

Hack Education - grayvector
http://idiomland.com/blog/hack-education/

======
TeMPOraL
"Gamification of education" is a very wrong approach. Try "educatifying of
games".

Children have very good bullshit detectors. They know when you try to trick
them into learning. They know when something looks like a game but it's
actually a chore. Such thing is just _not fun_. So if you want to go with the
path of gaming, make games with side-effect of education instead of education
with side-effect of play.

One way you could approach it is by making the skills you want to teach an
integral part of the game world, not something that looks like arbitrary
limitation. Say, you want to teach kids that moss on trees can be used for
navigation, and sun for telling time. Instead of doing stupid quizes about it,
just mod Minecraft so that the northen side of tree trunk is green and put
some hint in-game that you can use tree's shadow to tell the time. Kids will
learn those things as useful in-game skills and transfer them to real-life.

Another example. You know what's _the best_ MO(O)C for basic astrodynamics?
_Kerbal Space Program_. It doesn't try to _teach_ you math and physics, you
just _need_ to know some concepts to play effectively, and the more you know,
the better you play. And people learn it, and find it fun.

~~~
gus_massa
I really like the idea of the moss in Minecraft trees! It doesn't sound too
difficult to implement, but I never tried something like this. The shadows
seam to be more difficult.

My daughter is a fanatical Minecraft player, she made a few skins and easy
changes. Perhaps she knows. I also used to show to her the moss in the trees
IRL when she was smaller.

~~~
TeMPOraL
I actually dream of seeing a game one day that would be full of such things.
Imagine Minecraft, or Gothic, or something like that with not only moss on the
trees, but e.g. (if action is happening on Earth) _actual_ star configurations
on the sky that you could use for navigation, elements of basic chemistry like
KNO₃ + sugar mix that is flammable and generates tons of smoke, etc. I think
if someone was to implement half of a survival book in a game as something
that _just exists_ in the world (i.e. you're not forced to use it, but can if
you want), people would quickly learn, driven by whatever it is that makes
players want to master the game.

I think it could also be possible to extend this approach to less "direct"
knowledge, like some maths and physics calculation. Imagine a game with reward
structures that subtly encourages you to do calculations (and gives you some
tools to help), while not in any way forcing you to do them. Say you're
playing a platform game and need to shoot a cannon to hit something that is
beyond visual range. You can shoot blind and try to hit it, but the game hints
you how you can calculate parabolic throw and rewards you for hitting your
target with your first shot. My guess is kids will soon stop asking "is this
math ever useful in life?".

------
jmilloy
You know, I'm not sure I like this "gamify education" thing. Is the stuff we
want our society to learn really so boring that it has to be embedded in a
game? That's not the signal I think we should be sending.

> Remember animals which play with each other and learn how to fight or to
> hunt.

This is a great analogy, because it illustrates so clearly how "play to learn"
is being misused. The play here is _actually doing_ the things that are useful
later while fighting or hunting. The games need to _be_ the subject matter,
not just surround them.

~~~
ccvannorman
It's not that it's boring, it's that it APPEARS boring. Take math for example
-- try sitting down with a seven year old and teaching them fractions and
ratios. Unless you have an exceptionally curious kid, there simply isn't a way
to explain it that doesn't feel like dragging fingernails on chalkboards to
the kid. Games are a way to alleviate the introduction into mathy things like
this, the ideal state being one where the learner takes pleasure in the math
itself once it is appreciated.

------
aburan28
The problem with MOOC's is that there is no incentives to complete a single
course at this time. There needs to a curriculum towards some kind of
accredited certification that employers will notice

~~~
mike3292
Exactly. Online education in general is going to see these terrible course
completion metrics improve dramatically the better certification they can
offer, imo.

~~~
mgirdley
Accreditation is double-edged sword. Many awful providers of educational value
are accredited and the requirements of accreditation often inhibit innovation
in educational models.

