Fair game: More teachers are ‘gaming’ during lessons, but is it safe?

Games are shaking up the classroom – not as a student distraction but as a new learning mode.

Gamification – the implementation of gamelike elements – is becoming increasingly common, especially in education.

Essentially, it means “deriving all the fun and addicting elements found in games and applying them to real-world or productive activities,” according to Yu-kai Chou, an expert in gamification.

Language learning app Duolingo is a n example of this change. Since 2011, its 500 million worldwide users have been lured by vibrant green designs and curious caricatures.

A case study by Raw Studio analyzed just how Duolingo achieved its success and position as “the world’s most popular” app of its kind.

From an overload of encouraging notifications, to creating a linear model to allow learners to feel a sense of accomplishment, to adding features of “scarcity,” which in turn creates a sense of impatience, the app known for its owl icon has thrived under offerings to match the idiosyncrasies of the human mind.

Forest, a productivity-focused app, relies on a similar linear progress model.

When a user opens the app, a seed is planted on their screen, and throughout their work/study session, the tree will begin to grow. Should the person leave the app during the scheduled spell, the plant perishes.

These apps are generally accepted as positive options for boosting cognitive function, according to Verywell Health and other organizations.

What happens when these mechanisms are used in schools is less cut-and-dried, though.

ClassDojo is an education-centered app that uses gamification.

It allows teachers to track and manage classroom behavior through a points-based reward system.

The Class Dojo website includes the line “The future of learning looks a lot like play.”

While ClassDojo aims to improve classroom behavior, IXL Math hopes young learners can “gain fluency and confidence in math” with the help of their platform.

Immediately upon entering the website, visitors are greeted with a colorful pop-up boasting a glistening gold trophy and an even more striking statistic: “1 in 4 students use IXL for academic help and enrichment.”

The website features age-specific courses allowing students to increase proficiency. Students’ paces, accuracy and achievements are reported in vivid hues, similar to a summary after a video game.

There’s research to support these learning programs and gimmicks.

According to the UC Berkeley Center for Teaching & Learning, gamification allows students to exercise more control over their learning.

Studies cited by the university argue that learning, motivation, performance and engagement are all improved when courses are gamified.

Keen Ethics, a software development company that claims to encourage tech companies to consider ethics when developing technology, says the positives of gamification outweigh potential negatives.

One benefit, they said, is that “leaderboards, timers, awards, and other game-like components cause dopamine release in the brain, making the educational process far more addicting.”

David Crump, the director of behavioral health at Spokane Public Schools, agrees with these studies. He’s witnessed gamification help with everything from language deficiency to memory.

“It gives them permission to try and succeed, and if done really well, its high teacher engagement gives immediate feedback,” he said.

Crump also has witnessed learners become more empathetic towards one another, he said.

Many oppose this optimistic perspective, however. The North Carolina Employment Security Commission mentioned numerous harmful aspects linked to the trend.

To start, the use of a points-focused system may teach students to seek tokens or rewards, not knowledge. The commission also stated that because of learners’ desire to vie for awards, they’re being exploited.

Additionally, “gamification can raise ethical issues, such as manipulation,” the commission said. “It can be used to influence learners’ behavior, choices and emotions, without their full consent or awareness.”

Even more startling is the potential incentive for cheating that’s associated with educational gaming.

Crump recognizes that these issues exist. He feels that the key to the successful use of gamified technology is “integrating (games) into a learning lesson to help teach, and to help to get to the point that it’s not winning the game or achieving a level.”

Instead, these apps should be treated as elements of lessons, with the teacher supervising students. This powerful technology must not be folded into “video game culture,” he noted.

In light of these statistics and opinions, educators are faced with a tough decision: to use or ignore such a popular learning system.

Rachel Myers, a fourth-grade teacher at Cataldo Catholic School, uses gamified platforms including Kahoot!, Splash Learn and Moby Max.

She’s seen multiple positive effects with the technology; higher participation, including for “quieter, more reserved students,” is one benefit. Parents also share that “students go home and teach their family members the games,” meaning they’re gaining extra exposure to the content.

This has raised test scores, “especially on vocabulary tests and on Washington state history,” Myers said in an email interview.

She is cautious when her class gets too competitive. But by teaching them to avoid focusing on the speed or other metrics, the apps can be used effectively.

The teacher of 10 years does think educators can be approachable for the modern learner without relying on gamified technology.

“Have compassion,” she said, “be kind, patient, gather evidence, adapt and adjust.”