Beyond Gamification: A Corporate Lifecycle Simulation Model for Experiential Learning in Company Law Education

Traditional company law education is often characterised by fragmented and doctrine-centred teaching approaches that limit students’ ability to connect legal principles with real-world corporate practice. To address this challenge, this study introduces a corporate lifecycle simulation model that transforms company law teaching into a continuous, experiential learning environment. The model enables students to establish and manage a simulated company throughout the semester as they progress through key stages of the corporate lifecycle, including company formation, share capital management, maintenance of capital, directors’ duties, members’ remedies, corporate rescue, and winding up.
This study evaluates the implementation of the simulation among undergraduate law students enrolled in a company law course. Data were collected through a survey involving 90 students and supported by reflective learning activities conducted throughout the simulation. The findings indicate that the model enhanced students’ understanding of company law concepts, strengthened legal problem-solving abilities, improved teamwork and communication skills, and facilitated the application of legal principles in realistic corporate contexts. Students also reported high levels of engagement and perceived the simulation as more effective than conventional lecture-based learning. The incorporation of a human-first AI-assisted reflective learning approach further encouraged independent reasoning while supporting deeper analysis and reflection.
The study argues that the innovation extends beyond conventional gamification by providing a longitudinal and authentic corporate learning experience that mirrors the lifecycle of a real company. The Corporate Lifecycle Simulation Model offers a practical framework for promoting experiential learning and developing future-ready competencies in company law education.

Company Law Education; Corporate Simulation; Experiential Learning; Gamification; Legal Education; AI-Assisted Learning.

1. Maharg, P. (2007). Transforming Legal Education: Learning and Teaching the Law in the Early Twenty-First Century. Ashgate Publishing [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Nicolson, D. (2008). 'Education, education, education': Legal, moral and clinical. The Law Teacher, 42(2), 145-172. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Barton, K., McKellar, P., and Maharg, P. (2007). Authentic Fictions: Simulation, Professionalism and Legal Learning. Clinical Law Review, 14(1), 143-193 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hal [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–212. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Gaba, D. M. (2004). The future vision of simulation in health care. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 13(suppl_1), i2–i10 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Kasneci, E., Sebler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., & Kuhn, J. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Tlili, A., Shehata, B., Adarkwah, M. A., Bozkurt, A., Hickey, D. T., Huang, R., & Agyemang, B. (2023). What if the devil is my guardian angel: ChatGPT as a case study of using chatbots in education. Smart learning environments, 10(1), 15. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Lean, J., Moizer, J., Towler, M., & Abbey, C. (2006). Simulations and games: Use and barriers in higher education. Active Learning in Higher Education, 7(3), 227–242. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining “gamification”. In Proceedings of the 15th international academic MindTrek conference: Envisioning future media environments (pp. 9–15). ACM [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education. John Wiley & Sons [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3025–3034). IEEE. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Landers, R. N. (2014). Developing a theory of gamified learning: Linking serious games and gamification of learning. Simulation & Gaming, 45(6), 752–768 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Bell, B. S., Kanar, A. M., & Kozlowski, S. W. J. (2008). Current issues and future directions in simulation-based training. Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, 141–206. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Cotton, D. R. E., Cotton, P. A., & Shipway, J. R. (2023). Chatting and cheating: Ensuring academic integrity in the era of ChatGPT. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 61(2), 228–239. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study