Background
In
November 2023, I held the first implementation of the Gamification for
Sustainability course at University of Oulu. The aims of the course were
twofold: 1) to introduce students to the opportunities and challenges of
sustainable development in general and especially in the field of
human-computer interaction, and 2) to develop students' understanding,
knowledge and skills in sustainable interaction design (Blevis, 2007) through
the user-centred design of games and gamified applications for sustainability.
I developed the course following the pedagogical model of constructive
alignment (Biggs, 1996; Lindblom-Ylänne & Nevgi, 2009, 138-155).
This
model ensures that the learning outcomes and competence goals of the course are
in line with the course content, teaching methods, students' activities,
feedback, and assessment methods. Thus, the model ensures that students learn
meaningful things in an optimal way. The model includes five iterative and
interactive steps or features (Biggs & Tang, 2007, 92) that provide
students with (1) a good learning environment, (2) a well-structured knowledge
base, (3) appropriate learning activities, (4) formative feedback, and (5)
reflective practice and self- monitoring of one’s own learning (see Figure 1).
Figure 1: Constructive alignment model
to guide teaching in such a way that students achieve the targeted learning
outcomes and competence goals (based on Biggs & Tang, 2007)
When
applying this model to course design, I started by defining the learning
objectives and then gradually built the course content in such a way that the
learning objectives can be achieved, demonstrated, and assessed. In planning
the course, I used questions and answers. What do I want the students to learn
and know at the end of the course? How can learning and knowledge be
demonstrated? What do students need to know in order to complete their assignments?
How to ensure that students are engaged with the course every week? Based on
these questions, I formulated and defined the tasks, content, different
activities, the assessment methods, as well as the learning environment, such
as the Moodle workspace, and I thought more consciously about the learning
atmosphere.
The
learning theory underlying the design of the course is the experiential
learning theory (Kolb & Kolb 2005; Lindblom-Ylänne & Nevgi, 2009, 206-209).
It is a type of humanistic learning theory (Alaniska et al. 2022; Lindblom-Ylänne
& Nevgi, 2009, 204-206) and its principles are active student learning, independent
thinking and decision, interaction with others, and learning by doing.
Therefore, I thought that project-based group work should be a significant part
of the course's learning activities and requirements.
Reflection
Reflecting
on the teaching experience and feedback, I consider the course a
success. Students, peer teachers and my university pedagogy mentor have
appreciated the usefulness of the course in the current curriculum, the
interestingness of the content, the clarity, logical progression, flow, interactivity,
pace and structure of the lectures, the well-designed activities and tasks, the
feedback between teacher and students during the course, the interaction with
and between students, the encouraging and inspiring learning atmosphere and
much more. As a first implementation, there was also room for improvement, such
as the timing of various activities and staying on schedule during lectures.
The
students' performance in the course was generally very good to excellent.
In addition to weekly individual assignments and learning diaries, the course
work consisted of project-based group work, where a concept and possibly a
prototype of a gamification- or game-based application promoting sustainability
was designed. The students learned about games and gamification, game design,
user-centred design, sustainable development, and climate change communication.
The group work method activated working life skills, such as teamwork,
communication, time management. I would like to emphasize here that group work
was particularly rewarding for a group where students were from different
academic backgrounds, so multidisciplinary teams are recommended for complex topics
such as sustainability whenever possible. The course is included in the
Sustainability Studies Network, so students from different universities in
Finland are welcome to participate in the course thus increasing the
cross-disciplinarity of teams and projects.
Another
lesson from this teaching experience is that reflective practice helps
the teacher to be constantly connected and aware of what is happening in the
course and ready to make changes when necessary. In addition, self-monitoring
of one's own learning in the constructive alignment model can mean, on the
one hand, the teacher's learning about what works well during the course, what requires
development, and even an increase in the teacher's own understanding of the
subject and research in the area. On the other hand, it can refer to students
themselves monitoring and reflecting on their own growth and understanding of
the subject and interaction during the course. To activate these reflective
skills of the students, I used learning diaries and weekly assignments which were
integrated with the course learning objectives and project-based group work; these
proved very beneficial for both students and the teacher.
Experiential
learning for game design and sustainability
Finally,
I would like to conclude with a few remarks about experiential learning. I
found it a useful method for teaching, learning, and even designing games. In
the course, experiential learning was briefly presented during the lectures as
an underlying learning theory and a targeted generic skill and in the project
requirements as a recommended game design approach.
According
to Kolb and Kolb (2005), experiential learning emphasizes the learning process
rather than the outcome (it is a constructivist learning theory). Accordingly,
learners build their own understanding of the world or problem they encounter,
and this understanding is built on various interactions with the environment
(people, information, experiences, nature, tools, etc.). Learning takes place
by adapting between different ways of experiencing: feeling, reflection/seeing,
thinking, and action/doing. Thus, it is a holistic process that
integrates various experiences, cognitive processes, and interactions with the
world (Kolb & Kolb, 2005). I think the experiential model by Kolb and Kolb reflects
learning in everyday life as well as in working life; it is like a (re)search
process where actual experience (‘feeling’) inspires an answer or explanation
(‘reflection’) and once this is formulated or theorized (‘thinking’), it is
applied or tested (‘action’) in new contexts; the cycle repeats to further
refine knowledge, adaptation to and understanding of the world.
In
sustainable game design, the experiential learning model can be applied
iteratively also as a group work using techniques such as brainstorming,
cooperative learning, collaborative learning. In the first learning iteration
or cycle, in the first phase (‘feeling’), a problem related to sustainable
development is identified. In the second phase ('reflection'), the identified
problem is discussed in the group about what possible solutions could be
created; what can be changed and how? In the third phase ('thinking'), the
students analyse and select the different methods, concepts, theories learned
in the course in relation to the design solution; which theoretical and
methodological approaches could work well in designing a solution and how can
they be applied? Finally, in phase four (‘action’), students cooperate and
collaborate to formulate, design, and test a game concept and prototype based
on the theories and methods found appropriate in the previous phase. A game
concept and a game prototype require different iterations to complete; these are
performed in different experiential learning cycles. For example, in a new learning
cycle, the experiences identified and reflected in the initial phases of the
cycle (‘feeling’ and ‘reflection’) refer to the problems or questions of the
current design and how to solve them.
References
Alaniska, H.,
Hurskainen, J., Kähkönen, T., Maikkola, M., Pihlaja, J., & Tauriainen, T.
M. (2019). Pedagogisia malleja. Oulun ammattikorkeakoulu. 2022. https://vanha.oamk.fi/emateriaalit/wp-content/uploads/pedagogisiamalleja.pdf
Biggs, J.
(1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32
(3), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF0013887
Biggs, J.,
& Tang, C. 2007. Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student
Does. 3rd edition. The Society for Research into Higher education & Open
University Press.
Blevis, E.
(2007). Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal &
reuse. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
(503-512). https://doi.org/10.1145/1240624.1240705
Kolb, A. Y.,
& Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing
experiential learning in higher
education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193-212. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2005.17268566
Lindblom-Ylänne,
S., & Nevgi, A. (2009). Yliopisto-opettajan käsikirja. WSOYPro, Helsinki. https://doi.org/10.31885/9789515150325
Kirjoittaja: Dorina Rajanen
