1. bookVolume 20 (2017): Issue 1 (June 2017)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1027-5207
First Published
11 Dec 2014
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Teachers’ Use and Acceptance of Gamification and Social Networking Features of an Open Repository

Published Online: 23 Jan 2018
Volume & Issue: Volume 20 (2017) - Issue 1 (June 2017)
Page range: 127 - 138
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
1027-5207
First Published
11 Dec 2014
Publication timeframe
2 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

The affordance of social interaction has been a part of open online repositories of teaching and learning resources for nearly two decades. Repositories are built not only to collect and disseminate materials, but enable users to collaborate and review, comment on and rate the content they access. However, research indicates that (a) most users do not participate in this type of generative use, and (b) the possibility of social interaction does not necessarily signal active participation in social interaction. In recent years the positive effects of gamification and social networking elements on user engagement have come to the fore in educational settings. From this stance, a quantitative study was conducted to assess users’ acceptance of the existing game mechanics of a large national repository of educational resources, their attitudes towards the inclusion of extra features, and teachers’ motivation to share openly. Our results indicate that teachers do not see open repositories as social networks, but as libraries of resources, and are likely to share if rewarded by intrinsic rather than extrinsic factors.

Keywords

1. van Acker, F., van Buuren, H., Kreijns, K., & Vermeulen, M. (2013). Why Teachers Share Educational Resources: A Social Exchange Perspective. In R. McGreal, W. Kinuthia & Stewart Marshall (Eds.), Open Educational Resources: Innovation, Research and Practice (pp. 177- 192). Commonwealth of Learning and Athabasca University.Search in Google Scholar

2. de los Arcos, B., & Weller, M. (in press). A Tale of Two Globes: Exploring the North/South Divide in Engagement with OER. In U. Herb & J. Schöpfel (Eds.), Open Divide? Critical Studies on Open Access. Sacramento, CA: Litwin Books, LLC.Search in Google Scholar

3. Atenas, J., & Havemann, L. (2013). Quality assurance in the open: an evaluation of OER repositories. The International Journal for Innovation and Quality in Learning, 1(2), 22-34. Retrieved from http://eprints.soas.ac.uk/17347/Search in Google Scholar

4. Atenas, J., Havemann, L., & Priego, E. (2014). Opening teaching landscapes: The importance of quality assurance in the delivery of open educational resources. Open Praxis, 6(1), 29-43. Retrieved from http://openpraxis.org/index.php/OpenPraxis/article/view/8110.5944/openpraxis.6.1.81Search in Google Scholar

5. Borthwick, K., Millard, D., & Howard, Y. (2011). Report: HumBox Impact Analysis. Retrieved from http://microsites.oii.ox.ac.uk/tidsr/sites/microsites.oii.ox.ac.uk.tidsr/files/humboximpactanalysisv2.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

6. Clements, K., Pawlowski, J., & Manouselis, N. (2015). Open educational resources repositories literature review - Towards a comprehensive quality approaches framework. Computers in Human Behavior, 51(B), 1098-1106.10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.026Search in Google Scholar

7. Comas-Quinn, A., & Fitzgerald, A. (2013). Open Educational Resources in Language Teaching and Learning. York: Higher Education Academy (HEA). Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/37550/2/874A675B.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

8. Comas-Quinn, A., Beaven, T., Pleines, C., Pulker, H., & de los Arcos, B. (2011). Languages Open Resources Online (LORO): Fostering a culture of collaboration and sharing. The EuroCALL Review, 18. Retrieved from http://eurocall.webs.upv.es/index.php?m=menu_00&n=news_18#loro10.4995/eurocall.2011.16278Search in Google Scholar

9. Dicheva, D., Dichev, C., Agre, G., & Angelova, G. (2015). Gamification in Education: A Systematic Mapping Study. Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 75-88.Search in Google Scholar

10. Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., & artínez-Herráiz, J. J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers and Education, 63, 380-392.10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020Search in Google Scholar

11. Fogg, B.J. (2009). A Behavior Model for Persuasive Design. Proceedings of the 4th international conference on persuasive technology. New York, NY, USA: ACM. Retrieved from https://bjfogg.com/fbm_files/page4_1.pdf10.1145/1541948.1541999Search in Google Scholar

12. Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does Gamification Work? - A Literature Review of Empirical Studies on Gamification. Proceedings of the 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Science, 3025-3034. Retrieved from http://people.uta.fi/~kljuham/2014-hamari_et_al-oes_gamification_work.pdf10.1109/HICSS.2014.377Search in Google Scholar

13. McInerney, D. M. & Ali, J. (2016). Multidimensional and Hierarchical Assessment of School Motivation: Cross-cultural validation. Educational Psychology, 26(6), 717-734.10.1080/01443410500342559Search in Google Scholar

14. McInerney, D. M., Roche, L. A., McInerney, V., & Marsh, H.W. (1997). Cultural Perspectives on School Motivation: The Relevance and Application of Goal Theory. American Educational Research Journal, 34(1), 207-236.10.3102/00028312034001207Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

15. McLure Wasko, M., & Faraj, S. (2000). “It is what one does”: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2), 155-173.10.1016/S0963-8687(00)00045-7Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

16. Nacke, L. E., & Deterding, S. (2017). The maturating of gamification research. Computers in Human Behavior, Editorial, 1-5.Search in Google Scholar

17. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - OECD (2007). Giving Knowledge for Free: The Emergence of Open Educational Resources. Paris: OECD- Educational Resources Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/38654317.pdfSearch in Google Scholar

18. Phalachandra, B., & Abeywardena, I.S. (2016). Open Educational Resources in the Commonwealth 2016. Burnaby, Canada: Commonwealth of Learning. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/310327477_Open_Educational_Resources_in_the_Commonwealth_2016Search in Google Scholar

19. Pynoo, B., Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Duyck, W., Sijnave, B., & Duyck, P. (2012). Teachers’ acceptance and use of an educational portal. Computers & Education, 58(4), 1308-1317.10.1016/j.compedu.2011.12.026Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

20. Sabourin, J., Kosturko, L., & McQuiggan, S. (2014). Teacher Usage Behaviours within an Online Open Educational Resource Repository. Proceedings of the first ACM conference on Learning @ scale conference (L@S ‘14). New York. NY, USA: ACM.Search in Google Scholar

21. Tseng, F.-C., & Kuo, F.-Y. (2014). A study of social participation and knowledge sharing in the teachers’ online professional community of practice. Computers & Education, 72, 37-47.10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.005Open DOISearch in Google Scholar

22. Zourou, K. (2016). Social networking affordances for open educational language practice. ALSIC (Apprentissage des langues et Systèmes d’Information et de Communication), 19. Retrieved from https://alsic.revues.org/290310.4000/alsic.2903Search in Google Scholar

23. Zourou, K., & Lamy, M-N. (2013). Social networked game dynamics in web 2.0 language learning communities. ALSIC (Apprentissage des langues et Systèmes d’Information et de Communication), 16. Retrieved from https://alsic.revues.org/2642Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo