Does gamification work for boys and girls?

Abstract

The development and use of Virtual Learning Environments (VLE) has increased considerably over the past decades. Following that trend, many research findings have shown the benefits of using VLE during the learning process. Nevertheless, there are important problems that hinder their use requiring further investigation. Among them, one of the main problems is the inappropriate use of these systems by students. The boredom, lack of interest, monotony, lack of motivation, among other factors, ultimately causes students to behave inappropriately and lead them to a lower performance. In this context, the proposed study investigates whether it is possible to reduce undesirable behaviors and increase performance of students through the use of game mechanics (i.e. gamification). We develop a VLE, E-Game, that can turn on/off several game mechanics, such as points, badges, levels and so on. A case study was conducted with two groups of students to investigate their behavior during their interaction with E-Game with and without gamification. The results indicate that the gamification implemented by E-Game contributed to improve student performance in the case of boys. Yet, improvement was not observed in the case of girls. Furthermore, it was not possible to conclude whether the use of gamification helps to prevent inappropriate student behavior, and therefore, further studies and experiments are needed.

Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review

“…Another interesting observation is the low proportion of studies on gamifying STEM disciplines, excluding CS/IT and mathematics, where reinforcement of motivation is particularly beneficial: only two out of thirty two (Bonde et al, 2014) and . Anderson, Nash, & McCauley, 2015;Auvinen, Hakulinen, & Malmi, 2015;Bernik, Bubaš, & Radošević, 2015;Hakulinen, Auvinen, & Korhonen, 2015;Herbert, Charles, Moore, & Charles, 2014;Ibanez, Di Serio, & Delgado-Kloos, 2014;Knutas, Ikonen, Maggiorini, Ripomonti, & Porras, 2014a;Knutas, Ikonen, Nikula, & Porras, 2014b;Krause, Mogalle, Pohl, & Williams, 2015;Laskowski & Badurowicz, 2014;Leach, Laur, Code, Bebbington, & Broome, 2014;Lehtonen, Aho, Isohanni, & Mikkonen, 2015;Poole, Kemp, Patterson, & Williams, 2014;Sillaots, 2014;Sillaots, 2015;Smith, Herbert, Kavanagh, & Reidsema, 2014;Tvarozek & Brza, 2014) Math 5 (10%) (Attali & Arieli-Attali, 2015 a ;Christy & Fox, 2014;Long & Aleven, 2014;Paiva et al, 2015 a ; Pedro, Lopes, Prates, Vassileva, & Isotani, 2015b) a Multimedia/ Communication 6 (12%) (Barata, Gama, Jorge, & Gonçalves, 2014;Hanus & Fox, 2015;Holman et al, 2015;Jang, Park, & Yi, 2015;Leach et al, 2014;Utomo & Santoso, 2015) Medicine/Biology/ Psychology 5 (10%) (Bonde et al, 2014;Landers & Landers, 2015;Nevin et al, 2014;Pettit, McCoy, Kinney, & Schwartz, 2015; a Languages 4 (8%) ...…”

“…In turn, game design elements which are used in the creation of Barata et al, 2014;Bernik et al, 2015;Hanus & Fox, 2015;Holman et al, 2015;Ibanez et al, 2014;Jang et al, 2015;Krause et al, 2015;Laskowski & Badurowicz, 2014;Latulipe, Long, & Seminario, 2015;Leach et al, 2014;Poole et al, 2014;Sillaots, 2014;Utomo & Santoso, 2015) Interaction with learning environment 11 (21%) Boticki et al, 2015;Herbert et al, 2014;Morschheuser et al, 2014;Nevin et al, 2014;Paiva et al, 2015;Pedro et al, 2015b;Pettit et al, 2015) Exercises 6 (12%) Hakulinen et al, 2015;Hasegawa et al, 2015;Lehtonen et al, 2015;Long & Aleven, 2014;Tvarozek & Brza, 2014) Collaboration/discussions/ social interactions 4 (8%) Knutas et al, 2014;Shi et al, 2014;Smith et al, 2014) Projects/labs 6 (12%) (Bonde et al, 2014;Boskic & Hu, 2015;Hew et al, 2016;Landers & Landers, 2015;Sillaots, 2015;Simoes et al, 2015) Tests 4 (8%) Attali & Arieli-Attali, 2015;Christy & Fox, 2014;Tu et al, 2015) Othersgamification scenarios can be divided into three categories: dynamics, mechanics and components (Werbach & Hunter, 2012). 1 Dynamics represents the highest conceptual level in a gamified system.…”

“…and "How to balance points and rewards with play and intrinsic engagement?". For answering these questions and for advancing the understanding of how to build successful gamified educational systems, there is a need for testing systems that support examining the effect of game elements and experimentally Points only 1 (2%) Badges only 9 (18%) Davis & Klein, 2015;Hakulinen et al, 2015;Leach et al, 2014;Long & Aleven, 2014;Pedro et al, 2015a;Tu et al, 2015;Tvarozek & Brza, 2014) Leaderboards only 3 (6%) (Christy & Fox, 2014;Landers & Landers, 2015;Poole et al, 2014) PBL a 14 (27%) Anderson et al, 2015;Barata et al, 2014;Hanus & Fox, 2015;Hew et al, 2016;Laskowski & Badurowicz, 2014;Latulipe et al, 2015;Lehtonen et al, 2015;Nevin et al, 2014;Pedro et al, 2015b;Sillaots, 2015;Smith et al, 2014) Others 24 (47%) (Attali & Arieli-Attali, 2015;Auvinen et al, 2015Bonde et al, 2014;Boskic & Hu, 2015Hasegawa et al, 2015;Herbert et al, 2014;Holman et al, 2015;Ibanez et al, 2014;Jang et al, 2015;Knutas et al, 2014;Knutas et al, 2014;Krause et al, 2015;Mekler et al, 2015;Morschheuser et al, 2014;Paiva et al, 2015;Pettit et al, 2015;Shi...…”

“…knowledge acquisition outcomes (Jang et al, 2015); Laskowski & Badurowicz, 2014;Paiva et al, 2015; perceptual outcomes (Christy & Fox, 2014;Davis & Klein, 2015;Pedro et al, 2015b;Sillaots, 2014;Sillaots, 2015;Christy & Fox, 2014) behavioral outcomes Hakulinen et al, 2015;Hew et al, 2016;Pedro et al, 2015b) engagement outcomes (Boskic & Hu, 2015;Ibanez et al, 2014;Latulipe et al, 2015;Morschheuser et al, 2014;Poole et al, 2014) motivational outcomes (Hasegawa et al, 2015;Herbert et al, 2014;Mekler et al, 2015;Pedro et al, 2015a;Utomo & Santoso, 2015) social outcomes (Hanus & Fox, 2015;Christy & Fox, 2014;Shi et al, 2014).…”

An interdisciplinary perspective on gamification: Mechanics, psychological mediators and outcomes

“…As previously mentioned, badges, leaderboards and points are frequently mentioned in the context of gamification, sometimes to the degree of misleading practitioners into believing that simply applying these will guarantee success [13]. With regard to how domain-specific some mechanics are, such as learning outcomes in the domain of learning [11,12,76], or drinking behavior and health in the domain of health [39,101], mechanics likewise roughly represent the domains. The review shows that some mechanics are more or less shared and used in literature, while others are context-specific.…”