I noted that the intervention cost $500/student yielding a total price to the district of $20,000. That’s quite a high priced contract. You might want to contrast this with other pricing for interventions. For example, game-based learning/tutoring gets priced around $5-7 per student. That’s because the district wants all kids to have access. Now, some claim not all students play the game. But such is the world of district sales (note also, this affects game design. The game has to be perceived to work for all kids equally well. That turns it into a generic experience; hence why there are no real great games in high school).

My point is, how are we comparing video games with tutors when the pricing/value is dramatically inequivalent?

Additionally, it would be good to compare the $/hr of the intervention to the $/hr of classroom instruction. Ballpark, I get $15/hr per classroom hour. What did the $/hr come out to for the short burst tutoring.

And last … human intervention happens for video games at scale when influencers, friends, and experts start creating media and events where avid players interact. BUT, when the pricing is so dramatically low, companies can’t spend the development $$ to create fantastic games that create this meta culture of “tutoring” amongst each other.

Thanks,
-Robert