Tag Archive for Rewards

Gamification, Games-based learning, and Serious games

April 20, 2014 Theory No comments

In Gamification, Games-based Learning, and Serious Games – Any difference? Bhasin argues that there is no difference between the three. Suggesting that “gamification, games-based learning, and serious games are effectively the same thing, because in a corporate environment, all learning relates to strategic objectives and has serious purpose”. Bhasin then attributes this to the rise in popularity of games, and attributes the following to its traction:

  • Marketplaces forces
  • The connection between games and learning in children (noting “brain scientists the world over agree that the games’ challenge-achievement-reward loop promotes the production of dopamine in the brain, reinforcing our desire to play”)
  • Rising interest among adults in games (reports on statistics about gamer demographics)

Bhasin then moves on to discuss the design of gamification. He opens with “it is the mechanics of the game – not the theme – that make it fun (Zichermann and cunningham)” However from experience in the boardgames community theme can be the deciding factor in engagement with the game, and it is well noted that pasted-on themes provide for a less engaging experience.

After discussing the best use of leaderboards he outlines some other gamification elements that could be used. The focus on leaderboards and competition shows the authors hasn’t really considered the benefits on other elements in a meaningful way. The other game mechanics listed include, pattern recognition, collecting, surprise and unexpected delight, organizing and creating order, gifting, recognition of achievements, leading others, being the hero, and gaining status.

by the end of the post I feel like Bhasin has just cherry-picked some of Brenda Enders work to focus on. Further investigation of Brenda Enders work (noted as “Gamification, Games and Learning: What Managers and Practitioners Need to Know”, 2013). When discussing interactivity and feedback Bhasin focuses on Enders best practice for challenges. He then expands on this with James Paul Gee’s ideas on risk taking, challenges and consolidation, story telling and briefly touches on motivation. Then finishes off the the SAPS model of rewards (Status, Access, Power, Stuff).

 

References
Bhasin, K., (2014) Gamification, Games-based Learning, and Serious Games – Any difference?, Learning Solutions Magazine. 27th January, 2014. http://www.learningsolutionsmag.com/articles/1337/gamification-game-based-learning-serious-games-any-difference. Accessed 16/04/2014.

 

Badges workshop at ANU

March 22, 2014 Badges, Game Elements, Projects No comments
open badges anatomy

I was lucky enough to get in on a Badges lecture and workshop happening at the Australian National University (ANU) 20-21st March 2014. Here is what we covered, sprinkled with some of my own thoughts.

Day 1 – Badges Lecture – By Joyce Seitzinger

Joyce gave a great introduction about personal learning networks, and the importance of informal learning within those networks. Joyce engaged the class with a quick activity to map out individual use of online tools that can facilitate this process. This was all mapped to a matrix of degree of use (visitor to resident), and the purpose (personal to institutional). Here is mine as example. This exercise demonstrated how much I use the internet for one, but more importantly how much I learn informally, and how this shapes who I am, and the kind of leaner I have become.

We soon moved on to pathways of learning, and a desire to move towards a model that was less prescriptive. Allowing the learner to construct their own path and how badges may be key to drawing these diverse learnings together. Using examples of some insulated systems such as Duolingo and Code Academy as badge issuers, this shows how open badges could pull this all together. However, these example systems offered badges and recognition that was not transferable.

Learning Pathways

Towards the end of the lecture we got to badges, what they are, what they mean, how they can be used, and a discussion on trust economies. Joyce did drop that Mozilla are working on a app store concept for badges, something like their beginner badge earning offerings. I’m quite eager to see where this might lead. Since one of the flaws of that systems was identifying what options to earn badges were available, which in turn made getting started with your back just that little bit harder. It also has the potential to improve the MOOC space, just the about a catalog of courses across different systems gets me excited.

open badges anatomy

 

Day 2 – Workshop – By Joyce Seitzinger and Inger Mewburn

This was an opportunity to roll up are sleeves and start thinking about the design process for a badge. The attendees were split into three groups to think about how they might design a badge related to research skills. For this we worked through the digital me badge development guide. In all three cases is was hard to develop one badge in isolation without considering the eco-system. For example our Research Ninja badge end up being awarded after the learner had earned a number of other smaller badges that mapped to smaller tasks.

We also discussed a number of other projects, initiatives and examples, including:

It will be interesting to see what ANU do with this insignia project. The student me is jumping for joy at the potential for having informal learning recognized. However I have become very jaded having working the the Higher Education sector. I am aware that what I see now and the potential is not likely to the the tools I may well receive. If you are interested make sure you keep posted on the project here - Insignia project.

Motivating Learners – Just add badges right?

September 7, 2013 Badges, Game Elements, Gamification, Theory No comments

Reading through Play As You Learn: Gamification as a Technique for Motivating Learners (2013) by Ian Glover gives an overview of the current state of gamification, with particular relevance to  education. Glover first states the three basic parts of most games:

  • Goal-focused activity
  • Reward mechanics
  • Progress tracking

Glover then notes some current uses of gamification including popular social network FourSquare.

Eventually gets to the good stuff, and touches on some criticism of gamification. These included the detriment of providing extrinsic rewards for learners who are intrinsically motivated, the addictive behaviours often associated with certain personality types (notes from Zichermann, 2011), the competitiveness of leaderboards (Williams, 2012), and the types of engagement when gamification is removed (Thoma, Millen, and DiMicco, 2012).

Glover’s main points include the following

  • Careful consideration needs to be taken before the application of gamification to learning
  • Providing extrinsic motivation for intrinsically motivated learners is detrimental
  • Gamification in earning should therefore be optional
  • Popular Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) and LMSs (Learning Management Systems) provide an ideal opportunity, with tracking data already available
  • Rewards need to be desirable to all learner to motivate behavior
  • Gamifiation can be applied to non-electronic contexts

 

My references

Glover, Ian (2013) Play as you learn: gamification as a technique for motivating learners. In: HERRINGTON, Jan, COUROS, Alec and IRVINE, Valerie, (eds.) Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2013. Chesapeake, VA, AACE , 1999-2008. http://shura.shu.ac.uk/7172/

 

Glover’s References
Thom, J., Millen, D., & DiMicco, J. (2012). Removing gamification from an enterprise SNS. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW ’12), 1067-1070. Accessed: 27/11/2012 -http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2145204.2145362.

Williams, J. (2012). The Gamification Brain Trust: Intrinsically Motivating People to Change Behavior (part 2). Gamesbeat, Panel discussion, Wallace, M. [chair], Accessed: 26/11/2012 – http://venturebeat.com/2012/09/22/the-gamification-brain-trustintrinsically-motivating-people-to-change-behavior-part-2/#h8geQcI5BUyR5Ihv.99

Zichermann, G. (2011). Gamification has issues, but they aren’t the ones everyone focuses on. [Editorial] O’Reilly Radar. Accessed: 26/11/2012 – http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/06/gamification-criticism-overjustification-ownership-addiction.html

Rewards. Means I get a trophy right?

July 20, 2013 Game Design, Game Mechanics, Theory No comments

Rewards are a natural part of games and gamification. They appear to create the motivation to engage in a given behaviour. This is true pf many things. Most (if not all) games systems have a reward involved from board games, to digital games, and even other things that have been “gamified”.

Rewards can be either intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic rewards in games are where the player engages in the action for the simple enjoyment or pleasure of the task. Extrinsic rewards are those that would grant a reward that does not have application to the immediate task, eg grinding away in World of Warcraft (WoW) for that one amazing sword you must have. Both types of rewards have their values.

In Extra Credits Season 6 Episode Intrinsic or Extrinsic they discuss the ideas of both motivations. The narrator notes that all games should be made wholly with intrinsic rewards, were playing the game would be its own reward. While this is a great idea I find that this would not really appeal to me. Whilst I am not the first person to shoot my hand up to grind out a day for an awesome shield or some other similar reward, I see and feel the appeal. The narrator does come to note that building wholly intrinsically motivating games is unlikely.

Val Teixeira (2013) hits the nail on the head, different people are have different motivations. Some people are motivated by extrinsic rewards, while others are a motivated by the intrinsic nature of games. Which brings to mind the Bartle player types, perhaps the style of player influences motivation? What is more interesting perhaps is to what extent each gamer is motivated to engage with the game where only extrinsic rewards are presented.

Back to gamification, one of the most common methods of this is the application of badges, trophys or other such rewards to non-game processes. These are always extrinsic rewards. So, why for so many people do they stay engaged when clearly there is no intrinsic motivator? An answer I’d like to know. Recently Steam released a new method of extrinsic rewards, cards. It motivates gamers to play certain games in order to attain digital cards. Cards are not, by default, available for all games. It will be interesting to see the development of Steam cards over time. Not just of the community but the patterns of play. Will frequent gamers abandon the games they have put hours into, just to start playing new games that offer them opportunities to get the cards?

 

Further Reading

Games and motivation

Reward Systems

Bartle Player Types

 

Resources

Penny Arcade (2013) ‘Episode 01 – Intrinsic or Extrinsic’ Extra Credits, Season 6. Accessed 18/07/2013.

Val Teixeira (2013) ‘Rewarding players’ Boardgamegeek.com. Accessed 18/07/2013. http://boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/21342/rewarding-players

Valve (2013) http://store.steampowered.com/news/10946/