1. Cynthia Cipriano Bullard, M.Ed., NBCT, NCCEE Kernodle Middle School Greensboro, NC The Gamification of Personalized Learning

2. Gamification uses game-like thinking and game dynamics to promote intrinsic motivation. What is Gamification?

3. Intrinsic Motivation Intrinsically motivated behaviors have been defined “as those behaviors which are engaged for the “pleasure and satisfaction derived from their performance.” (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier & Ryan) Four dimensions of motivation are competence, autonomy, interest/value, and relatedness. (Usher & Kober)

4. Self-Determination Theory Self-Determination Theory suggests individuals are intrinsically motivated when their basic needs of competence, autonomy, and relatedness are met within a certain situation. (Deci & Ryan)

5. Support for Using Gamification Known as gamers, this generation of students view technology as omnipresent in their lives. (Pew Research Social and Demographic Trends, 2010). 63% of US children ages 8-18 play video games each day (The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, 2010).

6. Support for Using Gamification Gamification builds on innate desires for socialization, learning, altruism, and a need for accomplishment. According to Self-Determination Theory, when these needs are met, intrinsic motivation can occur.

7. External Rewards Gamification uses points or real or virtual badges as motivation for self-directed learning.

8. Negative Effects of External Rewards Deci’s 1971 study found extrinsic rewards undermined intrinsic motivation.

9. Deci’s Research 128 experiments were examined in two separate meta-analyses. 1 st Study – 101 studies that had used a free-choice behavioral measure of intrinsic motivation. 2 nd Study – 84 studies that had used self-reported interest.

10. Deci’s Results Deci, Koestner, & Ryan found Tangible rewards Significantly undermined intrinsic motivation for children and college students, with the greatest undermining effect being for children. Verbal rewards Had a less positive effect on children than on college students.

11. Deci’s Results Free-Choice Behavior Tangible rewards significantly undermined intrinsic motivation. Verbal rewards did not. Self-Reported Interest Tangible rewards undermined intrinsic motivation. Verbal rewards enhanced self-reported interest.

12. Positive Effects of External Rewards In 1994, Cameron, Banko, & Pierce conducted a separate meta-analysis on rewards and intrinsic motivation.

13. Cameron’s Research 145 independent studies were examined in two separate meta-analyses. 1 st – 115 included a free-choice measure of intrinsic motivation. 2 nd – 100 included a self-reported measure of task interest.

14. Cameron’s Results Cameron, Banko, & Pierce found no evidence of detrimental effects of reward on measure of intrinsic motivation. They further suggest: Tangible rewards Can increase an interest in and performance on low-interest activities. Verbal rewards Tended to increase high-interest tasks.

15. Cameron’s Results Expected rewards and performance There is a slight decrease in performance and interest when rewards are tied to performance. This seemed to support Deci, Koestner & Ryan’s finding that expected rewards were detrimental to intrinsic motivation in free-choice and self-reported interest.

16. Implications It seems extrinsic rewards can be beneficial if the rewards are not expected. Extrinsic rewards also motivate learners to complete low-interest tasks. Verbal rewards seem to have a more positive effect vs. tangible rewards. My experience supported these implications!

18. Implementation

19. Mission (the end goal)Objectives (assignments to meet the Mission) Player (student)Ally (peer tutor) Keeper (clan leader)Commander (me!) Level-Up (students complete additional or more challenging Objectives) Achievement Get (reward for completing Objectives) XP (experience points rewarded for various situations; being on task, being on time, completing Objectives, serving as an Ally, etc.), Bonus (Skype with parent during class, record a tutorial video, choose your seat in class, etc.), and Leaderboard on which Clan (team) points are ranked.

20. Objectives and XP Students are presented with several Objectives, and choose which they will complete to master the science concept. Objectives appeal to a variety of student learning styles. Objectives are tasks of varying lengths, degrees of difficulty, and are worth different Experience Points (XP). As Students earn XP, they Level-Up, and unlock secrets about our hero’s quest (from the novel).

21. Objectives and XP Students earn traditional grades for each Objective first. If a student earned a grade of 93% on an Objective, they would receive 93% of that Objective’s available XP. XP is tallied at the end of each month. Student with highest XP becomes the Keeper. Leader board is updated.

22. My Gamified Experience Personalized learning meets the needs of a diverse population of students. Student Choice gives students the power to choose what they will learn, and how they will learn it. Gamification “levels-up” personalized learning as students collaborate with peers, design instruction, serve as student leaders, and experience personal and team rewards.

23. GAME ON! CindyBullard0@gmail.com

24. References Cameron, J., Banko, K.M., & Pierce, W.D. (2001). Pervasive Negative Effects of Rewards on Intrinsic Motivation: The Myth Continues. The Behavior Analyst, 24(1) 1-44. Deci, E.L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R.M. (2001). Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation in Education: Reconsidered Once Again. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 1-27. Deci, E.L., Vallerand, R.J., Pelletier, L.G., & Ryan, R.M. (1991). Motivation and Education: The Self-Determination Perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3&4), 25-346.

25. References Usher, A., & Kober, N. (2012). What is motivation and why does it matter? Center on Educational Policy, CEP Report Student Motivation – An Overlooked Piece of School Reform. Retrieved March 15, 2015 from http://www.cep- dc.org/publications/index.cfm?selectedYear=2012 Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8 to 18-year-olds. A Kaiser Family Foundation Study (2010, January 20). The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved on November 25, 2014 from http://kff.org/other/report/generation-m2-media- in-the-lives-of-8-to18-year-olds/http://kff.org/other/report/generation-m2-media- in-the-lives-of-8-to18-year- Millennials: Confident. Connected. Open to Change. (2010, February 24). Pew Research Social and Demographic Trends. Retrieved on November 25, 2014 from http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/02/24/millennials-confident- connected-open-to-change/ http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/02/24/millennials-confident- connected-open-