Prompt: Why is it so difficult to bring gamification to K-12 when it appears to be happening in the corporate training world?
When considering the prompt, the initial question instead should be: to what degree should gamification be integrated into K-12 education? One could argue that gamification has already been implemented within the K-12 environment for decades. From a kindergartener selecting a toy from the treasure chest as a reward for good behavior to a high schooler getting a high score in the pre-test Kahoot! review, gamification already has had an impact on student learning.
Students receive awards for successful marks in their academics; these usually come in the form of a letter grade. “Our current grading system encourages competition among and between students. When you consider how grades determine class rank, access to certain classes, opportunities for extracurricular activities, and the subsequent stratification results, how much are they truly representative of knowledge or understanding?” (Shelton, 2021). Students are rewarded with the corresponding grade dependent on how well they play by the rules of the game. Was the work turned in on time? Did the work meet all the rubric requirements? Were the test scores measured by the student’s ability to memorize content? School is a game, and if you play the game well then you Level-Up to higher ed where the game continues.
Should gamified theories and course design have a stronger hold in K-12 education? Perhaps. After all, gamification is rooted in the theory of behaviorism and the foundational conditioning of animalistic instincts (Ju, 2020). The positive enforcement is the grade for a job well done, and the negative reinforcement is the poor grade for poor marks.
Yet, what if a larger gamified-structured curriculum was developed to reward/remediate students? This gamified learning system would be reminiscent of the previous discussions on personalized learning paths and the integration of artificial intelligence technologies. Students could follow their personalized learning path, which includes gamified design principles, such as: “goals and challenges, personalization, rapid feedback, visible feedback, freedom of choice, freedom to fail, and social engagement” (Wang, 2022).
Will (2022) argues that now is the time to implement systematic change within schools. The pandemic forced educators to rethink traditional education and implement new ways of learning. One positive outcome of the pandemic teaching was that it forced educators to put an emphasis on student-centered learning, rather than on testing requirements and meeting benchmarks (Will, 2022). The months ahead will determine the overall impact of the pandemic on student education. Will educators go back to their old, archaic ways? Or do we take this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reinvent education that is more student-focused, challenging, personalized, and full of choice? Will this be the springboard to gamify learning?
Resources
Ju, H. (2020). Gamification education – behaviorist theory. Gamification Education – Behaviorist Theory. Retrieved September 26, 2022, from https://www.gamification.education/learning-theories/behaviorist-theory
Shelton, K. (2021, June 9). Grading is capitalist, racist, and exploitative. Medium. Retrieved September 26, 2022, from https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/grading-is-capitalist-racist-and-exploitative-423c0c04742c
Wang, Y.-F., Hsu, Y.-F., & Fang, K. (2022). The key elements of gamification in corporate training – The delphi method. Entertainment Computing, 40, 100463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2021.100463
Will, M. (2022, September 15). Teachers are ready for systemic change. are schools? Education Week. Retrieved September 26, 2022, from https://www.edweek.org/leadership/teachers-are-ready-for-systemic-change-are-schools/2022/09
