Gamification of learning, the application of game design elements to learning activities, has increased over the last years, due to its potential to enhance learning. Following this assumption, we developed a board game in the style of a “wheel of fortune”, which is known to most people from television or trade fairs. The content of the wheel refers to the modeling language Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN). The basic idea of the BPMN wheel game is that players learn basics about BPMN and these can apply practically. The board game is suitable for a lecture in universities or enterprise trainings. The prototype was tested and evaluated in the course 'Business Process Management (BPM)' of the bachelor's program 'Digital Business' at Technische Hochschule Ingolstadt. This contribution should be considered as work in progress.
1
Playing games fascinate people. If people are
observed during a game session, an ongoing
motivation is remarkable. Huizinga defined
gaming as an activity, which is carried out
completely free without constraint, and where the
human feels pleasure [
2.1 Game design elements 2.1.1 BPMN wheel game content The BPMN wheel game was developed with the learning matter ‘BPMN’ [4, 5 and 6]. Players can get an overview of the modeling language BPMN and practice their knowledge by modeling a business process.
The core of the board game is the BPMN wheel and another wheel for the collection of notation elements needed for process modeling. The BPMN wheel contains 14 fields consisting of four field types called learning cards, control question cards, teamwork and notation elements wheel (see figure 1). The notation elements wheel (second wheel) includes also 14 fields for collecting the usual notation elements, e.g., activities and events (see figure 2). The number of fields per field type was adjusted after a real test to influence positively the game flow. Thus, there is an uneven distribution of the total number of fields to the field types. 2.1.3 Elements for knowledge acquisition and process modeling
Learning cards and control question cards We created 40 learning cards of the same color for the theoretical learning content needed for process modeling. We defined headings for the information printed on the learning card. This should support players by structuring the learning matter.
Control question cards 20 same-colored control question cards should query the theoretical learning content and support the learning process. Questions of various types, i.e., open and closed questions, are placed on the front of the control question cards. Students can see the answer of each question on the backside of the control question card. Players get coins as a reward for correct answers. The color of the coin, which can be collected by answering a question correctly, is printed on the front of the control question card. Collected coins can be redeemed for (missing) notation elements afterwards.
Notation elements We prepared moderation cards for the different notation element types to enable business process modeling. For that reason, a game set includes cards for activities, events, gateways, data objects and lanes. These can be collected throughout the time of playing. Collected cards can attached on presentation paper during the time of teamwork.
In order to motivate players and catch the attention of the different player types Bartle identified [7, 8 and 9], we implemented a set of 14 game mechanics, i.e., badges and clear goals. The following table lists some selected game mechanics and their implementation in the BPMN wheel game. … and how it is implemented in the game The winning team is crowned as an expert team in the modeling with BPMN.
business process.
Players can select and arrange notation elements as desired.
Transparency results of … … … …
2.2 Prototype and Playing We implemented the prototype according to the concept discussed above. Figure 3 illustrates the elements of a BPMN wheel game box. In the game are two phases: the learning phase and the modeling phase. In the learning phase, theoretical basics are learned and questions are answered related to BPMN. In the modeling phase, the theoretical contents learned are implemented by attaching the collected notation elements to the moderation paper. The gameplay looks like this: Students organize themselves in teams of 3-4 people. The teams get a modeling task in form of a verbal description. The board game is played clockwise. The players follow the instructions related to the ‘rotated’ fields (see table 2 and table 3). The winner team is the team who has modeled the business process with fewest errors within the given time slot. The following table lists the fields and the actions to be taken on the field.
read the question aloud. Try to answer the question. Your team members can support you, if you are not able to answer. Check the answer printed on the backside. The color of the coin, which can be collected by answering correctly, is printed on the front of the control question card.
Turn the notation elements wheel and follow the instruction (see table 3).
minutes. Collected coins can be redeemed for missing notation elements now.
You have the choice between a start event, an intermediate event and an end event. Again, within these you have to choose the types, i.e., message event or timer.
Choose from gateways, i.e., based gateway exclusive gateway. different event or
We tested and evaluated the BPMN wheel game in the course ‘BPM’ of the bachelor’s program ‘Digital Business’ at the Technische Hochschule Ingolstadt with 52 students. The course takes place in the 3rd semester. The 52 attending students were divided in an experimental and a control group randomly. In the experimental group were 28 students, while 24 students participated in the control group. Smaller teams of 3-4 students were formed in each group. The teams of the experimental group played the BPMN wheel game, while teams of the control group got some selected literary extracts. The teams got for modeling the given business process a timeframe of 70 minutes. The control group had to return the literature at the beginning of the modeling part after about half the time.
In order to measure the learning success of both groups, we conducted identical pre and post knowledge tests. The test consists of a theoretical part and a modeling part. In the modeling part, the students had to model two small processes. Students could achieve 3 points for each question in the theoretical part. A student could achieve a maximum of 30 points (3 points x 10 questions) in the theoretical part. A student could score a maximum of 10 points in the modeling part. For the entire test, a student could thus get a maximum of 40 points (30 points + 10 points). The experimental group could score a maximum of 840 points (28 students x 30 points) for the theoretical part and 280 points (28 students x 10 points) for the modeling part. Accordingly, the experimental group could score a maximum of 1,120 points (840 points + 280 points) for the entire test. The control group could score a maximum of 720 points (24 students x 30 points) for the theoretical part and 240 points (24 students x 10 points) for the modeling part. Hence, the control group could achieve a maximum of 960 points (720 points + 240 points) for the entire test. Figure 4 and 5 demonstrates aggregated scores for both groups and the change of absolute numbers and relative shares. From the results of the knowledge tests, the following findings can be achieved: Both groups have improved about equally well in the theoretical part of the knowledge test. It is noticeable, that the control group was significantly better than the experimental group in the modeling part of the knowledge test (pre). The control group was also better than the experimental group in the modeling part of the post knowledge test. This may be because the experimental group did not draw enough learning and control question cards for the practical modeling part. Instead, the control group had all the theoretical as well as the modeling information in more compact and structured form because of the literary extracts. In the modeling part of the knowledge tests, two smaller processes were depicted, dealing with specific gateways. Most likely, the teams in the experimental group did not draw the cards with this specific gateways used in the modeling part of the knowledge tests. Since both groups knew that process modeling was following, it may be that the control group has focused more on modeling. In addition, th groups knew that the identical knowledge test would be carried out after the learning activity. Probably the teams of the control group have dealt with similar modeling examples or gateways more intensively. It is also possible that the control group has delegated tasks to the team members, so that each team member has dealt with a specific topic. The team members could have exchanged intensively. This would make it possible to gain deeper insights.
We developed and evaluated a board game in form of wheels of fortune for the modeling language BPMN. The first experiences we gained were positive. The experimental group was able to acquire theoretical knowledge about BPMN and to reduce the errors in process modeling. Thus, the game has supported the knowledge acquisition and knowledge transfer in the field of the modeling language BPMN (RQ1). The practical implementation of the theoretical knowledge had a positive influence on the model quality (RQ2). Nevertheless, it is noticeable that the control group was able to acquire knowledge as well as improve model quality. This may be due to the reasons given in Chapter 3.
In order to measure the learning success more accurately, the same knowledge test was carried out after about 3 weeks again. This is to test the retention effect. It will certainly be interesting to compare these test results as well.
In order to consolidate our findings, we will conduct further evaluations with other student groups.