See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/319583155

The Model for Gamification of E-learning in Higher Education Based on

Learning Styles

Conference Paper · September 2017

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-67597-8_25

CITATION READS

1 352

5 authors, including:

Nadja Zaric Snezana Scepanovic

RWTH Aachen University Mediterranean University
9 PUBLICATIONS   5 CITATIONS    15 PUBLICATIONS   28 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Tijana Vujicic Jelena Ljucovic

Mediterranean University Mediterranean University
7 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

LAMS project View project

Gamification in personalized e-learning View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Snezana Scepanovic on 18 October 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 The model for gamification of e-learning in higher
education based on learning styles

Nadja Zaric[1],Snezana Scepanović[1], Tijana Vujicic[1], Jelena Ljucovic[1], Danco

Davcev[2]
1
Faculty of Information technologies, University "Mediterranean", Podgorica, Montenegro
2
Faculty of Computer Science and Engineering, University "Ss. Cyril and Methodius", Skopje,
Macedonia

Abstract
Rapid advances in information technology and easy access to the Internet are
reshaping educational institutions by providing new learning environments and
new ways to teach. Web-based course delivery (e-learning) might be the biggest
challenge in technology innovation used in higher education. If used effective-
ly, e-learning has a greater potential to alter higher education at its very core
than any other technology application we have known thus far. E-learning must
create the conditions under which students are motivated, satisfied, effective
and efficient.
This paper present conceptual model for gamification of e-learning courses in
higher education based on student learning styles. The model is based on our
previous research and results of experiments in using gamification in higher ed-
ucational courses [14, 23, 26]. Comprehensive review of the learning theories
and gamification concept is used to define the correlation between game ele-
ments and learning styles that are dominant gamified learning environments.
Conceptual design and architecture of virtual learning environment proposed in
our model can be used as framework for creating gamified e-learning courses
based on learning styles.
Keywords: gamification, learning style, e-learning, instructional design, Felder
Silverman model, adaptive hypermedia systems.

1 Introduction

Learning as a concept is almost impossible to explain with only one clear defini-
tion. It represents a complex process in which things (materials for learning), people
(students and instructors), relations (student-student, instructor-student, and student-
learning material), space (physical or virtual) and time (real or not) are playing equal-
ly important roles. All these parts are connected and they influence one another. De-
pending on how these factors combine, different teaching and learning methods are
identified. The traditional way of learning implies that its participants must complete-
ly adapt to the system as such, regardless of whether it suits them or not. This learning
model fails to recognize the complexity of learning process since students are charac-
2

terized by different learning styles, preferentially focusing on different types of in-

formation and tending to operate on perceived information in different ways [1, 2].
As one of the possible responses to the aforesaid limitations, there is e-learning. In
general e-learning refers to using web based technologies as a tool for gaining new
knowledge and skills. Since the introduction of the Internet in education, and espe-
cially online degrees offering by some universities, the selection of technologies for
creating online courses has been the major concern. The main questions that need to
be considered before creating online courses are: How do we make sure that students
learn? How do we decide what to learn next and to bridge weekly assignment to
achieve the wholeness of the topics? What factors motivate students? These questions
are central for successful creating of Virtual Learning Environment (VLE), and yet
most online courses are designed in ignorance of their answers.
There are a lot of different ways to use and implement e-learning. Instructional de-
sign and learning styles play critical roles that influence student retention and success
in web-based learning [3]. Adaptation of VLE to learning style of student could sig-
nificantly improve motivation and success of learning. On the other side, last decade
is marked by a large number of scientific papers [4-7] related to impact of gamifica-
tion to the learning outcomes. Gamification relates to the inclusion of the game ele-
ments (strategy, points, prizes levels, time constraints, events, avatars etc.) in the cur-
riculum [8]. Gamification is still fairly new in higher education, but it builds on the
success of the gaming industry, social media and decades of research on human psy-
chology. Effective gamification is not layering goals and rewards on top of content;
rather it involves adopting a game thinking mentality in order to integrate game me-
chanics into learning in a planned approach [9]. This brings us to the idea that appli-
cation of game elements that are consistent with learning styles can be used in VLE to
evoke student motivation, improve engagement and performance of learning.

2 Gamification and learning

2.1 Games and Gamification

Game can be defined as sequence of activities that involves one or more players.
Each game has goal, consequences and rewards. Game rules are defined in advance
and game involves competition against another player or yourself [10]. Games are a
part of our daily life and they are research subject of many scientific fields such as
psychology, philosophy, anthropology, pedagogy and many others. Gamification is
using game elements in non-game contexts like marketing, business, e-commerce,
education, work environment, social media, etc. It is about improving some real-
world products of activities by applying the motivational techniques that make games
so engaging. Goof example of gamification is corporate reward programs in which
company rewards consumers for certain behaviors. In the classroom, gamification can
be integrated in a more authentic manner. Course can become a living game, which
can increase the satisfaction, engagement, effectiveness and efficiency of students.
 3

2.2 Game elements

In order to understand gamification and incorporate games with learning, it is
necessary to understand the core concepts of games. There are four equally important
game elements [11]:
1. mechanics – describes behavior and control mechanisms, and defines actions
that player has to take in order to achieve a specific goal
2. story - goals, obstacles and challenges that will face a player during game-
play
3. aesthetics - design, visibility and usability of user interface
4. dynamics - run-time behavior of the mechanics, depending on player actions
and inputs
Ten most used game elements are: avatars, 3D environment, narrative context,
feedback, leaderboards, rankings and levels, economy, competition, team play, time
restrictions and systems for real-time communication [12].

2.3 Elements of gamification in e-learning

Game elements in education are used in order to increase motivation and engagement
in the learning process [13]. Any online course can be easily improved by adding some
basic game elements (such as points, badges, time track etc.). Main similarity between
learning process and game is that both of them are goal-focused activities. Play-
ers/students are being directed to undertake tasks in order to achieve a desired out-
come, moving to the next level/mission in the case of a game, or understanding a com-
plex topic in the case of learning process. We can draw a parallel between course activ-
ities and game activities, while course goals can be defined as game goals [14]. Analy-
sis of relevant studies on gamification in higher education [15] showed that most
commonly used game elements are: points, badges, leaderboards, levels and progress
tracking.
Playing a game to “win” is very similar to student learning harder in order to get a
better grade. Most common game reward mechanics are points, leaderboards and
achievements [4-7]. Those mechanics can be easily integrated in the learning process.
In the game process points are usually bond with game levels, while lessons or learn-
ing units in the course can be seen as levels and points from each level can be used for
grading students’ activities. Student’s grades (or points) can be used to show their
success and to form the leaderboard, so students could compete to accomplish higher
ranking. Another way to show student’s success are achievements, which are com-
monly displayed publicly on online profiles. The Open Badge are emerging trend that
allows any person or organization to define a badge (achievement) to recognize
knowledge or skills represented by that particular badge [16].
Also, method of progress tracking within a game is analogous to the provision of
feedback within education. An important part of providing feedback to users is to let
them know how much progress they've made, either in game or learning. Theoretical
background
4

2.4 Learning styles theories

Learning style is an ongoing issue of great importance to educational research in
technology enhanced learning. Learning style refers to the preferential way in which
the student absorbs processes, comprehends and retains information. Learning styles
are the psychological and cognitive behaviors that serve as indicators of how students
learn and how they interact with learning environment. The roots of learning styles
originating from the classification of psychological types and depend on cognitive,
emotional and environmental factors, as well as one’s prior experience [17]. There are
many theories and classification of learning styles. Most current in psycho-logical and
educational research are: Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, Kolb theory and the theory
based on the Felder-Silverman model learning styles (FSMLS) [18].
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is a model created on the basis of Jung's theory of
psychological types. According to Jung, there are four criteria (intuiting, sensing,
thinking and feeling) which define the eight types of personality who has different
learning styles [19]. Based on intuition criteria, two types are noted: extraversion type
who learns from the phenomenon and has expressed interpersonal communication and
introversion type who prefers learning on personal experience. Sensing criteria de-
fines sensing type and intuition type. According to feeling criteria, judgment and per-
ceiving types are defined. Judgment type is focused on details, while perceiving type
needs a lot of information and rich content to validate and adopt a fact.
Kolb's learning theory sets out four distinct learning styles, which are based on a
four-stage learning cycle [20]. In his model, Kolb differentiates students according to
their ability for receiving and disseminating information. There are two ways for re-
ceiving information: concrete and abstract, while processing information can be active
and reflective [21]. Based on this theory, Kolb defined four types of learning: diverg-
ing, assimilating, converging, and accommodating type.
Felder-Silverman learning style model (FSLSM) describes learning styles in very
much detail, distinguishing between preferences on four dimensions. FSLSM is one
of the most often used learning style model in technology enhance learning and some
researchers even argue that it is the most appropriate model for the use in adaptive
learning systems [14]. In the following, the four dimensions of FSLSM are described.
The first dimension distinguishes between an active and a reflective way of pro-
cessing information which defines how learner prefers to process information. Active
learners learn best by working actively with the learning material and trying things
out. In contrast, reflective learners prefer to think about and reflect on the material.
The second dimension covers sensing versus intuitive learning. This dimension de-
fines how learner perceives or takes in information. Learners who prefer a sensing
learning style like to learn facts and concrete learning material. They tend to be more
practical than intuitive learners. In contrast, intuitive learners prefer conceptual think-
ing, concerned with theories and meanings. The third, visual-verbal continuum deter-
mines how learners prefer information to be presented. This dimension differentiates
learners who remember best what they have seen, and learners who get more out of
textual representations, regardless of the fact whether they are written or spoken. In
the fourth dimension, the learners are characterized according to their under-standing.
 5

Sequential learners learn in small incremental steps and therefore have a linear learn-
ing progress. In contrast, global learners use a holistic thinking process and learn in
large leaps. They tend to absorb learning material almost randomly without seeing
connections but after they have learned enough material they suddenly get the whole
picture.

2.5 Current studies on using gamification in e-learning in higher

education
Teachers had often been struggling with keeping students’ motivation and concentra-
tion to the course. That is why many lecturers are searching for a way to increase the
engagement among students and to keep them interested. One of the methods used for
this purpose is implementing game elements in courses. Relevant studies on gamifica-
tion in higher education are analyzed in our previous research [22] in order to see
which game elements were implemented and which of them had the biggest impact on
participants’ cognitive and emotional behavior. All of the studies in education-
al/learning contexts considered the learning outcomes of gamification as mostly posi-
tive in terms of increased motivation and engagement in the learning tasks as well as
enjoyment over them. The most successfully implemented were experience points
(XPs), badges, scoreboards and feedback that had positive impact. While negative or
poor impact on students’ motivation had avatars, time track and competition. Students
rather appreciated that the format of the game was primarily based on collaboration
and not on competition.

3 The model for gamification e-learning in higher

education based on learning styles

The basic idea of the proposed conceptual model is to incorporate game elements in
online education based on student’ learning styles. The subject of this paper is gamifi-
cation of Moodle online learning courses according to learning styles defined in
FSLMS. Proposed model aims to define elements of the game which suits to a partic-
ular style of learning according to Felder Silverman model and develop a model of
learning in e-education, which is based on the use of game elements depending on the
style of learning.

3.1 Conceptual design and architecture

The model propose architecture of virtual learning environment for creating gamified
e-learning courses in which learning styles are base for the creation of teaching mate-
rial and course content. Furthermore, gamified e-learning courses should increase
student motivation, engagement and provide an atmosphere in which students are
proactive, motivated and express a positive attitude toward learning. The model is
presented in Fig. 1, and consists of the following main elements: management of e-
learning, management of FS learning styles, phases of development (analysis, plan-
6

ning, development, implementation and evaluation), gamification elements in e-

learning and their effects on students.

Fig. 1. Conceptual model of gamification e-learning based on students learning style

Moodle (Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment) platform
stands out as one of the most common systems to support e-learning. Moodle is wide-
ly used in higher levels of education, with over 50,000 registered sites.[24] As a ser-
vice that has, for many years, been successfully used in formal and informal teaching,
Moodle 3.2V is used as the basis for the development of gamified e-learning model.
Tools for managing user accounts and roles, creating and monitoring online courses,
developing and updating learning materials and collaborative tools are just some of
the features of Moodle that are used in this model. During the course, Moodle stores
data on a variety of students’ actions and activities such as: time spent on the course,
time spent in the development of tasks, the list of materials examined etc. The data
collected from Moodle LMS system is used to determine the typical behavior of stu-
dents in the system for managing the learning process and the ways in which individ-
ual resources and activities of the course are used.

3.2 Development of gamified e-learning course

Analysis
As the proposed model is based on introducing game elements, and, having in
mind the formerly described learning styles, it is necessary to structure and organize
the curriculum and the teaching material taking into account the learning style. Ques-
tionnaire that is used to collect data about users are modified ILS tests. The Index of
Learning Styles (ILS) [24], developed by Felder and Silverman, is a 44-item ques-
tionnaire for identifying the learning styles according to FSLSM. This standardized
questionnaire has to be extended to issues of student personal information (personal
data, gender, year of study and average grade) in order to be able to identify the re-
spondents in further steps. Results of modified ILS test are used to identify learning
styles to which the pupil belongs. Based on the results, tested sample is divided in two
groups - experimental and control. Table 1 provides suggestions for structuring of the
teaching material, so that it corresponds the FS learning styles.
 7

Table 1- methods of structuring of the teaching material, based on the FS learning styles

Materials and resources Activities and assessments

Practical assignments, experi-
Active Concrete examples, case studies
ments
Reflective Presentations with topics to think about Student gives his opinion
Visual Material with pictures, videos and graphs Question with visual elements
Verbal Textual documents, books and lectures Essay questions
Sequential Materials must be read in specific order Task with multiple steps
Global Students creates their own learning plan Conceptual solutions
Sensor Concrete examples and strict information Practical tasks
Intuitive Concepts and theoretical frames Conceptual issues

The result of this phase is the specification of the curriculum, programs and mate-
rials that will be created based on the recommendations set out in Table 1, for the
purpose of gamificiation.

Instructional design
The design phase is carried out with the aim of formalizing elements of the game that
can be incorporated into the online course in a way that they contribute to increasing
the motivation and participation of students, as well as to the expression of positive
behavior towards learning.
Table 2 provides an overview of the game elements that can make a positive im-
pact on a specific learning style. Proposals are given based on the examined theoreti-
cal literature and researches. [4-7, 16-18].
Table 2- Game elements that can make a positive impact on a specific learning
style(elements with impact are marked by “x” sign)

Active Reflective Visual Verbal Sequential Global Sensor Intuitive

Badges x x x x x x x
Leaderboards x x x x
XP’s x x x x x
Mystery x x x
Levels x x x x x x
Stories x x x x
Feedback x x x x x x
Time Track x x x
Progress bar x x x x x x x
Competition x x x x
8

Development
For the purposes of course development, existing Moodle LMS services were inte-
grated and new developed to support gamification. We used: Open badges to incorpo-
rate award winning element, Level up! Module for XP’s points, Ranking block for
showing scoreboards, User tours for implementing Story game element, Progress
track for showing students the current status of their progress and Game mod for de-
veloping educational games for assignments and practice [25].

Implementation
During implementation we introduce the system to its users and general public. Stu-
dents are divided in experimental and control groups. Students from first group will
enroll the course with gamified elements, while those from control group will learn
from non-game learning material. Before the evaluation starts, we need to ensure all
the users (professors and pupils) are familiarizing with gamification concept, assess-
ment methods and curriculum. It is also necessary to monitor system’s usage, perfor-
mance and collect feedback.

Evaluation
Evaluation results are supposed to show whether the gamified material made a posi-
tive impact on the learners, increased their learning motivation, and if it did, how the
game elements and learning styles are connected. Data collected from e-learning sys-
tem serves to analyze learning outcomes and should be used to compare results of two
groups. Since we know which students belongs to which learning style we can easily
draw conclusions about success and impact of game elements on the level of FS
styles. Opinion questionnaire is used to determinate students’ level of satisfaction and
impressions on using gamification.

4 Conclusion

Gamification has brought forward an opportunity for educators to provide a com-

prehensive framework by which playful learning in the context of serious adult level
content can be realized. It does so with no disruption to effective pedagogical practice
and provides the means to engage students in learning. Adaptation to learning styles
and gamification seem both to be promising concepts in e-learning worth further ex-
ploration, even if neither of the techniques will cure all problems or reach all students.
To determine the usefulness of gamification across academic disciplines and learning
styles a more thorough investigation is required.
The conceptual model for gamification of e-learning courses in higher education
based on student learning styles proposed in this paper is based on theoretical and
empirical research. The authors developed learning approach to establish the gamifi-
cation of e-learning system and enhance the learning achievements. Future work will
deal with implementation and evaluation of proposed model with a larger number of
students in order to identify correlations and variables between different learning
styles and students’ behavior in the gamified virtual learning environments.
 9

References

1. Corno, L., Snow, R.E., “Adapting Teaching to Individual Differences Among

Learners,” in M. C. Wittrock, ed., Handbook of Re- search on Teaching, 3rd ed.,
New York, N.Y.: Macmillan and Co., (1986).
2. Schmeck, R.R.: Learning Strategies and Learning Styles, New York, N.Y.: Ple-
num Press, (1988).
3. Akdemir, O., Koszalka, T.: Investigating the relationships among instructional
strategies and learning styles in online environments, Computers & Education,
Vol.50, No. 4, pp.1451-61. (2008).
4. Barata, G., Gama, S., Jorge, J., Gonçalves, D.: Engaging engineering students
with gamification, 5th International Conference Games and Virtual Worlds for
Serious Applications (VS-GAMES), September 11-13, 2013
5. Kosmadoudi, Z., Lim, T., Ritchie, L., Louchart, S., Liu, Y., Sung, R.: Engineering
design using gameenhanced CAD: The potential to augment the user experience
with game elements, Computer-Aided Design, 45, pp. 777-795. (2013)
6. Codish, D., Ravid, G.: Personality Based Gamification – Educational Gamifica-
tion for Extroverts and Introverts, u Zborniku IX CHAIS Conference for the
Study of Innovation and Learning Technologies: Learning in the Technological
Era, pp. 36-44. (2014)
7. Dickey, M.D: Engaging by design: how engagement strategies in popular com-
puter and video games can inform instructional design, Education Training Re-
search and Development, 53 (2), 2005, pp. 67-83, accessed on February 16, 2015
from: http://medicina.iztacala.unam.mx/medicina/Engaging %20by%20design.pdf
8. Glover: Play as you learn: gamification as a technique for motivating learners, in
Proceedings World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Tel-
ecommunications, AACE, Chesapeake, VA, pp. 1999-2008. (2013)
9. McGrath, N., Bayerlein, L.: "Engaging online students through the gamification
of learning materials: The present and the future," in Australasian Society for
Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE), Sydney, Australia,
(2013)
10. Schäfer, J., Holz, A., Leonhardt, T., Schroeder, U., Brauner, P., Ziefle, M.: From
boring to scoring – a collaborative serious game for learning and practicing math-
ematical logic for computer science education, Computer Science Education,
23:2, pp. 87-111.
11. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L.: From game design elements to
gamefulness: defining "gamification", Proceeding MindTrek '11 Proceedings of
the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Me-
dia Environments, pp. 9-15. (2011)
12. Kim, B., Park, H. , Baek, Y.: Not just fun, but serious strategies: Using meta-
cognitive strategies in game-based learning, Computers & Education, 52(4), pp.
800-810. (2009)
13. Adams, E.: Fundamentals of Game Design, Second editiont., New Riders, pp.
700. (2009)
 10

14. Scepanovic, S., Zaric, N., Matijevic, T. : Gamification in Higher Education Learn-
ing – State of the Art, Challenges and Opportunities, Proceeding of VI interna-
tional conference of e-Learning Belgrade, Serbia, pp. 128-134 (2015)
15. Glover. A, Play as you learn: gamification as a technique for motivating learners,
in Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and
Telecommunications, AACE, Chesapeake, VA, pp. 1999-2008. (2013)
16. Sillaots, M.: Gamification of Higher Education by the Example of Course of Re-
search Methods, in Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Web-
based Learning – ICWL, Tallinn, Estonia, pp. 106–115. (2014)
17. Sillaots, M. : Gamification of Higher Education by the Example of Computer
Games Course, The Seventh International Conference on Mobile, Hybrid, and On-
line Learning – eLmL 2015, Lisbon, Portugal, February 22-27, 2015, accessed on
April 08, 2017 from goo.gl/e7uHwr
18. Open Badges for Higher education, accessed on May 09, 2017, from
https://www.pearsoned.com/wp-content/uploads/Open-Badges-for-Higher-
Education.pdf
19. Keefe, J.W.: “Learning style: Cognitive and thinking skills”, National Association
of Secondary School Principals, Reston, VA, pp. 22-26. (1991)
20. Cassidy, S. : Learning styles: An overview of theories, models and measures, Di-
rectorat of Psychology, University of Salford, ISSN 0144-3410/ISSN 1469-046X,
pp. 2-4. (2004)
21. Catherine, B., Wheeler, D.,: The Myers-Briggs Personality Type and Its Relation-
ship to Computer Programming, Journal of Research on Computing in Education
Volume 26 - Issue 3, pp. 358-370. (1994)
22. Kolb, D. Kolb, Learning Styles and Learning Spaces: Enhancing Experiential
Learning in Higher Education, 10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566 ACAD MANAG
LEARN EDU vol. 4 no. 2 pp. 193-212. (2005)
23. Scepanovic,S., Debevc, M.: Adaptation of Learning Objects in Virtual Learning
Environment to Learning Styles of Students, In proceedings International Confer-
ence of Education, Research and Innovation- ICERI 2012 Madrid, Spain, Nov 19-
21, ISBN: 978-84-616-07631, pp. 5061-5067. (2012)
24. Schäfer, A., Holz, J., Leonhardt, T., Schroeder, U., Brauner P. & Ziefle, M. :
From boring to scoring – a collaborative serious game for learning and practicing
mathematical logic for computer science education, Computer Science Education,
pp. 87-111. (2013)
25. Keefe, J.W.: “Learning style: Cognitive and thinking skills”, National Association
of Secondary School Principals, Reston, VA, pp. 101-105. (1991)
26. Scepanovic, S., Vujicic, T., Radunović, P., Antovic, I., Vlajic, S.: Challenges in
design of games for mobile learning, In Proceedings of 10th International Technol-
ogy, Education and Development Conference (INTED 016),Valencia, Spain, 7-9
March., ISBN: 978-84-608-5617-7, pp. 2989-2998. (2016)

View publication stats