The name we use for things, how it's displayed, is often very critical. While the underlying structure might be standard, it's how the underlying structure is changed and displayed to the end user.
Take any FPS, and it can be broken down to a simple point and click. The underlying actions are essentially move the cursor to a spot and click. It's everything else that makes it a game.
So while I agree, that he didn't change the underlying structure too much, how that structure is displayed is what makes it special.
(I got three responses of this ilk, so I hope no one will be offended if I just respond to the topmost one.)
I agree very much with your point in general. However, in this case, if I were a student in the class, I don't think this scheme would really do anything for me. I think I'd have the same reaction I expressed in my comment - saying "XP" instead of "points" or "level" instead of "grade" doesn't change the work I'm going to have to do or the effort I'm going to put into it.
> if I were a student in the class, I don't think this scheme would really do anything for me.
Maybe it would. Maybe it wouldn't. Whether it does or not is irrelevant. It's whether it get's more people to put effort into a system they normally wouldn't (something that is proven time and time again). Branding something as X might not be important to you, but for the vast majority of people, that brand categorizes it in their mind.
It's easy to dismiss this, but I think if you look at what choices you make in your life, you'll find areas where the brand something is given impacts your choices, even in the slightest ways.
Take any FPS, and it can be broken down to a simple point and click. The underlying actions are essentially move the cursor to a spot and click. It's everything else that makes it a game.
So while I agree, that he didn't change the underlying structure too much, how that structure is displayed is what makes it special.