11
In this study, the researcher discusses one of the methodologies and tools that are provided by TBL. The researcher chooses gaming as the methodologies
and tools from TBL. Advanced Distributed Learning 2005 have described that:
Gaming involves more complex simulations with formal rules in which players engage in artificial conflict with variable and quantifiable
outcomes and both game play and learning objectives, a narrative which provide cues, context and relevance for the activities, and a simulation
which represents the learning space to support the activities and narratives.
From the explanation above, gaming can be used for teaching and learning because it can be based on the context and relevance of the learning activities. It
also gives a support for the learning activities in TBL program.
2. Gamification
This section is divided into four parts. There are beliefs about gamification, game elements, type of users, and accessible technology to make
gamification. Those aspects will be elaborated in the following paragraphs.
a. Beliefs about Gamification
Research by some researchers have yielded new findings that “gamification is not about turning the classes into a game; although the
gamification technique is not truly an academic methodology, it may improve the performance of students in the learning process” Xu, 2012. Bohyun Kim 2015
has described the difference between gamification and educational games: PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
12
Gamification and educational games have the same goals but different process. Educational games are complete games with
serious intentions. It also requires many resources because educational game is the simulator of the material of education.
Gamification of learning is not identical to educational games since the latter are full-fledged games while the former is
only a lightweight application that applies game elements to the learning context. However, both the gamification and the
educational learning share the same process of gamifying learning elements to achieve the goals p. 29.
In addition to the previous researcher, Deterding et al 2011 stated that gamification is not making or using game in the learning process but
“gamification is the use of game-play mechanics for non-game applications.” In 2013, Muntean noted that “the game-play mechanics are a set of rules and
feedback loops that create the game play” which is used for non-game
applications or activities. Therefore, gamification only uses the technique or mechanics of the game itself to achieve the goals of non-game activities such as
education, economics, health, ecology, etc. In the education field, many researchers found that gamification is useful
for the learning process and it makes “learning and instruction more fun” Sheldon, 2011; Hamari et al, 2014. Moreover, Lee and Hammer 2011 also
state that the definition of gamification but they add that “gamification use game
dynamics and frameworks to promote behaviors.” In other words, gamification has a great impact for the user‟s behaviors. Kapp 2011 added that “the
gamification of learning and instruction like time, accuracy, point systems integrated on the learning process will encourage users to achieve their desired
goals” that is called the education goals. Flatla, D., Gutwin, C., Nacke, L., Bateman, S., Mandryk, R. 2011 stated that “gamification‟s main goal is to raise
13
the engagement of users by using game-like technique such as scoreboard and personalized fast feedback” because it encourages students to get involved in the
learning process. Hence, gamification is efficient for learning “in order to make the content more attract
ive and engage the user” Muntean, 2013. Gamification is reputed as a new way to attract stud
ents‟ engagement and motivation. However, there are also some critiques which need to be noticed.
Bogost 2011 argued that “gamification can become „exploitationware‟ with counterfeit rather than genuine incentives” in order to motivate students to get
involved in the learning process. In addition, Rughinis 2013 revealed that gamification of education can be exploitative “if it becomes an excuse for a
simplistic inadequate design of learning.” In this case, Kim 2015 found the most critique about gamification which revolves around is
“the concepts of external reward and intrinsic motivation.” He also said that “it seems natural to assume
that what motivates people to engage in any gamified application is almost always extrinsic motivation
” which means that the reason behind the action is not the action itself but something else.
Therefore , the designer of gamification should “apply gamification wisely,
thoughtfully, and selectively with a clear goal” and also understand “the target audience, the nature of target activity, the gamified learning content; and
appropriate and effective rewards for the intended context” in order to solve problems which are faced while using gamified application in education field
Kim, 2015. In addition, Deterding et al 2011 stated that gamification can be applied using digital or without digital technology. It means that gamification can
14
be applied on the learning activities without any digital technology. It will happen if the learning process uses the game elements to attract students‟ attention and
motivation.
b. Game Elements
By knowing the definition about gamification, the researcher examines game elements which are important in designing gamification. There are lots of game
elements which are discovered by many researchers Deterding et al., 2011; Juul, 2005; Reeves Read, 2009. According to Reeves and Read 2009, there are ten
ingredients of great games. There are “self-presentation with avatars; three-
dimensional environment; narrative context; feedback; reputations, ranks, and levels; market places and economies; competition under rules that are explicit and
enforced; teams; parallel communication systems that can be easily configured; time pressure.
” On the other hand, there are many researchers who classify game design
elements into some levels Belman Flanagan, 2010; Björk Holopainen, 2005; Brathwaite Schreiber, 2008; Crumlish Malone, 2009; Fullerton, 2008. From
those researchers, Deterding et al. 2011 arrange the levels of game design elements on a table which ordered from concrete to abstract. The arrangement is
elaborated in the table below. PLAGIAT MERUPAKAN TINDAKAN TIDAK TERPUJI
15
Table 2.1 Levels of Game Design Elements
Level Description
Example
Game interface design patterns
Common, successful interaction design
components and design solutions for a known
problem in a context, including prototypical
implementations Badge, leaderboard, level
Game design patterns and mechanics
Commonly reoccurring parts of the design of a game that
concern gameplay Time constraint, limited
resources, turns
Game design principles and
heuristics Evaluative guidelines to
approach a design problem or analyze a given design
solution Enduring play, clear
goals, variety of game styles
Game models Conceptual models of the
components of games or game experience
MDA; challenge, fantasy, curiosity; game design
atoms; CEGE
Game design methods Game design-specific
practices and processes Playtesting, playcentric
design, value conscious game design
In addition to the game elements, there are lots of researchers who stated their discoveries. They have different focus in their discoveries. Some of them focus on
game elements which can be used in education field. In 2015, Bohyun Kim suggested that “an instructor gamifies part of or all homework for a class with a
leaderboard, points, teams, challenges, missions, and badges.” In addition to Kim
‟s suggestion, Kapp 2012 also describes “seven types of knowledge, along with gamification elements and examples for each type.”
