Exploring Engaging Gamification Mechanics in Massive Online Open Courses

Introduction Massive online open courses (MOOCs) are a current trend for creating online courses for equipping learning institutions to obtain a free and high quality teaching initiative with relevant visibility on the Internet (Johnson, Becker, Cummins, Freeman, Ifenthaler, & Vardaxis, 2013; Pellas, 2014). MOOCs refer to web platforms that allow millions of learners to access various instructional materials and resources without the constraints of time and place, and additional learning opportunities to supplement traditional classroom instruction, such as Coursera, Udacity, and edX (Lin, 2010; Stoel & Lee, 2003). MOOCs are interactive, online learning tools that support the learning of specific concepts by enhancing, amplifying, and guiding the cognitive processes of learners (Altbach, 2014). MOOCs use the increasing popularity of social networking services (SNSs) such as instant messengers (IMs), Facebook, and Twitter, to facilitate increased social interaction and engage millions of teachers, learners, and parents (Lin, 2010). The learner-learner and learner-instructor interaction created by MOOCs is central to knowledge acquisition and the development of learner cognitive skills, and that interaction is intrinsic to effective instructional practice (Lee & Hammer, 2011; Tobarra, Robles-Gomez, Ros, Hernandez, & Caminero, 2014). MOOCs are an alternative to traditional models of face-to-face education, and have even been viewed as a threat to traditional educational institutions and professionals (Millard, Borthwick, Howard, McSweeney, & Hargood, 2013). Thus, the development of MOOCs has received considerable attention from both educators and learning-technology developers. MOOCs have been an increased focus related to learner participation of MOOCs, given rising tuition costs and concerns regarding learner success and retention rates (Pappano, 2012). Although MOOCs are rapidly developing and gaining enormous popularity, most of them fail to help learners to remain focused on learning content and lead to relatively poor learning efficiency and effectiveness. This phenomenon occurs because most MOOC designs do not provide learners with an engaging experience. Certain researchers have mentioned that MOOCs must enhance learner digital engagement, which refers to the learning and everyday engagement of learners with available technologies in their learning ecologies, including both daily life and school contexts (Gurung & Rutledge, 2014). Therefore, improving learner digital engagement is critical to the development of MOOCs. Certain studies have proposed gamification as a potential solution to alleviate this problem (Grunewald, Meinel, Totschnig, & Willems, 2013; Skiba, 2013; Dicheva, Dichev, Agre, & Angelova, 2015). Gamification incorporates game mechanics into nongame settings to increase user engagement and enjoyment of a product or service, and to encourage users to perform certain behaviours (Hsu, Chang, & Lee, 2013). Gamification essentially functions as entertainment that causes learners to enjoy actively participating and engaging with others, such as through reputation points, rewards, and goal setting. Kapp (2012) indicated that gamification is crucial to the development of learning technology because numerous elements of gamification are based on educational psychology and techniques that instructors have been using for years. Simoes, Redondo, and Vilas (2013) developed a learning platform for K-6 learners, and suggested that education is an area with high potential for applying gamification because it substantially promotes learner motivation and engagement with the learning platform. Sung and Hwang (2013) proposed a gamification mechanism for course websites to improve the learning performance of learners in their learning attitudes, learning motivation, self-efficacy, and learning achievements. Because of the importance of gamification to learner engagement, certain popular MOOCs such as Coursera, Udacity, and edX effectively attract and maintain learners through various gamification designs such as rewards and badges. …

[1]  Henry M. Kim,et al.  Development and application of a framework for evaluating multi-mode voting risks , 2008, Internet Res..

[2]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Project massive: a study of online gaming communities , 2004, CHI EA '04.

[3]  Byron Reeves,et al.  Total Engagement: Using Games and Virtual Worlds to Change the Way People Work and Businesses Compete , 2009 .

[4]  R. Buckley,et al.  Distinguishing the Effects of Area and Habitat Type on Island Plant Species Richness by Separating Floristic Elements and Substrate Types and Controlling for Island Isolation , 1985 .

[5]  Magnus Bergquist,et al.  The power of gifts: organizing social relationships in open source communities , 2001, Inf. Syst. J..

[6]  Karsten D. Wolf Communities of Practice in MMORPGs: An Entry Point into Addiction? , 2007 .

[7]  M. David Merrill,et al.  Second generation instructional design (ID 2 ) , 1990 .

[8]  Galia Angelova,et al.  Gamification in Education: A Systematic Mapping Study , 2015, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[9]  Hsiu-Fen Lin,et al.  An application of fuzzy AHP for evaluating course website quality , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[10]  Shu‐chi Lin,et al.  Goal orientation and organizational commitment as explanatory factors of employees' mobility , 2005 .

[11]  Christopher Cunningham,et al.  Gamification by Design - Implementing Game Mechanics in Web and Mobile Apps , 2011 .

[12]  C. Kahraman,et al.  Multi‐criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP , 2003 .

[13]  Nick Yee,et al.  Motivations for Play in Online Games , 2006, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[14]  Mary Renck Jalongo,et al.  Using Wordless Picture Books to Support Emergent Literacy , 2002 .

[15]  Päivi Häkkinen,et al.  Designing and analyzing collaboration in a scripted game for vocational education , 2008, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[16]  Philip G. Altbach,et al.  MOOCs as Neocolonialism: Who Controls Knowledge? , 2014 .

[17]  Herman G. Weller Interactivity in Microcomputer-based Instruction: Its Essential Components and How It Can Be Enhanced , 1988 .

[18]  D. Keegan,et al.  Three Types of Interaction , 2013 .

[19]  SeoungHo Ryu,et al.  Exploring game experiences and game leadership in massively multiplayer online role-playing games , 2011, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[20]  Edward J. Garrity,et al.  Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs) and Commitment Behavior: An Integrated Model , 2007, AMCIS.

[21]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[22]  Jinwoo Kim,et al.  Why People Continue to Play Online Games: In Search of Critical Design Factors to Increase Customer Loyalty to Online Contents , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[23]  M. Moore Editorial: Three types of interaction , 1989 .

[24]  Robert J. Moore,et al.  The social side of gaming: a study of interaction patterns in a massively multiplayer online game , 2004, CSCW.

[25]  Paul Denny,et al.  The effect of virtual achievements on student engagement , 2013, CHI.

[26]  Leslie Stoel,et al.  Modeling the effect of experience on student acceptance of Web-based courseware , 2003, Internet Res..

[27]  Gwo-Jen Hwang,et al.  A collaborative game-based learning approach to improving students' learning performance in science courses , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[28]  Andrés Lucero,et al.  Applying game achievement systems to enhance user experience in a photo sharing service , 2009, MindTrek '09.

[29]  John W. Rice,et al.  The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-Based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education , 2012, Int. J. Gaming Comput. Mediat. Simulations.

[30]  Shang Hwa Hsu,et al.  Exploring user experiences as predictors of MMORPG addiction , 2009, Comput. Educ..

[31]  Chun-Chia Lee,et al.  Designing Attractive Gamification Features for Collaborative Storytelling Websites , 2013, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[32]  R. Trivers The Evolution of Reciprocal Altruism , 1971, The Quarterly Review of Biology.

[33]  Diane J Skiba On the horizon: the year of the MOOCs. , 2013, Nursing education perspectives.

[34]  Gülçin Büyüközkan,et al.  Multi-criteria decision making for e-marketplace selection , 2004, Internet Res..

[35]  Zarinah Mohd Kasirun,et al.  Gamification towards sustainable mobile application , 2011, 2011 Malaysian Conference in Software Engineering.

[36]  Chien Chou,et al.  Interactivity and interactive functions in web-based learning systems: a technical framework for designers , 2003, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[37]  P. Sadler,et al.  The Impact of Self- and Peer-Grading on Student Learning , 2006 .

[38]  Chun-Yen Chang,et al.  The Idea Storming Cube: Evaluating the Effects of Using Game and Computer Agent to Support Divergent Thinking , 2010, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[39]  E. Deci,et al.  When Paradigms Clash: Comments on Cameron and Pierce’s Claim That Rewards Do Not Undermine Intrinsic Motivation , 1996 .

[40]  Christoph Meinel,et al.  Designing MOOCs for the Support of Multiple Learning Styles , 2013, EC-TEL.

[41]  Yusuf Pisan,et al.  My guild, my people: role of guilds in massively multiplayer online games , 2007, IE '07.

[42]  Eric T. G. Wang,et al.  Understanding knowledge sharing in virtual communities: An integration of social capital and social cognitive theories , 2006, Decis. Support Syst..

[43]  Huei-Tse Hou,et al.  Exploring the behavioral patterns of learners in an educational massively multiple online role-playing game (MMORPG) , 2012, Comput. Educ..

[44]  D. Schunk Enhancing Self-Efficacy and Achievement Through Rewards and Goals: Motivational and Informational Effects , 1984 .

[45]  Rebeca P. Díaz Redondo,et al.  A social gamification framework for a K-6 learning platform , 2013, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[46]  James Paul Gee,et al.  What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy , 2007, CIE.

[47]  David Rutledge,et al.  Digital learners and the overlapping of their personal and educational digital engagement , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[48]  R. Bagozzi,et al.  Self-categorization, affective commitment and group self-esteem as distinct aspects of social identity in the organization. , 2000, The British journal of social psychology.

[49]  P. Crawford,et al.  Inside the Picture, Outside the Frame: Semiotics and the Reading of Wordless Picture Books , 2000 .

[50]  David E. Millard,et al.  The HumBox: Changing educational practice around a learning resource repository , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[51]  Chuen-Tsai Sun,et al.  Player Guild Dynamics and Evolution in Massively Multiplayer Online Games , 2008, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[52]  Nikolaos Pellas,et al.  The influence of computer self-efficacy, metacognitive self-regulation and self-esteem on student engagement in online learning programs: Evidence from the virtual world of Second Life , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[53]  Agustín C. Caminero,et al.  Analyzing the students' behavior and relevant topics in virtual learning communities , 2014, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[54]  E. Churchill,et al.  Badges in Social Media: A Social Psychological Perspective , 2011 .

[55]  John Ericson,et al.  A Review of the Concept of Visual Literacy , 1997, Br. J. Educ. Technol..

[56]  Gwo-Hshiung Tzeng,et al.  TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT PROJECT SELECTION WITH FUZZY MULTIOBJECTIVES , 1993 .

[57]  Chun-Chia Lee,et al.  Does Trust Promote More Teamwork? Modeling Online Game Players' Teamwork Using Team Experience as a Moderator , 2013, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[58]  Eduardo Guzmán,et al.  A web based collaborative testing environment , 2013, Comput. Educ..

[59]  Perttu Hämäläinen,et al.  Using peer tutoring in evaluating the usability of a physically interactive computer game with children , 2003, Interact. Comput..

[60]  Kenton O'Hara,et al.  Gamification. using game-design elements in non-gaming contexts , 2011, CHI Extended Abstracts.