Disqus - Latest Comments for karlkapp

Re: Microlearning: Short and Sweet | Learning Solutions Magazine

karlkapp — Fri, 13 Sep 2019 08:53:40 -0000

Bill thanks for such a comprehensive and thoughtful review. You did a great job of capturing our work and our attempt to help others understand and clarify this thing called "microlearning." Having some one of your knowledge and wisdom recognize our work is exciting and a high honor. Thanks again, Karl and Robyn.

Re: Top 10 Blogs for Learning & Development Professionals

karlkapp — Thu, 13 Dec 2018 15:07:57 -0000

Thanks for including me on this list, very honored:)

Re: How to Reduce Training Development Time from 2 Months to 2 Weeks

karlkapp — Wed, 31 Jan 2018 08:09:45 -0000

Josh,

Thanks for the insights into the process. It would make sense that shorter, more template driven missions and learning tools would decrease development time. As the industry moves forward, these types of tools and concepts can make L&D departments more responsive and allow for more rapid deployment of content. Thanks for the insights.
Karl

Re: 25 eLearning and L&D Thought Leaders to Watch in 2017

karlkapp — Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:51:37 -0000

Had a great time at LUC 2017, such an energetic user group community. Honored to be on the list!

Re: How Sharon Boller and Karl Kapp’s Learning Game Design Process Works

karlkapp — Tue, 07 Mar 2017 06:43:42 -0000

Steve, thanks for the nice, short and concise explanation of our 9 step process. Of course it gets a little more in-depth during the process but these are the basics, follow this foundation and your games will be successful. So everyone's first assignment is to play more games. How's that for homework:)

Re: 5 Things to Consider in Gamification Design

karlkapp — Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:46:10 -0000

Monica,

Good tips, one element I'd like to add is that the designer needs to ensure that the game dynamics match with the learning objectives. To help with this the gamification designer should create breadcrumb trail from desired performance to necessary behaviors to terminal and enabling learning objectives to game mechanics. I agree that data and analytics are key to monitoring and need to be recognized before the design starts and monitored over time because interest and participation will wane, However, I think L&D professionals can't overlook the alignment of the learning objective(s) with the right game dynamic(s). For instance, if speed is not part of an evaluation criteria for an on-the-job activity, one does not want to use "race to the finish" as the game dynamic. Once again, helpful tips.
Karl

Re: Will at Work Learning: Interview with Karl Kapp on Games, Gamification, and LEARNING!

karlkapp — Sat, 24 Sep 2016 09:28:28 -0000

Will,
Thanks for the great questions and for the interview. To me, you are the learning field's best research-to-practice guru and it was a pleasure answering the questions. Thought provoking and insightful!

Re: sxsw-panelpicker-logo PanelPicker®

karlkapp — Mon, 22 Aug 2016 12:11:32 -0000

Lynn is a thoughtful presenter who will provide great insights into the topic of using Pokemon Go in the classroom. It promises to be an interesting and worthwhile presentation.

Re: A New Wave Of Learning Management Systems

karlkapp — Thu, 09 Jun 2016 14:47:27 -0000

I feel like you missed a really big one! Especially in the learning and education space.

Re: How to Turn Your Sales Team's Victim Mentality into a Growth Mindset

karlkapp — Sun, 04 Oct 2015 15:27:10 -0000

Great article, especially agree with the part about the growth mindset. I think that is important in sales as well as in other areas. Even in the area of designing instruction.

Re: Building a Learning Game? Remember to Keep Your Perspective

karlkapp — Tue, 08 Sep 2015 10:31:20 -0000

Great infographic Melissa. Thanks for sharing!

Re: 10 Best Practices for Implementing Gamification

karlkapp — Wed, 19 Aug 2015 10:45:36 -0000

Yes, you can see part three here:

https://www.td.org/Publicat...

Re: The Art of Building Relationships

karlkapp — Tue, 17 Mar 2015 08:04:16 -0000

Enjoyed the article and one of the things I always try to tell my students is that trust and relationships are more important that what you know or how smart you think you are. Business, learning and life are all about how you treat people and how you build your relationships.

Re: Study Reveals that Adding Frequent Tests to Online Learning Improves Retention

karlkapp — Wed, 18 Feb 2015 10:32:59 -0000

Will,

Great Caveat to add to the research study, thanks.

Karl

Re: Top 5 Reads About Gamification: Let The Games Begin!

karlkapp — Wed, 11 Feb 2015 04:55:35 -0000

If someone is looking to learn more about Gamification in terms of learning/instruction, here are some resources that might help. "The Gamification of Learning and Instruction" and the accompanying fieldbook "The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Theory into Practice" and a Lynda.com course "Gamification of Education" might be useful as well. And for someone who is seriously into game theory and concepts, "Rules of Play" by Tekinbas and Zimmerman.

Re: Study Reveals that Adding Frequent Tests to Online Learning Improves Retention

karlkapp — Mon, 26 Jan 2015 17:35:22 -0000

Ben,

Thanks for your comment. I am sorry if you or any other person read the article as "5 minutes is the absolute time frame." I meant to couch my recommendation appropriately (by indicating that approximately...)

In the study the lecture had been broken up into four segments of about five minutes so that time frame does seem to be effective. Now, is it most effective? Is it better than 6 to 10 minutes? Is it superior than some unnamed method not included in the study? Maybe, maybe not.

However, I made the recommendation based on the data available and 5 minutes does work as per the study just not perhaps as good as 6-10 minutes (but again, we don't know).

I made recommendation because if practitioners wait around for all the research to be conducted on all possible permutations then they may never have any type of recommendation at all. This is a huge disconnect in the field between researchers and practitioners. (if not THE huge disconnect).

The problem with much research in the field of learning is that it is couched in so many caveats that practitioners--people who are actually trying to use the research to create better instruction--can't because of too many possible ifs-ands-or buts. Nothing is definitive so nothing gets done, no recommendations can be made because we don't know if all permutations have been tested so we can't "create a guideline".

So what is a practitioner supposed to do? Wait?

The question of "does 5 minutes work" is answered. "Yes, it worked in the study."

Now the question of does 4.5 or 6.3, or 10.1 minutes work better is not answered but one can still develop instruction to keep a person's mind from wandering by using approximately 5 minutes as an interval, it is an effective guideline as per this study. Maybe not the most effective but certainly better than no guideline at all which is, I think, what you propose.

And, the recommendation still indicates a strong understanding of the research while providing a guideline someone can actually USE.

So, based on this research 5 minutes is effective to keep the mind from wandering.

Is it the most effective time span? We don't know but as for a recommendation, it can help guide a developer who previously had not idea what an appropriate time frame might be.

Thanks for the healthy academic debate...always helpful to move the field forward.

Karl

Re: Instructional Design: Not for the Faint of Heart

karlkapp — Mon, 24 Nov 2014 09:18:19 -0000

Jeanne,

Insightful information. Experts do so much they often forget what it is they are actually doing or how they actually learned to apply their skills. An expert instructional designer can tease out the "real" knowledge and skills and develop instruction to pass-on that knowledge from the expert to the new learner in a fast and efficient manner.

Karl

Re: Review of Karl Kapp’s newest book on learning games aka serious games

karlkapp — Tue, 28 Jan 2014 10:34:31 -0000

Sharon,

Thanks for the review of the Fieldbook. It was a lot of fun to write.

Also, thanks again for your multiple contributions to the book from the case study to the great information about playtesting. I recommend people read your online series on game design, it is extremely helpful, well thought-out and will help people make great learning games.

Re: Karl Kapp’s New Gamification Fieldbook for Learning Professionals

karlkapp — Tue, 17 Dec 2013 20:11:45 -0000

Steve, I could not agree more. I have seen so much more interest in actually creating a game and making the game than trying to convince people that games actually teach! It's not that the resistance is totally gone but people understand a great deal more about games and how they impact learning than even a year or two ago.

Re: Games, Gamification, and the Quest for Learner Engagement

karlkapp — Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:31:12 -0000

Scott,

The idea of flow is an integral part of gamificaiton. If you can create an environment where the learner is engaged, flow can be a result. The learners get into the activity and, as a result, lose track of time and focus only on the activity before them and not on extraneous thoughts or actions. While creating a challenged, using story and encouraging activities are all parts of games, they are simple design elements that can "gamifiy" content without creating a game.

Re: August Learning Game Design Workshop Recap

karlkapp — Mon, 09 Sep 2013 22:21:49 -0000

Great workshop, we had wonderful people and a good time was had by everyone, happy game development!!

Re: Gamification, Hypocrisy, Snoop Dogg and Words

karlkapp — Tue, 16 Apr 2013 08:42:23 -0000

I think I lean toward your umbrella but, alas, I agree, it would be hard to gain widespread acceptance of that usage.

Re: What’s the difference between Gamification and Serious Games?

karlkapp — Mon, 15 Apr 2013 13:45:45 -0000

Enjoyed the post and the comments. I have been thinking more and more about gamification and find that it really can be two types. One seems to be Structural Gamification what you mentioned as applying the metaphor of games. Structural gamification is the use of game elements to propel a person through content without altering the content itself. So its 5 points for getting this quiz question right at the end of a unit and then you can go onto the next unit and earn more points. The structure around the content has game elements.

Content Gamification is when the content is altered to be more game-like. This is when you change learning objectives into challenges or when you add a character to an elearning course who describes, in her own words, the elements of an important policy or something along those lines. It is a change to the design of the content to contain game elements.

Both can be important and effective from a learning perspective.

I do tend to blurr the line between game-based leanring and gamification because, from a learning perspective, if I take typical content, let's say on negotiation skills and add an avatar to explain that content, one could call that gamification. If I then added points to correct answers in that course, is that still gamification or has it now become a game? If it's still gamification, what do I need to do to make it a game? Add more characters, provide more feedback? Just simple call it a "game."

I am not sure at what exact moment adding game elements to content switches from gamification to game. Someone once told me Simulation + Gamification = Game Based Learning. Is the simulation the element needed to turn gamification of learning content into a game? These are interesting questions and this have been an Interesting discussion. I think at times the distinction is critical and other times, not so much.

Re: Why Games Dont Teach

karlkapp — Mon, 14 May 2012 11:15:31 -0000

Ruth,
An interesting piece and one, I suspect, is meant to provoke thought and debate. For in your latest edition of "E-Learning and the Science of Instruction", you give several principles for creating game design that does teach which include matching game types to learning goals, making learning essential to game progress and building in proven instructional strategies. All sound and good advice. Additionally, as I am sure you know, there are several published studies that indicate that relevant and important learning can be a result of educational games.The trick for instructional designers is to find out what elements of games lead to the desired learning outcomes and what elements do not. In the "Gamification of Learning and Instruction" I attempt to build the taxonomy which you discuss in terms of what games to use for what types of content. I think games and games for learning is an important and critical subject to discuss in learning circles and I think, over time, more research will be conducted that will help everyone answer the question "When, How and What Types of Games Teach"Also, I wanted to add that prototyping, as you mentioned, is critical to success and that even in early stages of designing a learning game a paper-based prototype can answer many design questions.

Re: The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: What Will You Gain From This Book?

karlkapp — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 08:45:49 -0000

Judy,
First of all, thanks for being a stop on the Gamification Blog Book Tour. I especially like your lens for reviewing the book. And I agree, what in the world is a "typical" instructional designer. But given that typical isn't always typical, I think you hit on some key points that are important for understanding games and gamification and we've all played lame "educational" or instructional games and we've all seen points added as if they were salt and pepper to interactions that didn't need points.

I dedicated chapter 9 to helping designers and others develop a design document for their gamification processes so that they can codify the process they want to use, the instructional goals and the methodology they incorporate into their design. I think it is so important to add those elements.

Although I love games and think they are fun and instructional on so many levels, I tried to present a balanced approach to the research exploring games. I used an approach that focused on reviewing studies of studies (called a metanalysis) to be sure that I was not just culling results from a single source and then I did look at individual studies to see what we could learn about certain game attributes. I didn't want to pit games vs. traditional instruction, I wanted to explore "what about games makes them effective learning tools."

And, as you indicate, an instructional designer armed with this information will make better, more informed design and vendor choices given that information.

Finally, I love being involved in research and learning creation that actually requires me to play games but I also encourage anyone in the learning space to play games from a critical perspective. Think about what works, what is engaging, what is the game "forcing" you to do and decide if any of those elements can be incorporated, even in a small way, into the design of instruction.

Thanks again for taking a look at the book through the lens of an instructional designer, you surfaced some excellent points! Thanks for being a stop on the tour.