I’ve always had an issue with “gamification.” The logic goes something like this: Some things are just no fun. Games are fun, so let’s take some aspects from games to make not-fun things fun. That way people will want to do those not-fun things longer and/or more often.
This is the “a spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down” approach to pedagogy. It just so happens that the spoonful of sugar in this case is often extrinsic rewards, token economies, and intermittent reinforcement systems.
Imagine you’re an art teacher. You read somewhere that 10,000 hours of practice will help achieve skill mastery. Naturally you want your students to have lots of practice time. You have them spin a wheel every time they turn in a piece of art. The number result on their spin is given to them in ”Artbux”, which can be redeemed at increasingly expensive levels for sweet confections. 10 Artbux earns developing artists a peppermint, 50 Artbux is worth a chocolate bar. 200 Artbux earns an ice cream sundae. Get drawing, kids!
Would the students make more art? Likely. Would they do it for the sake of skill development, the aesthetic act of creation, or the dopamine and sugar rewards? Hard to say.
Two books that frequently come up in conversation when I talk with people about gamification are “Punished by Rewards” by Alfie Kohn and “Play: How it Shapes the Brain, Opens the Imagination, and Invigorates the Soul” by Stuart Brown.
I first discovered Alfie Kohn as part of a professional development when I was working in elementary schools, and Stuart Brown as a drama therapy student. Both would later heavily influence my work in applied games and were built into what became The Game to Grow Method.
Taken together, their work shows why gamification, while tempting, can actually work against deeper goals of education, therapy, and community building.
I won’t expect to completely summarize the books in this one substack post, but I’ll share here what I usually say in conversation with people who are tempted by the “spoonful of sugar” gamification style. (Also, go read both books. They’re great.)
Let me say this: extrinsic rewards undermine intrinsic motivation and intermittent reinforcement undermines autonomy (it’s the same manipulation system that hooks gamblers at slot machines). If your goal is willful compliance in a rote or mundane task with little or no inherent value, this process will get results. If your goal is thoughtfully-engaged and personally-driven critical participation in a community of learning, you are working against your goals!
To explore this, it helps to consider games and play as being related but not always completely overlapping concepts. Games provide the structure for play, and play often occurs in the context of a game, but they are not synonyms. I have participated in plenty of ”games” that were less than playful, and I have engaged in enthusiastic whole-brained play without a game in sight.
When well-meaning educators or caregivers aim for “gamification” they may do better by engaging in “playification.”
Instead of adding something extra (the “game element”) to the seemingly not-so-fun task, change the relationship to the task itself. Get playful.
Stuart Brown unpacks play using several key descriptors:
It is apparently purposeless.
It’s done for its own sake.
It is voluntary.
It’s a choice, not a mandated expectation.
It has inherent attraction.
It is fun or otherwise satisfying.
Players feel freedom from time.
Where did the time go?
Players feel diminished self-consciousness.
Worries of judgment (from self and others) slip away.
There is improvisational potential.
Play often involves novelty, creativity, and adaptability. (I’ll talk lots more about play and improvisation in future posts I’m sure!)
There is a continuation desire.
We are sad when it ends and want to keep doing it.
You can see quickly the difference between ”gamification” in my (admittedly-straw-man) description above and what would be described as “playful engagement” with a task.
The trouble with “playification” is the seeming paradox of using play to solve a problem with engagement. The extrinsic rewards and motivation of the example art teacher were added externally because of an expected lack of inherent attraction to the act of artistic creation.
Play, however, is something inherently motivating that we engage in voluntarily for its own sake, without fear of judgment, in which we lose ourselves and our desire for perfection.
So how do we face the apparent paradox of purposeful play: that contradiction in engaging in play (that is defined by engagement for its own sake) while also hoping to achieve an additional outcome? How do we do so if there are assessments attached to participation and completion?
As behavioral economists will point out, incentives drive behavior, so we can look at behavior to understand incentives and look at incentives to understand behavior. Gamification is the addition of game incentives to motivate specific behaviors. Playification is the emergence of an inherent incentive attached to the behavior. When the activity becomes play, extrinsic motivation is increasingly less necessary, even distracting. Extrinsic incentives might actually change the behavior. Ice cream for art may produce a surplus of uninspired hastily created pieces devoid of any organic inspiration or critical engagement.
Here’s the thing:
Play is not only an act, it’s a disposition. It’s a curious orientation toward the world. It’s a state of engaged non-attachment, a yearning to manifest the inherent potential in each emergent moment.
This is our goal. While we often think we have to add incentives to promote a desired behavior, I would argue that we may have to remove incentives to promote a playful engagement. If play is a voluntary activity that is done enthusiastically for its own sake, without fear, that we lose ourselves doing and want to continue doing, what better way would there be to remove a spirit of play than to add extrinsic rewards, token economies, and intermittent reinforcement systems?
So before reaching for points, badges, or tokens, ask instead: what would it look like to make the task itself more playful?
In college I performed in the stage play bobrasuchenbergamerica by Charles L. Mee. A line from the play came as a voiceover:
”Once you put it all together, it’s just obvious. I mean, tie a string to something, and see where it takes you. The biggest thing is don’t worry about it…”
This is play. Tie a string to something, and see where it takes you.
What does playification and gamification mean to you? Am I being too dismissive of gamification in favor of play for play’s sake? Let me know!
UPDATE!
I was speaking with a colleague about my insights on gamification, and he shared this video with me differentiating “gamification” from “game-based learning.” The latter is much more what I advocate for when we talk about applied gaming!
Gamification vs. Game-Based Learning: What's the Difference?
———
Thanks for the positive messages I received last week about my family journey through the coronavirus. It hasn’t been fun, but we’re on the other side now! I look forward to life as normal in the coming days. 🤞
I’ll conclude this post with another round of RWLP! And please share in the comments or in a direct message what your RWLPs are!
This book lives in a growing list of “I wish I’d read this earlier” books. It’s mostly focused on organizational leadership and how OKRs (clear objectives and key results) and CFRs (communication, feedback, and recognition) can improve organizational performance and culture. I’m not in a position of organizational leadership at this moment in my career, but as I’ve mentioned, I’m continually fascinated by how people work effectively and ineffectively together in structured groups, especially with my lived and learned experience as an untrained leader of a large organization. It’s a bit long-winded, but full of stories of implementation.
Watching: Daredevil: Born Again
This one was a long time coming, but there’s nothing like removing from COVID in the back room of my house for days at a time to sink into an entire season of a streaming TV show. This season was a nice return to the “street level” hero of the first season of Netflix’s Daredevil. The show also has excellent audio descriptions (a disability feature that’s not in all tv-shows, but is fantastic for low-vision. My vision took a hit with COVID, but I could still enjoy the story with audio description).
Listening: In the Air Tonight by Phil Collins
Having COVID meant I didn’t get out much, but I could still take my also sick kids through the drive-through car wash. Turns out if you enter the car wash at 1:43 into the song, you’ll drive out of the car wash at the iconic drum solo. These are the discoveries and the moments that give life meaning.
Playing: Pentament on Steam
A friend and colleague who is a librarian in Wisconsin has been talking about this game for months because it’s been used in classrooms to explore the historical themes of the Renaissance. I finally snagged it. It’s a beautiful point-and-click adventure. The dialog is all printed on screen, so it quickly hit a fatigue level for my low-vision COVID times, but I’m already very intrigued to see what’s in store.
Remember to share your RWLPs in the comments!
(*Amazon links are affiliate links)
No posts
Comments
Nothing yet. Say the first thing.
Sign in to join the conversation.