Gamifying Dry Subjects: Exploring Educator Readiness using Korthagen’s Onion Model

Dry subjects are often taught through lectures and static case studies, resulting in low student engagement and surface-level understanding. The challenge is that students struggle to connect theoretical concepts with real-world applications, especially in early-stage courses. Unfortunately, these subjects are often essential to a true understanding of the discipline, it is the fundamentals that they need to well verse before taking other intermediate or advance subjects. This study addresses how the successful implementation of gamification depends not only on instructional design but also on the readiness of educator. This conceptual paper explores the application of Korthagen’s Onion Model as a framework to understand and support educator’s internal and external dimensions in relation to gamification.

Gamification, Dry subjects, Korthagen’s Onion Model

1. Alshorman, S. (2024). The Readiness to use Ai in Teaching Science: Science Teacher's Perspectives. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 23(3), 432-448. doi:10.33225 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Ates, H. &. (2024). Integrating theories for insight: an amalgamated model for gamified virtual reality adoption by science teachers. Education and Information Technologies. doi:10.1007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bayrak, C. &. (2024). Understanding the adoption and usage of gamified web tools by K-12 teachers in Turkey: A structural equation model. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 24759–24781. doi:10.1007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Behl, A. J. (2022). Gamification and e-learning for young learners: a systematic literature review, bibliometric. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 176(121445). doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121445 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Desgourdes C., C. L. (2025). Investigating the factors influencing teachers’ adoption of gamification strategies in higher education: insights from Korthagen’s onion model. International Journal of Educational Management, 39(1), 55-69. doi:10.1108 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Duan, H. &. (2024). The Effects of Educational Artificial Intelligence-Powered Applications on Teachers’ Perceived Autonomy, Professional Development for Online Teaching, and Digital Burnout. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 25(3), 57. doi:10.19173 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Hao, T. W. (2023). Unlocking potential: Systematic review the use of gamification in leadership curriculum . Education and Information Technologies, 29, 12305-12346. doi:10.1007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Hitchens, M. &. (2018). A gamification design for the classroom. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 15(1), 28-45. doi:10.1108 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Huang, Z. F. (2025). Research on AIGC-Integrated Design Education for Sustainable Teaching: An Empirical Analysis Based on the TAM and TPACK Models. Sustainability, 17(5497). doi:10.3390 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Jonge, M. W.-d. (2019). From critic to inspirer: four profiles reveal the belief system and commitment to educational mission of medical academics. BMC Medical Education, 19(268). doi:10.1186 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Khaldi, A. B. (2023). Gamification of e-learning in higher education: a systematic literature review. Smart Learning Environment. doi:10.1186 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Korthagen, F. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more holistic approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 77-97. doi:10.1016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kuo, Y.-C. &.-T. (2024). An exploratory study of pre-service teachers’ perceptions of technological pedagogical content knowledge of digital games. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 19(008). doi:10.58459 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Lampropoulos, G. K. (2022). Augmented reality and gamification in education: a systematic literature review of research, applications and empirical studies. Applied Sciences, 12(13), 6809. doi:10.3390/app12136809 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Lan, H. B. (2024). Assessing the digital competence of in-service university educators in China: A systematic literature review . Heliyon, 10(16), e35675. doi:10.1016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lin, T. Z. (2025). Effects of Technology Perceptions, Teacher Beliefs, and AI Literacy on AI Technology Adoption in Sustainable Mathematics Education. Sustainability, 17(8), 3698. doi:10.3390 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Mahu, R. (2025). Gamification in Project Management. Studies in Business and Economics, 20(1), 319-339. doi:10.2478 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Malvasi, V. &. (2022). Perception of gamification strategies in Italian secondary schools. Alteridad, 17(1), 50. doi:10.17163 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. McKendree, R. B. (2019). Games in Natural Sciences Education: Exploring the Perspectives of Secondary School Educators. Natural Sciences Education, 48(1). doi:190005 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Mora, A. R.-M. (2017). Gamification: a systematic review. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 29(3), 516-548. doi:10.1007/s12528-017-9150-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Palha, S. &. (2023). Predisposition of In-Service Teachers to Use Game-Based Pedagogy. The Electronic Journal of E-Learning, 21(4), 286. doi:10.34190 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Ren, X. &. (2025). Examining Teaching Competencies and Challenges While Integrating Artificial Intelligence in Higher Education. TechTrends, 69, 519-538. doi:10.1007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Şenocak, D. B. (2021). Examination of the Hexad user types and their relationships with gender, game mode, and gamification experience in the context of open and distance learning. Online Learning, 25(4), 250-266. doi:10.24059 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Valverde, G. J.-P.-M. (2024). Gamifying Teacher Education with FantasyClass: Effects on Attitudes towards Physics and Chemistry among Preservice Primary Teachers. Education Sciences, 14(8), 822. doi:10.3390 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Vergara, D. A.‐S.‐A. (2023). Player Profiles in Science Education for Game-Based Digital Training Actions at the University Level. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 13(11), 1663-1671. doi:10.18178 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Zhang, W. &. (2025). AI for Enhancing English Lesson Design and Pedagogy in Chinese Middle Schools. Proceedings of the 16th International Scientific and Practical Conference, 3, pp. 397-403. doi:10.17770 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Zhao, D. P. (2021). An Innovative Multi-Layer Gamification Framework for Improved STEM Learning Experience. IEEE Access, 10, 3879-3889. doi:10.1109 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• What the Desert Fathers Teach Data Scientists: Ancient Ascetic Principles for Ethical Machine-Learning Practice
• Comparative Analysis of Some Machine Learning Algorithms for the Classification of Ransomware
• Comparative Performance Analysis of Some Priority Queue Variants in Dijkstra’s Algorithm
• Transfer Learning in Detecting E-Assessment Malpractice from a Proctored Video Recordings.
• Dual-Modal Detection of Parkinson’s Disease: A Clinical Framework and Deep Learning Approach Using NeuroParkNet