Strategize a Smooth Tenant-to-tenant Migration and Copilot Takeoff
The Application of Game Mechanics to a VLE
1. The Application of Game
Mechanics to a VLE
Steven Urmston
York University - September 2009
2. Rationale
VLEs do not always engage students (or staff). [Hramiak 2007]
Often low levels of participation = less useful system
Other systems which engage people?
Games (Video) Web 2.0
Both use Game Mechanics (varying quantities) [Kim 2007] - VLE?
3. Game Mechanics
Rule-based feedback loops of player interaction with the
game world. [Cook 2006, Sicart 2008, me]
Action Rules Tokens
Feedback
Goals ++ Synthesis
x3
(+ Rewards)
Other Mechanics Feedback Loops = Flow [McGinnis 2008]
Rewards = Conditioning [Hopson 2001]
Learning = Fun [Koster 2004]
4. Outside of Games?
Game Mechanics applied to functional software:
Ebay Ratings, Facebook Friends, Amazon Reviews, VLE actions?
Action Rules Tokens
Submit Quiz = 10 Points 10 Points
100 Points = Trophy
Feedback
Goal Synthesis 10 Pts
(+ Rewards)
Other Mechanics
Useless Info
Other actions get
Don't need points
points?
5.
6. Game Version is identical apart from:
Game Rules & Rewards as Feedback
Text
Standard Actions = Game Mechanics
7. Game Version is identical apart from:
Game Rules & Rewards as Feedback
Standard Actions = Game Mechanics
8. Game Version is identical apart from:
Game Rules & Rewards as Feedback
Standard Actions = Game Mechanics
9. Scoring system grades actions in value
Scoring
Ranks Trophies
Rewards are the sugar in the loops
10. Results
Levels of Participation improved?
Engagement Contributions
Significantly higher Logins Low, with no diff. in Forum
and Page Views. Posts, Votes or Quizzes.
Mann Whitney, But slightly higher overall.
p = < 0.01 and 0.015 Chi Squared, p = 0.07
Student Experience more positive?
Questionnaire Interviews
No obvious difference, very Again, both groups very
positive for both versions positive, however ...
11. Results (2)
Some participants were gaming the system (Votes)
Interviews Contributions
Mentioned by several Lots of Voting for debate
interviewees, both posts, several participants
instigators and voyeurs. voted for everything.
1% Heavy Contributors
Voting = low effort for 9% Intermittent
high reward (points)
[Nielsen 2006]
More difficult to motivate
meaningful contributions 90% Lurkers
e.g. (good) Forum Posts
12. Conclusions
Game Mechanics have potential to engage,
and with playtesting might improve contributions.
But are (clearly) not a silver bullet to fix VLEs
14. References
• Cook, D. (2006). “What are Game Mechanics”.
http://lostgarden.com/2006_10_01_archive.html
• Hramiak, A. (2007). “Evaluation and Analysis of Post Graduate Trainees’
Use of a Virtual Learning Environment”.
• Kim, A. J. (2007). “Putting the Fun in Functional” (Presentation)
(Various sources: see YouTube, Slideshare)
• Koster, R. (2004). “A theory of fun for game design”.
• McGinnis et al. (2008). “Enhancing E-Learning Engagement Using
Design Patterns from Computer Games”.
• Nielsen, J. (2006). “Participation Inequality: Encouraging More Users to
Contribute”. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/participation_inequality.html
• Sicart, M. (2008). “Defining Game Mechanics”.
http://gamestudies.org/0802/articles/sicart
![Rationale
VLEs do not always engage students (or staff). [Hramiak 2007]
Often low levels of participation = less useful system
Other systems which engage people?
Games (Video) Web 2.0
Both use Game Mechanics (varying quantities) [Kim 2007] - VLE?]()