The Gamification Hexad Saves My Classroom! Guest Blog

User types and learning v2 The Gamification Hexad Saves My Classroom Guest Blog
User Types and Learning v2

Andrzej Marczewski

Gamification Consultant with Motivait. I love to write about it, talk about it and bore people to death with it! If you really want to get to know me, check out the About page.

You may also like...

7 Responses

  1. Carl Eacott says:

    Hi Scott, thanks to you and Andrzej for sharing!

    Are you able to share what was actually gamified in the classroom? 🙂 Did you determine at an individual level who fit what Player Type? As a result of knowing the Types, how was that information used to inform your classroom gamification designs?

    Also, just putting on my ‘social science hat’, it would be interesting to understand a bit more about how you know the observed grade increases were attributed to the gamification intervention.
    – Of course, higher grade attainments and engagement is excellent nonetheless, just keen to understand it a bit more 🙂

    If I understand the context right, as a research design you a ‘between-subjects’ comparison – testing for grade differences between two different groups, last years group and this years group. With this type of design, it can be difficult to demonstrate – reliably – that the effects are attributed to the gamification effort, or other possible determinants of learning and grade attainment. For instance, if the current group were the same ones you taught last year (without gamification), then any other possible determinant factors would remain constant, therefore providing greater reliability in the gamification effect (i.e. the intervention/treatment)).

    One example for instance, this years group could of had greater cognitive ability than previous years (i.e. a strong determinant of learning and academic attainment). Do you have any information on how well the current years class has performed in other classes, e.g. their previous years classes, or this year?

    • Hi Carl

      Have a chat with Scott who wrote the post. He also has a book out now about this method. You can find him on twitter @MrHebertPE or his website http://www.mrhebert.org

      🙂

      • Carl Eacott says:

        Hi Andrzej – thanks for the sign-post! 🙂

        • Hello Carl!

          Thanks for the questions!

          Everything in the classroom is gamified and runs the whole year. It has an overarching story and a running narrative, players select avatars at the beginning of the year, they earn a game currency and there is a card based reward system. I also have mystery, death/penalties, chance and so much more. As well as Andrzej’s Hexad I utilized Yu-kai’s Octalysis model of our 8 Core Drivers to ensure I had all elements. By using both models I was able to create work (quests) and motivators (rewards) for each player type and motivational type which allowed for different students to the take the lead on different tasks as well as different motivators so everyone feels connected to the game at some point.

          When it comes to grade tracking, at this point, it is a sole comparison between the previous year (their grade 7 year of science) and this year (grade 8 sciences). While I know scientifically this is not the greatest proof (as you mentioned) the engagement and connection to the material has truly sky rocketed. Having taught the course for 2 years prior without a gamification model applied to it the students often lacked the enthusiasm and drive I was looking for and since applying Gamification it has grown exponentially. I do have access to their other grades this year and most do reflect the strong showing I am having in science. In other cases, it does show a noticeable improvement in compared to other core programs. When questioned, students often tell me it is because they are “more engaged” or “more connected” to the materials in comparison to other programs/courses that they take.

          As a side here, I believe we put too much emphasis on grades at young ages instead of building an interest in the topic/subject/materials. When a student is engaged they often achieve higher compared to just getting by because they have to. For many the disconnect between the material and their lives proves too much and failure is not even a deterrent to some. So using this approach, I am wrapping in real, up to date science, mixing in their curriculum and creating something they truly want to be a part of. Less emphasis on grades (although, to be clear I do assess and grade as required) but more emphasis on connecting students to the sciences to hopefully create a want to learn more in the future as they progress further into school.

          Lastly, the results have been strong for student who want to take and learn science as they move into grade 9. The cohort I taught last year is continuing well at their new school and many parents have e-mailed me expressing that their children now enjoy the sciences more than they had in the past. Their gamified year peaked their interest so many are doing well and continuing the trend upwards where they left off. I will continue to monitor this as I progress forward both anecdotally and statistically.

          Hope that helps clear up some things Carl!

          Also, thanks for following me on Twitter 😛

          All the best,

          Scott

  2. Just read it! It’s really good, although, I don’t share the view of Scott on the Disruptor. As much as they are actually disrupting the class, it’s not their player type most of the time. I’ve also been studying the 4MAT model on learning styles and 90% of the time (we run the test in my school every semester) those kids who tend to be disruptors, are actually Style 4 learners which are the kind of people who need space and opportunity.

    Style 4 learners do not need as many guides as the rest of students and are pretty hard to deal with because the education system of the world is based on their opposite style (number 2) which requires them to sit and listen.

    Take a read on the 4MAT model and I ensure you will understand your students a thousand times better.

    I would simply say that the Disruptor learns best under environments where they kind of “disrupt freely”.

    • Thanks for the insight Bernardo.

      I actually do share the same viewpoint on disruptors but it was tough to encapsulate in a shorter Blog post. I used the terms I did to keep up with the Gamification model.

      From my experience these students can thrive as a Type 4 learner (new to the 4MAT but it does make sense) but it also has to be an environment they trust, that is supportive and provides guidance. The type of student I am referring to as the disruptor is the student who is disinterested in school or attention seeking (to put it generally). If you put these students in an environment where they can disrupt freely it needs to be one designed for their success.

      Picturing the students I have that fall under that category it would be a recipe for disaster without the proper guidance but with the proper implementation great results could emerge so I totally agree . This is why when I have a particularly disinterested student in a class or subject (despite our best efforts as educators there is always one – even in my gamified classroom no less!) I try to keep them around an achiever or a player that I trust to help them build up some interest and boost their overall engagement or interest. Then when we have established the trust factor I let them flourish and “disrupt freely” as you said with some experimentation and all that good stuff. So far it has been working for me.

      Hope that made sense … 🙂

      Thanks for the comment!

  1. May 26, 2017

    […] to change the need for a final A,B,C grade, if you create a conversion matrix. Obviously creating full fantasy experience would be cool and, as it is beginning to appear, […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

thirteen + 14 =

I accept the Privacy Policy