Difference between revisions of "Gamification of Learning Processes"
From Learning and training wiki
| Line 44: | Line 44: | ||
| − | == | + | ==2. The performance exposure – embracing competition:== |
| − | One's score/grade used to be private, teachers used to give the results personally without announcing it to the whole class, to avoid public shame (in the case of those who did not perform so well). Now with | + | One's score/grade used to be private, teachers used to give the results personally without announcing it to the whole class, to avoid public shame (in the case of those who did not perform so well). Now with (over- or re-) gamification (or pointsfication) the points of the avatar and its achievements are public, anyone can see (in the case of explicit exposure). And if the points are not public, just those who did “well” will have a nice badge (which are per definition public), and those who do not have a badge had obviously a “not good enough” performance to earn one, which is an implicit exposure. |
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
Theories numbers one and two resemble the pleasure of playful activities, in which learners take part in during their free time, therefore the combination of both turn out to be effective.'' | Theories numbers one and two resemble the pleasure of playful activities, in which learners take part in during their free time, therefore the combination of both turn out to be effective.'' | ||
| − | After attending a | + | After attending a (over- or re-) gamified class, when given the choice for the format of upcoming classes, the majority of interviewed learners would go for the (over- or re-) gamified class once more, stating that it is “less boring” (but they also do not say that it is fun, because it is not a game in its full sense). This shows that either the competitive environment or the game inspired design is highly appreciated by learners, or both as a combination.}} |
Revision as of 16:59, 14 January 2014
 GAMIFICATION OF LEARNING PROCESSES |
| Form of Gamification of learning processes can be understood as the use of game design elements in learning environments in order to enhance the level of engagement of the learner. As explained in the respective article, the most generally adopted definition for gamification is: “gamification is the use of game design elements (such as badges, points and leaderboards) in non-game contexts” [1].
For an increased level of engagement, an increased level of motivation is required and games elements such as badges, points and leaderboards may be powerful motivational agents when applied in a meaningful way. All these elements (taken from games) concern extrinsic motivation, which “refers to behavior that is driven by external rewards such as money, fame, grades, and praise. This type of motivation arises from outside the individual, as opposed to intrinsic motivation, which originates inside of the individual.” [2] Being so, it has been intensively discussed that extrinsic motivational strategies have a finite term, meaning that their effectiveness may not last. This phenomenon is called replacement or over justification:
The learning environment was the first one to be gamified (from school grades to boyscouts` badges). This fact brings some topics for reflection:
Today many approaches focus on degamifiying learning environments, by criticizing the way people are submitted to tests, which fail to assess the real potential of the learner.
|
 Gamification Theories |
| {{{2}}} |
Overlapping terms:
It is impressive to see how many people are still talking and writing mistakenly about game-based learning (learning games, serious games) and naming it gamification of education, - of the classroom, - of learning and training.
The distinction between these terms is paramount: gamification regards the application of some selected game elements (points, badges, leaderboards) into non-gaming contexts, acting as extrinsic motivational tools. Many game theorists and game designers claim that “gamification” misuses the word “game” by referring to techniques that exclude the most relevant elements of game design and game thinking, suggesting “pointsification” as a better suiting label for the practice.
Thus by excluding the most relevant elements of games (those which turn the activity from a ordinary one into a ludic one, providing a full game experience), such as narrative, immersion, music, visuals and addictiveness, gamified activities or practices should not be named “games”.
Serious games and learning games provide a full game experience, differentiating themselves from gamified activities/practices. Serious games and learning games are the platform for the application of game-based learning approaches, which should be a better alternative than gamification when concerned to learning environments. Summing up, the gamification of learning processes is about bringing simple elements from games into learning environments, whereas game-based learning will bring the learning content and activities into the game, becoming then the learning environment itself.
However the gamification of content and environments is more simple and therefore faster and cheaper than the creation of a game, wherein the learning process will take place. And this is the reason why so many people have been choosing the cheap and fastest way, which may in its turn be loaded with several moral issues, to be discussed bellow.
In addition you may follow the links below, which relate to articles distinguishing gamification of learning processes of game-based learning:
Gamification vs. Game-based learning in education
Game-based learning vs. gamification
Game-based learning, gamification, game
 Web Resources |
| Link | Content |
|---|
 Additional Materials |
| Document | Content |
|---|
References
- ↑ Deterding et al. From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”. 9-15. p.10.
- ↑ http://psychology.about.com/od/eindex/f/extrinsic-motivation.htm
- ↑ Carlson, R.Neil and Heth, C. Donald (2007).Psychology of the Science of Behaviour. Pearson Education: New Jersey.