Content uploaded by Vilma Villarouco
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Vilma Villarouco on Sep 29, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Gamification in Education Through Design Thinking
Graziela Sombrio
1
, Leonardo Enrico Schimmelpfeng
1
,
Vânia Ribas Ulbricht
1
, and Vilma Villarouco
2(✉)
1Engineering and Knowledge Management, Federal University of Santa Catarina,
Florianópolis, Brazil
graziela.sombrio@gmail.com, leoenricos@gmail.com,
vrulbricht@gmail.com
2Department of Graphic Expression, Federal University of Pernambuco, Recife, Brazil
vvillarouco@gmail.com
Abstract. When thinking of inclusive education, it is necessary to consider that
schools and teachers must utilize appropriate didactical materials that suit the
students’ needs. For some subjects, such as Geometry, the vision is the most
utilized sense. However, as much as it is an important sense that helps to under‐
stand the concepts better, it can become an obstacle when the student has a visual
disability. The same thing occurs with hearing disability when utilizing learning
objects that contain multimedia resources. The main purpose of this work is to
discuss the creation of a gamified object of accessible learning that presents the
principles of design thinking. In order to achieve this goal, a literature review has
been made, mainly focused on accessibility, gamification and design thinking,
considering the accessib ility guidelines for LOs presented by Macedo . As a result,
besides the initially proposed objectives, it was also possible to relate the concepts
approached by the Theory of Flow.
Keywords: Gamification · Accessibility · Learning objects · Design thinking ·
Theory of flow
1 Introduction
Gamification, according to [1], is the use of game design elements outside the gaming
context.
According to [2], gamification in education increases the students’ commitment and,
by integrating game elements with the subjects, it makes the activities more attractive
and engaging. With the profusion of environments focused on e-learning, there is the
need of spreading gamification in education. [3] highlights that the current challenges
regarding games are invitations for a knowledge adventure and a dynamic learning
experience. In e-learning, articulated by HCI, the immersion process within the LMS is
powered by gamification and the experience articulates interactions and knowledge
sharing among the students.
The use of gamification in learning processes has been propagated, especially with
the use of learning objects (LOs). According to [4], the teaching materials distributed
in learning environments should be accessible to all individuals, with or without
© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016
A. Marcus (Ed.): DUXU 2016, Part II, LNCS 9747, pp. 311–321, 2016.
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-40355-7_30
disabilities. In this context, this work intends to relate: gamification concepts, design
thinking and accessible learning objects, in order to produce educational content.
2 Gamification and the Theory of Flow
The insertion process of Gamification in education can help by providing a different
dynamic regarding learning and mobilizing stimuli, sensations, emotions and a immer‐
sion mediated at different knowledge instances. In this context, Csikszentmihalyi’s
Theory of Flow sought to demonstrate how some experiences may lead the participant
to a Flow state.
Mihaly has created the autotelic experience model, which is defined as “a self-suffi‐
cient activity, carried out without the expectation of some future benefit, simply because
executing it is the reward itself” [5]. Figure 1 presents the Flow path.
Fig. 1. Diagram showing the path for the Flow state (Source: Adapted from Csikszentmihalyi
for authors, p. 74)
By associating this theory with the gamification process, it is stated that a student,
when starting his gamified classes, has its challenges occurring accordingly to his ability
(A1). At this point, he is probably in Flow state, though it soon turns into boredom (A2),
since his skills have already increased and no longer correspond to the initial challenge.
However, as soon as a new challenge is proposed, his feeling turns into anxiety (A3),
as now he intends to overcome his new challenge and reach again his Flow state (A4).
According to [6], the individual reaches his Flow state in two stages: A1 and A4,
both being equally pleasant. What is different in these two moments is the ability level
acquired, since while achieving the full Flow state the individual realizes that his ability
corresponds to level of the proposed challenge, thus transforming motivation in stim‐
ulus.
In the article “Flow in games (and everything else)”, [7] lists a couple of points from
the Theory of Flow. He claims that Csikszentmihalyi’s research and personal observa‐
tions have identified eight major components of Flow that can be associated with the
gamification process: challenging activity requiring skill; a merging of action and
312 G. Sombrio et al.
awareness; clear goals; direct, immediate feedback; concentration on the task at hand;
a sense of control; loss of self-consciousness; an altered sense of time.
In this context, gamification might be a way to make someone reach the Flow state.
For such, it must be intended to provoke greater focus and concentration, stimulate the
sensation of ecstasy, allow clarity and provide feedback, encourage the use of skills,
provide growth, cause the loss of time sense and generate intrinsic motivation.
3 Gamification and Education
The process of inserting gamified activities into a learning object should follow the
principles of game design and gamification.
The authors [8, 9] use a taxonomy of metrics of satisfaction for users and intend to
extend their studies to the area of Distance Education and the studies on ‘Gamification’.
Thereafter, [10], from [11], brings a couple of features and recommendations to the use
of gamification in learning objects. Based on the categorization made by [9], associated
to what was proposed by [10, 11], it is possible to list similarities between these two
approaches, through the keywords proposed by [9]. Table 1 shows how the concepts
may be related to these categories.
Table 1. Relation between the concepts of Petrovic and Ivetic (2012) and Alves (2012)
[9][10, 11]
Feedback Time that the user take s to domi‐
nate the game or perform a
certain task
Pleasant productivity, the
players see applied efforts
and energies achieving the
desired results
Social Socialization- interaction
between the system and
users; and duty - the system’s
and the generated social rela‐
tions’ capacity of creating
and accepting the user’s
emotional investment
Generation of the possibility of
working cooperatively, in
teams and groups in order to
solve problems/Construction
of stronger social relation‐
ships through emotional
bonds
Competition Self-competition and effort to
overcome the results
Pursuit of self-motivation to
remain in the activity
(intrinsic motivation)
Progression The system’s capacity of
providing persistence to the
user
Activities created with chal‐
lenges that can be overcome
Mechanics Pleasure that the user finds in the
game
Epic meaning of achieving
something expected
Context Context of the system’s actions
Through this categorization, it is possible to use the principles above in order to
produce gamified and accessible LOs. Therefore, the gamification concepts can also be
inserted in the conceptual basis of a LO.
Gamification in Education Through Design Thinking 313
4 Gamification, Design Thinking and Learning Objects
with Accessibility
According to [12], the evolution of design to design thinking is the evolutionary history
of creating products for the analysis of the relationship between people and products,
and finally, between people and people. Therefore, based on design concepts and
“thinking through design”, it was listed a few relations for the construction of several
processes and activities through design theories and processes.
To [13], design thinking is an innovation process focused on the human being that
emphasizes observation, collaboration, fast learning, visualization of ideas, prototyping
concepts and innovation, and is also applicable in different areas.
The design thinking process is essentially human-centered and emphasizes obser‐
vation, collaboration, fast learning, visualization of ideas, quick prototype building,
learning from failures, and allows a project to be validated more effectively and with
feedback from the public. The fact that gamification and design thinking are human-
centered and respond to the students’ needs meets the urge for accessibility from people
with disabilities. To the development of design thinking, [14] points out that the proto‐
type is not only a way to validate final ideas, but is also a creative process. By analyzing
the design thinking approach on education and gamification process, it is noticeable the
possibility of applying some of the concepts proposed by [12] as empathy, prototyping
and experience design.
Another method of applying Design Thinking is the one from Bootcamp Bootleg by
[15]. The approach proposed by [15] is divided into five phases: empathy (process
centered on the user, to immerse, engage and observe the problem); definition (makes
a synthesis, presents a focus problem or point of view); ideation (idea generation,
exploration of solutions); prototyping (producing ideas in a more realistic context,
bringing out the material nature); tests (to reset solutions and put the prototype in contact
with people).
The presented phases may be related to the processes for building accessible and
gamified LOs. As brought by [16], this kind of development must be collaborative and
integrated, with actions oriented by the group, collective participation in making deci‐
sions, self-regulating coordination, systemically organized thoughts and building rela‐
tionships through empathy. In this perspective, the gamification steps based on design
thinking from their correlations can be used in the process of building accessible and
gamified LOs, using steps such as discovery, interpretation, ideation, experimentation
and evolution.
During the development of a gamified LO, under the principles of design thinking,
it is necessary to conduct an intensive investigation on how the learning object responds
to the students’ needs, and also how to create added value for those who use it. Thus, it
is noticeable a potential in creating gamified learning objects from design thinking, for
teaching and learning processes involving disabled people.
The gamified LOs should seek the immersion and happiness present in the Theory
of Flow, with the simple reward of performing the activity itself. Considering this
premise, Fig. 2 presents, from the Theory of Flow, how the process of design thinking
is directed in order to produce gamified LOs. However, when taking in consideration
314 G. Sombrio et al.
the Universal Design and people with disabilities, the only possibility of achieving a
Flow stage is by including accessibility guidelines in the project. Figure 2 explains how
the elements operate interdependently.
Fig. 2. Interdependence of the elements (Source: Authors)
Based on the premise that the user is the central element of the process and stages
of Flow [5] - which allow an immersion state in the process- substantiate this immersion,
the first steps of the design thinking process were made [15]. As shown in the model,
during all stages of the DT process it was also aimed to integrate gamification theories
from [9–11], and to prioritize the last layer of the diagram, from accessibility guidelines
for LOs, of [4], outlined by Universal Design and the IMS GLC and W3C-WCAG 1.0
and 2.0 recommendations.
5 Gamified and Accessible LO to People with Visual and Hearing
Impairment “Triangle Perimeter”
With the objective of building the LO based on the Design Thinking process, a multi‐
disciplinary team was organized in order to provide the contribution from different areas
to the project. As part of the team, there were researchers from the design areas;
programming; mathematics; communication and audiovisual, and expert consultants in
LO and accessibility. Unfortunately during the first 3 steps it was not possible to include
the participation of people with visual and hearing impairment, although in the process
of feedback, based on UX, the tests with users will also be held with this public.
Starting from the Theory of Flow, the assumptions that could be followed in the steps
of Empath, Definition and Ideation were listed, correlating to these processes the gami‐
fication concepts and accessibility guidelines in LOs.
Gamification in Education Through Design Thinking 315
Figure 3 shows the concepts correlation in these 3 steps. From this piece, the creative
processes present in design thinking were utilized during the conception of the project,
the correlations between the theories concepts were presented, as well as and their
complementarities.
Fig. 3. Correlation of concepts (Source: Authors)
In the subsequent steps (which are not included in this study, considering that the
prototype is still in construction), in Prototype, there are all the involved concepts
presented, for the construction of the LO, and in Tests, the focus is on the feedback and
accessibility, including all the concepts from the preceding stages.
5.1 Empath
At this stage, the process is focused on the user, in order to immerse, engage and observe.
At this stage the teams utilized the bibliographic research, the mapping of gamified LOs
focused in mathematical concepts and gamified and accessible LOs.
From this early stage, the experiences of each one of the professionals were taken
in consideration regarding projects that have already been developed and the target
audience feedback, also emphasizing the need for reflexions regarding LOs developed
for people with visual and hearing impairment. The similarities between the theories
were:
Theory of Flow. Emphasized points: a merging of action and awareness; concentra‐
tion on the task at hand.
The possibility of promoting the Flow state in a gamified LO was directed to the LOs
analyzes that could promote educational concepts that would lead the student to the
action of starting gamified activities, through the awareness of how pleasant that activity
could be. In the reflexions, it was found that many gamified LOs bring obligatory tasks
and do not address the possibility of choice, which consequently removes the student
from the decision-making (he is obliged to enter in the environment). Then, it was
decided to go for the LO direction, in which the processes are focused on decision-
making. This context lead us to the following point, the concentration on the task at
316 G. Sombrio et al.
hand, in which the decision-making of the tasks must be made by the student. When
deciding on entering the gamified universe, he is already aware of the possibility of
immersion and achieving the Flow state.
Gamification. Emphasized points: social and mechanic.
Social: With the work of the multidisciplinary team being done through the DT
concepts, there was a direct relationship with the empathy matter, considering a product
that is closely related to a social matter, in which through the system the users can
promote socialization and interaction relations, and trigger phases such as competition
and progression. There is also the possibility of working cooperatively in teams and
groups, in order to solve problems and build stronger relationships through affective
bonds.
Mechanics: From the pleasurable situations generated, it was sought the gamified LO’s
development, with the narrative construction from a character and his search for goals
and challenges, also bringing what [10 and 11] have presented regarding the epic signif‐
icance of achieving something expected.
Accessibility. Emphasized points: Accessibility for people with visual or hearing disa‐
bility.
In order to allow the steps above to bring accessibility tools, the empathy process
begins with studies directed to dynamics utilized in gamified LOs from the stages of
merging of action and awareness and concentration on the task at hand; Social and
Mechanics, and accessibility and Universal Design strategies.
5.2 Definition
From the studies on empathy presented above, it was sought a first definition regarding
the project, mainly summarizing the collected concepts and presenting the focus of the
problem. Again, this step begins by looking for settings that can converge into solutions
to the points presented by the Theory of Flow.
Theory of Flow. Emphasized points: clear goals; A challenging activity requiring
skill; direct, immediate feedback.
Here emerges again the user’s immersion process, which directs him to challenging
activities that explore his different skills, always by utilizing clear goals and immediate
feedback. Exploring these possibilities allows the student, after having access to the
concepts, to direct his actions towards exploring the gamified LO through the presented
narrative. However, for this to occur he must be able to achieve the settled goals and, in
case of failure, to be able to optimize his actions in order to continue in the immersion
process. Therefore, the gamification strategies bring the directions for this.
Gamification. Emphasized points: feedback, progression and Competition.
Gamification in Education Through Design Thinking 317
Feedback: When searching for immersion, the users have different skills, and previous
collected knowledge. Thus, the feedback regarding the time in which the user performs
a certain task is essential, as well as the feedback regarding mistakes and successes. In
the validation stage, this process should be mapped in order to provide continuity and
the satisfaction of overcoming challenges. Consequently, the progression process
occurs.
Progression: In order to remain in the environment, his goals and actions must be
clarified as well as the key points yet to be achieved. Regarding a gamified and accessible
LO (under the principles of Universal Design), all users must have a path to overcome
challenges. For this to occur, the team searched for references of gamified LO with
possibilities of customization according to the users profiles, in which goals are set
accordingly with the presented profile. Another possibility would be the user himself
setting his own tracks and challenges, by directing actions and goals according to his
abilities and skills.
Competition: It was chosen to search in a VLE, besides the self-competition, also the
possibility of bringing collective challenges. This feature should be explored very
reflexively in learning environments. Promoting competition in gamification is one of
the resources that provides the immersion and recovery process. In order to define the
execution of these challenges, the team found in interactivity the possibility of the
students being stimulated to stimulate, with rewards and new challenges from stimu‐
lating other colleagues.
Accessibility. Emphasized points: Sign language, subtitle, environmental architecture
for screen readers and audio description.
The concepts presented in this work should be articulated so that people with visual
or hearing disabilities can explore them. Thus, it is defined the importance of using what
[4] defines as alternative media that, in the case of the gamified LO “Triangle’s Perim‐
eter” should contain the sign language resources and subtitles for people with hearing
disability, and the organization of the Virtual Environment architecture in accordance
with the guidelines of IMS GLC and W3C -WCAG 1.0 and 2.0, in order to be accessed
by screen readers, besides the audio description resource for videos and pictures.
5.3 Ideation
It may seem that the ideation phase is present in the preceding step, however the previ‐
ously articulated ideas and the presented solutions served to bring out possibilities of
solutions, based on the focus of the problem. However, it was in the ideation phase that
the evaluation and criticism regarding the initial solutions were applied. This option was
due to the Flow state characteristics related in this stage.
Theory of Flow. Emphasized points: A loss of self-consciousness; an altered sense of
time.
In this context, the objective of developing an accessible and gamified LO is to
actually take the user into a Flow state where the full immersion occurs. By accessing
318 G. Sombrio et al.
the contents and starting the gamified path, the Flow experience can be associated with
an immersion in which the attention level is high and the gamified process puts the user
off from what is around him. For those who have lived this experience, it is known that
at this moment the perception of time becomes elastic, and sometimes several hours go
by during one activity, without noticing its actual passage.
Gamification. Emphasized points: Context of system actions.
In the ideation phase, after mapping the application possibilities, it is tried to verify
the possibility of using the resources proposed in the architecture of a VLE, and how
the initially planned actions may be performed. Since it is a proposal for a VLE, it is
important in this process, besides the action plan of the system used in the laboratory,
to settle which are the software resources and minimum hardware required to run the
system, and the availability of internet connection.
Accessibility. Emphasized points: Alternative activities and concepts for blind and
deaf people.
After bringing resources such as subtitles, sign language, screen readers and audio
description, at this stage it is also aimed to develop alternative activities, based on the
mapping of geometry learning process for people with visual or hearing disability. An
example is the printing of Braille materials for children with visual disability, or the
proposal of producing a tactile geometric board so they can handle and understand the
concepts outside the computer screen. It was not presented in this topic the description
of the gamified and accessible LO development, since the focus of this work is to bring
directions for utilizing the presented theories towards the advancement of researches
focused on the production of resources that are accessible to people with disabilities.
6Conclusion
The ideation stage brought the direction of a gamified and accessible LO, which still has
to go through stages of prototyping and feedback tests accordingly with the prescripts
of UX. The target audience is geometry students with visual or hearing disability. The
learning dynamic occurs from presenting educational materials accessible on the
MOOBI
1
accessible platform. After accessing the accessible teaching materials
regarding the triangle’s perimeter, the student chooses to enter the gamified activities.
After entering the gamified LO, the student is introduced to the character Elvis (who
appears in the story as an animated character; a comic character and in videos (which
will be performed by an actor with similar characteristics to the character). He is the one
who leads the search for the student’s immersion into the Flow state, along with the
accessibility guidelines (subtitles activation, sign language, audio description, presen‐
tation of challenges, activities (within the environment and at home - such as the
construction of a tactile geometric board - in order to explore the perimeter concept,
made with egg packagings and strings); the print of Braille materials; among other
1MOOBI is an accessible VLE (Virtual Learning Environment) that has been being developed
by the group WebGD PPEGC/UFSC, and is available in http://webgd.egc.ufsc.br/.
Gamification in Education Through Design Thinking 319
possibilities of exploring accessibility resources, in order to bring the plane geometry’s
learning process closer to the universe of these children.
Besides enabling the immersion through an accessible environment, the LO stimu‐
lates through challenges, scores and awards, the search for “A loss of self-conscious‐
ness”; and “An altered sense of time”. A technological tool that directs this search is the
accessible environment MOOBI, which allows students to upload videos (a very useful
resource for the person with hearing disability who communicates through sign
language) or audio (for the person with hearing disability) and explore the interaction
process along with other colleagues within the environment. With these resources, they
can also interact with students without disabilities (as they are able to understand the
messages), which enables the development of integrated activities.
The Flow state’s main purpose in this work is directed to people with visual and
hearing disabilities. The reason for this choice is due to the particularities of disabled
people’s learning processes, of their historical social exclusion and the limited resources
available that promote learning and knowledge sharing. Lastly, it is aimed to bring this
reflection to researchers, educators, developers and instructional designers, regarding
the necessity of advancing in researches that seek alternatives to foster the inclusion
process and the disabled people’s active participation in society.
7 Future Steps
Future steps of this research should be directed to the Prototyping stages, with accessi‐
bility validation tests made with the public.
References
1. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L.: From game design elements to gamefulness:
defining “Gamification”. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic Mindtrek
Conference on Envisioning Future Media Environments, pp. 9–15. ACM, New York (2011)
2. Simões, J., Redondo, R.D., Vilas, A.F.: A social gamification framework for a K-6 learning
platform. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29(2), 345–353 (2013). Elsevier B.V.
3. Fialho, A.F.P.: From individual to social cognition: Piaget, Jung and commons, In: CSDC
2015 World e-Conference Complex Systems Digital Campus, Arizona (2015)
4. Macedo, C.M.S.: Diretrizes para criação de objetos de aprendizagem acessíveis. UFSC,
Florianópolis (2010)
5. Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow: The Psycology of Optimal Experience. Harper & Row, New
York (1990)
6. Diana, J.B., Golfetto, I.F., Baldessar, M.J., Spanhol, F.J.: Gamification e Teoria do Flow. In:
Fadel, L., Ulbricht, V.R., Batista, C.R., Vanzin, T. (eds.) Gamificação na educação, pp. 38–
73. Pimenta Cultural, São Paulo (2014)
7. Chen, J.: Flow in games (and everything else). Commun. ACM 50(4), 31–34 (2007)
8. Netto, M.: Aprendizagem na EaD, Mundo Digital e ‘Gamification’. In: Fadel, L., Ulbricht,
V.R., Batista, C.R., Vanzin, T. (eds.) Gamificação na educação, pp. 98–121. Pimenta Cultural,
São Paulo (2014)
320 G. Sombrio et al.
9. Petrovic, V., Ivetic, D.: Gamifying education: a proposed taxonomy of satisfaction metrics.
In: Conference Proceedings of “eLearning and Software for Education”, pp. 345–350.
Universitatea Nationala de Aparare Carol I, Frankfurt (2012)
10. Alves, L.: Games, colaboração e aprendizagem (Chap. 9). In: Okada, A. (ed.) Open
Educational Resources and Social Networks: Co-Learning and Professional Development.
Scholio Educational Research & Publishing, London, 1–7 (2012)
11. Mcgonigal, J.: Reality is Broken: Why Game Make Us Better and How They Can Change
the World. The Penguin Press, London (2011)
12. Brown, T.: Design thinking: uma metodologia ponderosa para decretar o fim das velhas ideias.
Elsevier, Rio de Janeiro (2010)
13. Lockwood, T.: Design Thinking: Integrating Innovation, Customer Experience, and Brand
Value. Allworth Press, New York (2009)
14. Demarchi, A.P.P., Fornasier, C.B.R., Carmona, C.F., Martins, R.F.F.: Design Thinking,
aprendizagem e conhecimento internalizado no processo de criação de uma mensagem
educacional com linguagem visual direcionada para adolescentes. Rev. Unifamma 12, 44–
67 (2014)
15. d.school: Bootcamp Bootleg. http://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/
BootcampBootleg2010v2SLIM.pdf
16. Amaral, S.F., Garbin, M.C.: Design Thinking: A Colaboração como Mola Propulsora da
Inovação na Educação. Inova Educ. 2, 1–11 (2013)
Gamification in Education Through Design Thinking 321
