "protagonist" -- each a concept containing the previous concepts but at a more intricate level.

We do this already, at least over here.


...

As a general rule, when it comes to education, it's much easier pointing out what doesn't work, than finding out what actually does.

[--Pete]

Hi,

As a general rule, when it comes to education, it's much easier pointing out what doesn't work, than finding out what actually does.

Softly said, but still a valid challenge. Those that haven't played the game might not understand it, so let me establish my credentials in that game.

In high school, as an Explorer Scout, I taught Boy Scouts in a number of fields, including pioneering, archery, camping, tracking, cross country skiing, canoing, and a few others. As a Red Cross water safety instructor, I also taught swimming and lifesaving at the Y pool. I also helped teach beginning fencing although I was just an advanced intermediate myself. In my sophomore through senior years, I tutored in math. In my senior year I taught freshman Cubans algebra and sophomores plane geometry in Spanish.

In Vietnam, as the honcho of the electrical/hydraulic/instrument and armament shop, I taught incoming recruits the lessons I myself had learned a few scant months (sometimes weeks) before. After returning from Vietnam, I took the Methods of Instruction course at William and Mary's and became an Army instructor at Ft. Eustis where I taught elementary electrical properties, hydraulic systems, and instrument repair. I did that until I completed my active service.

At GaTech, I tutored, for pay, from the start. In my junior year and senior years, I taught labs and lead self study classes for credit and pay. In graduate school, I continued to teach labs, as well as teaching some introductory and some upper division physics courses. By the time I went to work for Boeing in 1985, I'd spent at least part of every year since 1960 teaching -- and that in ever changing circumstances. That was a true 25 years of experience, and not the typical teacher's one year of experience repeated 25 times.

I've encountered what doesn't work. I've used it. I've fought it. And I've spent a lot of time trying to find what does. Occasionally, I succeeded. I've learned from teaching physical skills some of the things we do wrong in trying to teach mental skills. I've seldom learned much of use by studying how mental skills are taught. So, a lot of the Monday morning quarterbacking I've done and that I do is along the lines of "what could I have done better" and not simply a critique of the effort of others.

I hope that my teaching days aren't over -- that now that I'm retired, I'll have opportunities to teach again, better than before.

Break topics into small chunks, and only allow progression when there is progress. Ideally, every day should be a chunk, and every day should be succeed or repeat. But it has to be by topic and it has to be in short chunks.

2 problems:

1. In a class of 30 kids, 20 will understand what you're talking about, 5 will get most of it, and 5 will be clueless. Do you advance or repeat? Which kids do you ignore?

You don't ignore any of them. You also don't work with them only as a group. However, I suspect you are looking at this from your position in the swamp, where "when you're up to your ass in alligators, it's hard to remember you're there to drain the swamp."

I don't know how long a class is where you teach; what the minimum chunk of time a student has to repeat if he falls behind. Here, in the USA, it typically is a year. And there is the first problem. Suppose you have a student, and suppose that student is a month behind in reading at the end of seventh grade. What do you do?

If you hold him back, you could be, literally, ruining his life. The forced repetition of so much material which the student has already mastered could turn the child against school and knowledge, if not forever, for long enough that any recovery will probably be too late. We all know people like that -- they gave up on school and settled for a life below their potential. They would love to go back to school, they say, but seldom do because of 'life' -- as in mortgage, wife, children, job, etc.

If you pass him, you could be, literally, ruining his life. Trying to develop eighth grade skills and knowledge with less than eighth grade tools is an uphill battle. That the child fell back in the first place is an indicator that, at this time, he is not capable of keeping up the standard pace. Is it then rational to put him in a position where he not only has to keep up the standard pace, he has to exceed it to catch up? Is not the most likely output of this scenario a child who drops further behind, lacking the tools that would give him the tools to catch up?

So, what is the solution? Hold him back or pass him anyway? That is a trick question. The solution is to eliminate the situation developing in the first place. The solution is to break the blocks down into so fine a structure that the repetition of one block is trivial. A common event and a matter of little importance.

Ideally, the chunks should be a few days long, and some of that can be achieved by not forcing the whole class to work as a unit. To be more open to the concept that there is no such thing as teaching, only learning. That a teacher is wasting the students' time by telling them things the students should be reading or discovering for themselves. That lecturing is the wrong way to teach, since it emphasizes the output of the teacher rather than the input of the students. A good teacher says little to the class, but much to the students, and is not afraid to walk around, leaving the security of the podium, and do battle in the trenches of each desk -- helping those who need help, encouraging those who need encouragement, and re-enforcing those who need neither with mild, genuine, earned praise.

Changing the school calendar is also a necessity if the concepts of fixed learning periods is to be maintained (not a good idea, but perhaps a necessary idea). A year is too long. A week might be ideal ("Sorry, Johnny, but you failed this week, you'll have to repeat it" is not an earth shattering scenario) but is probably impractical. But a quarter should be eminently doable. Pace the curriculum so that it is comfortable for the five that get it. Expect the 20 to have to repeat one or two quarters in six years. And expect the other 5 to have to repeat a few more quarters, and finish that six years in seven. The problem isn't that there are some who get it faster and some that get it slower; the problem is that the pace is set the same for all.

Which kids do you ignore? Under the present methods, you are ignoring all of them. Instead of adapting to the needs to educate children, you are working to arbitrary marks on a calendar. And that brings us to your second point.

2. By repeating chunks of information because 'it didn't set it in' that day makes planning a semester nightmarish. Also, you'll never be able to get through the curriculum by repeating all the chunks of information the students didn't understand.

If the goal is to finish certain milestones on certain dates, I'd agree with you. Got to get that capstone on the top of that pyramid before the next flooding of the Nile or Ra will be displeased. If the goal is to educate children, then "planning a semester" and "get[ting] through the curriculum" are not only not useful concepts, but they are actively destructive. In NYPD Blues, Andy Sipowicz had a spiel about taking care of pet fish. It went something like "You keep your eyes on them and observe. If something starts to go wrong, you try to figure it out and adapt. If it works, then after a while you can call yourself someone who understands fish."

I think that's a better approach and attitude than all these lesson plans and curricula and semester goals and blah blah blah. Industrial management, time motion studies, efficiency improvements are all well and good in a domain where the inputs are consistent, the processes established, and all the outputs must meet the same requirements -- neither exceeding them (for that would be a waste) nor falling short (for those would be unprofitable failures). But educating children should not be confused with manufacturing widgets, as much as the widget manufacturers would want you to.

Yes, there must be a goal. And they must be relatively inflexible and relatively high. However, the schedule for achieving those goals must be flexible. It must be flexible for the class as a whole and for each individual in that class. Anyone who's ever taught knows that two classes of apparently identical individuals will, inexplicably, have an easier or harder time with the same material, taught in the same way, by the same teacher. One class will get it immediately. The other will have to have it explained in many different ways. And the same is true of individuals in that class as well. Which is why it is better to give a ten minute lecture and spend 40 minutes circulating around the class addressing individual questions than it is to give a fifty minute lecture. In the 50 minute lecture, you are probably making contact with 5 or 10 students, and either boring or losing the rest. In that 40 minute walk, you are making contact with all of them, each just where they need it.

Finally, the point is reached where it must be determined if each student has achieved the goal. And here is where the wisdom of Yoda comes in. Five plus five must be ten *all* the time, not 70% of the time for a passing C. Not "A", "B", etc. Not even pass/fail. Simply, "you've mastered this material, Grasshopper -- time to move on" or not.

Get rid of grades. Establish a feedback loop where performance determines progression and a certain amount of progression opens the door to further advancement.

This would establish a system where kids who come from an enlightened home (well educated, intelligent parents who help their children and supply them with necessary learning tools, books, computers, etc) will advance while students who come from a poor background, a broken home, a family where parents dont give a shit about their kids, will be forever "left behind". Class society will perpetuate. I'm not a socialist, even though I sound like one here.

First, I'm not sure I completely agree with what you say. There are two aspects here. There is the social aspect and the economic aspect. The economic aspect is properly addressed by the schools if the system is just. Books, computers, even food and clothing (school uniform) should be supplied by the school. As much as the economic playing field can be leveled, it should. The social is harder. However, I'm not totally convinced that all parents with a high economic background help their children nor that all those from a low economic background don't give a shit.

Second, even if it were true, so what? Not to put too fine a point on it, but an educational system is there to do the best it can for as many as it can. It is not there to remedy all social injustices (although access to an education is a good path to that goal). Some will do better, some worse. Sometimes it is because of economic conditions. Sometimes because of personality and motivation. And sometimes it is because of natural talent -- no educational system will turn a Forest Gump into someone who would conceive a special theory of relativity.

The spiral approach has the advantage of keeping the previous knowledge and building on it. Thus, in literature, one can spiral from "hero", to "main character", to "protagonist" -- each a concept containing the previous concepts but at a more intricate level.

We do this already, at least over here.

Good.

--Pete

[weakwarrior]

But that's OK. As long as our schools are decent breeding grounds for professional athletes, who can ask for more.

I presume you meant to say "As long as our schools are decent breeding grounds, who can ask for more."

[Tal]

I've been giving it some thought and have decided to apply the concept of the first video towards helping my daughter learn responsibility and to assist around the house. It's been more than a chore to get her to do even the smallest of tasks around the house and we've been struggling with her acting irresponsible. One of the things my daughter wants is to have a cell phone. It so happens that my wife is up for a new cell phone (and to re-sign) on her account this November and my daughter's birthday is November.

I hit upon the idea of offering quests and daily quests that would offer reward her with experience points. When she received enough points she would get the cellphone she desired. The quests would all be posted in one place that she could check on a daily basis. There would be daily quests like (Make your bed, tidy your room) and weekly quests such as (Dust and vacuum your room, sweep the living room and dining room) and bonus quests of a much longer duration (weed the garden) that would offer her points.

My problem has been in figuring out what her ending experience goal should be and how much to offer per quest along with a good way to graphically show this to her as a carrot on the stick to keep her on task. Any suggestions for tactics I use? I figure I can always Blizz-out on her and set a daily/weekly cap on experience and turn any extra quest rewards into something else she desires (new crayons, art supplies, etc) if she threatens to get to the goal before November.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I've been giving it some thought and have decided to apply the concept of the first video towards helping my daughter learn responsibility and to assist around the house.

Sounds interesting. Let us know how it works out.

My parents never gave me an allowance. However, they 'paid' me for doing certain things -- note that doing them was totally my choice, they weren't "my chores". Typical things were dusting, vacuuming, cleaning a bathroom, doing a load of laundry, washing a day's dishes, etc. Later on, when we got a house with a yard, things like mowing the law, trimming hedges, etc. were added. I think it was a win-win situation, and I even got to the point where I'd negotiate additional work (e.g., the living room needs painting, what's it worth to you?)

I realize that it isn't the same thing, but it is in the same spirit. Rather than making chores an undesirable pastime, it made them an opportunity to achieve my goals. There was no nagging to do them, for they were not my assigned responsibility. And that is the real issue -- had it simply been "these are your chores and you get no allowance till you do them" the situation would have been entirely different. Then something for which I'd developed an expectation would have been taken from me. The way it was actually done, there were no expectations, just opportunities.

And the chores got done

--Pete

[ShadowHM]

I realize that it isn't the same thing, but it is in the same spirit. Rather than making chores an undesirable pastime, it made them an opportunity to achieve my goals. There was no nagging to do them, for they were not my assigned responsibility. And that is the real issue -- had it simply been "these are your chores and you get no allowance till you do them" the situation would have been entirely different. Then something for which I'd developed an expectation would have been taken from me. The way it was actually done, there were no expectations, just opportunities.

And the chores got done

--Pete

I don't see this as being in 'the same spirit' at all. You missed out on one important part of learning, IMO, by that method. Being a member of a household carries benefits that you reaped without bearing any responsibility for household maintenance. The laundry needs to be done; the dishes need washing; the floors (and sometimes the furniture) need vacuuming, etc. The tasks don't go away if you don't feel poor this week or if you feel like doing something more fun. So where/when did you learn responsibility for household maintenance? (Or have you managed all along to reap those benefits without having to contribute? )

There are chores expected of my children because they are members of the household. These chores have no bearing on their allowance.

Tal, the only suggestion I would make is to do the arithmetic ahead of time to ensure that your daughter has to include some tasks that are 'over and above the routine' to collect sufficient points to gain the phone. I will be interested to hear read your report on this experiment. If nothing else, I want to know just how much it diminished parental wear and tear due to reduced nagging.

[LavCat]

My problem has been in figuring out what her ending experience goal should be and how much to offer per quest along with a good way to graphically show this to her as a carrot on the stick to keep her on task. Any suggestions for tactics I use? I figure I can always Blizz-out on her and set a daily/weekly cap on experience and turn any extra quest rewards into something else she desires (new crayons, art supplies, etc) if she threatens to get to the goal before November.

If it helps, some people will do practically anything for pets.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I don't see this as being in 'the same spirit' at all.

Maybe we're talking at cross purposes. You start by offering a video in which the concept of starting from zero and earning points is suggested as a replacement for the processes of starting with a 4.0 and losing points. I tell of how my parents, instead of giving me an allowance and withholding all or part of it when I failed to perform, gave me no allowance, but allowed me to earn it. The two cases, while not identical, are very similar. In both cases, the same ends are achieved, but the focus shifts from punishment for failure to reward for success.

(Or have you managed all along to reap those benefits without having to contribute? )

I never quit beating my wife because I never started beating my wife in the first place. But nice shot, anyway. As to the rest, my post, although typically long, was not a full autobiography. On the one hand, I did my own laundry (pretty much from when I could drag a sack to the Laundromat), I maintained my own room, I took total care of my cat (I found her, fed her, took her for shots, etc. -- she re-payed me by having three kittens on my bed while I slept). Any fad clothes I wanted I paid for as I did for all my own sporting gear. I had responsibilities, which I did perform and for which I was not payed, but they weren't necessarily the ones you might consider.

On the other hand, pretty near everything my parents payed me for were thing which they could, and often did, turn over to a paid maid in the first place. So, your implication that somehow I did not pull my share of the freight is based on a totally incorrect assumption of our life style. My parents, as very hard working, self employed people, had a good understanding that an hour spent doing laundry was an hour not spent designing hats, or negotiating sale of product, or finding better suppliers. When I found my own sources of income which were more remunerative than washing toilets (although not necessarily as legal) they put no pressure on me to continue. They simply hired someone else.

So, I will not judge the values which you instill in your children if you'll return the favor to my parents. They may have subscribed to a more continental than Anglo attitude, but that doesn't make them wrong.

--Pete

[ShadowHM]

Hi,

I don't see this as being in 'the same spirit' at all.

Maybe we're talking at cross purposes. You start by offering a video in which the concept of starting from zero and earning points is suggested as a replacement for the processes of starting with a 4.0 and losing points. I tell of how my parents, instead of giving me an allowance and withholding all or part of it when I failed to perform, gave me no allowance, but allowed me to earn it. The two cases, while not identical, are very similar. In both cases, the same ends are achieved, but the focus shifts from punishment for failure to reward for success.

I think you missed the part where I mentioned that in my own household the payment of allowance and the requirement for chore fulfillment are unrelated. I am interested in how it works out for Tal, but I still am dubious about how applicable the video on learning is to the issue of responsibility for household chores.

(Or have you managed all along to reap those benefits without having to contribute? )

I never quit beating my wife because I never started beating my wife in the first place. But nice shot, anyway. As to the rest, my post, although typically long, was not a full autobiography.

Brevity will occasionally leave out important details. Thanks for amplifying. Your initial response certainly did leave the impression that you might have missed out on the responsibility to contribute to household maintenance.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Your initial response certainly did leave the impression that you might have missed out on the responsibility to contribute to household maintenance.

Yes. It also failed to mention that, when the busy season in the millinery business hit (in the months just before Easter), I was allowed and encouraged to help. And rewarded for my help. I suspect that I was one of the few nine year olds that knew how to use a circular and reciprocating knife fabric cutter, how to hot block hats, how to run an edger, how to use a tack machine, etc., etc.

As I said, not an autobiography -- which would probably bore me only slightly less to write than it would anyone else to read.

--Pete

[Tal]

As I said, not an autobiography -- which would probably bore me only slightly less to write than it would anyone else to read.

--Pete

I think not. I know I would like to see the experiences that shaped you into the man you are today. =)

[--Pete]

Hi,

I think not. I know I would like to see the experiences that shaped you into the man you are today. =)

In case you missed it, there is some more here. One of these days I'll gather all the bits and pieces and put them someplace, although why I just don't know. I'm a lot more interested in the next 60 years than the last 60.



--Pete