*Activity Based Learning (ABL) Using Gamification (GBL) in Mechanical Engineering Design… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.104773*

Some of the topics such as surface texture definition, tolerances and elements of mechanical design (i.e., definition and selection of bearings) were covered as part of lecture-based delivery for the same module. The game offered further opportunities for reinforcing knowledge through application by collaboration.

As part of the rules, groups were required to work collectively and not to fragment to work independently, even if they considered this to be advantageous. They were also not allowed to exchange quiz cards. To break the rules (including segregation and exchange of cards) they would risk group disqualification.

The activity would be run over consecutive weeks and at the end of each session the tutor would sum up the points scored by each team across several group sets. The activity would run over a duration of 2 weeks. Once proven to be successful, there was no reason why it could not be run over a longer duration. An online leader board would display the ranking order for each team but only for the top 50% of teams. The leader board would be revised following each session that the activity was run thus introducing an element of competition and an attempt for a top 50% positioning. An example of the leader board is shown in **Table 3** where the names of individual students are omitted are replaced by group letters, for the purpose of this paper.

It was evident from student attendance, engagement and participation that the activity was well-received by all the students. Attendance was generally excellent for


*Note: ABS indicates that a member of the group was absent during that particular session.*

#### **Table 3.** *Final group ranking table.*

the activity sessions. Students were further enticed by being offered a minor score that would contribute towards their overall score for the module, for attending and actively participating. Even though this score was insignificant, it appeared to have resulted in good overall activity involvement.

Other than introducing a learning activity with an element of fun and competition, there were several other objectives:


A short feedback questionnaire was issued at the end of term in order to gather qualitative feedback from participants on how they perceived the activity from various aspects including,


The initial appraisal of the answers to the above questions is encouraging and students have indicated that they are satisfied with the format of this learning activity. Detail analysis of both the qualitative feedback and impact on their individual design work are reported in later in this chapter.

**Table 3** shows the final rankings of groups (with names disguised by assigning to groups). Participants could follow their progress and compete for a place on the rankings table. Only the top 50% of the participating groups would be displayed on the league tables. Positions could change during consecutive weeks of game deployment. This introduced an element of competition in an effort to be part of the top 50% of participating groups (**Figure 4**).
