Towards Gamification of Science and Mathematics in Upper Primary Schools in Uganda

Towards Gamification of Science and Mathematics in Upper Primary Schools in Uganda | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Towards Gamification of Science and Mathematics in Upper Primary Schools in Uganda Benjamin Kanagwa, Evelyn Kigozi Kahiigi, Agnes Rwashana Semwanga, and 2 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-3724071/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 8 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The research involved a needs assessment study for the application of gamification technology in teaching and learning of science and mathematics in upper primary (P5, P6 and P7)- typically 10 to 13 year olds. Gamification in education has been praised to create competition, critical thinking and collaborative engagement, which support construction of new knowledge, thus creating a positive learning environment. The research aim was to establish the challenging topics (hard to understand) in Science and Mathematics developing computer based gamification that would be used to support the teaching and learning. Additionally the research was used to identify the ICT training needs of the staff. It was observed that topics that relate to systems such as digestive system, blood circulation system, reproductive system were challenging in science. Challenging topics in mathematics included integers, sets and fractions. Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Introduction The daily use of technology by the current learners has transformed them into digital natives who have grown engaging and playing with online games (Machajewski, 2017). The adoption and use of gamification has created attention among teachers and researchers in terms of using game elements into non-gaming environments such as classrooms and workplaces to make learning more motivating and engaging (Ortiz, et al 2016; Dicheva, et al 2018). Gamification fosters involvement of users especially in the education environment that require teaching and learning activities to be fun and interesting (Kusuma et al, 2018). Indeed, a number of studies provide an indication of the importance of gamification in relation to evaluating its effect on student learning (Welbers et al., 2019; Tsay et al., 2018). From a global perspective, the urgency to advance STEM is evident (Lynch et al., 2018; Hudson et al., 2015). This is so since education systems aim to deliver students with high levels of achievement, mastery and innovation in STEM subjects right from kindergarten to tertiary educational levels. In Uganda, the high dropout rates and poor performance in STEM subjects at primary and secondary school levels can be attributed to lack of access to modern teaching and learning resources, learners' negative attitudes towards mathematics and science, an overwhelming number of learners in a class, lack of ICT pedagogical skills, students attitude, lower confidence beliefs, higher anxiety and lower motivation (Musiimenta et al., 2019; Oonyu, 2019; Mwonge et al., 2018) among others. Ortiz et al., (2016) emphasizes the importance of preparing and equipping learners with STEM in order for them to thrive in the current society related to science and technology innovations. In this context adoption and use of gamification in STEM-related areas could be one of the avenues through which students may be motivated to engage and perform well in STEM subjects. Indeed, Opolot-Okurut (2005) calls for the development and use of flexible software to help both learners and teachers comprehend concepts in a bid to alleviate poor performance in STEM subjects. Whereas benefits of gamification in terms of learner engagement are well documented, technology based gamification requires resources such as computers, and mobile devices as well as some level of skill on the side of the teachers and learners. In this paper, we present results of a needs assessment study in order to analyse and understand how gamification can be applied to Science and Mathematics subjects in upper primary levels in Uganda. This study stems from the fact that Science and Mathematics continue to post low results (Haolader et al., 2017) and the uptake of STEM subjects is still low even at the tertiary education level. For a start, it is envisaged that this study will present key aspects required for effective gamification of Science and Mathematics subjects in upper primary levels in Uganda to promote motivation, engagement and improved performance. This paper aims to Establish the challenges related to teaching and learning Science and Mathematics subjects in upper primary levels in Uganda Examine how Gamification can be applied to support teaching and learning Science and Mathematics subjects in upper primary levels in Uganda Our approach is a combination of survey and focus group meetings with key stakeholders such as teachers and school administrators. Related Work Gamification was first documented in 2008 (Deterding, Sebastian, et al, 2011) and has only gained traction in business with less application in the education sector especially at the primary level. A 2014 systematic literature review indicates that gamification started slightly before 2011, and gained popularity by 3 fold in 2012 and 2013 (Caponetto et al). A review in Molnar (2018) indicates seven objectives of educational games, these include: a) Improving student ability to learn and master concepts; b) increasing the learning process; c) engaging student interest in the learning process and activating interest; d) activating the acquisition of knowledge; e) providing a reward for correct responses and penalties for incorrect responses; f) allowing room socialization and group learning with peers; g) demonstrating benefits in order to motivate students and address learning process problems. These objectives ultimately are geared to provide students with educational experience and gain. In this regard gamification has been adopted and used in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) as an avenue to support student engagement and learning. This is so since STEM subjects are often perceived negatively by students and students feel they are not engaging enough (Molnar, 2018). Increasingly, the uptake of STEM subjects has decreased among students, while the failure rates have increased. Playfoot (2016) affirms that students view STEM subjects as not being for them and also perceive them as being difficult and challenging to achieve higher grades in comparison to humanities or art subjects. A discussion on the steps for gamification approach in education to improve learning engagement is presented by Muhamad et al 2018 where four categories of gaming that include game based learning, gamification, serious games and simulation are identified. Through a systematic literature review, they conclude that gamification can be integrated in all platforms including learning with and without online support. This observation creates an avenue to identify the kind of gamification that can be applied especially in resource-constrained environments. Games have the natural motivating power, and enable exploration of multiple alternatives in the course of play. Just like math and science systems, computer games embed dynamics and mechanics that work together as parts of an interconnected system. Gamification of science and mathematics provides an ideal intersection of games and specialized content for learning. Research Methodology A combination of focus group meetings and qualitative methods using survey tools was adopted in this study to understand the needs and possible applications of gamification in teaching and learning of STEM. The aim of qualitative research is to understand and interpret the meaning of situations from the perspectives of the core stakeholder from their point of view. According to (Corbin & Strauss, 2014), qualitative research is inductive in its approach, and thus generates reasoning from interpretation of the evidence based on existing theoretical background. The key stakeholders were primary school teachers, school owners, education experts and school head teachers. Two perspectives motivated the choice of a survey questionnaire: the need to collect information in a structured format; providing a generalizable perception of findings from the population sample (Fowler, 1988). Design of the questionnaire The questionnaire items were subdivided into sections covering different aspects which included background characteristics such as age, gender, highest education level and field of work. The questionnaire also comprised questions that required respondents state the level of access to social media services which included inquiries on which social media tool they used, how long they use social media and how they engage with social media. The final section of the questionnaire dealt with the effect of social media tax on education, research and retail businesses. The questionnaire was disseminated between June and July 2019 and participation in the survey was voluntary. Questionnaire Pre-testing The research employed an approach that has been used by other researchers to pre-test and pilot survey questionnaires as well as check the interpretation of survey questions (Bowden et al., 2002). Below are the 3 steps that were followed to pre-test the questions in the questionnaire: Step 1: A pre-test of the questionnaire was carried out on 10 randomly selected teachers and 2 school owners to provide feedback relating to the general structure of the questionnaire and the clarity and relevance of the questions. On completion of the pre-test, feedback received from the participants was used to modify the questionnaire. The selected respondents for the pre-test were required to establish the intended meaning of each question by; a) determining whether the respondents interpreted the questions as intended; b) preparing a description of intended meaning for each survey question. This was used to support content validity as well as clarify the aim of asking each question. Step 2: A series of criteria for evaluating the appropriateness of the survey questions were developed after the survey questions were prepared and agreed upon. The criteria facilitated a standard way of deciding which questions to include in the survey. The criteria focused on the style of language, attributed meaning, clarity of the question and consistency of interpretations. Step 3: A team of 4 researchers used the responses from Step 1 and 2 to review the questions for inclusion, revising the question or intended meaning, or dropping questions. The field transcripts and results from each research method were collated and summarized by the authors for each survey question. Reviews of questions were supported by a discussion between the researchers and field assistants. The questions were reviewed and action for inclusion was based on a) acceptance of the original question and meaning; b) acceptance of the original question, with a change to the meaning; c) slightly changing the question but keeping the meaning the same; d) dropping the question; and e) writing a new question and a new intended meaning. Changes to and development of new questions were examined and agreed upon through various translation checks. A final questionnaire was obtained and reviewed by the research team. Sample size determination A random sampling approach was used to select students and staff in higher institutions of learning in three public and one private university. Additionally the same approach was used to identify the retail business owners from Small and Medium Enterprises. A multistage sampling method was used to define a target sample size of 188 students and researchers and 188 retail business managers/owners as guided below. The Cochran formula was used to calculate the sample size since it provides the desired level of precision, desired confidence level and the estimated proportion of the attribute present in the population (Cochran, 1963). Cochran’s formula is considered especially appropriate in situations with large populations (greater than 10,000). The 39 Respondents from 9 schools were selected to provide a mix of rural and urban setting schools. The Respondents were selected using purposive sampling which was the best option since this is a non-probability technique of establishing a sample space which provided a high likelihood of having a population that would provide the desired opinion and experiences needs and possible uses of gamification. All the 39 responses were usable. We carried out 9 focus group meetings with teachers and school administrators. We selected teachers of mathematics and science for the primary school classes. Each focus group meeting was attended by two researchers and between 4 to 5 teachers. The teachers selected were for upper primary (Primary 4 to Primary 7) because this was the main area of focus. We presented a very preliminary screening of literature, that included pointed out current use of no-tech and low-tech gamification that is already in use by teachers. This was followed by an open discussion, in which of the researchers arranged the information presented while the other research focused on follow-up questions and discussion . Findings a) Personal Background and Information 39 respondents involved in the teaching of Science and/ or Mathematics were selected from 9 primary schools (7 Kampala District and 2 Mbarara District). 25.6% of the respondents were aged below 30, 35.9% were aged 30-39, 20.5% were aged 40-49 and 17.90% were aged 50 and above. The majority of the respondents were male (79.5%). Further investigation needs to be done to establish why there are fewer female teachers engaged in the teaching of Science and Mathematics. Regarding the positions of the respondents, there were 3 Deans, 7 Heads of Departments, 13 Class Teachers, 13 teachers and 1 subject consultant all engaged in teaching Science and Mathematics in primary schools. 53.8% of the respondents teach Mathematics, 33.3% teach Science while 12.8% teach both Mathematics and Science. 92.3% of the respondents teach upper primary (primary five to primary seven) while 17.9% teach lower/middle primary (primary one to primary four). Our study analysed the age of the respondents, and the number of hours taught per week as indicated in Figure (a) and Figure(b). We also considered the average number of students per class and how long they had been teaching since they graduated as shown in Figure(c) and Figure (d). b) Teaching of Science and Mathematics in Primary Schools The respondents were asked to state the 5 topics they found most challenging for the learners while teaching Science and Mathematics in upper primary. As seen in Figure 1, body systems are the most challenging. These include digestion, respiration, Excretory, Reproductive, Circulatory, Muscle and Skeletal System, and Nervous system of human being. Measures (Figure 2) are the most challenging in math and these include Distance, Speed, Time, Money, Currency Conversion. c) Experience with the use of ICT Asked to report on the frequency of use of computers at school, 30.8% of the respondents reported that they used computers on most days, 43.6% used them at least once a week, 12.8% used them at least once a month and 12.8% reported not to have used computers at all at school. While 43.6% reported to have access to computers at home, 56.4% did not. When asked the purposes for which the ICTs are used either at school or at home, ICTs were found to be commonly used for finding information and resources on the Internet (66.7%), recording marks (66.7%) and typing examinations (56.4%). Other uses of ICTs were personal use (33.3%), school administration (33.3%), development of teaching resources (28.2%) and other aspects such as the use of PowerPoint in teaching (2.6%) and blended learning (5.1%). When asked how learners use ICT during the lessons, 50% responded that learners did not use ICTs during the lessons. The learners were reported to use ICTs in the classroom in the following ways: searching for information using the Internet (36.1%), solving problems (13.9%), working on projects (11.1%), collaborating between classrooms (5.6%), studying towards ICT exams (5.6%) and using subject specific software (2.8%). When asked what the teachers were able to do using ICTs, they responded as follows: search information on a network (70.3%), login to a computer (54.1%), install a printer (45.9%) and install new software on a computer (24.3%). Only a few of the teachers could convert files to different formats (13.5%), add a shared folder on the network (8.1%), solve technical problems (troubleshooting) 8.1% and use blended learning (2.7%). 2 ( 5.4%) of the respondents were not able to carry out the tasks mentioned above using ICTs. Teachers were asked to comment on the technologies they used for teaching and learning purposes. The most commonly used technologies were reported to be smart phones/tablets (62.9%), projectors (34.3%), desktop computers (34.3%) and laptops (25.7%). Only 1 teacher mentioned the use of television for teaching and learning and 3 teachers reported that they did not use any of the technologies. d) Support given to the teachers for ICT use When asked regarding any ICT training, 50% (18) of the teachers reported to have taken an ICT-related course (basic word-processing, spread sheets, presentations, databases, Internet, etc.) while 50% had not had any formal ICT training. Regarding the hours of ICT training , the majority of the respondents (78.8%) received 0-4 hours of ICT training in the last 12 months, while 12.1% received 5-15 hours and 9.1% received 16-40 hours as shown in Figure 3 below: e) Obstacles to the use of ICT in Teaching and Learning The teachers were asked to list the obstacles they found in the use of teaching and learning in primary schools. Figure 4 provides a summary of the findings, where the major obstacles to the use of ICTs in teaching and learning were reported to be lack of skills for the teachers, insufficient number of computers, laptops, obsolete computers at the schools and inadequate technical support for teachers. f) Uptake of Gamification The teachers were asked on the use of games and gamification in teaching learning. It was noted that all teachers had different forms of gamification elements. Common elements included rewards such as small gifts, awards such as ‘star ratings’, and leader boards for different categories. Gamification elements were used more in lower classes (P1 - P4) compared to upper classes of P5 - P7). Most of these elements were non-computer based. There was consensus among teachers that computer based gamification using games targeting learning content can significantly improve motivation and learning outcomes. Discussion The results indicate that “systems” pause more challenges to teachers and learners. As opposed to isolated parts, a system is a group of things, pieces of equipment, etc that are connected or work together[14]. Systems such as digestive system have specific boundaries, with cause and effect depending on the interconnecting network; forming a complex as a whole. The dependencies among system such as digestion have temporal aspects. For instance, the type of food eaten affects the growth rate. In relation to the classroom setting, temporal aspects are hard to demonstrate to learners in a controlled many. Science concepts such as electricity and magnetism, heat and energy are hard to demonstrate by teachers in most learning environments in developing countries. As one teacher pointed out, learners are told from the early days that electricity and heat are dangerous and must be avoided. As a result science teachers need a safer and convenient way to make such concepts practical. Charts and illustrations are common in lower classrooms as a means of reminding learners. However, these are static and only enable learners to name parts. Therefore any promise for improvement in terms of interactivity was highly appreciated by teachers. Indeed, from the data, the dominant use of ICT in the classroom is searching for better visualizations of systems mainly colored images and videos in some cases. The data suggest that teachers are already adopting the use of ICT in the teaching and learning process. Indeed, teachers are looking for ways to make learning more interesting and practical. 62% use of mobile/tablet shows that teachers are willing to explore new technologies. In most cases teachers own the tablets/phones without facilitation from the school. With 32% of daily usage of computers by teachers, there is ground to spearhead innovative use of ICT in schools. This coupled by the self-interest by teachers, new learning methods such as gamification. Existing ICT skills such as typing, recording scores in excel sheets or customised systems are fundamental in gamification onboarding where teachers who can easily show learners how to manoeuvre the game. Conclusion and Recommendations The analysis confirms that teachers are looking for content and their imagination is limited by the available options. Good grades at the end of the study periods are a core constraint on the final choice of tools to use in classrooms. It is therefore recommended that carefully integration of learning content and exam expectations will enable quick uptake by teachers, learners and other stakeholders such as parents. Whereas teachers already exhibit advancement in the usage of ICT, the existing skill set should be enhanced to allow teachers to create their own customised learning modals using easy to use graphical tools. We recommend that any gamification of science and mathematics should have a great flexibility in terms of personalization to enable teachers to create unique learning experiences in the game environments. Finally, there is consensus by all stakeholders that gamifications has a natural motivating power for learners and there is a need for resources to support appropriate usage in teaching and learning. Declarations Data availability The datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. Competing interests Authors declare that there is no any conflict of interest between them regarding to the publication of this manuscript. Ethical Approval The research described in this manuscript did not require ethical approval as it does not involve human or animal subjects. Therefore, there are no experimental protocols that needed approval by an institutional review board or ethics committee. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study. References Dicheva, D., Dichev, C., Jones, E. J., Clarke, P. J., & Cassel, L. N. (2018). Using gamification strategies to motivate and engage students in computer science courses. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 1071-1071). Haolader, F. A., Hakim, W., Kassim, K., & Mubarak, H. R. (2017). A Comparative Study on the Academic Performance of Students in Bachelor’s Degree of Information Technology Having Arts and Science Background in Uganda. World, 4(2). Iremaut M. and Semwanga. A.R. A Qualitative Model for School Drop Outs in Uganda. Using System Dynamics Modeling African Journal of Computing & ICT. Vol 8. No. 4, December, 2015. ISSN 2006-1781. Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons. Kusuma, G. P., Wigati, E. K., Utomo, Y., & Suryapranata, L. K. P. (2018). Analysis of Gamification Models in Education Using MDA Framework. Procedia Computer Science, 135, 385-392. Lynch, T., Playfoot, J., De Nicola, C., Guarino, G., Di Salvadore, F., & Ghergulescu, I. (2018). Gamification elements in STEM subjects–Lessons learned from NEWTON Project. In Ireland International Conference on Education, IPeTEL workshop, Dublin. Machajewski, S. T. (2017). Application of Gamification in a College STEM Introductory Course: A Case Study. Online Submission. Molnar, A. (2018). The effect of interactive digital storytelling gamification on microbiology classroom interactions. In 2018 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC) (pp. 243-246). IEEE. Mohamad, Siti Nurul Mahfuzah & Salleh, Mohd. (2018). Gamification Approach in Education to Increase Learning Engagement. 4. 10.20469/ijhss.4.10003-1. Musiimenta, A., Tumuhimbise, W., Nankunda, M., Bangumya, E., Atuhaire, J., Mugonza, R., & Mugaba, A. T. (2019). Electronic Learning May Improve the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics and Science in Marginalized Schools in Nakivale Refugee Settlement, Uganda: A Baseline Analysis. Journal of Education and Development, 3(2), 63. Muwonge, C. M., Ssenyonga, J., & Kwarikunda, D. (2018). Cognitive appraisals, achievement emotions, and motivation towards learning mathematics among lower secondary students. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 22(2), 243-253. Mpyangu C. M., Ochen E. A., Onyango E. O. and Lubaale Y. A. M. (2014, Mar). Out of School Children Study In Uganda. Available: http://www.unicef.org/uganda/OUT_OF_SCHOOL_ CHILDREN_STUDY_REPORT__FINAL_REPORT_2014.pdf [Jan. 26, 2016] National Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy (August, 2009) by the Ministry of State for Finance, Planning and Economic Development. Oonyu, J. C. (2019). Regional Differences in Science Attitudes and Career Aspirations of Ugandan Secondary School Students. African Journal of Education and Practice, 4(1), 46-57. Opolot-Okurut, C. (2003). Factors that hinder opportunities to learn Mathematics in primary schools in Uganda. Ortiz Rojas, M. E., Chiluiza, K., & Valcke, M. (2016). Gamification in higher education and stem: A systematic review of literature. In 8th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (EDULEARN) (pp. 6548-6558). Iated-int Assoc Technology Education A& Development. Playfoot, J. (2016). Exploring the Role of Gamification Within Stem Teaching as a Mechanism to Promote Student Engagement, Develop Skills and Ultimately Improve Learning Outcomes for All Types of Students. In EDULEARN16 Proc. (pp. 2140-2147). Second National Development Plan (NDPII) 2015/16 – 2019/20 achieving the Uganda Vision 2040 by National Planning Authority Ssewamala, F. M., Wang, J. S. H., Karimli, L., & Nabunya, P. (2011). Strengthening universal primary education in Uganda: The potential role of an asset-based development policy. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(5), 472-477. Tsay, C. H. H., Kofinas, A., & Luo, J. (2018). Enhancing student learning experience with technology-mediated gamification: An empirical study. Computers & Education, 121, 1-17. UBOS (2017), Uganda Bureau of Statistics, Education: A means for population transformation, Thematic series, based on the Uganda National Population and Housing Census 2014. UNESCO, “Analysis of the world education indicators”. 2005. Available: from United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization online database. [December 5, 2008]. Welbers, K., Konijn, E. A., Burgers, C., de Vaate, A. B., Eden, A., & Brugman, B. C. (2019). Gamification as a tool for engaging student learning: A field experiment with a gamified app. E-Learning and Digital Media, 16(2), 92-109. https://buildmedia.readthedocs.org/media/pdf/kolibri-studio/latest/kolibri-studio.pdf http://blog.uncollege.org/how-gamification-is-revolutionizing-science-education https://haselwoodmath.wordpress.com/grad-school-pages/research-methods-and-design/a-mini-lit-review-and-mini-research-proposal-gamification/ http://npa.go.ug/wp-content/themes/npatheme/documents/vision2040.pdf Hornby, Albert Sydney. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English / [by] A.S. Hornby ; Editor Jonathan Crowther. Oxford, England :Oxford University Press, 1995. Deterding, Sebastian, et al. "From game design elements to gamefulness: defining" gamification"." Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments . 2011. Caponetto, Ilaria, Jeffrey Earp, and Michela Ott. "Gamification and education: A literature review." European Conference on Games Based Learning . Vol. 1. Academic Conferences International Limited, 2014. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Editorial decision: Revision requested 07 Mar, 2024 Reviews received at journal 29 Feb, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 29 Feb, 2024 Reviewers agreed at journal 20 Feb, 2024 Reviewers invited by journal 20 Feb, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 18 Feb, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 08 Feb, 2024 First submitted to journal 08 Dec, 2023 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-3724071","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":271726441,"identity":"6f0b0215-79b5-45ad-afa7-972bf32c58a9","order_by":0,"name":"Benjamin Kanagwa","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Makerere University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Benjamin","middleName":"","lastName":"Kanagwa","suffix":""},{"id":271726442,"identity":"416f5880-1ac3-455c-93aa-985019afa1bb","order_by":1,"name":"Evelyn Kigozi Kahiigi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Makerere University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Evelyn","middleName":"Kigozi","lastName":"Kahiigi","suffix":""},{"id":271726443,"identity":"4a5d2c80-78f8-4a50-8c82-7a30d6ca00cf","order_by":2,"name":"Agnes Rwashana Semwanga","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Makerere University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Agnes","middleName":"Rwashana","lastName":"Semwanga","suffix":""},{"id":271726444,"identity":"501d5439-7cf2-4070-bb37-1015853fc579","order_by":3,"name":"Samuel Siminyu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Makerere University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Samuel","middleName":"","lastName":"Siminyu","suffix":""},{"id":271726445,"identity":"c0527e4f-ffc3-42bf-bba1-543cdd8aa610","order_by":4,"name":"Paul Lubowa","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Makerere University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Paul","middleName":"","lastName":"Lubowa","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2023-12-08 06:59:12","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3724071/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3724071/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":50905737,"identity":"05aeead9-d06e-4466-930e-864c72dafa44","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 10:27:09","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":31940,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMost challenging Science Topic by Score\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3724071/v1/59f3ee10da1ebf3ea4b06eb4.png"},{"id":50905452,"identity":"4d313551-6411-4d30-bf54-5d300fb238b7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 10:19:09","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":30861,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMost challenging Mathematics Topic by Score\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3724071/v1/7264fa48bd36fb2c4f44ec84.png"},{"id":50905455,"identity":"7ac55cf2-dc26-441a-9a54-7c8b9c6827d1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 10:19:09","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":37450,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eSummary of ICT Training Hours for Teachers\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3724071/v1/2bc0abef8e6e498b71806825.png"},{"id":50905457,"identity":"2632e10c-bd86-43be-8d27-132183fe3c90","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 10:19:09","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":124755,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eKey Obstacles to the Use of ICT\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3724071/v1/eea7679ae575ced10a15ff9f.png"},{"id":50905456,"identity":"da814a93-1ce4-4f35-a986-e7937ad73502","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 10:19:09","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":191613,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eUnnumbered image in the Research Methodology section.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"un1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3724071/v1/d4ad60f88a21d354509d2898.png"},{"id":50905870,"identity":"21cc1130-9c70-45fc-a0fe-803aa557deb0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-02-09 10:35:16","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":602873,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-3724071/v1/2426545c-691a-4950-bb31-f5b56c86f8ac.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Towards Gamification of Science and Mathematics in Upper Primary Schools in Uganda","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe daily use of technology by the current learners has transformed them into digital natives who have grown engaging and playing with online games (Machajewski, 2017). The adoption and use of gamification has created attention among teachers and researchers in terms of using game elements into non-gaming environments such as classrooms and workplaces to make learning more motivating and engaging (Ortiz, et al 2016; Dicheva, et al 2018). Gamification fosters involvement of users especially in the education environment that require teaching and learning activities to be fun and interesting (Kusuma et al, 2018). Indeed, a number of studies provide an indication of the importance of gamification in relation to evaluating its effect on student learning (Welbers \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2019; Tsay \u003cem\u003eet al.,\u003c/em\u003e 2018).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom a global perspective, the urgency to advance STEM is evident (Lynch et al., 2018; Hudson et al., 2015). This is so since education systems aim to deliver students with high levels of achievement, mastery and innovation in STEM subjects right from kindergarten to tertiary educational levels. In Uganda, the high dropout rates and poor performance in STEM subjects at primary and secondary school levels can be attributed to lack of access to modern teaching and learning resources, learners' negative attitudes towards mathematics and science, an overwhelming number of learners in a class, lack of ICT pedagogical skills, students attitude, lower confidence beliefs, higher anxiety and lower motivation (Musiimenta et al., 2019; Oonyu, 2019; Mwonge et al., 2018) among others. Ortiz et al., (2016) emphasizes the importance of preparing and equipping learners with STEM in order for them to thrive in the current society related to science and technology innovations. In this context adoption and use of gamification in STEM-related areas could be one of the avenues through which students may be motivated to engage and perform well in STEM subjects. Indeed, Opolot-Okurut (2005) calls for the development and use of flexible software to help both learners and teachers comprehend concepts in a bid to alleviate poor performance in STEM subjects.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhereas benefits of gamification in terms of learner engagement are well documented, technology based gamification requires resources \u0026nbsp;such as computers, and mobile devices as well as some level of skill on the side of the teachers and learners. In this paper, we present results of a needs assessment study in order to analyse and understand how gamification can be applied to Science and Mathematics subjects in upper primary levels in Uganda. This study stems from the fact that Science and Mathematics continue to post low results (Haolader et al., 2017) and the uptake of STEM subjects is still low even at the tertiary education level. For a start, it is envisaged that this study will present key aspects required for effective gamification of Science and Mathematics subjects in upper primary levels in Uganda to promote motivation, engagement and improved performance.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis \u0026nbsp; paper aims to\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col start=\"1\" type=\"1\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eEstablish the challenges related to teaching and learning Science and Mathematics subjects in upper primary levels in Uganda\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eExamine how Gamification can be applied to support teaching and learning Science and Mathematics subjects in upper primary levels in Uganda\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOur approach is a combination of survey and focus group meetings with key stakeholders such as teachers and school administrators.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Related Work","content":"\u003cp\u003eGamification was first documented in 2008 (Deterding, Sebastian, et al, 2011) \u0026nbsp;and has only gained traction \u0026nbsp;in business with less application in the education sector especially at the primary \u0026nbsp;level.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA 2014 systematic literature review indicates that gamification started slightly before 2011, and gained popularity by 3 fold in 2012 and 2013 \u0026nbsp;(Caponetto et al).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA review in Molnar (2018) indicates seven objectives of educational games, these include: a) Improving student ability to learn and master concepts; b) increasing the learning process; c) engaging student interest in the learning process and activating interest; d) activating the acquisition of knowledge; e) providing a reward for correct responses and penalties for incorrect responses; f) allowing room socialization and group learning with peers; g) demonstrating benefits in order to motivate students and address learning process problems. These objectives ultimately are geared to provide students with educational experience and gain. In this regard gamification has been adopted and used in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) as an avenue to support student engagement and learning. This is so since STEM subjects are often perceived negatively by students and students feel they are not engaging enough (Molnar, 2018). Increasingly, the uptake of STEM subjects has decreased among students, while the failure rates have increased. Playfoot (2016) affirms that students view STEM subjects as not being for them and also perceive them as being difficult and challenging to achieve higher grades in comparison to humanities or art subjects.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA discussion on the steps for gamification approach in education to improve learning engagement is presented by Muhamad et al 2018 where \u0026nbsp;four categories of gaming that include game based learning, gamification, serious games and simulation are identified. Through a systematic literature review, they conclude that gamification can be integrated in all platforms including learning with and without online support. This observation creates an avenue to identify the kind of gamification that can be applied especially in resource-constrained environments.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGames have the natural motivating power, and enable exploration of multiple alternatives in the course of play. Just like math and science systems, computer games embed dynamics and mechanics that work together as parts of an interconnected system. Gamification of science and mathematics provides an ideal \u0026nbsp;intersection of games and specialized content for learning.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Research Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eA combination of focus group meetings and\u0026nbsp;qualitative methods using survey tools was adopted in this study to understand the needs and possible applications of gamification in teaching and learning of STEM. The aim of qualitative research is to understand and interpret the meaning of situations from the perspectives of the core stakeholder from their point of view. According to (Corbin \u0026amp; Strauss, 2014), qualitative research is inductive in its approach, and thus generates reasoning from interpretation of the evidence based on existing theoretical background.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe key stakeholders were primary school teachers, school owners, education experts and school head teachers. Two perspectives motivated the choice of a survey questionnaire: the need to collect information in a structured format; providing a generalizable perception of findings from the population sample (Fowler, 1988).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eDesign of the questionnaire\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe questionnaire items were subdivided into sections covering different aspects which included background characteristics such as age, gender, highest education level and field of work. The questionnaire also comprised questions that required respondents state the level of access to social media services which included inquiries on which social media tool they used, how long they use social media and how they engage with social media. The final section of the questionnaire dealt with the effect of social media tax on education, research and retail businesses. The questionnaire was disseminated between June and July 2019 and participation in the survey was voluntary.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eQuestionnaire Pre-testing\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe research employed an approach that has been used by other researchers to pre-test and pilot survey questionnaires as well as check the interpretation of survey questions \u0026nbsp;(Bowden et al., 2002). Below are the 3 steps that were followed to pre-test the questions in the questionnaire:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cul type=\"disc\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStep 1: A pre-test of the questionnaire was carried out on 10 randomly selected \u0026nbsp;teachers and 2 school owners to provide feedback relating to the general structure of the questionnaire and the clarity and relevance of the questions. On completion of the pre-test, feedback received from the participants was used to modify the questionnaire. \u0026nbsp;The selected respondents for the pre-test were required to establish the intended meaning of each question by; a) determining whether the respondents interpreted the questions as intended; b) preparing a description of intended meaning for each survey question. This was used to support content validity as well as clarify the aim of asking each question.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStep 2: A series of criteria for evaluating the appropriateness of the survey questions were developed after the survey questions were prepared and agreed upon. The criteria facilitated a standard way of deciding which questions to include in the survey. The criteria focused on the style of language, attributed meaning, clarity of the question and consistency of interpretations. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003eStep 3: A team of 4 researchers used the responses from Step 1 and 2 to review the questions for inclusion, revising the question or intended meaning, or dropping questions. The field transcripts and results from each research method were collated and summarized by the authors for each survey question. \u0026nbsp;Reviews of questions were supported by a discussion between the researchers and field assistants. The questions were reviewed and action for inclusion was based on a) acceptance of the original question and meaning; b) acceptance of the original question, with a change to the meaning; c) slightly changing the question but keeping the meaning the same; d) dropping the question; and e) writing a new question and a new intended meaning. Changes to and development of new questions were examined and agreed upon through various translation checks. A final questionnaire was obtained and reviewed by the research team.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ul\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSample size determination\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA random sampling approach was used to select students and staff in higher institutions of learning in three public and one private university. Additionally the same approach was used to identify the retail business owners from Small and Medium Enterprises. A multistage sampling method was used to define a target sample size of 188 students and researchers and 188 retail business managers/owners as guided below.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Cochran formula was used to calculate the sample size since it provides the desired level of precision, desired confidence level and the estimated proportion of the attribute present in the population (Cochran, 1963). Cochran\u0026rsquo;s formula is considered especially appropriate in situations with large populations (greater than 10,000).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe 39 Respondents from 9 schools were selected to provide a mix of rural and urban setting schools. The Respondents were selected using purposive sampling which was the best option since this is a non-probability technique of establishing a sample space which provided a high likelihood of having a population that would provide the desired opinion and experiences\u0026nbsp;needs and possible uses of gamification. All the 39 responses were usable.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe carried out 9 focus group meetings with teachers and school administrators. \u0026nbsp;We selected teachers of mathematics and science for the primary school classes. \u0026nbsp;Each focus group meeting was attended by two researchers and between 4 to 5 teachers. \u0026nbsp;The teachers selected were for upper primary (Primary 4 to Primary 7) because this was the main area of focus. We presented a very preliminary screening of literature, that included pointed out current use of no-tech and low-tech gamification that is already in use by teachers. This was followed by an open discussion, in which of the researchers arranged the information presented while the other research focused on follow-up questions and discussion\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFindings\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ea) Personal Background and Information\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e39 respondents involved in the teaching of Science and/ or Mathematics were selected from 9 primary schools \u0026nbsp;(7 Kampala District and 2 Mbarara District). \u0026nbsp;25.6% of the respondents were aged below 30, 35.9% were aged 30-39, 20.5% were aged \u0026nbsp;40-49 and 17.90% were aged 50 and above.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe majority of the respondents were male (79.5%). \u0026nbsp;Further investigation needs to be done to establish why there are fewer female teachers engaged in the teaching of Science and Mathematics. Regarding the positions of the respondents, there were 3 Deans, 7 Heads of Departments, 13 Class Teachers, 13 teachers and 1 subject consultant all engaged in teaching Science and Mathematics in primary schools. 53.8% of the respondents teach Mathematics, 33.3% teach Science while 12.8% teach both Mathematics and Science. \u0026nbsp;92.3% of the respondents teach upper primary (primary five to primary seven) while 17.9% teach lower/middle primary (primary one to primary four). \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOur study analysed the age of the respondents, and the number of hours taught per week as indicated in Figure (a) and Figure(b). We also considered the average number of students per class and how long they had been teaching since they graduated as shown in Figure(c) and Figure (d).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eb) Teaching of Science and Mathematics in Primary Schools\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe respondents were asked to state the 5 topics they found most challenging for the learners while teaching Science and Mathematics in upper primary. \u0026nbsp;As seen in Figure 1, body systems are the most challenging. These include digestion, respiration, Excretory, Reproductive, Circulatory, Muscle and Skeletal System, and Nervous system of human being. Measures (Figure 2) are the most challenging in math and these include Distance, Speed, Time, Money, Currency Conversion.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ec) Experience with the use of ICT\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAsked to report on the frequency of use of computers at school, 30.8% of the respondents reported that they used computers on most days, 43.6% used them at least once a week, 12.8% used them at least once a month and 12.8% reported not to have used computers at all at school. While 43.6% reported to have access to computers at home, 56.4% did not.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen asked the purposes for which the ICTs are used either at school or at home, ICTs were found to be commonly used for finding information and resources on the Internet (66.7%), recording marks (66.7%) and typing examinations (56.4%). \u0026nbsp;Other uses of ICTs were personal use (33.3%), school administration (33.3%), development of teaching resources (28.2%) and other aspects such as the use of PowerPoint in teaching (2.6%) and blended learning (5.1%).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen asked how learners use ICT during the lessons, 50% responded that learners did not use ICTs during the lessons. \u0026nbsp;The learners were reported to use ICTs in the classroom in the following ways: searching for information using the Internet (36.1%), solving problems (13.9%), working on projects (11.1%), collaborating between classrooms (5.6%), studying towards ICT exams (5.6%) and using subject specific software (2.8%).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen asked what the teachers were able to do using ICTs, they responded as follows: search information on a network (70.3%), login to a computer (54.1%), install a printer (45.9%) and install new software on a computer (24.3%). Only a few of the teachers could convert files to different formats (13.5%), add a shared folder on the network (8.1%), solve technical problems (troubleshooting) 8.1% and use blended learning (2.7%). \u0026nbsp;2 ( 5.4%) of the respondents were not able to carry out the tasks mentioned above using ICTs.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTeachers were asked to comment on the technologies they used for \u0026nbsp;teaching and learning purposes. The most commonly used technologies were reported to be smart phones/tablets (62.9%), projectors (34.3%), desktop computers (34.3%) and laptops (25.7%). \u0026nbsp;Only 1 teacher mentioned the use of television for teaching and learning and 3 teachers reported that they did not use any of the technologies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ed) Support given to the teachers for ICT use\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhen asked regarding any ICT training, 50% (18) of the teachers reported to have taken an ICT-related course (basic word-processing, spread sheets, presentations, databases, Internet, etc.) while 50% had not had any formal ICT training.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegarding the hours of ICT training , the majority of the respondents \u0026nbsp;(78.8%) received 0-4 hours of ICT training in the last 12 months, while 12.1% received 5-15 hours and 9.1% received 16-40 hours as shown in Figure 3 below:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ee) Obstacles to the use of ICT in Teaching and Learning\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe teachers were asked to list the obstacles they found in the use of teaching and learning in primary schools. \u0026nbsp;Figure 4 provides a summary of the findings, where the major obstacles to the use of ICTs in teaching and learning were reported to be lack of skills for the teachers, insufficient number of computers, laptops, obsolete computers at the schools and inadequate technical support for teachers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ef) Uptake of Gamification\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe teachers were asked on the use of games and gamification in teaching learning. It was noted that all teachers had different forms of gamification elements. Common elements included rewards such as small gifts, awards such as \u0026lsquo;star ratings\u0026rsquo;, and leader boards for different categories. Gamification elements were used more in lower classes (P1 - P4) compared to upper classes of P5 - P7). \u0026nbsp;Most of these elements were non-computer based. There was consensus among teachers that computer based gamification using games targeting learning content can significantly improve motivation and learning outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results indicate that “systems” pause more challenges to teachers and learners. As opposed to isolated parts, a system is \u0026nbsp; a group of things, pieces of equipment, etc that are connected or work together[14]. \u0026nbsp;Systems such as digestive system have specific boundaries, with cause and effect depending on the interconnecting network; forming a complex as a whole. \u0026nbsp;The dependencies among system such as digestion have temporal aspects. For instance, the type of food eaten affects the growth rate. In relation to the classroom setting, temporal aspects are hard to demonstrate to learners in a controlled many.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eScience concepts such as electricity and magnetism, heat and energy are hard to demonstrate by teachers in most learning environments in developing countries. As one teacher pointed out, learners are told from the early days that electricity and heat are dangerous and must be avoided. As a result science teachers need a safer and convenient way to make such concepts practical. Charts and illustrations are common in lower classrooms as a means of reminding learners. However, these are static and only enable learners to name parts. \u0026nbsp;Therefore any promise for improvement in terms of interactivity was highly appreciated by teachers. Indeed, from the data, the dominant use of ICT in the classroom is searching for better visualizations of systems mainly colored images and videos in some cases.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data suggest that teachers are already adopting the use of ICT in the teaching and learning process. Indeed, teachers are looking for ways to make learning more interesting and practical. 62% use of mobile/tablet shows that teachers are willing to explore new technologies. In most cases teachers own the tablets/phones without facilitation from the school.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWith 32% of daily usage of computers by teachers, there is ground to spearhead innovative use of ICT in schools. This coupled by the self-interest by teachers, new learning methods such as gamification. Existing ICT skills such as typing, recording scores in excel sheets or customised systems are fundamental in gamification onboarding where \u0026nbsp; teachers who can easily show learners how to manoeuvre the game.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Conclusion and Recommendations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe analysis confirms that teachers are looking for content and their imagination is limited by the available options. \u0026nbsp;Good grades at the end of the study periods are a core constraint on the final choice of tools to use in classrooms. It is therefore recommended that carefully integration of learning content and exam expectations will enable quick uptake by teachers, learners and other stakeholders such as parents.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWhereas teachers already exhibit advancement in the usage of ICT, the existing skill set should be enhanced to allow teachers to create their own customised learning modals using easy to use graphical tools. We recommend that any gamification of science and mathematics should have a great flexibility in terms of personalization to enable teachers to create unique learning experiences in the game environments. \u0026nbsp;Finally, there is consensus by all stakeholders that gamifications has a natural motivating power for learners and there is a need for resources to support appropriate usage in teaching and learning.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData availability\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets used and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCompeting interests\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eAuthors declare that there is no any conflict of interest between them regarding to the publication of this manuscript. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthical Approval\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003eThe research described in this manuscript did not require ethical approval as it does not involve human or animal subjects. Therefore, there are no experimental protocols that needed approval by an institutional review board or ethics committee. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to their involvement in the study.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDicheva, D., Dichev, C., Jones, E. J., Clarke, P. J., \u0026amp; Cassel, L. N. (2018). Using gamification strategies to motivate and engage students in computer science courses. In Proceedings of the 49th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 1071-1071).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaolader, F. A., Hakim, W., Kassim, K., \u0026amp; Mubarak, H. R. (2017). A Comparative Study on the Academic Performance of Students in Bachelor\u0026rsquo;s Degree of Information Technology Having Arts and Science Background in Uganda. World, 4(2).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIremaut M. and Semwanga. A.R. A Qualitative Model for School Drop Outs in Uganda. Using System Dynamics Modeling African Journal of Computing \u0026amp; ICT. Vol 8. No. 4, December, 2015. ISSN 2006-1781.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley \u0026amp; Sons.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKusuma, G. P., Wigati, E. K., Utomo, Y., \u0026amp; Suryapranata, L. K. P. (2018). Analysis of Gamification Models in Education Using MDA Framework. Procedia Computer Science, 135, 385-392.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLynch, T., Playfoot, J., De Nicola, C., Guarino, G., Di Salvadore, F., \u0026amp; Ghergulescu, I. (2018). Gamification elements in STEM subjects\u0026ndash;Lessons learned from NEWTON Project. In Ireland International Conference on Education, IPeTEL workshop, Dublin.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMachajewski, S. T. (2017). Application of Gamification in a College STEM Introductory Course: A Case Study. Online Submission.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMolnar, A. (2018). The effect of interactive digital storytelling gamification on microbiology classroom interactions. In 2018 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC) (pp. 243-246). IEEE.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMohamad, Siti Nurul Mahfuzah \u0026amp; Salleh, Mohd. (2018). Gamification Approach in Education to Increase Learning Engagement. 4. 10.20469/ijhss.4.10003-1.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMusiimenta, A., Tumuhimbise, W., Nankunda, M., Bangumya, E., Atuhaire, J., Mugonza, R., \u0026amp; Mugaba, A. T. (2019). Electronic Learning May Improve the Teaching and Learning of Mathematics and Science in Marginalized Schools in Nakivale Refugee Settlement, Uganda: A Baseline Analysis. Journal of Education and Development, 3(2), 63.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMuwonge, C. M., Ssenyonga, J., \u0026amp; Kwarikunda, D. (2018). Cognitive appraisals, achievement emotions, and motivation towards learning mathematics among lower secondary students. African Journal of Research in Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 22(2), 243-253.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMpyangu C. M., Ochen E. A., Onyango E. O. and Lubaale Y. A. M. (2014, Mar). Out of School Children Study In Uganda. Available: http://www.unicef.org/uganda/OUT_OF_SCHOOL_ CHILDREN_STUDY_REPORT__FINAL_REPORT_2014.pdf [Jan. 26, 2016]\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNational Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) Policy (August, 2009) by the Ministry of State for Finance, Planning and Economic Development.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOonyu, J. C. (2019). Regional Differences in Science Attitudes and Career Aspirations of Ugandan Secondary School Students. African Journal of Education and Practice, 4(1), 46-57.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOpolot-Okurut, C. (2003). Factors that hinder opportunities to learn Mathematics in primary schools in Uganda.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOrtiz Rojas, M. E., Chiluiza, K., \u0026amp; Valcke, M. (2016). Gamification in higher education and stem: A systematic review of literature. In 8th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (EDULEARN) (pp. 6548-6558). Iated-int Assoc Technology Education A\u0026amp; Development.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePlayfoot, J. (2016). Exploring the Role of Gamification Within Stem Teaching as a Mechanism to Promote Student Engagement, Develop Skills and Ultimately Improve Learning Outcomes for All Types of Students. In EDULEARN16 Proc. (pp. 2140-2147).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSecond National Development Plan (NDPII) 2015/16 \u0026ndash; 2019/20 achieving the Uganda Vision 2040 by National Planning Authority \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSsewamala, F. M., Wang, J. S. H., Karimli, L., \u0026amp; Nabunya, P. (2011). Strengthening universal primary education in Uganda: The potential role of an asset-based development policy. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(5), 472-477.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTsay, C. H. H., Kofinas, A., \u0026amp; Luo, J. (2018). Enhancing student learning experience with technology-mediated gamification: An empirical study. Computers \u0026amp; Education, 121, 1-17.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUBOS (2017), Uganda Bureau of Statistics, Education: A means for population transformation, Thematic series, based on the Uganda National Population and Housing Census 2014. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUNESCO, \u0026ldquo;Analysis of the world education indicators\u0026rdquo;. 2005. Available: from United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization online database. [December 5, 2008].\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWelbers, K., Konijn, E. A., Burgers, C., de Vaate, A. B., Eden, A., \u0026amp; Brugman, B. C. (2019). Gamification as a tool for engaging student learning: A field experiment with a gamified app. E-Learning and Digital Media, 16(2), 92-109.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ehttps://buildmedia.readthedocs.org/media/pdf/kolibri-studio/latest/kolibri-studio.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ehttp://blog.uncollege.org/how-gamification-is-revolutionizing-science-education\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ehttps://haselwoodmath.wordpress.com/grad-school-pages/research-methods-and-design/a-mini-lit-review-and-mini-research-proposal-gamification/\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ehttp://npa.go.ug/wp-content/themes/npatheme/documents/vision2040.pdf\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHornby, Albert Sydney. Oxford Advanced Learner\u0026apos;s Dictionary of Current English / [by] A.S. Hornby ; Editor Jonathan Crowther. Oxford, England :Oxford University Press, 1995.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeterding, Sebastian, et al. \u0026quot;From game design elements to gamefulness: defining\u0026quot; gamification\u0026quot;.\u0026quot; \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments\u003c/em\u003e. 2011.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCaponetto, Ilaria, Jeffrey Earp, and Michela Ott. \u0026quot;Gamification and education: A literature review.\u0026quot; \u003cem\u003eEuropean Conference on Games Based Learning\u003c/em\u003e. Vol. 1. Academic Conferences International Limited, 2014.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3724071/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3724071/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eThe research involved a needs assessment study for the application of gamification technology in teaching and learning of science and mathematics in upper primary (P5, P6 and P7)- typically 10 to 13 year olds. Gamification in education has been praised to create competition, critical thinking and collaborative engagement, which support construction of new knowledge, thus creating a positive learning environment. The research aim was to establish the challenging topics (hard to understand) in Science and Mathematics developing computer based gamification that would be used to support the teaching and learning. Additionally the research was used to identify the ICT training needs of the staff. It was observed that topics that relate to systems such as digestive system, blood circulation system, reproductive system were challenging in science. Challenging topics in mathematics included integers, sets and fractions.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Towards Gamification of Science and Mathematics in Upper Primary Schools in Uganda","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-02-09 10:19:04","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-3724071/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"decision","content":"Revision requested","date":"2024-03-07T06:48:02+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorInvitedReview","content":"","date":"2024-02-29T09:03:12+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"e5185c19-b1b3-45f6-9ac1-e78c5c7131e3","date":"2024-02-29T08:14:25+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"2dc534b2-e034-40e4-9942-b08f749f9855","date":"2024-02-20T11:25:11+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-02-20T08:48:46+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-02-18T08:05:42+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-02-08T08:51:11+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Discover Education","date":"2023-12-08T06:47:02+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"discover-education","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"diedu","sideBox":"Learn more about [Discover Education](https://www.springer.com/journal/44217)","snPcode":"44217","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/44217/3","title":"Discover Education","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"Discover Series","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"5dd15fac-4298-4a96-8c2b-ae7b4a9972f8","owner":[],"postedDate":"February 9th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-06-07T05:39:57+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-02-09 10:19:04","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-3724071","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-3724071","identity":"rs-3724071","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}