Adnan Ahmad
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Gamification is the use of game elements in domains other than games. Gamification use is often suggested for difficult activities because it enhances users’ engagement and motivation level. Due to such benefits, the use of gamification is also proposed in education environments to improve students’ performance, engagement, and satisfaction. Computer science in higher education is a tough area of study and thus needs to utilize various already explored benefits of gamification. This research develops an empirical study to evaluate the effectiveness of gamification in teaching computer science in higher education. Along with the learning outcomes, the effect of group size on students’ satisfaction level is also measured. Furthermore, the impact of gamification over time is analyzed throughout a semester to observe its effectiveness as a long-term learning technique. The analysis, covering both learning outcome and students’ satisfaction, suggests that gamification is an effective tool to teach tough courses at higher education level; however, group size should be taken into account for optimal classroom size and better learning experience.
- A. Khodadadi, S. A. Hosseini, E. Tavakoli, and H. R. Rabiee. 2018. continuous-time user modeling in presence of badges: a probabilistic approach. ACM Trans. Knowl. Discov. Data 12, 3, Article 37, 30 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3162050Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J. Koivisto and J. Hamari. 2014. Demographic differences in perceived benefits from gamification. Computers In Human Behavior 35 (2014), 179‐-188.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Seaborn and D. I. Fels. 2015. Gamification in theory and action: A survey. Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 74 (2015), 14--31.Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. de Freitas, D. Gibson, V. Alvarez, L. Irving, K. Star, S. Charleer, and K. Verbert. 2017. How to use gamified dashboards and learning analytics for providing immediate student feedback and performance tracking in higher education. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web Companion. 429--434.Google Scholar
- D. Siemon, F. Becker, L. Eckardt, and S. Robra-Bissantz. 2017. One for all and all for one-towards a framework for collaboration support systems. Education and Information Technologies. 1--25.Google Scholar
- H. Yin. 2018. What motivates Chinese undergraduates to engage in learning? Insights from a psychological approach to student engagement research. Higher Education. 1--21.Google Scholar
- Y. Attali and M. Arieli-Attali. 2015. Gamification in assessment: Do points affect test performance? Computers and Education 83 (2015), 57--63.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. D. Hanus and J. Fox. 2015. Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers and Education 80 (2015), 152--161.Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Rouse. 2013. Gamification in Science Education: The Relationship of Educational Games to Motivation and Achievement. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Southern Mississippi.Google Scholar
- G. Goehle. 2013. Gamification and web‐based homework. PRIMUS, 23, 3 (2013), 234‐-246.Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. Gabarron, T. Schopf, J. A. Serrano, L. Fernandez‐Luque, and Dorronzoro, E. 2012. Gamification strategy on prevention of STDs for youth. In Medinfo2013: The 14th World Congress on Medical and Health Informatics. IMIA, 1066.Google Scholar
- T. Reiners, L. C. Wood, V. Chang, C. H. Gütl, H. Teräs, and S. Gregory. 2012. Operationalising gamification in an educational authentic environment. In IADIS Internet Technologies and Society. Perth, Australia, 93--100.Google Scholar
- A. Gordillo, D. Gallego, E. Barra, and J. Quemada. 2013. The city as a learning gamified platform. In Frontiers in Education Conference. IEEE, 372--378.Google Scholar
- E. Danowska‐Florczyk and P. Mostowski. 2012. Gamification as a new direction in teaching Polish as a foreign language. In ICT for Language Learning (5th edition). Retrieved from http://www.pixelonline.org/ICT4LL2012/common/download/Paper_pdf/272‐IBT55‐FP‐Florczyk‐ICT2012.pdf.Google Scholar
- D. Watson, M. Hancock, and R. L. Mandryk. 2013. Gamifying behaviour that leads to learning. In Gamification'13. 87--90.Google Scholar
- C. Li, Z. Dong, R. H. Untch, and M. Chasteen. 2013. Engaging computer science collaborative learning environment. International Journal of Information and Educational Technology 3, 1, (2013), 72--77.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. Moccozet, C. Tardy, W. Opprecht, and M. Léonard. 2013. Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL), 2013 In The 2013 International Conference on Interactive Collaborative Learning (ICL). IEEE, 171--179.Google Scholar
- G. Barata, S. Gama, M. Fonseca, and D. Gonçalves. 2013. Improving student creativity with gamification and virtual worlds. In Gamification'13. Stratford, ON, Canada: ACM.Google Scholar
- E. H. Chiriac. 2014. Group work as an incentive for learning–students’ experiences of group work. Frontiers in Psychology 5 (2014), 558.Google Scholar
- C. E. Hammar and K. F. Frykedal. 2014. Assessment of knowledge and abilities when working in groups: An intervention study in everyday classroom practice. In Proceeding of the Joint Convergence between the Australian Association for Research in Education and New Zealand Association for Research in Education (AARE-NZARE'14).Google Scholar
- A. AlJarrah, M. K. Thomas, and M. Shehab. 2018. Investigating temporal access in a flipped classroom: procrastination persists. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 15 (2018), 1. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0083-9Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. Sanchez, S. Young, and C. Jouneau-Sion. 2017. Classcraft: From gamification to ludicization of classroom management. Educ. Inf. Technol. 22 (2017), 497. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9489-6Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Edney, R. Plotnikoff, C. Vandelanotte, T. Olds, I. De Bourdeaudhuij, J. Ryan, and C. Maher. 2017. “Active Team” a social and gamified app-based physical activity intervention: Randomised controlled trial study protocol. BMC public health 17, 1 (2017), 859.Google Scholar
- A. N. Kluger and A. DeNisi. 1996. The effects of feedback interventions on performance: a historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin 119 (1996), 254--284.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Denny. 2013. The effect of virtual achievements on student engagement. In SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors Computer Systems. 763--772.Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Raymer. 2011. Gamification: Using game mechanics to enhance elearning. eLearn, vol. 2011, 9, 3.Google Scholar
- S. M. Garcia, A. Tor, and R. Gonzalez. 2006. Ranks and rivals: A theory of competition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 32, 970--982. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167206287640Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Zichermann and J. Linder. 2010. Game-Based Marketing: Inspire Customer Loyalty through Rewards, Challenges, and Contests. Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.Google Scholar
- S. L. Wise and C. E. DeMars. 2005. Low examinee effort in low-stakes assessment: Problems and potential solutions. Educational Assessment 10 (2005), 1--17.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Simoes, R. Dıaz-Redondo, and A. Fernandez-Vilas. 2013. A social gamification framework for a k-6 learning platform. Comput. Human Behav. 29 (2013), 345--353.Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Domínguez, J. Saenz‐de‐Navarrete, L. De‐Marcos, L. Fernández‐Sanz, C. Pagés, and J. J. Martínez-Herráiz. 2013. Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers and Education 63 (2013), 380‐-392.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Z. Fitz-Walter and D. Tjondronegoro. 2011. Exploring the opportunities and challenges of using mobile sensing for gamification. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing. 1--5.Google Scholar
- D. Charles, T. Charles, M. McNeill, D. Bustard, and M. Black. 2011. Game-based feedback for educational multi-user virtual environments. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42 4 (2011), 638--654. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2010.01068.xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- F. Bellotti, R. Berta, A. De Gloria, E. Lavagnino, M. F. Dagnino, A. Antonaci and M. Ott. 2013. A gamified short course for promoting entrepreneurship among ICT engineering students. In 2013 IEEE 13th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2013.14Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. M. Connolly, E. A. Boyle, E. MacArthur, Y. Hainey, and J. M. Boyle. 2012. A systematic literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Comput. Edu. 59, 2 (2012), 661--686.Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. D. Kuh. 2010. Assessing what really matters to student learning inside the national survey of student engagement, Change: Mag. Higher Learn. 33, 3 (2010), 10--17.Google ScholarCross Ref
- O. L. Liu, B. Bridgeman, and R. M. Adler. 2012. Measuring learning outcomes in higher education: Motivation matters. Educational Researcher 41 (2012), 352--362.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Thom, D. Millen, and J. DiMicco. 2012. Removing gamification from an enterprise SNS. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW'12). ACM, Seattle, WA, 1067--1070.Google Scholar
- M. Kebritchi, A. Hirumi, and H. Bai. 2010. The effects of modern mathematics computer games on mathematics achievement and class motivation. Computers and Education 55 (2010), 427--443.Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Papastergiou. 2009. Digital game-based learning in high school computer science education: Impact on educational effectiveness and student motivation. Computers and Education 52 (2009), 1--12.Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. R. Christy, and J. Fox. 2014. Leaderboards in academic contexts: A test of stereotype threat and social comparison explanations for women's math performance. Computers and Education 78 (2014), 66--77. http://dx.doi.org/10.106/j.compedu.2014.05.005.Google ScholarCross Ref
- W. Li, T. Grossman, and G. Fitzmaurice. 2012. GamiCAD: A gamified tutorial system for first time AutoCAD users. In 25th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. Presented at UIST'12. ACM, Cambridge, MA, 103--112.Google Scholar
- R. McDaniel, R. Lindgren, and J. Friskics. 2012. Using badges for shaping interactions in online learning environments. In 2012 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference. Presented at IPCC2012. IEEE, Orlando, FL, 1--4.Google Scholar
- F. S. de Oliveira and S. Santos. 2016. PBLMaestro: A virtual learning environment for the implementation of problem-based learning approach in computer education. In 2016 Conference on Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1--9.Google Scholar
- S. Sepehr and M. Head, 2013. Competition as an element of gamification for learning: An exploratory longitudinal investigation. In 1st International Conference on Gameful Design, Research, and Applications. ACM, 2--9.Google Scholar
- M. Manyama, R. Stafford, E. Mazyala, A. Lukanima, N. Magele, B. R. Kidenya, and J. Kauki. 2016. Improving gross anatomy learning using reciprocal peer teaching. BMC Medical Education 16, 1 (2016), 95.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Gil. 2017. Short project-based learning with MATLAB applications to support the learning of video-image processing. Journal of Science Education and Technology 26, 5 (2017), 508--518.Google ScholarCross Ref
- N. V. Berkel, J. Goncalves, S. Hosio, and V. Kostakos. 2017. Gamification of mobile experience sampling improves data quality and quantity. In ACM Interaction Mobile Wearable Ubiquitous Technology. 1, 3, Article 107, 21 pages. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3130972Google Scholar
- I. Gil-Jaurena and D. Domínguez. 2018. Teachers’ roles in light of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Evolution and challenges in higher distance education. International Review of Education. 1--23.Google Scholar
- J. A. Foster, P. K. Sheridan, R. Irish, and G. S. Frost. 2012. Gamification as a strategy for promoting deeper investigation in a reverse engineering activity. In Proceedings of the 2012 American Society for Engineering Education Conference. AC 2012–AC 5456.Google Scholar
- V. B. Naya and L. A. H. Ibáñez. 2015. Evaluating user experience in joint activities between schools and museums in virtual worlds. Universal Access in the Information Society 14, 3 (2015), 389--398Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Nicholson. 2012. A user-centered theoretical framework for meaningful gamification. In Proc. Games þ Learning þ Society. 8.0, 223--230.Google Scholar
- I. Blohm and J. M. Leimeister. 2013. Gamification: Design of IT-based enhancing services for motivational support and behavioral change. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 5, 275--278. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12599-013-0273-5.Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. Nah, V. R. Telaprolu, S. Rallapalli, and P. R. Venkata. 2013. Gamification of education using computer games. In HIMI/HCII 2013, Part III (Lecture Notes in Computer Science), S. Yamamoto (Ed.), vol. 8018. Springer, 99--107.Google Scholar
- B. F. Skinner. 1954. The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Educational Review 24, 2 (1954), 86--97.Google Scholar
- J. McGonigal. 2011. Reality Is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. Penguin, New York.Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Reeves and J. L. Read. 2009. Total Engagement: Using Games and Virtual Worlds to Change the Way People Work and Businesses Compete. Harvard Business Press, Boston.Google Scholar
- R. Agarwal and E. Karahanna. 2000. Time flies when you are having fun: Cognitive absorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly 24, 4 (2000), 665--694.Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Zichermann and C. Cunningham. 2011. Gamification by Design. O'Reilly, Sebastopol.Google Scholar
- J. Harsanyi and R. Selten. 1971. A solution concept unifying the theories of cooperative and non-cooperative games. Econometrica 39, 4 (1971), 96--99.Google Scholar
- A. R. Dennis, J. S. Valacich, and J. F. Nunamaker. 1990. An experimental investigation of the effects of group size in an electronic meeting environment. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 20, 5 (1990), 1049--1057.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Fonseca, E. Redondo, and S. Villagrasa. 2015. Mixed-methods research: a new approach to evaluating the motivation and satisfaction of university students using advanced visual technologies. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14, 3 (2015), 311--332.Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Gåsland. 2011. Game Mechanic Based e-Learning (Master's thesis). Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar
- E. L. Deci, R. Koestner, and R. M. Ryan. 2001. Extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation in education: Reconsidered once again. Review of Educational Research 71, 1--27. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543071001001.Google ScholarCross Ref
- E. L. Deci and R. M. Ryan. 2000. The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry 11, 227--268. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Dijkstra, H. Kuyper, G. van der Werf, A. P. Buunk, and Y. G. van der Zee. 2008. Social comparison in the classroom: A review. Review of Educational Research 78, 828--879. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0034654308321210.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Orosz, D. Farkas, and C. Roland-Levy. 2013. Are competition and extrinsic motivation reliable predictors of academic cheating? Frontiers in Psychology 4, 87 (2013) 1--16. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10508422.2013.877393.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. L. K. Carden and S. A. Fowler. 1984. Positive peer pressure: the effects of peer monitoring on children's disruptive behavior. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis 17, 2 (1984), 213--227. DOI:10.1901/jaba.1984.17-213.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Harmer. 1991. How do cooperative and collaborative learning differ from the traditional approach? In The Practice of English Language Teaching (New Ed.). Longman Group UK Limited, UK. http://www.thirteen.org/edonline/concept2class/coopcollab/index_sub1.html. Accessed on 22nd May 2019.Google Scholar
- L. Bursztyn, G. Egorov, and R. Jensen. 2019. Cool to be smart or smart to be cool? Understanding peer pressure in education. The Review of Economic Studies 86, 4 (2019), 1487–1526.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L. W. Anderson, D. R. Krathwohl, and B. S. Bloom (Eds.). 2000. A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.Google Scholar
- D. W. Johnson and R. T. Johnson. 1979 Conflict in the classroom: Controversy and learning. Rev. Edu Res. 49, 1 (1979), 51--69.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Denny, F. McDonald, R. Empson, P. Kelly, and A. Petersen. 2018. Empirical support for a causal relationship between gamification and learning outcomes. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’18). ACM, New York, 1--13.Google Scholar
- M. Ortiz‐Rojas, K. Chiluiza, and M. Valcke. 2019. Gamification through leaderboards: An empirical study in engineering education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 27, 4 (2019), 777--788. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.12116Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- The Impact of Gamification on Learning Outcomes of Computer Science Majors
Recommendations
The Impact of Educational Games on Learning Outcomes: Evidence From a Meta-Analysis
The objective of this study is to examine and compare the impact of serious games and gamification on learning achievement and motivation. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that gamification has a more positive influence on learning achievement ...
Gamifying Computer Science Courses with OneUp Learning
SIGCSE '20: Proceedings of the 51st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science EducationThe low performance and drop-outs in Computer Science classes are frequently attributed to lack of student engagement and motivation. Meanwhile, gamification increasingly attracts the interest of educators due to its potential to foster motivation and ...
Using serious games in computer science education
Koli Calling '11: Proceedings of the 11th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education ResearchGames are generally considered to be motivating and engaging and people spend a lot of time playing recreational games. Serious games can be used in Computer Science (CS) education to offer a different type of method to learn and discuss relevant ...
Comments