My presentation for the annual Conference on College Composition and Communication (http://www.ncte.org/cccc/) on the gamification (or the process of making things more game-like) of classrooms.

1. TOWARDS A MODEL OF CRITICAL
GAMIFICATION: WRITING GAMES,
RULES DEPLOYMENT, AND REAL
WORLD SUCCESS
Guiseppe Getto
gettog@ecu.edu
Nathan Franklin
nfinitum.nathan@gmail.com

2. What We’ll Cover
 What we mean by writing games
 iFixit’s writing game
 Towards a model of critical gamification
 Implications

3. Writing Games
 Definition
 A problem-solving activity [involving writing],
approached with a playful attitude – Schell 2008

4. Writing Games, 2
 Rules deployment
 Gamesfacilitate human contact, are enjoyable, use
rules to create problems for people to solve, and
engage creativity - Radoff 2011
 The closer you get to this with rules you build, the
better
 Thus rules deployment in writing games should be
rhetorical (e.g. critical, epistemological, persuasive)

5. iFixit’s Writing Game
 TheTechnicalWriting Project
(http://edu.ifixit.com/)
 Free devices and tool kits shipped to technical
writing instructors
 Teaching and technical support
 Students create real documentation for the repair
of devices

6. iFixit’s Writing Game, 2

7. iFixit’s Writing Game, 3

8. iFixit’s Writing Game, 4

9. iFixit’s Writing Game, 5

10. iFixit’s Writing Game, 6

11. iFixit’s Writing Game, 7

12. iFixit’s Writing Game, 8

13. Critical Gamification
 Some problems with gaming theory
 “Gamification is bullshit” - Bogost 2011
 E.g., you can’t gamify anything that isn’t already a game
 But this essentializes a “game” as something that is a
priori designated as a game, and rules out everything else
 So, because iFixit labels theirTechnical Writing Project a
“project,” can it never be a game?
 Isn’t there more than one way for something to be a
game?

14. Critical Gamification, 2
 Some problems with gaming theory, 2
 Definitions of games are too facile and don’t discriminate
between different types of games
 Immersive
 Mobile vs. online vs. offline
 Social networks vs. individual
 Competitive vs. casual
 Micro games vs. large-scale games
 Gamified professional environments like classrooms

15. Critical Gamification, 3
 Some problems with gaming theory, 3
 We don’t have enough empirical research on
gamification to say definitively if it works or not
 We know people like games
 Thus folks are busing gamifying things on the
assumption people will like them more
 We need comparative studies between gamified
situations and non-gamified situations

16. Critical Gamification, 4
 Some problems with gaming theory, 4
 Gaming studies uses “correlationism” to define
what is and is not a game
 Correlationism = saying there is an a priori
arrangement for all possible networks -
Meillassoux2009
 The response is “contingency”
 Network arrangements are always already contingent
on the specific arrangement of both human and
nonhuman actors that emerge within a given network -
Latour 2005, Bennett 2009

17. Critical Gamification, 5
 Some attempted solutions
 More empirical research on gamification!
 An open question: can gamification be critical?
Meaning:
 Used rhetorically, but ethically - Rickert 2013
 Used democratically rather than as a marketing ploy
- Reeves and Read 2009, Chatfield 2010, Radoff 2011
 Viewed as a way to change the ways actors relate to
one another within a given network

18. Critical Gamification, 6
 iFixit’sTechnicalWriting Projectis a “social
experience game” (or an experience that uses
game-like features to enhance engagement)-
Radoff 2011
 Successful rules deployment
 Turns technical documentation into a more social and
more enjoyable experience
 Engages writers in “structured creativity” - Radoff 2011
 Real world problems, e.g. new knowledge will be
democratically negotiated with other users
 Thousands of engaged users from all over the world

19. Implications
 Certainly, not everything is a game
 Perhaps elements of games can be used critically
for teaching and other forms of professional
engagement
 Need more research!
 This critical gamification must be rhetorical,
ethical, and based in the contingencies of
specific networks