Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Using Ontology and Gamification to Improve Students’ Participation and Motivation in CSCL

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Higher Education for All. From Challenges to Novel Technology-Enhanced Solutions (HEFA 2017)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 832))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

During Collaborative Learning (CL), scripted collaboration may cause a motivation problem which makes the students to dislike and drop out the group activities over time. In order to cope with such a problem, we proposed the use of gamification as a technology to increase the students’ motivation and engagement in CL scenarios. As consequence of increasing the motivation of students, we assume a reduction in the desistance of CL activities when the scripted collaboration is gamified. However, gamification is a complex task that requires knowledge about game elements (such as leaderboards and point systems), game design (e.g. how to combine game elements) and their impact on motivation and learning. To address these issues, we have developed an ontology that aims to give structured guidance on how to gamify CL scenarios. In the study presented here, we focused on describing the ontology and how it is used to gamify CL scenarios. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this approach to deal with the motivation problem through an empirical study in which the students enrolled in the introduction to computer Science course at the university of São Paulo participated in either non-gamified CL sessions or ontology-based gamified CL sessions. Significant differences were found in the students’ intrinsic motivation and the percentage of students by groups who had incomplete participation in the CL session. The students who participated in ontology-based gamified sessions reported to be more intrinsic motivated than the students who participated in non-gamified CL sessions, and the percentage of students by groups who had incomplete participation was significantly less in ontology-based gamified sessions than in non-gamified CL sessions. These results indicate that our approach can be used to deal with the motivational problem caused by the scripted collaboration. They also validate the assumption that the gamification of CL scenarios can be used to reduce the desistance of students in CL activities when CSCL scripts are used as a method to orchestrate and structure collaboration.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Although the participants were 37 students, only 32 students answered the IMI questionnaire during the post-test because answering the IMI questionnaire was not a mandatory activity.

References

  1. Andrade, F., et al.: QPJ-BR: Questionário para Identificação de Perfis de Jogadores para o Português-Brasileiro. In: XXVII Brazilian Symposium on Computers in Education, Maceio, Brazil, pp. 637–646 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bleumers, L., et al.: State of play of digital games for empowerment and inclusion: a review of the literature and empirical cases. Eur. Com. 10, 36295 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Briand, L., et al.: On the application of measurement theory in software engineering. Empir. Softw. Eng. 1(1), 61–88 (1996)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Challco, G.C., Moreira, D.A., Mizoguchi, R., Isotani, S.: An ontology engineering approach to gamify collaborative learning scenarios. In: Baloian, N., Burstein, F., Ogata, H., Santoro, F., Zurita, G. (eds.) CRIWG 2014. LNCS, vol. 8658, pp. 185–198. Springer, Cham (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10166-8_17

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Collins, A.: Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology. In: Educational Values and Cognitive Instruction: Implications for Reform, pp. 121–138 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Deterding, S., et al.: From game design elements to gamefulness: defining gamification. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, pp. 9–15. ACM (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dillenbourg, P.: Over-scripting CSCL: the risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In: Kirschner, P.A. (ed.) Three Worlds of CSCL. Can We Support CSCL? pp. 61–91. Open Universiteit Nederland, Nederland (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Feidakis, M., et al.: Providing emotion awareness and affective feedback to virtualised collaborative learning scenarios. Int. J. Contin. Eng. Educ. Life Long Learn. 24(2), 141–167 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gagné, M., Deci, E.L.: Self-determination theory and work motivation. J. Organ. Behav. 26(4), 331–362 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Guadagnoli, E., Velicer, W.F.: Relation to sample size to the stability of component patterns. Psychol. Bull. 103(2), 265–275 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Inaba, A., et al.: An interaction analysis support system for CSCL: an ontological approach to support instructional design process. In: 2002 Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education, vol. 1, pp. 358–362 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Inaba, A., et al.: What learning patterns are effective for a learner’s growth. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Sydney, pp. 219–226 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Isotani, S., Mizoguchi, R., Isotani, S., Capeli, O.M., Isotani, N., de Albuquerque, A.R.P.L.: An authoring tool to support the design and use of theory-based collaborative learning activities. In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds.) ITS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6095, pp. 92–102. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13437-1_10

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Isotani, S., et al.: An ontology engineering approach to the realization of theory-driven group formation. Int. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. 4(4), 445–478 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Järvelä, S., et al.: Research on motivation in collaborative learning: moving beyond the cognitive-situative divide and combining individual and social processes. Educ. Psychol. 45(1), 15–27 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Järvelä, S., et al.: Self-regulation and motivation in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. In: Learning Across Sites: New Tools, Infrastructures and Practices, pp. 330–345 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Kapp, K.M.: The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-Based Methods and Strategies for Training and Education. Pfeiffer, San Francisco (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  18. King, A.: Scripting collaborative learning processes: a cognitive perspective. In: Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Mandl, H., Haake, J.M. (eds.) Scripting Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning. CULS, vol. 6, pp. 13–37. Springer, Boston (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36949-5_2

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Knutas, A., et al.: Increasing collaborative communications in a programming course with gamification: a case study. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies, pp. 370–377. ACM, New York (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Kong, J.S.-L., et al.: The effects of peer intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on MMOG game-based collaborative learning. Inf. Manag. 49(1), 1–9 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. McAuley, E., et al.: Psychometric properties of the intrinsic motivation inventory in a competitive sport setting: a confirmatory factor analysis. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 60(1), 48–58 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. McKnight, P.E., Najab, J.: Mann-Whitney U test. In: Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology. Wiley (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mizoguchi, R., et al.: The model of roles within an ontology development tool: Hozo. Appl. Ontol. Roles Interdisc. Perspect. 2(2), 159–179 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Orji, R., et al.: Modeling the efficacy of persuasive strategies for different gamer types in serious games for health. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 24(5), 453–498 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Pink, D.H.: Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. Riverhead Books, New York (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Prieto, L.P., et al.: Exploring teachers’ perceptions on different CSCL script editing tools. Comput. Educ. 78(Supplement C), 383–396 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Rienties, B., et al.: The role of academic motivation in computer-supported collaborative learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 25(6), 1195–1206 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Seaborn, K., Fels, D.I.: Gamification in theory and action: a survey. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 74, 14–31 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. de Sousa Borges, S., et al.: A systematic mapping on gamification applied to education. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pp. 216–222. ACM (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Torning, K.: A review of four persuasive design models. Int. J. Concept. Struct. Smart Appl. 1(2), 17–27 (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Webb, E.N.: Gamification: when it works, when it doesn’t. In: Marcus, A. (ed.) DUXU 2013. LNCS, vol. 8013, pp. 608–614. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39241-2_67

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  32. Yee, N.: Motivations for play in online games. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 9(6), 772–775 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Zichermann, G.: Fun is the future: mastering gamification (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was partially funded by CNPq, CAPES and FAPESP.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. ICMC, University of São Paulo, São Carlos, SP, Brazil

    Geiser Chalco Challco & Seiji Isotani

  2. Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Nomi, Ishikawa, Japan

    Riichiro Mizoguchi

Authors
  1. Geiser Chalco Challco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Riichiro Mizoguchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Seiji Isotani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Geiser Chalco Challco .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. FBCS FHEA SMIEEE, Computer Science Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom

    Alexandra Ioana Cristea

  2. Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Maceió, Alagoas, Brazil

    Ig Ibert Bittencourt

  3. Ciência da Computação, University of Brasília, Brasilia, Brazil

    Fernanda Lima

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Challco, G.C., Mizoguchi, R., Isotani, S. (2018). Using Ontology and Gamification to Improve Students’ Participation and Motivation in CSCL. In: Cristea, A., Bittencourt, I., Lima, F. (eds) Higher Education for All. From Challenges to Novel Technology-Enhanced Solutions. HEFA 2017. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 832. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97934-2_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97934-2_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97933-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97934-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation