Gamification Design of  Computer Network Virtual Laboratory  Using SAGD-VL Framework

Diny Syarifah Sany

doi:10.32722/multinetics.v9i1.5165

About Journal

Focus and Scope

Multinetics is published biannually, in May and November by Department of Computer and Informatics Engineering, Politeknik Negeri Jakarta.

Multinetics aims to:

Promote a comprehensive approach to computer and informatics engineering incorporating viewpoints of different disciplines.
Strengthen academic exchange with other institutions.
Encourage scientist, practicing engineers, and others to conduct research or other similar activities.

Multinetics Scopes:

Content-Based Multimedia Retrieval
Multimedia Application
Mobile Computing & Applications
The Internet of Things
Information Systems and Technologies
E- Learning & Distance Learning
Infrastructure Systems and Services
E-Business & E-Commerce
Artificial Intelligence
Embedded System
Network & Data Communication
Big Data and Data Mining
Software Engineering
Computer Network and Architecture
Soft Computing and Intelligent System
Networks and Telecommunication Systems

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts are reviewed by peer-review reviewers consisting of an editor and members of the Editorial Board or qualified outside/external reviewers. This is done within the shortest given time. Judgement from the first reviewer will be main priority for editor to make decision, if there are only two reviewers. In case of three reviewers, decision will be made from at least two reviewers. The journal, above all, strives to return reviewers’ comments to authors within 3 weeks. The Editorial Board re-review manuscripts that are accepted until they are revised.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Plagiarism Policy

Multinetics Editorial board recognizes that plagiarism by using Turnitin is not acceptable and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) when plagiarism is identified in an article that is submitted for publication in Multinetics.

Definition:
Plagiarism involves the "use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and the representation of them as one's own original work."

Policy:
Papers must be original, unpublished, and not pending publication elsewhere. Any material taken verbatim from another source needs to be clearly identified as different from the present original text by (1) indentation, (2) use of quotation marks, and (3) identification of the source.
Any text of an amount exceeding fair use standards (herein defined as more than two or three sentences or the equivalent thereof) or any graphic material reproduced from another source requires permission from the copyright holder and, if feasible, the original author(s) and also requires identification of the source; e.g., previous publication.
When plagiarism is identified, the Editor in Chief responsible for the review of this paper and will agree on measures according to the extent of plagiarism detected in the paper in agreement with the following guidelines:

Level of Plagiaris
1.Minor : A short section of another article is plagiarized without any significant data or idea taken from the other paper
Action : A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the text and properly cite the original article is made

2.Intermediate: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized without proper citation to the original paper
Action: The submitted article is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for one year

3. Severe : A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized that involves reproducing original results or ideas presented in another publication
Action: The paper is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for five years.

It is understood that all authors are responsible for the content of their submitted paper as they all sign the Multinetics Copyright Transfer Form. If a penalty is imposed for plagiarism, all authors will be subject to the same penalty.

If a second case of plagiarism by the same author(s) is identified, a decision on the measures to be enforced will be made by the Editorial board (Editor-in-Chief, and Editorial members) with the Chair of the Editor in Chief. The author(s) might be forbidden to submit further articles forever.

This policy applies also to material reproduced from another publication by the same author(s). If an author uses text or figures that have previously been published, the corresponding paragraphs or figures should be identified and the previous publication referenced. It is understood that in case of a review paper or a paper of a tutorial nature much of the material was previously published.

The author should identify the source of the previously published material and obtain permission from the original author and the publisher. If an author submits a manuscript to Multinetics with significant overlap with a manuscript submitted to another journal simultaneously, and this overlap is discovered during the review process or after the publications of both papers, the editor of the other journal is notified and the case is treated as a severe plagiarism case. Significant overlap means use of identical or almost identical figures and identical or slightly modified text for one half or more of the paper. For self plagiarism of less than one half of the paper but more than one tenth of the paper, the case shall be treated as intermediate plagiarism. If self plagiarism is confined to the methods section, the case shall be considered as minor plagiarism.

If an author uses some of his previously published material to clarify the presentation of new results, the previously published material shall be identified and the difference to the present publication shall be mentioned. Permission to republish must be obtained from the copyright holder. In the case of a manuscript that was originally published in conference proceedings and then is submitted for publication in Multinetics either in identical or in expanded form, the authors must identify the name of the conference proceedings and the date of the publication and obtain permission to republish from the copyright holder. The editor may decide not to accept this paper for publication.

However, an author shall be permitted to use material from an unpublished presentation, including visual displays, in a subsequent journal publication. In the case of a publication being submitted that was originally published in another language, the title, date and journal of the original publication must be identified by the authors, and the copyright must be obtained. The editor may accept such a translated publication to bring it to the attention of a wider audience. The editor may select a specific paper that had been published (e.g. a “historic” paper) for republication in order to provide a better perspective of a series of papers published in one issue of Multinetics. This republication shall be clearly identified as such and the date and journal of the original publication shall be given, and the permission of the author(s) and the publisher shall be obtained.

The Multinetics layout editor for the Journal is responsible for maintaining the list of authors subjected to penalties and will check that no authors of a submitted paper are on this list. If a banned author is identified, the layout editor will inform the Editor-in-Chief who will take appropriate measures. This policy will be posted on the web site with the instructions for submitting a manuscript, and a copy will be sent to the authors with the confirmation email upon initial receipt of their original manuscript. A sentence shall be added to the copyright transfer form to indicate that the author(s) have read the Plagiarism Policy.

Author must send Commitment and Copyright Form that has been signed to the Editor's email after the manuscript is processed for review.

Ethics and Malpractice

Multinetics is a peer-reviewed electronic international journal. This statement clarifies ethical behaviour of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer and the publisher (Politeknik Negeri Jakarta). This statement is based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed Multinetics is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

Politeknik Negeri Jakarta as publisher of Multinetics takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Department of Computer and Informatics Engineering of Politeknik Negeri Jakarta and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing article by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest.

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article are sufficient.

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Multinetics journal will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Multinetics journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Author Fees

This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Submission Free: 0.00 (IDR)

Article Publication Free: 0.00 (IDR)

If this paper is accepted for publication, you didn't charge to pay an Article Publication Fee to cover publications costs.

------------------------------------------------

Anita Hidayati

Editor-in-Chief of Multinetics

Journal History

Jurnal ini pertama kali diterbitkan pada tahun 2015 dengan dukungan dari program studi TI, program studi Multimedia Digital (TMD), program studi Multimedia dan Jaringan (TMJ) dan jurusan Teknik Informatika dan Komputer (TIK).

Published Mar 16, 2023

https://doi.org/10.32722/multinetics.v9i1.5165

Download

PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)

Statistic

Vol. 9 No. 1 (2023): MULTINETICS Mei (2023)

Diny Syarifah Sany

081322535993

Abstract

Building gamification in a virtual laboratory of the computer network will help students to be able to do practicums anywhere and be able to meet the needs of practicum tools and materials. However, researchers have not found a gamification design in a virtual laboratory of the computer network laboratory that can assist developers in building virtual laboratory gamification. Based on these problems, the researcher proposes a gamification design for a virtual laboratory of the computer network using components from the SAGD-VL framework. The SAGD-VL framework is a framework for building games in virtual laboratories. This study does not take all the elements of SAGD-VL but adjusts the results of the analysis from data collection. Technology analysis aims to produce fast and true-to-life virtual laboratory gamification technology designs. This study implements the proposed design in a virtual computer network laboratory to test the proposed design. This study tested the black box, pre-test, and post-test. This test resulted in an average increase in student scores of 32.353 with the highest increase of 60. So that the proposed design of a computer network virtual laboratory gamification using SAGD-VL can help improve students' understanding of practical learning. The questionnaire results in this application being fast in computation and the UI/UX of this application is like the original.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Sany, D. S. (2023). Gamification Design of Computer Network Virtual Laboratory using SAGD-VL Framework. MULTINETICS, 9(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.32722/multinetics.v9i1.5165

References

Y. Suryaningsih, “PEMBELAJARAN BERBASIS PRAKTIKUM SEBAGAI SARANA SISWA UNTUK BERLATIH MENERAPKAN KETERAMPILAN PROSES SAINS DALAM MATERI BIOLOGI,” J. Bio Educ., vol. 2, no. 2, 2017.
H. Hermansyah, G. Gunawan, and L. Herayanti, “Pengaruh Penggunaan Laboratorium Virtual Terhadap Penguasaan Konsep dan Kemampuan Berpikir Kreatif Siswa pada Materi Getaran dan Gelombang,” J. Pendidik. Fis. dan Teknol., vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 97–102, 2017, doi: 10.29303/jpft.v1i2.242.
A. Billah, “Pengembangan Bahan Ajar Konsep Dasar Fisika Untuk Mahasiswa Pendidikan Guru Madrasah Ibtidaiyah,” J. Teach. Learn. Phys., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 35–44, 2019, doi: 10.15575/jotalp.v4i2.5582.
I. Irwanto, “Using Virtual Labs To Enhance Students’ Thinking Abilities, Skills, and Scientific Attitudes,” no. Iceri, pp. 494–499, 2018, doi: 10.31227/osf.io/vqnkz.
M. A. P. Tanjung, “Analisis Pengaruh Storytelling Terhadap Game Lorong Waktu – Pangeran Dipenogoro Sebagai Media Edukasi Sejarah,” Ilm. Komput. dan Inform., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1–4, 2011.
D. S. Sany and A. Nurbaiti, “Desain Trivia Game untuk Latihan Assessment Kompetensi Minimum Tradisional pada Matematika Kelas V SD,” Media J. Inform., vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 52–56, 2021.
Ridwan Arif Rahman, Dewi Tresnawati, and D. Tresnawati, “Pengembangan Game Edukasi Pengenalan Nama Hewan Dan Habitatnya Dalam 3 Bahasa Sebagai Media Pembelajaran Berbasis Multimedia,” J. Algoritm., vol. 13, no. 1, p. 148, 1923, [Online]. Available: http://www.jurnal.sttgarut.ac.id/index.php/algoritma/article/view/323/300.
J. Heni, “Penggunaan Gamifikasi dalam Proses Pembelajaran,” J. TICOM, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–6, 2016, [Online]. Available: https://media.neliti.com/media/publications/92772-ID-penggunaan-gamifikasi-dalam-proses-pembe.pdf.
B. Krisbiantoro, “The effectiveness of gamification to enhance students mastery on tenses viewed from students creativity,” J. Adv. Multidiscip. Res., vol. 1, no. 2, p. 73, 2020, doi: 10.30659/jamr.1.2.73-97.
D. S. Sany and F. Zikri, “Perancangan Skenario Adaptif untuk Reward pada Gamifikasi Reseller Penjualan Daring menggunakan Finite State Machine,” Media J. Inform., vol. 13, no. 1, p. 12, 2021, doi: 10.35194/mji.v13i1.1485.
N. H. Aulia Majid and E. M. Sagoro, “Implementing the Gamification Learning Method To Improve Learning Results of Adjusting Journal,” J. Pendidik. Akunt. Indones., vol. 16, no. 2, 2018, doi: 10.21831/jpai.v16i2.22053.
D. S. Sany, “SAGD-VL Framework: A Framework for Serious Adventure Game Development in A Virtual Laboratory,” J. Informatics Inf. Syst. Softw. Eng. Appl., vol. 5, no. 1, 2022, doi: https://doi.org/10.20895/inista.v5i1.865.
D. S. Sany, “Framework untuk Serious Adventure Game pada Laboratorium Virtual,” Intitut Teknologi Bandung, 2018.
R. A. Luthfan and G. P. Mahardhika, “Sistem Evaluasi Berbasis Gamifikasi untuk Memantau Perkembangan Proses Hafalan Surat Pendek,” Autom. [Diseminasi Tugas Akhir Mhs. Univ. Islam Indones., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 1–6, 2021, [Online]. Available: https://journal.uii.ac.id.
Y. Udjaja, V. S. Guizot, and N. Chandra, “Gamification for elementary mathematics learning in Indonesia,” Int. J. Electr. Comput. Eng., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 3860–3865, 2018, doi: 10.11591/ijece.v8i5.pp3860-3865.
A. C. Sari, A. M. Fadillah, J. Jonathan, and M. R. David Prabowo, “Interactive Gamification Learning Media Application For Blind Children Using Android Smartphone in Indonesia,” Procedia Comput. Sci., vol. 157, pp. 589–595, 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.018.
A. V. Victoria and A. Oladejo, “VIRTUAL LABORATORY A viable and sustainable alternative to traditional physical laboratory,” vol. 16, pp. 1–7, Jun. 2020.
A. Denisova, First Person vs. Third Person Perspective in Digital Games: Do Player Preferences Affect Immersion? 2015.
G. Gorisse, O. Christmann, E. A. Amato, and S. Richir, “First- and Third-Person Perspectives in Immersive Virtual Environments: Presence and Performance Analysis of Embodied Users ,” Frontiers in Robotics and AI , vol. 4. 2017, [Online]. Available: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frobt.2017.00033.
S. J. Panattil, A. George, and M. M. Joy, “The role of informational feedback as a game mechanic on user perceptions, attitudes and the intention to continue using a gamified Health Behaviour Change Support System,” Health Mark. Q., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 88–108, Jan. 2022, doi: 10.1080/07359683.2021.1995639.
T. Baranowski, P. Bower, P. Krebs, C. Lamoth, and E. Lyons, “Effective Feedback Procedures in Games for Health,” Games Health J., vol. 2, pp. 320–326, Dec. 2013, doi: 10.1089/g4h.2013.1328.