GameChangers: Frank Parker

Speaker A: Foreign.

Speaker B: Welcome to the Gamification Quest podcast series where we showcase the voices behind our new collection on gamification and game based learning, the Sententia Anthology. I'm your host, Monica Cornetti, and in each episode, I sit down with one of our authors to explore the ideas and stories they've brought to life in their chapter. Together, these conversations reveal how creative, passionate professionals are transforming the way adults learn. Let's dive in. Hi, my name is Monica Cornetti and I am here with another edition of our very special Gamification Quest podcast. Because on these special editions, I am getting the privilege, I have the honor of interviewing the authors of the different chapters in our upcoming anthology. And today, I get the privilege and honor of interviewing Frank Parker. Frank's topic is Enframing and the Human Moment in Learning Design. So I have a lot of questions for Frank, as I'm sure you will, and I know you'll absolutely love reading his chapter.

Speaker A: I.

Speaker B: Let me just tell you a little bit about Frank before we get started. He's a retired director of Instructional Technology at Johnson C. Smith University, and he is one of our most, uh, I don't want to use the word active because active, it does not describe it. He's engaged, he's generous, he's gracious. He's always saying, like he always says, you, uh, know, you got me thinking about something I hadn't thought about before. So he's retired now from his career, but he's a lifelong learner and just such a champion and cheerer for everybody who's in our gamification community of practice. So Frank's chapter, I'm not sure it was a breath of fresh air because it was a totally different direction for me. But I know Frank and I know what his thinking gets like when he's exploring new ideas. So thank you for joining me, Frank. And I can't wait to talk to you about this whole human moment in learning design. So thank you for being with me today.

Speaker A: Thanks, Monica. It's always a pleasure to have conversation with you. I'm always learning something new.

Speaker B: See what I mean? Look what I just say. He always learns and he always tells you. He's so gracious with that. So let's start with what was your inspiration for this? You wrote about the term end framing and human moment in learning design. So where's our whole catalyst? What's the motivation for this?

Speaker A: Oh, that's good. You know, for several years since I've been looking at gamification, I've had a nagging concern that There were dark patterns that needed to be paid attention to. In fact, our own took Sigmund did a YouTube presentation a few years ago on dark patterns. And if you look at, if you look at the literature, you'll hear language like exploitation, manipulation, and these kind of negative kind of conversations. And so there's an aspect of, uh, trying to come to grips with where is that coming from, what's creating that space. I know a lot of people who do work in design and, and I don't see them as engaged in manipulation by any intention or exploitation, but somehow that's showing up as language in and around it. And then I had an experience with you planning Game of Con in which you introduced the notion of hospitality as opposed to service. And that's a different conversation in the context of planning and putting together a game of con event. And that tension was very interesting. And it is that tension that actually set up the paper. And so for me, it was a matter of looking at how I might understand that tension. And it's a tension between clear planning being very explicit and at the same time taking care of, of the human beings. A big part of that process, how those come together, began to become the interest. And I saw that as a design issue. And so I started looking, Yeah, I started looking for where, where has this been anticipated? And when I say that, I immediately go to conversations in philosophy. So you actually said, oh, wonder philosophy has anything to say about that? Other philosophers to talk about it. And the paper came to mind by Heidegger called On Technology. And I said, let me see what he spoke about that. And that's where I picked up the notion of in framing from Heidegger. And in framing is a term used to point to seeing the world as a resource. So things show up as resource. So when I think about students, there are always the possibility of being improved. They're a resource. Mhm. Of course, if I think about trees, I think about lumber. If I think about whatever in a technical world, everything shows up like something to be optimized, changed. Even our sense of progress is all based on the world of in framing. And so when I looked at that, I went, ah, uh, this is the notion that may help me explore the human moment in design. And that will give me a way to begin to frame the concerns I have about gamification. Yeah, so the paper is really about those insights.

Speaker B: So I want to come back to Heidegger. Heidegger is the philosophy, uh, Heidegger. Okay, so Heidegger. And he's talking about end Framing. He talks about alcos. But before we go to that, when you talk about your concern, you started your chapter, I guess it would be like a vignette, but it was pretty strong about points and badges and leaderboards. And so what is that story revealing to us about the story that you're telling there about points, badges and leaderboards? What is that?

Speaker A: Yeah, I opened the paper with a vignette because I thought I should ground it in maybe a kind of an idealized view of what gamification might look like. And so it begins with this notion of an employee showing up for work and someone hands him a map and says, follow the map. And what he discovers is he's in another training program again, and he's getting ready to engage in these activities. He's a good employee, he's done this before, it didn't hurt him in the past. So he just goes along with it. And what he discovers in that process is there's something to be achieved. At each of the stations he visits along the corridor, there's a leaderboard. He's happened to be in good shape with the leaderboard. He's doing everything quite well. However, he has a sense that something is not right. And then he all of a sudden shows up in an alcove and the alcove asked him one question and it simply is, when was the last time you were proud of yourself? That's very different conversation than do this, get that right, Move on, get this, do that right. All of a sudden the conversation shifted. The card then begins to recognize him and pay attention. Yeah, I felt like, ah, human, ah, moment. That's what you were referring. Yeah, two different experiences of the process. And that's then what I set up as kind of the metaphor for the paper, the nature of the corridor, which is what I would call the traditional processes of walking people through very efficient, very well designed activities and design of leaderboards. Having people essentially be compliant to some training program, but then to stop and have them reflect are kind of the two tensions at least represents the tension I see that gamification can make almost more explicit.

Speaker B: Right.

Speaker A: So it's that human moment, the echo moment that the paper kind of resolves around.

Speaker B: Yeah. And it's so interesting because, like, I really, really dislike that word compliant. And it takes me back to when I was interviewing different schools for my oldest grandson when he was 4 or 5. And if I heard that word compliant one more time, I was just gonna it like, what about creativity and innovation and. But when we think about bringing people into A workplace, especially something uh, like that, a fintech or something where there are, there's a confidentiality and proprietary information and so there is this compliance angle to it. But we, that's not who the individual is. The individual has a moment of when was the last time you felt proud? When did you feel the most appreciated by your manager? You know, like, what was that? What did that look like? Was that uh, some kind of private. Where he just stopped by or she stopped by to say really love how you did X or was it some kind of, you know, all these questions that make them human. As we think about gamification design rather than. The thing about points, badges and leaderboards is it's easy because it's, it's achievement based. And what I mean by that is checkbox, I can now slap a badge check. I can add points. You did this, I can put you on. And it's not, it's like, it's just this algorithmic rather than individualized as to who they are. And if we're really going to help them be successful, that's a whole different story.

Speaker A: Right. We, yeah, we, we end up being bookkeepers, keeping up the points, keeping up with what's happening, keeping up with who's on top. That's why I frame that as the efficiency compliance schema.

Speaker B: Yes.

Speaker A: Yeah. There's a human being in this process that matters, that has a journey that our designs don't take into account necessarily. They do to some degree. Let me point out where they.

Speaker B: Yeah, uh, no, I, I know what you're saying. It's not, it's not all, it's not bad. It's just that it's not bad. Yes.

Speaker A: Yeah.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: So even though we can talk about motivation and what people generally are dealing with at the moment we engage them, they are the possibility of something else as well. They can, they can be in discovery, they can wonder about something, they can decide a uh, lot of possibilities that the, the car that didn't take into account.

Speaker B: Yeah, good.

Speaker A: Because. And that's, that's what I'm looking at. I'm putting those two ah, aspects of the process together. That's the tension when, when does the, when does the program recognize the person.

Speaker B: Yeah. Which brings one of your, one of your strongest points was that it's something like sometimes the most meaningful moments aren't measured because, uh. Right. Because I can't just say check. Because as we think about instructional designers and we have content and we're focused on the content and a deadline and a learning program fulfilling objectives yeah. And what am I measuring? Am I measuring how many students complete it? Am I measuring whether you got through it? And how do I measure? What's some kind of meaningful moment for you inside of there?

Speaker A: Yeah, so notice that's missing in our evaluations and gamification. What, ah, we noticed are all those other things that we measured. But, uh, what was the moment of recognition for the learner? What did the learner notice? What emerged as what matters to the learner? What did the learner discover as a result of the process? When did we hear that? And you'll notice we didn't collect anything on that. We didn't notice it, we didn't ask for it. We weren't even planning to have that show up. What we were planning is to fulfill, and this is the compliance issue, fulfill our objectives. So the learner then is reduced to resource. They're simply there to achieve our objectives. And the moment that's dominant is the moment you can also create in the learner the sense of mistrust, manipulation, exploitation. Yeah, so I see those notions showing up because we prioritized our measurement over the human moments that show up in the alcove. That's exactly how I frame the dilemma.

Speaker B: I guess the difficulty with that is I try it like whenever we think about learning and development, I want to be very clear. Like I'm not blaming anybody. Like, you know, you L D people have it all wrong. It's, it's, that's not how I think at all. I think you have been given, you know, this is content that a subject matter expert wants somebody to know because they feel like they've got to know all the features of this new printer. Let's just make that up. Right. But like that's not who that individual is. It's not really probably going to help them in second selling. It's m more about when they realize and make that connection with an individual customer of what their pain points are and how I can talk to them as a human being rather than just try and sell you on the points of my product that I'm. And, but all of those things are just too hard to measure. So we don't, we don't even think about how would we measure them? Because how would we measure them? It feels like it's squishy, like that's something that is too soft, not tangible.

Speaker A: Now you raised an interesting dimension. The thing about end framing is we tend to think of the world only in terms of what's measured and notice what's not valued to what makes the in framing issue, this is what I call Heidegger's big call out is in framing is dangerous because it means we don't notice that there are other ways of being that are not part of measurement.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: That's all that happens. And so I want to make room for these other ways of being that are more complete. And that's the only issue. It's not like in framing is wrong, it's just there are other ways that need to be also protected. The human moment honors discovery, honors mystery, even honors confusion.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: Or perplexity. Yeah, Failure and failure. Exactly. And so that has more to do with what I call discovery in learning, rather than what I typically would say is the emergence of pretense in which the learner pretends to go along with what's going, happening and simply patterns what we expect. And we see that as some measure of engagement.

Speaker B: Yes.

Speaker A: Where real engagement has to do with what's showing up for the learner. What is the learner doing about acting for the sake of some future? Even organizations are doing, training and engaging employees for the sake of the company's future. But there's never conversation about, from the learner's perspective of what they are discovering about that future with the company. They don't get to frame together a shared way of working. So again, I'm setting up not enough alcohol conversation in relationship to our car to work. And so that's actually the essence of the argument that I made.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: So need more alcove moments.

Speaker B: More al moments. So you went in the, in the chapter, you, you gave like a genealogy of like Nick pelling and Jane McGonagall and Sebastian Darding and, uh, so basically this evolution of what, you know, the gamification growth path, whatever that, whatever we want to call it. So gamification started here, it's been here, it's. So where we are now versus where we need to go. Where do you feel like we need to go with it?

Speaker A: That's interesting. Yeah. So when it first started, in fact, Nick Pellen's piece, Nick was a UI designer, so he was really interested in making it easy for people to use computers. So there could things you could tweak that would allow for easier use. That's kind of what we think about in gamification. But his use of the term gamification actually meant something else. It really meant, notice how all this video game stuff is taking over our life. Why is everything a video game? We've got video games everywhere, and it's almost as if we can't design anything unless it looks like a video game. So he was really raising the question about what is with the gamification of life. He was almost an early kind of critic and he still is. I think he still fundamentally questions those concerns. But people like the Turgen came back and said, oh, there's some possibility here game mechanics and a non game context, which is kind of we generally think about. So we begin to see some organization of uh, the kind of qualities of game showing up as a way to enhance education. Nice. And he warns even against leaderboards. And we see development there. We've seen it in the autolysis model where function focus versus human centered.

Speaker B: Right.

Speaker A: Extrinsic motivation versus intrinsic motivation. All those conversations are there. So there's always been this concern about heavy external versus internal. And McGonagall really got uh, concerned because she even coined the phrase poincification, focusing so much on the measurement that we actually did not take into account that human beings are at their best when they're inventing their future. In fact, Jane McGonagall very much spends time working with people or in the process of designing futures as a way of taking a lot of that futurist kind of thinking. In fact, in the paper I actually offer an existing definition that moves it from simply exploring new mechanics to what can we do to evolve the human moments. So if I had to talk about where is it going? It's going toward more human moments. Oh, I know that's true. You have raised the question of hospitality in learning. Hospitality is focused on human moments. M. How is what we're doing recognize the other? How do we increase belongingness? You can talk probably more about those particular themes. How does, how does the learning program see the learner? How does it recognize the learner? You raise those questions under the protocol of hospitality. That's an emerging notion, I think that wasn't there a year ago. Yeah, as a possibility. And it's very much influenced by Will Guidera's look at service efficiency versus hospitality. You take it into account the person. So we can now maybe think about our learning programs as being more hospitable. Our learning programs allowing for failure, our uh, learning programs encouraging wonder and discovery. Those are qualities we could begin to start planning for. And therefore gamification now becomes more about provocation.

Speaker B: Right.

Speaker A: And the future. Yeah, that kind of thing I think

Speaker B: about and I don't want to get stuck on like Stephen, uh, Rees's 16 motivators, but I think about how many of our learners, and I don't want to divide it into two fields, but I think about, like, neck up, like, I have to be innovative and creative. It's not. If I do this, then do that, then do that. I have to actually, I have to think this is a situation. How is the best way to respond to that situation? And so if I think about those types of learners, I could see that feedback is a conversation to help me get better. You tell me what you really liked about how I did an interaction. You tell me, had you considered or maybe next time you try this? And so I see this as a way of, oh, that's really good. I hadn't thought about that. Because we have those kind of conversations all the time. And I. It always makes things that make me go, hmm, right. Like, I hadn't thought about it. But then for our other employees who, you know, they really maybe don't have that high curiosity or desire to learn. And what they really just want is they want meaningful work and.

Speaker A: Yep.

Speaker B: But. And they want to be good at what they do. They want to be a master at what they do. But anytime we have that conversation about feedback, it feels like something rears its ugly head of.

Speaker A: I.

Speaker B: You know, this feels like that this was back there when I had a coach who jumped all over me for messing up or a teacher who gave me a bad grade or. So I don't even really know what I'm asking here, but do you think that this idea of alcove and is that it works for all employees, or do you think it's more. Oh, yeah, yeah.

Speaker A: Um, yeah. I'm raising the question that the big concern is what do people care about?

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: So the issue for me is to center it all on how do they make sense of their world? What future do they see? What do they care about? What do they want to bring forth? And I have a notion that what they care about, care is a foundation of all human action. So that's what I want to therefore keep forward. So it's engaging in revealing and disclosing where care is for them. At any given time in a conversation, you're going to confront what matters to the other. I just think we need to have more conversations about what matters.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: And therefore we need a place to have that conversation. Alcoves is my issue.

Speaker B: Right.

Speaker A: Alcove designs. Notice, I haven't specified all the ways one can do that yet, but that's a different. That's kind of another issue. But human beings care. All human beings care. They have concerns for their family. They have concerns for Their future. They have concerns for the organization they are engaged with. And it seems to me it starts there. So if it doesn't start there, there needs to be a design that has it show up so that we remind everyone that they have these concerns and, and that they can link it to what we're doing.

Speaker B: Right.

Speaker A: When that's not possible, then I think there's a disconnect.

Speaker B: Well.

Speaker A: And I think we're, uh, uh, in uh, what I would consider to be ethical concerns at that point as well.

Speaker B: Oh, interesting. So, uh, again, I go back to. None of that is easy what you're talking about. Yeah, I, I hear that, Frank, but I need to have this done by Tuesday. So I'm just going to put some points in there and some level ups and maybe a little side quest here or. Because I don't really have time to think about how. But then that whole, that comes back to that whole ethical question of who are we doing the training for? Why does it even exist in the first place? Right.

Speaker A: And all I say is. Oh, do that. Start there, add an alcove.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: Make sure you have a debrief and make sure that debrief takes into account the specific learners engaged in that which looked like this. What was it like for when you showed up? What was it like during the process? What was missing for you that we, we have to ensure at least a debrief happens. Um, that allows a human moment. That's all I suggest. But I've seen so much that missed that.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: And when that happens, here's the consequence. When it happens, it means the experience betrays trust and learners no longer will engage because they're clear that what's happening here has nothing to do with them.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: And we get to see all the boredom we all know and recognize when we walk into schools.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: Because schools are full of classrooms with kids who figured out how to disconnect. They've mastered the art of being there and not being there. And they even notice that the institution doesn't even notice that they're not there.

Speaker B: Right. Yes.

Speaker A: How good they are at the process.

Speaker B: I hate to perpetuate that, but, uh, I mean, telling my grandson who just entered middle school, I'm like, school without other stuff sucks. I mean, it's just not. There's not enough there because it's not individualized. It's just cranking them through the grades. But you got to find your people. You got to find your people. You enjoy that. You know, whether that's music, drama, sports, whatever it is, your People will make your time in school. That's what will make it engaging and fun. And you'll work harder to get good grades and to stay engaged and to do not disappoint your friends. And I don't mean that in a bad way. I mean that in a positive way. So, um, it's just perpetuated. Again, I don't blame teachers. I'm not blaming anybody here. I except maybe Horace Mann who brought over the system that we should just crank people through because we need to educate everybody. So let's just crank it through. But as we think about design going forward with gamification, I hear that at least have a debrief. And fortunately, when I was first moving into adult learning, I bought a book that I did not know how much it would impact my life. But right from the very beginning it was. Mel Silberman was the author and he was like, you gotta debrief everything you do. If you don't debrief it, it has absolutely no reason for being there. You've got to stop and help them to connect the dots with why this is important to what they're doing. So I do get that. But as you think about thinking something that's game based or gamification, is it all just going forward? Is it about designing in those moments of reflection, stopping long enough to have them? Yeah, yeah, yeah. And that's whether that's asynchronous or E learning or. There's plenty of space for that. No matter what kind of program we're designing.

Speaker A: I think there's space for it and I think we need to make it a rule. When I started, I started this off as a, uh, manifesto which was we will have alcoves everywhere. That would be the rule fundamentally. But unless we make that as important as our points and leaderboard designs. Because think about it, we spend more time getting our mechanics right than getting our human moments right. I just want to spend some time figuring out what are some good ways we can bring the human moment to the space. Let's work on that.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: As I mentioned, debrief is one aspect, but there are other dimensions of that as well. There's even a way to do it with A.I. uh, I think there are a lot, a lot of ways of designing within that context. The. So that, that's my call. There's no possibility of having any learning disaffected without a corridor. You gotta have some stuff. And all I'm saying is, and you got to make sure there's some alcoves around and when you do that then you have a nice dynamic. You've opened up, uh, alternative ways of being. You're protecting wonder, you're protecting trust, you're protecting discovery on the part of the learner. Just where I think real learning happens anyway.

Speaker B: Yeah, I agree. And it's, it's just in those little moments like we keep talking about unreasonable hospitality but you know, it's, it's a short two minute scene in a TV series that then leads to a book, that then leads to discussions that leads to like it's all these moments that, but they are all stitched together, uh, like any one single one of them, wasn't it? But having that opportunity to reflect and what can we do with this and what does this mean to us and how do we bring this into what, what we're doing? And it's not implying that anybody's doing anything bad or wrong. It's just that what can we do that's just that much different? Yeah, yeah.

Speaker A: We begin, we're exploring, we're beginning to explore and design our future. And so gamification is just as developmental as any other aspect of human practice. And in the beginning we focus a lot on fun. Made sense. We focused a lot on understanding the nature of game mechanics. I think Javier colleague is really good at paying attention at that level.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: And yet she sees that there's something missing in our gamification work even more that I think is aligned with partially what I'm concerned about as well. That there's some new spaces to kind of open up. You have to think about it. When I start getting ready to start designing something, I start with what's the platform I'm going to use.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: Well, why did I start with Platinum?

Speaker B: Right. That's.

Speaker A: Yeah, yeah, that's Corridor, you know, that's related to the Carter side. Maybe I could start on the other side. What is the human moment I want to help protect or make show up. And that would require me knowing something about what really matters to the learners. Uh, part of what really matters is what we understand about motivation, what we understand about Persona. But what really matters is what matters at the moment we engage them. That's what we forget. It is what we can anticipate. But at the moment is what really matters. That's where engagement happens. It doesn't happen in the theoretical issue. See, they're not. Again, human beings are not resources. That's the end framing. They're not a motivation to change or improve. And we have to start in a different place. And that's that's the essence of that.

Speaker B: And we know that about adult learners. I'm thinking about a class I have next week that I imagine, because I've done this before, that when I show up, because I'm working for a client, that there'll be not half a dozen, but a percentage of the room that have no idea why they're there. Like, I just woke up this morning, my supervisor said I was supposed to be here. So, like, I. Unless I can get to someplace pretty quickly that is important to them, it's a total waste of their time because they're not seeing, you know, as we think about the human moment, like, why is this important to me? Why. What. What's not working for me? That I want to find a way to help, to make it work, to. To be different than what it is right now. So all that goes back to what we already know about adult learning is that they've got to be involved in what they're going to be learning and how they're going to be learning it and why it's important for them to learn it.

Speaker A: And. Yeah.

Speaker B: Yeah. It's not because it's another initiative from L and D that you got to take this class. It's not.

Speaker A: Nuh uh.

Speaker B: Doesn't work. It's not a reason. All right, Frank. So I just. We, uh, had such a great conversation, and thank you for this. I really enjoy every minute of it. And we always end up talking way too long. So let's just wrap. If. If someone only had, like, they were looking for one big idea to take from your chapter, what would it be that you'd want them to remember from your chapter in the anthology?

Speaker A: Yeah. Great. Corridors are necessary. I think we were kind of focusing on that a little bit. But alcoves are essential.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: So the issue is to always design alcoves inside the corridors that we're dealing with. That's where the human moment exists, in the alcoves. So that's the essence of that for me. It's being aware that we have to build structures, but we also have to have places for reflection. Otherwise learning isn't going to show up. That's, um, the bottom line or takeaway I have around the piece.

Speaker B: Yeah. And as we think about adult learners and why they need to learn something, it's, again, important for us to be thinking. Not that, like, they're not. They're. What is? Your words. They're not a resource. We're not. They're. Yeah, yeah.

Speaker A: They're not a resource.

Speaker B: Yeah, right.

Speaker A: Which means we want them to learn that because we have a job for them to do.

Speaker B: Yes.

Speaker A: In other words, it's not their humanity that matters to us.

Speaker B: Right.

Speaker A: It's their what they can provide us,

Speaker B: Ability to help us get done. Yes. Yeah.

Speaker A: Which is. Which is different from our living together to design future together. Very different spirit.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: Very different spirit.

Speaker B: Well, and I think that we've seen lots of examples of that where it's, you know, the Golden Whip or just that, uh, you know, checkout game where I just want you to be as fast as you can to benefit me as a corporation. Yes. Not to. Because this makes you feel good about yourself and what you've learned and what you've accomplished. Yeah. But that you've complied.

Speaker A: That's when we.

Speaker B: Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Speaker A: That's the pattern. I want to.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: That way you then end up experiencing, being manipulated, and therefore you have no reason to trust or engage.

Speaker B: Yeah.

Speaker A: In the future. Yeah. That, to me, is the essence.

Speaker B: Uh, that's very good. Very good. Well, Frank, thank you so much for this conversation. And I think that your call to design these alcoves, don't forget the quarters, because those are important, but it's just crucial that we have these alcoves for these human moments. I think that's just so important for us. So, again, Frank's chapter in the anthology is in Framing and the Human Moment in Learning Design. And we will be starting, uh, with our pre sales probably, as you're watching this podcast, our pre sales are probably open and we'll have hard copies available in New Orleans for those who are coming to Gamicon nola. And you'll be able to see in all these podcasts that we're doing with all the authors, just everyone's take on something different with gamification design. It's not like we said, I need you to write on X topic. We said, would you like to be a part of this anthology and what do you want to bring? And the authors brought what was on their heart, what they've been thinking about, what they've been studying, and Frank's just a great example of that. So, Frank, thank you for your time. Really appreciate you being here with me. And I look forward to the feedback that we get as people start to read the anthology and read your chapter and see this podcast and have their insights about the whole idea of corridors and alcoves. I just think it's fascinating. So thank you very much. Appreciate you. Thank you for joining us for this episode of the Gamification Quest podcast. Series. If you'd like to go deeper, you can get your own copy of the Sententia Anthology, where you'll find all of our author's chapters collected in one place. Simply go to www.sententiagamification.com anthology. And if you're ready to take the next step in your own practice, visit our homepage at www.sententiagamification.com to explore our certification programs and our community of practice. Until next time, keep designing learning that engages and transforms it.