中山管理評論

  期刊全文閱覽

中山管理評論  2018/9

第26卷第3期  p.415-452

DOI:DOI: 10.6160/SYSMR.201809_26(3).0002


題目
遊戲化學習機制與模式的設計與成效初探 - 以某高職為例
An Exploratory Study on the Effects of a Gamification-based Design Mechanism and Model on Learning Outcomes in a High School Context
(140_M5ba49e650115e_Full.pdf 1,642KB)

作者
葉佩君、郭建良/開平餐飲學校資訊中心、中國文化大學資訊管理學系
Pei-Chun Yeh, Chien-Liang Kuo/

Computing Center, Kai Ping Culinary School; Department of Information Management, Chinese Culture University


摘要(中文)

社群與遊戲應用的交互影響,讓遊戲化(Gamificaiton)設計成為創造教育典範移轉的重要驅力;惟現有研究多聚焦學生視角,加上衡量標的多著重課程層次,間接影響遊戲化應用成效衡量及其對教育設計的反饋效果。為回應此一缺口,本研究針對台灣具指標性的某餐飲學校,融合其教育目標、教學活動與教師課程需求進行遊戲化學習機制設計與開發,並透過導入至不同類型課程的方式,分析學生、教師及校方的認知態度與成效。結果發現,除了具吸引力的人機介面外,能夠反應學習動態和提升同儕比較的動態遊戲化機制,為提升學生主動參與的關鍵;至於如何在遊戲化服務設計階段納入教師需求與動因,則成為確保持續使用意願與成效、並誘發師生積極投入的首要課題。

(140_M5ba49e650115e_Abs.pdf(檔案不存在))

關鍵字(中文)

遊戲化,服務設計,教育應用,可持續性,系統開發


摘要(英文)

Fostered by the broad adoption of social community and online games, gamification has attracted considerable attention in the education context. Recent studies have reported the value and effects of applying gamification in learning; however, most of them have focused on measuring on short-term effects from the perspective of students. The issues of how the broader needs for holistic learning should be addressed or whether gamification is valuable in leading the paradigm shift of pedagogy remains unclear. To react to the above-mentioned gap, the present study determined whether a gamification-based design mechanism can achieve a win–win situation in a high school context, thus ensuring the sustainability and effectiveness of this gamification-based system. First, a gamified prototype in a Taiwanese high school was implemented, which was designed by referring to the education goals, instructional design, and teaching needs of this school. Results from a field test on two classes were used to measure learning outcomes; students’ performance and perceptions of teachers and school administrators were all considered. The preliminary results revealed that in addition to providing an attractive user interface, the proposed gamification-based mechanism does capture the learning dynamics of students. The results also indicated that a competing status among peers indeed help foster proactive, participatory learning. Moreover, determining how to streamline current teaching practices with the newly designed mechanism without substantial changes is crucial for attracting the active participation and contribution of both teachers and students.

(140_M5ba49e650115e_Abs.pdf(檔案不存在))

關鍵字(英文)

Gamification, Service Design, Application in Education, Sustainability, System Development


領域
Other

政策與管理意涵

遊戲化(Gamificaiton)設計的潛力與重要性自2011年正式受到關注,它致力翻轉原有產業與服務模式,讓使用者在服務體驗歷程中可以更積極投入、改變行為、共創多贏價值,因此在教育領域被視為重要應用課題。但是,現有研究多偏重微觀層次的元素與情境效果探討,且有關成效之結論仍未臻一致;可能原因之一,可能和既有研究多聚焦學生視角、衡量標的多著重課程層次,導致相關研究對教育服務生態系中各利害關係人感知與中長期反饋效果掌握相對不足所有關。因此,本研究從學校學習活動角度探究遊戲化學習機制與模式設計,並透過為期半年的觀察,分析導入後的學生、教師及校方的態度與認知成效分析,藉此對此議題進行回應及貢獻。依據研究結果,提出如下實務管理意涵,期作為未來設計和應用之參考。 1. 在社群與行動裝置都已融入生活與學習環境的時代,如欲打造具特色且能誘發質變的數位創新應用,應跳脫著眼教材與設備e化的傳統思維,轉向槓桿學生理解及興趣項目,進行數位學習應用設計及導入方法規劃。 2. 相較於課程成效衡量及單一科技應用導入,串聯「學生-教師-學校教育系統」方為創新教育永續經營的關鍵,因此,如學校期望透過導入遊戲化學習機制翻轉既有教育模式,應具備下述思維︰(1)學校全力支持,且家長及師生需對遊戲化概念有一定理解和認知;(2)將校方設定的總學習目標、現有教學與管理機制、課程教學教案,及校方配套活動與遊戲化應用進行串聯;(3)需將教師參與獲得之效益納入。 3. 遊戲化設計的落實,可善用價值共創(Value co-creation)與生產性消費者(Prosumer)概念,輔以虛擬人物形象建構與成果視覺化設計,讓參與者透過虛實學習活動,誘發主動學習和參與行為。 4. 致力導入遊戲化設計進行應用的企業和資服業者,面對遊戲化服務創新與設計策略,應以「策略調校(Strategic alignment)」思維取代「魔術子彈(Magic bullet)」觀點,方能藉此創造和企業需求搭配,同時亦能喚起使用者參與的服務應用,確保解決方案的可持續性。


參考文獻

吳明振、林雅幸、陳培基,2014,「技職教育再造的挑戰與展望」,中等教育,65卷2期:6~20。(Wu, M. J., Lin, Y. H., and Chen, P. G., 2014, “Challenges and Prospects on the Reengineering of Technical and Vocational Education,” Secondary Education, Vol. 65, No. 2, 6-20.)
施力瑋,2013,遊戲式學習研究的現況、成果與課題,國立臺灣師範大學科技應用與人力資源發展研究所碩士論文。(Shih, L. W., 2013, A Study of the Situation, Achievements and Issues in Game-based Learning, Master Thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.)
孫春在,2013,遊戲式數位學習,初版,台北:高等教育。(Sun, C. T., 2013, Game-based Digital Learning, 1st, Taipei: TW, EduBook.)
財團法人資訊工業策進會,2011,服務體驗工程方法:藍圖工具案例,初版,台北:財團法人資策會創新應用服務研究所。(Institute for Information Industry, 2011, Service Experience Engineering, 1st, Taipei: Institute for Information Industry.)
張人偉,2013,探索社交媒體之遊戲化與社交性設計因素,國立交通大學工業工程與管理研究所博士論文。(Chang, J. W., 2013, Exploring Design Factors for Gamification and Sociability of Social Media, Ph. D. Dissertation, National Chiao-Tung University.)
連宜萍譯,井上明人著,2013,遊戲化的時代,初版,台北:時報出版。(Lien, Y. P. translated, Akihito, I., 2013, Gamification: Game Changes Business, 1st, Taipei, TW: eadingTimes.)
黃宇瑀,2014,「從校園生態環境的轉變論述當前我國中等學校所面臨的挑戰與因應」,中等教育,65卷1期,77~94。(Huang, Y. Y., 2014, “The Ecosystem Analysis of Transformation in the Secondary Schools: Challenges and Actions Needed,” Secondary Education, Vol. 65, No. 1, 77-94.)
葉佩君,2015,建立以遊戲化為本之學習機制成效初探–以某高職為例,中國文化大學資訊管理學系碩士論文。(Yeh, P. C., 2015, Effects of Gamification-based Design on Learning Outcomes in a High School Context, Master Thesis, Chinese Culture University.)
廖大賢譯,Dignan, A.著,2012,加入遊戲因子,解決各種問題:激發動機、改變行為、創造商機的祕密,初版,台北:先覺出版。(Liao, D. X. translated, Dignan, A., 2012, Game Frame: Using Games as a Strategy for Success, 1st, Taipei, TW: Booklife.)
Attali, Y. and Arieli-Attali, M., 2015, “Gamification in Assessment: Do Points Affect Test Performance?,” Computers & Education, Vol. 83, 57-63.
Bíró, G. I., 2014, “Didactics 2.0: A Pedagogical Analysis of Gamification Theory from a Comparative Perspective with a Special View to the Components of Learning,” Procedia-social and Behavioral Sciences, Vol. 141, 148-151.
Christy, K. R. and Fox, J., 2014, “Leaderboards in a Virtual Classroom: A Test of Stereotype Threat and Social Comparison Explanations for Women’s Math Performance,” Computers & Education, Vol. 78, 66-77.
CONCUR, “Gamification and Your Business,” https://www.concur.com/newsroom/article/ gamifying-your-business
den Hertog, P., 2000, “Knowledge-intensive Business Services as Co-producers of Innovation,” International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 4, No. 4, 491-528.
De-Marcos, L., Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., and Pagés, C., 2014, “An Empirical Study Comparing Gamification and Social Networking on e-learning,” Computers & Education, Vol. 75, 82-91.
De-Marcos, L., Garcia-Lopez, E., and Garcia-Cabot, A., 2016, “On the Effectiveness of Game-like and Social Approaches in Learning: Comparing Educational Gaming, Gamification & Social Networking,” Computers & Education, Vol. 95, 99-113.
Deterding, S., 2012, “Gamification: Designing for motivation,” Interactions, Vol. 19, No. 4, 14-17.
Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernán-dez-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., and Martínez-Herráiz, J., 2013, “Gamifying Learning Experiences: Practical Implications and Outcomes,” Computers & Education, Vol. 63, 380-392.
Filsecker, M. and Hickey, D. T., 2014, “A Multilevel Analysis of the Effects of External Rewards on Elementary Students’ Motivation, Engagement and Learning in an Educational Game,” Computers & Education, Vol. 75, 136-148.
Hamari, J., 2013, “Transforming Homo Economicus into Homo Ludens: A Field Experiment on Gamification in a Utilitarian Peer-to-peer Trading Service,” Electronic Commerce Research and Application, Vol. 12, 236-245.
Hamari, J. and Koivisto, J., 2013, “Social Motivations to Use Gamification: An Empirical Study of Gamifying Exercise,” Proceedings of the 21st European Conference on Information Systems, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., and Sarsa, H., 2014, “Social Motivations to Use Gamification: An Empirical Study of Gamifying Exercise,” Proceedings of 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS 2014), Hawaii, USA.
Hanus, M. D. and Fox, J., 2015, “Assessing the Effects of Gamification in the Classroom: A Longitudinal Study on Intrinsic Motivation, Social Comparison, Satisfaction, Effort, and Academic Performance,” Computers & Education, Vol. 80, 152-161.
Hew, K. F., Huang, B., Chu, K. W. S., and Chiu, D. K., 2016, “Engaging Asian Students through Game Mechanics: Findings from Two Experiment Studies,” Computers & Education, Vol. 92, 221-236.
Keusch, F. and Zhang, C., 2017, “A Review of Issues in Gamified Surveys,” Social Science Computer Review, Vol. 35, No. 2, 147-166.
Klapztein, S. and Cipolla, C., 2016, “From Game Design to Service Design A Framework to Gamify Services,” Simulation & Gaming, Vol. 47, No. 5, 566-598.
Maican, C., Lixandroiu, R., and Constantin, C., 2016, “Interactivia.ro – A Study of a Gamification Framework Using Zero-cost Tools,” Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 61, 186-197.
Markus, M. L. and Benjamin, R. I., 1997, “The Magic Bullet Theory in IT-enabled Transformation,” Sloan Management Review, Vol. 38, No. 2, 55-68.
Paiva, R., Bittencourt, I. I., Tenório, T., Jaques, P., and Isotani, S., 2016, “What Do Students Do On-line? Modeling Students’ Interactions to Improve Their Learning Experience,” Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 64, 769-781.
Perryer, C., Celestine, N. A., Scott-Ladd, B., and Leighton, C., 2016, “Enhancing Workplace Motivation through Gamification: Transferrable Lessons from Pedagogy,” The International Journal of Management Education, Vol. 14, No. 3, 327-335.
Seaborn, K. and Fels, D. I., 2015, “Gamification in Theory and Action: A Survey,” International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 74, 14-31.
Simoes, J., Redondo, R. D., and Vilas, A. F., 2013, “A Social Gamification Framework for a K-6 Learning Platform,” Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 29, 345-353.
Wu, P. H. and Kuo, C. L., 2015, “Does Gamification Work Well in Education Context? Meta-analysis Based on Current Gamifi-cation Studies,” Proceedings of 2015 International Conference on Innovation and Management, Sapporo, Japan.
Zichermann, G. and Linder, J., 2013, The Gamification Revolution: How Leaders Leverage Game Mechanics to Crush the Competition, 1st, New York: McGraw Hill Professional.