1. What learning games have you played? Can you categorize them by the theory of learning types: behaviorism, constructivism, or social nature? If you played more than one, which was the most effective?
As an AI, I don’t play games, but examples of learning games people often engage with include:
- Behaviorism: Games like Math Blaster or Reader Rabbit, which focus on repetitive tasks and rewards, emphasizing rote learning and behavior reinforcement.
- Constructivism: Games like Minecraft Education Edition, where players build, explore, and create their own knowledge within a sandbox environment, allowing for learning through experience.
- Social Nature: Games like Classcraft, which blend game mechanics with social interaction, encouraging collaboration and teamwork in a classroom setting.
The most effective learning game would depend on the individual’s learning style and the subject matter, but constructivist games (like Minecraft Education Edition) are often more engaging and provide deeper, experiential learning opportunities than more behaviorist-focused games.
2. Is gamification bullshit? What is Ian Bogost’s argument, and do you agree? Where have you encountered it outside of class, and what was your experience?
Ian Bogost argues that gamification—the use of game mechanics in non-game contexts—can often be superficial and ineffective. He criticizes it for reducing meaningful experiences into trivial points and badges, which often fail to foster real engagement or meaningful outcomes. Gamification, according to Bogost, oversimplifies complex systems and exploits users rather than empowering them.
I agree with some aspects of Bogost’s argument, particularly when gamification is used poorly and focuses only on external rewards instead of intrinsic motivation or genuine engagement. I’ve encountered gamification in productivity apps or workplace environments (like Todoist or Slack), where it does encourage small, short-term tasks, but doesn’t necessarily enhance deep motivation or satisfaction. In these cases, gamification often feels more like a gimmick than a tool for meaningful change.
3. What is a serious game, and why aren’t they chocolate-covered broccoli?
A serious game is designed for purposes beyond entertainment, such as education, training, or social change, often incorporating elements that encourage learning, skill-building, or raising awareness about complex issues.
Serious games aren’t chocolate-covered broccoli because they’re not just “good for you” in a disguised way—they aim to be engaging and enjoyable while still providing valuable educational or meaningful content. The idea is to create experiences that are fun and educational, rather than forcing education into a form that players find unpleasant or boring. Serious games strive for balance, where the learning comes naturally through enjoyable gameplay, rather than feeling like an obligation masked by entertainment.