Why Gamification Is So Often Just Kissing a Pig in a Dress

I'm skeptical of gamification. Actually, more than that, I think gamification is more often than not harmful to meaningful learning.

I know it's like the hot thing right now and everybody's doing it and if you want to write a book that everyone will love then you have to do it, but I still have my concerns. I'm also concerned about that run-on sentence, but let's just move past it.

To be clear, the fundamental concept is not problematic to me, but the implementation is, especially when gamification is the backbone of a unit of study. I say this knowing full well that some people are doing amazing things with gamification and getting kids engaged in learning who otherwise would have shut down and disengaged. I see the value there, but so often teachers ride into battle on the gamification horse only to completely lose track of what's important.

And let's be real here: points are not a new thing, even if they lead to incentives and leveling up instead of a grade. It's the same thing. We just put the pig in a dress and called it a princess.

This is why I'm skeptical of gamification. Too often we use it to package outdated practices in a way that makes them look new and innovative. I can take worksheets and lectures and gamify them. I can grab a textbook from the 90s and gamify it.

Here's the truth: Gamification doesn't change anything about teaching and learning.

And here's the scarier truth: Gamification can take the focus away from the learning and turn students into an exaggerated version of the points-hungry monsters we see with traditional grades, where all they care about is how many points they can earn, and the learning becomes secondary.

If earning is more important than learning, we have failed our students.

However, let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. There are elements of gaming that, when applied to education, can truly be revolutionary.

Element 1:

Let's consider the following idiotic scenarios:

• When you fail at a level in a video game, for your next attempt, you can only complete 70% of the level. 
• A video game has a one-hour time limit for each level, and as long as you complete 60% of the level, you get to move on. 
• You only get one chance to play a level. If you die, you don't get another chance. 

If a game used any of those elements, no one would play it. You know why kids love video games? Because they get the opportunity to demonstrate mastery, learn from failure, get immediate feedback, spend as much time as they need on each level, and feel an ultimate feeling of success after struggling.

You know what we so often don't do in our schools? All of those things.

• "This unit is two weeks long. No matter what score you get, we have to move on."
• "Late work? Sorry, that's only worth 70%."
• "Don't worry about your 60%. You can still move on."

Those sentences suck and should be outlawed from classrooms. Will it happen? Unfortunately not. Can you outlaw them from your own classroom? Yes, and you should right now.

Here's what gaming gets right, and what gamification should truly be: mastery-based learning. 

Element 2:

I still can picture playing Super Mario and constantly choosing to run underneath some block instead of jumping up and running across them, only to find I'd made a horrible choice and had to run back or face the inevitable death from some turtle throwing fireballs. A little more recently (I still have an Xbox 360, so recent is a very relative term with me), I loved playing Skyrim. I could be any character I wanted, choose any armor I wanted, accomplish all these cool side quests, and still progress towards the ultimate goal of defeating the dragons and saving the world. 

Now, compare this to how most classrooms operate. You all start in the same place, proceed along the same path (typically just following the teacher), are corralled back onto said path whenever you stray, and have little to no control over the process or product. 

So often we're like, "Naw, that's not my classroom. I let my students choose their seats and they got to do either a poster or a slideshow for their last project."

Okay, so I'll revise my previous statement to this: "You all start in the same place, proceed along the same path (typically just following the teacher), are corralled back onto said path whenever you stray, and have little to no control over the process or product (except that you get to sit with your friends and choose one of two things, neither of which you like)."

Am I being harsh? Yes. Is this entirely in our control as teachers? Unfortunately, no. However, it's our job to push back and find new ways to allow our students MEANINGFUL choices and AUTHENTIC ownership over their learning. 

If no one would ever play a game with prescribed steps the whole way to a prescribed outcome, why then are we surprised when students hate to go to schools that operate in that fashion?

Abrupt Conclusion

There may be a few more, but this is what I'm getting at: at the deepest levels, kids like games because they get to master something and make choices to pursue what they care about so that they can feel competent at something that matters to them. 

Let's make classrooms that do the same. No more making kids feel unsuccessful at things they don't care about. Let's work on creating classrooms where kids get to struggle towards success in something that's important to them. If you want to make it flashy after that and add points, fine. Go for it. 

But stop slapping dresses on pigs, calling it gamification, and pretending you've changed the game. You didn't. You're still kissing a pig, and if you need incentive to do something different, just pretend that pig kiss just turned a little French. If anything can inspire people to do something different, I'd bet that the mental image of someone French kissing a pig should do it. 

So please, before I extend this image any more, let's start doing gamification in meaningful ways that empower kids in our classrooms.