Impact of Gamified Problem Sheets in Seppo on Self-Regulation Skills

2.1 Self-Regulation During Problem Solving

Self-regulation is a key concept for successful academic learning. It is defined as the control of performance, cognition, and the observation of effects (Efklides, Niemivirta, & Yamauchi, 2002). Students can be described as self-regulated if they take an active role in managing and directing their learning experiences (Zimmerman, 1994); for example, they are aware of their strengths and weaknesses, be able to motivate themselves to engage in, and improve their learning. Self-regulation is a fundamental component of mathematical competence, too, so it is important to emphasize it when teaching mathematical problem-solving (De Corte, Mason, Depaepe, & Verschaffel, 2011). As Pape and Smith (2002) pointed out, “problem solving is perhaps the area of mathematics in which self-regulation is most apparent” (p. 95). The use of self-regulation strategies makes the problem-solving process more effective; thus, mathematics instruction should incorporate the development of self-regulated strategies (Fadlelmula, 2010). During the problem-solving process students must develop solution plans and apply them to test their correctness, they must argue about their ideas and evaluate those of others, which helps develop their reasoning skills (Van de Walle, Karp, & Bay-Williams, 2004). Cognitive abilities, such as good concentration, effective memory, meaningful perceptions, and logical and critical thinking, also play an important role in problem-solving (De Corte, Verschaffel, & Eynde, 2000). Therefore, there are more self-regulation processes that are important for successful problem-solving, such as self-control, self-efficacy, self-reaction, and self-regulation of motivation.

As problem solving and SRL are complex competencies, their development requires active and strategic participation from the learners (Cleary & Zimmerman, 2004). Gamification might be a method which fosters active participation (Zsoldos-Marchis, 2020) and could contribute to the development of some self-regulatory skills (Li et al., 2022; Li et al., 2023).

Motivation is also important for a self-regulated learner. Intrinsic motivation refers to the internal drive and desire to engage in an activity for its own sake, being characterized by genuine interest, enjoyment, and satisfaction felt when engaging in the activity (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Extrinsic motivation refers to the drive to engage in an activity primarily to attain external rewards or avoid punishments, rather than to derive inherent satisfaction or interest from the activity itself. It involves performing a task to obtain tangible or social rewards or to evade negative consequences (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Motivation and self-regulation are closely linked, as self-regulation processes help individuals align their behavior with their motivational goals. Individuals who are highly motivated tend to engage in effective self-regulatory strategies to monitor and adjust their behavior, while self-regulatory skills contribute to the maintenance and enhancement of motivation (Zimmerman, 2000).

2.2 Gamification

Gamification is “the use of game design elements in non-game contexts” (Deterding, Dixon, Khaled, & Nacke, 2011, p. 10). The use of gamification is justified by increased learning efficiency, promoting motivation (Carrillo, García, Laguna, Magán, & Moreno, 2019; Zsoldos-Marchis, 2020), and engagement in learning (De Byl, 2012; Laskowski & Badurowicz, 2014; Zsoldos-Marchis, 2020). “Gamification is about rethinking motivation in a world where we are more often connected digitally than physically. It is about building motivation into a digitally engaged world.” (Burke, 2014, p. 135).

Research shows that gamification does not always have the expected benefits. Buckley and Doyle (2014) found that gamification could increase different types of motivation. In her review study, Dahlstrøm (2017) has shown that gamification could have neutral, positive, and negative effects on intrinsic motivation. In her opinion, based on the previous articles, the reason for the varied results is the dependence on implementation and contextual factors, such as the age, personality, and experience of the user with games, or whether the use of the gamified system took place voluntarily or not. Another factor influencing motivation is the duration of the gamification; Hanus and Fox (2015) have shown that students’ motivation decreased with long-term application. In many cases, the reward elements of gamification increase external motivation instead of internal motivation (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 2001; Zsoldos-Marchis, 2020). Torrado Cespón and Díaz Lage (2022) support Dahlstrøm’s findings, investigating the problem of motivation in terms of online teaching practice. They affirm that extrinsic motivation could work, but it depends on the actual reward, which should be sufficiently attractive to students.

Gamification incorporates some aspects of self-regulation (Hassan, Xi, Gurkan, Koivisto, & Hamari, 2020), such as goal setting (assured by the story), monitoring progress (ensured by progress bars, badges, and point-systems), and encouraging perseverance (provided by feedback elements: leaderboards, performance graphs, or feedback given for each task). Gamification promotes goal setting and planning, as games often provide players with clear goals and objectives, encouraging them to plan their actions and strategize to achieve those goals. This goal-directed behavior fosters self-regulation skills, as individuals learn to prioritize tasks, manage their time effectively, and persist in the face of challenges (Przybylski, Rigby, & Ryan, 2010). Gamification provides immediate feedback, which can promote self-regulation by providing individuals with information about their progress and performance, which develops a sense of self-awareness and self-reflection (Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014).

There are several learning management systems that apply gamification strategies or play elements to the learning experience, like Schoology, Moodle; or special online gamification platforms that can be utilized in education, e.g. ClassCraft, EdApp, Kahoot! In this study, the Seppo gamification platform was selected to be used in the intervention. This selection is for several reasons. Seppo (seppo.io platform) provides an intuitive and user-friendly interface in which it is easy to create and customize game-based learning experiences. It is possible to freely use any picture as the map of the game, thus it can be adapted to any frame story. The map could also be a real map on which GPS locations can be given, enhancing the connection of learning with the real world. The tasks could also be given with QR codes promoting the use of smartphones for learning purposes. Seppo provides educators with valuable data and analytics on student performance and progress. The platform generates comprehensive reports that allow teachers to track individual and group achievements, identify areas of improvement, and personalize instruction based on student needs.

3.1 Scope and Research Questions

The purpose of this research is to study the impact of gamification on self-regulation skills of pre-service preschool and primary school teachers. For this purpose, gamified mathematics problem sheets in Seppo were used.

The research tried to answer the following questions:

1. What is the influence of gamified problem-sheets in Seppo on students’ motivation?

2. How does the use of gamified problem-sheets in Seppo affect the usefulness perception of problem-solving?

3. What is the influence of gamified problem-sheets in Seppo on students’ self-efficacy?

4. How does the use of gamified problem-sheets in Seppo affect students’ self-control?

3.2 Participants

Participants in this study were second-year students with a specialisation in primary and preschool pedagogy from Transylvania (Romania). In the research, there were 118 students, 82 in the experimental group, and 36 in the control group. Nine students from the experimental group participated in the interview.

3.3 Instrument

3.4 Intervention

The experimental group had a six-week intervention, a two-hour seminar each week during which a gamified problem sheet designed on the Seppo platform (Figure 1) was assigned to the students.

Figure 1

The map for the gamified problem sheets.

The Seppo game had a story from the fairy tale world and three scenes, each scene associated with a difficulty level. Students could freely go from one scene to another. The problems given in the game were associated with the material taught during the mathematics course (i.e., logical problems, problems with sets, natural and rational numbers, proportions, equations and systems of equations, and geometry). Most of the problems were formulated as word problems whose text was correlated with the story of the game.

Questions referring to self-regulation were attached to each problem, for example:

• Could you solve the problem with a different method? If so, which method is more adequate for this problem?

• How did you feel during problem-solving?

• Have you checked whether the solution is correct?

• Did you find this problem difficult?

The game incorporated 4 of the 5 motivational elements identified by Huang and Hew (2018) based on self-determination and flow theories.

• Goals – The main goal was formulated in terms of points necessary to collect in each seminar. As the gamers had access to the leaderboard, obtaining a higher place could also be a goal formulated for themselves (Landers, Bauer, & Callan, 2017).

• Access – Players can freely choose the level and order of the problems they solve.

• Feedback – The solutions to the problems were asked in closed questions (multiple choice, checkbox, matching pairs, filling in) so that students got immediate automatic feedback on the correctness of their solution. The questions related to self-regulation processes were not scored; their purpose was to make students monitor and control the problem-solving process. For some problems, full solutions were required to upload as a picture of their handwritten calculations, but these were not scored, and only helped the lecturer see students’ difficulties.

• Challenges – The game used a leaderboard that offered the feeling of competition.

Collaboration was not implemented in this game, as the students played individually. This decision was made based on the results of the previous experiment using teamwork (Egri et al., 2022).

Students must earn a minimum of 12 points for each seminar. The maximum number of points that could have been earned in a seminar was between 27 and 32.

4.1 Results Based on the Self-Regulated Problem-Solving Scale

The scale contains affirmations measured on a five-level Likert scale from 1 (this affirmation doesn’t characterize me at all) to 5 (this affirmation totally characterizes me). The results of the negative affirmations were reversed, and the means for each category were calculated for each student both on pretest and posttest. Then, the differences between the means by categories obtained in the posttest and pretest were calculated. As the Shapiro–Wilk test showed deviation from normality the Mann–Whitney test was used to compare the results obtained for the experimental and control group. The statistical results are shown in Table 1.

There are significant differences in the case of self-control and regulation of motivation. In both cases, the means decreased from pretest to posttest in the case of the experimental group and decreased in the case of the control group.

A Multivariate Analysis of Variance was conducted to compare the posttest–pretest differences between the experimental and control groups, with the objective of examining whether the intervention had a statistically significant effect. The Wilks test revealed no significant effect, as Wilks’ Lambda = 0.914, F(1,116) = 1.286, and p = 0.258.

Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to compare the pretest and posttest results of the experimental group by categories. The statistical results are presented in Table 2. The means for self-control during problem-solving, searching for multiple solutions, and perception of the usefulness of mathematical problem-solving significantly decreased.

4.2 Results of the Interviews

Semi-structured interviews were conducted to obtain in-depth information and explanations for the statistical data of the self-regulated problem-solving scale. The students were anonymized by the labels S1, S2, …, S9. The transcripts were qualitatively analyzed using the MAXQDA program and codes and sub-codes were identified. The following main codes were identified: level, goal, and motivation. In addition to the identified codes and subcodes, the content of the responses underwent analysis. This process involved discerning explanations for quantitative data and uncovering reasons behind students’ behaviors while engaging with the gamified problem sheet.

4.2.3 Motivation During the Game

The motivation code was the richest. A hierarchical code-subcodes model was used to visualize the subcodes of the motivation code with their frequencies (Figure 2). Aggregate frequencies were used for parent codes.

Figure 2

Hierarchical code-subcodes model for the motivation code.

For seven students, the gamified problem sheet was more motivating than a traditional problem sheet. Only student S1 stated that the game did not give her extra motivation.

Half of the students think their motivation was more extrinsic, as they were motivated by points (4 students) and leaderboard (one student), but also by the story (seven students), design of the game board (two students), and instant feedback (two students). The answer given by student S6 highlighted the importance of the aesthetic and the story for motivating students.

S6: The graphics of the entire experience were visually stunning, driving and motivating me to tackle one task after another. The aesthetic appeal of tracking when and how each task was completed was particularly satisfying. I found great motivation and was impressed by the coherence of all the tasks being related to a single topic, which allowed me to approach them with a sense of calm.

Student S7 also highlighted the motivating character of the immediate feedback given by the game beside the frame story.

S7: The story frame added a positive dynamic to the game, preventing it from becoming monotonous. Immediate feedback upon solving a task was particularly engaging, and I appreciated the creativity of the self-regulating questions.

The other half of the students stated that they were intrinsically motivated to focus on finding the correct solutions (one student), feeling success (one student), and self-validation (one student). Student S9 provided a detailed explanation of her intrinsic motivation.

S9: I believe my internal motivation was heightened as I sought to prove to myself that I could successfully complete the tasks. My motivation stemmed not from the points but from the awareness that I was enhancing my skills and capabilities during the assignment.

The type of motivation of some students changed during the intervention. Student S3 reported the change in her motivation from extrinsic driven by point to intrinsic.

S3: I think that my internal motivation has grown stronger. Initially, I was still focused on chasing points, but that changed over time. If we were to play this game live now, I believe the reactions of others would provide additional motivation.

As regards self-regulation of motivation, for seven students it was easier to stay motivated with the gamified problem sheet than in the case of a traditional problem sheet. Three students stated that they did not have to encourage themselves to solve the tasks, the game helped them stay motivated.

5.1 The Influence of Gamified Problem-Sheets in Seppo on Students’ Motivation

It is known from previous research that academic motivation decreases during the university year (Lazowski & Hulleman, 2016). Another aspect that must be considered is that the intervention was carried out online during the Covid-19 pandemic, and research has shown that academic motivation decreased during online teaching (Zaccoletti et al., 2020). Therefore, the results regarding the motivation of the students must be interpreted in this context. The intrinsic motivation of the students did not decrease, which could be considered a positive result from the point of view of the above observations. Interviews also confirmed that a considerable number of the students were intrinsically motivated by the satisfaction of finding the solution or by trying to prove to themselves that they are capable of problem-solving. These intrinsic motivational elements are not so evident in the case of teamwork, this could be the explanation for the intrinsic motivation decrease in the previous study of Egri et al. (2022). Some students reported in interviews a decrease in motivation by the end of the semester, explained by the fact that they had more assignments to complete in different disciplines, so they did not have as much energy left for the game as at the beginning.

Gamification is reported in the literature to increase extrinsic motivation more than intrinsic motivation (Deci et al., 2001; Zsoldos-Marchis, 2020). In the present study, the extrinsic motivation of both groups increased, but in the case of the control group the increase was more pronounced and the increase in the case of the experimental group was statistically insignificant. Based on interviews, points and the leaderboard were the most important external motivational elements. The leaderboard was found to be an important motivational element also in the research of O’Donovan, Gain, and Marais (2013) and Sillaots (2014).

The interviews highlighted the fact that in the case of gamified problem sheets the game helped students to continue to try to solve the problems, they did not need as much self-encouragement for perseverance as in the regarding of a traditional problem sheet. The story and the design of the game board were those gamification elements that contributed to maintaining motivation. This explains the decrease in the mean for the self-regulation of motivation category in the case of the experimental group, while in the control group, the mean for this category increased.

5.2 The Impact of the Gamified Problem Sheet on Students’ Beliefs About the Utility of Mathematical Competencies

Students’ beliefs about the utility of mathematical competencies influence their problem-solving behavior (Schoenfeld, 1985). It is interesting to observe that the mean of the usefulness perception of the mathematical problem solving category decreased in both groups, but more in the experimental group where this decrease is statistically significant. The problems tried to cover all the topics of the mathematics course, so a significant part of them was not taken from everyday life and were not realistic. This could have affected the perception of the usefulness of mathematics in students.

5.3 The Influence of the Gamified Problem Sheet on Students’ Self-Efficacy

Students’ self-efficacy also decreased in both groups. This could be related to the perception of the utility of the problems (Siregar & Prabawanto, 2021), which also decreased, or by experimenting failures in solving some problems (Etherton, Steele-Johnson, Salvano, & Kovacs, 2020). As students could have started with problems at higher levels, they could face more failures than in a ‘traditional’ gamification in which players cannot access higher levels before completing the lower ones. The interviews show that some students are aware of their abilities, they have decided which level to start based on their competencies regarding the mathematical topic of the game, but others have just randomly chosen the level and problems to be solved.

The experimental group was less open to searching for multiple solutions in the posttest, their mean for this category decreased significantly, whereas, in the case of the control group, the mean did not change. This can be explained by the fact that students from the experimental group tried to solve as many problems as possible in a limited time (2 hours) and not only to fulfil the goal of the game earning the required 12 points.

5.4 The Influence of the Gamified Problem Sheet on Students’ Self-Control

Self-control during problem-solving exhibited a significant decrease in the experimental group, while conversely, it showed an increase in the control group, indicating significant differences between the two groups. Again, the rule of obtaining at least 12 points could have contributed to this result. As the game gave immediate feedback and automatically scored each solution, the students submitted the solution and went to the next problem without staying to check the solution. They were not stressed to correctly solve each problem; an incorrect solution did not influence their performance. Self-control capacity could be depleted due to a change in motivation (Inzlicht, Schmeichel, & Macrae, 2014). Depletion occurs not because students become less able to self-control, but because their willingness for self-control decreases (Masicampo, Martin, & Anderson, 2014). Self-control could also decrease due to fatigue, when excessively required (Masicampo et al., 2014). During the intervention, some problems contained extra questions related to self-control, such as checking the correctness of the solution or analyzing the solving method, so that students must exercise self-control time to time, but these questions were not frequently asked.