N-i-n-j-a - Chop it up and put it under a microscope!

I've been thinking about the various aspects of the Ninja Board for a while.  I posted about it first here, then here about how it's evolved, and then here again on the physical form of the board.  This was definitely inspired by Jeff who posted about it here.

But that's not really it.  I'm not happy enough with it, with reasons that I will list later on.

On Twitter @mathhombre mentioned that he was presenting it, and then he said this:

For a lack of a better expression...  I will use a picture instead:

I am simply so excited to chat about this, and am glad there is people to talk to.

Ok so let's begin with some background [which I actually only watched after John put it all together for me (who is also a wonderful blogger that you should follow if you haven't already)] (omg incorrect uses of brackets because I am just so excited)

Exciting stuff, now let's talk Ninja Board.

I want to talk about: the good, the bad, what worked, what didn't, what else can we do, should we be doing this...etc.  I will attempt to organize this conversation in 2 strands: the perceived strengths; and the lingering questions.

The Perceived Strengths:

I believe it's fair to be modest about these strengths here.  It's new, the sample size is very small (for me at least), and nothing is set in stone.  Hence perceived strengths

1. Engagement
It is a different type of engagement for students.  I basically used the idea of this board as part of the construction of a positive classroom culture.  Building collaboration habits through unlocked achievements, building positive aspects for coming to the classroom, encouraging the active participation of student interactions...etc.  Students highly enjoyed it for many reasons.  I mentioned it's a different type of engagement.  Different to what?  I am actually referring to the concept of "perplexity" that Dan Meyer has been writing and speaking about.  Although there is definitely perplexity built into the board itself, I would argue that the main piece of engagement for students with respect to the board is not perplexity (this is actually something I want to throw into the discussion later).  This is not a replacement for other ways of engaging the class, it is simply an additional element.

2. Craving for the mathematics
I mentioned the main piece of engagement is not mathematics, but there is clearly mathematics built into the structure of the board itself.  "How are we getting points, sir?" "OMG I leveled up! How did I do that?" "When am I getting to the next rank??"

I never answer them.

This snowballs into perplexity where I then engage them in different ways.  They are then eager to work out their own formula of how the levels work (because they can't look it up).  They tested against other students points and levels and see if their ideas work.  And this happens without me ever forcing them to do it.  I think my lack of explanation for them makes them want the answer even more.

3. Enforcing positive classroom culture
This was the main reason why I started the board... so it better be one of the strengths!  Students are eager to come into the classroom, where I can then catch them and help them.  (After all, getting them to class can be half of the battle sometimes).  Students don't know how exactly I am giving them points, but the "unlocked achievements" give them some sort of idea:

 I can update their unlocked achievements whenever I want, so students get better and better at maintaining and creating these behaviour when they are working in groups or simply being in class.

The Lingering Questions:

This is actually why I am writing this up.  I crave some discussion on these questions (and other questions that you come up with).

1. Is this type of engagement actually useful?

I wonder about this one all the time... Is this an appropriate way to engage students?  Should we only be engaging students through the power, beauty, utility of mathematics?  I realize that there's a lot of other aspects from the board that is useful, but is this really a good thing?  I understand the dangers of extrinsic rewards -- is this something like that?  I have always hoped that something intangible, that they don't completely understand how to obtain, would not affect their general interest that we're trying to develop...  but is that just my hope? Is it actually reality?

2. How do we reduce the amount of preparation time?

As I mentioned in my post about the structure of the board, this thing took me approximately 75 hours to plan, create, recreate, update, post...etc.  That's a lot of time invested.  I am not sure if the good outweighs the time spent.  I mean, sure, student smiles and wonderment are immeasurable... but still.  So what other options are there?  I considered throwing it online on my website instead.  I considered passing the card out and have the students put them in themselves.  But I am just not sure.  I am unsure if it will have the same effect.  I am unsure if kids will begin to get bored.  I just don't really have a solid grounding for whether alternatives will work.

3. What other features can be built into this?

Besides the board, I also made individualized ninja business cards for students at the end of the semester.  I told them they were kind of a "to-be-continued" coupons.  If they ever get me again, they can restart with bonus points.  But enough about what I've added to this, what other features can be built on top of this game layer?  Will they be useful ones?  If I begin to incorporate aspects beyond positive classroom culture -- things like achievements of curriculum standards, mastery of concepts...etc -- will that then become extrinsic rewards that I never wanted in the first place?  Or maybe marks already do that so I shouldn't worry?  Are there other features I can add to this?  Maybe an individual bar graph for achievements? Maybe a sticker for each face on a separate graph?  as more people achieve those, more anonymous Ninjas will be there (actually the more I think about this one... the more it might work).

4. Is it fundamentally problematic to create a game layer in the classroom?

Again, another question that I grapple with all the time.  It's actually similar to the first question, but digs a bit deeper I think.  Is the concept of a game layer actually a good thing for the cognitive development of students? Of people? Of teachers?  Of course, it comes from a good place, but a lot of bad practices come from a good place.  Would this be the unintended message: "The world is so boring that we have to build a game layer on top of it."  Or could it be that it's not about whether reality is boring or not boring, but it's simply a part of reality that we are building into the students experiences of school?

In any case... I welcome any questions, and any discussions.  I would love to dive into this.