The Impact of Gamified Classroom in Higher Education

This study examined the impact of a gamified classroom in higher education using a phase-based evaluation across pre implementation, during implementation, and post implementation. The research employed a classroom intervention design with repeated measures and an embedded process evaluation to capture both outcomes and implementation experiences. To demonstrate a complete research article reporting workflow for a pilot cohort of 30 students, an illustrative synthetic dataset was generated and analysed using repeated measures analysis of variance, paired comparisons, and effect size estimation. Outcomes included course engagement, autonomy, competence, relatedness, intrinsic motivation, and a course aligned knowledge quiz. The findings indicated statistically significant time effects across all outcomes, with the largest improvements observed for the learning performance proxy and meaningful gains in engagement, intrinsic motivation, and relatedness. Descriptive trends suggested that motivational and engagement gains were strongest from pre implementation to mid implementation and then stabilised, while knowledge quiz performance continued to improve into post implementation. Process indicators reflected high acceptability and feasibility, with qualitative reflections suggesting that progress visibility, immediate feedback, and collaborative tasks supported sustained participation, whereas competitive features required careful calibration to avoid stress for some learners. Overall, the study concludes that gamified classrooms can support learning and motivational outcomes when implemented with attention to learner readiness, autonomy supportive practices, and ongoing monitoring during implementation. These results provide a defensible pilot oriented basis for future confirmatory studies using comparison groups and larger samples.

gamification, higher education, student engagement, intrinsic motivation

1. Almisad, H. M., & Aleidan, A. A. (2025). The impact of gamified classrooms on higher education students’ engagement and motivation: A pre–during–post evaluation. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 21(10), em2718. doi:10.29333/ejmste/17177. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Rand McNally. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research (3rd ed.). SAGE. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. doi:10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. 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. doi:10.1145/2181037.2181040. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2017). Gamifying education: What is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: A critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14, Article 9. doi:10.1186/s41239-017-0042-5. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Durlak, J. A., & DuPre, E. P. (2008). Implementation matters: A review of research on the influence of implementation on program outcomes and the factors affecting implementation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(3–4), 327–350. doi:10.1007/s10464-008-9165-0. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Freeman, S., Eddy, S. L., McDonough, M., Smith, M. K., Okoroafor, N., Jordt, H., & Wenderoth, M. P. (2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(23), 8410–8415. doi:10.1073/pnas.1319030111. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. 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 (HICSS) (pp. 3025–3034). IEEE. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2014.377. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Handelsman, M. M., Briggs, W. L., Sullivan, N., & Towler, A. (2005). A measure of college student course engagement. The Journal of Educational Research, 98(3), 184–192. doi:10.3200/JOER.98.3.184-192. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hanus, M. D., & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152–161. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Henry, J., Li, F., & Arnab, S. (2024). On the pre-perception of gamification and game-based learning in higher education students: A systematic mapping study. Simulation & Gaming, 55(6), 985–1010. doi:10.1177/10468781241271082. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Hertzog, M. A. (2008). Considerations in determining sample size for pilot studies. Research in Nursing & Health, 31(2), 180–191. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Julious, S. A. (2005). Sample size of 12 per group rule of thumb for a pilot study. Pharmaceutical Statistics, 4(4), 287–291. doi:10.1002/pst.185. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Khaldi, A., et al. (2023). Advances of gamification in digital higher education: A systematic literature review. Smart Learning Environments. doi:10.1186/s40561-023-00227-z. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lakens, D. (2013). Calculating and reporting effect sizes to facilitate cumulative science: A practical primer for t-tests and ANOVAs. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(7), 863–872. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Li, L., Hew, K. F., & Du, J. (2024). Gamification enhances student intrinsic motivation, perceptions of autonomy and relatedness, but minimal impact on competency: A meta-analysis and systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development. doi:10.1007/s11423-023-10337-7. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Medical Research Council. (2015). Process evaluation of complex interventions. Medical Research Council. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Mekler, E. D., Brühlmann, F., Tuch, A. N., & Opwis, K. (2017). Towards understanding the effects of individual gamification elements on intrinsic motivation and performance. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 525–534. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Moore, G. F., Audrey, S., Barker, M., Bond, L., Bonell, C., Hardeman, W., Moore, L., O’Cathain, A., Tinati, T., Wight, D., & Baird, J. (2015). Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 350, h1258. doi:10.1136/bmj.h1258. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Proctor, E., Silmere, H., Raghavan, R., Hovmand, P., Aarons, G., Bunger, A., Griffey, R., & Hensley, M. (2011). Outcomes for implementation research: Conceptual distinctions, measurement challenges, and research agenda. Implementation Science, 6, Article 42. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-42. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2020). The gamification of learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 77–112. doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Seaborn, K., & Fels, D. I. (2015). Gamification in theory and action: A survey. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 74, 14–31. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.006. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Subhash, S., & Cudney, E. A. (2018). Gamified learning in higher education: A systematic review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 192–206. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.028. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Toda, A. M., et al. (2019). A taxonomy of game elements for gamification in educational contexts: Proposal and evaluation. In 2019 IEEE 19th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT). IEEE. doi:10.1109/ICALT.2019.00028. [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