Are the perks simply a substitute for learning? I’ve seen students sitting around playing video games instead of doing anything remotely related to education, and only a fool would claim that, since the kids are in school, this is education.

I’ve also see students “paid” for doing schoolwork with video game time and similar perks. Psychologically speaking, there are risks to this, but one should not rush to write off such a strategy with at risk students.

I’ve also seen strategies to teach students through fun activities. It is tough to keep up that pace through an entire curriculum, and without high skill, the entertainment will simply come across as lame to jaded teens, but if someone is making it work with high risk students, that is fantastic.

This post was mentioned on Twitter by JoanneLeeJacobs: School to would-be dropouts: ‘Have it your way’ http://bit.ly/1XTlha...

If they meet their academic goals and accomplish more than they otherwise would have, who cares? Anyway, we don’t know what “more time in the game room” amounts to. Maybe it’s not a great deal of time. Nobody said they’d be spending all day there.

“At the new Mavericks High in Largo, students who boost their academic performance and attendance will eventually get to spend more time in a game room playing John Madden football and Tiger Woods golf.”

So they go to school more often, then they play more video games.

and the public school thinks this is a good idea?