[game_edu] curious

[Lee Sheldon]

Re: the Fibonacci Attendence Policy of Doom (TM)

Actually most attendance policies work like that: penalize students for not
coming to class. Current game design practice has been trending in recent
years, particularly thanks to social network games, toward no sticks, only
carrots. So in the multiplayer classroom, where we grade entirely by
attrition anyway, I simply award XP for showing up. Creating unbearable
pain in students is not something I want to do. They have enough of that
already. This quote caught my eye in the Wikipedia article you cited as
well:

"Recently, studies have questioned the existence of loss aversion. In
several studies examining the effect of losses in decision making under
risk and uncertainty no loss aversion was found (Erev, Ert & Yechiam, 2008;
Ert & Erev, 2008; Harinck, Van Dijk, Van Beest, & Mersmann, 2007; Kermer,
Driver-Linn, Wilson, & Gilbert, 2006; Yechiam & Ert, 2007). There are
several explanations for these findings: one, is that loss aversion does
not exist in small payoff magnitudes; the other, is that the generality of
the loss aversion pattern is lower than that thought previously.
Alternatively, Gal (2006) argues that the phenomena previously attributed
to loss aversion are more parsimoniously explained by inertia than by a
loss/gain asymmetry. However, loss aversion may be more salient when people
compete. Gill and Prowse (2012) provide experimental evidence that people
are loss averse around reference points given by their expectations in a
competitive environment with real effort. [3]"

I want them to come to class because they want to, not because they are
scared not to. This is what we do so successfully in games that people try
to slap the word "addiction" on them. I'm glad its working for your
students, and there's no reason to change, but I kind of feel sorry for
them! For the record the results are about equal. In some cases though my
students also meet outside of class on their own, again because they want
to, much as guilds plan raids for long hours before the actual action
begins. So I suppose you could say we occasionally see attendance rates of
115% or so. ;-)

Lee

On Wed, May 2, 2012 at 10:00 AM, <game_edu-request at igda.org> wrote:


> Send game_edu mailing list submissions to

>        game_edu at igda.org

>

> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit

>        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to

>        game_edu-request at igda.org

>

> You can reach the person managing the list at

>        game_edu-owner at igda.org

>

> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific

> than "Re: Contents of game_edu digest..."

>

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

>              IGDA Education SIG

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

> Today's Topics:

>

>   1. Re: curious (Steve Rabin)

>   2. Re: curious (Katrin Becker)

>

>

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------

> From: Steve Rabin <Stevera at noa.nintendo.com>

> To: IGDA Game Education Listserv <game_edu at igda.org>

> Cc:

> Date: Tue, 1 May 2012 21:37:52 +0000

> Subject: Re: [game_edu] curious

>

> I have one more Gamification-ish technique that I use in my class. This

> technique was first developed in the Comp Sci Graphics class at the

> University of Washington around 1994 and I heard that they still use it

> today. It's my understanding that it was developed by the two professors

> who taught that class originally: Tony DeRose (now a Senior Scientist at

> Pixar) and David Salesin (now a Fellow at Adobe).

>

> Technique: Bells and Whistles

> The idea is that for a given programming assignment, there are lots and

> lots of ways to expand on it or add features - all of which are for extra

> credit. So with every programming assignment (for example, a raytracing

> assignment), there is a very, very long list of extra credit options

> (perhaps 10 to 15 things), like a giant menu. For the raytracing

> assignment, the extra credit options would be things like adding motion

> blur or depth of field. Next to each option is the worth of the extra

> credit in terms of Bells and Whistles. One Bell is worth two Whistles, so a

> given option of extra credit might be worth two Bells, one Bell and one

> Whistle, or maybe just a Whistle if it was pretty easy.

>

> When I originally saw this technique (by taking the class around 1995), it

> was nebulous how much a Bell would add to the final grade of the assignment

> (which may have been on purpose). However, I remember looking at the long

> list of options and I couldn't wait to try and do a bunch of them, putting

> a big check mark next to each one as I finished it (the assignment was

> printed out on a sheet of paper, front and back, and it somehow added to

> the effect, like a menu). Somehow this technique really tapped into my

> reward system and I wanted to do as many as possible. Having the option to

> pick and choose was one aspect that really made this technique work.

>

> Aspects that seem reminiscent of games (Gamification):

> 1. Option of doing lots of different types of extra work (similar to

> side-quests, perhaps).

> 2. Grading rewards for doing extra work (extra points for side-quests).

> 3. Collecting of Bells and Whistles (extra credit isn't just extra points,

> it's these sort-of tangible objects).

> 4. Desire to collect as many as you can, perhaps all of them (Gotta catch

> 'em all).

> 5. Self-adjusting difficulty level (over-achievers end up making the

> assignment harder for themselves).

> 6. Sense of accomplishment once the assignment is done with various extras

> (completion of the game).

>

> The downside of the technique (as any game designer would know) is

> balancing. What happens if a student does a ton of extra credit on one

> assignment, to the point where they can just skip subsequent assignments

> and still pass the class? There are probably ways to fix this, but it could

> be a potential problem. In my own class at DigiPen, it usually turns out

> that not that many people go crazy with the extra credit and the ones that

> do are over-achievers anyway, so they do all of the assigned work

> regardless.

>

> My unanswered questions about this technique are:

> 1. Is the printed sheet of paper a key aspect to this technique? If you

> just list these things in a PowerPoint does it have the same effect? I

> suspect not. In my own class I just put it in a PowerPoint, but I feel like

> it isn't as effective. The idea of a printed menu is much more compelling.

> 2. Does it enhance the effect if the worth of a Bell and Whistle is

> nebulous? I suspect it does help. In my own class I nail it down to a

> specific percentage. Upon reflection, I think I'll try making it nebulous

> in the future.

> 3. Should you guard against gaming the system and accumulating too much

> extra credit? I suspect it's not necessary to worry about this because

> over-achievers are over-achievers.

>

> So all in all, the Bells and Whistles technique is really a way for

> students to self-adjust the difficulty level of assignments. While the

> collecting aspect and extra credit is the carrot, adding all of these extra

> things to a programming assignment is also deeply satisfying once it's over

> (sense of accomplishment).

>

> -Steve Rabin

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: game_edu-bounces at igda.org [mailto:game_edu-bounces at igda.org] On

> Behalf Of Steve Rabin

> Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 11:08 AM

> To: IGDA Game Education Listserv

> Subject: Re: [game_edu] curious

>

>

> I think you need to make a distinction between "theming" your class like a

> game and using "gamification" to motivate students. There is overlap, but I

> think the brilliance of gamification is to use the tricks learned from

> games to motivate while staying true to the original framework (like a

> college class). Theming a class like a game, with power ups, lives, or

> whatever, seems rather gimmicky and feels to me like it just cheapens the

> class. However, if you can somehow use the concepts developed in games (or

> psychology for that matter) without being so silly or overtly patronizing,

> then I think you might have something powerful.

>

>

> Here is something that I developed in the last year that I just have to

> share because it works so amazingly (perhaps more related to psychology

> than gamification):

>

> 96%-98% class attendance guaranteed!

> It's the Fibonacci Attendence Policy of Doom (TM).

> If a student is absent 1 time, they get a 2% deduction to their final

> class grade.

> If a student is absent a 2nd time, they get an additional 3% deduction

> (total 5% at this point).

> If a student is absent a 3rd time, they get an additional 5% deduction

> (total 10% at this point).

> If a student is absent a 4th time, they get an additional 8% deduction

> (total 18% at this point).

> If a student is absent a 5th time, they get an additional 13% deduction

> (total 21% at this point).

> etc...

>

> I teach the game AI class at DigiPen and it's a 3-hour class once a week

> for 15 weeks. With this new policy, I get attendence of 48 or 49 students

> out of 50 enrolled, every class. How do I check attendance? I pass out a

> sheet of paper at the start of class and at some point during the class I

> have a class activity that involves putting something on the paper. They

> put their name at the top and I collect it at the end of class. If I don't

> have their paper for that class, they get deducted the points.

>

> It seems harsh, but it works like nothing else I've ever tried.

> Why does it work? -> LOSS AVERSION + mounting losses

>

> It is very painful to lose points - much more so than gaining points

> (finding from economics and decision theory:

> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loss_aversion). And since it stacks and

> grows, the pain becomes unbearable. Students also realize that they may

> have to miss a class in the future, so they better save their first (-2%)

> penalty for when they really need it.

>

> Anyways, if you want full class attendance, then this will work. I've done

> it for the last 3 semesters and believe it or not, people don't fail the

> class due to attendance - they make damn sure they go every time... (or

> they drop the class)

>

> -Steve Rabin

>

>

>

> -----Original Message-----

> From: game_edu-bounces at igda.org [mailto:game_edu-bounces at igda.org] On

> Behalf Of Tom Toynton

> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 9:39 AM

> To: game_edu at igda.org

> Subject: Re: [game_edu] curious

>

> I have been refining a positive feedback point system with levels and

> achievements in my introductory course for the past 2 years, and am working

> on implementing it into the Capstone experience for the coming year. I have

> used it at various levels of complexity with some excellent results, but

> find that excessive game vocabulary creates a large barrier of entry for

> non-game dev students. This is an issue since my intro course is also taken

> by other majors for 'arts as catalyst' gen ed requirements. That will

> change in a couple of years, but for now I have to keep it scaled back to

> help all students with their understanding of the course structure. (e.g.

> last fall I renamed all of the resource and discussion areas in Blackboard

> to things like The Town Crier, The Great Library, The Bard's Tavern, etc,

> and some non-game students really struggled remembering what was what. It

> essentially breaks the basic rule of interface design and forces the user

> to relearn the interface - whic

>

>  h can be overwhelming to some of our students. If I keep the names

> standard to what other courses use, it frees up the students to focus on

> understanding the point system and other course changes - which is already

> a big leap for many of them.)

>

> My one major change to what Sheldon is doing is the number of points in

> the system. Studies in the Psychology of motivation suggest that people

> place more value on higher numbers. So doing an assignment that is worth 5

> points out of a total of 100 is deemed less valuable that doing an

> assignment that is worth 500 out of a total of 10000 - even though the

> relative values are exactly the same. And although I don't have any

> quantitative proof (outside of my fiddling with the numbers over 4

> semesters), I believe there are diminishing returns on any number over

> 1,000. So I now build all of my assignments around a point system that

> ranges from 250-1000, with some very special assignments/experiences worth

> as much as 1,500 out of a total of 30,000. But even these numbers aren't

> final, and I plan on lowering them a bit more for next fall and see how it

> works out.

>

> One cautionary tale I would like to share about using a points system:

> The first semester I tried mimicking standard RPG level progression. So

> students leveled up quickly in the beginning, and slowed down as they

> climbed higher in level. That definitely didn't work well, as students

> thought they were doing really well in the beginning even if they weren't

> doing all of the assignments, and then got frustrated with their slowed

> progress towards the end of the class. So I now keep it extremely simple,

> for them and myself, and make it 1 level per 1,000 experience for every

> level.

>

>

>

> As for teaching gamification, it is a small part of the serious games

> section of my intro course, and will be covered in more detail in the

> special topics "Serious Games" course that is running in the fall. But that

> is it. On the experiential side the most I do is give students the

> opportunity to suggest changes to the gamification of the intro course

> during the last week of class for bonus experience.

>

> Outside of my classes, I know of one two-year program that is doing

> something phenomenal. It is at Camden County CC in New Jersey, and the

> program is run by Ryan Morrison from Island Officials. The points and

> leveling up system happens throughout the entire two years in all game

> courses, and during graduation the students are called up for their diploma

> not only by their major, but also by their class and level. This should be

> the first year that students graduate this way, and I am excited to hear

> how it goes. Getting buy-in by the administration for such a major change

> is really impressive. I know my college would never go for it. But can you

> imagine the college dean calling students up... "Kate Smith, Associates in

> Applied Science, Game Design and Development, and 19th Level Sorceress!"

> How cool is that?!

>

> Cheers,

> Tom

>

> Tom Toynton

>  Assistant Professor of

>     Game Development

>  Faculty Advisor for

>     Alpha Chi

>  Bloomfield College

>  467 Franklin Street

>  Bloomfield, NJ 07003

>

> --------------------------

> -----Original Message-----

> --------------------------

> Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 09:49:16 -0400

> From: Susan Gold <goldfile at gmail.com>

>

> Do you know of examples in education using gamification as incentives or

> grading? Of course I already know of Lee Sheldon's example but am looking

> for others. Also, has anyone added sections on gamification to their

> courses?

>

> Thanks in advance,

>

> Susan

>

> _______________________________________________

> game_edu mailing list

> game_edu at igda.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

> _______________________________________________

> game_edu mailing list

> game_edu at igda.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>

>

>

> ---------- Forwarded message ----------

> From: Katrin Becker <becker at minkhollow.ca>

> To: IGDA Game Education Listserv <game_edu at igda.org>

> Cc:

> Date: Tue, 01 May 2012 17:39:38 -0600

> Subject: Re: [game_edu] curious

> On 01/05/2012 3:37 PM, Steve Rabin wrote:

>

> The downside of the technique (as any game designer would know) is balancing. What happens if a student does a ton of extra credit on one assignment, to the point where they can just skip subsequent assignments and still pass the class? There are probably ways to fix this, but it could be a potential problem. In my own class at DigiPen, it usually turns out that not that many people go crazy with the extra credit and the ones that do are over-achievers anyway, so they do all of the assigned work regardless.

>

> My unanswered questions about this technique are:

> 1. Is the printed sheet of paper a key aspect to this technique? If you just list these things in a PowerPoint does it have the same effect? I suspect not. In my own class I just put it in a PowerPoint, but I feel like it isn't as effective. The idea of a printed menu is much more compelling.

> 2. Does it enhance the effect if the worth of a Bell and Whistle is nebulous? I suspect it does help. In my own class I nail it down to a specific percentage. Upon reflection, I think I'll try making it nebulous in the future.

> 3. Should you guard against gaming the system and accumulating too much extra credit? I suspect it's not necessary to worry about this because over-achievers are over-achievers.

>

> I can answer some of your questions. I used a similar technique in a very

> large 1st year CS class I used to teach. I called it the bonus system. At

> the time, we had a 1st year enrollment of about 1200 and the abilities of

> the students were all over the map. My original goal was simply to provide

> challenging options for some of the better students, while at the same time

> making sure that the "average" students could still get an A doing the

> "normal" work.

>

> I would list various bonuses on each assignment, with values ranging from

> 1 - 10 points. Some tasks were pretty easy, others were insanely difficult

> for 1st year's (make this turn-based game real-time). Even the hardest

> bonuses were worth no more than 10 points. The students could also suggest

> embellishments that were not on the list. I still got to decide how many

> points it was worth.

>

> I dealt with the downside you mention by tallying bonus points separately

> from the regular assignment grade. They were added up at the end and had an

> upper limit.  The effect that bonus points could have on someone's grade

> were very limited - the most they could do was bump you up to the next

> higher letter grade (so a B could become a B+ but never an A-). Anything

> over 49 points would make no difference whatsoever. There was no way to

> collect enough marks on one assignment to make it possible to skip another.

>

> My experience was that most people did a few bonuses on one or two

> assignments, and a few racked up lots of points. They all liked the

> concept. The record holder got 155 points. Since most things were only

> worth 1-2 points, that's quite a lot of work. What I found interesting was

> that the high-scorers were going to get A's anyways - the bonus points made

> NO difference to their grade. For them, the bonuses were just a way to keep

> score, and they liked it.

>

> The questions:

> 1. It's not about the paper, or the check-list. In my assignments, the

> bonuses were simply listed at the end of the assignment - there was nothing

> to check off. My assignments were online - I didn't print them out so many

> students never had paper. Many of them were pretty vague too so mine really

> weren't in any kind of menu format.

>

> 2. In my case the bonuses weren't worth much, and to make things worse,

> the effect of the bonus points depended on their final grade. If they got

> just enough for a B, and didn't have many bonus points they'd still get a

> B. I viewed it a little like insurance. They could get it or not.

>

> 3. I'd say yes, but not to stop the over-achievers from gaming the system,

> because I think you're right, most of them won't anyways. It's for the

> optics. Average and struggling students see that the really good students

> don't win a lot of marks by doing bonuses. They STILL have to do the usual

> work like everyone else.

>

> One of the side-effects that made a huge difference for me, was that the

> number of people coming in to my office to beg for more marks after the

> final exam dropped to nearly zero. The bonus point system took care of the

> "My grade is really close to the next letter grade,.... can you please

> please bump me up?"

> They already knew they had plenty of chances to improve their marks

> throughout the term, and I posted all marks and all calculations so they

> could see the mark they got and what effect the bonus points had.

>

> I also wrote my assignment specs so they could see what they had to do to

> earn a C, or a B, or an A. Some students would deliberately target the 'C'

> solution sometimes if they were having a particularly busy or bad week in

> their other classes. That also did wonders for cutting down on complaints.

> I had various other optional things they could do for extra marks too.

>

> One of the really important aspects of these approaches is that it gives

> students clear choices. They have some control over their mark, and it's

> clear to them what they need to do to get the mark they want. If you can

> find ways to give them lots of choises while still making sure they have

> taken up enough of the things you need them to, you all win.

> --

> *Katrin Becker, PhD* *(sent from Mink Hollow)*

> *President, Mink Hollow Media <http://minkhollowmedia.ca/>*

> *Author:* The Guide to Computer Simulations and Games<http://books.minkhollow.ca/>published by Wiley, 2011

> *Adjunct Professor* School of Interactive Arts and Technology<http://www.siat.sfu.ca/>,

> Simon Fraser University <http://www.sfu.ca/> (BC, Canada)

>

> E-mail: becker at minkhollow.ca HomePage: http://minkhollow.ca/becker Blog:

> http://minkhollow.ca/beckerblog

> *In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary

> act. ~George Orwell *

>

> _______________________________________________

> game_edu mailing list

> game_edu at igda.org

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/game_edu

>

>



-- 
*Lee Sheldon*
*Associate Professor
Department of Language, Literature and Communication
Co-Director Games and Simulation Arts and Sciences
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/game_edu/attachments/20120502/d2f2abec/attachment-0001.htm>