The Gamification of Learning: A False Promise?

The trend in education technology has many parents and educators worried. Ed-tech games, such as Prodigy, Blooket, and Gimkit, have become a staple of daily lesson plans and homework assignments, promising to make learning fun and engaging for students. But beneath the surface lies a more complex reality.

My own son was caught playing Prodigy on his laptop, masquerading as math homework. The game’s cartoon characters and battle mechanics were undeniably engaging, but I couldn’t shake the feeling that he wasn’t learning much of anything. Research has shown that these types of gamified platforms often prioritize entertainment over education.

Prodigy has come under scrutiny for its failure to provide meaningful feedback to students. When my son answered a question incorrectly, the game didn’t pause to explain where he went wrong or guide him to the correct answer. Instead, it forced him to watch videos advertising its paid-membership plans. This is not an isolated incident; numerous reports have surfaced of ed-tech games that prioritize gaming mechanics over learning outcomes.

The widespread adoption of Chromebooks and other digital tools in schools has created a demand for digital solutions. Ed-tech companies saw an opportunity to capitalize on this trend, and as a result, gamified platforms like Prodigy and Blooket are becoming increasingly popular.

However, this trend raises important questions about the value we place on education. Are we so desperate to make learning fun that we’re willing to sacrifice depth and complexity? By prioritizing gamified platforms over traditional teaching methods, are we inadvertently creating a culture of superficial engagement?

These ed-tech games often rely on manipulative design elements, such as rewards systems and in-game currencies, to keep students hooked. This can lead to an unhealthy obsession with the game itself, rather than the subject matter at hand.

Ben Stewart, co-founder of Blooket, argues that his company’s platform is designed not to supplant lectures or project-based learning, but rather to provide a fun and engaging way for students to review facts they’ve already learned. However, even Stewart acknowledges that using Blooket for an extended period can be a sign of something gone wrong.

Teachers I spoke with agree that ed-tech games are best deployed in small doses and for defined purposes. But this raises further questions about the role of technology in education. Are we using these platforms as a crutch, a way to keep students occupied while we focus on more “important” things? Or are we genuinely attempting to use technology to enhance learning outcomes?

The gamification of learning is a complex issue that requires nuance and critical thinking. While ed-tech games may offer a short-term solution for educators looking to make learning fun, they also risk creating a culture of superficial engagement and undermining the value of education itself.

As we move forward in this era of ed-tech dominance, it’s essential that we carefully evaluate the impact of these platforms on student learning outcomes. We must ask ourselves: are we using technology to enhance education, or are we simply following the latest fad?