I frequently get frustrated when I talk about video games on university campuses because the conversation often turns into “Oh, do you mean gamification?” No, I don’t. I think gamification has great value for certain disciplines, but putting gamification at the forefront of what’s interesting about video games is like McDonald’s positioning ketchup as the focus of their advertising.
I stumbled across “3 Things I Wish Everyone Knew About Gamification” in one of my feeds this morning, and the author eloquently states what gamification can do well, why it’s not a solution for bad systems, and encourages educators to consider their classrooms in a holistic fashion, rather than thinking the simple addition of points to curriculum will suddenly cause their students to become more engaged.
I could quote a number of passages, but chose this reminder that good technology is a powerful too, but often requires a lot of work to provide value.
Learning how to apply the principles of gamification and methods of games-based learning effectively is not easy. Designing a class as a well-designed game is extremely difficult and time-consuming on the educator’s part. Playing a well-designed game is difficult and may be time-consuming on the part of the student. Too often, gamification is used as a band-aid, a quick-fix applied on top of a poorly-designed game.
As always, I hesitate to post anything about gamification, since it gets so much hype, without linking to Ian Bogost’s thoughts. The blog post doesn’t go as far as Bogost, but maybe if everyone talking about gamification was as thoughtful about the potential as the blog post author, Bogost wouldn’t be quite so firm in his statements. Maybe