2015
Hamari, Juho
Gamification: Motivations & effects Väitöskirja
Tietojärjestelmätiede, Aalto-yliopisto, 2015, ISBN: 978-952-60-6055-2.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Avainsanat: badges, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, gamification, hedonic information systems, playfulness
@phdthesis{Hamari2015,
title = {Gamification: Motivations & effects},
author = {Juho Hamari},
url = {http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-60-6056-9},
isbn = {978-952-60-6055-2},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
school = {Tietojärjestelmätiede, Aalto-yliopisto},
abstract = {The field of information systems has a sustained tradition of dividing systems into either utilitarian or hedonic systems, with the core idea that some systems are purely utilitarian in nature and some are self-purposeful. However, in recent years, information system design has been increasingly used for motivational purposes, that is, a hedonic or motivational system design is employed as a method for increasing the utility of systems and activities. Simply put, the core idea is that the more enjoyable or motivating a system or activity becomes, it can also become more utilitarian since the user is expected to be more willing to increase the amount and quality of related activities.
The most popular conceptual development in this area has sparked wide-ranging interest towards this phenomenon, and has adopted the name 'GAMIFICATION'. This multi-disciplinary term arises from the general conception that game design, if anything, is an art of hedonic system design, since games are one of the pinnacle forms of self-purposeful systems. In other words, self-purposeful systems such as games are thought to be used for the sole purpose of non-utilitarian enjoyment that is derived from the actual use of the system, rather than from any concrete outcomes of that use. Therefore, the term gamification can be read as 'a process of making systems/activities more enjoyable and motivating, in order to support the utilitarian or otherwise beneficial outcomes of the system, service or activity.
Although the idea of gamification has been enormously popular over the last couple years, there has remained a dearth of conceptually refined understanding of the phenomenon, as well as a gap in the empirical evidence offered to demonstrate its effectiveness. With these paucities in mind, this dissertation aims to address both the conceptual and empirical gap. From the conceptual perspective, this dissertation presents two studies in which gamification is linked to IS/marketing theory. The first study links marketing literature with observations drawn from actual games on how game developers use game mechanics in their services as means of marketing (Study 1 - Game design as marketing: How game mechanics create demand for virtual goods). The second conceptual study forms a definition of gamification, arrived at by triangulating theories taken from game studies, motivational psychology, service marketing and IS/HCI (Defining Gamification - A Service Marketing Perspective). To investigate the empirical gap, this dissertation presents two studies. The first empirical study investigates what (social) benefits and motivations drive the continued use of gamification services (Social motivations to use gamification: an empirical study of gamifying exercise). The second empirical study presents a 1.5 year long field experiment on the effects of gamification on user activity and retention (Transforming Homo Economicus into Homo Ludens: A Field Experiment on Gamification in a Utilitarian Peer-To-Peer Trading Service).},
keywords = {badges, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, gamification, hedonic information systems, playfulness},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
The field of information systems has a sustained tradition of dividing systems into either utilitarian or hedonic systems, with the core idea that some systems are purely utilitarian in nature and some are self-purposeful. However, in recent years, information system design has been increasingly used for motivational purposes, that is, a hedonic or motivational system design is employed as a method for increasing the utility of systems and activities. Simply put, the core idea is that the more enjoyable or motivating a system or activity becomes, it can also become more utilitarian since the user is expected to be more willing to increase the amount and quality of related activities.
The most popular conceptual development in this area has sparked wide-ranging interest towards this phenomenon, and has adopted the name 'GAMIFICATION'. This multi-disciplinary term arises from the general conception that game design, if anything, is an art of hedonic system design, since games are one of the pinnacle forms of self-purposeful systems. In other words, self-purposeful systems such as games are thought to be used for the sole purpose of non-utilitarian enjoyment that is derived from the actual use of the system, rather than from any concrete outcomes of that use. Therefore, the term gamification can be read as 'a process of making systems/activities more enjoyable and motivating, in order to support the utilitarian or otherwise beneficial outcomes of the system, service or activity.
Although the idea of gamification has been enormously popular over the last couple years, there has remained a dearth of conceptually refined understanding of the phenomenon, as well as a gap in the empirical evidence offered to demonstrate its effectiveness. With these paucities in mind, this dissertation aims to address both the conceptual and empirical gap. From the conceptual perspective, this dissertation presents two studies in which gamification is linked to IS/marketing theory. The first study links marketing literature with observations drawn from actual games on how game developers use game mechanics in their services as means of marketing (Study 1 - Game design as marketing: How game mechanics create demand for virtual goods). The second conceptual study forms a definition of gamification, arrived at by triangulating theories taken from game studies, motivational psychology, service marketing and IS/HCI (Defining Gamification - A Service Marketing Perspective). To investigate the empirical gap, this dissertation presents two studies. The first empirical study investigates what (social) benefits and motivations drive the continued use of gamification services (Social motivations to use gamification: an empirical study of gamifying exercise). The second empirical study presents a 1.5 year long field experiment on the effects of gamification on user activity and retention (Transforming Homo Economicus into Homo Ludens: A Field Experiment on Gamification in a Utilitarian Peer-To-Peer Trading Service).
The most popular conceptual development in this area has sparked wide-ranging interest towards this phenomenon, and has adopted the name 'GAMIFICATION'. This multi-disciplinary term arises from the general conception that game design, if anything, is an art of hedonic system design, since games are one of the pinnacle forms of self-purposeful systems. In other words, self-purposeful systems such as games are thought to be used for the sole purpose of non-utilitarian enjoyment that is derived from the actual use of the system, rather than from any concrete outcomes of that use. Therefore, the term gamification can be read as 'a process of making systems/activities more enjoyable and motivating, in order to support the utilitarian or otherwise beneficial outcomes of the system, service or activity.
Although the idea of gamification has been enormously popular over the last couple years, there has remained a dearth of conceptually refined understanding of the phenomenon, as well as a gap in the empirical evidence offered to demonstrate its effectiveness. With these paucities in mind, this dissertation aims to address both the conceptual and empirical gap. From the conceptual perspective, this dissertation presents two studies in which gamification is linked to IS/marketing theory. The first study links marketing literature with observations drawn from actual games on how game developers use game mechanics in their services as means of marketing (Study 1 - Game design as marketing: How game mechanics create demand for virtual goods). The second conceptual study forms a definition of gamification, arrived at by triangulating theories taken from game studies, motivational psychology, service marketing and IS/HCI (Defining Gamification - A Service Marketing Perspective). To investigate the empirical gap, this dissertation presents two studies. The first empirical study investigates what (social) benefits and motivations drive the continued use of gamification services (Social motivations to use gamification: an empirical study of gamifying exercise). The second empirical study presents a 1.5 year long field experiment on the effects of gamification on user activity and retention (Transforming Homo Economicus into Homo Ludens: A Field Experiment on Gamification in a Utilitarian Peer-To-Peer Trading Service).
Stenros, Jaakko
Playfulness, play, and games: A constructionist ludology approaches Väitöskirja
Informaatiotutkimus ja interaktiivinen media, Tampereen yliopisto, 2015, ISBN: 978-951-44-9788-9.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Avainsanat: constructionist ludology, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, game, grief play, playfulness
@phdthesis{Stenros2015,
title = {Playfulness, play, and games: A constructionist ludology approaches},
author = {Jaakko Stenros},
url = {https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-44-9788-9},
isbn = {978-951-44-9788-9},
year = {2015},
date = {2015-01-01},
school = {Informaatiotutkimus ja interaktiivinen media, Tampereen yliopisto},
abstract = {This dissertation presents a framework for understanding playfulness, play, and games. The framework presented is developed for the needs of a constructionist ludology, rooted in realist social constructionism. The work is situated in the field of game studies. The contribution of this work is threefold: firstly, it presents a foundational theoretical framework for understanding and separating playfulness, play, and games. Secondly, contributions to mid-level theory as models for understanding social play are presented. Thirdly, with the help of these tools, more practical insights are examined, in three substudies.
The primary contribution in this dissertation is the presented framework. A very wide spectrum of play is considered, from animal play to human play, and from the play of children to the play of adults. The starting point is very inclusive, considering all activities that are performed for their own sake, regardless of how they are culturally valued. Thus the framework tackles ‘good’ and ‘bad’ play: play that is positive and widely considered as desirable, as well as play that is transgressive or destructive. The framework is also used to understand games, both digital and non-digital, in a larger context of play, and there is even room in the framework for enacting play with a goal-oriented mindset. The framework postulates a boundary between play and non-play, but play is not considered to be exceptional or fundamentally detached from everyday life. The framework is not designer-centric, and can handle games both as artefacts and activities.
In the framework playfulness as a mindset and play as an activity are separated. Through these two are connected, and in practice intertwined, analytically they can be separated. Both are rooted in the biology-based tendencies of humans and other animals. The playfulness of humans and other animals is a realist brute fact, but humans are the subject of the more complicated conceptualisations of play and games as they are aided by the awareness of their own playfulness and affected by social construction.
The framework draws together and builds on earlier research. Much of this earlier work has existed in disconnected pieces. Building bridges between game studies and other fields, as well as positioning the current study of games in relation to other research efforts into games and play during the last century, is an important part of this work. The framework presented is an original synthesis that extends and elaborates earlier attempts. The constructionist ludology framework presented provides a theoretical grounding that delimits playfulness, play, and games without disconnecting them from the world around them. The boundaries surrounding play are also untangled. The secondary contribution of the dissertation is the presentation of more specific models relating to social play. One of these is for the categorisation of game playing based on the number of participants. All game playing is to some degree social, even single-player games. Another model is presented for navigating the juxtaposition of mindset and context. This tool shows the usefulness of separating playfulness as a mindset, and playing as a socially recognised activity.
The tertiary contribution takes the form of substudies, which bring the framework and models to bear on three particular topics. Firstly, an analysis of grief play and trolling shows a side of play that is often seen as negative, or even as not-play. The analysis helps explain the creativity and enjoyment of acts of griefing without profiling the participant. Secondly, the challenges faced by gamification and other serious games are reframed in the analysis as stemming from the confusion between game as a cultural artefact, and playfulness as a mindset that need not be connected to it. Thirdly, the challenge of lacking explicit rules of play – as well as having divergent player expectations regarding how to play a game – are analysed in relation to the pervasive game Conspiracy For Good.},
keywords = {constructionist ludology, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, game, grief play, playfulness},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
This dissertation presents a framework for understanding playfulness, play, and games. The framework presented is developed for the needs of a constructionist ludology, rooted in realist social constructionism. The work is situated in the field of game studies. The contribution of this work is threefold: firstly, it presents a foundational theoretical framework for understanding and separating playfulness, play, and games. Secondly, contributions to mid-level theory as models for understanding social play are presented. Thirdly, with the help of these tools, more practical insights are examined, in three substudies.
The primary contribution in this dissertation is the presented framework. A very wide spectrum of play is considered, from animal play to human play, and from the play of children to the play of adults. The starting point is very inclusive, considering all activities that are performed for their own sake, regardless of how they are culturally valued. Thus the framework tackles ‘good’ and ‘bad’ play: play that is positive and widely considered as desirable, as well as play that is transgressive or destructive. The framework is also used to understand games, both digital and non-digital, in a larger context of play, and there is even room in the framework for enacting play with a goal-oriented mindset. The framework postulates a boundary between play and non-play, but play is not considered to be exceptional or fundamentally detached from everyday life. The framework is not designer-centric, and can handle games both as artefacts and activities.
In the framework playfulness as a mindset and play as an activity are separated. Through these two are connected, and in practice intertwined, analytically they can be separated. Both are rooted in the biology-based tendencies of humans and other animals. The playfulness of humans and other animals is a realist brute fact, but humans are the subject of the more complicated conceptualisations of play and games as they are aided by the awareness of their own playfulness and affected by social construction.
The framework draws together and builds on earlier research. Much of this earlier work has existed in disconnected pieces. Building bridges between game studies and other fields, as well as positioning the current study of games in relation to other research efforts into games and play during the last century, is an important part of this work. The framework presented is an original synthesis that extends and elaborates earlier attempts. The constructionist ludology framework presented provides a theoretical grounding that delimits playfulness, play, and games without disconnecting them from the world around them. The boundaries surrounding play are also untangled. The secondary contribution of the dissertation is the presentation of more specific models relating to social play. One of these is for the categorisation of game playing based on the number of participants. All game playing is to some degree social, even single-player games. Another model is presented for navigating the juxtaposition of mindset and context. This tool shows the usefulness of separating playfulness as a mindset, and playing as a socially recognised activity.
The tertiary contribution takes the form of substudies, which bring the framework and models to bear on three particular topics. Firstly, an analysis of grief play and trolling shows a side of play that is often seen as negative, or even as not-play. The analysis helps explain the creativity and enjoyment of acts of griefing without profiling the participant. Secondly, the challenges faced by gamification and other serious games are reframed in the analysis as stemming from the confusion between game as a cultural artefact, and playfulness as a mindset that need not be connected to it. Thirdly, the challenge of lacking explicit rules of play – as well as having divergent player expectations regarding how to play a game – are analysed in relation to the pervasive game Conspiracy For Good.
The primary contribution in this dissertation is the presented framework. A very wide spectrum of play is considered, from animal play to human play, and from the play of children to the play of adults. The starting point is very inclusive, considering all activities that are performed for their own sake, regardless of how they are culturally valued. Thus the framework tackles ‘good’ and ‘bad’ play: play that is positive and widely considered as desirable, as well as play that is transgressive or destructive. The framework is also used to understand games, both digital and non-digital, in a larger context of play, and there is even room in the framework for enacting play with a goal-oriented mindset. The framework postulates a boundary between play and non-play, but play is not considered to be exceptional or fundamentally detached from everyday life. The framework is not designer-centric, and can handle games both as artefacts and activities.
In the framework playfulness as a mindset and play as an activity are separated. Through these two are connected, and in practice intertwined, analytically they can be separated. Both are rooted in the biology-based tendencies of humans and other animals. The playfulness of humans and other animals is a realist brute fact, but humans are the subject of the more complicated conceptualisations of play and games as they are aided by the awareness of their own playfulness and affected by social construction.
The framework draws together and builds on earlier research. Much of this earlier work has existed in disconnected pieces. Building bridges between game studies and other fields, as well as positioning the current study of games in relation to other research efforts into games and play during the last century, is an important part of this work. The framework presented is an original synthesis that extends and elaborates earlier attempts. The constructionist ludology framework presented provides a theoretical grounding that delimits playfulness, play, and games without disconnecting them from the world around them. The boundaries surrounding play are also untangled. The secondary contribution of the dissertation is the presentation of more specific models relating to social play. One of these is for the categorisation of game playing based on the number of participants. All game playing is to some degree social, even single-player games. Another model is presented for navigating the juxtaposition of mindset and context. This tool shows the usefulness of separating playfulness as a mindset, and playing as a socially recognised activity.
The tertiary contribution takes the form of substudies, which bring the framework and models to bear on three particular topics. Firstly, an analysis of grief play and trolling shows a side of play that is often seen as negative, or even as not-play. The analysis helps explain the creativity and enjoyment of acts of griefing without profiling the participant. Secondly, the challenges faced by gamification and other serious games are reframed in the analysis as stemming from the confusion between game as a cultural artefact, and playfulness as a mindset that need not be connected to it. Thirdly, the challenge of lacking explicit rules of play – as well as having divergent player expectations regarding how to play a game – are analysed in relation to the pervasive game Conspiracy For Good.
2010
Kangas, Marjaana
Kasvatustiede, Lapin yliopisto, 2010, ISBN: :978-952-484-418-5.
Abstract | Links | BibTeX | Avainsanat: creative and playful learning, creativity, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, pedagogical model, playful learning environment, playfulness, technology
@phdthesis{Kangas2010,
title = {The school of the future: Theoretical and pedagogical approaches for creative and playful learning environments},
author = {Marjaana Kangas},
url = {https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi:ula-2011291055},
isbn = {:978-952-484-418-5},
year = {2010},
date = {2010-01-01},
urldate = {2010-01-01},
school = {Kasvatustiede, Lapin yliopisto},
abstract = {This qualitative study investigates how learning and a learning environment can be defined and how the school learning environment should be designed to accommodate the potential of an innovative playful learning environment. Conceptually, the playful learning environment (PLE) refers to an indooroutdoor technology-enriched play and learning environment that has been developed for pre-primary and primary education. The five empirical studies comprising the thesis represent a continuum describing the development of the PLE, its pedagogical foundation, and its evolution. The study draws on two methodologies: grounded theory (GT) and design-based research (DBR). Both provide a researcher with the opportunity to generate theory and develop novel educational practices.
The particular focus of the research is on pre-primary and primary-aged children, their ideas, views, experiences and activity processes in various playful learning environments. The first study provides insights into the central features of the environment and the related learning activities. Among other findings, the research indicates that feelings are an essential part of children’s play and learning activities. The second study analyzes children’s creative collaboration in playful co-design activities and provides tools for defining learning. Here, the research yields insights into narrativity, creativity, and imagination in children’s collaborative activity. The third study illustrates children’s ideas and expectations regarding their ideal school and learning environment. It shows how primary school children’s expectations resonate in many ways with the arguments advanced in the current educational debate on what kinds of learning environments might best support children’s learning and well-being.
The fourth and fifth studies examine experiences of the PLE in authentic curriculum-based play and learning settings. These studies mark the beginning of a series of innovative design experiments. The results of the research indicate that various forms of creative and playful learning in the playground context can serve children’s learning in a multifaceted way. The two studies provide a strong underpinning for further research and design experiments relating to the PLE.
As defined in the thesis, learning is creative and playful learning that comprises mind-on, hands-on and body-on activities. It encompasses two slightly different learning processes: creative learning and playful learning. The former takes place mostly in classrooms, using various technology and media affordances, whereas the latter, as a physical form of learning, typically takes place outdoors, on a technology-enriched playground. The theoretical approaches to creative and playful learning elaborated in the thesis culminate in a pedagogical model for creative and playful learning. The model provides educators with a pedagogical foundation and tools for applying creative and playful learning in innovative environments and for approaching learning in ways that might contribute to the school of the future. The study captures the ideal creative and playful learning environment through a vision of a learning environment that encourages the use of various formal and informal learning places and spaces, novel technologies and technology-enriched learning environments, creativity, playfulness, physicality and children’s overall well-being.},
keywords = {creative and playful learning, creativity, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, pedagogical model, playful learning environment, playfulness, technology},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
This qualitative study investigates how learning and a learning environment can be defined and how the school learning environment should be designed to accommodate the potential of an innovative playful learning environment. Conceptually, the playful learning environment (PLE) refers to an indooroutdoor technology-enriched play and learning environment that has been developed for pre-primary and primary education. The five empirical studies comprising the thesis represent a continuum describing the development of the PLE, its pedagogical foundation, and its evolution. The study draws on two methodologies: grounded theory (GT) and design-based research (DBR). Both provide a researcher with the opportunity to generate theory and develop novel educational practices.
The particular focus of the research is on pre-primary and primary-aged children, their ideas, views, experiences and activity processes in various playful learning environments. The first study provides insights into the central features of the environment and the related learning activities. Among other findings, the research indicates that feelings are an essential part of children’s play and learning activities. The second study analyzes children’s creative collaboration in playful co-design activities and provides tools for defining learning. Here, the research yields insights into narrativity, creativity, and imagination in children’s collaborative activity. The third study illustrates children’s ideas and expectations regarding their ideal school and learning environment. It shows how primary school children’s expectations resonate in many ways with the arguments advanced in the current educational debate on what kinds of learning environments might best support children’s learning and well-being.
The fourth and fifth studies examine experiences of the PLE in authentic curriculum-based play and learning settings. These studies mark the beginning of a series of innovative design experiments. The results of the research indicate that various forms of creative and playful learning in the playground context can serve children’s learning in a multifaceted way. The two studies provide a strong underpinning for further research and design experiments relating to the PLE.
As defined in the thesis, learning is creative and playful learning that comprises mind-on, hands-on and body-on activities. It encompasses two slightly different learning processes: creative learning and playful learning. The former takes place mostly in classrooms, using various technology and media affordances, whereas the latter, as a physical form of learning, typically takes place outdoors, on a technology-enriched playground. The theoretical approaches to creative and playful learning elaborated in the thesis culminate in a pedagogical model for creative and playful learning. The model provides educators with a pedagogical foundation and tools for applying creative and playful learning in innovative environments and for approaching learning in ways that might contribute to the school of the future. The study captures the ideal creative and playful learning environment through a vision of a learning environment that encourages the use of various formal and informal learning places and spaces, novel technologies and technology-enriched learning environments, creativity, playfulness, physicality and children’s overall well-being.
The particular focus of the research is on pre-primary and primary-aged children, their ideas, views, experiences and activity processes in various playful learning environments. The first study provides insights into the central features of the environment and the related learning activities. Among other findings, the research indicates that feelings are an essential part of children’s play and learning activities. The second study analyzes children’s creative collaboration in playful co-design activities and provides tools for defining learning. Here, the research yields insights into narrativity, creativity, and imagination in children’s collaborative activity. The third study illustrates children’s ideas and expectations regarding their ideal school and learning environment. It shows how primary school children’s expectations resonate in many ways with the arguments advanced in the current educational debate on what kinds of learning environments might best support children’s learning and well-being.
The fourth and fifth studies examine experiences of the PLE in authentic curriculum-based play and learning settings. These studies mark the beginning of a series of innovative design experiments. The results of the research indicate that various forms of creative and playful learning in the playground context can serve children’s learning in a multifaceted way. The two studies provide a strong underpinning for further research and design experiments relating to the PLE.
As defined in the thesis, learning is creative and playful learning that comprises mind-on, hands-on and body-on activities. It encompasses two slightly different learning processes: creative learning and playful learning. The former takes place mostly in classrooms, using various technology and media affordances, whereas the latter, as a physical form of learning, typically takes place outdoors, on a technology-enriched playground. The theoretical approaches to creative and playful learning elaborated in the thesis culminate in a pedagogical model for creative and playful learning. The model provides educators with a pedagogical foundation and tools for applying creative and playful learning in innovative environments and for approaching learning in ways that might contribute to the school of the future. The study captures the ideal creative and playful learning environment through a vision of a learning environment that encourages the use of various formal and informal learning places and spaces, novel technologies and technology-enriched learning environments, creativity, playfulness, physicality and children’s overall well-being.
2008
Hyvönen, Pirkko
Affordances of playful learning environment for tutoring playing and learning Väitöskirja
Kasvatustiede, Lapin yliopisto, 2008, ISBN: 978-952-484-262-4.
Abstract | BibTeX | Avainsanat: affordance, curriculum, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, grounded theory, pedagogical model, playful learning environment, playfulness, pre-primary and basic education
@phdthesis{Hyvönen2008,
title = {Affordances of playful learning environment for tutoring playing and learning},
author = {Pirkko Hyvönen},
isbn = {978-952-484-262-4},
year = {2008},
date = {2008-01-01},
urldate = {2008-01-01},
school = {Kasvatustiede, Lapin yliopisto},
abstract = {This study investigated the affordances of playful learning environments (PLE) for tutoring, playing and learning in the context of pre-primary and basic education. A PLE is an outdoor construction that provides an additional informal learning environment, with or without technological solutions. Theoretically, this study draws on the sociocultural tradition and ecological psychology, in which the environment is perceived as an intrinsic element of individual psychology. A salient concept in ecological psychology is ‘affordance’, a term coined by James J. Gibson. Affordances are the elements within a given situation that allow a human or animal to perform specific actions. In this study, affordances describe the “action possibilities” (Gibson, 1979) of PLEs that support tutoring, playing and learning. In Study I, a pedagogical model of Tutoring-Playing-Learning was designed, and the quality of play was defined. Study II investigated what children desire from a play environment. It was found that the ideal play world includes physical activity, nature, and animals, with rich and varied emotional components that vary slightly for girls and boys. Both genders seek excitement and amusement in their play experiences. Study III explored teacher’s expectations of PLEs. The results revealed that teachers expect PLEs to offer activities beneficial to understanding and learning that cannot be implemented in classrooms. Study IV explored teacher’s views on play in the school context. Different types of play used in schools were distinguished. The role of teachers in play can be as a leader, allower, or afforder. Study V explored collaborative play (ColPlay) between genders in the school context. The data indicated that the most effective forms of ColPlay are role-play and outdoor play, but gender collaboration needs to be practiced. The overall purpose of this research was to consider the results of the studies from a higher theoretical level, using the concept of affordance. The most significant results were as follows: (1) The use of PLE with the pedagogical models presented in this study encouraged the integration of play and the curriculum with formal and informal learning environments. (2) For children, PLEs afford playful learning through physical activities that provide various emotional experiences in a natural environment. Affordances included an increase in learning outcomes, social interaction, and school enjoyment. Playfulness in learning provides embodiment, emotion, collaboration, action, narration, creativity, insight, authenticity, and concretization. (3) PLEs afford meaningful ways to use technology in teaching and learning. (4) Preventing affordances included teacher’s concerns that they may become overloaded and require additional technical skills. Playful learning environments in which children interact with teachers provide various possibilities for perceiving hidden affordances. Complex environments can provide hidden affordances and thus, learning through play. Teacher training should consider these results when teaching pedagogical methods.},
keywords = {affordance, curriculum, englanninkieliset väitöskirjat, grounded theory, pedagogical model, playful learning environment, playfulness, pre-primary and basic education},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {phdthesis}
}
This study investigated the affordances of playful learning environments (PLE) for tutoring, playing and learning in the context of pre-primary and basic education. A PLE is an outdoor construction that provides an additional informal learning environment, with or without technological solutions. Theoretically, this study draws on the sociocultural tradition and ecological psychology, in which the environment is perceived as an intrinsic element of individual psychology. A salient concept in ecological psychology is ‘affordance’, a term coined by James J. Gibson. Affordances are the elements within a given situation that allow a human or animal to perform specific actions. In this study, affordances describe the “action possibilities” (Gibson, 1979) of PLEs that support tutoring, playing and learning. In Study I, a pedagogical model of Tutoring-Playing-Learning was designed, and the quality of play was defined. Study II investigated what children desire from a play environment. It was found that the ideal play world includes physical activity, nature, and animals, with rich and varied emotional components that vary slightly for girls and boys. Both genders seek excitement and amusement in their play experiences. Study III explored teacher’s expectations of PLEs. The results revealed that teachers expect PLEs to offer activities beneficial to understanding and learning that cannot be implemented in classrooms. Study IV explored teacher’s views on play in the school context. Different types of play used in schools were distinguished. The role of teachers in play can be as a leader, allower, or afforder. Study V explored collaborative play (ColPlay) between genders in the school context. The data indicated that the most effective forms of ColPlay are role-play and outdoor play, but gender collaboration needs to be practiced. The overall purpose of this research was to consider the results of the studies from a higher theoretical level, using the concept of affordance. The most significant results were as follows: (1) The use of PLE with the pedagogical models presented in this study encouraged the integration of play and the curriculum with formal and informal learning environments. (2) For children, PLEs afford playful learning through physical activities that provide various emotional experiences in a natural environment. Affordances included an increase in learning outcomes, social interaction, and school enjoyment. Playfulness in learning provides embodiment, emotion, collaboration, action, narration, creativity, insight, authenticity, and concretization. (3) PLEs afford meaningful ways to use technology in teaching and learning. (4) Preventing affordances included teacher’s concerns that they may become overloaded and require additional technical skills. Playful learning environments in which children interact with teachers provide various possibilities for perceiving hidden affordances. Complex environments can provide hidden affordances and thus, learning through play. Teacher training should consider these results when teaching pedagogical methods.