 Thanks, Mary. So as Mary said, my name is Mark Linn, and I work for Dublin City University. Speaking on behalf of some of my colleagues, Louise, Laura and Lorraine, who essentially were the lecturing staff that were behind this project, whereas I just came along and started to tell them all these fancy different bits and pieces they could do. So in terms of gamification, we started off, I was obviously promoting it, reading it up in the literature, and they just didn't know whether it was a big cure or it wasn't much to do about nothing. Before we go into anything, I think it's important, because there's a lot of misconceptions about what gamification is. So just putting up that definition there, which we explained to our staff, that it's about bringing in elements of games. It's about bringing in a quiz. It's about bringing in lessons and mood books and conditional activities, and all these sorts of little bits and pieces. Simple things, and you don't have to gamify everything. You can gamify just one little bit, or indeed you can incrementally increase it as you go along. And the first reaction we had from staff was, no, that's not gamification. I said, yeah, it is, because I'll tell you exactly what it is I've read up on it. They started getting confused with serious games, or they started getting confused with game-based learning. They started off just educating them at the very onset about the value of gamification, but also what it is and what it isn't. And I have tweeted out these slides so you can have them and dice and splice them, whatever way you like. The challenge that we looked at was research literacy. And it was a particular module that is key throughout the entire programme, in this case an undergraduate psychology programme. It's key throughout the years one to four, but students didn't get it in first year. And if they didn't get it in first year, they were shafted as they went through in terms of second year, third year and fourth year. So as I said, the challenge is problems associate with research literacy. And in this particular instance, we're talking about the maths behind it, the quantitative analysis, the statistics, the stuff the students hated. So that's the challenge. For me, the challenge level sticking with the gaming terminology, the challenge levels were on three different stages, the staff CPD. So I told them, yes, you can gamify, no problem. And this is how it will help. I can show you all the literature to show it will improve engagement. But you need to use an assignment. You need to use a quiz. You need to use a lesson. And they say, ah, that sounds great. How do I do that? I'd look at their Moodle courses and it was full of PowerPoints and PDFs. I won't even mention about the accessibility or lack thereof. So there was a big education process that we had to go through, a staff development bit. They didn't know what they didn't know. That was essentially what it came down to. There was no objections from the staff when you explained it to them. They saw the value, but they didn't know what they didn't know. The next bit then was the implementation. And very much like Aurelie in her presentation, we had to work with staff underground identifying the fruits and the foods and everything else and design the course and actually roll it out. And really for me, and it reminded me of, you may remember the ad in the 80s of the Hamlet cigar where the guy does everything trying to organize it and then he sits back and has a smoke when it all falls to pieces afterwards. That was the sort of situation where I found myself halfway through the module. And I'll explain that now in a second. And then we had the evaluations. Did it work? It looked cool. If I was looking at it from a technical point of view, and indeed a course design point of view, the course looked so much better after we finished, but did it work. So there are three stages or the three levels that we had to go through with it. And here are our findings. In no particular order, right? But we did have positive outcomes. We did see improved retention within it, right? But I'll go through them one by one. Okay, so all the slides are quite similar layout. The main learning is on this side and then just a little bit more detail on the left-hand side, right? But the students absolutely responded really well to having the quizzes, to having videos in advance of the sessions, right? That whole flipping the classroom side of things we didn't fully implement, but we did give them as much information in as many formats as we could, and they had it as they liked it. That was pretty much the way it worked out. They really liked the progress bar that we had to tell them where they were within each stage, but they didn't want a progress bar with 50 things on it. They wanted several different progress bars where it's broken down into small identifiable chunks, manageable chunks. They definitely preferred the e-learning activities and definitely preferred the videos and the introductory topics and the lessons as opposed to a PDF that was put up on the site. And the gamified activities where we built scenarios to explain the real-life applications of this stuff, the students could resonate with that and it helped them embrace the subject a little bit more. So key learning for us, more tools, Moodle is great. That was pretty much what it was. And we actually started to set up a little bit of course envy with some of our colleagues where we said, oh, you know, our students are doing X, Y and Z in this module. You should give it a go. The next one was the control. And as I said, students loved it because it was as you like it. But where they had all of the material available that they could do at their pace in their place. And that was overwhelmingly, overwhelmingly their sponsor students was this was good thing. Now it's obvious to everybody here in this room, but when we had all of the students in the class replying back to the survey saying, Moodle is good. You should use it more often. The lectures start to listen. But the lectures got a little bit uncomfortable, right? Where we were giving control over to the students. And they said, no, no, no, they need to learn it this way because this is the way I learned it. And I need to know exactly what, no, put up all your stuff and give them it. Allow them the choice and the direction as to where they can go because it helps them engage with them and helps them engage with the material. So there was a little bit of, I won't say education with the lectures, but just a little bit of let and go that someone wasn't too comfortable with. The other one is motivation and anybody that's into psychology, and I must confess I'm not, I just have a little interest more so than deep knowledge. But the gamification elements weren't enough by themselves to generate interest. So what we had to do, and as I say here on the slides, the ones that were intrinsically motivated actually embraced it so much more and was brilliant. But what we're going to do, and actually we're doing the week after next, is we're trying to come up with a way to profile the students at the very start to see if we can identify and tap into the intrinsic motivations by using the likes of gamification. And because we can personalize to learning through it, we feel we would stand a good chance at it. Group work. This was a huge revelation for us, right? Now, students hated it. First year, right? They came in typically, our typical participants came in straight from the leaving search, so A-level equivalent. And hadn't really done group work before, and now all of a sudden you're telling them 25% of their score or 50% of their score is relying on somebody else. They absolutely hated it. But in our course and our learning outcomes, we had your students by the end of this will be able to work in group work. So actually what we found was, and it was really stressing out the students, right? But what we found was we needed to actually change the way we taught and actually introduce group work activity at a much earlier level, but in a structured safe level to go through. And again, that has worked. We've redeveloped it for this year. This work started a year and a half ago, now at this stage, but redeveloped it. And we're getting much more positive results when we can structure in the group work an awful lot more. Now, this was the disappointing thing for the lecture. And basically, just to explain what we did, when it gets really tough in around week five, we surveyed the students and we were saying what's your attitude towards statistics and a whole load of other different questions that we asked them. And then we asked them at the end of week 12 and we were sort of ready to hear this. We all lost statistics now and we didn't actually hear it, right? So that was quite disappointing for us. But again, what we need to do is we need to, like, group work really impacted on their whole attitude towards the subject. But we need to learn from that and actually in this case, we're going to take the attitudes, the same survey we're going to take at week one and then week five and then week 12 and so on and see if there's a change. But as you said, the grades have improved, the retention has improved and actually very significantly, the lead lecturer got one of the highest nominations for teaching a learning ward from our class. So there was other knock-on effects like that where I think she got 14 separate nominations out of a class of 32. So there was positive things, even though we didn't get the attitude change. In terms of the next step, so right now this semester, we've removed group work, right? We've removed group work from that element of it. We were actually redesigning it or integrating it outside the gamified elements, but from the gamified elements we've removed it. And we're redesigning the group tasks accordingly. And we're also looking at the timetabling options because the daily students, we actually got a big insight into the students. Most of them were commuting like over 90 minutes each way. So asking them to do group work when they have to catch a bus and they're on the bus for an hour and a half, just the practical things like this that opened our eyes and opened our lecturer's eyes as to why this sort of approach needs to be redefined. And also why putting the content online and it blended in became more attractive to the students. 90 minutes each way they could be actually learning their stuff on the bus. So we are splitting a year-long module into two and actually we're having that foundation work put at the start. But it's very much, even despite the last slide where the attitudes didn't change towards statistics, it's very much seen as a successful project. And I'll explain why. I'm looking at this from two points of view, right? So I'll be the icon on the left on the head of teaching and learning that people want to encourage blended learning. Absolutely great success. So Louise has it integrated into her module. Louise's colleagues now want to integrate into the module and the students are now asking for other bits and pieces. And the learning that Louise and her colleagues had through the various different workshops that we'd run, you can't unlearn that. You can't forget that. So even though we were teaching it for NS126, she used it in NS405, she used it in NS307 or whatever the other modules were. So it was a real worthwhile investment for us, for our team. From her point of view, she got an insight as to how the student works, the challenges facing students and to redesign her module accordingly. But I would only give it a 4 out of 5 and the reason why I would do that is because it didn't change the attitudes, right? It wasn't a panacea, it wasn't the overall cure. But if I go back to the Shakespearean analogy and if I compare that with Julius Caesar where you forget the ladders from where, or just forget the steps from where you did arise. You don't see, it's a total to get that one in there, right? What happened with Lorraine was, Lorraine and with Laura, they'd forgotten how basic their course was beforehand and how they've actually incorporated technology. They'd forgotten what they didn't know, okay? So for me, gamification was a success, is a success. It does work, but I would say if you are implementing it in your own organization or getting your staff to implement it, I would say take it in baby steps. Don't try, change it completely overnight. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mark. And any questions? Put your hands up and we'll get the microphones to you. One there first. That was great. I'm really interested in the link you brought with retention because so often we put these new pedagogies and new things in place, but you don't, I'm speaking broadly now, but you see the engaged students engage more, but the not engaged students don't really come along any further. What do you think it is about this approach that gets that retention switch going? So there was a multitude of things that actually happened, but when students, this was a class of 32 students, but I'm sure the dynamic would apply in so many more situations, but when it started off in a good place, when it started off at students' attitudes were quite happy about it and I understand it, the classes became a discussion-style thing as opposed to a lecture. Straight away the dynamic changed where if you had anybody that was like sitting on the fence, there were more suede towards the positive feelings towards it. So that had a big thing. When students are coming in, particularly with this subject, and they know from their predecessors that, oh, it's very matty, and there was a high failure rate in it, they immediately come in with these preconceptions. So if we can address that by giving them content in advance, by allowing them to take it step by step, by allowing them the freedom to fail, and by that I mean do a quiz time and time and time and time again, and we could give them structured feedback that automatically had a very positive effect for us. Thank you very much. You've obviously explained it so well that we only needed one question. Thank you.