As you can surmise, Solo missions are completed by each individual student, while Team missions require all members to participate. The final score on these missions are shared by all members, while also counting towards a separate Team Competition that is tallied on the Team Leaderboard. (More on leaderboards in the next post.)
A majority of team members must have successfully progressed to this level in order for the team to start. Those that are way ahead can earn extra XP for assisting teammates who have fallen behind. Those who are still far behind even though a majority of the team has made it to the level will "jump up" to the team level, but must return to where they were in the scenario upon completion.
If that last part sounds a bit confusing, it has been for students as well, especially when we started off. I will certainly revisit this system based upon end of year student feedback and my own observations.
Here are my thoughts regarding the advantages and challenges of teams and Team Missions thus far:
- Fosters Collaborative Problem Solving
- Encourages Peer Support and Instruction
- Competition Among Teams is a Motivating Factor for Most Students
- What happens when some students persistently fall behind?
- Does this penalize others in the Team if they don't reach that mission?
- By ability? Interest? Randomly?
- Should TEAM XP be including in the grading system?
Although some tinkering is needed to make this system work more seamlessly, I believe that the advantages far outweigh the challenges.
NEXT POST: LEADERBOARDS
Complete Gamification Series