7 principles of game-like learning to shape teaching and learning

"7 principles of game-like learning to shape teaching and learning:

• everyone is a participant;
• challenge is constant;
• learning happens by doing;
• feedback is immediate and ongoing;
• failure is reframed as iteration;
• everything is interconnected;
• and it kind of feels like play."

http://www.instituteofplay.org/49E19C9E-5EB1-4CD9-9117-E01A135B32AE/FinalDownload/DownloadId-43C4C1D3042001D421B73F6316C76397/49E19C9E-5EB1-4CD9-9117-E01A135B32AE/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/IOP_QDesignPack_Curriculum_1.1.pdf

Wow.  This is totally the opposite of the way I was taught!

• I never participated unless the teacher called on me
• I was bored or frustrated, but rarely challenged
• I never did much besides workbooks and tests
• I got my grade 3 days after with all the grammar corrected in bloody red
• Failure was framed as failure
• Nothing was interconnected
• and it totally felt like work.

arguments with myself

Yesterday I posted a bit of a rant against percentage based grades.  Here's more about how that came about.


Student: Please raise my grade, Teacher.

Me: No, that would be unethical.

(Exit Student in disgust)

Me: That was very admirable of me to stick to my ethics and not raise Student's grade.

Me: Yes, I must be a wonderful teacher. Just one question, me. Why couldn't I raise his grade?

Me: Look at his test! He lost points here, here and here.

Me: I see. But why did I take off those points?

Me: Because he made mistakes.

Me: Yes, but why is this mistake worth 2 points and that one worth 0.5 points?

Me: Because this concept is 4 times as important as that one!

Me: Really? Why?

Me: I don't know. Look, I need to give a grade to Student and this is the best way I can think of to get one.

Me: Other than the fact that the system requires it, why does Student need a grade?

Me: To prove how much he knows, silly!

Me: So you think this test proves without a doubt that Student knows exactly 76% of the material?

Me: Well, I don't know...

Me: And that, assuming he does know precisely 76% of the material, it's ok to pass him knowing that he's missing 24%?

Me: SHUT UP ME!!!

Me: Ok. Can I buy me a cup of coffee?

grading and assessment

How do you decide on a grade?  What, for you is exactly the difference between 88% and 89%?  Between 99% and 100%?  Or, more importantly, from the students point of view, the difference between passing-by-the-skin-of-your-teeth (where I work, that's 70%) and failing?

Do you see a problem with a pass grade of 50% or 60% or 70% (depending on where you work)?  Does it make sense to pass a course when you haven't understood over a quarter of the material? 

What if the test doesn't measure things right?  For example, students may fail a grammar-based exam even when they obviously have good speaking skills.  Or vice versa.

I spent a month last week arguing over how to test students' levels of English and none of it made sense to me: why should students be given 2 hours to answer questions that have nothing to do with their field of interest.  Yet those questions are written by experts who claim that their standardized tests are objective and impartial and can accurately measure and predict a student's curent and future level of English.  Why "predict"?  Because the law is requiring university students to pass this test when they have completed 60% of their degree.  That makes sense because it allows teachers in subsequent courses to assign readings and projects in English.  But it works on the assumption that by the time the students graduate, they will still remember all of their English.  I would seriously doubt that if all they did was pull an all-nighter the day before the exam.

I'm arguing for a project-based system of assessment worth (are you ready for it?) either 100% or 0%.  All or nothing.

Shocked?

Here's the logic: a project (a story, a video, a demonstration of a skill, etc.) can be done over a period of time which means the student can prove what he or she can actually do with the language (which, if you'll notice is how the levels of the Common European Framework are phrased: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_European_Framework_of_Reference_for_Languages)
They use the language as it is intended: to communicate something of interest to the speaker.  Either they can do this within an acceptable measure for the level they are trying to achieve according to a panel of judges, or they can't.  It's a simple as that.  There's no 76% or whatever (un puntito mas profe, por fis!) 

The beauty is that this can (and, in my humble opinion, should) apply at any level from kindergarten to university and beyond.  Wanna see what students can do?  Let them show you!

Two ways of looking at EFL games

I boxed in college. 
Really.
All 1.5m of me.

Why am I telling you this? 

Boxing is a game: it has clear rules and a point system and the winner is the one who can knock out the other guy.  It's bloody and violent and potentially lethal...but it's a game.  English is a game in the same way: you go out and you use it.  You have rules and structures and if you use it right you can get what you want.

However, no-one, not Muhammed Ali, and certainly not little ol' me, can just get into a ring and start beating the opponent senseless.  No, you have to be trained to do it right.  As with English.  No matter what those fly-by-night schools tell you, you cannot suddenly become fluent.   Like it or not, you have to master the basics of the grammar, the vocabulary, and the skills before you can go out and start wheeling and dealing in English.

Now here's the thing: training for boxing can be fairly boring (think hours of skipping rope and jabbing at punching bags) but it can also be turned into a game.   Just like language teaching:  you can do hours of worksheets or you can play learning games.

The important thing is to distinguish between the two kinds of games:

1.  Scaffolding games where you learn through playing

• In boxing I used to rally with a friend to see who could skip rope the longest, or we'd call out increasingly difficult punching combinations for the other to try.  The aim was partly to develop our muscles and our technique, and partly to watch our partner to learn correct and incorrect moves.
• In English, you can play games where you have time to think about specific concepts such as vocabulary words or verb tenses.   In my experience, the best games for these are modified card or board games where players take turns and can watch each other and learn from each others successes and errors.

2.  Mastery games where you play with what you already know.

• In boxing, this means getting into the ring and ...well, boxing.  This doesn't mean you're perfect already, but that your muscles and technique are sufficiently developped that you can now put them into practice.
• In English this means that you can now play drama-type games based on writing and speaking where it is assumed you know enough language for the game to proceed.  At lower levels, the games would require simpler language, but as you move up to higher levels the language required becomes more complex in order for the game to work, while still remaining within the abilities of the learners. (This is really important: many games fail because they're either too easy or too difficult for the level!)

The mistake most teachers make here is to mix up the two.  For example, a game like "guess the word" won't work if the students don't have the language to describe the word.  If you need the students to practice the vocabulary, a memory game matching words and definitions would be much better.  Then, once the students know the vocabulary and are comfortable with it, you can challenge them to incorporate the new words into an improvised dialogue, say by picking words out of a hat and seeing if they can use it in the next sentence without their partner realising which word they've used.

Playtested: journal-type poker

It's hard to teach what a journal can be used for since it can be used for almost anything.   I said that yesterday.

The best way to teach what you don't know is to have your students go through the same process you would go through to figure it out.   So, yesterday I sent mine to Google "types of journals" and they came back with foodjournaldreamdiaryfeedbackjournaldialoguejournalhealthdiarytraveljournalmeditationjournal etc.

We narrowed it down to 4:

• Emotional intelligence journal: This is what you write in whenever you have an issue relating to emotional intelligence to deal with.  For example, if you had a fight with your best friend at recess, you write in it.  Or if you have trouble managing your time or leading your group or understanding why you don't get along with a particular teacher.
• Science journal: This is where you record scientific questions and observations based on readings, experiments and research.
• Creative writing journal:  This is where you note down words, phrases and ideas for songs, poems or stories
• Reading journal: This is where you respond to your readings, not just by summarising them but by adding your opinions, questions, likes and dislikes about the text.

Why these?  Why not?  You can't work with all of them, but we agreed these seemed the most useful.

Then we played "journal-type poker".

Each person wrote 2 entries for each of the 4 journal types (so 8 entries).   Then they put them in a pile and dealt 4 to each player.  The aim was to get either two pairs (ex: 2 science journals and 2 reading journals), 4 of a kind (ex: 4 science journals) or a "straight" (one of each).  If a player thought they'd won they had to show the journal entries and explain what type they thought they were.

One student, J, decided to be so creative in writing his journals entries that it was hard for the other players to identify what type of journal they were supposed to be.  This meant a great deal of arguing back and forth which I thought was great.  It meant they were practicing the language a lot, but it also led to a very interesting discussion on who has ownership of a text.  Is the writer the only one who gets to say what it means or, if the readers disagree, can they be right too?

Once they had an idea of what exactly makes a journal a journal (that it's personal, creative and periodic), then they thought about different ways to use them in their classes.  Turns out, you can fit journalling into almost any part of a lesson!

What is a journal?

Interesting question:  this blog is a journal.  What's it for? 

To me, a journal needs:

• A writer, but not necessarily the writer.  That is to say that I can write as Janine, but I can also write my journal as Juliet for a literature class or as a 2 year-old baby for a psychology class or even as a tadpole for a science class.  "Dear Diary, today I sprouted feet..."
• A reason.  Am I using my journal to explore a question or to answer it?  Are my thoughts fully formed or are these half-baked opinions.  Do I expect to look back on this one day surprised at how little I knew, or am I recording an epiphany for all time?
• A reader.  Can I be the reader of my own journal?  Sure I can, but is that enough motivation to keep me writing everyday?  Maybe it might be better to have a reader, but not necessarily the reader.  So if I'm writing as Juliet, my classmate isn't reading my entry as my clasmate but as Romeo.  If my teacher is my reader, does my teacher have to be a teacher?  Or can she can just be reading my journal as a fellow traveller on the road to becoming a better teacher herself?

Have I answered my question?

Video: the fundamentals

Many people seem to have this weird moral pyramid where reading is "good" and most TV and all video games are a "waste of time".  I don't believe this. 

Humans interact with media, whether it's the printed page, the camera or the avatar.  We just interact with it differently.

Videos are above all sequences of images and sound.  The first thing is to understand that sequence.  For EFL learners this part can be difficult because the language itself is a barrier. 

If you're watching a piece of fiction such as a movie or a TV series, the first task is to understand the plot.  As teachers we need to help guide students through the story by asking questions. 
Notice, I said guide, not test.  Those are two different things entirely!

If you're watching non-fiction, such as a documentary or an information slide-show, then the task is to make sure the students have understood the nformation.  Again, questions are only one of the many ways to do this.

Once the students have understood, then it's up to them to analyse it.

As I mentioned on earlier posts, for fiction it's about analysing the motivations of the characters: why did the characters, think, speak or act the way they did?  For non-fiction it's about analysing the source of the information itself: is it trustworthy or b.s and how can you tell?