8100 - Blog Post #5 Galvan Chapter 11 Activity #2

Now consider the first draft of your own literature reviews.

• Compare your first draft with the topic outline you prepared. Do they match? If not, where does your draft differ from the outline? Does the variation affect the path of the argument of your review?

Well, my first draft is not completely finished, although I wish it was. From what I do have completed, there is a little difference. In the heading of gamification, the more research I do, the more aspects of the topic I find. Much of the initial research of gamification talked about student engagement and motivation which went right along with my topic, but the game-based learning aspect was mostly all digital. In fact, many of the articles call the topic digital-game-based learning (dgbl). My actual gamification is not all digital although it has some components that can be digital. The more I continued to research I found more about game mechanics that has the components of games that I believe goes along with my topic of BreakoutEDU better. BreakoutEDU activities are puzzles instead of one long digital game with points etc. I am enjoying the new avenue I have found and will definitely be discussing it as a subtopic of gamification.

• Find two or three places in your review where your discussion jumps to the next major category of your topic outline. How will the reader know that you have changed to a new category (i.e., did you use subheadings or transitions to signal the switch)?

For the literature review, I really used the components of the concept map to be my headings so the reader knows when I am changing from gamification to student engagement or student motivation. Under gamification I now have two subheadings of digital game based learning and game mechanics. I definitely have more information on dgbl but I hope to find a few more articles on game components. I believe that the headings allow a reader to easily follow the thought process of the writer.