Research Study Article

The Effects of Using Gamification Techniques on Graduate Students’ Motivation in a Face-to-Face Training Environment
• The purpose of the study was to explore the effects of using gamification techniques on graduate students’ intrinsic motivation.
• Methodology: Experimental research
• Two groups: 1. Control group (24 students) 2. Experimental group (25 students)
• Participants: In-service and preservice teachers enrolled in a graduate instructional technology program. Their ages range between 25-33 years old
• Data collection tools:
1. Motivation was measured using a validated instrument (Intrinsic motivation inventory/IMI) http://selfdeterminationtheory.org/intrinsic-motivation-inventory/
• The subscales used from this inventory are:
• Interest/enjoyment (7 items)
• Perceived competence (6 items)
• Effort/ importance (5 items)
• Pressure/ tension (5 items)
• Value/ Usefulness (7 items)
• Relatedness (8 items)
• The only subscale not been used in this study was the perceived choice subscale because it didn’t apply to the purpose of the study. Students’ participation was voluntary and all participants participated because they wanted to. Applying the instrument does not require using all subscales.
2. Instructional materials:
The purpose of the conducted workshop was to help graduate students understand and apply the TPACK framework. Graduate students were supposed to match learning objectives with an appropriate choice of technology and instructional strategy. The materials were prepared by the researchers. It was composed of cards that each had an instructional objective related to a discipline (math, science, geography, religion, history). Under the instructional objective lie a set of technologies and another set of teaching strategies where students were asked to choose from and match with the learning objective. The data was collected in each treatment group as follows:
• Control group: (no gamification)
? Students were arranged in groups; (4-5 students) per group.
? Students were introduced to the rules of the training session.
? Researchers gave the first group the first card
? Students in the group were asked to work together to match the card parts
? The group was instructed to present their best match and convince the other groups of their choice.
? The round then goes to the second group
? No points or badges were given as a result of having the correct match.
• Experimental group: (gamification)
? Students were arranged in groups; (4-5 students) per group.
? Students were introduced to the rules of the training session.
? Researchers gave one member in the first group the first card
? Students in the same group were asked to work together to help that member find the correct match
? The chosen member presented her best match to the other groups and tries to convince them of her choice.
? If the member was able to convince two other groups, she will be allowed to proceed to the board game (snakes and ladder) and throw the dice in order to proceed on the board. This exact member will be given a point also for coming up with the correct match using Class Dojo (gamification app).
? The round goes to the next group.
? The winner group is the one who reached 100 on the snakes and ladder board game. And the winner member is the one who accumulated most points in class dojo.
3. Data Analysis/Results
• Total score was calculated separately for each subscale (Relatedness, value/usefulness, presser/tension, effort/importance, perceived competence, and interest/enjoyment). Total score was also calculated for the total of all subscales together (motivation).
• Average was calculated for each group on each subscale and for all subscales together.
• An independent-samples t-test was performed to check for differences between the two groups.
Results:
• Intrinsic Motivation: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the level of students’ intrinsic motivation in a gamified and non-gamified learning environment. The results showed that there was a significant difference in the scores for IV (gamified) (M=207.52, SD=22.072) and IV (non-gamified) (M=183.54, SD=40.395) conditions; t(35)= -2.564, p = . 015.
• Relatedness: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the level of students’ relatedness to each other in a gamified and non-gamified learning environment. The results showed that there was not a significant difference in the scores for IV (gamified) (M=50.84, SD=5.893) and IV (non-gamified) (M=47.21, SD=8.204) conditions; t(47)= -1.785, p = .081.
• Value/Usefulness: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the level of students’ perception of the value and usefulness of the workshop presented in a gamified and a non-gamified learning environment. The results showed that there was not a significant difference in the scores for IV (gamified) (M=41.52, SD=8.661) and IV (non-gamified) (M=37.33, SD=13.628) conditions; t(38)= -1.278, p = .209.
• Pressure/Tension: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the level of pressure and tension the students experience in the workshop presented in a gamified and non-gamified learning environment. The results showed that there was not a significant difference in the scores for IV (gamified) (M=9.28, SD=5.184) and IV (non-gamified) (M=10.21, SD=5.748) conditions; t(47)= .594, p = .555.
• Effort/Importance: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the level of effort and importance the students perceive of the workshop presented in a gamified and non-gamified learning environment. The results showed that there was not a significant difference in the scores for IV (gamified) (M=28.32, SD=4.161) and IV (non-gamified) (M=24.75, SD=8.179) conditions; t(33)= -1.914, p = .064.
• Perceived competence: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the level of students’ perceived competence in the workshop presented in a gamified and non-gamified learning environment. The results showed that there was a significant difference in the scores for IV (gamified) (M=36.84, SD=3.848) and IV (non-gamified) (M=31.63, SD=9.150) conditions; t(30)= -2.582, p = .015.
• Interest/Enjoyment: An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare the level of students’ perception of interest an enjoyment experienced in the workshop that is presented in a gamified and non-gamified learning environment. The results showed that there was a significant difference in the scores for IV (gamified) (M=40.72, SD=7.191) and IV (non-gamified) (M=32.42, SD=12.998) conditions; t(47)= -2.751, p = .009.
Paper Specifications
• The paper should be written in a suitable and acceptable format in order to be published in the: Technology, Pedagogy and Education Journal http://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=rtpe20&page=instructions#.V11YtLt95dg
• The paper should include the following headings:
o Abstract (170-200 words) + Keywords
o Background: previous research done in the area and the research gap.
o Problem Statement: research purpose (teacher development): using innovative teaching strategies (gamification) to facilitate the acquisition of effective technology integration skills among teachers and that is by training them to effectively apply the TPACK framework.
The main goal of this research study was exploring the effectiveness of gamification as a strategy in increasing participants’ intrinsic motivation. The main purpose of the workshop was facilitating the acquisition of effective technology integration skills through training teacher to deeply understand and effectively applying the TPACK framework.
o Methodology and Data Collection
o Results
o Discussion: should include explanation of the results and it should be tied to previous research.
o Limitations and implications
o Conclusion
o References (APA style)
• The overall paper style should adhere to the APA style and not less than the word count specified on the order.
• References should be chosen carefully to reflect the sequence of literature in the area of gamification with adult learners. But, more emphasis should be placed on teacher training as the main purpose of the study and ways to motivate and engage them. As I mentioned before the purpose was to help teachers to acquire effective technology integration skills through training them on applying the TPACK framework and that is supported by using innovative teaching strategy such as gamification.
• References shouldn’t be older than 5-7 years.
• The Intrinsic Motivation tool should be included in the paper and a reference to its validation should be mentioned.
• Please feel free to email me if you have any question