THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GAMIFICATION IN TEACHING ENGLISH
TO GRADE 11/12 LEARNERS OF ST. ROBERT’S INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE
A Thesis
Presented To
The Faculty of the College of Graduate School
NORTHWEST SAMAR STATE UNIVERSITY
Calbayog City
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Arts in Education
Major in English Language Education
By
HOPE JOY EUDELA, JENA BASCO
July 2022
APPROVAL SHEET
This Thesis entitled: THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GAMIFICATION IN TEACHING
ENGLISH TO GRADE 11/12 LEARNERS OF ST. ROBERT’S INTERNATIONAL
COLLEGE, presented and submitted by HOPE JOY EUDELA, JENA BASCO, in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION Major in
English has been examined and recommended for acceptance and approval for ORAL
EXAMINATION.
THESIS COMMITTEE
JAMES RUIZ KIM, PHD
Chairman
AZUCENA FALALES, PhD
Member
ROBERT F. GALINDEZ
Member
LENNY ARANETA, EDD
Adviser
PANEL OF EXAMINERS
JAMES RUIZ KIM, PHD
Chairman
AZUCENA FALALES, PhD
Member
ROBERT F. GALINDEZ
Member
LENNY ARANETA, EDD
Adviser
Accepted and approved in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF
ARTS IN EDUCATION Major in English language Education.
Comprehensive Examination Passed on June 29, 2022.
JAMES RUIZ KIM, PHD
Executive Director
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Cover Page
Title Page
i
Approval Sheet
ii
Acknowledgement
iii
Dedication
vi
Abstract
vii
Table of Contents
ix
List of Tables
xii
List of Figures
xiv
List of Appendices
xv
Chapter 1. The Problem and its Setting
Introduction
English proficiency is considered now a necessity. It is the language of the academe, the
language of commerce, and the language of the global work environment. The Philippines is
recognized globally as one of the English-speaking countries in the world with more than 14
million Filipinos speaking English, which has traditionally been one of the nation's official
languages.
Proficiency in the language is one of the country’s strengths that has helped drive the
economy and educational system of the country. The use of the English language as a medium of
instruction has helped the students to improve their English skills to communicate, understand
academic writing, produce scholarly writing, and increase school completion and proficiency
examination rates.
Hernandez (2015) cited on the Board of Investments that Filipinos are highly educated,
making them among the largest English speakers in the world.
As stated by Racca and Lasaten (2016), educators agree that proficiency in the English
language is the basis for success in academic pursuits. Reading, writing, and working with numbers
are tasks that are based on language skills, which describes this as the interplay between everyday
language skills and more advanced communication skills.
However, concern on the narrowing competitive advantage of the country was raised despite
that the country is doing fine in terms of English competency (Cabigon, 2015). Recent studies are
showing that the Filipinos’ grasp of the English language requires an area of concern. In 2018, A
Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) by the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD) also revealed that the Philippines was the lowest in reading
comprehension among 79 countries. Results showed that the Philippines only had an average
reading score of 340 – 100 points short of the OECD average of 487. The results of PISA 2018
National Report of the Philippines revealed that Filipino students obtained an average score, and
it was found out that one out of five Filipino students achieved at least the minimum proficiency
level in overall reading literacy. It was implied in the results that students have poor vocabulary
skills (PISA 2018, 2019). coined, reading difficulties are present in the world. The Philippines
shared a significant rate of low performers among all PISA-participating countries and economies.
That is, 80% of the Filipino students did not reach the minimum level of proficiency in reading.
Their poor scores in English, Mathematics, and Science are attributed to the students’ lack of
ability in basic reading and comprehension.
Results of an online Standard English Test (SET) also revealed a declining trend in the
English language skills of Filipinos (Education First, 2019). Philippine Institute for Development
Studies (PIDS) consultant, Brillante (2020) also claimed that some students struggle to write in
English.
To improve the English literacy of the learners, there have been numerous of educational
approaches are being developed to motivate students to participate actively in learning. One of the
strategies used by the teachers is Gamification- the integration of game elements into conventional
learning activities in order to increase the students’ engagement and motivation.
Gamification of education is a strategy for increasing engagement by incorporating game
elements into an educational environment (Dichev and Dicheva 2017). The goal is to generate
levels of involvement equal to what games can usually produce (Fardo 2014). The main goals of
gamification are to enhance certain abilities, introduce objectives that give learning a purpose,
engage students, optimize learning, support behavior change, and socialize (Knutas et al. 2014;
Krause et al. 2015; Dichev and Dicheva 2017; Borges et al. 2013).
The gamification theory in education is that learners learn best when they are also having fun.
Not only this – they also learn best when they have goals, targets and achievements to reach for,
of course in a way the learner still perceives as fun.
Furthermore, gamification in learning involves using game-based elements such as point
scoring, peer competition, team work, score tables to drive engagement, help students assimilate
new information and test their knowledge. It can apply to school-based subjects, but is also used
widely in self-teaching apps and courses, showing that the effects of gamification do not stop when
we are adults.
This study aims to assess the proficiency levels of the learners through the implementation of
gamification in teaching English classes.
Theoretical Framework
Gamification is defined as the application of game-design elements and game principles in
non-game contexts. It can also be defined as a set of activities and processes to solve problems by
using or applying the characteristics of game elements. Gamification is a very effective strategy
and approach to inspire students. Gamification techniques are likely to become more prevalent as
the educational landscape becomes increasingly digital.
Gamification in education, or gamification in learning, is sometimes described using other
terms: gameful thinking, game principles for education, motivation design, engagement design,
etc. It is predicated on the idea that the level of involvement that gamers feel with games may be
transferred to an educational setting in order to facilitate learning and have an impact on student
behavior.
Gamification is designed to promote intrinsic motivation, or the desire to perform an action
because you are interested in doing so. Learners who are motivated in this way will actually
appreciate the subjects they are studying.
Contrarily, extrinsic motivation refers to the desire to carry out a task as a result of rewards
or pressure from outside sources, such as being ordered to do so. Although most students will have
a healthy balance of both types of drive, it's crucial that students avoid favoring extrinsic incentive
over intrinsic motivation.
Gamification of education is a strategy for increasing engagement by incorporating game
elements into an educational environment (Dichev and Dicheva 2017). The goal is to generate
levels of involvement equal to what games can usually produce (Fardo 2014). The main goals of
gamification are to enhance certain abilities, introduce objectives that give learning a purpose,
engage students, optimize learning, support behavior change, and socialize (Knutas et al. 2014;
Krause et al. 2015; Dichev and Dicheva 2017; Borges et al. 2013). Stimulated by the effects that
game elements can produce, many researchers have looked into the influence of gamification in
an educational context, getting favorable results, such as the increase of engagement, user
retention, knowledge, and cooperation (Hakulinen and Auvinen 2014; Tvarozek and Brza 2014).
Researchers have studied gamification, using the psychological foundation of SelfDetermination Theory, Flow-Theory and Self-Efficacy Theory (Cherry, 2017; Tandon, 2017). In
combination, these three perspectives set the foundation for the possible benefits of gamification.
Juho Hamari published studies which linked game designs and motivation by connecting learning
theories and gamification design (Hamari, 2017).
It is indicated that the most prominent feature of gamification is to enable abstract experiences
to be transformed into concrete ones, which can build a bridge between theoretical learning and
applications (Varışoğlu at al., 2013; Öztemiz & Önal, 2013). Likewise, Canbay (2012) stated that
gamification offers students opportunities for cooperation, competition and active participation in
the learning process.
Based on the numerous theories and research, gamified instruction has been very effective in
teaching and learning. In the context of English proficiency, game is one of the creative techniques
to introduce new vocabulary in learning activities to the students (Al Masri & Al Najar, 2014) and
often used in the English classes (Sevi-Biloon, 2017).
Teachers should seek some creative strategies, such as vocabulary games to engage the
learners in the English language (Derakhshan & Khatir, 2015). In teaching the English language
especially vocabulary, it should cover the four basic skills such as “listening, speaking, reading,
and writing” (Kusrini, 2012, p. 2). Researchers recommend teachers to integrate a game-based
approach and other strategies for the vocabulary acquisition process. Additionally, it has been
demonstrated that employing games, whether they use digital technology or not, is beneficial in
teaching several facets of the English language.
Taheri (2014) confirmed that language games are effective and suitable techniques in helping
the students’ vocabulary retention to have a long-term memory in English vocabulary. Keshta and
Al-Faleet (2013) and Njoroge, Ndung’u, and Gathigia (2013) studies which show that the puzzle
can develop the vocabulary achievement and retention of students, and effective teaching strategy
of vocabulary instruction compared to the traditional one. Furthermore, Shabaneh and Farrah
(2019) study claimed that the efficiency of utilizing games can help the students retain unfamiliar
vocabulary, associate new information with their surroundings, and help them develop their
language and communicative skills.
Conceptual Framework
The figure below aims to provide an overview of the implementation of gamification and the
variables involved to discover its effectiveness and impact on the learners’ academic
performance in English class.
Independent Variable
Dependent Variable
Students’ Personal Profile
Age
Sex
Grade level
English Teachers’ Gamification
Performance
Students’ Academic Profile
English Grades
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
Statement of the Problem
This study aims to determine the extent of implementation of gamification in English classes of Grade
11/12 learners in St. Robert’s International College.
Specifically, it seeks to answer the following questions:
1. What is the profile of the respondents?
2. Is there a significant difference in the English teachers’ performance when classified
according to:
2.1. Students’ Personal Profile,
2.2. Students’ Academic Profile?
3. Is there a significant relationship between students’ grades and teachers’ gamification
performance?
4. What is the predictor of English teachers’ gamification in respect to:
4.1. Students’ Personal Profile,
4.2. Students’ Academic Profile?
Null Hypotheses
1. There is no significant difference in the English teachers’ performance when classified
according to:
1.1. Students’ Personal Profile,
1.2. Students’ Academic Profile?
2. There is no significant relationship between students’ grades and teachers’ gamification
performance.
3. None of the variables can predict the English teachers’ gamification performance.
Significance of the Study
Gamification aims to provide system solutions to both students and teachers in a gamified
approach to teaching and learning. It also fosters an environment that allows students and teachers
to employ creativity, wide-open opportunities for collaboration, and seek overall development.
The positive acceptance of this study along with effective implementation, will lead to the benefit
of the following:
Learners. Gamification is not just a new discovery that embodies game mechanics but it is more
of an innovation that offers a whole new experience for students. Including games in studies helps
the students to have a better understanding of what they learn. Apart from that, game-centric
learning also helps to sharpen their skills. When teachers introduce game-based lessons in
classrooms, it contributes to the growth and development of students in a mature and healthy
way. Students learn to make decisions, apply logic and utilize their survival skills, and to come
up with innovative ideas. All these will contribute to the development of students as individuals
besides academics. Gamified learning can help students solve problems by fostering skills like
understanding causation, logic and decision making they can use in life outside of school.
Teachers. Gamification can give aid to teachers for varied approaches in teaching processes and
assessing students learning. It gives opportunities for professional growth and development for
teachers to become more competent and efficient in delivering lessons catered to the different
learning styles of students.
The Education industry. This study will widen the perspective of the importance of the
education sector. This leads the ministry of education to an open mind in terms of new
innovations that can be helpful and transformational to the monotonous system that schools are
applying at present. This study provided insight to the ministry of education to new approaches
to meeting objectives and reaching goals in a more varied dynamic setting catering to diverse
learners and teachers.
Contribution to the field. This study will be helpful in creating change in science education.
The outcome of this study will inspire future researchers to explore deeper guidelines for the
effective implementation of gamification. And will inspire future innovators to create and
discover unique and wide-ranging approaches and strategies to focus on the total development of
learners and improve the entire education system as a whole.
Scope and Limitations of the Study
This study focuses on exploring the impact of gamification designs and structures to
provide solutions for concerns in education. The system’s goal is to positively transform the
current conventional education system into a structure that is motivating and active in nature where
diversity and individual differences of students are highly prioritized.
This study is limited to testing the effectiveness of gamification during a four-month period
of implementation in the 1st Semester of School Year 2021-2022. The flow of gamification
implementation, including its reward punishment system, and its basis of school curriculum is
customized according to the nature of the research environment and to the standards the school is
adapting. Lastly, the most evident limitation of gamification is embraced not the purpose of
replacing a school’s existing curriculum but only as an added feature that supplements and
incorporates game elements to the current practices of the school.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are defined operationally:
Gamification. An educational approach that integrates game-like elements for non-game purpose
to enhance engagement and motivation of the learners in teaching English classes.
Quizizz. An online assessment tool that can be used as a learning activity that provides a fun
method and allows learners to practise using smart phone technology. In this study, Quizizz will
be employed to improve the learners’ English proficiency.
St. Robert’s International College. Formerly St. Robert’s International Academy; This academic
institution offers basic education from Kindergarten to Grade 12.
Chapter 2. Related Literature and Studies
Related Literature
An educative breakout is a modified version of the popular immersive entertainment
experience of escape rooms, aimed to be used in educational settings to teach content and other
skills such as creative thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration (Parker & Hessling, 2019).
Escape rooms are a type of “escape games” designed playfully through narrative-based challenges
that offer an immersive experience to be usually carried out in groups in a cooperative manner
(Grande-dePrado et al., 2021). Their design includes a game played by teams where they have to
“escape” from a room by solving challenges —such as solving riddles and puzzles, finding hidden
objects, finding out codes or passwords— within a time limit (Bartlett & Anderson, 2019;
Wiemker et al., 2015). When escape rooms have a pedagogical purpose, they are related to
gamification and GBL (Grande-de-Prado et al., 2021) because of the cognitive development
entailed by skill-based learning while providing suspense and rewards (Healy, 2019).
The main objective of this challenge-based approach is to create a creative and playful
learning environment to help learners learn new subject matter and skills, as well as to reinforce
and transfer the existing knowledge (Lathwesen & Belova, 2021; Manzano-León et al., 2021). The
game concept should be adopted, adapted to the needs of the target group, and linked to the
required content-related and process-related skills (Lathwesen & Belova, 2021).
A breakout must meet a series of characteristics in terms of game type (physical, digital
or mixed), location (classroom or lab), time limit (average of 30-60 min), and team size (5-10
members) to be considered as such (Fotaris & Mastoras, 2019). However, this can change when
offered to students in an online or digital format, asking them to collaborate from home to solve a
case related to a topic studied in class while relying on the internet connection to prevent face-toface communication (Vidergor, 2021).
Research into utilizing these academic activities is still in its nascent stages (Bartlett &
Anderson, 2019), reflecting the need for more easily adaptable escape rooms and more empirical
evidence on their actual effects (Lathwesen & Belova, 2021). However, some studies have
provided evidence that they are useful in enhancing student collaboration and communication
skills, and in building specific content knowledge (Bartlett & Anderson, 2019).
Gamification in the context of learning can be referred to as gamified learning (Armstrong
and Landers 2017; Landers 2014). It is a design process of adding game elements in order to
change existing learning processes (Landers et al. 2018). Although many studies that have
examined gamification have lacked a theoretical foundation (Hamari et al. 2014; Seaborn and Fels
2015), some authors have attempted to explain the relationship between gamification and learning
by providing frameworks such as the theory of gamified learning (Landers 2014). This theory
defines four components: instructional content, behaviors and attitudes, game characteristics, and
learning outcomes. The theory proposes that instructional content directly influences learning
outcomes as well as learners’ behavior. Because gamification is usually not used to replace
instruction, but rather to improve it, effective instructional content is a prerequisite for successful
gamification (Landers 2014). The aim of gamification is to directly affect behaviors and attitudes
relevant to learning. In turn, these behaviors and attitudes are hypothesized to affect the
relationship between the instructional content and learning outcomes via either moderation or
mediation, depending on the nature of the behaviors and attitudes targeted by gamification
(Landers 2014).
A series of characteristics or elements must be used for gamification in learning and
education. Even though using these elements does not ensure more effective activities or better
results (Mora et al., 2017), they are advised for a coherent design. Manzano-León et al. (2021)
recommend to take into account some essential elements such as the pattern, the challenges, the
physical or online elements used to solve tasks, for the clues, and the narrative. These authors
describe the pattern as linear (an orderly sequence of challenges), open (the final task is solved
with the combination of the solutions of challenges of all teams), or multilinear (those in which
you can simultaneously develop two or more lines of clues/puzzles throughout the game). They
refer to the challenges as the diverse tasks whose resolution leads to the exit or other challenges
through the use of elements like padlocks, puzzles, hidden codes, encrypted messages, riddles, or
hidden objects. According to them, clues are also an essential part that must be provided by the
Game Master (GM), who must ensure the group does not become frustrated or stuck in a challenge.
Finally, they define the narrative as a guiding thread by which all of the challenges are related.
Educational escape rooms are not always designed with a narrative. However, this can contribute
to making the game more immersive and, therefore, more motivating for the players.
Despite the variety of possible challenges, Wiemker et al. (2015) identified three core
components: a challenge, a solution, and a reward. Durin et al. (2019) listed 33 game elements and
concluded that the most popular ones used from 2008 to 2018 were rewards, feedback, challenge,
quest/mission/goal, level/stage, point/score, avatars/players, task, character, time limit,
narrative/dialogue, leaderboards/dashboards, progress bars, and badges/achievements.
The instructor usually plays the role of Game Designer (GD) and GM, structuring the
learning environment and providing instructional scaffolding and instant feedback to the learners
to facilitate their interaction not only with the challenges but also with each other (Giang et al.,
2018). This follow-up is essential so that participants do not lose the flow in the activity and,
therefore, they keep an intense concentration for achievement or winning (Vidergor, 2021). GD
and GM must take this work into account as part of the challenges or constraints they might face
when designing this type of activity. The lack of resources, the investment of time, the planning
stage, the testing of the challenges, and the debriefing stage after the game need to be considered
before starting the process (Botturi & Babazadeh, 2020; O’Brien & Pitera, 2019).
Benefits of game-based approaches
Even though a few disadvantages have been conferred upon these game-based approaches
(like the breakout): excessive competitiveness, inadequate time management, unfocussed games
—i.e., they are created because they are fun or trendy—, stress, frustration, and too high
expectations on the instructor’s behalf —leading to disappointment when learning outcomes fall
short— (Kapp et al., 2012; O’Brien & Pitera, 2019, Padilla et al., 2011; Pisabarro & Vivaracho,
2018), the benefits of these teaching methods surpass their drawbacks (Bartlett & Anderson, 2019;
Connolly et al., 2012; Hunt-Gómez et al., 2020; Padilla et al., 2011), and that is why this study is
based on this approach as the learning theory to be followed.
Gamification, in general, in education has outstandingly increased in the last decade and,
in an online setting, it has the potential to provide greater support for learning outside formal
contexts, and for distance, lifelong, and distributed learning groups (De Freitas, 2006). Digital
breakouts are characterized for being innovative, active, collaborative, and constructivist
instructional approaches that can shape learning more powerfully than conventional teaching
because they help learners understand the value of seeing problems from different perspectives
(Fotaris & Mastoras, 2019). Motivation is one of the main reasons why this trend has been
implemented in the classrooms (Pham et al., 2021) and, in the best-case scenario, motivation is
intended to lead to engagement. At the university level, it has also been confirmed as a practical
and motivating teaching-learning strategy to reinforce and evaluate the curricular contents
(Manzano-León et al., 2021). While games may initially motivate students with extrinsic
motivation, they can also promote intrinsic or self-generated rewards (O’Brien & Pitera, 2019),
leading to an improvement in students’ engagement (Connolly et al., 2012; Manzano-León et al.,
2021). Some consequences of these actions are noticed through more efficient knowledge transfer
and their resulting generalisation (O’Brien & Pitera, 2019), more persistence on task (Fotaris &
Mastoras, 2019), and an increase in attendance rates (Barata et al., 2013; Wichadee &
Pattanapichet, 2018), students’ satisfaction (Friedrich et al., 2018), and self-confidence
(Lathwesen & Belova, 2021).
Other benefits are more related to the actions involved in the own games, like cooperation,
teamwork, communication, social skills, creativity, critical thinking, meaningful learning, and
learning outcomes. On the one hand, the first four have a direct and inherent connection to the
breakout itself if it has been designed to be executed in groups. Games can often be a facilitator to
social, communication, and peer activities (Kirriemuir & McFarlane, 2004), and collaboration
allows small groups of students “opportunities to share perspectives, debate points of
disagreement, question and understand each other’s points of view, problem-solve complex
dilemmas, and reach agreements” (Mahoney & Harris-Reeves, 2019, p. 26). On the other hand,
the remaining four benefits are more related to intellectual, cognitive, and psychological benefits
since they promote logic, memory, concentration, attention, deductive and lateral thinking,
metacognition, imagination, mental agility, conflict resolution, time control, and management of
available resources (Jiménez et al., 2020; Nicholson, 2015; O’Brien & Pitera, 2019).
Regarding the EFL class, the implementation of digital games has been positively accepted by
students due to the benefits that they bring about (Waluyo & Bucol, 2021; Wichadee &
Pattanapichet, 2018). The use of mobile computing devices in foreign language courses at the
university level has shown positive results. Pham et al. (2021) designed a platform to study English
where learners could play games, interact with their classmates, track their progress, and practice
their skills and self-study at the same time. Results showed that using this type of learning through
gamified activities improved both the students’ academic performance and their autonomy, besides
their content-based knowledge and listening skills. Wichadee and Pattanapichet (2018) also
reported positive results from a gamified experience in an EFL course in higher education.
Participants who were exposed to this type of learning obtained higher scores in performance and
motivation and showed more positive attitudes towards the application of digital games in English
language classes. Also, Bradford et al. (2021) highlighted that the implementation of a breakout in
the EFL classroom provided opportunities for cooperation and collaboration; however, how to
balance its difficulty and how to encourage the use of the target language are some of the
challenges underlying this implementation.
Gamification elements
Researchers are beginning to study how these individual elements contribute to student
motivation (Hakulinen et al., 2015). For this research, the question of motivation is studied from
the perspective of gamification, and its foundational elements. The importance of finding a variety
of methods to motivate is in part due to the many distractions and lack of motivation faced in the
classroom on a daily basis (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017). Gamification elements are varied, so there
is a need for research to provide their individual effectiveness to motivate as well as the
combinations of elements to motivate most effectively (Hamari, 2017; Sailer et al., 2017). Current
research on gamification lacks the separation of elements to determine which are most effective
(Faiella & Ricciardi, 2015). To illustrate the varied and different elements of gamification,
literature reviews indicate there is no systematic, or regular categories for gamified elements
(Cheong et al., 2014; Dicheva et al., 2015). Leaderboards, medals, points, and avatars are examples
of a gamification environment. However, little research has been done specific to individual game
elements (Hakulinen et al., 2015). To answer these questions each element should be studied
individually and then collectively to discover the best methodology for their use (Sailer et al.,
2017). Juho Hamari (2017) published a two-year study specifically on badges and their effect on
user engagement. The results were mixed (Chia & Hung, 2017). Users were seen to engage more
when in gamified environment using badges. However, combing other factors, badges were found
to have no significance (Hamari, 2017). In another study on the use of badges, Lasse Hakulien,
Tapio Auvinen, and Ari Korhonen (2015) found a statistical significance in the use of badges
regarding the amount of time spent engaged on activities. These two studies illustrate the need for
specific research. While both studied the effects of users, the participant groups varied. Hakulien,
Auvinen, and Korhonen (2017) studied university students in a specific online course, and
Hamari’s participants from the general population of users of an online platform. Furthermore,
each element, as a result of careful research, must be systematically categorized for consistency of
the discipline (Dicheva et al., 2015). An understanding of game elements, and their effects on
learning and learners is needed, so practitioners can have valid information on the formation of
effective lesson design (Morschheuser et al., 2017; Nacke & Deterding, 2017). At this point in
gamification, elements of designs and mechanisms are known and discussed, but best practices in
how to create lessons which motivate are not known (Morschheuser et al., 2017; Nacke &
Deterding, 2017). There are a limited number of studies on specific game elements and designs,
in specific contexts (Dicheva et al., 2015; Hamari, 2017).
Motivation
Gamification seeks to take elements from games, and implements them in non-game
environment; in educational settings its focus is to motivate learning (Sailer et al., 2017). Sailer et
al. (2017) used self-determination theory of motivation as a foundation for their study on how
gamified environments can motivate learners. Self-determination theory differs from other theories
of motivation because while most focus on motivation as steps, or amounts, Edward Deci argued
motivation as types (Anthology, 2017). For Deci, the types of motivations are autonomous and
controlled motivation (Anthology, 2017). Autonomous motivation is characterized by doing
something because you enjoy it and gain pleasure and satisfaction from it (Anthology, 2017). At
the earliest stages of human existence, pleasure, and enjoyment are foundational to intrinsic
motivation (David A Cook, 2016). As a child grows and matures, they are presented with a series
of extrinsic motivators, and situations of nonpleasurable activities they must participate. These
non-pleasurable activities are necessary, but bring no intrinsic joy (David A Cook, 2016). To
illustrate, consider students who must pass a class in a subject area they do not enjoy, but know
passing is necessary to graduate and gain access to higher education. In contrast to enjoyment,
when one does something because of the gain, or avoidance of something unwanted, Deci
discussed this as controlled motivation (Anthology, 2017). The more one acts or engages in
undesirable activities for extrinsic gains, motivation diminishes (David A Cook, 2016).
Autonomous motivation creates individuals who feel better, work harder, and enjoy what they are
doing more than those who experience controlled motivation (Anthology, 2017). Deci explained,
to properly motivate, one needs to create an environment based on competence, autonomy, and
relatedness across all social situations and disciplines (Anthology, 2017). If a teacher can create a
classroom environment where students feel competent, autonomous, and connects students to each
other; autonomous motivation can occur, and those students will achieve at a higher level than
students who are not in this environment (Anthology, 2017). Competence is the ability of the
learner to complete tasks (Sailer et al., 2017). Individuals are motivated when they can do
something. Motivation is based on desirability or expectation. After time, the simple rewarding of
activities is not enough to stay motivated (David A Cook, 2016). Autonomy, in self-determination
theory, points to the individual’s ability to make choices in the context of solving problems (Sailer
et al., 2017). This ability gives the freedom to choose options within given parameters allowing
for the feeling of freedom and the ability to tap into one’s personal definitions of values and
meaning (Sailer et al., 2017). The third foundational aspect of self-determination theory is the need
for social relatedness (Sailer et al., 2017). Social relatedness is the ability of having a sense of
belonging and connection, within the given environment (Sailer et al., 2017). In the context of selfdetermination theory; competence, autonomy and relatedness are areas which can be created and
implemented into a learning environment (Sailer et al., 2017). Self-Determination theory argues,
individuals grow and develop according to their psychological need (Kim, Song, Lockee, &
Burton, 2018). Psychological needs are those foundations human beings need to be happy,
productive, and absent of negative consequences (Anthology, 2017). Self-determination theory
argues, autonomy, relatedness, and competence are universal human, psychological needs
(Anthology, 2017). Giving students the opportunity to make choices which determine their
learning creates a learning environment where students feel more in control of how they learn,
which in turn motivates students (Kim et al., 2018). In an environment where students are making
choices, they are additionally able to decide what they are capable of accomplishing. Choice gives
students the sense of control, creating a feeling of autonomy which in turn increases intrinsic
motivation (Jeno, Grytnes, & Vandvik, 2017). Satisfying the basic psychological needs of selfdetermination creates motivation in students to learn (Jeno et al., 2017). In this context, students
are in charge of determining their ability to complete tasks (Kim et al., 2018). Finally, the creation
of a learning environment where students must work together to accomplish a task, creates group
dynamics, which connects students (Kim et al., 2018). Working on a project or solving a problem
as a team requires students to connect socially and intellectually. Quests and leaderboards are
examples of social connection (Jantke, Baumbach, & Friedemann, 2015). In quests, students must
work together to solve problems to earn points or other recognition. Leaderboards give information
about where individuals are in relationship to completing tasks. This social competition connects
students to a common goal (Jantke et al., 2015). Leaderboards allows students to view their
progress, in relationship to their peers (Chia & Hung, 2017). According to self-determination
theory, students who are given choices, the ability to determine their learning, and create
connections will be motivated. In a gamified learning environment, students will be continually
given opportunities to show their competence through constant feedback. Platforms such as
Kahoot, Socrative, Quizizz, and Mindcraft: Education Edition give students opportunity to practice
and show their competence (Lynch, 2017). Using these applications, students are given immediate
feedback on both correct and incorrect responses (Lynch, 2017). This feedback allows students to
show their competence and function autonomously while they learn. Learners with high levels of
believing in what they are capable of tend to participate more in areas which will help them build
their abilities so they will acquire necessary skills (Schunk & DiBenedetto, 2016). Badges and
stars are not themselves important; however when students truly desire a badge, star, or avatar and
internalize their desire, working for it becomes integrated motivation (Anthology, 2017).
Moreover, in a learning environment where students have some level of control over how they
accrue points in pursuit of an outcome, choosing will be a motivating factor. In a gaming
environment, the pursuit of external motivators becomes paramount in the mind of the player.
Players will spend hours to gain a medal, badge, or the ability to modify the game environment
(McGrath, 2017). The promoters of gamifying learning suggest, if this same environment can be
replicated in the classroom, students will internalize the objectives and in turn better learn the
material required of them (McGrath, 2017). The idea of gamifying learning is for learning to have
the elements of fun and enjoyment, while learning. At the foundation, self-determination theory
competence, autonomy, and relatedness, are the factors which produce motivation in students (Sun
et al., 2017). Students are motivated by accomplishing tasks they feel competent doing (Anthology,
2017). In traditional learning, the teacher is the holder of knowledge, and students gain knowledge
based on how and when the teacher presents it. Moreover, in traditional learning, students’
complete assignments and take exams when they are told and have no say in when those
assignments are due, or what assignments they need to complete. Not having a stake or active input
in how students show mastery is demotivating according to motivational principles in selfdetermination theory (Jeno et al., 2017). Finally, traditional learning requires students to sit in
rows, facing the same way, completing work independent of their peers. In this configuration,
students do not interact with one another and interact with the teacher only when called upon
(Holland, 2014; McKiben, 2016). Gamifying the learning experience implements the three
foundational elements of selfdetermination theory, giving the learner a sense of competence,
autonomy, and relatedness (Hamari et al., 2016). To socialize learning, the use of leaderboards,
gives students the opportunities to compete, showing progress as they complete tasks. This social
interaction of competition creates connections with other students. Additionally, working on
projects together to solve problems, builds connections and connectedness.
Learning enjoyment
While many parents and educators find cell phones and game consoles a distraction to
students, they may also have the answer to the question of motivating students and encouraging
them to enjoy learning (Dichev et al., 2015). Enjoyment does not mean entertaining, but in the
context of gamification, enjoyment denotes a created environment (Hamari et al., 2016). This
environment has motivational elements which make the taking on of tasks meaningful, because
challenges are a natural human desire (Hamari et al., 2016). Games provide an environment where
players are given constant feedback, along with short term and long-term goals and objectives in
the process of completing a given set of circumstances. Gamification is the inclusion of game-like
experiences into the learning process (Dichev et al., 2015). In the game world, the player is
participating purely for the enjoyment of playing and not to learn. Flow theory argues enjoyment
is a component to staying engaged (Duncan & West, 2018). In this context, when discussing fun
and enjoyment, it is not a reference to entertainment. It is, however, a reference to a state of mind
in which the learner is motivated because the learning experience is enjoyable (Hamari et al.,
2016). In creating a gamified environment, designers attempt to create the feeling of a game, by
using similar game dynamics and mechanisms (Dichev et al., 2015). By using game mechanisms
such as the accumulation of points, customization, and position on a leaderboard, educational game
designs create a gamelike situation where students can level up and compete with their peers
(Dichev et al., 2015).
Game-like environment. Gamification is much more than keeping track of student
progress. Gamification attempts to create a learning environment, where the entire process of
learning is game-like (Hasan, 2018). This game-like environment influences all aspects of the
learning experience. To create a feeling of autonomy, all aspects of the classroom need to be
gamified, giving students choices, and opportunities. In a true sense, gamification is the ultimate
differentiation of student learning (Wiggins, 2016). Leveling up, unlimited restarts, and unlimited
lives in the classroom affect the accumulation of points, attendance, final grades, pacing, and the
relationship between students (Chia & Hung, 2017). Furthermore, with gamification being a buzz
word, there is created a sense of one size fitting all (Hakulinen et al., 2015). However, in a gamified
environment, each student has the opportunity to progress at their own pace to reach the final
objective (Wiggins, 2016). This individual progress is predicated by gender, personality, and
ability (Chia & Hung, 2017). Moreover, gamification is not just labeling classroom elements
differently (Chia & Hung, 2017). It is a redesigning of the look and feel of learning (Hasan, 2018).
For gamification to be effective and meaningful, there must be a consensus based on research,
which directs educators towards best practices and implementation strategies (Hakulinen et al.,
2015).
Learning environment of gamification. The process of gamifying learning is the
incentivizing and making it personal and meaningful (McGrath, 2017). Jason Goldsmith in his
presentation to the Gen Con Trade Day, spoke about wanting to create a system where students in
his English course feel they are earning and receiving points, as opposed to losing points for
incorrect responses (McGarth, 2017). This describes a gamified learning environment where
students are earning points and earning grades, in combination with having choices in the ways
they earn points towards their final grade. Students are able to choose how to fulfill the course
requirements by choosing the type of assignments to show mastery (McGarth, 2017). It is the
creation of a learning environment with a set of rules, and a system for guiding students in the
process (Sailer et al., 2017). In a gamified learning environment, students are given rules to follow,
by which they receive rewards and recognition. Those rewards and recognition scaffold student
learning, giving them bits and pieces of information to fill in the learning experience (Dichev et
al., 2015). The reason for this incorporation is to answer the question about motivating students to
learn and give a sense of joy in learning (Dichev et al., 2015). The big picture of learning in a
classroom setting, is to learn a given set of standards. Pulling game elements into the classroom
means, learning the big picture standards, by way of learning a series of small, scaffolded
objectives, which build upon each other (Dichev et al., 2015).
It is unnecessary to have a game to be gamified, but to teach in a game-like environment
(Hasan, 2018). Gamification claims to have the ability of modifying the learning environment by
implementing game dynamics and mechanisms into learning (Dichev et al., 2015). There are a
variety of platforms which teachers can access to give students the opportunities to see their
achievements on leaderboards, collect medals, and connect with their peers (Lynch, 2017). These
platforms are web based and can be accessed by any device connected to the internet. Teachers
can use these tools for taking notes, giving quizzes, tests, and making presentations. These
applications are tools, they are not themselves games or the definition of a gamified classroom.
Gamification tools collect data, give feedback, and award points and medals according to what
instructors create. Incorporating these game dynamics and mechanics, creates a learning
environment where students are active, autonomous participants in their learning (Boyun, 2015).
While gamification is a new concept in learning, many of the elements are not entirely new (Dichev
et al., 2015). Both gamification and traditional learning provide the opportunity to earn points and
badges. Traditional learning has actual points; grades from tests, quizzes, and assignments.
Leveling up occurs when students move on to the next level of learning from grade to grade, with
the ultimate medal a diploma or degree. The problem in a traditional learning environment, is it
takes long periods of time to feel the gratification of receiving points or medals. Feedback is an
important pedagogical strategy; however in a traditional learning environment, feedback is not
immediate (Dichev et al., 2015). In a gamified learning environment, students do not have wait to
receive points, but can be awarded them as soon as they are earned. Moreover, retesting is a
learning strategy. However, in a gamified learning environment if a student fails, they can
immediately put into practice what they have learned and attempt the activity again without
waiting. Leveling up is not something that only happens over the course of a year or four years,
but in smaller objectives along the way (Dichev et al., 2015). These elements give students control
and autonomy in their learning, along with real-time information about their progress. In the 21st
century, students at all levels are familiar with this environment, and when done properly, the
learning environment can have these same elements, eliciting the same sense of accomplishment
and joy (Dichev et al., 2015). As gamification evolves from concept to application, each of these
game elements discussed must be researched individually, to discover which element is successful
in which situation (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017). There is a need to be more specific, so practitioners
can apply research-based strategies with applicable pedagogy (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017).
Furthermore, research is needed to look into the differences in gamification and different
demographic groups (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017). “Broadly, studies comparing gamification to no
gamification without carefully isolating elements or meaningful element clusters are of limited
theoretical value and should not be conducted” (Landers, Auer, Collmus, & Armstrong, 2018, p.
16).
Effectiveness of Gamification
A systematic literature review had been conducted by Calderón and Ruiz (2015) who found
that 53 educational games research literature had adopted different methods to assess the
effectiveness of diverse educational games in the period between November 2013 and April 2015,
compared to 18 and 20 games used in health and wellness, and the professional learning and
training domain, respectively. They also reported that 60% of these 53 studies examined the
effectiveness of using educational games in higher education setting, compared to only 40% in
primary or secondary school settings, indicating that teachers in higher education are more likely
to combine educational games with traditional teaching methods into students’ learning
experiences—a sign of creativity of embracing the new strategy to enrich students’ learning
experience.
Gamification has become popular in education in recent years. Its advantages include, but
not limited to, giving students the opportunity to experience learning in a multi-sensory, active and
experimental environment. Specifically, learners can use these educational games for experimental
learning to develop their decision-making and problem-solving skills in a dynamic learning
environment. In addition, students can receive feedback/results immediately to get answers,
instead of receiving delayed feedback from traditional assessment methods (e.g., tests and
examinations). Moreover, some educational gamification may help to reduce limitations, including
time and place, as portable devices can enable students to study and/or learn anytime and
anywhere. These user-friendly tools can make difficult subjects easier to understand and
memorize. In other words, with the use of educational games, the learning process is considered
to be more interesting, motivating achieving knowledge retention, increasing attention, and can
even enhance peer communication and social skills.
Although extensive research supports the use of educational games to help improve
students’ learning experience, it has been found that young students are more likely to be
inattentive, and the use of educational games, among the many other solutions, to alleviate the
issue may become helpful. Research shows that students’ attitudes toward learning, class
attendance and mood were more positive when compared to primarily using traditional methods
of teaching and learning. It is believed that in the learning process, when students have the
opportunity to participate in decision-making, they are more likely to enjoy learning because they
regard “learning” as “playing” (Zapalska et al., 2012). Even though as children grow older, their
attention and concentration may correspondingly increase, it is important to ensure that students’
learning motivation can remain at a high level. In other words, by using educational games during
lectures or teaching, students will be required to focus on the teaching content in order to
successfully complete the tasks in the game, whilst their learning motivation may remain high due
to the inclusion of game elements in the learning process.
However, the advantages of using gamification in education does not necessarily mean it
would receive overwhelming advocacy, as it had produced some mixed results. Hanus and Fox
(2015) even documented that their participants did not find educational games motivating or
interesting, elucidating that since individuals normally play games for entertainment purposes, the
deployment of gamification in educational environments/settings may not produce the same
motivational effect. If individuals have the option of either playing educational or casual games,
they are more likely to choose the latter, because they may perceive educational games to be
dreary. Furthermore, participating in educational games may even have detrimental effects.
According to Dominguez et al. (2013), the utilization of education games was associated with a
decline in academic performance.
While the fun side of gamification has counterbalancing effect to learning motivation is
not yet known, an educational game is fun and/or motivating, and ultimately effective for learning,
will highly depend on learners’ personal differences and learning preferences.
Synthesis:
Gamification has become an increasingly interesting and researched discipline in education and
learning. Technology has aided in the growth and development of platforms, however there is
much more involved. Educators must consider the psychology of motivation in combination with
game designs and elements to truly achieve the potential of gamification. Moreover, the research
methods in gamification must begin to focus on specific elements and best research methods to
more clearly come to consensus of best practices in research application. While gamification is not
in and of itself a game, it is attempting to bring to the classroom, the feel of games, and as such, it
is important for researchers to understand what games are from a design perspective. Additionally,
for gamification to be relevant, it must look at specific game elements in comparison with specific
demographic groups, so there are more clear methods for educators to implement gamification
with effectiveness. Finally, educators must understand the implementations of gamification is a
complete pedagogical process. This process changes educators’ current understanding of the
creating a learning environment, giving up more control and allowing for more student autonomy
in how information is accessed, and how mastery is shown. This literature review illustrates the
need for more research and understanding in implementing gamification.
Related Studies
Variable 1:
Gamification in EFL classroom to support teaching and learning in 21st century
In the 21st century, the use of games becomes a trend within adults and youngsters,
and has recently obtained a massive notice of academics, educators, and practitioners.
Gamification is a term used in learning with games that can be used to improve English
since it reflects an innovative and captivating learning activity. Several studies on
gamification show that it can make students feel more excited and motivated during their
effort to elevate their English language skills. In this research, one medium of gamification called
Duolingo was explored in grammar learning activities for the second-year students in the
subject of “Grammar for Written Discourse”. They used Duolingo from their smartphones
to support their grammar learning. This research employed an action research design in
which observations, questionnaires, and documentation were used to collect the data. By the end
of the result, it can be concluded that Duolingo is a medium that can be effectively used
to implement gamification in language learning. It is also confirmed that students gave positive
attitudes and results in the implementation of Duolingo in grammar lesson. The results of the
research can be used as a reference in facilitating the students with innovative and captivating
English learning to support teaching and learning in the 21st century.
An action research design (Stringer, 2010) was adopted to investigate how the gamification
of Duolingo could help students achieve the goals of grammar learning process. The type of action
research cycle applied in this educational research followed the theory of Coghlan & Brannick
(2014) in which each cycle has four steps: diagnosing, planning, action, and evaluation. The action
research design consisted of quantitative (survey) and qualitative research methods (observations,
questionnaires and documentations) to collect and analyze data from 15 second semester students
in EFL classroom, specifically in the subject of “Grammar for Written Discourse”. They were all
female students from a university in Bogor – West Java who have grammatical skills ranging from
low, medium to high. This study was conducted in 2 cycles and each cycle consisted of 2 days, so
that the length of time of data collection was 4 days. Every day from 8 to 11 July 2020 they worked
on Duolingo’s exercises at home using their own smartphones based on some criteria (reason, goal,
and topic) that were determined by the researchers. During this activity, the researchers opened
discussion or question-answer session with the students, and asked them to provide information
about what they had discovered and experienced while using Duolingo. After both cycles ended,
they were asked to respond to the implementation of duolingo in the grammar class as part of EFL
classroom. Because of the Covid-19, schools, universities and many other learning institutions
have been temporarily closed, and it much influenced to the changes of the data collection method
and the number of participants. At the beginning, this research was planned to involve 40 students
from two grammar classrooms, and the researchers were going to collect the data directly to the
students in class. Finally, instead of the direct (offline) data collection, this research applied the
online data collection in two conditions.
First, the students must have smartphones in a good condition with a large capacity internal
memory. Second, their smartphones must always be supported by an internet quota and a good
internet connection. Without the two conditions, the online data collection will be difficult to do.
Therefore, the number of students who could meet the conditions and participate in this research
was reduced to 15 students. They were asked to join in a WhatsApp group created by the
researchers. WhatsApp group is the most appropriate way to conduct the online data collection in
which the researcher can communicate with the students more easily. The instruments used in the
online data collection were still the same as the offline one: observations, questionnaires and
documentations, but of course they experienced changes or adjustments. Observation was
conducted online through the Whatsapp group, and it was done during the online learning process
to know the implementation of Duolingo. The researcher made notes of behavior of the participants
of the research and situations happened during the learning process. Questionnaire was also
conducted online using Google form, and it was administered to collect some information related
to the responses of the respondents about Duolingo related to the English grammar learning
process. The form of the questionnaires was open-ended questionnaires from which the
respondents had some rooms to express their knowledge and understanding about Duolingo used
in the classroom. Documentations through screenshots from students’ smartphones were taken
during the online learning process to support the observation. Afterwards, the data gathered from
the questionnaire was summarized, computerized and analyzed to get information about the
opinions of the respondents about the implementation of Duolingo in EFL classroom especially in
grammar subject. Then, the results werematched with the data gathered during observation which
was also supported by the documentation. By doing so, the questionnaire and observation data
from which the gaps between responses and practices would be found out.
Duolingo Features for Language Learning
The researchers prepared 2 components in diagnosing step of the first cycle, i.e. an online
grammar classroom using a Whatsapp group consisting of 15 students, and the preliminary
procedure of using Duolingo to be followed by them as shown in some following features.
After installing the application, the students found Duolingo’s symbol as the first feature,
and the second feature to choose a language they wanted to learn. This application extends several
languages for English speakers as well as others for non-English speakers (Jašková, 2014). In this
research, the students automatically chose English as a language they wanted to learn.
In the third feature asked the students the reason of why they were learning a language. There are
7 options on this feature: school, travel, culture, brain training, family and friends, job
opportunities, and other, and they were asked to choose “school”.
There are 4 options on the fourth feature:casual (5 minutes a day), regular (10 minutes a
day), serious (15 minutes a day), and insane (20 minutes a day). The goal can be changed anytime.
All the students were asked to choose “15 minutes a day”, but they can add the duration if they
want to explore more about Duolingo relating to the development of their motivation and selfdirected learning.
On the fifth feature of choosing a path, there are only 2 options to be chosen: learning
English for the first time (start from beginning) or already know some English. The respondents
were asked to choose the second option.
Soon after the fifth feature, the students had to take the preliminary test (the sixth feature)
as a consideration on the topics that Duolingo will give to the students. In other words, the student’s
preliminary test result determines the number and the kind of topics given by Duolingo. The test
just needed 5 minutes and its questions would be easier or more difficult in accordance with the
student’s proficiency level based on the student’s answers. Having finished doing the test, each
student got the result (the seventh feature). In fact, the 15 students’ preliminary test results were
varied from 42% up to 72%. As a result, not all the students got the same topics. This would be a
consideration for the researchers in giving the topics for the students which were same and relevant
to the grammar materials they were learning. The list of the topics based on the maximum result
of 72% were: Basic 1, Basic 2, Phrases, Food, Animals, Plurals, Clothes, Present Verbs 1, Colors,
Questions, Conjunctions, Occupations, Adjectives 1, Present Verbs 2, Adverbs, Past Verbs 1,
Infinitives, Past Verbs 2, Abstract Nouns 1, and Comparative Adjectives. The number of the given
topics will increase if the students regularly add the exercises every day.
After the preliminary procedure carried out by all the students at home, each of them
personally shared information to one of the researchers (via Whatsapp) about what they found and
experienced during the preliminary test. The researcher then gave responses towards the students’
information and took notes the three important aspects to be taken as the diagnosis result of the
first cycle: the reason of using Duolingo, the goal each day, and the topic given to the students.
The Implementation of Duolingo in EFL Classroom
Duolingo was used in 2 cycles in which each cycle consisted of 2 meetings, so the total
was 4 meetings. In each cycle, the students were asked to play or use Duolingo by working on the
exercises given based on the reason, goal, and topic determined by the researchers. After finishing
their activities in each cycle, they gave comments and reports to the researchers (via Whatsapp)
about what they experienced with the application. A discussion automatically took place between
them. Those activities were carried out until the two cycles finished. From the discussions with
the students, the researchers found some implementation results of Duolingo in the grammar
learning as part of the EFL classroom. First, the student’s preliminary test result determines the
number of topics given by Duolingo. Among the 15 students, 5 students got low results, that is,
less than 50%. As a result, they did not get the complete topics of present verbs which are the first
main topic of the research. They only got 2 parts of the topic, so they could not carry out the
exercises for the last part (present verbs part-3). This situation may change if they do the exercises
every day, especially if they increase their goals to do more Duolingo’s exercises. In other words,
the topics given could increase depending on the progress of the student’s practice. This also could
motivate them to improve their grammar knowledge.
Several studies on gamification have shown that it can make students more excited and
motivated during their effort to elevate their English language skills. In this current study, one
medium of gamification called Duolingo was explored in grammar learning activities as part of
EFL classroom. They played Duolingo at home using their smartphones in order to implement it
in the grammar lesson. The implementation of Duolingo has increased student’s motivation and
self-directed learning. The answers to the questionnaires given to the students inform us that the
implementation of Duolingo is seen as a positive activity because of some following reasons. All
the students enjoyed learning English with Duolingo as it was fun, quite interesting, simple,
modern, and easy to use (user-friendly) as long as there are an internet quota and a good internet
connection. They only need to have an email or Facebook account to install the application. It is
also suitable to all levels, so everyone can learn English even from basic .Most of the students
added to the allotted time per day to work on more exercises. This is because learning with
Duolingo is like playing a game on a smartphone, so it is fun and does not make them bored easily.
They admitted that they were satisfied with Duolingo because Duolingo can increase their interest
in learning English. Therefore, they would continue using Duolingo even after the grammar
classroom was over. As a result, the students confessed that Duolingo could improve students’
English in general as it provides varied exercises related to the general topics around our life such
as food, animals, clothes, job, colors, and so forth. They could get some experiences of practicing
English skills such as writing, reading, listening, translating, and speaking skills through
pronunciation practices. Duolingo could also improve their grammar knowledge since its exercises
were a lot about grammar. When they made a mistake in answering a question given, the
application gave them a correct answer and repeated the question until they could answer it
correctly. This kind of repetition helps students understand the material given better and improve
their English grammar. Nevertheless, not all students accepted the condition in which regular
grammar homework was substituted by Duolingo. They accepted Duolingo as an additional
homework only, not a regular homework, since there was a possibility that they would not focus
or lack of focus while working on grammar homework via Duolingo. In conclusion, this study has
proven that Duolingo, one of gamification, can be implemented into the subject of grammar as part
of EFL classroom. In this case, Duolingo provides some motivational interesting features to
increase students’ interest in working on Duolingo’s exercises regularly in order to improve their
English skills, especially grammar. This action will not only motivate the students but also promote
self-directed learning for them. As a result, it is suggested that teachers or ELT (English Language
Teaching) practitioners implement Duolingo to support teaching and learning EFL. Furthermore,
to explore more about this type of gamification, it is recommended for the future research to
investigate the implementation of Duolingo in some other language skills such as listening,
pronunciation, and translating as part of EFL classroom.
Variable 2:
Gamifying Language Testing through Web-Based Platforms
In this 21st century, technology has revolutionized almost all aspects of life, including
language learning. However, the trend of testing has substantially remained unchanged. Since the
ultimate goal of language testing is to judge and gather information about learners’ proficiency,
one might archetypically describe it as either having students sit at their tables with paper and
pencils trying to answer a number of questions individually and in a very formal manner, or asking
them to perform something like a presentation or role play in front of the examiner. Those kinds
of tests tend to bring a nerve-racking atmosphere which might hinder students in demonstrating
their actual competence. Relating to the issue, this study dwells upon the use of web-based
platforms in the gamification of language testing. Gamification is the adoption of game elements
for nongame purposes. By promoting gamified testing via web-based platforms, this research seeks
to make language assessments more fun and motivating, and of course less terrifying for learners.
Computer-Assisted Language Testing
Computerized language testing has long been around since the dawn of computer
technology. Nowadays, with the popularity of personal computers, word-processing software has
become so commonly used to modify or even create tests. One of the most salient features offered
by computer and internet technology which has been brought to language testing is the ability to
deliver various test tasks online, with immediate feedback, anywhere and anytime. Test of English
as a Foreign Language (TOEFL), which is one of the largest and most prominent testing systems
for measuring second language proficiency, is now administered in many countries via the internet
through what is known as the internet-based test (iBT) program. This shows that the ―exploration
of technology for testing has increased to the point that today no matter where second language
learners live, they will sooner or later take a computer-assisted language test.
Web-Based Gamification in Language Learning
Computer and the internet merely equal paper and pencil—they are only tools. Without a
new format, online tests might still be nerve-racking and even demotivating. This is when
gamification comes into play. Reference states that gamification has turned out to be a popular
term since the publication of Kapp’s book entitled ―The Gamification of Learning and
Instruction‖ in 2012. Reference defines gamification as the use of game elements in a non-game
context. The purpose of gamification is to use game thinking, aesthetics, and mechanics to engage
and motivate people as well as promote learning and problem-solving. Even though gamification
in language learning is actually a new thing, it has much success in other disciplines and thus is
showing good prospects to be implemented in the field of language education, and language testing
in particular. Through gamification, language learners conceptualize themselves as game players
who strive to complete a level as part of their learning. Thus, learners’ success in ―completing a
unit, module, or task and language learning is assessed through a variety of game like experiences.
By incorporating the techniques and elements of games into language learning and testing, it is
expected that learners’ motivation and participation can be increased. More motivation and
participation will in turn create a sense of empowerment and engagement as learners work through
the learning process and accomplish the tasks. For that reason, teachers need to fully understand
the basic concepts and principles of games in order to use gamification as a strategy for language
learning.
Elements of Gamification
This paper suggests a number of potential game elements and mechanics which can be
adapted for the purpose of gamifying educational instruction and testing. They are: points, levels,
badges, avatars, leaderboards, performance graphs, progression, quests/challenges, social
elements/community collaboration, discovery/exploration, rewards, achievements, and epic
meaning.
With the growing prominence of various web-based games and gamification platforms, it is
easier for teachers to change the stereotypical nature of language testing, which is nerve wracking
and demotivating, into a more fun and stimulating one. Nonetheless, there are few questions that
one needs to deliberate before selecting the tools and incorporating them into language
assessments, especially those regarding what to assess, how to assess, and under what condition.
As a matter of fact, the success of language testing gamification really depends on whether the
games are well aligned with learning objectives and whether those objectives are properly assessed
with the right criteria. Therefore web-based gamification can be a very effective way of
transforming language testing into a more engaging one only if teachers know how to make the
games relevant to the intended objectives of the class.
Chapter 3. Methodology
Research Design
This study will apply descriptive research to analyze the effects of the implementation of
gamification. The study will compare the learners’ performance before and after the
implementation of gamification. An adopted questionnaire will be administered to evaluate the
respondents’ perception of the extent of implementation of gamification. Gathered data under the
dimensions will be statistically analyzed together with the academic achievements of the learners
to determine the effect of Quizizz on the learners’ academics.
Locale and Time of the Study
This study will be conducted in St. Robert’s International College located in E. Lopez Street,
Jaro, Iloilo City. This study will be based on the data of the 1st Semester of School Year 20212022.
Respondents of the Study
The respondents of this study will be the 117 Grade 11/ 55 Grade 12 learners enrolled in SY 2021-2022.
Table 1 Distributions of Respondents
Grade 11 Strands
Population
Respondents
(30%)
GAS
86
26
ABM
54
16
HUMSS
105
32
STEM
113
34
31
9
389
117
Population
Respondents
GAS
41
12
ABM
35
11
HUMSS
53
16
STEM
38
11
ICT
15
5
182
55
ICT
Total
Grade 12
Total
Instrumentation
An adapted questionnaire will be used as the instrument to collect data on the extent of
implementation of gamification in teaching English. The main source for data collection will be
the survey elaborated in Google Forms because it has been highly recommended in literature
(Jiménez et al., 2020; Neumann et al., 2020; Vidergor, 2021). A 5-point Likert scale consisting of
26 items distributed in three dimensions: (1) Accomplishment (2) Challenge (3) Competition. This
scale has the following range: (1) strongly disagree, (2) disagree, (3) uncertain, (4) agree, and (5)
strongly agree will be chosen because 5-point scales are easy to understand by participants, require
less effort to answer (Nemoto & Beglar, 2014), and maximise reliability (Bendig, 1954; Chang,
1994).
Data Gathering Procedure
A permit letter will be secured to conduct the research among the Grade 11/12 learners of
St. Robert’s International College. After the permission is obtained, the researcher will send the
instrument in Google Form to the respondents.
The researcher will tally and tabulate the gathered data.
Statistical Treatment
The following statistical tools will be used to analyze the data collected:
The profile of the respondents will be drawn using the following descriptive statistic: frequency,
percent and mean.
The mean to review the answers based on the demographic variables: age, sex, and grade
level.
The Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) will be used to compare more than two variables.
t-Test result will be used to determine significance differences in the participants’ level
implementation of gamification in the teaching of English classes and academic performance of
learners in St. Robert’s International College.
Pearson’s r will be used to determine the relationship between the subject grade and
teachers gamification performance. The 0.5 alpha degree was used as the criterion for the
acceptance or rejection of the null hypothesis.
References
Aalbers T, Baars Maria A E. Olde Rikkert Marcel G M. Kessels Roy P C Puzzling with online
games (BAM-COG): reliability, validity, and feasibility of an online self-monitor for
cognitive performance in aging adults. J Med Internet Res. 2013;15(12)
doi: 10.2196/jmir.2860. http://www.jmir.org/2013/12/e270/
Al-Azawi, R.; Al-Faliti, F.; Al-Blushi, M. Educational Gamification vs. Game Based Learning:
Comparative Study. Int. J. Innov. Manag. Technol. 2016, 7, 132–136.
Anguera J, Boccanfuso J, Rintoul J, Al-Hashimi O, Faraji F, Janowich J, Kong E, Larraburo Y,
Rolle C, Johnston E, Gazzaley A. Video game training enhances cognitive control in
older adults. Nature. 2013 Sep 5;501(7465):97–101.
doi: 10.1038/nature12486. http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/24005416.
Asa’D, R.; Gunn, C. Improving Problem Solving Skills in Introductory Physics Using
Kahoot! Phys. Educ. 2018, 53, 053001.
Baeten, M.; Struyven, K.; Dochy, F. Student-Centred Teaching Methods: Can They Optimise
Students’ Approaches to Learning in Professional Higher Education? Stud. Educ.
Eval. 2013, 39, 14–22.
Bayram, Z.; Oskay, Ö.Ö.; Erdem, E.; Özgür, S.D.; Şen, Ş. Effect of Inquiry Based Learning
Method on Students’ Motivation. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2013, 106, 988–996.
Brown H, Zeidman P, Smittenaar P, Adams R, McNab F, Rutledge R, Dolan R. Crowdsourcing
for Cognitive Science - The Utility of Smartphones. PloS One. 2014 Jul
15;9 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0100662.
Buckley, P.; Doyle, E. Gamification and Student Motivation. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2016, 24,
1162–1175.
Curto Prieto, M.; Orcos Palma, L.; Blázquez Tobías, P.; León, F. Student Assessment of the Use
of Kahoot in the Learning Process of Science and Mathematics. Educ. Sci. 2019, 9, 55.
Dicheva, D.; Dichev, C.; Agre, G.; Angelova, G. Gamification in Education: A Systematic
Mapping Study. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2015, 18, 75–88.
Erhel, S.; Jamet, E. Improving Instructions in Educational Computer Games: Exploring the
Relations between Goal Specificity, Flow Experience and Learning Outcomes. Comput.
Hum. Behav. 2019, 91, 106–114.
Erdoğdu, F.; Karatas, F.O. Examining the Effects of Gamification on Different Variables in
Science Education. In Identifing Turkish Society’s Level of Scientific Literacy View
Project Identifing Turkish Society’s Level of Scientific Literacy View Project; Antalya,
Turkey, 2016; Available
Hamari, J.; Koivisto, J.; Sarsa, H. Does Gamification Work?—A Literature Review of Empirical
Studies on Gamification. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 6–9 January 2014; pp. 3025–3034.
Hamari, J.; Koivisto, J. Social Motivations to Use Gamification: An Empirical Study of
Gamifying Exercise. In Proceedings of the ECIS 2013: 21st European Conference on
Information Systems, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 5–8 June 2013.
Hamari, J. Do Badges Increase User Activity? A Field Experiment on the Effects of
Gamification. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 71, 469–478.
Hu, J. Gamification in Learning and Education: Enjoy Learning Like Gaming. Br. J. Educ.
Stud. 2020, 68, 265–267.
Huang, H.M.; Rauch, U.; Liaw, S.S. Investigating Learners’ Attitudes toward Virtual Reality
Learning Environments: Based on a Constructivist Approach. Comput. Educ. 2010, 55,
1171–1182.
Huang, B.; Hew, K.F. Implementing a Theory-Driven Gamification Model in Higher Education
Flipped Courses: Effects on out-of-Class Activity Completion and Quality of
Artifacts. Comput. Educ. 2018, 125, 254–272.
Huang, R.; Ritzhaupt, A.D.; Sommer, M.; Zhu, J.; Stephen, A.; Valle, N.; Hampton, J.; Li, J. The
Impact of Gamification in Educational Settings on Student Learning Outcomes: A MetaAnalysis. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2020, 68, 1875–1901.
Hug, B.; Krajcik, J.S.; Marx, R.W. Using Innovative Learning Technologies to Promote
Learning and Engagement in an Urban Science Classroom. Urban Educ. 2005, 40, 446–
472.
Huizenga, J.; Admiraal, W.; Ten Dam, G.; Voogt, J. Mobile Game-Based Learning in Secondary
Education: Students’ Immersion, Game Activities, Team Performance and Learning
Outcomes. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019, 99, 137–143.
Hursen, C.; Bas, C. Use of Gamification Applications in Science Education. Int. J. Emerg.
Technol. Learn. 2019, 14, 4–23.
Jenkins, D.A.; Mason, D. Gamification in General Chemistry. In Active Learning in College
Science; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 439–449.
Jones, S.M.; Katyal, P.; Xie, X.; Nicolas, M.P.; Leung, E.M.; Noland, D.M.; Montclare, J.K. A
‘KAHOOT!’ Approach: The Effectiveness of Game-Based Learning for an Advanced
Placement Biology Class. Simul. Gaming 2019, 50, 832–847.
Kam, A.H.; Umar, I.N. Fostering Authentic Learning Motivations through Gamification: A SelfDetermination Theory (SDT) Approach. J. Eng. Sci. Technol. 2018, 13, 1–9.
Kapp, K.M. The Gamification of Learning and Instruction: Game-Based Methods and Strategies
for Training and Education. Int. J. Gaming Comput. Simul. 2012, 4, 81–83.
Khan, A.; Ahmad, F.H.; Malik, M.M. Use of Digital Game Based Learning and Gamification in
Secondary School Science: The Effect on Student Engagement, Learning and Gender
Difference. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2017, 22, 2767–2804.
Khazanchi, R.; Khazanchi, R.; Khazanchi, P. Exploring Kahoot! Learning through Gaming in
Secondary Science Education. In Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology
& Teacher Education International Conference, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 18 March 2019;
AACE: Waynesville, NC, USA, 2019; pp. 1873–1879.
Kim, S.; Song, K.; Lockee, B.; Burton, J.; Kim, S.; Song, K.; Lockee, B.; Burton, J. Gamification
Cases in STEM Education. In Gamification in Learning and Education; Springer: Cham,
Switzerland, 2018; pp. 125–139.
Landers, R.N.; Bauer, K.N.; Callan, R.C.; Armstrong, M.B. Psychological Theory and the
Gamification of Learning. In Gamification in Education and Business; Springer: Cham,
Switzerland, 2015; pp. 165–186.
Landers, R.N. Developing a Theory of Gamified Learning. Simul. Gaming 2014, 45, 752–768.
Hsin-Yuan Huang, W.; Soman, D. A Practitioner’s Guide to Gamification of Education.
Research Report Series Behavioural Economics in Action; University of Toronto:
Toronto, ON, Canada, 2013.
Lazonder, A.W.; Harmsen, R. Meta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learning: Effects of
Guidance. Rev. Educ. Res. 2016, 86, 681–718.
Loganathan, P.; Talib, C.; Thoe, N.; Aliyu, F.; Zawadski, R. Implementing Technology Infused
Gamification in Science Classroom: A Systematic Review and Suggestions for Future
Research. Learn. Sci. Math. 2019, 14, 60–73.
Matallaoui, A.; Hanner, N.; Zarnekow, R. Introduction to Gamification: Foundation and
Underlying Theories. In Gamification; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 3–18.
McDaniel, R.; Lindgren, R.; Friskics, J. Using Badges for Shaping Interactions in Online
Learning Environments. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Professional
Communication Conference, Orlando, FL, USA, 8–10 October 2012; pp. 1–4.
Mellado, V.; Borrachero, A.B.; Brígido, M.; Melo, L.V.; Dávila, M.A.; Cañada, F.; Conde,
M.C.; Costillo, E.; Cubero, J.; Esteban, R.; et al. Emotions in Science Teaching. Ensen.
las Cienc. 2014, 32, 11–36.
Morris, B.J.; Croker, S.; Zimmerman, C.; Gill, D.; Romig, C. Gaming Science: The
“Gamification” of Scientific Thinking. Front. Psychol. 2013, 4, 607.
Nand, K.; Baghaei, N.; Casey, J.; Barmada, B.; Mehdipour, F.; Liang, H.-N. Engaging Children
with Educational Content via Gamification. Smart Learn. Environ. 2019, 6, 1–15.
Orhan Göksün, D.; Gürsoy, G. Comparing Success and Engagement in Gamified Learning
Experiences via Kahoot and Quizizz. Comput. Educ. 2019, 135, 15–29.
Opfermann, M.; Schmeck, A.; Fischer, H.E. Multiple Representations in Physics and Science
Education—Why Should We Use Them? Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; Volume
10, pp. 1–22.
Papadakis, S.; Vaiopoulou, J.; Kalogiannakis, M.; Stamovlasis, D. Developing and Exploring an
Evaluation Tool for Educational Apps (E.T.E.A.) Targeting Kindergarten
Children. Sustainability 2020, 12, 4201.
Papadakis, S.; Marios Trampas, A.; Barianos, A.K.; Kalogiannakis, M.; Vidakis, N. Evaluating
the Learning Process: The “ThimelEdu” Educational Game Case Study. In Proceedings
of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2020),
Prague, Czech Republic, 2–4 May 2020; Volume 2, pp. 290–298, ISBN 978-989-758417-6.
Papadakis, S.; Kalogiannakis, M. Using Gamification for Supporting an Introductory
Programming Course. The Case of Classcraft in a Secondary Education Classroom.
In Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and
Telecommunications Engineering, LNICST; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume
229, pp. 366–375. Kalogiannakis, M.; Papadakis, S. Combining Mobile Technologies in
Environmental Education: A Greek Case Study. Int. J. Mob. Learn. Organ. 2017, 11,
108–130.
Papadakis, S.; Kalogiannakis, M.; Zaranis, N. The Effectiveness of Computer and Tablet
Assisted Intervention in Early Childhood Students’ Understanding of Numbers. An
Empirical Study Conducted in Greece. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2018, 23, 1849–1871.
Riga, F.; Winterbottom, M.; Harris, E.; Newby, L. Inquiry-Based Science Education. In Science
Education; Brill Sense: Leiden, The Netherlands, 2017; Volume 31, pp. 247–261.
Sajin, M.; Namli, R.A.N.A. Gamification and effects on students’ science lesson
achievement. Int. J. New Trends Educ. Their Implic. 2016, 7, 41–47.
Sanmugam, M.; Abdullah, Z.; Mohamed, H.; Aris, B.; Zaid, N.M.; Suhadi, S.M. The Affiliation
between Student Achievement and Elements of Gamification in Learning Science. In
Proceedings of the 2016 4th International Conference on Information and
Communication Technology, ICoICT 2016, Bandung, Indonesia, 25–27 May 2016; pp.
1–4.
Sjøberg, S.; Schreiner, C. Results and Perspectives from the Rose Project. In Science Education
Research and Practice in Europe; Sense Publishers: Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2012;
pp. 203–236.
Slykhuis, D.; Slykhuis, D.; Krall, R. Teaching Science with Technology: A Decade of Research.
In Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education
International Conference, Nashville, TN, USA, 7 March 2011; pp. 4142–4151.
Strmečki, D.; Bernik, A.; Radošević, D. Gamification in E-Learning: Introducing Gamified
Design Elements into e-Learning Systems. J. Comput. Sci. 2015, 11, 1108–1117.
Teo, T.; Fan, X.; Du, J. Technology Acceptance among Pre-Service Teachers: Does Gender
Matter? Background. Australas. J. Educ. Technol. 2015, 31, 235–251.
Tsai, F.-H. The Development and Evaluation of a Computer-Simulated Science Inquiry
Environment Using Gamified Elements. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2018, 56, 3–22.
Van Roy, R.; Zaman, B. Need-Supporting Gamification in Education: An Assessment of
Motivational Effects over Time. Comput. Educ. 2018, 127, 283–297.
Wallace, J.; Louden, W. Dilemmas of Science Teaching: Perspectives on Problems of Practice;
Psychology Press: London, UK, 2002.
Yapıcı, İ.Ü.; Karakoyun, F. Gamification in Biology Teaching: A Sample of Kahoot
Application. Turk. Online J. Qual. Inq. 2017, 8, 396–414.
Zainuddin, Z. Students’ Learning Performance and Perceived Motivation in Gamified FlippedClass Instruction. Comput. Educ. 2018, 126, 75–88.
Zamora-Polo, F.; Corrales-Serrano, M.; Sánchez-Martín, J.; Espejo-Antúnez, L. Nonscientific
University Students Training in General Science Using an Active-Learning Merged
Pedagogy: Gamification in a Flipped Classroom. Educ. Sci. 2019, 9, 297.
Zourmpakis, A.I.; Papadakis, S.; Kalogiannakis, M. Education of Preschool and Elementary
Teachers on the Use of Adaptive Gamification in Science Education. Int. J. Technol.
Enhanc. Learn. (Forthcom. Artic.) 2020.
Survey Questionnaire for Students
Part I. Respondent’s Personal Profile
Age: _______________
Gender: [ ] Male [ ] Female
Grade Level: ___________________
Part II. Respondent’s Academic Profile
Semester 1-Midterm Average English Grade: ___________________
Part II:
Directions: Below are items which will determine the extent of implementation of gamification in
teaching English. Please indicate your answer by putting a check ().
Please use the following scale as basis for your answer:
5
Strongly Agree
4
Agree
3
Uncertain
2
Disagree
1
Strongly Disagree
5
Accomplishment
1
Makes me feel that I need to complete things
2
Pushes me to strive for accomplishments
3
Inspires me to maintain my standards of performance
4
Makes me feel that success comes through
accomplishments
5
Makes me strive to take myself to the next level
6
7
Motivates me to progress and get better
Makes me feel like I have clear goals
4
3
2
1
8
9
Drives me to collect things if I am to progress
Gives me the feeling that I need to reach goals
Challenge
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Makes me push my limits
Drives me in a good way to the brink of wanting to give
up
Pressures me in a positive way by its high demands
Challenges me
Calls for a lot of effort in order for me to be successful
Motivates me to do things that feel highly demanding
Feels like a test of my ability
8
Makes me feel like I continuously need to improve in
order to do well
9
Makes me work at a level close to what I am capable of
Competition
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Feels like participating in a competition
Inspires me to compete
Makes me strive to be the best
Involves me by its competitive aspects
Makes me want to be in first place
Makes victory feel important
Feels like being in a race
8
Makes me feel that I need to win to succeed