Research Base

While our research aimed to find how gamification strategies could increase student risk-taking and academic confidence, much of our Lesson Study Cycle ended up teaching us about the differences between game-based learning and gamification, as well as exposing us and giving us practice with gamification strategies in their general use. 

Focus Students: Assets & Needs

PDSA Data & Experience

Cycle 1: Game-Based Learning

Initially, our group did not have a strong understanding of the difference between "gamification" and "game-based learning." As a result, our very first PDSA cycle focused on collecting data for how student learning is supported by their own creating and playing of games. We chose to focus the learning outcomes around vocabulary. 

We learned a lot from this session, though it failed to achieve most of our goals. Student game creation took far more class time than anticipated, so that we did not have the time to play the games that we had expected to have. Margot was able to have students play the games after they created them, then take a follow-up vocabulary quiz to see what they'd learn. Retention of new vocabulary was shockingly low. 

As a result of this lesson, we came to the conclusion that having students create games is not worth the time investment due to their retention results. Questions we had included if repetitive practice of pre-made games would be more effective in helping with retention of new information. We also wondered if game-based learning isn't helpful for learning academic material, but instead for things like motivation, teamwork, and other SEL skills. 

Cycles 2 & 3: Badges

By cycle 2, we had learned what sets gamification apart from game-based learning. We decided to use badge systems to incentivize student learning in various ways. In my classroom, I used a badge system with our timed writing responses. Students watched a short video about an issue or opinion (for example, how video games impact the brain), then wrote a timed response to the video expressing their own opinions. At the end of the time, students counted how many "meaningful sentences" they wrote, then shared their count out loud as I tracked them for the class. The 5 or so students with the highest sentence count received a sticker or piece of candy from our prize bucket. We repeated this practice a few times each week. 

I saw an immediate positive impact on my students with this practice. In one class, 14 out of 20 students increased their sentence count from the first to the second practice. In the class with my focus students, 12 out of 20 students increased their sentence count, including FS3 (FS1 was absent for the first practice, and FS2's sentence count decreased by one sentence). From that point forward, I saw incredible consistency in how much students were writing. I rarely needed to redirect students or prompt them to get started; nearly everyone started immediately and wrote for the entire time, often stretching beyond when our timer went off. Students like FS1 who typically needs frequent prompting and FS3 who puts minimum effort into her writing were suddenly writing nearly full pages. 

For cycle 3, we continued this badge system with our opinion writing, but shifted from counting "meaningful sentences" to counting uses of logos. In my class with my focus students, 15 out of 22 increased their use of logos between the first and second practice (with another 6 staying stagnant and only 1 student decreasing). FS2 used 3 instances of logos in both the first and second practice, then used 8 instances of logos in her third practice. FS3 used 4 instances of logos in her first practice, 9 in her second practice, and 3 in her third practice. FS1 used 0 instances of logos in his first practice, 1 in his second practice, and 9 in his third practice. Additionally, FS1 thought we were counting for meaningful sentences in this first practice rather than logos. When he expressed his confusion and realized we were counting for logos (after completing his writing), he laughed about out -- something that previously would have caused a behavioral outburst. 

For the majority of students, the quantifiable data shows a significant increase in engagement and effort in the writing task as seen in the number of sentences they wrote and in their attentiveness to the task in class. Even students who inflated their sentence counts wrote significantly more than they usually would for a written response. On a qualitative level, the quality of student writing has also developed significantly and has stayed more consistent, with students focusing their responses on the question and using evidence to back their reasoning. 

Based on these, we made the decision to focus our lesson study on use of badges with a new activity. Having seen that badges help students take risks in their individual writing, we planned to see if they might also help students take verbal and community risks in the context of a Socratic Seminar. 

However, a planning mix-up resulted in a shift in our plans. Instead of trying badges in a new context, we shifted to an attempt at an escape room. This choice was made based on our research on the effects of escape rooms on learning outcomes (see "Read, Ask, Reflect" above) as well as on the observational data collected from my own unofficial PDSA experiences. For cohesiveness, I ended the lesson with a timed opinion writing response where students shared their opinion on what the worst part of the Medieval Ages would have been and counted their uses of logos and the number of meaningful sentences. 

Lesson Plan & Materials 

Lesson Hypothesis: If we employ use of escape room clues and puzzles while students are using notes from our unit and review knowledge of social studies information acquired through the unit to complete the puzzles/clues, then students will be more likely to take risks sharing verbally and finding information as evidenced by their individual contributions and engagement in solving the escape room puzzles.

Equity Goal: Every student will take risks and show an increase in their confidence.

Content Goal: Students will practice individualized skills, selected for their particular growth ares. Every student will practice using their notes and classroom resources. Individual skills we will be tracking are as follows: 

1. Reading out loud to a small group

2. Identifying information within a text that answers a question

3. Completing a crossword puzzle based on notes and past learning.

Lesson Flow: 

1. On entering, student completed a quick questionnaire rating their confidence (from 1 to 5) with reading out loud, identifying information in a text, and using notes. 

2. Students were given directions are rules of the escape room.

3. Students were then given directions for how to pick their groups. (Students had been assigned a number -- 1, 2, or 3 -- before the lesson based on the risk-taking task we wanted them to engage in.)

4. Once students picked their groups, they checked in with me, where they received their first task. Students who chose to work with people they didn't usually work with received the first clue for free. (This was a risk-taking assessment.)

5. The 60 minute timer begins once everyone has received their first task. The first two teams to finish receive a prize (hidden behind the last lock). If there is still time, the remaining students are given the option to finish. 

6. After finishing, students complete the confidence questionnaire again. On the back, they answer the exit ticket questions (see slides). 

7. After completing the exit ticket and a quick, conversational debrief, students will complete a 10 minute timed writing response. We will count for meaningful sentences and logos. In this response, students will share what (in their opinion) would have been the worst part of the Middle Ages to live through. This connects to our continuous badges practice. 

Reflecting on the Lesson & PDSA Cycles

Overall, this lesson (for most students) successfully did what gamification does: created engagement and increased overall time-on-task. However, the escape room was probably the least successful gamification strategy we attempted (second to Cycle 1: Game Creation). I can see how this has the potential to be successful in a science or math context where students can practice skills that produce numbers for the combination codes. I would be curious if academically lower students and/or students with high anxiety and SEL needs would show more risk-taking behavior in a context where they are practicing skills, or if the results would be the same as they were in this lesson. 

The escape room was a fun break from our routine and provided a good opportunity for students to review what they know. It would be interesting to see how the results might change if students were assigned their groups or if every clue was designated to be completed by a specific team member. I would like to see an escape room in a humanities context run by a veteran teacher. While it was a fun lesson, I was not blown away by either the academic or SEL results, only by the high-interest results, and will therefore probably reserve it to a special activity once a year or so. 

However, I have seen tremendous growth in students' writing since we began using badge systems. The badges motivate students to stay on-task, and their general effort as well as the quality of their work has been positively affected by the increased time-on-task. I will continue using this system in my classroom for the foreseeable future, adding variation to try to keep student engagement. 

Reflecting on the Process

I found this Lesson Study Cycle much more frustrating than the last Lesson Study Cycle. The lack of reliable and thorough research on the topic of gamification made our approach to studying it challenging. I often felt that we were falling short of expectations, but did not have enough guidance to adjust in positive or productive ways. I rarely felt that I found living resources or academic papers that helped me fuse strategy with execution, and as a result, much of this lesson study cycle felt like trying to solve a maze while blindfolded. Our most beneficial resources were the veteran teachers who met with us twice. I learned a lot from them about what gamification is and how to implement it well. I did not feel that the lesson study cycle worked well with gamification, but am grateful to have been exposed to a new concept and am hopeful that I will find opportunities to keep learning more.