=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1604/Paper7
|storemode=property
|title=Ace That Game: Educating Students to Gamified Design Thinking
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1604/Paper7.pdf
|volume=Vol-1604
|authors=Naomi Unkelos-Shpigel
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/caise/Unkelos-Shpigel16a
}}
==Ace That Game: Educating Students to Gamified Design Thinking==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1604/Paper7.pdf
Proceedings of STPIS'16
Ace That Game: Educating Students to
Gamified Design Thinking
Experience Report
Naomi Unkelos-Shpigel
Information Systems Department, University of Haifa
Carmel Mountain 31905, Haifa, Israel
naomiu@is.haifa.ac.il
Abstract. Undergraduate information system (IS) and software engineering (SE)
students are required to plan and deliver a project in their last year of study. These
projects are intended to enhance business processes in firms, but often are not in
use later on. One reason that can explain this is the fact the employees in the firm
do not want to use the system created by the students, due to various reasons. In
recent years, several persuasive technologies, and in particular gamification,
were offered to enhance employees' motivation for using new tools.
This paper presents a teaching of gamification workshop, where undergraduate
students were presented with gamification mechanisms, and were asked to embed
them in their design of final project. The results were interesting, and can con-
tribute to the design of projects in information systems and software engineering.
Keywords: Gamification, collaboration, education
1 Introduction
As an integral part of information systems degree curricula, software engineering and
information systems students are required to design and implement a final project. The
project is developed for a firm, chosen by the students. Its main goal to enhance busi-
ness processes in that firm. These projects often include the writing of requirement
documents, implementing a prototype, and several iterations of development, according
to the development methodology used. Students often use predefined templates for de-
signing the product and its requirements. However, though much effort is invested in
various project tasks [6], there is no guarantee that the product will be used by the firm.
Any software system that has extensive interaction with human beings becomes
part of a bigger socio-technical system. Not all software engineers are aware of this
fact, which results in software systems poorly adapted to be part of a socio-technical
system. The use of the product depends on human factors such as how the employees
of the firm are motivated to contribute to innovation in the firm, perceive the product
Edited by S. Kowalski, P. Bednar and I. Bider 75
Proceedings of STPIS'16
and its contribution to their business processes, and their perception of their role in the
firm [16]. The success of software development processes and their enhancement have
been vastly researched in recent years. Software engineers increasingly rely on profes-
sional social networks in their organizations in order to complete their tasks [4]; meth-
ods of gamification are being developed and used in order to evaluate team and indi-
vidual performance [ibid]; many metrics have been proposed to monitor software de-
velopment projects success [12,14]. However, the human factors affecting users' moti-
vation to use the software product, require additional attention. Persuasive technolo-
gies, in particular Gamification, has been acknowledged as affecting employees’ moti-
vation and behavior. Gamification is defined as “the integration of Game Mechanics in
non-game environments to increase audience engagement, loyalty and fun” [4, p.2],
and has been found to encourage users participation and contribution in computer-sup-
ported applications. In recent years various gamification elements have been embedded
in different information systems and applications in general and in applications in-
tended for software engineers in particular.
This paper proposes a new direction for enhancing software engineering via gamifi-
cation. IS students who are in the stage of designing their final projects, participated a
three-hours workshops, where they learned about gamification principles, and the use
of gamification mechanisms to enhance motivation among users of software products.
Students worked in teams, designing an outline for embedding gamification mecha-
nisms in their final projects' business processes. Each group presented their outline to
other students in class, justifying the need for gamification. Each student was asked to
share thoughts on each presentation, using an online form. Finally, each student was
asked to express their opinion about embedding gamification in software products.
The next section presents the background for the gamification workshop. Section 3
details the workshop outline and principles. Section 4 presents students’ perceptions
toward gamification in general, and in which business processes they believe they can
use gamification. Section 5 concludes and presents lesson learned.
2 Scientific Background
2.1 Gamification
Coined by Nick Pelling in 2002 [7] the term "gamification" is used in order to de-
scribe how any task can be performed as a game. In recent years, research has been
conducted with regard to gamification, its mechanisms, and their use. Gamification in-
cludes several elements, including levels, points, badges, social recognition, and lead-
erboard [4]. While the early use of gamification was intended for games and application
for users, research from the last few years has been targeted on using gamification
mechanisms for changing behaviors of specific populations. In the context of software
engineering, several attempts to use gamification techniques in software projects were
conducted. Sheth et al. [8] gamified a number of software engineering activities in ed-
ucational settings in order to engage software engineering students in development,
documentation, bug reporting, and test coverage using social rewards. The students who
used the system showed statistically significant improvement in their work results [1].
©Copyright held by the author(s) 76
Proceedings of STPIS'16
The system helped the students to be exposed to the complete lifecycle of software
development, and encouraged students to choose software engineering as a major in
their studies. Another effort to gamify software development in educational settings
was done in the context of early stages of software development, successfully integrat-
ing gamification elements into requirement elicitation [15]. This study identified three
types of activities needed to be performed when integrating gamification into software
engineering: analysis, integration, and evaluation and found that students performing
these activities produced better outcomes.
2.2 Motivation Theories
Several cognitive theories address the topic of encouraging motivation for work tasks.
Here we briefly present three of the most influential theories in this field.
The Self Determination Theory (SDT) [8] presents a continuum of motivation types,
from intrinsic motivation that emerges from the employee, to extrinsic motivation cre-
ated by rules and regulation in the workplace. Although intrinsic motivation is consid-
ered to be linked to positive human behavior, SDT suggests that proper use in extrinsic
motivation can lead to motivated behavior. According to the Theory of Flow [3] there
are five elements of reaching to a state where the individual is immersed into the per-
formed task (some of which can be extrinsically induced): Clarity, Centering, Choice,
Commitment, Challenge. Sawyer [9] extended these elements to the context of group
flow, to contain, among others, the following characteristics: A compelling, shared
goal, a sense of being in control, blending egos, equal participation, familiarity, con-
stant and spontaneous communication, and the potential for failure. We relied on these
characteristics when designing our solution, creating an environment that would en-
courage group flow. The proposed solution is described in the next section.
2.3 Gamification and Motivation Theories
Using gamification is strongly linked to enhancing motivation of the users to particular
behavior [11, 14]. However, as gamification is being incorporated into business pro-
cesses, there is no distinction between using proper gamification elements for each par-
ticular business goal, and adjusting the gamified solution to business' needs.
Thus far, gamification for software engineering has focused on education and student
training, using gamification principles borrowed from the domain of applications and
website usage. To the best of our knowledge, there is no research in this context relying
on cognitive theories in order to design games for software engineers, or developing
gamified environments in industry, on the basis of cognitive principles, in order to mo-
tivate practitioners to enhance work performance.
Edited by S. Kowalski, P. Bednar and I. Bider 77
Proceedings of STPIS'16
3 The Gamification Workshop
This section describes the gamification workshop I designed and lectured, intended
for last year SE students, in the midst of their work on the final project. The workshop
is three hours long, where I first explain about gamification in general, and also about
motivation theories and then give them a task - to think of any process they know, and
to gamify it.
The workshop consists of three parts, each of them that was 50 minutes long, which
can be described by the acronym ACE:
Audit gamification principles and examples– a presentation, presenting the principles
of gamification, the frequent use of game elements in various domains in last years, and
some guidelines to designing a business process using gamification-oriented thinking.
The lecture also included an analysis of gamification principles, based on cognitive the-
ories [10]. Students were asked to think of gamification examples from their personal
experience. Then we had a discussion about how gamification can be used in various
aspects of daily routines.
Collaborative design of gamified processes – students worked in the teams, same
work teams as their final projects. Their task was to design a gamification framework
for one business process from their projects. They were free to choose any process they
wanted, as long as they can justify the choice and to explain why gamification can con-
tribute to the process. They were instructed to address the gamification design frame-
work [11]: The goals of the game, the identity of the players, success metrics, activity
loops, and "fun" elements.
Embed gamification in the business process – as this part of the workshop, students
created an outline for embedding gamification in the business process. The outline in-
cluded references to all gamification mechanisms which students plan to embed in the
process, and also a preliminary sketch of the gamified process. In some cases, students
created full screens of their application, containing gamification mechanisms. Each
group presented their work to the entire class. The other students evaluated the proposed
solution using questionnaires.
Figure 1. The ACE model for the gamification workshop
To conclude, the workshop presented the topic of gamification to SE students, and
provided them with a hands-on task to embed gamification in their projects. The next
section describes students' reflections on this experience, and their perceptions towards
embedding gamification in SE products.
As can be seen, students chose various business processes, usually related to their
projects. Some interesting ideas were presented, such as gamifying couples therapy
©Copyright held by the author(s) 78
Proceedings of STPIS'16
process (by granting points to each of the participants for following the therapist' ad-
vice), or improving quality of service in an airline company. Students suggested SE
related games as well, such as a programming contest where the prize is a job interview
in a high-tech company.
In some cases, several groups chose to focus on the same topic. Figure 2 presents
three different examples of proposed gamification mechanisms for requirement engi-
neering (RE) process. One group focused on leaderboards, the other on grading new
requirements, and the third group created an animation game where progress is made
when requirements are properly classified.
Figure 2. The ACE model for the gamification workshop
To conclude, students perceived the use of gamification as a motivation enhancer, and
proposed many interesting and novel ways to embed gamification in various business
processes. Some students chose to focus more on the appearance of the game, while
others focused on the embedding various gamification elements they have just learned
in the workshop.
4 Students perceptions toward gamification
The workshop was held five times, where the audience consisted of last year infor-
mation systems and software engineering undergraduates. Each group consisted of 15-
30 students. At the end of the workshop, students were asked to review the other teams`
solutions, and to express their opinion about using gamification.
The students wrote mostly positive comments on the other teams' gamified pro-
cesses. The students were also asked to give a likert-scale grade to their peers, concern-
ing issues such as was the game appealing or fun. Most scores were very high, probably
due to social desirability [12].
Table 1 describes several quotes of the students reviewing their peers' work, catego-
rized by elements from the motivation theories described in section 2.2. It can be seen
that the students addressed in their reviews the aspects of motivation, competence, fun
and collaboration. All of these issues were discussed during the first phase of the work-
shop, while presenting them the motivation theories.
Edited by S. Kowalski, P. Bednar and I. Bider 79
Proceedings of STPIS'16
Table 1. The gamified processes from the reviewers' perspective
Quote SDT Flow Group
theory flow
theory
"Increases interest, and motivation"
" That is challenging "
" The game is fun to play with"
" Motivates employees to play the game"
"Collaboration among employees, convenient tools"
"Easy"
It should be noted, that students also wrote less positive reviews of the other teams'
work. Comments such as "no user stimulation", or "it seems banal" suggest that some
students expected their peers to create fun and creative games, and were disappointed
where they encountered games which did not match their expectations. Another inter-
esting critique was "it feels like a competition and not a game", which suggests that for
some students, the games developed seemed highly competitive and would probably
decrease their motivation to participate.
In addition, the students were asked to express their opinions of the gamification
workshop. All students who answered the questions, said that this was a good experi-
ence, and that they learned that gamification elements can indeed be beneficial in in-
creasing employee motivation. In their comments, they often addressed the issues
which were discussed in the first part of the workshop.
Table 2 describes several quotes of the students regarding the workshop, categorized
by elements from the motivation theories described in section 2.2.
As can be seen, students mostly addressed the issue of employee' motivation, and
how gamification can increase motivation of the individual employee, and the collabo-
ration among employees.
Table 2. The gamification task from the student' perspective
Quote SDT Flow Group
theory flow
theory
" Inspires good atmosphere in the organization
" Contributing to collaboration"
" More people are involved in organizational activities
" Encourages contest over promotions
"Prizes encourage motivation"
"Encourages 'employess of the month'"
" Everyone can participate and suggest ideas"
©Copyright held by the author(s) 80
Proceedings of STPIS'16
" Encourages creativity"
" The scoring system encourages participation and
motivation"
5 Conclusions and lessons learned
The paper concerns education of the new generation of software engineers who are
aware of socio-technical nature of the bigger system. In particular, this is done via
teaching them gamification techniques. The paper reports on the experience of intro-
ducing such teaching into the bachelor program for software engineers.
Gamification is one of the approaches to make a software system more suitable to
be part of a socio-technical system. Thus far, although gamification has been quite thor-
oughly researched among users, only a few examples of gamification research are in-
tended for software developers. Moreover, gamification principles are not presented to
students as a mechanism to enhance motivation among potential users. This paper pre-
sented a workshop intended for last year undergraduate students, in order to introduce
them gamification principles and mechanisms, and to encourage them to use these
mechanisms in their final project design, and later on in industry. As the aim is to con-
tribute to the software engineering industry, further elicitation of information is needed,
according to the principles of field study in education [2].
This paper presented the gamification workshop which was developed to present
third year IS and SE students with gamification elements, and their contribution to em-
ployee motivation. The goal of the workshop was to introduce to the students the pos-
sibility of gamifying some or all of the business processes they need to implement in
their final project. Judging by the responses of the students to the workshop, it appears
that the students indeed understood the potential contribution of gamification.
Further study should be performed on how gamification was indeed embedded in
final projects, and how employees responded to gamification. The results of such study
could help organizations in increasing software developers’ motivation to complete
their tasks successfully and efficiently.
Edited by S. Kowalski, P. Bednar and I. Bider 81
Proceedings of STPIS'16
6 References
[1] Bell, J., Sheth, S., and Kaiser, G.: Secret ninja testing with HALO software engineer-
ing. In Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on Social software engineering ,
43-47 ACM (2011)
[2] Bogdan, R. C and Biklen, S. K.Qualitative Research for Education: An introduction
to Theories and Methods (4th ed.). New York: Pearson Education group.110-120
(2003)
[3] Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. Harper
Perennial, New York (1997)
[4] Deterding, S., Khaled, R., Nacke, L., and Dixon, D.: Gamification: Toward a defini-
tion. In CHI 2011 gamification Workshop Proceedings ,12-15 (2011)
[5] Dubois, D. J., and Tamburrelli, G. Understanding gamification mechanisms for soft-
ware development. In Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of
Software Engineering , 659-662 ACM (2013)
[6] Jørgensen, M., & Sjoeberg, D. I. K.An effort prediction interval approach based on
the empirical distribution of previous estimation accuracy.Information and Software
Technology, 45(3), 123-136.(2003)
[7] Hägglund, P.: Taking gamification to the next level (2012)
[8] Ryan, R. M., and Deci, E. L. Self-Determination Theory and The Facilitation of In-
trinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-being. American Psychologist,
55(1), 68. (2000)
[9] Sawyer, K. Group Genius: The Creative Power Of Collaboration, Basic Books. (2008)
[10] Sheth, S. K., Bell, J. S., and Kaiser, G. E.: Increasing Student Engagement in Software
Engineering with gamification (2012)
[11] Unkelos-Shpigel N. and Hadar I. Gamifying Software Development Environments
Using Cognitive Principles”, CAiSE Forum 2015
[12] Unkelos-Shpigel N. and Hadar,I. Inviting Everyone to Play: Gamifying Collaborative
Requirements Engineering”, 5th International Workshop on Empirical Requirements
Engineering (EmpiRE 2015), Requirement Engineering Conference, 24th August,
2015, Ottawa, Canada. (2015)
[13] Vroom, V. H. Work and motivation. (1964)
[14] Werbach, K., and Hunter, D.For the win: How game thinking can revolutionize your
business. Wharton Digital Press.(2012)
[15] Werbach, K., and Hunter, D. For the win: How game thinking can revolutionize your
business. Wharton Digital Press. (2012)
[16] Wendelken, A., Danzinger, F., Rau, C., and Moeslein, K. M. Innovation without me:
why employees do (not) participate in organizational innovation communities. R&D
Management, 44(2), 217-236. (2014)
©Copyright held by the author(s) 82