One of the more prominent features of what is often called “gamification” is that certain behaviors, such as correctly solving a problem, are followed by points, medallions, or awards made contingent on the behavior. But what makes the points or medallions valuable? Is solving the problem really important to the individual? And herein lies the one of the great dilemmas of gamification. The points, awards, etc. are often assumed to be reinforcing in and of themselves. Or, perhaps they are linked to prizes or to avoiding penalties. But are these really meaningful to the person? And if they are, do they derive their meaning from outside the activity being reinforced? Such consequences have been described by Skinner as “spurious,” and by Goldiamond as “program-extrinsic.” The identification and programming of “program-intrinsic,” activity-specific consequences, as contrasted with program-extrinsic, spurious consequences, will be the focus of the breakout. This session will allow participants to design those practices that help learners find the fun in math (and other topics), rather than design practices that simply make math fun.
Review T. V. (Joe) Layng‘s biographical statement.
CE: 1.0 credit BACB