Reflections on Jen Porter's Presentation

Reflections on Jen Porter’s “The Gamification of education:
A behaviour analytic perspective”

On November 16, Jen Porter presented to EDDE 806 on her proposed area of research for her dissertation, “The Gamification of education: A behaviour analytic perspective.” The research problem she is hoping to address is the relative absence of empirical studies on the effectiveness of gamification in education, even though it has become something of a buzzword in higher education circles. Jen has been discussing her unique perspective on gamification in teaching and learning with her classmates both within and outside of course spaces for some time, so her choice of topic was no surprise. She approaches this work from a behaviourist perspective—considering the impact in an educational setting of positive reinforcement, effective feedback, the imposition of rules and constraints, and “flow” (via Czikszentmihalyi’s 1990 work on this concept), on students’ motivation and the transfer of knowledge. However, she has encountered some resistance from various corners because people have a strong negative reaction to the idea of behaviourism—perhaps because they associate it with earlier versions of this approach.  

The format of Jen’s presentation was thorough and methodical, yet accessible. One challenge I had was that, while I am familiar with the concept of gamification and numerous aspects of it that Jen laid out in the presentation, her methodology is very different from the work I have been reviewing in my own research. Because of this, I would probably benefit from a bit more explanation of some of the methods she plans to use in her research. For example, a more detailed explanation of hierarchical linear modeling and the use of ANCOVA and MANCOVA, and how these would be useful in a relatively small study, would help me to understand this project better. But that may be more of a commentary of my own limitations in this area. Also, I am always a fan of people utilizing the methods and school of thought that they are advocating for. In other words, would there have been a different way of presenting this project that utilized behaviourist analytic approach?

Regarding the use of graphics and other elements in the slides: I liked the variety, and the visualization of the game elements into the three categories of Dynamics, Mechanics, and Components helped me to understand the concepts. The value of using images of James Paul Gee and his publications was less clear, perhaps, but I have the most concern about the use of the graph that showed the simplified and limited concept of “the art of flow.” Visuals make a strong impression on viewers—if this was meant to be an example of what not to do in this study, it should at least be countered by a visual depiction of what one should do. Otherwise, viewers will retain this image in their memories, and perhaps recall the project in a mistaken or misleading way.

Because this project is so different from my own, it is hard to determine what I might take away from this presentation that I might use in my own research. Jen’s commitment to the work certainly shines through, though, and it has certainly led me to take a closer look at behaviour analytics and how it might apply to my work as an educator.

References:

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: the psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.