DEVELOPMENT OF ECOKINGDOM FUN KIT GAMIFICATION MODEL FOR

ECOSYSTEM SUBTOPIC IN FORM TWO SCIENCE SUBJECT

Ayuni Nadrah binti Kamarujaman, Nurul Bahiyah binti Abd Wahid

Abstract

EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model is developed for Ecosystem Subtopics in Form Two Science
Subjects as teaching aids (BBM) in the teaching and facilitation process (PdPc). The level of usability of the
model also has been tested among trainee teachers. This gamification model developed is based on the
ADDIE Model by using materials such as giant snake and ladders board, marker, dice, questions, user
manuals and daily lesson plans (RPH). Validity from experts was obtained before conducting the actual
study. Next, the usability of this model was tested on 50 trainee teachers consisting of AT11 Bachelor of
Educational Biology’s students. Questionnaires were distributed to respondents to get feedback on the level
of usability of teaching aids developed and SPSS 26.0 software was used to analyse the data obtained. For
the face and content validity test are 1 and 0.74 respectively. Then, the reliability test obtained from the
software used is 0.857. The results show that the mean value for the usability level of this gamification model
is 3.5. From this value, it is proven that the EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model, has reached a very
good scale because it is suitable for use by trainee teachers. In conclusion, this gamification model can help
and facilitate trainee teachers to implement teaching and facilitation process (PdPc) either in or outside the
classroom and encourage active learning as well as able to increase students' interest to engage in PdPc
with the game activities. Other than that, students are able to improve their positive interdependence and
social interacts with others.
Keywords: ADDIE Model, usability

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Gamification in Education

Teachers are responsible in learning engagement of individuals, potential development and thinking skills of
students. Active learnings in classrooms is encouraged to grab student attentions and interest so they stay
on focus in class. Nowadays, traditional methods which is teacher centred are no longer capable to help
students in conceptual understanding and creative and critical thinking in learning Science subject (Nadhirah
Baharuddin, 2017). Several methods have been implemented to counter this issue which one of them are
gamification. According to Cain, Anderson and Taylor (2016), gamification in education is basically a
connection of games elements with educational contexts so that students able to learn while playing.
Gamification has been used as teaching aids by teachers in different types of fields. The uses of clear and
suitable teaching aids are one form of aspects that delivers a good impact to ensure an effective and
meaningful learning to be happen. Games evoke a variety of emotions and attract students to engage in the
process of learning learning (Dunleavy, 2013). Other than that, student engagement in games based
learning able to improve individual ability and competency (Eseryel, Law, Ifenthaler, Ge, & Miller, 2014; Wu,
Richards & Saw, 2014). Futhermore, according to Liu, Rosenblum, Horton and Kang (2014), students can
enjoy themselves while learning. Moreover, study shown that games based learning can enhance cognitive
ability of students such as focus, memory capacity and storage mind working, images and spatial
manipulation and speed in decision making and task (Tobias, Fletcher, Bediou, Wind, & Chen, 2014). When
students involved in games while learning, they able to boost their academic performance (Martin & Shen,
2014). Lastly, according to Osipov, Volinsky dan Grishin (2015); Hamari dan Koivistoa (2015), gamification
method is a developing device aids that can motivate student to enrich positive behaviour.
1.2 Misconception in Science subject
According to Aziz Nordin and Ling (2011); Chin (2012), most of students have negative attitudes and some
of them do not interested in Science. Statistic shows that numbers of students taking STEM subjects are
declining from 203,391 to 167,962 in 2012 to 2018.This also proportional to percentage of students taking
STEM subject which is 44% in 2012 compared to 49% in 2018 (Documentation Centre of Education Planning
and Research Division, 2019). Students are less prefer to learn STEM subject. This trend can be seen with
statistical data shown above and has been a concerned matter in educational field. Next, mostly of students
assumed that Science subject is challenging and difficult to master. According to Nazirah Mat Sin, Othman
Talib and Tengku Putri Norishah (2013), student interest in Science subject are declining over the past
years. Students assumed that Science and Mathematics subjects are difficult to learn (Teng, 2002), Rojahan,
2004) and Hanafi, 2005) in (Fatin Aliah Phang, Mohd Salleh Abu, Salmiza Salleh & Mohammad Bilal Ali,
2014). According to Kamisah Osman and Rian Vebrianto (2012), children made up early conception about
phenomenal based on their interaction with nature. According to Shella Margalita, Fida Rachmadiarti and
Muji Sri Prastiwi (2015), there are three subtopic that have the highest misconception in ecosystem subtopic
which are the flow of energy about 36%, followed by niche around 31.89% and lastly food chain about
30.6%. These factors occurred because of students, teachers and learning materials and students unable to
master about concept and have limited knowledge (Shella Margalita, Fida Rachmadiarti and Muji Sri
Prastiwi, 2015). Misconception about theories and concepts in Ecosystem subtopic occur because of
contradiction between student belief and reality (Elif & Muhlis, 2015).

2.0 Research questions

i. How Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model for Ecosystem Subtopic in Form Two Science Subject
as teaching aids can be develop?

ii. What is the level of usability of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model for Ecosystem Subtopic in
Form Two Science Subject?

3.0 Methodology

3.1 Research design

This design for the study is design and development research (DDR). The development of the model has
been adapted from ADDIE model which consist of five stages which are analysis, design, development,
implementation and evaluation (Herout. 2016). Diagram 1 shows the stages involved in the model
development.

Analysis Design Development Implimentation Evaluation

(Adaption from Herout, 2016)

Diagram 1 ADDIE Model

 I. Analysis

In this phase, problem statement has been identified through the journal reading. From the articles,
proven that gamification able to stimulate student interest, positive behaviour and can boost
individual confident abilities. Furthermore, gamification in classroom can let students have fun and
promotes active learning. According to Bruder (2015), Kapp (2012), Zichermann and Cunningham
(2011), gamification in education can encourage a teamwork among students. Social skills, decision
making and problem solving among group members also can be improve through the gamification
activities. Other than that, ecosystem subtopic needs a proper teaching aids to help students
understand better. Early knowledge and student experience should be aligned with scientific views
so that there is no conflict between belief and reality. This is because student belief is constructed
through past experiences and reading from sources that may be contradict from the scientific view.

II. Design

Ladder and snakes gigantic board games has been chosen as a primary model in this gamification
model. This is because this game has simpler components and suitable for targeted student age.
First, researcher made a sketch about desired board games then the sketching was transferred into
Adobe photoshop software to give a proper sketching for the developing model. Next, researcher
listed out the item components needed in the game such as question which is based on ecosystem
subtopics for form two science subject. Next items also include marker, rewards, gigantic dice and
lesson plan.

III. Development

This phase is the most crucial stages in the model development. For the board games, the design
produced contain a few modifications from the previous versions. This is to ensure the board game
designed consist of desired criteria like colour and space by the researcher. This board game has 50
spaces and made up with five colour such as yellow, red, purple, green and blue. This space’s
colour represented questions created. As mentioned, questions are made based on ecosystem
subtopics and applicable in bloom taxonomy level like remembering, comprehension and application.
Next, reward is given to player that able to answer the questions in required period of time (depends
on the questions). Two marks is given to questions in blue and green coloured while three marks is
given questions in yellow and orange coloured. Group that has most collected marks in fastest time
will be announce as winner of the game. User manual and video demonstration for this game are
also provided by the researchers to assure that the respondents will have better understanding and
view on how the game should be delivered. Daily lesson plans using this gamification model was
made by the researcher so that teachers can follow the plans provided so lesser time is allocated on
planning daily lessons. Diagram 2 shows the gigantic snake and ladder board game that has been
developed.
 Diagram 2 Gigantic snake and ladder board game

Diagram 3 shows the user manual provide by the researcher for the snake and ladder board
game.
 Diagram 3 User manual

IV. Implementation

Before testing the gamification model to the responded, but first researcher made sure that the
instruments involved such as gamification model and questionnaire must went through a pilot study.
The validity test was run to two experts to ensure the accuracy of the construct as well as the clarity
of the content (Kline, 2005) in (Abdullah & Wei, 2017). This test was divided into two components
which are face validity and content validity. Both model and questionnaires undergo these two types
of validity. According to Kamaruzaman Moidunny (2009), questionnaires and interview questions
constructed by a researcher should be tested for face validity and content validity. Then, the model
was run for reliability test on 10 respondents. The reliability test was gained for the consistency or
stability of the assessment results (Azizi Ahmad, 2010). The pilot test was run using quantitative
methods as its ability to collect and analys data in numerical and able to explain the phenomena
studied (Mazliana Md Said, Zolkepeli Haron & Shahlan Surat, 2018).

V. Evaluation

In this phase, the Ecokingdom Fun Kit gamification model was run to the trainee teachers which is
the respondents of the study. Data collection process was conducted and followed by data analysis
to obtain findings for the study.

4.0 Results

4.1 Pilot study

For validity, the instruments that was validated by experts are board game and questionnaire. Table 1 shows
the formula used and result for face validity. Table 2 shows the formula and result for content validity.

Table 1.1 Face validity

Expert Calculation Kappa Coefficient Kohen Kappa Mean

 Expert 1 10−5 1 K 1+ K 2
=1
10−5 K
Expert 2 10−5 1
=1 1+ 1
10−5
2

=1
Note: K= expert

Table 1.2 Content validity

Expert Calculation Kappa Coefficient Kohen Kappa

Mean
Expert 1 27−15.5 0.74 K 1+ K 2
=0.74
31−15.5 K
Expert 2 27−15.5 0.74
=0.74
31−15.5 0.74+0.74
2

= 0.74
Note: K= expert

This clearly shown that validity test results for the instruments are 1 and 0.74 respectively. Table 3 shows the
interpretation of Kappa value for validity testing. Then, the values were compared to Kappa value in the
Table 3.

Table 1.3 Kappa value interpretation

Kappa value Interpretation

<0.00 Poor

0.00-0.20 Slight

0.21-0.40 Fair

0.41-0.60 Moderate
 0.61-0.80 Substantial

0.81-1.00 Almost perfect

(Source: Landis dan Kosh,1977)

From the table, it shown that shown, the instruments for the study which are Ecokingdom Fun Kit Model and
questionnaire are suitable for the teaching aids and learning material for the Ecosystem subtopic in form two
Science subject.

For reliability test, a software programmed version 26.0 (SPSS) was used to analyse the collected data.
Diagram 4 is the result obtained for reliability testing conducted for 10 respondents using SPPS.

Cronbach's Alpha N of Items

.857 10

Diagram 4 Reliability statistic

Table 4 shows the interpretation of Alpha Cronbach for reliability statistic. The result obtained is then
compared to the Table 4.

Table 1.4 Alpha Cronbach Interpretation

Alpha Cronbach Reliability
score
0.9-1.0 Very good and effective with a high level of consistency

0.7-0.8 Good and is acceptable

0.6-0.7 Acceptable

<0.6 Item needs to refinement

<0.5 Item needs to be discarded

(Source: Bond dan Fox, 2007)

Based on the reliability results, Cronbach’s value is within the range of very good and has high level of
consistency. Hence, the instrument developed by the researcher is accepted and can be used for the study.

4.2 Respondent’s demography

From the survey conducted, Diagram 4 shows the finding data show mostly of the respondents are from
Year 4, 68% followed by Year 3, 28% and lastly by Year 2 which is 4%. All of the respondents involved from
the survey are from Bachelor of Educational Biology with honours programmed. Diagram 5 shows that most
of the respondents also have experience in conducting teaching and facilitation process (PdPc) in classroom
which is 86% meanwhile 14% of them do not have experience in PdPc.

Study year
Year 2 Year 3 Year 4

4%

28%

68%

Diagram 4 Year

Experience in conducting teaching and facilitation process

in classroom

Yes No

14%

86%
 Diagram 5 Experience in conducting teaching and facilitation process (PdPc) in classroom

4.3 Level of usability of Ecokingdom Fun Kit as teaching aids for Ecosystem subtopic in Form Two
Science Subject

Questionnaire consist of 18 questions that can be divided into two sections which are;
Section A: Respondents profile
Section B: The level of usability of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification for Ecosystem Subtopic in Form Two
Science Subjects
B1: The Characteristics of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model for Ecosystem subtopics in Form Two
Science Subjects
B2: The Appropriateness of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model for Ecosystem Subtopics in Form Two
Science Subjects Used in PdPc Sessions

For the data collected, analysis process was performed using descriptive statistic method by obtain the
mean, percent, frequencies, standard deviation and variance. Likert scale was used in questionnaire to
measure the agreement of respondent on the items. Table 5 shows the Likert scale used in survey in
questionnaire.

Table 1.5 Four Likert scale interpretation

 Scale Interpretation

1 Strongly disagree

2 Disagree

3 Agree

4 Strongly agree

The usability of the model was measured by mean score for 18 items in the survey questionnaire. Table
6 shows the four Likert scale for mean score interpretation. The average mean value is then interpreted
according to the mean score interpretation as below.

Table 1.6 Mean score interpretation

Mean scale Interpretation

1.00-2.00 Low

2.01-3.00 Moderate

3.01-4.00 High

(Source: Ghani Taib,

4.4 Findings

a) The Characteristics of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model for Ecosystem subtopics in Form Two
Science Subjects

The findings of analysis of the characteristic of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model for Ecosystem
subtopics in Form Two Science Subjects is shown in Table 1.7 and Table 1.8.

Table 1.7 Frequency and percentage analysis of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model
Characteristics for Ecosystem subtopics in Form Two Science Subjects
 No Items SD D A SA

1 The language used in the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 18 32

Gamification Model is easy to understand.
36% 64%
2 The text and image sizes in the EcoKingdom 1 25 24
Fun Kit Gamification Model are easy to read.
2% 50% 48%
3 The image and text spacing used in the 28 22
EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model are
56% 44%
appropriate.

4 The instructions given in the EcoKingdom Fun 22 28

Kit Gamification Model are clear.
44% 56%
5 The grammar used in the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 28 22
Gamification Model is good
56% 44%
6 The content of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 1 25 24
Gamification Model is appropriate for KSSM
2% 50% 44%
Form 2.

7 The contents of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 22 28

Gamification Model contain game elements that
44% 56%
are appropriate for students.

8 The contents of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 1 19 30

Gamification Model can help students to active
2% 38% 60%
in the classroom.

9 The Gamification Model EcoKingdom Fun Kit is 1 27 22

easy for teachers to carry around and keep.
2% 54% 44%

Table 1.8 Mean, standard deviation and variance analysis of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification
Model Characteristics for Ecosystem subtopics in Form Two Science Subjects
No Item Mean SD V

1 The language used in the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 3.64 0.485 0.235
Gamification Model is easy to understand.

2 The text and image sizes in the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 3.46 0.542 0.294
Gamification Model are easy to read.

3 The image and text spacing used in the EcoKingdom 3.44 0.501 0.251
Fun Kit Gamification Model are appropriate.

4 The instructions given in the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 3.56 0.501 0.251
Gamification Model are clear.

5 The grammar used in the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 3.44 0.501 0.251
Gamification Model is good
6 The content of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification 3.46 0.542 0.294
Model is appropriate for KSSM Form 2.
7 The contents of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 3.56 0.501 0.251
Gamification Model contain game elements that are
appropriate for students.

8 The contents of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 3.58 0.538 0.289

Gamification Model can help students to active in the
classroom.

9 The Gamification Model EcoKingdom Fun Kit is easy 3.42 0.538 0.389
for teachers to carry around and keep.

Average mean 3.51

Table 1.9 Frequency and percentage analysis of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model
Appropriateness for Ecosystem Subtopics in Form Two Science Subjects Used in Pdpc Sessions

No Items SD D A SA

1 The contents of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 1 4 29 16

Gamification Model correspond for the time
2% 8% 58% 32%
allocation to play in the classroom.
2 The EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model 27 23
can help students to active in the classroom.
54% 46%
3 The EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model is 27 23
easy for teachers to do revision with students
54% 46%
for Subtopic 2.1 Energy Flow in the Ecosystem.

4 The EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model is 2 25 23

suitable for use during PdPc sessions by
4% 50% 46%
teachers in the classroom.

5 The demonstration video provided are easy to 2 19 30

understand on how the EcoKingdom Fun Kit
4% 38% 60%
Gamification Model can be played.

6 The duration of the demonstration video 1 28 21

provided is appropriate on how the
2% 56% 42%
EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model of this
game can be play.

7 The language used in the demonstration video 20 30

is clear for teachers on how the EcoKingdom
40% 60%
Fun Kit Gamification Model is can be play.

8 The subtitles included in the demonstration 23 27

video are clear for teachers on how the
46% 54%
EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model is
play.

9 The colors and animations used in the 18 32

demonstration video of the EcoKingdom Fun
36% 64%
Kit Gamification Model provided are
appropriate.
 Table 1.10 Mean, standard deviation and variance analysis of Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification
Model Appropriateness for Ecosystem subtopics in Form Two Science Subjects Used in Pdpc
Sessions

No Items Mean SD V

1 The contents of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit 3.20 0.670 0.449

Gamification Model correspond for the time
allocation to play in the classroom.

2 The EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model can 3.54 0.503 0.253
help students to active in the classroom.

3 The EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model is 3.46 0.503 0.353

easy for teachers to do revision with students for
Subtopic 2.1 Energy Flow in the Ecosystem.

4 The EcoKingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model is 3.42 0.575 0.330

suitable for use during PdPc sessions by teachers
in the classroom.

5 The demonstration video provided are easy to 3.58 0.538 0.289

understand on how the EcoKingdom Fun Kit
Gamification Model can be played.

6 The duration of the demonstration video provided 3.40 0.535 0.285

is appropriate on how the EcoKingdom Fun Kit
Gamification Model of this game can be play.

7 The language used in the demonstration video is 3.60 0.495 0.245

clear for teachers on how the EcoKingdom Fun
Kit Gamification Model is can be play.

8 The subtitles included in the demonstration video 3.54 0.503 0.253

are clear for teachers on how the EcoKingdom
Fun Kit Gamification Model is play.

9 The colors and animations used in the 3.64 0.485 0.235

demonstration video of the EcoKingdom Fun Kit
Gamification Model provided are appropriate.

Mean average 3.49

5.0 Discussion
Based on Table 1.7 and Table 1.8, the first section which is Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model
Characteristics, it consists of nine items and the mean for all items are 3.51. Majority of the respondents are
strongly agreed and agreed with items. Only a few items have percentage of disagreed which are not more
than 2%. According to Shya (2004), uses of teaching tools is a must because it helps students to sharpen
their senses in achieving an effective learning. Students who read while looking at pictures can remember
better than just reading the text. Then, the uses of teaching aids are important for improve students
understanding and also interest in learning either in electronic and non- electronic form (Mohamed Nor
Azhari Azman, Nur Amierah Azlia, Ramlee Mustapha and Balamuralithara Balakrishnan, 2014). By using
teaching aids, the information can be delivered clearly (Mohamed Nor Azhari Azman et al., 2014). According
to Hughes (2008), teacher is the main source of the knowledge. The teaching aid used must able to fulfil the
syllabus and suitable for the students. Next, student-centered activities such as interactive techniques in
active learning are the main focus in the educational process nowadays (Asmawati Mohamad Ali, Norizal
Abdul Karim@SAB, Anita Mohamed, and Noraihan Ismail, 2018). According to Loula et al. (2014), student-
centered learning is used to describe and understand the teaching and learning process that takes place in
and outside the classroom. This is because student-centered learning require active involvement for the
teaching and learning process to be achieved (Asmita, 2013 & Loula et al., 2014).

Based on Table 1.9 and Table 1.10, the second section which is Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model
Appropriateness, it consists of nine items and the mean for all items are 3.49. Most of the respondent
respondents are strongly agreed and agreed with items. But, there are some of them are disagreed and
strongly disagreed with a few items. The uses of teaching aids in teaching and learning sessions is very
important in ensuring the learning sessions in schools run smoothly and optimize the teaching time in
classroom (Mohamed Nor Azhari Azman et al., 2014). According to Mohd Tafizam Mohd Taib and Ramlee
Mustapha (2017), students will have plenty of time to discuss, think and imagine about the learning at that
time. Study from Muin (2011), said the element of knowledge can be measured through the skills of a
teacher in using various teaching strategies while implementing teaching in the classroom or workshop. So,
teachers play and important role to manage a proper teaching aids in their teaching. This can be proven by
the act of teaching aid medium can stimulate and develop the student knowledge and intelligence mereka
(Mohd Suhaimi Bin Omar, Noor Shah Saad & Mohd. Uzi Dollah, 2017). According to Li, Mai and Tse-Kian
(2014), Teacher who guides the students and allocates more time to carry out learning activities, either in
groups or individually. Competent teachers have knowledge in delivering the content of teaching in the
classroom in an organized and systematic manner (Zaiha Nabila, 2014). Lastly, by video demonstration can
smoothen the teaching and learning process in the classroom ((Jamunarani Muthusamy, 2016).

6.0 Conclusion
From the study, an average mean for all 19 items has a mean of 3.5. From the obtained value, it shown that
the Ecokingdom Fun Kit Gamification Model for Ecosystem subtopics in Form Two Science Subjects has
reached a good usability level as a teaching aid. With the development of this model, it can help and facilitate
trainee teachers in PdPc either inside or outside classroom. Futhermore, by using this gamification kit
students will be more interested and more active to engage in PdPc with the method of learning while
playing. Teachers are also not tied to traditional methods and focused on two-way learning that is between
teachers and students and students with students so that the learning process becomes more meaningful
and effective. Student-centered learning encourages the use of media that can enhance students' thinking.
The use of various PdPc resources is very important to ensure that students enjoy learning. Thus, the game
model produced is not only limited for the teachers during PdPc session only, but also during revision
session. By using teaching aids that is appropriate and interesting during the learning process able to keep
students focus and having fun in classroom.

References
Abdullah, M. F. N. L., & Wei, L. T. (2017). Kesahan dan kebolehpercayaan instrumen penilaian kendiri
pembelajaran geometri tingkatan satu. Malaysian Journal of Learning and Instruction, 14(1), 211–
265.

Ahmad. (2010). Pentaksiran pembelajaran. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka.

Asmawati Mohamad Alia, Norizal Abdul Karim@SAB, Anita Mohamed, Noraihan Ismail. (2018). Aplikasi
Gaya Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Aktif dalam Subjek Kemahiran Dinamika bagi Merealisasikan
Pendidikan Abad ke-21. Jurnal Sains Humanika. 10:3- 2 (2018):47-55.

Asmita, H.D. (2013). Colaborative learning as effective teaching. Global Online Electronic International
Interdisciplinary Research Journal. 2(1), pp. 400-403.

Aziz Nordin & Lin, H. L. (2011). Hubungan Sikap Terhadap Mata Pelajaran Sains Dengan Penguasaan
Konsep Asas Sains Pelajar Tingkatan Dua. Journal of Science & Mathematics Educational, 2, 89-
101.

Bond, T. G., Fox, C. M., & Lacey, H. (2007). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement. In in
the social sciences (2nd.

Bruder, P. (2015). Game on: Gamification in the classroom. The Education Digest, 80(7), 56-60.

Cain, C., Anderson, A., & Taylor, M. E. (2016). CONTENT INDEPENDENT CLASSROOM GAMIFICATION.
The ASEE Computers in Education (CoED) Journal, 7(4), 39.

Chin, H. W. (2012). Kajian tentang teknik-teknik untuk meningkatkan minat dan sikap murid-murid terhadap
mata pelajaran sains di Sekolah Rendah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina Pei Yuan Kampar.

Dunleavy, B. M. (2013). Design principles for augmented reality learning. TechTrends.

Elif, O. Y., & Muhlis, O. (2015). Determination of secondary school students cognitive structure, and
misconception in ecological concepts through word association test. Educational Research and
Reviews, 10(5), 660–674. https://doi.org/10.5897/err2014.2022.

Eseryel, D., Law, V., Ifenthaler, D., Ge, X., & Miller, R. (2014). An investigation of the interrelationships
between motivation, engagement, and complex problem solving in game-based learning.
Educational Technology & Society, 17(1), 42–53.

Ghani Hj Talib, 1996. Pembinaan Instrumen: Ceramah Kursus Penyelidikan Pendidikan, Anjuran Bahagian
Pendidikan Guru, Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 12-13 Ogos 1996.
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? -- A literature A literature review of
empirical studies on gamification. 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.
doi:10.1109/hicss.2014.377.
Hanafi Jasman. (2005). Salah Tanggapan Tentang Konsep Elektrik di Kalangan Pelajar-Pelajar Tingkatan
Enam Rendah di Daerah Kluang, Johor. Tesis Sarjana, UTM.

Herout, L. (2016). Application of Gamification and Game-. Proceedings of EDULEARN16 Conference,

August, 1048–1053. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1513.3680.

Hughes, R. (2008). Sumber Bahan Bantu Mengajar Dalam Kalangan Guru Pendidikan Islam Sekolah
Bestari. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 53(9), 287.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004.

Kamaruzaman Moidunny. 2009. Keberkesanan Program Kelayakan Profesional Kepengetuaan Kebangsaan

(NPQH). Disertasi Doktor Falsafah, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Kapp, K. (2012). Games, gamification, and the quest for learner engagement. T and D, 66(6), 64-68.

Kline, T. (2005). Psychological Testing: A practical approach to design & evaluation. California: Sage
Publication.
Landis, J. & Kosh, G.G. 1977. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics,
33:159-174. 

Liu, M., Rosenblum, J. A., Horton, L., & Kang, J. (2014). Designing science learning with game-based
approaches. Computers in the Schools, 31(1-2), 84–102.
http://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2014.879776.

Loula, A. C., De Castro, L. N., Apolinário, A. L., Da Rocha, P. L. B., Carneiro, M. D. C. L., Reis, V. P. G. S.,
Machado, R. F., Sepulveda, C., & El-Hani, C. N. (2014). omar. International Journal of Computer
Games Technology, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/382396.

Margalita, Shella. "Analisis Miskonsepsi Tertinggi Materi Ekologi Pada Siswa Sekolah Menengah Atas
(SMA)." BioEdu, vol. 4, no. 3, 201.

Martin, M. W., & Shen, Y. (2014). The effects of game design on learning outcomes. Computers in the
Schools, 31(1-2), 23–42. http://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2014.879684.

Mazliana Md Said, Zolkepli Haron, & Shahlan Surat. (2018). Kesahan dan kebolehpercayaan instrumen
literasi pentaskiran bilik darjah melalui Model Pengukuran Rasch. Seminar Antarabangsan Isu-Isu
Pendidikan (ISPEN2018), 24–35.

Mohamed Nor Azhari Azman, Nur Amierah Azlia, Ramlee Mustaphaa, Balamuralithara Balakrishnan dan Nor
Kalsum Mohd Isa. (2014). Penggunaan Alat Bantu Mengajar ke Atas Guru Pelatih Bagi Topik Kerja
Kayu, Paip dan Logam. Jurnal Sains Humanika, 3:1(2014): 77-85.
Muin, F. (2011). Perwujudan Kerperibadian Guru Menuju Guru Yang Profesional. Supremasi, Volume 4 No.
2, 128-135.
Muthusamy, J. (2016). Keberkesanan kaedah demonstrasi video dalam pengajaran dan pembelajaran bagi
modul pendawaian elektrik tiga fasa. Journal of ICT in Education (JICTIE), 3(1), 34-54.

N. Y. Shya. (2004). Penggunaan Alat Bantu Mengajar Di Kalangan Guru-Guru Teknikal Sekolah Menengah
Teknik, Negeri Kedah. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia: Tesis Sarjana Muda.

Nadhirah Baharuddin. (2017). Pembangunan Model Bahan Bantu Mengajar (BBM) dalam Topik
Menganalisis Kelas Makanan bagi Mata Pelajaran Sains Tingkatan 2. Tanjung Malim; Universiti
Pendidikan Sultan Idris.
Omar, M. S., Saad, N. S., & Dollah, M. U. (2017). Penggunaan bahan bantu mengajar guru matematik
sekolah rendah. Jurnal Pendidikan Sains dan Matematik Malaysia (JPSMM UPSI), 7(1), 32-46.

Osipov, I.V., Volinsky, A.A., & Grishin, V.V. (2015). Gamification, virality and retention in educational online
platform. (IJACSA) International Journal of Advanced Computer Sci- ence and Applications, 6(4), 11-
18.

Phang, F. A., Abu, M. S., Salleh, S., & Alia, M. B. (2014). Faktor penyumbang kepada kemerosotan
penyertaan pelajar dalam aliran. Sains Humanika, 2(4), 63–71.
https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2011v36n3.2.

Rian Vebrianto & Kamisah Osman (2012). Keberkesanan Penggunaan Pelbagai Media Pengajaran dalam
Meningkatkan Kemahiran Proses Sains dalam Kalangan Pelajar, Jurnal Pendidikan Malaysia 37(1)
(2012): 1-11.

Rojahan Hj. Abdullah. (2004). Pencapaian dan Kesalahan Konsep dalam Kerja, Tenaga dan Kuasa di
Kalangan Pelajar Tingkatan Lima Aliran Teknikal. Tesis Sarjana, UM.

Sektor Pusat Dokumentsi Bahagian Perancangan dan Penyelidikan Dasar Pendidikan, K. (2019). Jumlah
Pelajar Mengambil Sains,Teknologi, Kejuruteraan dan Matematik (STEM) Semakin Merosot. 02, 1.

Sin, N. M., Talib, O., & Norishah, T. P. (2013). Merging of game principles and learning strategy using apps
for science subjects to enhance student interest and understanding. Jurnal Teknologi(Sciences and
Engineering, 63(2), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v63.1998.

Taib, Mohd Tafizam Mohd, and Ramlee Mustapha. "Kemudahan Prasarana Dalam Pelaksanaan Mata
Pelajaran Teknologi Kejuruteraan, Lukisan Kejuruteraan dan Reka Cipta di Sekolah Menengah
Harian Malaysia." Sains Humanika 9, no. 1-5 (2017).

Teng, S. L. (2002). Konsepsi Alternative dalam Persamaan Linear di Kalangan Pelajar Tingkatan 4. Tesis
Sarjana, USM.

Tobias, S., Fletcher, J. D., Bediou, B., Wind, A. P. & Chen, F. (2014). Multimedia learning with computer
games. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (2nd ed., pp. 762–
784). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zichermann, G., & Cunningham, C. (2011). Gamification by Design: Implementing Game Mechanics in Web
and Mobile Apps. Canada: O’Reilly Media.