Last year I was invited to do an interview for a local TV station. I know this isn’t a big deal for many of my game colleagues, but I don’t get on TV very often so for me it’s kind of cool. I recently found it on YouTube, so here it is.
This is Part 4 in my continuing saga of my current iteration of a gamified course.
Last time I ended with a high-level course map.
Maybe you can see why many of these “modules” actually need to be interleaved.
So that means that my pre-test idea isn’t going to work. I have something different planned for tomorrow’s post, but tune in the day after for the next step.
These are the details of each “module”:
If you are
interested in following my course journal, watch for the “Gamification 101” heading.
Also, for more information on gamification, check out my website here.
This is Part 3 in my continuing saga of my current iteration of a gamified course.
I had decided to modularize the course so I could offer my students pre-tests. This is the kind of course where many students will already know some parts but not others. My goal is to give them an opportunity to strategize – if they have sufficient competence in one of the modules, they shouldn’t have to sit through the lectures. They will still need to demonstrate competence by doing the relevant quests. Similarly, if they don’t have competence in a particular module, then that’s a sign they should be coming to those classes. Since I will be tracking their scores as well as their attendance, I will know.
So, step one is to organize modules. Previous editions of this course had topics that came from whatever textbook was being used. I want to decouple my course form the text, so I need to figure out more general topics.
Since I’ve taught the course before, the logical place to start is with my class notes.
Step One: collect all the topics that have been taught.
Step Two: sort them by theme/major topic.
Step Three: connect the dots by creating a topic map. Are there any that have a clear order? Which are prerequisites for others? Co-requisites? Which ones stand alone?
Here’s what I ended up with:
It looks all nice an compartmentalized, but while I was putting this together, I realized that I was never going to be able to teach it like this. I can’t go through each ‘module’ in order because many of them are interrelated.
Tune in tomorrow to fine out why.
If you are interested in following my course journal, watch for the “Gamification 101” heading.
Also, for more information on gamification, check out my website here.
This is Part 2 in my continuing saga of my current iteration of a gamified course.
Last time I mentioned one of the changes I implemented last year was to offer small bonuses for getting things in by a particular date. That worked quite well and so I plan to continue that.
This course is an intro to computing course and a common problem is that many students believe they already know a lot about technology and so attendance is a challenge. Given the lack of deadlines and the wide variety of options for earning points, attendance is even more of a challenge in the gamified course than it is in a ‘regular’ one. As a result, I decided I would make more of an effort to modularize the course. I intend to provide pre-tests for each module so that students will get feedback on their level of preparedness before the module is taught. The hope is that this will let students know which sections of the course they should attend and which ones they can safely skip out on. I do track attendance, so I’ll let you know how it works out.
If you are interested in following my course journal, watch for the “Gamification 101” heading.
Also, for more information on gamification, check out my website here.
I’m just about to start term with a gamified course. I’ve been developing this design for a number of years now and thought I’d provide a bit of a journal on what we I am doing and how it’s going.
My department has a tradition of having every instructor fill out a completion report at the end of every term for every section of every course that was taught. It’s a bit of a nuisance, but it has a number of wonderful benefits, some of which are:
This will be my 3rd time teaching this course, and I’ve made a number of changes. It’s a 1st year introduction to computers course, that is in many ways quite typical. We teach them a bit about hardware & software, networks, how to use Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc.
The basic design of the course is as I have described in previous posts. In the first iteration I had almost no deadlines at all and I found it hard to convince my students to submit things on a regular basis. Taking a page from the book of “Carrots are better than Sticks”, I decided to offer a few bonus points for submitting certain things by certain dates. Mathematically, it amounts to the same thing as giving late penalties, but bonus sounds so much nicer, doesn’t it? Missing out on an opportunity for a bonus may be disappointing, but not as dispiriting as having points taken away. One is more like a lost opportunity, while the other is punishment.
More and more I’m thinking that with very few exceptions, punishing students is a mistake. I’m not saying they should be able to get away with anything they want – most of my students will probably tell you that they have to work quite hard in my classes.
Somehow, the idea that a student who has managed to maintain an A, let’s say, could lose that by blowing one single test or assignment just seems illogical.
For a variety of reasons, my website for the course is not fully public, but I will provide screenshots of various things when they are appropriate.
If you are interested in following my course journal, watch for the “Gamification 101” heading.
Also, for more information on gamification, check out my website here.
Came across this: Why I’m Asking You Not to Use Laptops – Lingua Franca – Blogs – The Chronicle of Higher Education.
I suspect it is because we are starting a new school year that this topic is popping up a lot. There was a discussion about it in my department just last week. As usual, there are some people on each side of the issue (I’ve copied a few of the research articles that came out of that discussion at the bottom of this post). There’s an eery similarity between the anti group and the media effects folks (see my recent post on the APA’s pronouncement that videogames cause violent behavior). It’s often pretty clear that the researchers started off with a bias against the use of technology in class and were looking to confirm their opinions.
I’ve been using tech in my classes extensively for a long time – I create a website for each course, and as the tech develops, so does my website.
I’m familiar with some of the research on the value of writing things vs typing them, and I really like the idea of giving a set break during a class for checking email etc. (especially if it’s > 50 m.). That’s what I was thinking of when I said I thought it was a great idea. I make my students get up and walk around in longer classes too. My approach to phones and other tech would be a little different though – in my classes, I spend some time talking about the research on multi-tasking, the so-called ‘digital natives’, writing vs typing, and the effect you can have on those around you when you play games, or facebook, etc.
I try to put the focus on being courteous and considerate, but I’m not convinced that keeping phones out of sight will solve anything. Many people use phones as their main computing device.
Based on my own (admittedly biased) 35 years worth of teaching experience, I would say that tech in the class has more benefits than challenges, but you need to actively engage with it in the classroom. I think it also helps to actually teach them how to use the computer for something more than note-taking and powerpoint watching. Modeling behaviour is an important piece.
Pro:
Investigating the Benefits and Challenges of Using Laptop Computers in Higher Education Classrooms, http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1030425.pdf
Kay, Robin Holding; Lauricella, Sharon – Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 2014
The purpose of this study was to investigate the benefits and challenges using laptop computers (hereafter referred to as laptops) inside and outside higher education classrooms. Quantitative and qualitative data were collected from 156 university students (54 males, 102 females) enrolled in either education or communication studies. Benefits of…
Laptops in Classroom Interaction: The Dynamic Reach of the Laptoped Situation http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED557180.pdf
Lindroth, Tomas; Lundin, Johan; Svensson, Lars – International Association for Development of the Information Society, 2013
Laptops and other networked technologies are commonplace at university campuses. While a range of studies researches the negative effects of multitasking, screenpeeking and other laptop related side effects this article emphasize the situational impact of student-laptop interaction. Departing from Goffman’s framework on unfocused interaction and…
Descriptors: Laptop Computers, Computer Uses in Education, Educational Technology, Higher Education
Wireless Laptops as Means for Promoting Active Learning in Large Lecture Halls http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ728904.pdf
Barak, Miri; Lipson, Alberta; Lerman, Steven – Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 2006
This paper reports on a study that examined the use of wireless laptops for promoting active learning in lecture halls. The study examined students’ behavior in class and their perceptions of the new learning environment throughout three consecutive semesters. An online survey revealed that students have highly positive perceptions about the use…
Descriptors: Active Learning, Student Behavior, Educational Environment, Teacher Student Relationship
Con:
Carrier, L. M., Rosen, L. D., Cheever, N. A., & Lim, A. F. (2015). Causes, effects, and practicalities of everyday multitasking. Developmental Review, 35, 64-78.
Gaudreau, P., Miranda, D., & Gareau, A. (2014). Canadian university students in wireless classrooms: What do they do on their laptops and does it really matter?. Computers & Education, 70, 245-255.
David, P., Kim, J. H., Brickman, J. S., Ran, W., & Curtis, C. M. (2014). Mobile phone distraction while studying. New Media & Society, 1461444814531692.
Dietz, S., & Henrich, C. (2014). Texting as a distraction to learning in college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 163-167.
Gupta, N., & Irwin, J. D. (2014). In-class distractions: The role of Facebook and the primary learning task. Computers in Human Behavior.
Gingerich, A. C., & Lineweaver, T. T. (2014). OMG! Texting in class= u fail :(empirical evidence that text messaging during class disrupts comprehension. Teaching of psychology, 41(1), 44-51.
Junco, R. (2012). Too much face and not enough books: The relationship between multiple indices of Facebook use and academic performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(1), 187-198.
Junco, R., & Cotten, S. R. (2012). No A 4 U: The relationship between multitasking and academic performance. Computers & Education, 59(2), 505-514.
Jacobsen, W. C., & Forste, R. (2011). The wired generation: Academic and social outcomes of electronic media use among university students. Cyberpsychology,
Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(5), 275-280.
Fried, C. B. (2008). In-class laptop use and its effects on student learning. Computers & Education, 50(3), 906-914.
I came across this article: “Sorry, I’m Not Taking This Test” | Mother Jones.
We don’t seem to be quite as maniacal about it in Canada, but standardized testing has spread like an epidemic in the US. Without the proper perspective it has the power to completely distort what education is supposed to be. Most tests these days are about sorting students (or their teachers). Tests are the gatekeepers of advancement – if you don’t do well enough on the test, you don’t get to proceed. Who cares why?
Do you freeze up during tests? Too bad.
Were there some things you didn’t quite understand, so getting a bit more help on the material itself would have helped you far more than yet another test review? Sucks to be you, I guess.
Did you study the wrong things? Too bad. Your test says you blew it, so clearly, you aren’t good enough.
Tests can and should be used to mark a student’s progress. They can and should be used for diagnostic purposes – to let students see what they know and where they need to do more work.
They should NOT be used as the sole or even primary means of assessing a student.
EVER.
Over the years, I came to dislike giving tests and exams more and more. It bugs me that some kids can get by without doing any of the work but by being good at doing tests. It really bugs me to see students working hard all term and actually learning things, only to fall flat on an exam.
I’ve been developing a very practical approach to gamification in my classes, and my students have a great deal of choice in how they demonstrate mastery of the material. We still have quizzes and we even have a final exam (it’s called the Boss Battle, of course). The difference is that ALL of my tests are optional. Students need to earn a certain number of points in order to pass, but taking the tests is only ONE way. If they have earned enough points over the term to pass the course, then they can skip the final exam. Some do. Something fundamental changes though when the exam becomes optional – the anxiety mostly disappears, and the test goes back to being what all tests should be: a measure of the student’s progress. I have students who get to the end of term with more than enough points to earn an A+, and most of them STILL come and write the final. Cool, huh? They do it just to see how they will do – for them, it’s about personal feedback. If they already have an A+, there is NOTHING they can do to wreck that.
Think about this for a bit: I have students who CHOOSE to write a final exam that can in no way affect their mark.
APA Says Video Games Make You Violent, but Critics Cry Bias.
It’s disappointing, but really not surprising to see the APA come out with a pronouncement like this.
It is pretty clear that the approach was (as it often is) intended to “prove” a conclusion they had already decided was true.
Since at least the Columbine school shooting in 1999—when both researchers and the media speculated that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold went on a killing spree because they were denied access to the violent computer games—we have been studying and arguing about whether violent video games create violent urges in players. In 2013, the American Psychological Association (APA) announced the creation of the Task Force on Violent Media. The seven-member task force was charged with conducting a “meta-analysis,” or review of existing literature, to determine whether video game violence can and does lead to real-world violence.
So, based on speculation (that, by the way has since been shown to be pretty thin) they decided to go out and prove that video game violence causes violent behavior. Hmmmm, not what I’d call good science.
The problem, though, is that many experts think the APA’s findings are junk science. In 2013, a large group of researchers—more than 230, including academics from Harvard, Yale and Columbia universities—took issue with the APA, the task force and its research methodology. In an open letter, the group called the APA’s policy statements on violent video games “misleading and alarmist” and said they “delineated several strong conclusions on the basis of inconsistent or weak evidence.”
For some of those researchers, Thursday’s announcement is confirmation that the APA has it in for video games. “The literature is beset with methodology flaws and I don’t think this report addresses those flaws,” says Dr. T.A. Ceranoglu, a psychiatrist at Massachusetts General Hospital who signed the 2013 letter.
Existing research on violent video games has “vague and inconsistent” definitions of aggression and violence, he says. While the APA’s report acknowledges this problem (“The violent video game literature uses a variety of concepts, terms, and definitions in considering aggression and aggressive outcomes…”), it does not attempt to solve it.
If they really wanted to find out the truth, then this should be getting much more attention than it is:
“I think it’s causing us to miss a bigger picture,” he says. “These violent video games are played all around the world, but we have a much higher violence rate in the U.S. than other countries, like Japan, and we can’t explain why that difference is.”
…
Ferguson is unconvinced. “People have to remember that groups like the American Psychological Association—of which I’m a fellow, by the way—are guilds. They do not exist to provide people with objective facts. They exist to promote the profession. It’s to their advantage to identify problems that psychologists can run in and fix. It is not to their advantage to say ‘we don’t know’ or ‘the evidence is all over the place’ or ‘there’s nothing we can do to help you.'”
“This seems to be a pattern with the APA,” he adds. “We’re talking about an organization that was caught colluding in the real torture of real people in real life and now they’re turning around and wagging their hand about people playing video games?”
If you are also tired of these sort of biased proclamations, sign this scholars’ open letter to the APA calling on them to retire their policy statements on media violence: https://www.scribd.com/doc/223284732/Scholar-s-Open-Letter-to-the-APA-Task-Force-On-Violent-Media-Opposing-APA-Policy-Statements-on-Violent-Media
Don’t get me wrong – the interaction of violent videogames (and movies, television, books, etc.) concerns me deeply. I just think that this is a much more complex issue than they want us to believe. Personally, I worry far more about the popularity of reality shows where deception and bullying are passed off as entertainment than I do about violence in videogames. The problem really isn’t with the games (or the shows, much as I hate them) – the problem is with a society that finds this acceptable. Banning any of these things will not solve the problem. The problem will only be solved when we figure out what’s really at the root of the anger and hatred that popularizes these things and begin to deal with that.
There’s also a CBC radio bit on this that’s worth listening to.
