It didn't feel like I was talking to an alien who had no understanding of the problem with education today when I interviewed him. He started having attention problems in 4th grade (which is the age he's targeting), and all of the problems he described to me lined up with my own beliefs.
I know it reads as blatantly bragging, but from my interactions with Andrew (having met him at his office personally and then having done the interview over Skype), he didn't come across that way. It sounded to me like he had explained it many times before and was trying his best to succinctly give a straight answer. He seemed pretty normal by social standards, and I have some engineering friends who are sincere assholes with an ego much larger than Andrew's, if that's how you perceive him. I think most hackers and especially programmers have some amount of that cockiness though, that's not something we're all immune to. Even the CS professors admit that CS students walk around feeling more entitled than liberal arts students (and it's scribbled on the bathroom stalls: "Liberal arts degree dispenser below" right above the toilet paper roll in an engineering building on the campus I went to). Anyway, that wasn't the vibe I got from him, although I can see how you could read it that way.
It's an interesting point brought up: has he had enough painful experience with education to build a solution to it all? I don't know. I don't think it takes much to fix education; it's so broken that any young person today with an appreciation for gaming could probably figure out something better than what exists now. But I'm really interested in seeing what his team comes up with, and if someone wants to work on education, I'm more than supportive of those efforts because that whole process sucks right now.
"I don't think it takes much to fix education; it's so broken that any young person today with an appreciation for gaming could probably figure out something better than what exists now."
The world of gaming has put a lot of work into discovering how to motivate people to keep going, even if what they're doing isn't actually that fun. Think of grinding in an MMORPG, or whatever the hell people do on Farmville: it's not that fun, probably significantly less fun than playing Super Mario Brothers 3, and yet people spend hours and hours on it.
And yet teachers have trouble getting students to learn anything.
I think this is inaccurate both in its presumed comparison and in the premise which underlies it.
First, grinding (really farming, no one outside of Korea grinds anymore, which I'll get to) in an MMO or playing Farmville is pretty low intensity mentally, it does not require that much of your attention. Multi-tasking is easy, for example. I'm not so sure that you would be able to grind away at mentally taxing activities. It generates fatigue.
Second, though, is that video games have not figured out a way to effectively reward boring activities. Let's use MMORPGs. When I played Final Fantasy XI, grinding was so tedious I quit before level 20. EverQuest 2 was better, but not too much more. WoW was fairly easy. RIFT was a breeze. Each new release is easier than the last, indicating that grinding is something game developers have learned to avoid rather than create ways of rewarding it. As an empirical test, it seems like a resounding rejection of thesis.
I'm not sure gamification is going to get much done on the education front. I think this idea resounds with techies because they like video games, they often like to show their accomplishments and they like the ego-stroke the concept of displacing education with games brings.
Khan Academy has to some extent gamified educational exercises and [video] study. I have reservations about this sort of thing as it focuses on reward fulfilment rather than fostering a love of the topic by engaging the learner.
I know it reads as blatantly bragging, but from my interactions with Andrew (having met him at his office personally and then having done the interview over Skype), he didn't come across that way. It sounded to me like he had explained it many times before and was trying his best to succinctly give a straight answer. He seemed pretty normal by social standards, and I have some engineering friends who are sincere assholes with an ego much larger than Andrew's, if that's how you perceive him. I think most hackers and especially programmers have some amount of that cockiness though, that's not something we're all immune to. Even the CS professors admit that CS students walk around feeling more entitled than liberal arts students (and it's scribbled on the bathroom stalls: "Liberal arts degree dispenser below" right above the toilet paper roll in an engineering building on the campus I went to). Anyway, that wasn't the vibe I got from him, although I can see how you could read it that way.
It's an interesting point brought up: has he had enough painful experience with education to build a solution to it all? I don't know. I don't think it takes much to fix education; it's so broken that any young person today with an appreciation for gaming could probably figure out something better than what exists now. But I'm really interested in seeing what his team comes up with, and if someone wants to work on education, I'm more than supportive of those efforts because that whole process sucks right now.