LỜI CAM ĐOANTác giả xin cam đoan dé tài luân văn: "Study on Gamification as a Motivational Tool in English 5 Academic Reading Training at FPT University" là công trình nghiên cứu độc lập
Theoretical foundations of the motivation: Self-determination Theory
The concept of motivation is supported by various theories that serve as its theoretical foundations, much like gamification This section will explore how different researchers interpret and approach the idea of motivation.
Motivation theories can be categorized into two main types: content theories and process theories Content theories focus on the "what" of motivation, identifying the factors that drive individuals, while process theories examine the "how," exploring the mechanisms behind human motivation Although content theories are some of the earliest frameworks in motivation studies, they often fail to fully explain the complexities of what motivates or demotivates people In contrast, process theories offer valuable insights into the dynamics of motivation, making them more applicable in understanding human behavior.
Motivation is influenced by various processes and theories, with key content theories including Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Alderfer's ERG theory, McClelland's achievement motivation, and Herzberg’s two-factor theory In contrast, prominent process theories encompass Locke's goal-setting theory, Adam's equity theory, Victor Vroom's expectancy theory, and Skinner's reinforcement theory Recently, the self-determination theory by Edward L Deci and Richard Ryan has emerged as a fundamental framework for understanding motivation.
M Ryan The following queries follow: Self-determination theory: What is it? What does it worry about? Why does it serve as a pillar in the hypothesis behind the alleged motivation?
Self-Determination Theory (SDT), developed by Deci and Ryan in the 1970s and 1980s, explores the relationship between human personality, motivation, and optimal performance It identifies two main types of motivation: intrinsic, which arises from within an individual, and extrinsic, which is influenced by external factors.
31 that both are significant in influencing human personalities and actions (Deci & Ryan,
Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is a macro-theory of human motivation that explores the social factors influencing human growth and well-being It posits that individuals rarely act based solely on one type of motivation, as their needs and desires are expressed through various goals and aspirations While applicable in multiple contexts, SDT is primarily utilized in educational settings to understand what motivates students to engage and persist The theory emphasizes the importance of fulfilling basic psychological needs, raising the critical question of what those needs are.
Human motivation, as outlined by Niemiec and Ryan (2009) and Ryan and Deci (2017) through Self-Determination Theory (SDT), is driven by the fulfillment of basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness Autonomy involves having control over one's actions and feeling that choices are self-directed rather than imposed externally In educational settings, students experience autonomy when they are offered choices in how to complete and present their work Competence refers to the perception of one's effectiveness and success in actions, which is enhanced when students receive clear feedback on their academic progress Relatedness is the sense of connection and support from peers and teachers, fostered through meaningful interactions that promote a supportive community Additionally, Ryan and Deci (2017) note that individuals satisfy these needs differently, and that experiences of need fulfillment can evolve over time due to environmental influences (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
Motivation exists along a continuum in Self-Determination Theory (SDT), where individuals experience self-determined motivation, such as intrinsic motivation, integration, and identification, when their psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are adequately supported by their environment Self-determined motivation is characterized by an internal locus of control, meaning that internal factors drive behavior Integration and identification are types of autonomous extrinsic motivation, as they stem from internal and voluntary choices.
Behavior Nonself- determined Selt-cetermined
Reguatory Nonimentional, Corngiiancs, Se#-coevol, Personal Congrueme, lroeeegt,
Procc2+z Nonvalucing, External Ego-imotvement, Importance, Awareness, Enjoyment,
Incompetence, Rewards and = Internal Rewards Conscious Synthesis inherent
Lack of Coe#rol Punishmets and Punishments Valuing with sell Satisfaction
Figure 2.1 The self-determination continuum, adapted from Deci & Ryan (2002)
Intrinsic motivation, as defined by Deci and Ryan (2002), arises when individuals act out of genuine interest and enjoyment This self-determined motivation is evident when a person acknowledges the significance of a behavior, integrates it into their self-identity, and engages in actions that reinforce this identity, a process known as integrated regulation Additionally, when individuals value a habit, it influences their behavior, a phenomenon referred to as identified regulation.
When an environment fails to support autonomy, competence, and relatedness, individuals may experience non-self-determined motivation, characterized by introjection and external regulation Introjected regulation occurs when people are driven by internalized consequences like pride, shame, or guilt, while external regulation involves actions controlled by external factors such as rewards or penalties At the lowest end of the motivation spectrum lies amotivation, which emerges when individuals lack reasons to act and feel no sense of satisfaction or purpose, even when they succeed.
The self-determination theory highlights the psychological significance of certain assumptions, primarily that behavior is motivated by the desire for growth and mastery Engaging with challenges, completing tasks, and seeking new experiences are crucial for developing a sense of self Additionally, the theory underscores the importance of autonomous motivation as a core aspect of our personality, emphasizing intrinsic motivation over extrinsic rewards such as money, awards, and recognition.
The research ứap cú HH HC 08000080080088080588980509809089000900008888 33 2.5 Theoretical FrarieWOrK cu nu ng ng 0110811811 8.8 37 2.5.1 The Playing Experience of Need Satisfaction (PENS) model
Implementing this study is essential due to the prevalent issue of demotivation among FPT students in TRS courses, which can adversely affect both teaching and learning practices Research in gamification literature indicates that gamification in education has been extensively studied, with many findings confirming its positive impact on learning processes and outcomes (Dicheva et al., 2015).
Despite existing research on gamification's impact on engagement, motivation, and learning English as a second language, there is a lack of conclusive systematic reviews specifically addressing its effectiveness in teaching reading comprehension at the tertiary level The relationship between various gamification components and their influence on learners' experiences and outcomes remains ambiguous This is significant, as each gamification feature is designed to promote meaningful learning processes and ultimately achieve desired educational results.
Gamification in higher education, particularly in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) classes, has been underutilized in Vietnam's university system until recently Research, including Le (2020), shows that ESL students experience increased engagement—behaviorally, emotionally, and intellectually—in gamified blended classrooms Phuong (2020) found that students hold positive views on gamified learning and are prepared for online gamification, which primarily aids vocabulary acquisition Additionally, Pham et al (2021) reported that students using gamified applications demonstrated improved academic performance and increased learner autonomy compared to those in traditional classes Findings by Pham and Pham (2022) revealed that instructors view gamification positively for teaching English grammar, while Tran and Duong (2022) noted favorable sentiments from participants regarding gamified learning activities for English language acquisition However, a notable gap in the existing research is the lack of focus on reading in the Vietnamese context.
Despite several studies indicating that gamified activities could motivate both teachers and students, there is a lack of official research focused on reading comprehension lessons for university students This gap is significant, especially considering Shehzad et al (2020) found a strong negative correlation between reading motivation and reading comprehension ability Furthermore, previous research has primarily examined content gamification rather than structural gamification To date, there has been no specific investigation into whether competition and casual gamification can influence student motivation.
Structural gamification presents significant potential across various educational contexts due to its affordability and practicality It allows teachers to implement engaging activities without requiring advanced information technology skills, enabling easy adaptation of lessons based on the classroom environment rather than extensive computer preparation While the rigorous nature of the course can place a heavy burden on educators, particularly in developing students' reading comprehension, structural gamification alleviates the need for constant creation of gamified content, which can be exhausting Additionally, this approach does not alter the course content, making it a preferable option to avoid potential complications with administrators and ensure consistent educational outcomes.
Gamification has been widely acknowledged in literature for its potential benefits and criticisms in enhancing reading comprehension Despite this recognition, there is a lack of compelling evidence regarding its application in classroom settings and its effects on reading comprehension This systematic review aims to summarize the existing research on gamification in reading comprehension instruction and to explore its effectiveness in educational contexts.
36 relationship between gamification and students’ motivation in reading comprehension classes and how students respond to gamified exercises.
The effectiveness of gamification in education remains a topic of discussion; however, numerous studies have demonstrated a positive correlation between gamification and improved learning outcomes Research by Aldrich (2005), Anderson & Rainie (2012), and Domiguez et al (2013) supports the notion that integrating gamified elements into educational settings can enhance student engagement and achievement.
Whiteley, 1990; Gee, 2008: Hakulinen et al., 2013; Kumar & Khurana, 2012; Li et al.,
Learning accomplishments, along with psychological and behavioral changes, are the primary categories of impact identified in various studies (Smith & Baker, 2011; Sitzmann, 2011; Su & Cheng, 2015; Prensky, 2001; Quinn, 2005; Randel et al., 1992).
Learning accomplishments are a crucial outcome in education, prompting educators to question whether gamification enhances students' learning outcomes Numerous studies have explored this topic, including research by Domnguez et al (2013), Faria & Whiteley (1990), Li et al (2012), Mayo (2009), Nah et al (2014), Randel et al (1992), Smith & Baker (2011), Sitzmann (2011), and Su.
& Cheng, 2015) have shown that gamification can increase learning achievement.
According to certain research, gamification can improve not just higher order thinking abilities (Domnguez et al., 2013), declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge
(Sitzmann, 2011), but also test performance (Faria & Whiteley, 1990; Li et al., 2012;
Mayo, 2009; Nah et al., 2014; Randel et al., 1992; Smith & Baker, 2011; Su & Cheng, 2015; Yildirim, 2017).
Psychological and behavioral changes stemming from learning are crucial, as many teachers face challenges with unmotivated students who lack active participation in class This issue has sparked long-standing interest among educators and academics in enhancing motivation and engagement Research indicates that gamification can effectively foster these psychological and behavioral improvements in students.
37 changes, according to certain studies Students’ interest and engagement can be boosted by gamified learning, according to Hakulinen et al (2013), Kumar and Khurana (2012),
Research by Li et al (2012), Nah et al (2014), and Su and Cheng (2015) highlights that gamification in learning and education fosters significant psychological and behavioral changes that extend beyond mere motivation and engagement Sitzmann (2011) further emphasizes that gamification enhances self-efficacy and improves knowledge retention among learners.
Gamification is more than just a fun approach for students; it serves as an effective teaching method that enhances instructional impact on learning (Kapp et al., 2014) By incorporating gamified activities in the classroom, educators can significantly increase student engagement and motivation, boost academic performance, and enhance recall and retention of information Additionally, gamification offers instant feedback on student progress, encourages behavioral changes, allows students to monitor their own advancement, and fosters collaboration skills among peers.
Gamification can significantly enhance student engagement and motivation in the classroom, addressing a common challenge faced by educators Traditional motivational strategies have often yielded only temporary results (Kim et al., 2018) By incorporating game-like elements into learning, gamification offers an enjoyable and interactive approach that can effectively tackle issues of student involvement and participation.
There are several theories associated with gamification and serious games.The researcher has studied various major ideas in order to develop a theoretical
This article explores a comprehensive framework for integrating gamification into academic reading within the educational sector It will outline key theories that support the application of gamification in teaching, ultimately leading to a robust theoretical framework for its implementation.
2.5.1 The Playing Experience of Need Satisfaction (PENS) model
Self-Determination Theory highlights the role of social environments in fostering organic motivation, as explored by Ryan and colleagues through research on digital video games (Ryan et al., 2006) Their studies examined how specific game elements influenced players' intentions for future engagement, utilizing the PENS satisfaction index Three experiments conducted in lab settings revealed that increased satisfaction of autonomy and competence correlated with a higher preference for future play Additionally, a fourth study within an online gaming community focused on Massively Multiplayer Online games confirmed that autonomy, competence, and relatedness significantly predicted future play intentions Rigby and Ryan noted that PENS could effectively forecast a game's success in terms of enjoyment, ratings, sales, and player loyalty, suggesting its potential as a foundational design tool for game developers (Rigby & Ryan, 2007, p 2) The fundamental demands in gaming contexts are summarized in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3 Examples and Definitions of the Three Basic Psychological Needs in Games (Aparicio et al., 2012; Riley & Ryan, 2011; Riley & Ryan, 2007)
Three Basic Definition in Game Examples of Game Design
Competence The natural desire to fecl e Optimal difficulties accomplished or effective ¢ A robust system of positive in what one is doing feedback ¢ Developing information ¢ Intuitive controls
METHODOLOGY cccssssssersersssesnsenseesseesnssnssensensnnsnasenseesnnsnasenseeese 46 3.1 Research Design ccscessecsessesserseesessseeseserseessnssnnersteesnnsnsseesensnesenseeseneneseensenenens 46 3.1.1 A Quick Overview of Design-Based Research (DRB)
The incorporation of game elements in structural gamification
Research indicates that integrating game features into educational practices enhances both learning efficiency and enjoyment, suggesting that gamification can effectively motivate students to engage in their studies (Sahin & Namli, 2016; da Rocha Seixas et al.).
A study conducted in 2016 confirmed the effectiveness of gamification in education; however, it faced criticism for limiting game elements to mere scoring, points, and rankings This narrow focus on game mechanics has raised concerns about the overall impact of gamified solutions in educational settings (Zainuddin et al., 2020).
Unhealthy competitiveness and aggressiveness among players can hinder effective engagement in gamification Teachers can design games tailored to specific audiences, while gamification in education requires a clear understanding of the target participants Recognizing players as essential to the gamification framework is crucial, as mismatched mechanisms can result in short-lived participation driven by external incentives Defining student profiles is vital for selecting appropriate gaming features, and this approach is reflected in various gamification models that emphasize customization based on user needs Understanding motivation is key to fostering engagement in gamification activities, as it creates the necessary incentives for participants to actively participate.
The influences of competition and casual gamification . ô-ô 110
Most participants reflected on the leaderboard as a tool for social comparison, noting that only top performers could earn bonus scores, which created a competitive atmosphere However, none reported feeling pressured to achieve these bonus points This may be attributed to some respondents understanding the significance of the bonuses and the gamification objectives, prioritizing their learning and accomplishments in each session over the competition The quantitative results were similar across the board.
The introduction of a leaderboard clarified competition among students, making it appealing despite the lack of additional points for non-first place finishes Ryan and Deci (2017) noted that this appeal stemmed from students' desire for peer respect, which created pressure to improve their rankings In response, some students shifted their focus from leaderboard standings to personal progress within the level system While determined students thrived and felt energized after the course, those who struggled attributed their lack of success to insufficient knowledge and motivation Consequently, the leaderboard was viewed by students as a mechanism for self-regulation.
Individual perception and deliberate individual decisions determined how much
Students were motivated to complete their coursework through a gamification approach that awarded bonus points for effort and completion While Ryan and Deci (2017) note that these points, lacking tangible rewards, could diminish intrinsic motivation, they also serve as a significant factor in students' evaluations, contributing to 60% of their final grades Moreover, students who excelled received additional rewards unrelated to their grades, functioning as a form of recognition for their achievements.
Interviews revealed that the impact of incentives on intrinsic motivation is shaped by the individual's perception of the event, particularly regarding their sense of autonomy and competence.
Ryan and Deci (2017) highlighted the risks associated with outcome-focused rewards, suggesting that individuals may prioritize quick attainment of goals primarily for the sake of rewards A study on gamification revealed that schoolchildren opted for more challenging physical exercises when no rewards were offered, but chose easier tasks when points were at stake (Ahn et al., 2019) This indicates that adults, too, may recognize the temptation to take shortcuts when rewards are involved.
Despite achieving success, some students chose to forgo the bonus, opting instead to give up Those who felt their expertise validated through the bonus recognized its informative value In interviews, they shared techniques used to prove their integrity in earning the incentive Additionally, many students emphasized the importance of guiding discussions and gamified exercises as essential skills for educators As instructional design majors, they appreciated these experiences, viewing them as valuable practice for their future teaching careers.
The manner in which the bonus was presented influenced student reactions, allowing them to express how earning the bonus could fulfill their need for competence This approach empowered students to make their own choices, potentially reducing the demotivating effects of the incentive Previous research by Yildirim et al (2016) utilized badges to convey not only skill levels but also guidance on achieving learning goals However, this design failed to mitigate the risk of badges being perceived negatively, as symbols of inadequacy, and did not alleviate their controlling nature for students.
The gamification design focused on students' need for relatedness, highlighting their reliance on teachers and experienced peers for support Interviews revealed that students often expect guidance in decision-making, which aligns with Ryan and Deci's (2017) assertion that relatedness to authority figures is linked to autonomy In situations where students feel connected to adults, their intrinsic motivation may not be influenced by their ability to make choices, leading some to prefer that teachers or more knowledgeable peers determine the best responses or approaches to tasks.
4.6.6 The choice of casual games
Designing a structural gamification course presents challenges, particularly in selecting casual gamification strategies that align with teachers' styles and personalities Teachers may struggle to implement certain games, like "Guess the Song," without a solid understanding of their students' musical preferences, as poor music choices can disrupt the lesson's atmosphere Generation gaps and varying levels of background knowledge can hinder participation, but resources like YouTube and Spotify can help bridge these gaps Additionally, teachers must be resourceful and adept at improvisation, as unexpected situations often arise during gameplay Maintaining a flexible attitude allows educators to address anxieties and adapt when lessons deviate from their original plans.
4.7 Comparisons and contrasts between the survey and interview findings
In Chapter 3, the author integrated the findings from both the survey and interview tools to assess their reliability and validity To facilitate effective comparisons and contrasts of each theme, Figure 4.7 was created.
Interview Questions Main themes Survey questions
Background experience with _ pamification Qu 3
Figure 4.7 The mapping between main themes and questions of both interview and survey
General experience with the gamiffied COuTSC SH, 114 4.7.2 Attitude towards game âẽ€TTCTIS, s Ă SH HH ngu 115 457.3: BASIC PSYCROLODICANNOOUS sscrssscssscssscsasisesisesssncsssnssnssasassscensisesisesssnnsiesssassaasis 117 4.8 Summary of Findings and DiscussioOns ccsseseeessesesereerssersserssensseeseessees 119
In order to discover the general experience of learners towards the design of gamification in this study, question 2 in the interview and all items in the scale of
GAM were employed (questions 16 — 23) First, statistically speaking, in section 4.1.5,
The average score for the gamification factor ranged from 3.86 to 4.33, with GAM2, which states "Oftentimes, I feel pleased and willing to provide or receive feedback," receiving the highest mean score of 4.33 In contrast, GAM8, which notes "Generally speaking, the competitiveness of the games in this course brings more advantages than disadvantages," received the lowest score Overall, these findings indicate that gamification has a positive impact on student motivation in TRS lessons, supporting its use as an effective motivational tool This conclusion is further validated by qualitative interviews, where all 12 students affirmed the effectiveness of structural gamification, specifically casual and competitive elements, in enhancing their learning experience at FPT University.
In the interview, questions 3 and 4 assessed learners' attitudes toward game elements, while the survey, detailed in section 3.6.2, utilized an 8-item scale to evaluate the four key components of gamification, specifically through questions 16 to 23 Notably, the items related to GAM were a focal point of this analysis.
The GAM2 item assessed feedback, while GAM3 and GAM4 focused on leaderboard dynamics Additionally, GAM5 and GAM6 evaluated bonus features, and GAM7 and GAM8 measured competitiveness The mean and standard deviation for each game element are detailed in Table 4.21.
Table 4.21 Means and standard deviations of each game elements in the survey
Scale Observed variables Game Mea Std.
GAMI _ I think feedback when I play games in Feedback 422 0.576847 reading lessons is necessary.
GAM2 Oftentimes, I feel pleased and willing to provide or receive feedback.
-GAM3 _ The use of the leaderboard encourages Leaderboard 3.995 0.577944 me to try harder in the reading lessons.
GAM4 The leaderboard helps me keep track of their progress in relation to the other players.
GAMS The bonus in reading activities Bonus 4.08 0.59466 increases my interest in the lesson.
GAM6 I think bonus is an effective way to motivate learners in the reading lessons.
GAM? Iprefer the reading lessons with games Competitive 3.88 0.538936 because they are competitive ness
GAM8 _ Generally speaking, the competitiveness of the games in this course brings more advantages than disadvantages
The survey data revealed that feedback scored the highest mean of 4.22, indicating its significance Additionally, interview results corroborated this finding, with 100% of participants affirming that feedback in gamified activities is essential and beneficial for the gamified course.
Table 4.22 Results of the interview concerning the game elements
Game elements Percentage of positive attitude
The survey results revealed that both the bonus and leaderboard elements received high ratings, with means of 4.08 and 3.995, respectively Additionally, 83.33% of interview participants expressed a positive perception of these features, indicating that TRS students recognize the value of bonuses and leaderboards, despite their initial appearances.
In a study of 117 participants, the most significant factor that enhanced their enjoyment of gamified activities was the feedback they received throughout the learning process, whether from teachers or peers Interestingly, competitiveness ranked as the least motivating element, with only 75% of students indicating it was a strong motivator in the gamified activities This sentiment was reflected in the survey results, where competitiveness received a mean score of just 3.88, the lowest among the four evaluated elements.
The survey results indicated a slightly higher mean for bonuses compared to the leaderboard, while interviews revealed equal positive attitudes towards both This minor discrepancy may be attributed to the sample size and sampling method used Overall, the findings from both the quantitative and qualitative phases closely aligned, reinforcing the reliability and validity of the research data collected.
The results of the scale Autonomy, Competence and Relatedness were achieved through questions 1 — 5,6— 10 and 11] — 15 in the questionnaire respectively The following table summarizes their means and standard deviations (Table 4.23)
Table 4.23 Means of the scales of AUT, COM and REL
As for the qualitative phase, questions 5 — 7 were dedicated to exploring the opinions of TRS students towards the basic psychological needs of Autonomy,
Competence and Relatedness respectively Their results, similarly, are presented in the following table (Table 4.24)
Table 4.24 Result of the interview concerning basic psychological needs
Basic psychological needs _ Percentage of positive attitude
The survey and interviews highlighted that autonomy was the most valued need, with a mean score of 4.0751, and all 12 interview participants confirmed that structural gamification enhanced their sense of autonomy in learning They emphasized the non-mandatory nature of their learning and the freedom of choice they experienced while engaging in games Additionally, both Competence and Relatedness were closely ranked in the interviews, with 11 participants acknowledging that gamified activities fostered social bonds and improved their competence and confidence.
The survey revealed a minimal gap of just 0.0254 between competence and relatedness, likely influenced by the sample size and sampling method Overall, the findings from both the quantitative and qualitative phases closely aligned, reinforcing the reliability and validity of the collected data.
The interview results revealed that students had a positive outlook after completing the TRS course, which incorporated competition and casual gamification These findings closely align with the survey results, highlighting the effectiveness of the course design.
The findings from the 119 stage indicate that the implementation of structural gamification in the TRS reading comprehension course was largely effective The upcoming chapter will delve deeper into these results, exploring their implications and acknowledging the study's limitations.
4.8 Summary of Findings and Discussions
The project's objective was to explore the potential of gamification as a motivational strategy in Teaching Reading Skills (TRS) lessons at FPT University The researcher aimed to assess the influence of motivational factors such as relatedness, autonomy, and competence on reading comprehension when gamification is integrated into the teaching process.
Research indicates that structural gamification can enhance student engagement in reading comprehension, as evidenced by both quantitative and qualitative findings It generally boosts motivational factors such as autonomy, relatedness, and competence, though these effects can vary based on the classroom environment and the implementation of gamification strategies Essential elements for a successful gamified learning experience include components like leaderboards, bonuses, competition, and feedback Additionally, various factors, including student personalities, learning preferences, academic levels, task complexity, group dynamics, and the teacher's guidance and planning, significantly influence the effectiveness of a gamified classroom.
In conclusion, the findings of this study align with previous research by Hanus and Fox (2015) and Hasegawa, Koshino, and Ban (2016), demonstrating that game-based learning positively influences student motivation These results could be valuable for educators and may influence teaching methods at FPT University.
CONCLUSIONS wissscsscssscssassoasssacconsssnssenceonsssnseoncssnsssnssnassnnszonesonssonees 120 Si SOMMAAKY Of CO ID a ssscsssncssnccsncscacssncssacsoacconssnscencsenesenasoaseoassenasoassoasionsenastonses 120 5.2 The contributions of the study co HH giun 121 5.2.11), TREOLETI Cal COMMA ELON ssiscsssesssassssssseassasssesssasssassencssaaveesszassvacsveassesasnsssneseesis 121 5.2.2 Teaching methodology COntributiOn cc ecceeceseesseeseseeeeeeeseatseeeeceaseaeeeeeacees 121 5.3 The implications of the study HH nga, 122 5.3.1 Implications on using DBR in the Design of Reading Comprehension Courses
Limitations of the studỡy ôĂn nu nu ng nung na ng me 126 5.5 Recommendations for future researchh cce se sieeieerieriererrirrserirrsrsee 128 ẹ€Í€r€TCâS Ăn nu HH ng ng 00111.081.511 130
This study has notable limitations, primarily its focus on two specific types of structural gamification—competition and casual gamification—within reading comprehension classes Consequently, the research concentrated on one aspect of gamification, which restricts its findings to validating the positive impact of structural gamification on FPT learners' motivation, rather than addressing content gamification Therefore, to substantiate the claim that gamification can effectively serve as a motivational tool in reading, further research is necessary.
127 comprehension lessons, he or she needs to apply both types of gamification in a different context to make such claims plausible.
Second, there were no learning performance tests in the research since it was primarily concerned with how students behaved while interacting with their peers.
The impact of gamification design on learning remains underexplored, particularly regarding its influence on students' intrinsic motivation While the study examined the motivational aspects of gamification on student psychology, it did not directly assess intrinsic motivation Future research could expand the gamification concept across various academic disciplines, allowing for multiple assessments of students' learning and intrinsic motivation throughout longer courses.
One limitation of the study is its sample size, which, while adequate for assessing the predictive ability of the selected variable in reading comprehension classes, would benefit from being larger for a more comprehensive analysis The research was conducted exclusively at FPT University, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings to broader contexts, suggesting potential patterns rather than definitive empirical conclusions However, this limitation is mitigated by several factors: the study involved authentic TRS classes that had undergone gamification training, the participants were carefully selected and well-informed about the study's purpose, the interview outcomes were consistent, and the results are pertinent to the field of education.
The findings from the semi-structured interviews and surveys indicate that the information gathered is both reliable and comprehensive, as participants demonstrated a strong understanding of the topic being studied Additionally, the lack of previous empirical research to support the study's conclusions highlights the significance of these results.
This study highlights the potential for future research in gamification, despite its limitations, such as the absence of control variables in the multiple linear regression analysis Control variables, which are typically excluded due to their perceived lack of interest, can include factors like the external environment and socio-psychological settings that may influence students' motivation While the study's high R-square and adjusted R-square values suggest that external influences may not fully explain the observed patterns, it remains essential for future research to incorporate these control factors to enhance the validity of findings.
Future research should expand beyond the initial focus on students' motivation regarding gamification in FPT University's reading comprehension courses It is essential to explore how gamification influences student performance and assess instructors' readiness to adopt this innovative educational approach Findings from such studies would provide valuable insights for curriculum designers and educational administrators on the integration of gamification in English courses within their specific contexts Additionally, this research could identify the necessary tools for instructors to effectively implement this pedagogical method.
The study primarily concentrated on students' motivation during reading comprehension sessions, resulting in the absence of learning performance tests Additionally, it did not conduct a comprehensive analysis of how gamification design influenced learning outcomes, nor did it include direct measurements of students' intrinsic motivation.
Gamification design can be applied across various subjects, and leveraging data from learning management systems is essential Extended course durations offer multiple chances to evaluate students' learning outcomes and intrinsic motivation effectively.
The growing popularity of online courses in higher education highlights the potential of learning management systems to enhance the learning experience for both instructional designers and educators Future research on motivation should explore factors specific to online learning environments, contrasting them with traditional classroom settings Additionally, understanding the limitations of this study can provide valuable context for interpreting the findings and comparing them with results from related research.
Incorporating gamification into extracurricular classes beyond FPT University could expand the sample size for future studies Additionally, future research should explore significant factors not addressed in this study, including the use of content gamification and online gamification in Vietnam Investigating these elements, along with the challenges educators and administrators face due to internal and external factors, could provide valuable insights into motivation.
Aebersold, J A., & Field, M L (1997) From reader to reading teacher Cambridge
Reciprocal teaching is a vital strategy for enhancing reading comprehension, particularly in foreign language education This approach employs four essential strategies: predicting, questioning, clarifying, and summarizing, which are designed to improve students' cognitive and meta-cognitive skills Research indicates that explicitly teaching these reading strategies can significantly boost students' comprehension abilities The article explores the theoretical framework of reciprocal teaching, its impact on reading skills, and the correlation between these strategies and academic success, ultimately demonstrating that reciprocal teaching positively influences English reading comprehension among EFL students.
Alizadeh, M (2016) The Impact of Motivation on English Language Learning.
International Journal of Research in English Education, /(L), 11-15 Retrieved from http://ijreeonline.com/article-1-23-en.html&sw=.
Allen, I E., & Seaman, J (2015) Grade level: Tracking Online Education in the
United States Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse.
Allen, I E., & Seaman, J (2016) Online report card: Tracking online education in the
United States, Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse.
Allen, I E., & Seaman, J (2017, April 30) Digital Compass Learning: Distance
Education Enroliment Report 2017 Babson Survey Research Group Retrieved October 19, 2022, from https://eric.ed.gow/?id80868
Alyousef, H S (2005) Teaching Reading Comprehension to ESL/EFL Learners.
Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 5, 143-154.
Anderson, J., & Rainie, L (2012) Gamification and the internet: Experts expect game layers to expand in the future, with positive and negative results Games for
Health Journal, 1(4), 299-302 https://doi.org/10.1089/g4h.2012.0027
Aparicio, A F., Vela, F L., Sanchez, J L., & Montes, J L (2012) Analysis and application of Gamification Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Interaccion Persona-Ordenador - INTERACCION '12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2379636.2379653
Arnold, J (2000) Affect in language learning Cambridge Univ Press.
Arthur, W., Bennett, W., Edens, P S., & Bell, S T (2003) Effectiveness of training in organizations: A meta-analysis of design and evaluation features Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(2), 334-245 https://doi-org/10.1037/0021-
Bain, K (2004) What the Best College Teachers do Harvard University Press.
Bandura, A (1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change.
Psychological Review, 84(2), 191-215 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
295x.84.2.191 Barron, K E., & Hulleman, C S (2015) Expectancy-value-cost model of motivation.
International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 503-S09. https://doi.org/10,1016/6978-0-08-097086-8,26099-6
Battle, R (1996) Hearts, Clubs, Diamonds, Spades: Players Who Suit MUDs, /(1).
Bedwell, W L., Pavlas, D., Heyne, K., Lazzara, E H., & Salas, E (2012) Toward a taxonomy linking game attributes to learning Simulation & Gaming, 43(6),
Bellotti, F., Berta, R., De Gloria, A., Lavagnino, E., Antonaci, A., Dagnino, F M., &
Ott, M (2013) A gamified short course for promoting entrepreneurship among ICT Engineering Students 2013 IEEE 13th International Conference on
Advanced Learning Technologies https://doi.org/10.1109/icalt.2013.14
Benson, P (2013) Teaching and researching autonomy Routledge.
Block, C C (2003) Literacy difficulties: Diagnosis and instruction for reading specialists and classroom teachers, Allyn and Bacon.
Boaz, A., & Ashby, D (2003) (rep.) Fit for purpose? Assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence
Bogost, I (2011, May 3) Persuasive games: Exploitationware Game Developer.
Retrieved October 19, 2022, from https://www.gamedeveloper.com/design/persuasive-games-exploitationware
Bomia, L., Beluzo, L., Demeester, D., Elander, K., Johnson, M., & Sheldon, B (1996,
November 30) The impact of teaching strategies on intrinsic motivation ERIC.
Retrieved October 19, 2022, from https://eric.ed.gov/?7id 18925
Brigham, T J (2015) An introduction to gamification: Adding game elements for
Engagement Medical Reference Services Quarterly, 34(4), 471-480. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2015.1082385
Brookhart, S M (2017) How to give effective feedback to your students ASCD.
Brown, A L (1992) Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings Journal of the Learning
Sciences, 2(2), 141-178 https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2
Brown, H D (2000) Principles of language learning and teaching, Pearson
Bryman, A., & Bell, E (2011) Business research methods Oxford Univ Press.
Burgers, C., Eden, A., van Engelenburg, M D., & Buningh, S (2015) How feedback boosts motivation and play in a brain-training game Computers in Human
Behavior, 48, 94-103 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.01.038 Burke, B (2014) Gamify how gamification motivates people to do extraordinary things Bibliomotion.
Cahyani, A D (2016) Gamification approach to enhance students engagement in studying language course MATEC Web of Conferences, 58, 03006. https://doi.org/ 10,105 1/matecconf/20165803006
Caillois, R (1967) Les Jeux et les hommes; Le Masque et le Vertige Gullimard.
Caponetto, l., Earp, J., & Ott, M (2014) Gamification and education: A literature review ECGBL 2014: Eighth European Conference on Games Based Learning,
Carrell, P L., & Carson, J G (1997) Extensive and intensive reading in an EAP setting English for Specific Purposes, 16(1), 47-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-4906(96)0003 1 -2
Carrell, P L., & Eisterhold, J C (1983) Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy.
TESOL Quarterly, 17(4), 553 https://doi.org/10.2307/3586613 Chee, Y S (2016) Games-to-teach or games-to-learn unlocking the power of digital game-based learning through performance Springer Singapore, Imprint:
Cherry, K (2022, August 10) The psychology of what motivates us Verywell Mind.
Retrieved October 19, 2022, from https://www.verywellmind.conywhat-is- motivation-2795378#citation-1
Cherry, K (n.d.) How does observational learning actually work? Verywell Mind.
Retrieved October 19, 2022, from https://www.verywellmind.com/social- learning-theory-2795074
Chorney, A I (2012) Taking the game out of Gamification Dalhousie Journal of
Interdisciplinary Management, 8(1) https://doi.org/ 10.593 1/djim.v8il.242
Cobb, P., & Gravemeijer, K (2008) In A E Kelly (Ed.), Handbook of Design
Research Methods in Education: Innovations in Science, Technology, engineering, and Mathematics learning and teaching essay, Routledge.
Cobb, P., Jackson, K., & Sharpe, C (2015) Design research: An analysis and critique.
Handbook of International Research in Mathematics Education. https://dot.org/10.4324/9780203448946
Cobb, T (2007) Computing the vocabulary demands of L2 reading Language
Cole, M S., Walter, F., Bedeian, A G., & O’ Boyle, E H (2011) Job burnout and employee engagement Journal of Management, 38(5), 1550-1581. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311415252
Collins, A (1992) Toward a design science of education In N A T O advanced research workshop on N directions in advanced educational technology, E.
Scanlon, & T O'Shea (Eds.), New Directions in educational technology (pp.
Conrad, C F., & Serlin, R C (2011) The sage handbook for research in education:
Pursuing ideas as the Keystone of Exemplary Inquiry SAGE.
Corley, K G., & Gioia, D A (2004) Identity ambiguity and change in the wake of a corporate spin-off Administrative Science Quarterly, 49(2), 173-208. https://doi.org/10.2307/4131471
Cox, K E., & Guthrie, J T (2001) Motivational and cognitive contributions to students' amount of reading Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(1),
Creswell, J W (2013) Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches SAGE.
Creswell, J W (2017) Research design qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J W., & L., P C V (2009) Designing and conducting mixed methods research, Sage.
Creswell, Plano, C V L., Gutmann, M L., & Hanson, W, E E, (2003) Advanced mixed methods research designs In A Tashakkori & C Teddlie (Eds.),
Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research (pp 209-240). essay, SAGE Publications.
Crystal, D (2017) English as a global language Cambridge University Press.
Csikszentmihalyi, M (2000) Beyond boredom and anxiety Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Csikszentmihalyi, M (2009) Flow: The psychology of optimal experience Harper and
Row. da Rocha Seixas, L., Gomes, A S., & de Melo Filho, I J (2016) Effectiveness of gamification in the engagement of students Computers in Human Behavior, 58,
In "Extensive Reading in the Second Language Classroom," Day and Bamford (2013) emphasize the importance of extensive reading for language acquisition, highlighting its benefits in enhancing vocabulary and comprehension skills Additionally, de Sousa Borges et al (2014) present a systematic mapping of gamification in education at the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, illustrating how gamification can engage students and improve learning outcomes Together, these works underscore the significance of innovative approaches in language education and the role of interactive methods in fostering effective learning environments.
DeCarlo, M (2018) Scientific inquiry in social work Open Textbook Library.
Deci, E L., & Flaste, R (1995) Why we do what we do: The Dynamics of Personal
Deci, E L., & Ryan, R M (2002) Handbook ofself-determination research.
Self-determination theory, developed by Deci and Ryan, serves as a comprehensive framework for understanding human motivation, development, and well-being This theory emphasizes the importance of intrinsic motivation, highlighting how autonomy, competence, and relatedness are essential for fostering personal growth and psychological health Their research underscores the role of these fundamental needs in enhancing motivation and overall life satisfaction By exploring the dynamics of intrinsic motivation, Deci and Ryan provide valuable insights into human behavior that can be applied across various domains, including education, work, and mental health.
DeLong, M., & Winter, D (2014) Learning to teach and teaching to learn mathematics resources for professional development Mathematical Association of America.
Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry (2003).
Educational Researcher, 32(1), 5-8. https://doi.org/10.3 102/0013189x032001005
Designing Digitally (2019) Structural gamification and content gamification:
DDINC Designing Digitally, Inc Retrieved October 24, 2022, from https://www.designingdigitally.cony/blog/structural-gamification-and-content- gamification
Deterding, S., Khaled, R., Nacke, L E., & Dixon, D (2011) Gamification: Toward a
Definition CH 2011 Gamification Workshop Proceedings, 12-15.
Deterding, S., Sicart, M., Nacke, L., O'Hara, K., & Dixon, D (2011) Gamification:
Using game design elements in non-gaming contexts Proceedings of CHI 2011
Workshop Gamification: Using Game Design Elements in Non-Game Contexts,
Dhanapala, K V (2006) Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation and L2 Reading
Comprehension of University Learners in Japan and Sri Lanka Proceedings of the JACET Summer Seminar, 39-43.
Dicheva, D., & Dichev, C (2015, October 19) Gamification in education: Where are we in 2015? Gamification in Education: Where Are We in 2015? - Learning &
Technology Library (LearnTechLib) Retrieved October 19, 2022, from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/152186/
Dicheva, D., Agre, C., Dichev, G., & Angelova, G (2015) Gamification in education:
A systematic mapping study Journal of Educational Technology & Society,
Dickinson, L (1995) Autonomy and motivation a literature review System, 23(2),
165-174 https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-25 1x(95)00005-5 Ding, L (2019) Applying gamifications to asynchronous online discussions: A mixed methods study Computers in Human Behavior, 91, 1-11. https://doi.org/10,1016/j.chb.2018.09,022
Ding, L., Er, E., & Orey, M (2018) An exploratory study of student engagement in gamified online discussions Computers & Education, 120, 213-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.007
Research by Ding et al (2017) highlights the significance of student engagement in gamified online discussions, demonstrating its positive impact on learning outcomes Additionally, Doll et al (2013) provide insights into the reasons behind high school dropouts, emphasizing the importance of understanding students' perspectives to address this critical issue Both studies contribute valuable knowledge to the fields of education and student retention strategies.
215824401350383 https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013503834 Dominguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernandez-Sanz, L., Pagés, C.,
& Martinez-Herraiz, J.-J (2013) Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes Computers & Education, 63, 380-392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020
Dornyei, Z (2006) Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition A/LA
Duke, N K (2003) Reading & writing informational text in the primary grades research based practices Scholastic Teaching Resources.
Duke, N., Pearson, D., Strachan, S., & Billman, A (2011) Essential elements of fostering and teaching reading comprchension What Research Has to Say About
Reading Instruction, 5\—93 https://doi.org/10.1598/0829.03
Dửrnyei, Z (1990) Conceptualizing motivation in foreign-language learning*.
Language Learning, 40(1), 45-78 https://doi.org/10.1111⁄4.1467- 1770.1990.tb00954.x Đửrnyei, Z (1998) Motivation in second and Foreign Language Learning Language
Dérnyei, Z (2019) Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies Oxford University Press.
Eickhoff, L Frazier, L & Vosters, M (2018) University success reading Pearson
Elley, W B (1991) Acquiring literacy in a second language: The effect of book-based programs *, Language Learning, 41(3), 375-411. https://doi.org/10.1 11 1⁄4.1467-1770.1991.tb0061 1.x
Ellis, R (2019) Understanding second language acquisition Oxford University Press.
Faria, A J., & Whiteley, T R (1990) An Empirical Evaluation of the Pedagogical
Value of Playing a Simulation Game TN a Principles of Marketing Course.
Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 17, 53-57.
Filatro, A., & Cavalcanti, C C (2016) Structural and content gamification design for tutor education Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning, 1152-1157.
Findlay, J., ti-avatar {f1H:#005S&c;} ti-avatar2 { [l:#ffT:} ti- avatar3 { fill:#82¢341;} Training Industry Logo Emblem AvatarDefault Training Industry Avatar John Findlay
John Find, Vitz, M., & Media, X O (2020, July 29) Game-hased learning vs. gamification: Do you know the difference? Training Industry Retrieved October
19, 2022, from https://trainingindustry.com/articles/learning-technologies/game- based-learning-vs-gamification-do-you-know-the-difference/
Finn, J D., & Zimmer, K S (2012) Student engagement: What is it? why does it matter? Handbook of Research on Student Engagement, 97-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-2018-7_5
Fletcher, J., Grimley, M., Greenwood, J., & Parkhill, F (2012) Motivating and improving attitudes to reading in the final years of primary schooling in five new zealand schools Literacy, 46(1), 3-16 https://doi,org/10.1111/j.1741-
Flores, J F F (2015) Using Gamification to Enhance Second Language Learning.
Fowler, F J (2014) Survey research methods Sage Publication.
Galli, L., & Fraternali, P (2014) Achievement Systems explained Trends and
Applications of Serious Gaming and Social Media, 25-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-98 1-4560-26-9 3
Gamification in education: What is it & how can you use it? True Education
Partnerships (2020, April 1) Retrieved October 19, 2022, from https://www.trueeducationpartnerships.com/schools/gamification-in-education/ Gardner, R C., & Lambert, W E (1972) Attitudes and motivation in second-language learning.
Garris, R., Ahlers, R., & Driskell, J E (2002) Games, motivation, and learning: A research and Practice Model Simulation & Gaming, 33(4), 441-467. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878 102238607 Gee, J P (2008) What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy.
Gilakjani, A P., Leong, L.-M., & Sabouri, N B (2012) A study on the role of motivation in foreign language learning and teaching /nternational Journal of
Modern Education and Computer Science, 4(7), 9-16. https://doi.org/10.5815/ijmecs.2012.07.02
Gottfried, A E (1990) Academic intrinsic motivation in young elementary school children Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 525-538. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.82.3.525
Gottfried, A W., Cook, C R., Gottfried, A E., & Morris, P E (2005) Educational characteristics of adolescents with gifted academic intrinsic motivation: A longitudinal investigation from school entry through carly adulthood Gifted
Child Quarterly, 492), 172-186 https://doi.org/10.1177/001698620504900206
Grab, W (2002) Dilemmas for the Development of Second Language Reading
Abilities In J C Richards & W, A Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice, essay, Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W., & Yamashita, J (2022) Reading in a second language moving from theory to practice, Cambridge University Press.
Gredler, M., & Shields, C (2004) Does no one read vygotsky’s words? commentary on Glassman Educational Researcher, 33(2), 21-25. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x033002021
Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C F., Marsh, H W., Larose, S., & Boivin, M (2010).
Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in
Young Elementary School Children British Journal of Educational Psychology,
Guilford, J P (1950) Creativity American Psychologist, 5(9), 444-454. https://doi.ore/10.1037/h00634§7
Hair, J F (1998) Multivariate Data Analysis Prentice-Hall.
Hair, J F., Black, W C., Babin, B J., & Anderson, R E (2019) Multivariate Data
Hakulinen, L., Auvinen, T., & Korhonen, A (2013) Empirical study on the effect of
Achievement Badges in trakla2 online learning environment 20/3 Learning and Teaching in Computing and Engineering. https://dot.org/10.1 109/latice.2013.34
Halter, E (2006) From Sun Tzu to Xbox: War and video games Thunder's Mouth
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H (2014) Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on Gamification 20/4 47th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences https://dot.org/ 10.1 109/hicss.2014.377
Hamstra, S J., Brydges, R., Hatala, R., Zendejas, B., & Cook, D A (2014).
Reconsidering fidelity in simulation-based training Academic Medicine, 89(3), 387-392 https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000 130
Hanus, M D., & Fox, J (2015) Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom:
A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance Computers & Education, 80, 152-161. https://doi.org/10,1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019
Hasegawa, T., Koshino, M., & Ban, H (2015) An English vocabulary learning support system for the learner’s sustainable motivation SpringerPlus, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-0792-2
Hedge, T (2019) Teaching and learning in the language classroom Oxford
Heib, H.-U., Witt, M., Scheiner, C., & Robra-Bissantz, S (2011) Gamification of online idea competitions: Insights from an explorative case In /nformatik 2011:
Informatik Schafft communities ; Beitrdge der 41 Jahrestagung der Gesellschaft fiir Informatik EV (GD) ; 4 - 710.2011 in Berlin ; abstracts (pp.
Herzig, P., Ameling, M., & Schill, A (2012) A generic platform for enterprise gamification 20/2 Joint Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software
Architecture and European Conference on Sofiware Architecture. https://doi.org/10.1109/wicsa-ecsa.212.33 Herzig, P., Strahringer, S., & Amerling, M (2012) Gamification of ERP Systems —
Exploring Gamification Effects on User Acceptance Constructs MKWT 2012.
Hoffman, L W., & Mason, J A (1994) Developmental psychology Today McGraw-
Hornstra, L., Mansfield, C., van der Veen, I., Peetsma, T., & Volman, M (2015).
Motivational teacher strategies: The role of beliefs and contextual factors.
Learning Environments Research, 18(3), 363-392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9189-y
Huang, B., Hew, K F., & Lo, C K (2018) Investigating the effects of gamification- enhanced flipped learning on undergraduate students’ behavioral and cognitive engagement /nteractive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1106-1126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495653
Huang, W H Y., & Soman, D (2013) (rep.) A Practitioner’s Guide to Gamification of Education Toronto.
Huizinga, J (2016) Homo ludens: A study of the play element in culture Angelico
Hulleman, C S., Barron, K E., Kosovich, J J., & Lazowski, R A (2016) In A A.
Lipnevich, F Preckel, & R D Roberts (Eds.), Psychosocial skills and school systems in the 21st century theory, research, and Practice essay, Springer International Publishing.
Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M., & Zubek, R (2004) MDA: A Formal Approach to Game
Design and Game Research Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game Al, 4, 17-22.
Huotari, K., & Hamari, J (2012) Defining gamification Proceeding of the 16th
International Academic MindTrek Conference on - MindTrek ‘12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2393 132.2393 137
Ibrahim, M M., & Nat, M (2019) Blended learning motivation model for instructors in Higher Education Institutions /nternational Journal of Educational
Technology in Higher Education, 16(1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-019-
Jabnoun, N., & Hassan Al-Tamimi, H A (2003) Measuring perceived service quality at UAE Commercial Banks /nternational Journal of Quality & Reliability
Jackson, M (2016) Gamification elements to use for learning - training industry.
Training Industry Retrieved October 23, 2022, from https://www trainingindustry.com/contenUuploads/2017/07/enspire_cs_gamifica tion_2016.pdf Jackson, M (2016) Gamification in Education: A Literature Review (dissertation).
Jiang, X (2010) How to motivate people working in teams /nternational Journal of
Business and Management, 5(10) https://doi.org/10.5539/ijbm.v5n10p223 Johnson-Laird, P N (1995) Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language,
Inference, and Consciousness Harvard University Press.
Joubert, M., & Wishart, J (2012) Participatory practices: Lessons learnt from two initiatives using online digital technologies to build knowledge Computers &
Education, 591), 110-119 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.09.024 Kapp, K (2013, March 25) Two types of #gamification Karl Kapp Retrieved October
19, 2022, from https://karlkapp.com/two-types-of-gamification/
Kapp, K M., Blair, L., & Mesch, R (2014) The gamification of learning and instruction fieldbook: Ideas into practice Wiley & Sons.
Kapp, R., Badenhorst, E., Bangeni, B., Craig, T S., van Rensburg, V J., Le Roux, K.,
Prince, R., Pym, J., & van Pletzen, E (2014, August 31) Successful students' negotiation of township schooling in contemporary South Africa Perspectives in Education Retrieved October 19, 2022, from https://eric.cd.gow/?id=EJ 1043542
Keenan, J M., Betjemann, R S., & Olson, R K (2008) Reading comprehension tests vary in the skills they assess: Differential Dependence on decoding and oral comprehension Scientific Studies of Reading, 12(3), 281-300. https://doi.org/10,1080/10888430802 132279
Khurana , P., & Kumar, B (2012) Gamification in education - Learn computer programming with fun /nternational Journal of Computers and Distributed
Kim, S., Song, K., Lockee, B., & Burton, J (2018) Gamification in learning and
Kingston, A J., & White, W F (1967) The relationship of Reader's Self Concepts and personality components to semantic meanings perceived in the protagonist of a reading selection Reading Research Quarterly, 2(3), 107. https://doi.org/10.2307/747032
Kintsch, W (2010) Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition Cambridge Univ.
Kiryakova, G., Angelova, N., & Yordanova, L (2014) Gamification in Education 9th
International Balkan Education and Science Conference.
Kiryakova, G., Angelova, V., & Yordanova, L (2014) Gamification in education.
Proceedings of 9th International Balkan Education and Science Conference.
Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J (2017) The rise of Motivational Information Systems: A review of Gamification Research SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3226221
Krashen, S D (1981) Second language acquisition and Second language learning.
Krashen, S D (2004) The power of reading: Insights from the research, Libraries
Landers, R N (2014) Developing a theory of gamified learning Simulation &
Gaming, 45(6), 752-768 https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878 1 14563660 Landers, R N (2018) Gamification misunderstood: How badly executed and rhetorical gamification obscures its transformative potential Journal of
Management Inquiry, 28(2), 137-140. https://doi.org/10.1177/10564926187909 13
Landers, R N., & Armstrong, M B (2017) Enhancing instructional outcomes with gamification: An empirical test of the technology-enhanced training effectiveness model Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 499-507. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.031
Landers, R N., & Callan, R C (2011) Casual social games as serious games: The psychology of gamification in undergraduate education and employee training.
In Serious games and edutainment applications (pp 399-432) essay, Scholars
Landers, R N., & Callan, R C (2012) Training evaluation in virtual worlds:
Development of a model Journal For Virtual Worlds Research, 5(3). https://doi.org/10.4101/jvwr.v5i3.6335
Larrabee, G L (2005) Assessment of malingering In G J Larrabee (Ed.), Forensic neuropsychology: A scientific approach (pp 116-159) essay, Oxford University Press.
Lau, K.-ling, & Chan, D W (2003) Reading strategy use and motivation among
Chinese good and poor readers in Hong Kong Journal of Research in Reading,
Lave, J., & Wenger-Trayner, E (2020) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation Cambridge University Press.
Le, H., Schmidt, F L Harter, J K., & Lauver, K J (2010) The problem of empirical redundancy of constructs in organizational research: An empirical investigation.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 112(2), 112-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.obhdp.2010.02.003
Le, L T (2020) A Real Game-Changer in ESL Classroom? Boosting Vietnamese
Learner Engagement with Gamification Computer-Assisted Language Learning
Le, N L (1999) Thit di tim phương pháp day học hiệu qua Vietnam Education
Le, P H (2013) Play activities for primary English learners in Vietnam Language
Education in Asia, 41), 76-87 https://doi.org/10.5746/Ieia/13/v4/il/a6/le
Leap, B (2017, May 23) What is gamification and how can it work for my business?
[Actionable Retrieved October 19, 2022, from http://iactionable.com/gamification/what-is-gamification/
Lee, J J., & Hammer, J (2011) Gamification in Education: What, How, Why Bother?
High school students often experience a lack of motivation in the classroom, which can be understood through the lens of academic amotivation This phenomenon is influenced significantly by the role of social support, as highlighted by Legault, Green-Demers, and Pelletier in their 2006 study published in the Journal of Educational Psychology Understanding these factors is crucial for educators aiming to enhance student engagement and foster a more motivating learning environment.
Li, C., Dong, Z., Untch, R H., & Chasteen, M (2013) Engaging computer science students through gamification in an online social network based Collaborative Learning Environment /nternational Journal of Information and Education
Technology, 72-77 https://doi.org/10.7763/ijiet.2013.v3.237
Li, W., Grossman, T., & Fitzmaurice, G (2012) GamiCAD: A gamified tutorial system for first time autocad users Proceedings of the 25th Annual ACM
Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology - UIST '12. https://doi.org/10.1145/2380116.2380131 Lightbown, P., & Spada, N (2006) How languages are learned OUP.
Lin, D., Wong, K K., & McBride-Chang, C (2011) Reading motivation and reading comprchension in Chinese and English among bilingual students Reading and
Lincoln, Y S., & Guba, E G (2006) Naturalistic inquiry Sage Publ.
Lohr, K N (2004) Rating the strength of scientific evidence: Relevance for Quality
Improvement Programs /nternational Journal for Quality in Health Care,
Lonsdale, C., Hodge, K., & Rose, E (2009) Athlete burnout in elite sport: A self- determination perspective Journal of Sports Sciences, 27(8), 785-795. https://doi.org/10.1080/026404 10902929366
Looyestyn, J., Kernot, J., Boshoff, K., Ryan, J., Edney, S., & Maher, C (2017) Does gamification increase engagement with online programs? A systematic review.
PLOS ONE, 12(3) https://doi.org/ 10.137 L/journal.pone.0173403 Mack, N., & Woodsong, C (2005) Qualitative research methods: A Data Collector's field guide FLI.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S M (2022) Second language research: Methodology and design Routledge.
Malone, T (1981) What makes computer games fun? Proceedings of the Joint
Conference on Easier and More Productive Use of Computer Systems (Part -
1) Human Interface and the User Interface -. https://doi.org/10.1145/800276.810990
Malone, T W (1982) Heuristics for designing enjoyable user interfaces Proceedings of the 1982 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ‘82. https://doi.org/10,1145/800049,801756
Mart, C T (2015) Combining Extensive and Intensive Reading to Reinforce
Language Learning Journal of Educational and Instructional Studies in the
Maslow, A H (1943) A theory of human motivation Psychological Review, 50(4),
Maslow, A H (1954) Motivation and personality Harper and Row.
Maslow, A H., & Frager, R (1987) Motivation and personality Pearson Education. Matallaoui, A., Hanner, N., & Zarnekow, R (2016) Introduction to gamification:
Foundation and underlying theories Progress in IS, 3-18. https://doi.org/10,1007/978-3-319-45557-0_ 1
Mayo, M J (2009) Video games: A route to large-scale STEM education? Science,
McGonigal, J (2012) Reality is broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world Vintage.
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T C (2012) Conducting Educational Design Research:
What it is, How we do it, and Why Routledge, Taylor et Francis Group.
McNamara, D S., & Scott, J L (2001) Working memory capacity and strategy use.
Memory & Cognition, 29(1), 10-17 https://doi.org/10.3758/b103 195736
Meyer, J P., & Gagné, M (2008) Employee engagement from a self-determination theory perspective /ndustrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(1), 60-62. https://đoi.org/10.1 1 1 1⁄4.1754-9434.2007.00010.x
Michael, D., & Chen, S (2011) Serious games: Games that educate, train, and inform.
Morgan, D L (1998) Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications to health research Qualitative Health Research, 8(3), 362-376 https://doi.org/10.1 177/104973239800800307
Morgan, D L (2017) Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods: A pragmatic approach SAGE Publications, Inc.
Morgan, P L., & Fuchs, D (2007) Is there a bidirectional relationship between children's reading skills and reading motivation? Exceptional Children, 73(2),
165-183 https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290707300203Muijs, D (2011) Doing quantitative research in education with Spss SAGE.
Murray, F (1990) Explanations in education In M C Reynolds (Ed.), Knowledge base for the beginning teacher (pp 1-12) essay, Pergamon Press.
Nah, F F H., Zeng, Q., Telaprolu, V R., Ayyappa, A P., & Eschenbrenner, B (2014).
Gamification of education: A review of literature Proceedings of Ist
International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction in Business, 40\1—
Nair, S., & Mathew, D J (2019) A theoretical framework for gamificd learning.
International Journal of Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering,
Nation, K., & Snowling, M (1997) Assessing reading difficulties: The validity and utility of current measures of reading skill British Journal of Educational
Nation, P (2020) The language learning benefits of extensive reading. https://doi.org/10.26686/wetn 12560378
Nation, P., & Wang, K (2020) Graded readers and vocabulary. https://doi.org/10.26686/wetn 12560366
Nayak, M., & Narayan, K (2019) Strengths and Weaknesses of Online Surveys.
Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences , 24(S), 31-38. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.9790/0837-2405053 138
Nevid, J S (2013) Psychology: Concepts and applications Wadsworth Cengage
Nguyen, K C (2012) (rep.) Xây Dung Va Sứ Dung Trò Chơi Dạy Học Nha Tích
Cực Hóa Hoạt Động Học Tập Cua Sinh Viên Sư Phạm Trong Dạy Học Mon
Giáo Dục Học Ở Trường Đại Học Đồng Tháp Dong Thap.
Nguyen, K N., Lou, V.N K., Le, T T., & Le, M X (2021) An investigation of