Week 6 Gamification
and Open Education Blog
Essential Question:
What is the implication of player type on game design?
After
taking multiple quizzes on what type of gamer type I am, my realization is that
I felt very uncomfortable with all of the gamer language that was used and
found that sometimes I wasn’t sure what I would do in the situation that was
given. With this said, I went ahead and answered as if I was a full-blown
player of games and see what type of results would come up. I am mainly a
socialite gamer type but also I have tendencies to be a gamer of an explorer
game type. Upon reflection, the results of the tests I took were fairly
accurate because the characteristics given for each does reflect my own
characteristics. Kiang explains that explorers “love to figure out games, has
fun from discovery, collects knowledge and little-known facts, and enjoys
teaching others.” (2016) He also lays out the characteristics of socializer
game types to be individuals who seek interaction with other players, play
mainly to gain friends and a part of a clan, and enjoy being recognized by
their co-players in the game. The lists that explain both a socialite and
explorer gamers do speak to me as an educator, a student, and even a gamer (I
think I need to play a little bit more often to be considered a gamer but…).
Being that
there are four foundational types of gamers, a teacher can use this knowledge
to have all aspects in gamifying their classroom. Most people fall in the three
types of achievers, socialites, and explorers and very few fall in the killer
gamer type (Kiang, 2016). Having the knowledge of which students have what
gamer type is key in having successful gamified activities in the classroom
because you can use each type of gamer to help the class be a great learning
environment. For example, if there is a complicated aspect such as making your
own virtual reality, the educator (or even students) should seek out a student
that has the gamer type of explorer who wants to figure out the game and
doesn’t really need to power ups or badges to figure out or even teach others.
Dixon does warn educators not to take to heart all of the implications of gamer
types outside of games meaning in gamification situations. Rather he explains
to do more research how gamer types might help or even hinder in gamified
services (2011).
The fact
that people (students specifically) learn differently is not new to education.
Educators learn early in their teacher prep program that there are tactile,
audio, and visual learners. So it should not be a surprise that people
(students specifically) play and enjoy games in a different manner than others.
As teachers who might gamify our classrooms, we need to consider these
different gamer types. I myself would gear to activities or parts of the
gamified class of figuring out all the elements that I can do to maybe help
others gain life and it would be nice to have a little bit of life game myself.
Dixon, D. (2011).
Player types and gamification. CHI 2011, May 7–12, 2011,
Vancouver, BC, Canada. ACM 978-1-4503-0268-5/11/05.
Kiang, D. (2016).
Use the four gamer types to help your students collaborate: Edudemic. Retrieved from http://edtechteacher.org/use-the-four-gamer-types-to-help-your-students-collaborate-from-douglas-kiang-on-edudemic/
Mariah- I found myself thinking the same way. Some of the questions I don’t think I would do but answered them the best way I can. I did take two quizzed and both of them said I was an explorer which I think that is what I would be if I played games more. I like what you said here, “Having the knowledge of which students have what gamer type is key in having successful gamified activities in the classroom because you can use each type of gamer to help the class be a great learning environment.” I think that is true, but wonder if these quizzes we took are the best one to figure out what type of gamer they are. I am sure they are students like me who don’t play games at all or very little. It would be interesting to find out.
ReplyDeleteMariah,
ReplyDeleteFocusing on achievers, socialites and explorers seems to me to be a positive focus for classroom activities. I like to think of the killer as a risk taker instead; especially for in class gaming.
I think achievers would do well to stretch their focus over into the explorer and socializer realms as well. Maybe a game could be designed for achievers who like to collect to have a reason for those items to benefit the group, rather than just collecting to gain the most of anything (points, levels up, graphic embellishments).
It is so true that educators have been seeking to teach to a variety of learning modalities for years. I think the biggest change came when Public Law 94-142 was enacted in 1976, stating that we could not just push students out of school for having serious learning challenges. This stretched to the students who have a variety of different learning needs. Then we included the gifted and talented. I think now we are actually at a point where we can get past much of the wording/labeling and just plan for students. The biggest hang-up, in my view, seems to be the issue of how to grade students who are included with the class; yet. at the same time, can not reach the goals at the same level as many of their peers. Gaming environments allows for all to succeed and be a part of the whole environment.
I am in total agreement. I did the same thing and there were some quiz questions I just picked an answer because I wasn't sure. I guess that is why there are so many questions so that a few questions you don't know probably don't really matter. I like how at the end you sum it up with the fact that people learn differently. I think that is really what this week was all about. Differentiation would be the educational term for it and you are right it is not new. This is just a different way of thinking about it.
ReplyDelete