Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
--------------------------------------------------------------RALFIE: A GAME WHERE MAKER FAIRE MEETS HACKERTHON
Lindy Orwin, Andrew Maxwell, Alexander Kist, Ananda Maiti, Warren Midgley, Wu Ting
University of Southern Queensland
Abstract
Australia is facing a STEM skill shortage. Insufficient numbers of children develop and
maintain an interest in Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM) while at
school. The RALfie Project (Remote Access Labs for Fun, Innovation and Education) aims
to develop children’s STEM knowledge whilst fostering a positive attitude towards STEM
learning. Using Design Based Research, a group of investigators, unconstrained by past
thinking, is redefining how remote access labs are used in education.
In the RALfie game, children are able to make real experiments. The quests are designed to
maximize online collaboration and communication. Learners advance through a series of
levels and achievements rewarded by badges and points. This aims to motivate
participation, and maintain engagement with STEM content and build positive attitudes.
Intrinsic motivation to engage with STEM is nurtured using an online community called a
‘guild’. Becoming an active Guild member fosters responsibility, not reliance. Children use
communication and collaboration tools to safely engage with the wider STEM community
to get help and mentor peers. With community support in forums and a repository of web
based plans and models as well, children involved in the RALfie Project will be connected
into a wider community sharing experiments via the Internet for local and remote use.
This paper describes the design based research plan and current iteration of the design of
this online learning environment. RALfie aims to prepare children for the digital future by
building confidence with and vital knowledge and understanding of design and digital
technologies as well as production skills which are all key outcomes of the national
Technology curriculum. The research conducted within the RALfie Project is investigating:
- the gamification of STEM learning with RAL;
- curriculum and pedagogical implications of using a ‘maker’ approach to RAL in STEM
education
- the self-efficacy of teachers incorporating RAL; and
- the technical aspects of a child-friendly system for interfacing experiments to the Internet
to form a distributed network of labs.
Using an iterative process called the Integrative Learning Design Framework, the research
team are developing and testing a quest-based game environment that uses a custom made,
innovative, online, technical system. Trials in 2013 in controlled laboratory conditions
indicate children as young as 6 can understand the networking concepts required to
assemble and interface experiments to the Internet. In early 2014, pre-service primary
teachers will explore the curriculum possibilities of RALfie in a hands-on trial during their
engagement with the Technology curriculum. Children in informal learning situations at
home will engage with RALfie in trials in mid-2014.
Keywords
“gamification” “ Remote Access Laboratories” "design research" "Integrative Learning Design
Framework"
Introduction
Page 1 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
There is a skill shortage to meet Australia’s needs in careers based on Science, Technology,
Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). This is partially due to insufficient numbers of children
developing and maintaining an interest in STEM while at school. Student engagement and
participation rates in STEM in secondary schools are low (Masters, 2009; Thomson, Wernert,
Underwood, & Nicholas, 2008). Primary school teachers, and some secondary teachers who are
teaching outside their content area, especially in remote area schools, have low levels of content
knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge in STEM (Fensham, 2008).
ICT enrolments in tertiary courses have experienced negative growth of 34.5% in the eight
years to 2010 (p 1). Australia may not have the skilled workforce to sustain productivity
and experience economic growth. (Macpherson, 2013)
The use of experiments is an effective way to engage STEM students in experiential learning that can
lead to deep understanding of content (Feisel & Rosa, 2005; George, 2003). Students do not have
equal opportunity to participate in hands on experiments in STEM (Johnson, 2013). One method of
providing more support for STEM teachers and increase access to experiments for learners is to use
remotely accessed laboratories (RAL). These labs are accessed using a web browser and the Internet to
enable students to control a remotely located experiment and view the process via webcams. This has
been used in tertiary education for many years (Kist & Gibbings, 2010; Lowe, Murray, Liu, Lindsay,
& Bright, 2007) but has more recently become available to schools (Kist et al., 2011; Lowe et al.,
2012).
In a comparison of existing RAL projects and systems for school and tertiary education, Maiti,
Maxwell and Kist (2014) found that all involved a service delivery model of experiments. Banks of
sophisticated, expensive, ready-made experiments, hosted mostly by universities, are made available
to students through an online booking system. Collections may be distributed amongst several
institutions such as the LILA Library of Labs ("LILA Library of Labs,") and Labshare (Lowe et al.,
2012) projects. In this mode, the design, building and delivery of experiments remain in institutions
denying students access to the creative process of designing and building experiments (Lowe, Murray,
Lindsay, & Liu, 2009; Lowe et al., 2007).
Most traditional RAL systems have little opportunity for collaboration (Kist, Maxwell, & Gibbings,
2012). Students predominately work individually on remotely located experiments created by experts.
Exploration of the potential to build more collaboration and communication opportunities around the
use of RAL have been limited to forums and the social media interface, Graaasp (Gillet, Ngoc, &
Rekik, 2005). Constructivism espouses that learning is a social act that benefits from communication
and collaboration between learners and the use of RAL needs to reflect this.
At the University of Southern Queensland, a cross-disciplinary team of researchers from education and
engineering is designing an innovative approach to the use of RAL for STEM education that will
allow both primary and secondary school-aged children to use, make and share RAL. The RALfie
Project (Remote Access Labs for Fun, Innovation and Education) is a three year project that aims to
design and test an environment for the development of children’s STEM knowledge and skills whilst
fostering a positive attitude towards STEM learning. Dziabenko and Zubia (2012) concluded that
schools and teachers are very interested in remote laboratories, but are unsure how to integrate them
into school curriculum. The learning environment is being designed and trialed for use in both formal
and informal learning settings with a focus on collaborative learning.
Employing an iterative Design Based Research methodology, the team is taking a multi-disciplinary
approach to a mixed methods study investigating four inter-related themes. The technical team is
investigating novel approaches to peer-to-peer technology designed to create a system that connects
users to the experiments created by the makers. The pedagogical team is investigating the feasibility of
using a constuctionist pedagogy (Papert & Harel, 1991) dubbed the Maker Approach, a design and
building process for the development of RAL by school aged children. They will also develop
appropriate materials and systems to support the adoption of this approach. The professional learning
Page 2 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
needs of teachers are being identified and the effect of the use of RAL in schools on teacher selfefficacy is being studied. This paper will focus on the research design of the fourth research theme
investigating the social and pedagogical affordances of gamification for the purpose of developing and
supporting engagement, communication and collaboration around the use of RAL in formal and
informal STEM learning by school aged children.
Goals and elements of the design of the gamification of RALfie.
Deterding, Dixon, Khaled, and Nacke (2011) developed the definition of gamification as “the use of
game elements and game design techniques in non-game contexts”. Burke (2014) has elaborated on
earlier definitions suggesting gamification is “the use of game mechanics and experience design to
digitally engage and motivate people to achieve their goals”. The decision to approach the user
experience of RALfie from a games design perspective is aimed at capitalizing on the motivation,
engagement, communication and collaboration opportunities that game elements afford. Game
elements have the potential to provide social, pedagogical and organizational opportunities to engage
learners at cognitive, emotional and social levels.
The first goal of the gamification of RALfie is to contextualize the content in a story-based system of
quests that incorporate the use or making of RAL. Evidence shows that students do more work on
average and achieve higher grades overall in a quest-based course when compared to traditional
courses (Haskell, 2013). This study will investigate if quests are motivating in formal and informal
STEM learning settings. The design incorporates quests suitable for Chou’s four stages of game play:
Discovery, Onboarding, Scaffolding and Endgame (2013a). Some of the quests have been designed to
target the learning outcomes in the Australian Science and Technology curriculum areas.
A reward and reputation system aims to stimulate participation and maintain engagement with STEM
learning in a fun and challenging way. Built-in feedback tools such as experience points, progress bars,
levels, achievements, badges and leader boards are being used to engage the learners and provide
extrinsic reward for participation in RALfie. They are motivating and meaningful to students (Haskell,
2013).
RALfie aims to build a self-sustaining, online community of STEM learners by drawing on the
successful model of peer learning support using online communities in the form of game-style guilds
to build an environment designed around the concept of socially constructivist learning and
connectivism (Siemens, 2004). Through these “guilds” the wider community of STEM professionals,
university students, academics and enthusiasts contribute expertise to meet the needs of learners.
Using various iterations of the system, the study will investigate the affordances of a range of
synchronous and asynchronous online communication technologies that currently includes discussion
forums; calendars and rosters; polls, ratings and surveys; file sharing; media galleries for videos and
images; and journals using blogs but could expand to explore roles for micro blogging; social media;
virtual worlds; and voice and video chat using avatars. Guilds provide a support community not only
to address technical and maker needs but also foster a positive attitude to STEM.
Methods
Using Design Based Research (Kelly, Lesh, & Baek, 2008), the group of investigators, informed, but
unconstrained, by past practice, and taking on-board a pedagogical shift to the Maker Approach, is
redefining how remote access labs are used in school education. Bannan’s Integrative Learning Design
Framework (2003) summarized in Error! Reference source not found. below was selected as a
framework to guide the multidisciplinary research. Having its roots in software development, product
design and instructional design meant that each of the research themes was represented in the process
allowing pedagogical, technical and curriculum to be addressed within a single methodology by the
Page 3 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
researchers from engineering and education.
Figure 1: Bannan's Integrative Learning Design Framework.
Web-Enabled Proto-Diffusion
Consequences
Diffusion
Adoption
Adaptation
Publish
Results
Evaluate
Results
Implement
Theory / System
Refinement.
Formative
Testing
Detailed
Design
Articulated
Prototype
Research /
System Design
Audience
Characterization
Theory
Development
Survey
Literature
Needs Analysis
Adaptation
Integrative Learning Design Stages
Enactment
Evaluation: Local
Impact
Evaluation: Broader
Impact
Questions:
What are the learning
targets for innovation?
What design principles
or strategies may be
applicable?
How to identify and
operationalize
cognitive and
performance
processes in design?
To what extent does
the design embody the
theoretical model?
Questions:
Is the enacted design
usable, valid and
relevant?
Is the design instance
accessible and
efficient in delivering
instruction or
supporting learning?
What is the local
impact or
effectiveness of the
design instance?
How effective is the
design solution in
achieving learning
targets at its highest
fidelity in full context?
Questions:
What factors influence
diffusion, adaption and
adaption of
innovation?
What are the
pragmatic demands of
the learning
environment that
influences adoption of
design?
What policies and
cultures shape
participants use of
innovation?
Methods:
Usability Testing
Expert Review
Observation or Video
records
Interviews
Formative Evaluation
Pre-post Comparative
Studies
Quasi-experimental
studies
Methods:
Analysis of computer
log files
Multi-site Interviews,
Surveys and
Observations
Data mining
Correlational studies
Quasi-experimental
studies
Informed Exploration
Guiding Questions for Research
Questions:
What are identified
gaps/problems in
theory, practice and/or
the marketplace?
What information can
be gleaned from
existing data or
research?
How can we
characterize the
problem or leaner
need?
What are the systemic
social, cultural, and
organizational
influences or
constraints on design?
What are
characteristics of the
audience?
Applicable Research Methods
Methods:
Benchmarking
Performance/needs
analysis
Interviews
Survey of Experts
Focus Groups
Observation/Role
Modelling
Case Studies
Methods:
Task Analysis
Contextual Analysis
Designer Logs
Expert Review
Audience Review
Page 4 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
Within this framework, the design process for the gamification components intersects with the design
of the technical system and the development of appropriate teaching and learning support materials for
the Maker Approach. After a period of exploration of the relevant literature in STEM education, the
Maker Approach to pedagogy (constructionism), gamification and technical RAL system
development, a requirements analysis was developed featuring a descriptive design for the whole
environment. This was circulated for expert review by Science teacher educators, educational gaming
leaders, and Technology and Science educators who are members of their professional associations.
Feedback was elicited using interviews and a workshop at a conference of the Queensland Society for
Information Technology in Education (QSITE) (reference removed during review). When the robust
design was articulated and refined, development began on the various elements of the system. A
sequence of user trials to test various aspects of the design was developed, see Figure 2 below.
Figure 2: Sequence of RALfie trials.
The first trial, in August 2013, was a laboratory bench test of the peer-to-peer technical system for
connecting and sharing experiments. It was conducted under a range of simulated Internet connection
speeds (Reference removed during review).
The second technical trial in October 2013 tested whether the target audience could use the technical
system as designed. The trial involved children between the ages of six and eighteen assembling
experiments from plans, interfacing them to the system through the hardware interface (RALfie Box)
and accessing them remotely. It tested if the children could understand the networking concepts
required to operate the system as a remote user and to interface experiments to the system as a maker.
The gamification elements were not used at this stage of the prototype development.
Experiment rigs can be as simple as a webcam to observe a site that wildlife frequent to a more
complex experiment such as a pendulum that can be raised and lowered using a small motor (actuator)
via a web interface. Another actuator in a Lego construction with an arm can be activated to strike th
ball on the pendulum to make it swing. The same rigs can be used for different quests which ask the
learner to control the apparatus to complete a task and report the findings via the quest submission
process. Learners of different ages can use the same apparatus at different levels of complexity. For
example, older students might use a formula to make predictions whereas younger students might
observe and report.
The third trial in April to June 2014 includes the gamification aspects of the design. This will involve
pre-service teachers in a course about the Australian Technology curriculum. It will help refine the
Page 5 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
system and participants will also develop materials for teachers and children. The fourth trial will be
conducted in the second half of 2014. It is a limited home user trial in which children in informal
STEM learning contexts will use the system to create new experiments and use existing experiments.
Usability testing by children, teachers and parents will yield data collected from user logs; quest
completion rates; interviews with teachers, children and their parents; analysis of forum posts;
interaction mapping; a focus group; and observation of user behavior. (More detail and data from this
trial will be available at the time of presentation.)
A Gamification Prototype: Design decisions, data collection and analysis.
Through an iterative process, the systems to support communication and collaboration will be
developed and refined based on user feedback and patterns of usage of the various tools.
The Game Management System
As RALfie is designed to provide access to RAL through a quest-based game interface, the options
were to custom build the system, a potentially expensive route for an untried theory, or find a suite of
appropriate technologies that could work in harmony to build a prototype for testing that would
provide for rapid iterative development. Iterative testing using expert review and usability testing
informs refinement of the design of a possible future custom system. Basing decisions on Chou’s
Octalysis Gamification Framework (2013b), and Marczewzki’s User Types Hexad (2013), a
combination of a website developed using "Weebly" 2014) for web pages and forums linked to a
Game Management System (GMS) called 3D GameLab (Dawley & Haskell, 2011) is being used in
the early iterations to determine the requirements of a production system. 3D GameLab acts as a shell
structure for a quest based game and reward and reputation (achievement) system in the same way that
a Learning Management System acts as a shell structure for an academic course. This capitalizes on
the research about quest-based learning that informed the development of its feature set (Haskell,
2013).
Within the capabilities of the inbuilt reward and reputation system of 3D Gamelab, the design of the
structure and purpose of the rewards is drawing on the framework for designing and evaluating game
achievements by Hamari and Eranti (2011). Should the 3D Gamelab system limit the design of the
reward and reputation system, features will be recorded in the design specification for future inclusion
and testing.
The Website and Guilds for Communication
The types, patterns and roles of communication that occur within the guilds will be analysed using
Content Analysis of the various communication channels and Social Network Analysis of the
interaction patterns. Interviews will be used to identify the communication voids experienced by users
that may have been filled by technologies outside the system such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter.
This data will facilitate an iterative refinement of the toolset within the guild system.
The Quests and Collaboration
The creation of quests that incorporate collaborative learning will require a four step process. In the
coming months a literature review of collaborative learning in communities of practice and quest
based games will yield appropriate ways to measure or document online collaboration. A set of reusable learning designs for quests that involve collaboration will be developed building on a taxonomy
of game quest structures. These will be refined using an expert review process with Science and
Technology teachers and teacher educators. These designs will provide the structure for the
Page 6 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
development of the collaborative quests. There will also be individual quests developed that do not
require collaboration for comparison purposes. When learners use the quests, the record of their
completion rates and quest ratings will be used to supplement the other measures.
The quests will be embedded in a story that will involve design challenges, problem solving,
investigations and observations. An overarching storyline involving four characters will tie the quests
together. These four characters, pictured in Figure 3 below, provide anchor points in the story to the
key roles within the game which are the overall game leader (RALfie), Sparky who helps the Makers,
Buffer who provides technical support; and Boot who is the guild master. Avatars of these characters
are being developed in the virtual world of Second Life to allow for the creation of videos using the
process of machinima, videos in which avatars are actors and the virtual world is the set. A quest
template is being developed that includes links to a range of free online tools for submission of the
quest data and outputs. The website will be the repository for Maker materials such as plans, text and
video guides and diagrams.
Figure 3:
RALfie Game Characters Version 1.0: (From left) RALfie, Boot, Buffer and
Sparky.
During the user trails, data is being collected to answer a range of questions related to the effect of the
game elements on engagement, communication and collaboration. Plans are being developed to use
various data sources to answer these questions. Usability testing will address the research questions
associated with the Evaluation: Local Impact phase. (See Figure 1, Column 3).
Lessons Learned During the Informed Exploration Phase
Remote experiments
Controlled lab trials with a mixed gender group of children aged between 6 and 17 years with a range
of technical skills indicated that children can cope with understanding the networking concepts
required to connect experiments to the Internet and access them remotely. Children were not only
capable of connecting and using remote experiments but they rapidly wanted to innovate on the
designs to creatively “improve” them based on their prior knowledge, their personal preferences, their
interests or simply the creative urge that was inspired by having access to flexible materials like the
Lego Ev3 kit.
Until further testing, the question remains if the use and making of experiments is engaging enough to
Page 7 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
entice new players and maintain their interest. The expert advice points to the need for a powerful
overarching storyline or engaging purpose as a trigger for engagement that would be maintained by
engaging and challenging quests. For a community-based environment such as this, both the literature
and expert advice recommends boot strapping the group during the establishment phase until the
community gains critical mass.
The quest to make experiments
At the time of writing, all experiments created by children have been assembled from plans provided
by the research team. As the environment expands into wider trials, the opportunity for participants to
find and design other experiments will be supported by the guild communities who can provide plans
and guides via the web-based repository. Designing quests for makers must cater for the diverse skill
set of the potential participants. Making a series of short tutorial quests about key concepts to kickstart
the knowledge and skills of new makers draws on the strategy used in video games in which the first
quests are tutorials that teach the necessary skills to play the game (Gee, 2003). A group of
authenticated adults with technical skills has been recruited from within the university to seed the
support community to aid the makers.
What’s next?
As the trials continue and more data informs the design, it will be shared in both research publications
and via the project website (reference removed during review) and blog as a form of ‘web-protodiffusion’ (Bannan, 2007). This process will crowd source additional feedback that will inform the
design as well as keep interested future participants abreast of developments.
Acknowledgements
This project is supported through the Australian Government's Collaborative Research Networks
(CRN) program.
References
Bannan-Ritland, Brenda. (2003). The role of design in research: The integrative learning design
framework. Educational Researcher, 32(1).
Bannan, Brenda. (2007, November 23-26). The Integrative Learning Design Framework: An
illustrated example from the domain of Instructional Technology. Paper presented at the An
Introduction to Educational Design Research Seminar, Shanghai (PR China).
Burke, Brian. (2014, 4 April 2014). Gartner redefines gamification. Retrieved 5 April, 2014, from
http://blogs.gartner.com/brian_burke/2014/04/04/gartner-redefinesgamification/?nicam=rmsm13
Chou, Yu-kai. (2013a). Gamification design: 4 Phases of a player’s journey. from
http://www.yukaichou.com/gamification-examples/experience-phases-game/#.U04hSVeDiNg
Chou, Yu-kai. (2013b). Octalysis: Complete gamification framework. Retrieved 8 May, 2013, from
http://www.yukaichou.com/gamification-examples/octalysis-complete-gamificationframework/
Dawley, Lisa, & Haskell, Chris. (2011). 3D GameLab: quest-based learning platform. 2012
Deterding, Sebastian, Dixon, Dan, Khaled, Rilla, & Nacke, Lennart. (2011). From game design
elements to gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”. Paper presented at the MindTrek’11,
Tampere, Finland.
Page 8 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
Feisel, L D, & Rosa, A J. (2005). The role of the laboratory in undergraduate engineering education.
Journal of Engineering Education, 94(1), 121-130.
Fensham, P J. (2008). Science education policy-making: Eleven emerging issues. Paris, France:
UNESCO.
Gee, James Paul. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York:
Palgrave McMillan.
George, S. (2003). Robert A. Millikan Award Lecture: Global study of the role of the laboratory in
physics education. American Journal of Physics, 71(8), 745-749.
Gillet, D, Ngoc, Anh Vu Nguyen, & Rekik, Y. (2005). Collaborative web-based experimentation in
flexible engineering education. IEEE Transactions on Education, 48(4), 696-704. doi:
10.1109/TE.2005.852592
Hamari, Juho, & Eranti, Veikko. (2011). Framework for designing and evaluating game achievements.
Paper presented at the Think Design Play: The fifth international conference of the Digital
Research
Association
(DIGRA),
Utrecht,NL.
http://www.digra.org/digitallibrary/publications/framework-for-designing-and-evaluating-game-achievements/
Haskell, Chris. (2013). Understanding quest-based learning : Creating effective classroom experiences
through
game-based mechanics and community (pp. 4). Boise, USA: Boise State University.
Johnson, Larry. (2013). The future of education: The 2013 NMC Horizon Project Summit
communique. Austin, TX: New Media Consortium.
Kelly, Anthony E., Lesh, Richard A., & Baek, John Y. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of design research
methods in education: Innovations in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics
learning and teaching. New York, NY: Routledge.
Kist, Alexander A., & Gibbings, Peter. (2010, Dec 2010). Inception and management of remote access
laboratory project. Paper presented at the 21st Annual Conference of the Australasian
Association for Engineering Education, Sydney, Australia.
Kist, Alexander A., Maxwell, Andrew, & Gibbings, Peter. (2012). Expanding the concept of remote
access laboratories. Paper presented at the 2012 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition:
Spurring Big Ideas in Education (ASEE 2012), San Antonio, TX. United States.
http://www.asee.org/search/proceedings?fields%5B%5D=author&search=kist
Kist, Alexander A., Maxwell, Andrew, Gibbings, Peter, Fogarty, Roderick, Midgley, Warren, & Noble,
Karen. (2011). Engineering for primary school children: Learning with robots in a remote
access laboratory. Paper presented at the SEFI 2011: Global Engineering Recognition,
Sustainability
and
Mobility,
Lisbon,
Portugal.
http://www.sefi.be/wpcontent/papers2011/T12/114.pdf
LILA Library of Labs. 13 Dec 2011). Retrieved 15 Apr, 2014, from http://www.lila-project.org/
Lowe, David, Conlon, S, Murray, S, Weber, L, Villefromoy, M D L, Lindsay, Euan, . . . al, et. (2012).
LabShare: Towards Cross-Institutional Laboratory Sharing. In A. Azad, M. Auer & J. Harward
(Eds.), Internet Accessible Remote Laboratories: Scalable E-Learning Tools for Engineering
and Science Disciplines (1 ed., pp. 453-467). Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.
Lowe, David, Murray, S, Lindsay, Euan, & Liu, D. (2009). Evolving remote laboratory architectures to
leverage emerging Internet technologies. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 2(4),
289-294.
Lowe, David, Murray, Steve, Liu, Dikai, Lindsay, Euan, & Bright, Chris. (2007). Literature Review:
Remotely accessible laboratories – Enhancing learning outcomes. Canberra, ACT: Australian
Learning and Teaching Council.
Macpherson, K. (2013). Digital technology and Australian teenagers: consumption, study and careers.
Canberra, ACT: The Education Institute.
Maiti, Ananda, Maxwell, Andrew D., & Kist, Alexander A. (2014). Features, trends and characteristics
of remote access laboratory management systems. Journal of Online Engineering (iJOE),
10(2), 30 - 37.
Marczewski, Andrzej. (2013). Marczewski’s user types hexad.
Retrieved from
http://www.gamified.co.uk/user-types/
Masters, G N. (2009). A shared challenge: Improving literacy, numeracy and Science Learning in
Queensland Primary Schools. Camberwell, Vic: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Page 9 of 10
Ralfie: A game where maker faire meets hackerthon.
Author Name: L.ORWIN et al
Papert, Seymour, & Harel, Idit. (1991). Situating constructionism Constructionism Ablex Publishing
Corporation.
Siemens, George. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved from
elearnspace website: http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Thomson, S, Wernert, N, Underwood, C, & Nicholas, M. (2008). TIMSS 2007: Taking a closer look at
mathematics and science in Australia Trends in international mathematics and science study.
Camberwell, Vic.
Weebly. (2014). from http://weebly.com
Page 10 of 10