Leaderboard system
Patent Information
- Authority / Receiving Office
- WO · WO
- Patent Type
- Applications
- Current Assignee / Owner
- Filing Date
- 2025-04-11
- Publication Date
- 2026-08-13
Smart Images
Figure AU2025050362_13082026_PF_FP_ABST
Abstract
Description
[0001] Leaderboard System
[0002] TECHNICAL FIELD
[0003]
[0001] The present invention relates to a Leaderboard System and more particularly although not exclusively to a system which ranks participants .
[0004]
[0002] The present invention relates to a Leaderboard System and more particularly although not exclusively to a system which ranks participants and displays the rankings .
[0005]
[0003] The present invention relates to a Leaderboard System and more particularly although not exclusively to a system which ranks participants and displays the rankings in groups or lists .
[0006]
[0004] The present invention relates to a Leaderboard System and more particularly although not exclusively to a system which ranks participants and displays the rankings in groups where the groups comprise sub groupings or sublists of the participants .
[0007] BACKGROUND
[0008]
[0005] Traditional gamified education relies on singleclass leaderboards, often discouraging lower-performing students while rewarding high-achieving students . This system can lead to disengagement and reduced participation among students who struggle to compete .
[0009]
[0006] CN 109766497B to Netease Hangzhou Network Co Ltd (the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by crossreference) discloses a particular hardware methodology (also implementable in software) for carrying out sorting of lists for generation of leaderboards .
[0010]
[0007] US8699329B to RPX Clearinghouse LLC (the disclosure of which is incorporated herein by cross-reference) discloses a methodology for resolving a tie in rankings in the context of computer network communication.
[0008] Notwithstanding, there remains a need for an adaptive multi-group leaderboard system that dynamically groups students based on real-time or historical performance, providing multiple levels of competition where all students have an opportunity to succeed within peer-matched groups .
[0011]
[0009] More generally there is a need for sophistication to be applied in the generation of rankings on leaderboards beyond simple "highest to lowest" listings for all those participating in a task or event .
[0012]
[0010] There is also a need to provide hardware and logic to better present rankings on leaderboards .
[0013]
[0011] It is an obj ect of the present invention to address or at least ameliorate some of the above disadvantages or at least provide a useful alternative .
[0014] Notes
[0015]
[0012] The term "comprising" (and grammatical variations thereof ) is used in this specification in the inclusive sense of "having" or "including", and not in the exclusive sense of "consisting only of" .
[0016]
[0013] The above discussion of the prior art in the Background of the invention, is not an admission that any information discussed therein is citable prior art or part of the common general knowledge of persons skilled in the art in any country.SUMMARY OF INVENTION
[0017] Definitions
[0018] Leaderboard: in this specification leaderboard refers to an ordered list of competitors usually ranked highest to lowest by score .
[0019] Score: in this specification score refers to a rankable value, usually expressed as a numerical value .
[0020] List: in this specification list refers to an ordered list of competitors or participants in a rankable task. A leaderboard is a particular example of a list .
[0021] Master Ranked List: is a list of participants ranked by score from highest to lowest .
[0022] Sublist: in this specification sublist refers to an ordered list of competitors or participants in a rankable task comprising a subset of the competitors or participants in a master ranked list . In some scenarios the sublist may be referred to as a tiered ability group or student ability group and may be used interchangeably. The sublist is created by application of an algorithm to the order of the participants on a list .
[0023] Re-ranked sublist: in this specification a re-ranked sublist is a sublist to which a secondary algorithm has been applied thereby to re-rank the competitors or participants on that list .
[0024] Participant: in this specification a participant is a member of a group executing a rankable task. In some scenarios the participant may be referred to as a competitor or student or member . These terms may be used interchangeably.
[0025]
[0014] The present invention relates to educational technology, and more particularly but not exclusively to gamebased learning platforms or applications that utilise adaptive leaderboards to improve student engagement, motivation, and differentiated learning outcomes .
[0015] In one non limiting form there is provided an adaptive multi-group leaderboard system that dynamically groups students based on real-time or historical performance data within a gamified educational platform or application which provides multiple levels of competition where all students have an opportunity to succeed within peer-matched groups .
[0026]
[0016] In another non limiting form there is provided a System and Method for Adaptive Multi-Group Leaderboards in Educational Gamification.
[0027]
[0017] Accordingly, in one broad form of the invention there is provided a method of presenting results to members of a group; the method comprising:
[0028] a . set a rankable task for each member of the group; b . present the task individually to each individual member of the group by means of an individual member display,
[0029] c . allow a predetermined period of time T for each said individual member of the group to execute the task, d. after the predetermined period of time T has elapsed, prepare a master ranked list comprised of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task, by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member in execution of the task during the predetermined period of time T .
[0030] the improvement comprising:
[0031] e . prepare a plurality of sublists by application of an algorithm to the master ranked list; each sublist of the plurality of sublists comprising a subset of the members on the master ranked list;f . display each sublist of the master ranked list of individual members of the group, each sublist displayed only on the individual member display of the individual member in the sublist in which that member appears .
[0032]
[0018] Preferably the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist is preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member with respect to each other individual member on the master ranked list .
[0033]
[0019] Preferably the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each individual member on the sublist is re-ranked according to a secondary algorithm applied to the ordering of each individual member on the sublist, thereby to produce a re-ranked sublist .
[0034]
[0020] Preferably the number of members displayed on each sublist, is the same as on each other sublist of the master ranked list .
[0035]
[0021] Preferably the total number of members displayed on all sublists of the master ranked list equals the number of members in the master ranked list .
[0036]
[0022] In yet a further broad form of the invention, there is provided a method of presenting results to members of a group; said method comprising
[0037] a . setting a rankable task for each member of the group;
[0038] b . presenting the task individually to each individual member of the group;
[0039] c . each member of the group executing the task individually for a predetermined period of time; d. ranking each member of the group with respect to each other member of the group against the task by means of a score attributed to each member; thescore calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member against the task; e . after the predetermined period of time has elapsed; f . according to how each member perform the task; g. sub ranking each member; presenting the score for each member in order in subgroups .
[0040]
[0023] Preferably the individual member display is viewable only by the individual member .
[0041]
[0024] In yet a further broad form of the invention there is provided a method for adaptive multi-group leaderboards in an educational gamification system, comprising:
[0042] a . receiving student performance data from an active game round, game session, or after the entire game; b . receiving student performance data from historical game rounds, game sessions, past games, or historical student activity data;
[0043] c . classifying students into ability-based groups based on real-time accuracy and speed metrics;
[0044] d. displaying multiple leaderboards for different ability groups of which students only see their own leaderboard;
[0045] e . dynamically adjusting the student ability groups throughout the game based on real-time accuracy and speed metrics from one round or session to the next; f . each leaderboard is a display of performance in order from most capable to least capable based on speed and accuracy of answers within each tiered ability group;
[0046] g. each leaderboard is displayed wherein other student or students' performance data which may be displayed, for example, "most improved performance"; h. allowing teachers to customise or override student group assignments .
[0025] In yet a further broad form of the invention there is provided a system that generates dynamic leaderboards by:
[0047] a . continuously re-evaluating student performance during each game round, game session or after the entire game;
[0048] b . maintaining an adaptive multi-winner structure that encourages student engagement and participation.
[0049]
[0026] Preferably the leaderboards are :
[0050] a . automated via a server-based and / or a browser-based algorithm utilising prior historical game data, or real-time round or session data;
[0051] b . customisable by educators through an interactive dashboard .
[0052]
[0027] In yet a further broad form of the invention there is provided a computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions for implementing multi-group adaptive leaderboards within an educational platform.
[0053]
[0028] In yet a further broad form of the invention there is provided a system for presenting results to members of a group; the system comprising:
[0054] a . A rankable task generator which sets a rankable task for each member of the group;
[0055] b . A rankable task communicator which receives the rankable task from the rankable task generator and presents the rankable task individually to each individual member of the group by means of an individual member display, one individual member display for each individual member of the group; c . The rankable task generator allowing a predetermined period of time T for each said individual member of the group to execute the task,
[0056] d. after the predetermined period of time T has elapsed, the rankable task generator prepares a master ranked list comprised of each member of thegroup where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task, by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member in execution of the task during the predetermined period of time T .
[0057] the improvement comprising:
[0058] e . The rankable task generator further prepares a plurality of sublists by application of an algorithm to the master ranked list; each sublist of the plurality of sublists comprising a subset of the members on the master ranked list;
[0059] f . The rankable task communicator communicating and causing display of each sublist of the master ranked list of individual members of the group on the individual member displays, each sublist displayed only on the individual member display of the individual member in the sublist in which that member appears .
[0060]
[0029] Preferably the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist is preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member with respect to each other individual member on the master ranked list .
[0061]
[0030] Preferably the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each individual member on the sublist is re-ranked according to a secondary algorithm applied to the ordering of each individual member on the sublist, thereby to produce a re-ranked sublist .
[0062]
[0031] Preferably the number of members displayed on each sublist, is the same as on each other sublist of the master ranked list .
[0032] Preferably the total number of members displayed on all sublists of the master ranked list equals the number of members in the master ranked list .
[0063]
[0033] In yet a further broad form of the invention there is provided a gamification apparatus for presenting results to members of a group; the gamification apparatus comprising a rankable task generator in communication with a rankable task communicator which, in turn, is in communication with a plurality of individual member displays;
[0064] a . The rankable task generator setting a rankable task for each member of the group;
[0065] b . The rankable task communicator receiving the rankable task from the rankable task generator and presenting the rankable task individually to each individual member of the group by means of an individual member display of the plurality of individual member displays, one individual member display for each individual member of the group; c . The rankable task generator allowing a predetermined period of time T for each said individual member of the group to execute the task,
[0066] d. after the predetermined period of time T has elapsed, the rankable task generator preparing a master ranked list comprised of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task, by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member in execution of the task during the predetermined period of time T .
[0067] and wherein:
[0068] e . The rankable task generator further preparing a plurality of sublists by application of an algorithmto the master ranked list; each sublist of the plurality of sublists comprising a subset of the members on the master ranked list;
[0069] f . The rankable task communicator communicating and causing display of each sublist of the master ranked list of individual members of the group on the individual member displays, each sublist displayed only on the individual member display of the individual member in the sublist in which that member appears .
[0070]
[0034] Preferably the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist is preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member with respect to each other individual member on the master ranked list .
[0071]
[0035] Preferably the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each individual member on the sublist is re-ranked according to a secondary algorithm applied to the ordering of each individual member on the sublist, thereby to produce a re-ranked sublist .
[0072]
[0036] Preferably the number of members displayed on each sublist, is the same as on each other sublist of the master ranked list .
[0073]
[0037] Preferably the total number of members displayed on all sublists of the master ranked list equals the number of members in the master ranked list .
[0074]
[0038] In yet a further broad form of the invention there is provided a method for driving adaptive multi-group leaderboards in an educational gamification system, comprising :
[0075]
[0039] receiving student performance data from an active game round, game session, or after the entire game;
[0040] receiving student performance data from historical game rounds, game sessions, past games, or historical student activity data;
[0076]
[0041] classifying students into ability-based groups based on real-time accuracy and speed metrics;
[0077]
[0042] displaying multiple leaderboards for different ability groups of which students only see their own leaderboard;
[0078]
[0043] dynamically adjusting the student ability groups throughout the game based on real-time accuracy and speed metrics from one round or session to the next;
[0079]
[0044] each leaderboard is a display of performance in order from most capable to least capable based on speed and accuracy of answers within each tiered ability group;
[0080]
[0045] each leaderboard is displayed wherein other student or students' performance data which may be displayed, for example, "most improved performance";
[0081]
[0046] allowing teachers to customise or override student group assignments .
[0082]
[0047] In yet a further broad form of the invention there is provided a system that generates dynamic leaderboards by:
[0083]
[0048] continuously re-evaluating student performance during each game round, game session or after the entire game;
[0084]
[0049] maintaining an adaptive multi-winner structure that encourages student engagement and participation.
[0085]
[0050] Preferably the leaderboards are :
[0086]
[0051] automated via a server-based and / or a browser-based algorithm utilising prior historical game data, or real-time round or session data;
[0087]
[0052] customisable by educators through an interactive dashboard .
[0088]
[0053] In yet a further broad form of the invention there is provided a computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions for implementing multi-group adaptiveleaderboards within an educational platform as described above .
[0089] BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS
[0090]
[0054] Embodiments of the present invention will now be described with reference to the accompanying drawings wherein:
[0091]
[0055] Figure 1-1 is a block schematic diagram of a generalised form of a leaderboard system as suited to implement embodiments of the invention.
[0092]
[0056] Figure 1-2 is an algorithmic flow chart executable by the leaderboard system illustrated in the block schematic diagram of Fig 1-1.
[0093]
[0057] Figure 1A is a block diagram of a generalised functional embodiment of the present invention.
[0094]
[0058] Figure IB is a block diagram of the leaderboard system in accordance with a first embodiment of the invention.
[0095]
[0059] Figure 1C is a block diagram of the leaderboard system in accordance with a second embodiment of the invention .
[0096]
[0060] Figure 2A is a flow chart of the operation of the leaderboard system in accordance with the generalised functional embodiment of Figure 1A.
[0097]
[0061] Figure 2B is a flow chart of the operation of the leaderboard system applied to the block diagram of Figure IB .
[0098]
[0062] Figure 2C is a flow chart of the operation of the leaderboard system applied to the block diagram of Figure 1C .
[0063] Figures 3 through 12 disclose displays on the individual member displays during the progress of an example of a leaderboard system in accordance with the present invention .
[0099] DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS
[0100]
[0064] Example embodiments will now be described more fully with reference to the accompanying drawings . Example embodiments may, however, be embodied in many different forms and should not be construed as limited to the examples set forth herein; rather, these embodiments are provided so that this disclosure will be thorough and complete, and will fully convey the concept of example embodiments to those skilled in the art . The described features, structures, or characteristics may be combined in any suitable manner in one or more embodiments . In the following description, numerous specific details are provided to give a thorough understanding of embodiments of the disclosure . One skilled in the relevant art will recognize, however, that the subj ect matter of the present disclosure can be practiced without one or more of the specific details, or with other methods, components, devices, steps, and the like . In other instances, well-known technical solutions have not been shown or described in detail to avoid obscuring aspects of the present disclosure .
[0101]
[0065] Furthermore, the drawings are merely schematic illustrations of the present disclosure and are not necessarily drawn to scale . The same reference numerals in the drawings denote the same or similar parts, and thus their repetitive description will be omitted. Some of the block diagrams shown in the figures are functional entities and do not necessarily correspond to physically or logically separate entities . These functional entities may be implemented in theform of software, or in one or more hardware modules or integrated circuits, or in different networks and / or processor devices and / or microcontroller devices .
[0102]
[0066] With reference to Fig 1-1 and Fig 1-2 there is illustrated a hardware structure for implementing embodiments of the present invention together with a flowchart of program steps that may be executed by the hardware structure .
[0103]
[0067] In particular there is disclosed a rankable test generator in this instance in the form of a memory 18 in communication with a processor 19 which, in turn, is in communication with rankable task communicator in this instance in the form of a communications bus 20. The bus 20 facilitates electronic communication with a plurality of individual member displays 11A, B, C... .
[0104]
[0068] A program 21 comprises a series of computer instructions which, when executed by processor 19, ranks members 12A, B, C... of a group 22 each of which has been assigned the same rankable task 13. In preferred forms each member is to execute the rankable task 13 during the same predetermined period of time T .
[0105]
[0069] Member data 23 comprises records 24, each one of which stores data in the form of an individual member unique identifiers 30A, B, C... together with the individual members' scores 31A, B, C... after performing the rankable task 13.
[0106] Preferably the score 31 is that score obtained by the member after performing the rankable task 13 for the period of time T .
[0107]
[0070] As shown in flowchart form in figure 1 the rankable task 13 is executed by processor 19 in accordance with instructions 21 thereby to produce a master ranked list 15, the list comprising all individual members of the group ranked according to their score .
[0071] In preferred forms the program 21 executes an algorithm on the master ranked list 13B in order to produce sublists 16.
[0108]
[0072] The sublists 16A, B, C... are presented to the individual member displays 11A, B, C... of only those members who' s unique ID appears on the list .
[0109]
[0073] In a further particular preferred form a further algorithm may be executed by program 21 on each sublist 16 to produce a modified sublist 26 comprising the same individual members but re-ordered or re-ranked according to the further algorithm 17 (also termed a secondary algorithm 17 or a modify function 17 in this specification) . In this instance the modified sublist 26 is again presented only to those members of the group whose unique IDs 30 appear on the modified sublist 26.
[0110]
[0074] With reference to Figure 1A, there is illustrated a block diagram of a generalised form of a leaderboard system as suited to implement embodiments of the leaderboard system of the invention.
[0111]
[0075] Broadly, Figure 1A illustrates components of a leaderboard system 10 in this instance including a plurality of individual member displays 11A, B, C... . In this instance, each individual member display 11A, B, C is arranged to be viewable by only one user or member 12A, 12B, 12C... at a time .
[0112]
[0076] The individual member displays 11A, B, C are configured to display a rankable task 13. In a preferred form the rankable task 13 is generated by a server 14. In a preferred form the rankable task 13 is the same as presentedto each member 12A, B, C on their respective individual member displays 11A, B, C .
[0113]
[0077] In use the server 14 causes the rankable task 13 to be displayed on all of the individual member displays 11A, B, C . In a preferred form the rankable task 13 is displayed at the same time and for a predetermined period of task time, T, on all of the individual member displays 11A, B, C . Each individual member 12A, B, C then performs the task following the steps in Figure 2A. At the end of the predetermined period of time the server 14 prepares a master ranked list 15 of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task in the form of a list . In a preferred form the list comprises scores associated with each member / participant . In a preferred form the members are ranked from highest score to lowest score .
[0114]
[0078] The server 14 then prepares a series of sublists 16 (A) , (B) , (C) ... and the sublists are displayed on the individual member displays 11A, B, C again in accordance with the flowchart of Fig 2A where, in this generalised instance, there is displayed a sublist of the master ranked list of individual members of the group, the sublist displayed only on each individual member display of each individual member sublist 16 (A) , (B) , (C) ...
[0115]
[0079] Stated another way and in a preferred but not exclusive form, the invention may provide a multi-group leaderboard system that dynamically segments students into ability-based groups after each game round, game session or after an entire game of an educational game .
[0116]
[0080] Features may include :
[0081] Real-Time Student Grouping: Students are automatically placed into ability-matched groups based on their performance during ongoing game rounds, game sessions or after the entire game;
[0117]
[0082] Multiple Leaderboards : Instead of a single ranking system, students compete within their respective ability groups, ensuring multiple winners per game round, game session or after the entire game;
[0118]
[0083] Adaptive Learning Adjustments : The system dynamically re-evaluates student placement after each game round, game session or after the entire game to ensure fair competition;
[0119]
[0084] Teacher Customisation: Educators can manually override group placements or allow the system to auto-generate groups based on historical performance data;
[0120]
[0085] Inclusive Engagement Model : High-performing students remain challenged, while lower-performing students gain confidence by competing against peers of similar skill levels .
[0121]
[0086] By removing the traditional single-winner structure, this system fosters an engaging and inclusive learning environment that may incentivize all students of a group to participate .
[0122]
[0087] With reference to figure 1 and 1A a first preferred embodiment may comprise an adaptive multi-group leaderboard system which may comprise
[0123]
[0088] a server-based and / or a browser-based algorithm that processes student responses in real time or from historical data;
[0124]
[0089] a server-based and / or a browser-based algorithm that divides students into tiered ability groups based on accuracy and speed of answers;
[0125]
[0090] a dynamic leaderboard interface that displays an individual leaderboard for each tiered ability group of whicheach student is displayed only the leaderboard for which they are a group of ;
[0126]
[0091] each leaderboard is a display of performance in order from most capable to least capable based on speed and accuracy of answers within each tiered ability group;
[0127]
[0092] each leaderboard is displayed wherein other student or students performance data may be displayed, for example, "most improved performance";
[0128]
[0093] a teacher dashboard enabling manual or automatic group adjustments;
[0129]
[0094] Upon starting a game, all students begin in the same pool . After each game round, game session or after the entire game, the server-based and / or a browser-based algorithm analyses student performance and reassigns them into smaller, ability-matched groups . These groups appear on separate leaderboards, ensuring that multiple students achieve top positions within their respective tiered groups . This dynamically occurs after each game round, game session, or after the entire game .
[0130]
[0095] This structure may increase engagement, motivation, and retention in classroom learning while ensuring fairness in competitive educational games .
[0131]
[0096] In one preferred form there is provided a method of presenting results to members of a group; the method comprising :
[0132] a . set a rankable task for each member of the group; b . present the task individually to each individual member of the group by means of an individual member display viewable only by the individual member,c . Allow a predetermined period of time for all of the said individual members of the group to execute the task
[0133] d. after the predetermined period of time has elapsed, prepare a master ranked list comprised of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task
[0134] e . by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member in execution of the task during the predetermined period of time T . the improvement comprising:
[0135] f . display a sublist { tiered ability groupjof the master ranked list of individual members of the group, the sublist displayed only on each individual member display of each individual member in the sublist .
[0136]
[0097] In a preferred form the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist being preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member with respect to each other individual member on the master ranked list .
[0137]
[0098] In a preferred form the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each individual member on the sublist is ordered according to a secondary algorithm applied to the ordering of each individual member on the sublist .
[0138]
[0099] In a preferred form the number of members displayed on each sublist is the same as on each other sublist of the master ranked list .
[0139] [ 000100] In a preferred form the total number of members displayed on all sublists of the master ranked list equals the number of members in the master ranked list .[ 000101 ] In an alternative form there is provided a method of presenting results to members of a group; said method comprising
[0140] [ 000102 ] setting a rankable task for each member of the group;
[0141] [ 000103] presenting the task individually to each individual member of the group;
[0142] [ 000104 ] each member of the group executing the task individually for a predetermined period of time;
[0143] [ 000105] ranking each member of the group with respect to each other member of the group against the task by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member against the task;
[0144] [ 000106] after the predetermined period of time has elapsed;
[0145] [ 000107 ] according to how each member perform the task;
[0146] [ 000108 ] sub ranking each member; presenting the score for each member in order in subgroups .
[0147] [ 000109] In a further preferred form there is provided a method for adaptive multi-group leaderboards in an educational gamification system, comprising:
[0148] [ 000110] receiving student performance data from an active game round, game session, or after the entire game;
[0149] [ 000111 ] receiving student performance data from historical game rounds, game sessions, past games, or historical student activity data;
[0150] [ 000112 ] classifying students into ability-based groups based on real-time accuracy and speed metrics;
[0151] [ 000113] displaying multiple leaderboards for different ability groups of which students only see their own leaderboard;
[0152] [ 000114 ] dynamically adjusting the student ability groups throughout the game based on real-time accuracy and speed metrics from one round or session to the next;[ 000115] each leaderboard is a display of performance in order from most capable to least capable based on speed and accuracy of answers within each tiered ability group;
[0153] [ 000116] each leaderboard is displayed wherein other student or students performance data which may be displayed, for example, "most improved performance";
[0154] [ 000117 ] allowing teachers to customise or override student group assignments .
[0155] [ 000118 ] In yet a further preferred form there is provided a system that generates dynamic leaderboards by:
[0156] [ 000119] continuously re-evaluating student performance during each game round, game session or after the entire game;
[0157] [ 000120] maintaining an adaptive multi-winner structure that encourages student engagement and participation.
[0158] [ 000121 ] The adaptive multi-group leaderboards wherein the leaderboards are :
[0159] [ 000122 ] automated via a server-based and / or a browser-based algorithm utilising prior historical game data, or real-time round or session data;
[0160] [ 000123] customisable by educators through an interactive dashboard .
[0161] [ 000124 ] In yet a further preferred form there is provided a computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions for implementing multi-group adaptive leaderboards within an educational platform.
[0162] First Preferred Embodiment
[0163] [ 000125] With reference to Figure IB, there is illustrated a block diagram of a preferred form of a leaderboard system 110 suited to effect the flowchart of Figure 2B and otherwise in accordance with a first preferred embodiment .
[0164] [ 000126] In this instance, components of the first preferred embodiment are numbered as for the generalised embodiment of 1A and 2A, but in the 100s series .[ 000127 ] Broadly, Figure IB illustrates components of a leaderboard system 110 in this instance including a plurality of individual member displays 111A, B, C... . In this instance, each individual member display 111A, B, C is arranged to be viewable by only one user or member 112A, 112B, 112C... at a time .
[0165] [ 000128 ] The individual member displays 111A, B, C are configured to display a rankable task 113. In a preferred form the rankable task 113 is generated by a server 114. In a preferred form the rankable task 113 is the same as presented to each member 112A, B, C on their respective individual member displays 111A, B, C .
[0166] [ 000129] In use the server 114 causes the rankable task 113 to be displayed on all of the individual member displays 111A, B, C . In a preferred form the rankable task 113 is displayed at the same time and for a predetermined period of task time, T, on all of the individual member displays 111A, B, C . Each individual member 112A, B, C then performs the task following the steps in Figure 2B . At the end of the predetermined period of time the server 114 prepares a master ranked list 115 of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task in the form of a list . In a preferred form the list comprises scores associated with each member / participant . In a preferred form the members are ranked from highest score to lowest score .
[0167] [ 000130] The server 114 then prepares a series of sublists 116A, B, C... and the sublists are displayed on the individual member displays 111A, B, C again in accordance with the flowchart of Figure 2B where, in this generalised instance, there is displayed a sublist of the master ranked list ofindividual members of the group, the sublist displayed only on each individual member display of each individual member sublist 116A, B, C... .
[0168] [ 000131 ] In the instance of the first preferred embodiment the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist being preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member with respect to each other individual member on the master ranked list .
[0169] Second Preferred Embodiment
[0170] [ 000132 ] With reference to Figure 1C, there is illustrated a block diagram of a preferred form of a leaderboard system 210 suited to effect the flowchart of Figure 2C and otherwise in accordance with a first preferred embodiment .
[0171] [ 000133] In this instance, components of the second preferred embodiment are numbered as for the generalised embodiment of 1A and 2A, but in the 200s series .
[0172] [ 000134 ] Broadly, Figure 1C illustrates components of a leaderboard system 210 in this instance including a plurality of individual member displays 211A, B, C... . In this instance, each individual member display 211A, B, C is arranged to be viewable by only one user or member 212A, 212B, 212C... at a time .
[0173] [ 000135] The individual member displays 211A, B, C are configured to display a rankable task 213. In a preferred form the rankable task 213 is generated by a server 214. In a preferred form the rankable task 213 is the same as presentedto each member 212A, B, C on their respective individual member displays 211A, B, C .
[0174] [ 000136] In use the server 214 causes the rankable task 213 to be displayed on all of the individual member displays 211A, B, C . In a preferred form the rankable task 213 is displayed at the same time and for a predetermined period of task time, T, on all of the individual member displays 211A, B, C . Each individual member 212A, B, C then performs the task following the steps in Figure 2C . At the end of the predetermined period of time the server 214 prepares a master ranked list 215 of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task in the form of a list . In a preferred form the list comprises scores associated with each member / participant . In a preferred form the members are ranked from highest score to lowest score .
[0175] [ 000137 ] The server 214 then prepares a series of sublists 216A, B, C... and the sublists are displayed on the individual member displays 211A, B, C again in accordance with the flowchart of Figure 2C where, in this generalised instance, there is displayed a sublist of the master ranked list of individual members of the group, the sublist displayed only on each individual member display of each individual member sublist 216A, B, C... .
[0176] [ 000138 ] In the instance of the second preferred embodiment the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist may not be preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member with respect to each other individual member on the master ranked list . This will be because, in the instance of the second preferred embodiment and following the flowchart ofFigure 2C a modify function 217 is applied to the sublist 216A, B, C... initially derived as follows :
[0177] [ 000139] The modify function 217 (also termed further or secondary algorithm) is applied to the ordering of each individual member on the sublist 216 with respect to each other individual member on the sublist; the ordering of each individual member 211 with respect to each other individual member on the sublist modified according to modification criteria effected by the modify function 217 to produce a modified sublist 226 which is displayed for each individual member 212 on each of their displays 211 for which the modified sublist displays only on each individual member display of each individual member sublist 226, of which the members within the modified sublist are the same as the members in the original sublist 216.
[0178] Example 1
[0179] [ 000140] With reference to Figures 3-11 a worked example of a leaderboard system operable in accordance with embodiments of the invention will now be described. Commercially it is termed "The Unique Math Ready approach" . Like components are numbered as for the generalized embodiment but in the 400s series . In this instance the system is applied in the context of gamification of a mathematical problem task.
[0180] [ 000141 ] Below is a general description of the salient features of the Math Ready approach implemented by means of a web-services online learning platform.
[0181] [ 000142 ] With reference to Figure 3, once a teacher has an account they are taken to the "Teacher Dashboard" .[ 000143] This teacher dashboard allows teachers to build and play "class games" 451 with their students of which the students compete as a class (or group 422 ) against each other on their individual devices 411. These class games consist of "rounds" . The rounds within the class game are rankable tasks 413. In this example the seven (7 ) rounds are listed from 1 to 7. Each of the rounds is a mental math concept the teachers wish for the students to practice within the class game . Each of the rounds within the class game runs for 60 seconds (one minute - an example of pre-determined period of time T) .
[0182] [ 000144 ] Teachers can build their own class games with different mental math concepts the teacher would want their students to practice . These are called "Custom Games" . To build a custom game the teacher clicks the "+ new game" button on the top right alongside the title, Custom Games .
[0183] [ 000145] With reference to Figure 4, when the teacher clicks the "+ new game" button the activity selection menu 452 appears . This lists a menu of the 250+ "activities" of which the teacher can choose from in order to build their own custom class game of rankable tasks 413 they want their students to play / practice .
[0184] [ 000146] With reference to Figure 5, in this example, the teacher has built their own custom class game called "Negative number practice", which consists of six ( 6) rounds with different rankable tasks 413, that the teacher wants their students to play / practice .
[0185] [ 000147 ] Note, the new custom game 451 labelled "Negative numbers practice" has been added to the Custom Games list, andthe rankable task 413 rounds within this custom class game are listed from 1 to 6.
[0186] [ 000148 ] Once the class game has either been built (as is the case above) , or selected from previous custom games, or selected from the predefined class games listed under "Preset (Grd / Yr) ", THEN the teacher can START a class game .
[0187] [ 000149] For a teacher to START a class game, they then click the button 453 labelled, "Click here to START game" . This will provide the teacher with a "game code" to share with their students so they can join the class game .
[0188] [ 000150] In this case here, see Figure 6, the game code for this class game is q876.
[0189] [ 000151 ] This is the game code the teacher shares with the students so they can join the game via the student' s "Enter Game Code" page . The students 412 enter this game code into the page displayed on each of their individual devices 411.
[0190] [ 000152 ] With reference to Figure 7, the students 412 enter the game code onto their own individual devices 411, they are then prompted to join the class game . Each of the students 412 play the class game individually on their own device 411.
[0191] [ 000153] With reference to Figure 6, once the teacher is satisfied enough students have joined the class game, the teacher then STARTS the class game by clicking the button 454 labelled "Click to PLAY" .
[0192] [ 000154 ] The class game will then start playing on each of the student' s individual devices .[ 000155] The class game starts by rendering questions from the activity defined under round 1. In this case round one ( 1 ) is defined as, "Addition and subtraction of integers - easy" .
[0193] [ 000156] With reference to Figure 8, each of the students have questions rendered to them one at a time . Students click the correct answer . Once the student 412 has clicked the correct answer, a new question is rendered on the student' s screen .
[0194] [ 000157 ] Of the questions rendered onto each of the individual student' s screens 411, they answer them one by one for the duration of the one minute round (predetermined period of time T) .
[0195] [ 000158 ] At the completion of round 1, each individual student has their score recorded and displayed on each of their individual screens 411. As shown in Figure 9. This screen is displayed for eight ( 8 ) seconds .
[0196] [ 000159] While each student 412 sees their individual results on their individual screen 411, the data 423 which records the student' s results from the round is sent to the central platform server 414. The student' s round data from all of the students within the class game is collected on the central platform server and collated into one full class list of all 422 of the student' s round data .
[0197] [ 000160] The data from all of the students is then processed through an algorithm and this list containing all of the students ' round data is then ranked according to each of the individual student' s performances . This ranking is based on the number of questions each student answered correctly and speed .[ 000161 ] This produces one list, the master ranked list 415 of all of the students who played in round one ( 1 ) and it is ranked in ability from most capable student down to the least capable according to their performance in the last round 415.
[0198] [ 000162 ] The round one ranked list is then used to create multiple leaderboards comprising sublists 416 to display to each of the students . For example, if the entire class has twenty-four (24 ) students within it, and the teacher had specified in the Teacher Dashboard that the "Max game size : 4", that is, the maximum number of students to be displayed on each sublist leaderboard 416 is to be 4 student names, then:
[0199] - the first leaderboard 416A would contain the names of the 1st, 2nd, 3rd & 4th ranked students,
[0200] - the second leaderboard 416B would contain the names of the 5th, 6th, 7th & 8th ranked students,
[0201] - the third leaderboard 416C would contain the names of the 9th, 10th, 11th & 12th ranked students .
[0202] [ 000163] And it would continue until all of the students are placed within a sublist leader board 416, of which, the sixth sublist leaderboard would contain the names of the 21st, 22nd, 23rd & 24th ranked students .
[0203] [ 000164 ] In total there would be six ( 6) sublist leaderboards each containing four (4 ) students . No student appears on any more than one leaderboard.
[0204] [ 000165] Once all of the students have been sorted into their respective leader boards (sublists 416) , each of these individual sublists 416 may, or may not, have a secondary server / browser based algorithm applied to it . This secondary algorithm or modify function 417 would use some othercriteria, which the teacher may or may not be able to define, by which the students within each leader board (sublist) 426 are ranked on the actual leader board.
[0205] [ 000166] For example, this secondary server / browser based algorithm or modify function 417 may be used to re-arrange the student in a particular leader board based upon the percentage ratio of number of questions each individual student answered correctly to the total number of questions attempted.
[0206] [ 000167 ] As an illustration, a particular leader board (sublist 416) may have been constructed as a result of the following student performances .
[0207] [ 000168 ] With reference to Figure 10A, in this case, Jonno, Zane, Alina and Tommo appear on this sublist leaderboard 416 therefore each of them will only see this leaderboard on their screen ordered or ranked based on number of"total correct" answers, sorted highest score 431 to lowest score .
[0208]
[0209] [ 000169] Note, all of the students within this leader board (sublist 416) answered approximately the same number of questions correctly, ranging from 12 to 15. As a result, this is why they have been placed into this initial sublist 416 as a result of the initial ranking algorithm as shown in Fig 10A.
[0210] [ 000170] Application of secondary algorithm or modify function 217[ 000171 ] However, the student within this leader board (sublist 416) who answered the most questions correctly (Tommo) , attempted a total of 31 questions in order to obtain their score of 15. This resulted in a percentage correct ratio of 48% .
[0211] [ 000172 ] On the other hand, another student within this leader board ( sublist 416) who answered the lowest number of questions correctly (Jonno) , attempted a total of 13 questions in order to obtain their score of 12. This resulted in a percentage correct ratio of 92% .
[0212] [ 000173] Also within this leader board (sublist) , Zane' s percentage correct ratio was 88% and Alina' s was 52% .
[0213] [ 000174 ] As a result, by application of this method of reranking or modify function 417 the leader board for the final displayed re-ranked sublist 426 will appear as shown in Figure 10B .
[0214] [ 000175] As shown in the total system diagram of Fig 12, students do not know if they are on the highest ( 1st) , the lowest ( 6th) , or any in between of the sublist leaderboards shown on the individual member displays 411. All of the displayed leaderboards on each of the student' s screens or individual member displays 411 look the same, they just have different student' s names on them.
[0215] [ 000176] Multiple Rounds
[0216] [ 000177 ] With reference to Figures 10A, 10B and Fig 11 and total system diagram Fig 12 these sublist leaderboards appear on the student' s screen for ten ( 10) seconds . Thereafter the class game continues on to the next round, of which, for thisclass game, the second rankable task round is the activity, "Simplify integer expressions" .
[0217] [ 000178 ] At the end of the second round, and after each subsequent round, the student' s individual score is displayed and then a new leaderboard sublist is built based on the student' s performance as described above . The new leaderboard sublists 416 or 426 are then displayed on each of the students ' screens 411 for round 2.
[0218] [ 000179] Alternatively if the modify function 417 is applied then a modified sublist 426 will be shown as exemplified in figure 10B .
[0219] [ 000180] All The student ranking will more than likely change therefore the names on the leaderboards will also more than likely change . (Note for these pictures, the same names are on the leaderboards) . Figure 11 illustrates a sublist leaderboard 416 for round 2 .
[0220] [ 000181 ] This continues until the class game finishes all of its rounds, in this case there are six ( 6) rounds .
[0221] [ 000182 ] It will be appreciated that there could be any number of rounds whilst falling within the scope and breadth of embodiments of the present invention.
[0222] ALTERNATIVE EMBODIMENTS
[0223] [ 000183] Throughout the above description of the embodiments, those skilled in the art will readily understand that the exemplary embodiments described herein may be implemented by software, or by software in combination with hardware .
[0224] Therefore, the technical solution according to the embodiments of the present disclosure may be embodied in the form of asoftware product, which may be stored in a non-volatile storage medium (which may be a CD-ROM, a usb disk, a removable hard disk, etc . ) or on a network, and includes several instructions to enable a computing device (which may be a personal computer, a server, a terminal device, or a network device, etc . ) to execute the method according to the embodiments of the present disclosure .
[0225] [ 000184 ] In an exemplary embodiment of the present disclosure, there is also provided a computer-readable storage medium having stored thereon a program product capable of implementing the above-described method of the present specification. In some possible embodiments, aspects of the invention may also be implemented in the form of a program product comprising program code for causing a terminal device to carry out the steps according to various exemplary embodiments of the invention described in the above Detailed Description section of the present description, when said program product is run on the terminal device .
[0226] [ 000185] In further versions embodiments may be implemented entirely in hardware .
[0227] It will be understood that the Master Ranked List may be a notional list in a first algorithmic step to creating the sublists of embodiments of the present invention. As such, a Master Ranked List may not appear or be identifiable as such during execution or implementation of embodiments of the invention .
[0228] INDUSTRIAL APPLICABILITY
[0229] [ 000186] The above-described system may be applied in many areas of endeavour where gamification is applied to improve user participation and user experience .[ 000187 ] In particular forms the multi-group leaderboard system improves classroom gamification by ensuring all students remain engaged and motivated, regardless of skill level . By introducing fair, ability-based competition, this innovation may foster inclusive participation and improves learning retention.
Claims
1. CLAIMS1. A method of presenting results to members of a group; the method comprising:a . set a rankable task for each member of the group; b . present the task individually to each individual member of the group by means of an individual member display,c . allow a predetermined period of time T for each said individual member of the group to execute the task, d. after the predetermined period of time T has elapsed, prepare a master ranked list comprised of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task, by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member in execution of the task during the predetermined period of time T .the improvement comprising:e . prepare a plurality of sublists by application of an algorithm to the master ranked list; each sublist of the plurality of sublists comprising a subset of the members on the master ranked list;f . display each sublist of the master ranked list of individual members of the group, each sublist displayed only on the individual member display of the individual member in the sublist in which that member appears .
2. The method of claim 1 wherein the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist is preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member withrespect to each other individual member on the master ranked list .
3. The method of claim 2 wherein the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each individual member on the sublist is re-ranked according to a secondary algorithm applied to the ordering of each individual member on the sublist, thereby to produce a re-ranked sublist .
4. The method of any one of claims 1 to 3 wherein the number of members displayed on each sublist, is the same as on each other sublist of the master ranked list .
5. The method of any one of claims 1 to 4 wherein the total number of members displayed on all sublists of the master ranked list equals the number of members in the master ranked list .
6. A method of presenting results to members of a group;said method comprisinga . setting a rankable task for each member of the group;b . presenting the task individually to each individual member of the group;c . each member of the group executing the task individually for a predetermined period of time; d. ranking each member of the group with respect to each other member of the group against the task by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member against the task; e . after the predetermined period of time has elapsed; f . according to how each member perform the task; g. sub ranking each member; presenting the score for each member in order in subgroups .
7. The method of any previous claims wherein the individual member display is viewable only by the individual member .8 . A method for driving adaptive multi-group leaderboards in an educational gamification system, comprising:a . receiving student performance data from an active game round, game session, or after the entire game; b . receiving student performance data from historical game rounds, game sessions, past games, or historical student activity data;c . classifying students into ability-based groups based on real-time accuracy and speed metrics;d. displaying multiple leaderboards for different ability groups of which students only see their own leaderboard;e . dynamically adjusting the student ability groups throughout the game based on real-time accuracy and speed metrics from one round or session to the next; f . each leaderboard is a display of performance in order from most capable to least capable based on speed and accuracy of answers within each tiered ability group;g. each leaderboard is displayed wherein other student or students' performance data which may be displayed, for example, "most improved performance"; h. allowing teachers to customise or override student group assignments .
9. A system that generates dynamic leaderboards by:a . continuously re-evaluating student performance during each game round, game session or after the entire game;b . maintaining an adaptive multi-winner structure that encourages student engagement and participation.
10. The adaptive multi-group leaderboards wherein the leaderboards are :a . automated via a server-based and / or a browser-based algorithm utilising prior historical game data, or real-time round or session data;b . customisable by educators through an interactive dashboard .
11. A computer-readable storage medium comprising instructions for implementing multi-group adaptive leaderboards within an educational platform.
12. A system for presenting results to members of a group; the system comprising:a . A rankable task generator which sets a rankable task for each member of the group;b . A rankable task communicator which receives the rankable task from the rankable task generator and presents the rankable task individually to each individual member of the group by means of an individual member display, one individual member display for each individual member of the group; c . The rankable task generator allowing a predetermined period of time T for each said individual member of the group to execute the task,d. after the predetermined period of time T has elapsed, the rankable task generator prepares a master ranked list comprised of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task, by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member in execution of the task during the predetermined period of time T .the improvement comprising:e . The rankable task generator further prepares a plurality of sublists by application of an algorithmto the master ranked list; each sublist of the plurality of sublists comprising a subset of the members on the master ranked list;f . The rankable task communicator communicating and causing display of each sublist of the master ranked list of individual members of the group on the individual member displays, each sublist displayed only on the individual member display of the individual member in the sublist in which that member appears .
13. The system of claim 12 wherein the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist is preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member with respect to each other individual member on the master ranked list .
14. The system of claim 13 wherein the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each individual member on the sublist is re-ranked according to a secondary algorithm applied to the ordering of each individual member on the sublist, thereby to produce a re-ranked sublist .
15. The system of any one of claims 12 to 14 wherein the number of members displayed on each sublist, is the same as on each other sublist of the master ranked list .
16. The system of any one of claims 12 to 15 wherein the total number of members displayed on all sublists of the master ranked list equals the number of members in the master ranked list .
17. A gamification apparatus for presenting results to members of a group; the gamification apparatus comprising a rankable task generator in communication with a rankable task communicator which, in turn, is incommunication with a plurality of individual member displays ;a . The rankable task generator setting a rankable task for each member of the group;b . The rankable task communicator receiving the rankable task from the rankable task generator and presenting the rankable task individually to each individual member of the group by means of an individual member display of the plurality of individual member displays, one individual member display for each individual member of the group; c . The rankable task generator allowing a predetermined period of time T for each said individual member of the group to execute the task,d. after the predetermined period of time T has elapsed, the rankable task generator preparing a master ranked list comprised of each member of the group where each member of the group is ranked with respect to each other member of the group against the task, by means of a score attributed to each member; the score calculated with reference to the performance attributed to each member in execution of the task during the predetermined period of time T .and wherein:e . The rankable task generator further preparing a plurality of sublists by application of an algorithm to the master ranked list; each sublist of the plurality of sublists comprising a subset of the members on the master ranked list;f . The rankable task communicator communicating and causing display of each sublist of the master ranked list of individual members of the group on the individual member displays, each sublist displayedonly on the individual member display of the individual member in the sublist in which that member appears .
18. The gamification apparatus of claim 17 wherein the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each other individual member on the sublist is preserved to be the same as the ordering of each individual member with respect to each other individual member on the master ranked list .
19. The gamification apparatus of claim 18 wherein the ordering of each individual member on the sublist with respect to each individual member on the sublist is reranked according to a secondary algorithm applied to the ordering of each individual member on the sublist, thereby to produce a re-ranked sublist .
20. The gamification apparatus of any one of claims 17 to 18 wherein the number of members displayed on each sublist, is the same as on each other sublist of the master ranked list .
21. The gamification apparatus of any one of claims 17 to 20 wherein the total number of members displayed on all sublists of the master ranked list equals the number of members in the master ranked list .