The Limits of Gamification

Carina S. González-González* and Vicente Navarro-Adelantado

University of La Laguna, 2020

One of the most well-known studies in the modern study of games is “Homo Ludens:
a study of the play element in culture” (Huizinga, 1938), which is the reference for some
contemporary game studies to propose the “rules of play” (Salen & Zimmerman, 2004).

Another relevant and classic author in game studies, Roger Caillois, considered that
“the play is an activity essentially free and voluntary, rated and defined by space and time,
uncertain in outcome, unproductive, governed by rules, and make-believe instead of real-
life” (Caillois, 1958). Both authors have profoundly influenced the conception of the
structural elements of play in game studies. Lately, these rules and game elements applied
to non-game contexts are defined as “gamification” (Deterding et al., 2011).

Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman argues that play in our playful culture is no longer
limited to childhood but has become a lifelong attitude: "The mark of post-modern
adulthood is the willingness to embrace play wholeheartedly children do" (Raessens, 2014).
We can then say that play has infantilized adults and adulterized childhood. Huizinga's
definition of play has met with three main types of criticism. First, his definition would be
universalist and essentialist in that it aims to cover the immense variety of games and play.
However, this could be countered by understanding the six elements I have distinguished in
Huizinga's definition as a set of criteria that together constitute a family resemblance in
Wittgenstein's sense. An activity belongs to the family of play when it meets at least some
of these characteristics. We believe that play's characteristics - pleasure, uncertainty,
agreement-rules, and unproductiveness - must be given simultaneously to identify an
activity as play (Navarro, 2002).

According to Raessens (2014), Huizinga does not do justice to the game's ambiguity
(Sutton-Smith, 1997), precisely its specific definition. For us, the game's ambiguity is one
more argument to look for a General Game Theory. Thus, we present a gamification system
that makes us understand how games are articulated among themselves, reducing the
game-playing complexity and opening a route in the absent General Game Theory (Fuchs et
al., 2014).
International Journal of Education, Training and Learning
Vol.2, No. 1, pp. 29-34
2018
DOI: 10.33094/6.2017.2018.21.29.34
Masoud Ghaffari

Problem Solving VS. Problem Formulating: Educational Implications of the Trinity

Paradigm of Intelligence

Gardner (1993) emphasizes multiple intelligences including logical-mathematical

intelligence. Ceci (1990) in agreement with Vygotsky and his successors (e.g.,
Bronfenbrenner), believes that one‘s intelligence depends considerably on one‘s particular
lifetime experiences. Jantsch (1989) self-organizing paradigm stresses the
interconnectedness of natural dynamics at all levels of evolving micro and macro systems,
which offers a new sense of meaning. Goody (1995) elaboration on evolving human
intelligence points out that there is a growing view that intelligence evolves as a product of
social interdependence.

Sternberg (1985) triarchic theory explains the relationships among three different
facets of intelligent behavior (i.e., individual‘s mental world, individual‘s experience, and
individual‘s external world). Another theory which can help us further our understanding of
this complex process is autopoiesis. According to autopoiesis, proposed by Maturana (1981)
the notion of cognition is extended to fully cover an organism‘s effective interactions. Acting
is knowing, and knowing is acting (Mingers, 1995).

To explore the source of mathematics, Lakoff and Núñez (2000) examined the
concept through multiple modalities (i.e., history of human evolution, cognitive science,
culture, and neurobiology). They concluded that mathematics arises from our minds and
our everyday experiences in the world. Human evolution and culture characterize the
effectiveness of mathematics in the world, and that effectiveness results from a combination
of mathematical knowledge and connectedness to the world. ―Mathematics is a natural
part of being human‖ (Lakoff and Núñez, 2000).

Overall, there are four stages in problem solving: (a) understanding and
representing the problem, or translating; (b) selecting the solution, or integrating; (c)
executing the plan, or executing; and (d) evaluating the results, or planning /monitoring /
reviewing. A critical element in solving problems in school is accurately representing the
problem. To search for a solution, two general procedures are possible, algorithmic and
heuristic (Woolfolk, 1990; Mayer, 1994).
 Asia Pacific Journal of Educators and Education, Vol. 29, 81–94, 2014

READING COMPREHENSION SKILLS AND PERFORMANCE IN SCIENCE

AMONG HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS IN THE PHILIPPINES
Ombra A. Imam1*, Maripaz Abas Mastura2, Hajri Jamil3 and Zurida Ismail4

Reading ability has always been viewed as critical to academic success (Grabe &
Stoller, 2002) and studies have recognised the importance of reading in academics. Most
teachers agree that good reading skills are crucial for learning science concepts although
science texts are often more difficult for students than other text types. Many school texts
are difficult to understand because they often omit important background information and
fail to make relations among

concepts in the text explicit (VanLehn, 1998). Students may have the ability to read
and know the words, identify and locate information, and recall content, but may be unable
to analyse, summarise, or critique the text when asked to do so. This is experienced from
elementary level until the middle high school, which produces negative impact on science
learning (Carnine & Carnine, 2004).

The lack of comprehension in reading science text frustrates students to learn

secondary science (Cooper, 2004). It is argued that when reading skills are insufficient, a
number of problems occur which lead to frustration in learning (Callahan & Clark, 1988;
Bender et al., 2008). Research has demonstrated the importance of reading skill for both
comprehension (e.g., Voss & Silfies, 1996) and academic achievement (e.g., Alcock et al.,
2000). Thus, research recommends vocabulary development and reading activities to
achieve science goals (Spencer & Guillaume, 2006; Ediger, 2009).

Experts claimed that both science and language arts, particularly reading
comprehension, share cognitive processes, such as predicting, classifying, identifying cause
and effect, sequencing, inferencing and summarising (Kumar & Bristor, 1999). Bowers
(2000) believed that reading skills and science process skills complement each other well.
For this reason, the interconnection of the skills in both subject areas make them natural
partners for integration. Armbruster (1992) observed that similar skills describe an attribute
of good scientists and readers: getting prior knowledge, constructing hypotheses,
establishing plans, assessing understanding, identifying the relative importance of
information, describing patterns, comparing and contrasting, making inferences, drawing
conclusions, generalising, evaluating sources, and so on.