Discussion Board #3 Gamification
Transcription:
Roblyer and Hughes (2019) describe technology-based games as a bridge between the worlds of education, gaming, and entertainment with elements such as badges, virtual trophies, and levels of play. When digital games include educational content, they have the potential to increase the achievement scores of students. The authors cite the results of 34 studies examining the benefits of games in education and found that those benefits include “(1) increased motivation and competition, (2) interactivity and feedback, (3) achievement and rewards, and (4) playfulness” (Roblyer & Hughes, 2019, p. 179).
Educational games are not all of the same caliber. Teachers need to be sure that the digital tools they select meet certain qualifications in order to not waste valuable instructional time. Tools that are simply fun but have no educational value are good for recreation or down-time, but they should not have a place in the classroom. In the twenty-fourth chapter of the Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, research by Zapata-Rivera and Shute (2008) support that it is critically important that new technologies be evaluated under controlled conditions to gauge the value-added of these expensive technologies in comparison to their effectiveness in improving student learning.
Digital tools should meet the following criteria to be considered for classroom use. Roblyer and Hughes (2019) describe eight criteria for choosing a digital tool.
| Game development | Is the game designed by a reputable developer with a history of creating educational products? Has an independent researcher studied the game? |
| Curricular value | Does the game have high-quality content with timely feedback and scaffolding mechanisms? Does the content match the learning level of the student? |
| Pedagogical framework | What is the learning theory that is built into the game (direct or constructivist learning theories)? Is it adaptable based on learner actions? |
| Assessment capabilities | How is assessment built into the game, what types of assessment are used, and how is this information used and reported? |
| Social, societal, and cultural considerations | Is the game free of violence and stereotypes? |
| Playfulness and motivation | Does the game include playful elements that motivate the learner to pursue challenges? |
| Technical considerations | Are the system requirements compatible with the classroom’s computing setting? |
| Physical dexterity | Do the students have the physical dexterity to play the game? |
I tutor several students in language arts. Some of those students have reading disabilities. I have found that a combination of direct instruction and digital reinforcement is successful. Nessy is one of the reading programs that I use because it meets all of the above criteria. I teach reaching with Orton-Gillingham methods for direct instruction and reinforce with Nessy.
One particular student is very difficult to motivate, but I have discovered that I can convince him to work with me for 15-20 minutes at a time if I promise him 30 minutes of “playtime” on Nessy. When I first set him up with this program, he completed a reading assessment, and the program prescribed an order of lessons for him based on the data from that assessment. However, I changed the settings so that I can manually choose the lessons and the order that I want for him. I took my scope and sequence that I use for teaching reading, and I adjusted the settings on Nessy. He is now practicing on Nessy the same skills in the same order that I am introducing them to him. I have been very surprised at how motivated my student is to complete lessons toward his most recent goal – The Banana Trophy! As he completes reading lessons, he earns virtual bananas toward that goal. He has gone from being combative and manipulative during our lessons to being cooperative and eager to get on with it. He’s not any more intrinsically motivated to learn to read than he had been (at least not yet), but Nessy is sneaking in the educational content anyway, and I have seen his reading improve since I added this into his schedule. This is one program out of many that I have found to meet the criteria for achieving a successful outcome. Not all programs will work with all our students. In addition to evaluating them with criteria, we must also keep in mind the individual needs and interests of our students.
References
Roblyer, M. D., & Hughes, J. E. (2019). Integrating educational technology into teaching: Transforming learning across disciplines. Pearson Education, Inc.
Zapata-Rivera, D., & Shute, V. (2008). Adaptive Technologies. In J. M. Spector, D. Jonassen, M. Driscoll, M. D. Merrill, & J. Van Merrienboer (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (3rd ed., pp. 279–292). essay, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.