“The Effect of Gamified Based LMS towards the Eleventh

Grade Students’ Engagement in SMA N 4 Singaraja”

Ni Putu Dian Utami Dewi NIM: 1312021057

ENGLISH EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

LANGUAGES AND ARTS FACULTY
GANESHA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION
SINGARAJA
2017

1
“The Effect of Gamified Based LMS towards the Eleventh Grade Students’
Engagement in SMA N 4 Singaraja”

A. Background of the Study

The English language has been the common language of the world for decades.
Indonesian government also involved English as one of the subject matters in
Indonesian education program. Moreover, in 2015 there was a launch of a universal
market named MEA (ASEAN Economic Community). During MEA, the citizen of
Southeast Asian should be able to use English language because English language
will become the official language that is used by the people to communicate,
interact, and negotiate (Mardinata, 2016). It will be strong reasons why English
should be learned and mastered by the students in Indonesia.

Regarding to the importance of English language, teachers should help students

to be able to comprehend and apply their knowledge in their real life, especially for
the students in High School. The young-adolescent students should be able to not
only understand the English, but also able to use the English in communication.
However, Ministry of Education and Culture (2013) found the phenomenon about
discrepancies between what happened in real situations and what was expected by
the curriculum. For example, the curriculum expected that the cognitive, affective
and psychomotor aspects are emphasized proportionally, but in the real
implementation the cognitive aspect was most stressed by teachers in the classroom.
The teachers only give explanation, task and test just to complete the indicator and
the assessment for the students’ scores. Those phenomena keep decreasing students’
intention in learning English.

Preliminary observation in SMA N 4 Singaraja resulted that the students has less
motivation in learning English as the effect of the way of the teacher in teaching.
The English subjects in SMA N 4 Singaraja is divided into two meetings; one for
the mandatory language class and the other is for the specialization class. Based on
the informal interview with the students, the researcher found that the students feel
bored when one of their English teachers is mostly giving them a lot of tasks and
tests. The teacher only gives them a text and discussed it with them through some

2
tasks in the book. In the other side, they also have a teacher that always give them
fun activities like watching video and singing a song, but without good
reinforcement it doesn’t make they understand the material which proven by the low
score that they get from the final test. From the interview, the researchers also get
results that actually, the students has high interest to acquire English because they
realize the importance of English for their future but it seems difficult for them to
motivate themselves in learning English because of those factors.

From the phenomenon above, it can be concluded that the teacher only teach the
students with monotonous teaching strategy and do not have enough time to
emphasize students’ understanding of the materials. The other main problems are
related to the lack of innovation and engagements of students to participate actively
in the learning process inside or outside the classroom. Those types of teaching
demotivate them to learn English because they feel bored with the teaching learning
process and as the result, English become a difficult subject for them.

Since teaching English is not an easy task in Indonesia, teacher should be aware
with this situation. The improvement of era has changed the culture of teaching and
learning process so teacher might be able to keep students’ attention and also
motivate them to learn English. One of the possible way to overcome that problem
is by using certain fun activities during teaching learning process that make students
enjoy the teaching learning process (Escudeiro & Carvalho, 2013). Besides that,
Kiryakova, G., et.al. (2014) inserted that teachers can give the students some
rewards for the efforts, which leads to increase their motivation for participating in
the class activity. It is like the use of game elements in the learning process or
known as gamification.

Gamification is the use of game metaphors, game elements and ideas in a

context different from that of the games in order to increase motivation and
commitment, and to influence user behavior (Marczewski, 2013). In the education,
gamification means that game elements (e.g. points, leader boards, and badges) are
used in non-game learning contexts to increase students’ motivation and
engagement (Villagrasa, Fonseca, Redondo, & Duran, 2014). They believe that
gamification isn’t just about playing games, but it’s also about making sure that the

3
students are motivated to complete the tasks. Students need the feeling of
accomplishment and success of striving against a challenge.

One of the popular and innovative way in using gamification is through E-

learning. Pesare, Roselli, Corriero, & Rossano (2016) states that “a smart learning
environment has to combine the smart technologies with the proper pedagogical
approaches to promote engagement and motivation.” In a line with that, teachers
can create favorable condition for the implementation of gamification in E-learning.
The teacher can conduct a Blended Learning which is a combination of traditional
face-to-face learning and also on-line learning (Saliba, 2013). In order to have a
good E-learning, the teacher should have good plan and preparation. So, the teacher
need to design an E-learning platform that has an administration that requires
knowledge of technology and people (Urha, Vukociva, Jereba, & Pintara, 2015).

Administration of technology and people is easily performed by using Learning

Management Systems (LMS). LMS according to Jenkins (2014) can help the
process of tracking students’ data and progress it automatically and also the
software tools can generate detailed reports. LMS offers various tools, which
supports the performance of one or more specific instructional tasks. There are
some LMS that has game elements (gamification) such as Socrative, Kahoot!,
FlipQuiz, Duolingo, Ribbon Hero, ClassDojo and Goalbook (Kiryakova, Angelova,
& Yordanova, 2014). The use of E-learning outside the learning in classroom or
known as Blended Learning will gives more time for the students to learn and
understand the material (Jenkins, 2014).

There are some studies of the implementation of Gamification. Some

researchers found that Gamification can increase students’ motivation. They found
that those happened because of the rewards and the leaderboards in Gamification
enable the students to see their work publicly and they can compare their progress
with other classmates (Domínguez et al., 2013; Hanus & Fox, 2015). The badges
that they got as the rewards after they finished boring tasks also will made them
more interesting and engaging in the learning. In addition, another research found
that Gamification is not only increase students’ motivation, but also it increased

4
 students cognitive in a line with the well-planned of the gamification (Sanmugam,
Abdullah & Zaid, 2015).

In the midst of the positive reviews about Gamification, the researcher wants to
investigate further in particular the effect of using Gamification towards the
motivation of the eleventh grade students in SMA N 4 Singaraja.

B. Statement of the Problems

Based on the background of the study, the statement of the problem in this
research can be formulated as follows.

1. Is there any significant effect of Gamified based LMS towards the engagement
of the eleventh grade students in SMA N 4 Singaraja?
2. What types of engagement do eleventh grade students of SMA N 4 Singaraja
have in learning English through Gamified based LMS?
3. What are the reasons behind the engagement level of the eleventh grade students
in SMA N 4 Singaraja as the effect of Gamified based LMS?
C. Objective of the Study
The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of Gamified based LMS
towards the motivation of the eleventh grade students in SMA N 4 Singaraja, to
find out the types of students engagement in learning English and the reasons
behind the engagement level of the students as the effect of Gamified based LMS.
D. Significance of the Study
This study is expected to give theoretical and practical significance which is
described as follow:
1. Theoretical Significance
The used of Gamification to teach English for Senior High School students is
still in the early age. There are only few studies about this topic, especially in
Singaraja. Therefore this study will enrich the empirical resources related to the
topic area as well as supporting the theories presented in teaching English for
young learners.
2. Practical Significance
a. For English teacher

5
 The result of this study was useful for the English Language Teacher as
the consideration to improve their teaching strategy in order to develop
students’ motivation in learning English.
b. For students
Through the developed Gamification, the atmosphere of learning process at
home will be fun and interesting. That atmosphere will motivate students to
keep improve their English skill.
c. For school
This study will give more references about teaching strategy to teach
English for its students in which the teaching and learning atmosphere will
be more effective.
d. For researcher
For researcher, this study will give the researcher opportunity to test and
identify the effect of Gamification on students’ motivation in learning
English.
e. For other researcher
For the other researcher who wants to conduct a research in the same
field, this study can give related information about Gamification, how to
implement gamification by using LMS and the effect of it that can be used
as a guidance and reference for related research.
E. Definition of Key Terms
In order to provide a clear insight and avoid misunderstanding about what this
study was concerned with, some conceptual and operational key terms are defined
as follows:
1. Gamification
1.1 Conceptual Definition
Marczewski (2013) referred gamification as the use of game metaphors,
game elements and ideas in a context different from that of the games in order to
increase motivation and commitment, and to influence user behavior. Attali &
Arieli-Attali (2015) define gamification in education as the game elements (e.g.
points, leader boards, and badges) that used in non-game learning contexts to
increase students’ motivation and engagement. Gamification often refers

6
 specifically to the use of game elements in a non-game learning context that use
to influence the user behavior.

1.2 Operational Definition

Gamification is a teaching strategy involving instruction of learning activity

through online learning setting to treat the eleventh grade students of SMA N 4
Singaraja for learning English. The students who are taught by Gamification
strategy are classified into experimental group.

2. LMS
2.1 Conceptual Definition
According to Adzharuddin (2013), Learning Management System (LMS) is
a software application or Web-based technology used to plan, implement, and
assess a specific learning process that enable the teacher to held a class beside
the face to face learning. (Barata et al., 2014)

2.2 Operational Definition

LMS in this study is a platform that used by the teacher to do the
Gamification for the eleventh grade students in SMA N 4 Singaraja

3. Students Engagement
3.1 Conceptual Definition
According to Shernoff (2013), engagement is a complex construct,
encompassing both observable (attending class) and unobservable
psychological events (investment), a persistent quality of interaction and
positive emotions (enjoyment). Therefore, students’ engagement can be
described as the desire or want that activates the students to do a task or
attend the class with direct goal-oriented behavior and enjoyment.
3.2 Operational Definition
Engagement in this study is a process where we interpret someone’s
statement or infer someone’s behavior that shows willingness to do something,
particularly to learn something and reach success in learning a language.

7
F. Review of Related Literature
1. Theoretical Review
1.1 Gamification
Gamification is the use of game metaphors, game elements and ideas in a
context different from that of the games in order to increase motivation and
commitment, and to influence user behavior (Sandusky, 2014). In the
ndeducation, gamification means that game elements, game thinking ad game
designs are used in non-game learning contexts to increase students’ motivation
and engagement (Villagrasa, Fonseca, Redondo, & Duran, 2014; Attali &
Arieli-Attali, 2015; Lister, M., 2015). They believe that gamification isn’t just
about playing games, but it’s also about making sure that the students are
motivated to complete the tasks. Students need the feeling of accomplishment
and success of striving against a challenge.

1.1.1 Game Elements

Cheong (2014) states that one objective of gamifying learning is to

stimulate the same motivation and engagement that gamers have towards
games in learners toward education. He believes that choosing the best
elements of games in gamification is an important factor that can help to
encourage students motivation and engagement. He defines the game
elements into five aspects as follow.

1. Point System
The point system was described to students simply as the
accumulation of points for things done in a game. Students most will
use the points as competitive aspect. Games without score it means
that there is no competition and it will be bored them. Therefore,
point system is believed always good keep track of performance,
keep track of progress and show the knowledge that they have
mastered from the game.

2. Leader Boards
The leader board was described as the ranking of players in the
game. A leader board builds upon the point system, and, naturally,

8
 the students’ comments reflected that. In regard to the leader board,
participants commented on competition, strive to be the best and see
how good they are compared to others. However, other students who
did not perform well may not enjoy such game elements, performing
individuals wouldn’t really like it, although, the leader board could
better motivate those individuals.

3. Player Profile
The description of the player profile provided to students also
included the tracking of playing statistics. More students stated they
would find it useful as feedback for their own benefit and keep the
track. Besides, the use of avatars as the player profile is also good to
engage the students because it could be used for social display and
recognition and each student has their profile to show
others/teachers.

4. Progress Bars
Progress bars were described as the use of graphics to indicate levels
of completion. They relate to the extent of work completed (or to be
completed) to accomplish a task. Students will be more engaged when
they see their progress in graphics rather than a text. It is because the
visual aids motivates the user and makes it more interesting.

5. Achievement Badges
Achievement badges were describe as badges awarded as recognition
for accomplishments in a game. Students generally thought badges
would better motivate players. The badges that students get make them
want to keep playing until all are achieved. Another reason is it might be
useful for motivating and give more advanced players things to work at.
1.2 LMS
A learning management system (LMS) is a software application or Web-
based technology used to plan, implement, and assess a specific learning
process (Adzharuddin, 2013). Typically, a learning management system
provides an instructor with a way to create and deliver content, monitor

9
 student participation, and assess student performance (Cavus, N.,
Uzunboylu, H., Ibrahim, D., 2006).
Moreover, the system in LMS will support communications among
teachers, students, parents and administrators; store digital assignments and
assessments so they can be easily used in the classroom when teaching;
enable teachers to set up online groups to share best practices, peer review
and allow students to submit homework online and get feedback from their
teachers (Jenkins, 2014).

Some of the best known commercially available LMS systems are

Blackboard, WebCT, and Desire2Learn. There are also many open-source
and free LMS systems, such as Moodle, Segue, Interact, CourseWork,
Atutor, KEWL and several others (Cavus, N., Uzunboylu, H., Ibrahim, D.,
2006).

1.3 Students’ Engagement

Shernoff (2013) states that engagement is a complex construct,
encompassing both observable (attending class) and unobservable
psychological events (investment), a persistent quality of interaction and
positive emotions (enjoyment). Therefore, students’ engagement can be
described as the desire or want that activates the students to do a task or
attend the class with direct goal-oriented behavior and enjoyment.
Another definition comes from Newmann (1992), he claims student
engagement as the “psychological investment in and effort directed toward
learning, understanding, or mastering the knowledge and skills” (as cited in
Macklem, 2015). The students are considered to be engaged (positively)
when they devote their effort and time for a task, care about the quality of
their work and also commit themselves during the learning process. It
supported by the explanation from Trowler (2010) that defines engagement
as interaction between time, effort, and other relevant resources invested by
both students and teacher that intended to optimize students experience and
enhance their learning outcomes.
According to Macklem (2015), a Massachusetts Licensed Educational
Psychologist, engagement is the combination of the cognitive and emotional

10
involvement, including enjoyment, interest, and focus. He believes that
engagement is not only the interaction and emotions of the students toward
the learning in the classroom environment, but also outside the class. He and
also another researchers define engagement into three dimensions as follow.
a) Behavioral engagement
Frederick (2004) states that behavioral engagement is based on
observational measures of how engrossed students are in school tasks,
and consistency of effort, participation, attendance, or good behavior
typical of good students (as cited in Shernoff, 2013). Students who are
behaviorally engaged would typically comply with behavioral norms,
such as attendance and involvement, and would demonstrate the absence
of disruptive or negative behavior (Fredricks, Blumenfeld and Paris,
2004).
b) Cognitive engagement
Cognitive engagement is usually measured as students’
investment in learning, depth of processing or quality of thinking, and/or
mastering ideas, knowledge, skills and students’ intrinsic motivation to
learn (Blumenfeld 1992). Cognitively engaged students would be
invested in their learning, would seek to go beyond the requirements,
and would relish challenge (Fredricks, Blumenfeld and Paris, 2004).
c) Emotional engagement
Emotional engagement refers to students’ affect and emotions in
schools, including interest, boredom, happiness, sadness, and anxiety
(Finn 1989). It means that students who engaged emotionally would
experience affective reactions such as interest, enjoyment, or a sense of
belonging (Fredricks, Blumenfeld and Paris, 2004).
Based on Hendron (2014), one of the best-known names in the field of
student engagement is Phillip Schlechty in 2011. Schlechty give his effort to
help the teachers and other educators in assessing the presence or absence of
engagement and to develop a classroom or school profile to guide action.
Therefore he developed distinctions of five levels of student engagement

11
with its indicators and characteristics. The levels of student engagement are
explained as follow.
a. Engagement Indicators
The student is attentive to the task because he or she finds personal
meaning and value in the task. The student will not compromise personal
standards for completion of the task even when he or she experiences
difficulty. Moreover, the student is committed to the work and places moral
value on its completion
b. Strategic Compliance Indicators
The student is attentive to the task because he or she perceives that the
receipt of some desired extrinsic reward is conditionally available to those
who pay attention to the task and do what is required of them. The student
persists with the task, willing to accept the reward and abandon the task
even though he or she may not be personally satisfied that the work done is
of the quality that he or she could produce. Mostly, the student also
allocates only as much time, energy, and resources as are required to get the
reward offered or desired.
c. Ritual Compliance Indicators
The student pays minimal attention to the work, is easily distracted, and
is constantly seeking alternative activity to pursue. The student is easily
discouraged from completing the task and regularly tries to avoid the task or
get the requirements of the work waived or compromised. The student does
only those things that must be done and does little or nothing outside the
context.
d. Retreatism Indicators
In this level, the student does not attend to the work, but does not engage
in activity that distracts others. Indeed, the student often employs strategies
to conceal his or her lack of involvement—for example, sleeping with eyes
wide open and smiling from time to time. The students’ persistence is totally
lacking because they do not do the work. When they forced through direct
supervision to do the task, either engages in ritual behavior or rebellion.

e. Rebellion Indicators
The student in this level will overtly refuses to comply with the
requirements of the task. This refusal may involve cheating, refusing to do
the work, or even doing other work in place of that which is expected.

12
 Unlike the retreaters, students who rebel are likely to be active in their
rejection of the task, up to and including efforts to sabotage the work, cheat,
and build negative coalitions of other students around the work and the
rejection of the values the work suggests.

1.4 Key Attributes of Engagement

Byl & Hooper (2013) create key attributes of engagement consisted of
factors contributing to successful student engagement aligned with gamified
learning environment. They try to construct this attributes in order to help the
teacher in designing the best gamified learning that can engaged the students to
in the learning. These attributes are prolific and common in key literature across
both domains, and taken from Lepper & Malone (1987), Csikszentmihalyi
(1990), Jones et.al (1994), Schlechty (1997), and Furlong & Christenson (2008).
The key attributes of engagement in a gamified learning environment will
explain in a table as follow.

Education Games

Students are more engaged FOCUSED Engagement only occurs

when having to work on GOALS where there is a connection
specific learning task. to the player’s own values
and goals.
The most effective learning is CHALLENGING Optimal engagement comes
achieved by giving students TASK from a challenge that adapts
tasks they can only achieve to a player’s ability not
with the instructors guidance being too difficult or too
hard.
Educators can engage student CLEAR Clear instructions must be
by clearly communicating INSTRUCTOR provided and accessible
success criteria and depicting throughout the game.
success as a realistic objective.
Engagement is mediated by RAPID Immediate feedback is
rapid compelling action and FEEDBACK critical in games to maintain
feedback engagement.
To succeed, students need to AFFIRMATION Visual feedback on

13
 know what good performance OF performance is critical in
is, how their performance rates PERFORMANCE maintaining player
with respect to good engagement with the game.
performance and how to
improve
Engagement is reliant on a SOCIAL Engaged players experience
student’s sense of belonging NETWORKING optimal enjoyment more
and connection with parents, frequently and value the
teachers and peers importance of social
interactions
The more attempts and failures SEFETY FROM Games provide players with
there are, the more a student FAILURE a safe environment in which
achieves mastery to make mistakes and
practice skills without real-
world repercussions.
Learners with intrinsic CURIOSITY Mystery and curiosity is
motivation exhibiting epistemic AND NOVELTY closely related to other
curiosity dimensions in designing a
game for engagement
Engagement is achieved by FANTASY Engaging games can
presenting material to students stimulate intrinsic curiosity
in an familiar/imaginary because of challenge and
context or an attractive/fantasy game fantasy.
context.

2. Empirical Review

There were some researchers that have been conducted a similar study before.
One of them was Pesare, Roselli, Corriero, & Rossano (2016). They did a research
entitled “Game-based learning and Gamification to promote engagement and
motivation in medical learning contexts”. This study aimed at finding the effect of
using gamification to sustain student’s engagement and motivation in learning
process in medical context. The participants of the study were the students at the

14
Departments of Nephrology and Cardiology at the General Hospital in Bari and
involved only professional figures: 7 users in the Nephrology Department (3
specialist physicians, 1 specialist and trainer, 3 nurses); and 6 users in the
Cardiology Department (2 specialist physicians, 1 specialist and trainer 3 Nurses).
They used questionnaire with 20 questions as their instrument to measure the level
of student’s engagement and motivation. The results of this study shown that the
interest and motivation level of the students in learning was increased. It also gave
positive effects on the acquisition of their knowledge. This study confirms that the
use of game based learning could be promising tool to increase student’s
engagement and motivation.

In England, there were McGrath & Bayerlein who have also conducted a
similar research in 2013 entitled “Engaging online students through the gamification
of learning materials: The present and the future”. This study aimed at uncovering
the effectiveness of using game techniques to help stimulate learning and encourage
student engagement. This study was conducted in University of New England
Business School. They implement scenario-based learning and alternate reality
gaming (ARG) techniques. From the study, it resulted that those techniques can
keep students engage, collaborate, participate, and experience new ideas and
technology.

Wilson in 2015 conducted a research entitled “Increasing Student Engagement

through Gamification”. The overall purpose of her study was to create a gamified
French unit that would deeply engage students and could be implemented in an
online, blended, or face-to-face environment. She collaborated using Web 2.0 tools
such as OneNote and Google Sheets, then completed it using 3D GameLab to create
the gamified learning environment (GLE) at the A1 level. The subject of this study
were the distributed learning (DL) students in British Columbia. She used an
informal observation to collect the data by asking peer review from the educators
and students. The finding of this study shown that the GLE can engage learners,
build independence and increase student academic success.

Buckley, Doyle, & Doyle in 2017 did a research entitled “Game On! Students’
Perceptions of Gamified Learning Patrick”. This study aimed at finding out the

15
students’ perception of a gamified learning intervention deployed in a large
undergraduate module and a small postgraduate module. This study was conducted
by doing focus group interview with 2 group of participants, group 1 consisted 13
business undergraduate student and group 2 consisted of 9 postgraduate students.
The instruments that used in this research is interview guides. The results of data
analysis shown that gamified learning interventions suit some students and their
learning styles better than others learning. However, the students did not achieve the
same level of learning. Some of the students also find difficulties and frustrated by
the gamified activity because they considered the stakes to be too high to engage in
game playing.

Another research was done by entitled “Key Attributes of Engagement in a

Gamified Learning Environment” that aim to find out the key attributes of
engagement in a gamified learning, so the teacher can design the gamification that
can engage students even them who wouldn’t otherwise play games. The study was
conducted using survey design consisted of sixteen questions measured on a five-
point Likert scale, where “1” indicated strong agreement with the question, through
to “5” indicating strong disagreement. Questions for determining engagement were
extracted from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). From the
study, they found that engagement was positively correlate with students’ desire for
a playful learning environment and alternative approaches to traditional lectures.

Those are studies which have been done by the other researchers in students’
engagement. Those studies can be used as an orientation to do this study. There
were several contributions that were given by those studies in this study especially
in the way the researcher conducted the research and the finding of those studies.
Although the subjects of those studies are not exactly the same, those researches are
mostly focus on the effect of gamification on student’s engagement which also the
main purpose of this study. So, it can help the researcher to predict the finding of
this study and compare those finding in order to get other factors which may affect
students’ motivation in learning English. The difference between those studies and
this study is in the purpose of the study. In this study, the researcher does not only
want to know the level of student engagement that affected by gamification, but also
to find out the types of students engagement. The results of this study may give a

16
 clear description of students feeling of the implementation of gamification by
transcribing and analyzing the result of the engaged and disengaged students’
interview.

G. Research Hypothesis
To accomplish the purpose of the research about the significance effect on
students’ motivation between those who taught with Gamification and those who
taught with conventional LMS, the researcher purpose an alternative hypothesis
(Ha). The alternative hypothesis is:
There is significant effect of Gamification on Engagement of the eleventh
grade students in SMA N 4 Singaraja in academic year 2017/2018

H. Research Methodology
1. Research design
This research is designed by using mixed method approach. According
to Klette (2012), mixed method is the combination of methods in which the
data obtained are quantitative and qualitative data. In mixed methods research,
researcher use both quantitative and qualitative data to provide the best
understanding of a research problem.
Based on Gorard (2012), quantitative research is the numerical
representation and manipulation of observation to describe and explain the
phenomena that reflected from the observation. Therefore, the quantitative data
in this study is used to find out the levels of students motivation in learning
English after taught by Gamification strategy.
Meanwhile, Sharma (2010) defines that qualitative research as a
description representation of the observation to explain a phenomenon. In this
study, qualitative data use to find out the reasons behind engaged and
disengaged students in learning English that taught by using Gamified based
LMS strategy.
2. Setting
The study will be conducted in SMA N 4 Singaraja, Buleleng district,
Buleleng regency, Bali province.
3. Subject of the Study
The participants of this study are the students in SMA N 4 Singaraja in
odd semester academic year 2017/2018. In gaining the data needed, the eleventh

17
 grade students from 2 different classes (40 students in each class) to be
involved. The researcher selected the eleventh grade students by considering the
results of the preliminary observation and pre-interview. Researcher found that
the tenth grade students still in process adaptation in SMA N 4 Singaraja and the
twelfth grade will face examinations which can affect the data during the
research.
4. Object of the Study
The objects of this study are emphasized on student’s levels of
engagement in learning English after affecting by Gamified based LMS, kinds
of engagement that students have in learning English, and the reasons behind the
engagement level of student in learning English as the effect of Gamified based
LMS.
5. Research Instruments (Instrument validation)
Research instrument is tools which are chosen and used by the researcher in
the process of data collection (Setyosari, 2012). In collecting the data of the
study, the researcher use some instruments as follows.

a. Questionnaires
The questionnaires will be given in order to find the results of the study. The
questionnaires use to obtain the data about students’ level of learning
engagement affected by Gamified based LMS. The participants of the study
respond to questionnaire based on the information provided in the questionnaire.
The items asked in the questionnaire for students’ engagement are adapted from
the Students Engagement Questionnaire (SEQ) based on Schlechty’s Level of
Engagement Theory in 2011. The Schlechty’s factor affecting engagement will
be mixed with the theory from Fredricks, Blumenfeld and Paris (2004) about
three categorize of engagement; behavioral, emotional and cognitive
engagement.

Each statement in the questionnaire provides five scales (likert scale):

strongly agree (5), agree (4), doubt (3), disagree (2) and strongly disagree (1) for
positive statements and strongly agree (1), agree (2), doubt (3), disagree (4) and
strongly disagree (5) for negative statements. The participants need to put
checklist (V) in column as their responses.

18
 b. Interview guide
Interview guide is list of questions which is asked to students about their
reasons behind the level of their engagement in learning English. There are
some questions that will be asked by the researcher to fifteen students in each
class. The students are the combination of students who have engagement,
strategic compliance, ritual compliance, retreatism, and rebellion level of
engagement. The questions also related to the kinds of engagement proposed by
the experts (behavioral, emotional and cognitive engagement). The questions are
designed to direct the students to tell the researcher his/her feeling honestly in
learning English by after being taught by using gamified based LMS.

6. Data analysis method

According to Onwuegbuize and Leech (2006), there are several steps in data
analysis for mixed method approach namely:
a. Data Reduction
The data that gain through interview will be reduced to get the data needed
that can answer research questions. At first, the researcher made written data and
then choose the data needed. The researcher made the data transcription from
the interview and chose which one is the data needed.
b. Data Display
The data from interview will be displayed in the form of written
conservation. Then, it will be analyzed by using the formulas to find percentage
of the students’ motivation level related with the gamification strategy.
c. Data Validation
In order to make the data valid and reliable, the researcher use triangulation,
data validity and data reliability.
1) Triangulation
According to Yeasmin & Rahman (2012), triangulation is the use of
more than one method in gathering the data at different times, situations
and also include more than one person as the subjects of the study. In
this study, the researcher will use interview guide and questionnaire as
the method of data collection.
2) Data Validity
According to Drost (2011), validity is the evidence of whether the
research measures the thing that supposed to be measure or can be said
how truthful the research results are. An instrument has content validity

19
 if measures particular purposes that included the theory used and
appropriate with the theory used (Heffner, 2015). An instrument has
construct validity if all points in the instrument (statements or questions)
built based on the theories used, in which the total of q0uestions or
statements same with total of indicators. (Heffner 2015) Content and
construct validity done through expert judgement. The validit will be
assessed by expert judgement.
Gregory’s Table for Testing Validity
First Examiner
Low Relevance High Relevance
(Rates 1-2) (Rates 3-4)
Second Low Relevance A) B)
Examiner 0 0
(Rates 1-2)
High Relevance C) D)
(Rates 3-4) 0 0

Gregory Formulas for Testing Validity:

D
Content Validity=
A+B+C+D
Column A : disagreement between examiners
Column B and C : different agreement between examiners
Column D : agreement between examiners
3) Data Reliability
Noble and Joanna (2015) state that reliability is the results of the
instruments are consistent overtime and an accurate representation of the
subject in the research. Alpha Cronbach formula used to assess the
reliability of the instruments.

20
 REFERENCES

Adzharuddin, N. (2013). Learning Management System (LMS) among University

Students: Does It Work? International Journal of E-Education, E-Business, E-
Management and E-Learning, 3(3). https://doi.org/10.7763/IJEEEE.2013.V3.233

Barata, G., Lisboa, U. De, Gama, S., Lisboa, U. De, Jorge, J., Lisboa, U. De, & Lisboa,
U. De. (2014). Identifying Student Types in a Gamified Learning Experience,
4(December). https://doi.org/10.4018/ijgbl.2014100102

Buckley, P., Doyle, E., & Doyle, S. (2017). Game On ! Students ’ Perceptions of
Gamified Learning, 20, 1–10.

Byl, P. De, & Hooper, J. (2013). Key Attributes of Engagement in a Gamified Learning
Environment, 221–230.

Cheong, C. (2014). Towards the Gamification of Learning : Investigating Student

Perceptions of Game Elements, 25(3), 233–245.

Macklem, G. L. (2015). Gayle L. Macklem. USA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-

13120-7

McGrath, N., & Bayerlein, L. (2013). Engaging online students through the
gamification of learning materials: The present and the future. In 30 th Ascilite
Conference (pp. 573–577). Retrieved from
http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/sydney13/program/papers/McGrath.pdf

Pesare, E., Roselli, T., Corriero, N., & Rossano, V. (2016). Game-based learning and
Gamification to promote engagement and motivation in medical learning contexts.
In Smart Learning Environments (Vol. 3, p. 5). Smart Learning Environments.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0028-0

21
Sandusky, S. (2014). Gamification in Education. In Asbbs American Society of Business
and Behavioral Sciences (Vol. 21, pp. 32–39). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
10208-5

Shernoff, D. J. (2013). Optimal Learning Environments to Promote Student

Engagement.

Trowler, V. (2010). Student engagement literature review, (November).

Wilson, C. M. (2015). Increasing Student Engagement through Gamification. Retrieved

from http://engagementbygamification.weebly.com/

22