Gamification in High School: Motivation & Success

Abstract

This literature review investigates the influence of gamification on student motivation and academic achievement in high school education. The paper synthesizes findings from recent research to delineate how gamification strategies impact student engagement, academic performance across various subjects, and the specific elements most effective in enhancing learning outcomes. The review highlights that gamification significantly boosts student motivation and engagement, often leading to improved academic behaviors and achievement. However, its effectiveness on academic performance is nuanced, varying by subject matter and the type of game elements employed. The analysis underscores the critical role of thoughtful design, alignment with learning objects, and a focus on fostering intrinsic motivation, guided by established psychological theories such as Self-Determination Theory, Flow Theory, and Social Cognitive Theory. While acknowledging implementation challenges, this review concludes that gamification offers a promising avenue for creating more dynamic and effective high school learning environments, provided it is applied strategically and with careful consideration of pedagogical principles.

1. Introduction

1.1. Background on Student Motivation and Engagement Challenges in High School

High school education frequently encounters significant challenges related to student disengagement and low motivation, which can impede academic progress and broader educational objectives. Factors contributing to this phenomenon include a perceived lack of relevance in the curriculum, limited student autonomy in learning experiences, and the pressure associated with academic performance, all of which can foster anxiety and disengagement among students (Collie, Granziera, & Martin, 2019; Yazzie-Mintz, 2007). This prevalent issue points to a fundamental disconnect between traditional teaching methods and the evolving learning preferences of contemporary students. Many adolescents, growing up as digital natives, are accustomed to highly interactive environments that offer immediate feedback and dynamic engagement outside of the classroom (Prensky, 2001). Traditional, passive learning environments may inherently struggle to capture and sustain the attention of these learners, suggesting that pedagogical approaches need to adapt to this changing cognitive landscape. This situation highlights a pressing need for innovative educational strategies that can re-engage students and cultivate a more dynamic learning experience.

1.2. Introduction to Gamification as a Potential Solution

In response to these challenges, gamification has emerged as a promising pedagogical approach. Gamification involves the strategic application of game design elements, such as points, badges, leaderboards, and quests, into non-game contexts, specifically educational settings. (Deterding et al., 2011). The core aim is to create more immersive, engaging, and enjoyable learning experiences. This approach transforms conventional classroom activities into interactive adventures that can foster student participation, curiosity, and enthusiasm. It is important to distinguish gamification from game-based learning; gamification integrates game elements into existing learning activities, whereas game-based learning involves designing learning activities that are intrinsically game-like (Subhash & Cudney, 2018). This distinction is crucial, as these two approaches represent different depths of integration within a spectrum of “game-ness” in education. Gamification often serves as a lighter touch, integrating specific elements like a badge system for discussion forums, while game-based learning involves a deeper immersion, such as using educational games like Minecraft: Education Edition. This difference implies varying complexities in design and resource requirements, and research suggests that comprehensive game-based learning might have a more stable impact on academic achievement, while gamification may exert a more significant effect on motivation (Wouters et al., 2013; Hamari, Koivisto, & Sarsa, 2014). Understanding this spectrum is vital for educators to choose the most appropriate strategy based on their specific educational goals.

1.3. Purpose of the Systematic Literature Review

This paper aims to systematically review existing literature on the application of gamification in high school education. The primary objective is to synthesize research findings regarding its influence on student motivation and academic achievement. Given the growing interest in gamification and the mixed results reported in the current literature, a comprehensive review is necessary to consolidate the evidence and provide a clearer understanding of its effectiveness and the conditions under which it thrives.

1.4. Statement of Research Questions and Objectives

This systematic review is guided by the following research questions:

How does gamification influence student motivation in high school education?
What impact does gamification have on academic performance across various high school subjects?
Which gamification strategies are most effective in enhancing motivation and achievement in high school students?

To address these questions, the review pursues the following objectives:

To examine how gamification affects student motivation in high school classrooms.
To evaluate the impact of gamification on academic achievement across different subjects in high schools.
To identify effective gamification strategies and elements that contribute to improved learning outcomes.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Defining Gamification in Educational Contexts

Gamification in education refers to the integration of game design elements – such as points, levels, badges, leaderboards, feedback loops, and quests – into traditional learning environments to foster student engagement and motivation (Deterding et al., 2011; Buckley & Doyle, 2014). In high school settings, this involves infusing curriculum content with interactive game-like features that transform passive learning into active participation. Rather than simply adding entertainment value, the purpose is to enhance cognitive and emotional engagement, guiding students through clear goals, structured challenges, and meaningful rewards (Domínguez et al., 2013).

Research has shown that key game elements like narrative context, autonomy, feedback, and collaboration are particularly effective in motivating high school students and enhancing learning outcomes (Seaborn & Fels, 2015; Su & Cheng, 2015). These components tap into intrinsic motivators by promoting a sense of purpose, competence, and connection, critical developmental needs during adolescence. For instance, digital badges can provide a visible and incremental sense of progress, while narrative-driven quests turn assignments into meaningful adventures (Hamari et al., 2014).

It is essential to differentiate gamification from game-based learning. While gamification layers game elements over non-game educational tasks, game-based learning involves using actual games as instructional tools (Zainuddin et al., 2020). For example, adding a points system and leaderboard to a high school biology quiz is gamification, whereas using a simulation game like Foldit to teach protein folding is game-based learning. Both strategies aim to increase engagement, but they differ in scope and instructional design. Gamification generally requires fewer resources and is more adaptable to conventional classroom formats, making it particularly appealing for high school teachers.

Despite its potential, the effectiveness of gamification depends heavily on thoughtful implementation. Poorly designed gamification – over-reliant on extrinsic rewards or lacking clear educational alignment – can lead to disengagement or superficial participation (Hanus & Fox, 2015). However, when aligned with learning objectives and student needs, gamification can significantly enhance the learning experience by combining academic rigor with elements of fun and challenge (Barata et al., 2013).

Table 1. Key Gamification Elements and Their Pedagogical Roles

2.2. Theoretical Foundations of Gamification in Education

The effectiveness of gamification in education is rooted in several established psychological and educational theories that explain human motivation and learning.

Self-Determination Theory (SDT)

Self-Determination Theory (SDT), widely recognized as the foundational framework in game-based learning literature, posits that human motivation and well-being are largely dependent on the fulfillment of three innate psychological needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Krath et al., 2021). Gamification strategies are particularly adept at supporting these needs:

Competence: Gamified elements such as progress bars, level advancements, and progressively challenging tasks enhance individuals’ self-efficacy by providing clear indicators of skills development and mastery. Recognition for achievements, especially through badges awarded for effort rather than just winning, fosters a growth mindset and reduces anxiety associated with making mistakes, thereby cultivating a stronger sense of competence. (Kim et al., 2018; Dahlstrøm, 2017).
Autonomy: Gamification can empower learners by offering choices in how they earn points, complete tasks, or demonstrate their learning, thereby fostering a sense of ownership and control over their educational journey. This perceived choice contributes significantly to intrinsic motivation. (Peng et al., 2012).
Relatedness/Connection: Elements like leaderboards, while sometimes fostering competition, can also create a sense of camaraderie through social comparison. More importantly, collaborative tasks and teamwork-based point systems or quests build feelings of connection and shared purpose among students. Research indicated a strong student preference for collaborative activities over purely competitive ones, as collaboration reduces pressure and facilitates peer learning (Dahlstrøm, 2017; Krath et al., 2021).

SDT also distinguishes between intrinsic motivation, which stems from internal factors like curiosity and a desire for mastery, and extrinsic motivation, which is driven by external rewards and recognition (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Gamification can effectively leverage both. While extrinsic motivation, like points and badges, provides immediate incentives and applies tangible value to learning activities, the ultimate goal of effective gamified design is often to cultivate intrinsic motivation. However, a critical consideration is the “Overjustification Effect”, where the introduction of external rewards can paradoxically decrease intrinsic motivation for an activity that was previously enjoyable (Deci et al., 1999). If gamified elements are perceived as irrelevant, controlling, or merely a means to “game the system” (e.g., completing tasks quickly without genuine learning), they can undermine autonomy and competence, thereby hindering true learning. This highlights that the design and integration of rewards are more crucial than their mere presence. The optimal approach involves using extrinsic motivation as an initial “hook” or scaffolding to draw students in, then strategically transitioning to foster intrinsic motivation by consistently supporting their needs for competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Krath et al., 2021). This implies a dynamic design where the emphasis on external incentives can gradually diminish as internal drive strengthens.

Flow Theory

Conceptualized by psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow Theory describes an optimal psychological state characterized by “effortless attention” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). In this state, individuals are fully immersed, captivated, happy, and eager when engaged in a task that is challenging yet within their perceived capabilities. Gamification is particularly effective at eliciting this “flow experience” by employing mechanisms such as progress bars, level advancements, and progressively more difficult challenges that dynamically adjust to the learner’s skill level. Key elements that support the state of flow include clear goals, immediate feedback, a delicate balance between skill and challenge, and the reduction of distractions (Kim et al., 2018). The concept of the “just right” challenge is central to Flow Theory. If a task is too complex or difficult, it can lead to anxiety and overwhelm; conversely, if it is too easy, it results in boredom and disinterest. Both extremes obstruct the flow state. This implies that effective gamification must incorporate adaptive difficulty, personalized learning paths, and continuous assessment to keep students consistently at their optimal learning edge (Krath et al., 2021). Achieving this requires a dynamic design that can adjust to individual student progress and abilities, moving beyond static reward systems to provide a continuously engaging and appropriately challenging learning experience.

Social Cognitive Theory (SCT)

Social Cognitive Theory (SCT), developed by Albert Bandura, posits that learning occurs not only through direct experience but also through observing others, with personal (cognitive) factors, behavior, and environmental influences interacting dynamically (Bandura, 1986). A crucial component of SCT is self-efficacy, which refers to an individual’s belief in their capacity to execute behaviors necessary to produce specific performance attainments. Gamification can significantly facilitate social learning by providing opportunities for learners to observe and imitate their peers, receive feedback and reinforcement, and engage in collaborative activities (Krath et al., 2021). Game elements such as clear goals (both game-specific and real-life learning outcomes), outcome expectations (e.g., unlocking new content upon task completion), and visual progress indicators (like bar meters simulating time or effort) align well with SCT principles.

SCT highlights the power of social influence in learning. While competitive elements like leaderboards can motivate some students by fostering rivalry, the observed preference for collaboration among students suggests that gamification’s social power extends far beyond simple competition (Dahlstrøm, 2017). Designing gamified experiences that prioritize peer learning, shared goals, and visible collective progress (e.g., team-based challenges, collaborative quests, or group badges) can foster a supportive learning community. This approach can enhance individual self-efficacy through observing peer successes and reduce the anxiety often associated with purely individual competition. Shifting the emphasis from “winning against others” to “winning together” or “learning from others’ successes” aligns more effectively with intrinsic motivation and contributes to a positive, inclusive classroom culture.

Other Relevant Motivational Theories

Beyond these core theories, other motivational frameworks also inform gamification efficacy:

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: This theory emphasizes that basic needs (e.g., safety, belonging) must be met before individuals can engage in higher-level learning. In an educational context, this highlights the importance of creating a supportive and secure environment where students feel comfortable and motivated to reach their full potential (Maslow, 1943).
Expectancy-Value Theory: This theory posits that student motivation is influenced by their belief in their ability to succeed at a task (expectancy) and the value they place on that task (value). Educators can enhance motivation by connecting new concepts to students’ interests or career goals, thereby increasing their perceived relevance and value of the learning material (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002).
Behaviorism: While not explicitly detailed in all gamification discussions, the use of points, badges, and rewards (extrinsic motivators) in gamified systems draws from behaviorist principles of reinforcement, where desired behaviors are encouraged through positive consequences (Skinner, 2953).

2.3. Metrics for Assessing Student Motivation and Academic Achievement in High School

Assessing student success in high school extends beyond traditional measures like grades and standardized test scores to encompass a more holistic view of development and learning.

Traditional Metrics

Grades: Term grades continue to be the dominant academic performance indicator in high schools. While gamification may not drastically inflate grades, it often improves underlying student behaviors, such as persistence, motivation, and satisfaction, that contribute to better academic outcomes (Li et al., 2023). For example, students in gamified high school classrooms tend to exhibit stronger study habits and task focus, factors which positively correlate with grade point average (GPA) over time (Sal-de-Rellán et al., 2025).
Standardized Test Scores: Although test scores are seen as objective academic benchmarks, gamified learning environments yield mixed outcomes. Zeng et al. (2024) found that high school-level gamification interventions produce modest gains in standardized assessments, with more pronounced benefits seen in problem-solving and conceptual understanding. However, test scores often fail to capture broader improvements in learning engagement or class participation (Li et al., 2023)

Beyond Traditional Measures (Holistic Assessment)

A comprehensive understanding of student success incorporates a wider array of indicators:

Attendance and Persistence: Regular school attendance is a known predictor of graduation and long-term academic success. High school classrooms using gamification often experience lower absenteeism, as the interactive elements (like points, levels, and challenges) sustain student interest. Li et al. (2023) report a marked improvement in class attendance and participation following gamified interventions.
Formative Assessments and Task Completion: Gamified tasks, such as point-earning quizzes or badge-based projects, promote task completion among high school students. Teachers report that students are more consistent in submitting assignments when those assignments are embedded in a game structure (Zeng et al., 2024).
Classroom Behavior and Peer Collaboration: Improved behavior is one of the strongest non-academic outcomes observed in gamified high school settings. In a controlled high school physics experiment, Gaurina et al. (2025) found that students in the gamified group showed fewer disciplinary disruptions and stronger teamwork during group labs. The competitive but supportive environment reduced classroom friction and improved peer dynamics.
Engagement and Motivation: Engagement is a multifaceted success indicator – spanning emotional, cognitive, and behavioral domains. Meta-analytic evidence shows that gamification produces large effect sizes on engagement (g ≈ 0.8), particularly in secondary education contexts (Li et al., 2023). Sal-de-Rellán et al. (2025) also report a surge in student enthusiasm and voluntary effort among adolescents exposed to gamified lessons.
Student Satisfaction and Well-Being: Gamification has a measurable positive effect on high schoolers’ attitudes toward learning. In gamified science classrooms, students report feeling more enthusiastic, supported, and connected to the curriculum (Gaurina et al., 2025). These emotional gains translate to a healthier school experience overall.
Social-Emotional Learning (SEL): SEL skills such as collaboration, self-management, and empathy are strengthened through gamification, which often embeds team-based challenges and reflective practices. Sal-de-Rellán et al. (2025) emphasize that gamification in high school Physical Education improves social awareness and classroom climate.
Growth Over Time: Longitudinal measures such as pre-post test growth or rubric-based portfolio evaluations show promising results. Even when final test scores remain constant, high school students in gamified classes often demonstrate growth in motivation and learning strategies (Zeng et al., 2024; Li et al., 2023).
Persistence and Completion Rates: Course completion and dropout reduction are critical goals in high school education. While longitudinal data is still developing, available studies suggest that gamified environments increase student resilience when facing academic setbacks. Gaurina et al. (2025) noted higher persistence in problem-solving tasks among gamified students.
Extracurricular Engagement: Though harder to quantify, some high school teachers observe that students energized by classroom gamification tend to join more school clubs and academic competitions. This cross-over enthusiasm hints at broader school engagement.
Digital Learning Metrics: In 1:1 laptop and digital platform environments, gamification boosts metrics like time on task, login frequency, and module completion. Li et al. (2023) found that students in gamified high school settings logged in more frequently and spent more time on learning platforms than their peers in traditional classes.
School Climate and Culture: A gamified classroom contributes to a positive overall school climate, especially when scaled. Reduced conflict, improved collaboration, and increased joy in learning all add to a more constructive high school environment (Sal-de-Rellán et al., 2025; Gaurina et al., 2025).
Student Success After High School: While data linking gamification to postsecondary outcomes is limited, high schoolers with enhanced motivation, self-regulation, and SEL skills are statistically more likely to enroll and persist in college. Gamified learning may help build the very habits that lead to long-term academic and career success (Zeng et al., 2024).

The comprehensive nature of these student success metrics reveals that academic achievement is not solely about cognitive outcomes like test scores. Gamification’s reported benefits—such as increased assignment completion (Zeng et al., 2024), improved social skills (Sal-de-Rellán et al., 2025), and enhanced classroom atmosphere (Gaurina et al., 2025)—align strongly with these broader indicators. This suggests that even if gamification’s direct impact on standardized test scores might sometimes be mixed or inconclusive (Li et al., 2023; Zeng et al., 2024), its value in fostering a more engaged, motivated, and socially competent student population is profound. These contributions extend beyond immediate academic performance, potentially leading to long-term success and well-being for students well after they leave high school. Therefore, a holistic evaluation of gamification’s impact should consider its influence on this wide range of success indicators.

3. Methodology

3.1. Research Design: Systematic Qualitative Literature Review

This study employed a systematic review design, guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework, to identify, evaluate, and synthesize peer-reviewed empirical research published between January 2020 and May 2025. This methodological approach ensures transparency, reproducibility, and methodological rigor in reviewing the evidence base on gamification’s impact on student motivation and academic achievement in high school education.

To enhance the applicability of findings, the review focused exclusively on secondary school learners, thereby ensuring contextual consistency across studies and relevance to educators and policymakers working with adolescent students.

The flow of study selection is visually represented in the PRISMA flow diagram (see Figure 1), which illustrates the rigorous filtering and selection process used to ensure high-quality and relevant data sources for analysis.

Figure 1. PRISMA Flow Diagram for Study Selection

3.2 Search Strategy

A structured search was conducted across multiple academic databases, including ERIC, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and ResearchGate, using Boolean operators and a combination of relevant keywords:

(“gamification” OR “game-based learning”) AND
(“student motivation” OR “academic achievement” OR “engagement” OR “school performance”) AND
(“high school” OR “secondary school” OR “grades 9–12”)

Search filters were applied to include only peer-reviewed journal articles published in English between 2020 and 2025. Reference lists of selected studies were also manually screened to identify additional relevant sources.

3.3 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

To ensure the relevance and quality of the selected literature, the following inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied:

Inclusion Criteria:

Empirical studies (qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods) focusing on gamification in high school or secondary education contexts.
Research that explicitly measured outcomes related to motivation, engagement, or academic performance.
Peer-reviewed journal articles published in English between 2020–2025.

Exclusion Criteria:

Studies focusing solely on primary or post-secondary education.
Editorials, opinion pieces, conference abstracts, dissertations, or grey literature.
Articles that did not provide sufficient methodological detail or outcome data for extraction.

3.4 Data Extraction and Synthesis

Key information was systematically extracted from each selected article using a structured coding framework. The following data points were recorded:

Author(s), year of publication, and country
Study design and sample characteristics
Gamification elements used (e.g., points, badges, leaderboards, quizzes)
Targeted learning outcomes (motivation, engagement, grades, test scores, behavior, etc.)
Assessment metrics and key findings

The synthesis process involved a thematic analysis to identify common patterns, differences, and emerging trends. Studies were categorized based on the primary outcome(s) assessed and were compared to reveal how gamification impacts various student success metrics in high school settings. Attention was paid to whether gamification interventions were short-term or sustained, the instructional design used, and the level of integration into the curriculum.

4. Findings and Discussion

4.1. Influence of Gamification on Student Motivation (RQ1)

Overall Impact on Motivation

The systematic review of literature consistently demonstrates that gamification exerts a significant positive influence on student motivation and engagement in high school settings. Multiple studies and meta-analyses confirm that integrating game elements into learning activities enhances students’ drive to participate and learn. For example, Ratinho and Martins (2023) reported that most empirical studies in secondary settings observed improvements in motivation following gamified instruction. Their review found that game mechanics such as points, badges, and leaderboards were widely employed and associated with increased motivation and active student involvement. Jaramillo-Mediavilla et al. (2024) similarly concluded that gamification in high school education promotes greater student motivation, autonomy, collaboration, and emotional engagement.

Meta-analytic findings further validate this impact. Li, Hew, and Du (2024) found that gamification had a positive effect on students’ intrinsic motivation (Hedges’ g = 0.257) and significantly improved students’ perceptions of autonomy (g = 0.638) and relatedness (g = 1.776). Another meta-analysis by Li, Ma, and Shi (2023) revealed that both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation increased in gamified learning environments across educational levels, with effects particularly notable in secondary education contexts.

Mechanism at Play (Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Motivation)

Gamification’s motivational impact stems from its ability to stimulate both intrinsic and extrinsic drivers. Intrinsically, game elements can enhance students’ enjoyment and satisfy their psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, as outlined in Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Well-structured gamified activities encourage a sense of purpose, curiosity, and mastery. For example, according to Li et al., (2024), gamification has a stronger influence on extrinsic motivation – such as autonomy and relatedness – (Hedges’ g = 0.64 and 2.78, respectively) compared to its smaller effect on overall intrinsic motivation (g = 0.26) in secondary and higher education settings, indicating that external rewards can serve as powerful entry points to learning. However, sustained motivation often depends on transitioning students from external incentives to intrinsic engagement.

Reported Changes in Engagement, Interest, and Persistence

Numerous studies have documented observable behavioral changes following gamified instruction. Fuentes-Riffo et al. (2023) found that high school students participating in a gamified geometry unit scored significantly higher in motivation surveys compared to their peers in non-gamified classes. Similarly, Sal-de-Rellán, Hernández-Suárez, and Hernaiz-Sánchez (2025) highlighted increased student participation, focus, and vocabulary usage during gamified sessions in secondary Physical Education courses.

Students also reported great interest and willingness to engage in challenging tasks, particularly when effort was rewarded. Facey-Shaw et al. (2020) noted that students responded positively to systems that acknowledged their learning process, not just outcomes. However, these benefits are often strongest in the short term. Ratinho and Marins (2023) cautioned that motivation gains may diminish over time due to the novelty effect, a sentiment echoed by Hanus and Fox (2015), who found declining motivation in students over the duration of a gamified semester-long course.

Student Preferences: Collaboration vs. Competition

A notable theme across several studies is students’ preference for collaborative gamification over competitive approaches. According to Jaramillo-Mediavilla et al. (2024), students expressed higher satisfaction and motivation when engaged in team-based challenges rather than individual leaderboards. Collaboration was found to reduce anxiety, increase peer learning opportunities, and support students’ psychological need for relatedness. Conversely, competitive elements such as ranking systems were reported to demotivate lower-performing students and increase stress.

To maximize motivational benefits, researchers recommend designing gamified activities that emphasize cooperation, shared goals, and personal mastery. This approach aligns with Self-Determination Theory and supports the development of a more inclusive and psychologically safe learning environment.

Table 2. Impact of Gamification on Student Motivation

4.2. Impact of Gamification on Academic Performance Across Various High School Subjects (RQ2)

General Impact Across Curricula

The influence of gamification on academic performance in high school education is generally positive, with numerous studies reporting enhanced academic outcomes following gamified instruction. Meta-analytic reviews confirm this trend. For instance, Dickmen (2022) reported an overall effect size of 0.862 for academic achievement, explaining 74% of the total variance across studies. Similarly, Subhash and Cudney (2018) found a moderate-to-large positive effect of gamification on learning outcomes in secondary and post-secondary education, particularly when game mechanics were directly aligned with learning objectives.

Gamification was shown to positively affect both test performance and assignment completion rates, especially in contexts where motivation and attention were traditionally low. While short-term gains are more consistent, several long-term studies also demonstrate sustained academic improvements (Jaramillo-Mediavilla et al., 2024). However, it is important to note that some studies, such as Hanus and Fox (2015), observed increased motivation but no statistically significant improvements in final course grades, highlighting the importance of implementation fidelity and content alignment.

Subject-Specific Differences

Academic gains from gamification are not uniform across all disciplines. Several meta-analyses have identified subject area as a significant moderator of gamification’s effectiveness on academic achievement. Dikmen (2022) found the highest effect sizes in Social Studies (d = 1.314), Foreign Languages (d = 1.014), and Science (d = 0.993). In contrast, the impact was more modest in Mathematics (d = 0.416) and native Language Arts (d = 0.479).

Foreign Languages: Gamification, particularly through role-playing and reward systems in English as a Second Language, has been shown to lead to higher motivation and improved communication skills (Nurhayati & Fathurrohman, 2025).
Science: Gamification programs have demonstrated improved material comprehension and knowledge retention in subjects like biology and chemistry. (Nurhayati & Fathurrohman, 2025).
Social Studies: Gamification facilitated cooperative learning and contextualized historical narratives, which increased test scores and reduced absenteeism in high school history classes (Clark & Mayer, 2016).
Physical Education: Gamification in PE increased participation and motivation (Sal-de-Rellán et al., 2025), yet had inconclusive effects on academic performance or skill acquisition in motor-based tasks.

The significant moderation by school subjects suggests that successful implementation requires tailoring gamified designs to the specific pedagogical needs and learning objectives of each discipline. Subjects that inherently involve narrative, role-playing, or clear progression, such as languages or social studies, may naturally lend themselves better to gamified elements. In contrast, highly abstract or procedural subjects, like certain aspects of mathematics, might require a deeper integration of gamification that specifically addresses their unique learning difficulties. This necessitates the involvement of subject-matter experts in the design process to ensure that the game mechanics genuinely support the learning content.

Moderating Factors

Beyond subject specificity, several contextual and instructional factors influence academic outcomes in gamified high school settings:

Student Level: Meta-analyses indicate no significant difference in effectiveness between middle school, high school, and college populations, suggesting broad applicability (Subhash & Cudney, 2018).
Game Format: Surprisingly, non-digital gamification (e.g., card games, role-play, physical challenges) was more effective (d = 0.976) than digital games (d = 0.604) in enhancing academic performance (Dikmen, 2022). This may reflect reduced cognitive overload and better social interaction in offline environments.
Duration of Intervention: Longer gamification interventions generally produced more sustained academic improvements, though diminishing returns may occur beyond a certain point without content renewal (Hanus & Fox, 2015).
Technology Use: Gamification in non-technology-based courses showed a significant effect on academic achievement, whereas its effect in technology-based courses was not significant (Dikmen, 2022). This finding aligns with the observation regarding the superior effect of non-digital games.
Cultural Differences: Studies conducted solely within specific cultural contexts, such as Turkey, have shown a larger effect size compared to meta-analyses encompassing studies from various countries, suggesting that cultural factors may influence the effectiveness of gamification. (Dikmen, 2022).

4.3. Most Effective Gamification Strategies and Elements (RQ3)

The effectiveness of gamification in enhancing motivation and academic performance among high school students is largely influenced by the intentional selection and integration of game elements and pedagogical design. Research emphasizes that while gamification holds great promise, its outcomes depend on more than the presence of game mechanics – it requires thoughtful alignment with learning objectives and student needs (Kabilan et al., 2022; Sánchez-Mena & Martí-Parreño, 2017).

Key Elements Identified as Effective

Several gamification elements consistently appear in the literature as effective:

Points, Badges, Leaderboards, and Levels: these classic gamification elements are widely used in secondary education and consistently linked to improvements in both motivation and performance. They offer measurable acknowledgement of progress, create positive competition, and foster a sense of accomplishment (Aldemir et al., 2018; Koivisto & Hamari, 2019). When implemented with care, they help students monitor their success and stay motivated through visual achievement tracking.
Progress Tracking and Visual Feedback: Progress bars and individual milestone markers have been shown to maintain engagement and reinforce persistence by making learning progress visible (Alsawaier, 2018). For many students, especially those struggling with attention or executive function, such tools reduce anxiety and increase task completion rates (Landers et al., 2017).
Real-Time Feedback: Immediate feedback enhances learning by helping students recognize mistakes and correct them quickly. It also helps sustain concentration and supports formative assessment process (Sailer et al., 2017). This mechanism is particularly effective in STEM subjects, where rapid iteration and mastery of procedures are essential.
Challenges, Quests, and Missions: Reframing learning activities as quests or missions allows educators to provide a goal-oriented structure that encourages deep engagement. These elements stimulate students’ sense of purpose and are particularly effective in narrative-driven subjects like English or history (Yildirim, 2019).
Collaborative Elements: Gamified group challenges foster teamwork and communication skills, reducing the pressure of individual performance. Research has shown that cooperative game-based tasks can increase social motivational and classroom cohesion, especially in diverse student groups (Cheong et al., 2014; Wang & Lieberoth, 2016).
Narratives and Storytelling: A compelling storyline can increase cognitive engagement by embedding academic content within meaningful contexts. Narratives help students relate emotionally to the material, enhancing retention and perceived relevance (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017).
Autonomy Support: Allowing students to make choices, such as how to complete assignments or which challenges to pursue, supports their intrinsic motivation. When students feel in control of their learning experience, their engagement and ownership increase significantly (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Landers et al., 2017).
Real-World Relevance: Linking game content to real-life interests or future goals increases the perceived value of academic tasks. Studies suggest that context-aware gamification, such as career-themed missions or community-based challenges, leads to deeper investment in learning (Koivisto & Hamari, 2019; Dicheva et al., 2015).

Conditions for Effectiveness

The mere presence of game elements does not guarantee successful outcomes; their effectiveness is contingent upon several critical conditions:

Intentional Design and Learning Alignment: The presence of game mechanics alone does not guarantee success. To be effective, gamification must be aligned with clearly defined learning outcomes and target skills. Poorly matched mechanics can divert attention from learning and reduce task value (Sailer et al., 2017; Sánchez-Mena & Martí-Parreño, 2017). Elements should support core psychological needs identified in Self-Determination Theory—competence, autonomy, and relatedness (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
Fostering Intrinsic Motivation: Extrinsic rewards can provide an initial boost in motivation, but sustainable engagement comes from intrinsic drivers. When students engage in learning for enjoyment or curiosity, they are more likely to persist and retain information (Li et al., 2024). Game elements should gradually shift from rewarding outcomes to rewarding effort, strategy, and mastery.
Balancing Challenge and Skill (Flow Theory): Task must be appropriately difficult relative to student skill levels to maintain the “flow” state – a psychological zone of optimal engagement (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). Features like adaptive difficulty, level progression, and scaffolding help ensure the challenge remains stimulating but not overwhelming.
Context Dependence: Gamification strategies should be adapted to specific academic subjects, school environments, and learner profiles. For example, while competition may motivate high-achieving students, it may discourage those with lower self-efficacy (Nurhayati & Fathurrohman, 2025). Educators should select elements based on classroom dynamics and cultural factors.
Addressing the Digital Divide: Access to devices and digital literacy varies widely across student populations. To ensure equitable participation, gamified tools must be inclusive and accessible, even in low-resource settings. Offline adaptations or low-tech alternatives should be provided when needed (Alsawaier, 2018).
Teacher Training and Support: Teachers play a critical role in gamification success. Without adequate training in design and evaluation, educators may default to superficial implementations that fail to deliver results (Sánchez-Mena & Martí-Parreño, 2017). Ongoing professional development is essential for sustaining quality gamified practices.
Avoiding Distractions from Learning Goals: Game elements must not overshadow academic content. When points or badges become ends in themselves, students may lose focus on the actual learning task. Research emphasizes the importance of “meaningful gamification”, where mechanics directly reinforce knowledge and skill development (Landers et al., 2017; Dichev & Dicheva, 2017).

4.4. Overall Benefits and Challenges of Gamification Implementation

The integration of gamification in high school education presents a compelling array of benefits alongside notable challenges that require careful consideration for successful implementation.

Benefits of Gamification

In a well-designed gamified classroom, students often display higher levels of engagement and ownership of learning. For example, Smiderle et al. (2020) found that incorporating game elements into a web-based learning environment led to “increases of engagement, user retention, knowledge, and cooperation”. Similarly, Hernanz et al. (2024) note that gamified strategies are recommended to “improve active participation and immediate learning of students”. The overall evidence suggests that gamification can substantially boost student participation, motivation, and interest in subject material. For instance, a recent systematic review highlights that gamified approaches typically enhance students’ self-efficacy, commitment to learning, and especially perceived enjoyment. In practice, teachers observe that game-like tasks feel more engaging to learners, making them invest more effort and time in lessons, which fosters a stronger sense of agency in their education (Ruiz et al., 2024; Hernanz et al., 2024).

Gamification has also been linked to improved knowledge retention. Gamified approaches often involve repetition, feedback, and interactive reinforcement, which together support longer-term memory of learned concepts. Khoshnoodifar et al. (2023) showed that game-based activities helped students retain statistical knowledge more effectively. This aligns with broader findings that active-learning methods such as gamification can enhance long-term conceptual understanding.

Gamification also supports the development of critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Sahito and Sahito (2024) observed that students exposed to interactive and gamified STEM tasks demonstrated significantly higher levels of analytical thinking. These tasks typically require learners to explore real-world problems, test hypotheses, and collaborate on solutions. Likewise, Kapp (2012) and Buckley & Doyle (2016) have long argued that well-structured game mechanics can activate deeper cognitive processes and boost students’ persistence with complex challenges.

Furthermore, gamified classrooms are often perceived as more enjoyable and interactive than traditional ones. According to Demirbilek et al. (2022), English teachers reported that gamified lessons made content more appealing and sparked greater student interest. Ruiz et al. (2024) found that increased enjoyment from gamification translated into better participation and classroom satisfaction – key components of a productive learning environment.

Gamification can also promote personalized learning experiences. Maryono et al. (2025) described an adaptive gamified platform in programming instruction that automatically adjusted difficulty based on each learner’s performance. This personalization resulted in higher learner satisfaction and a better match between task challenge and skill level. Hernanz et al. (2024) supported this by suggesting that gamified tools often offer multiple learning paths, roles, and feedback options tailored to diverse learning styles.

Another positive impact lies in social development. Team-based gamification has been shown to foster collaboration and communication. Smiderle et al. (2020) reported increased cooperation in their study of gamified instruction. Ruiz et al. (2024) similarly concluded that gamification encouraged meaningful peer interactions, contributing to a more supportive and connected classroom environment.

Creativity is also enhanced through gamification. Students may be encouraged to build stories, create artifacts, or solve open-ended challenges within a game-based framework. Sahito and Sahito (2024) observed measurable gains in creativity among students using gamified STEM approaches, highlighting gamification’s potential to nurture original thinking in academic contexts.

Challenges of Gamification Implementation

Despite these advantages, gamification presents several challenges. A key issue is the risk of misalignment between game mechanics and learning objectives. Smiderle et al. (2020) cautioned that poorly designed gamified activities might distract students or decrease motivation when superficial rewards (e.g., badges or points) become the focus rather than the learning goals. To prevent this, educators must ensure that gamification strategies are directly connected to meaningful curricular outcomes.

Excessive competition is another concern. While some students thrive in competitive settings, others may become discouraged. Demirbilek et al. (2022) found that overuse of leaderboards and rankings can lead to negative emotional responses and harm classroom morale. It is essential that gamified environments strike a balance between friendly competition and collaborative achievement.

Curriculum integration and teacher training also pose practical barriers. Luaran, Ramli, and Jain (2025) emphasized that successful gamification depends on proper alignment with curricular standards, adequate resources, and educator readiness. Without strategic planning and support, gamified content risks being shallow or disconnected from core learning goals.

Equity and access issues can further complicate implementation. As noted by Demirbilek et al. (2022), some schools lack the technological infrastructure required for effective gamification, including devices and internet connectivity. Luaran et al. (2025) also pointed out that resource disparities limit the scalability of gamification in under-resourced settings.

Additionally, some studies have warned against over-reliance on extrinsic rewards, which may dampen students’ intrinsic motivation. Hanus and Fox (2015, as cited in Smiderle et al., 2020) found that students exposed to constant external rewards reported less pleasure and motivation over time, especially when the novelty wore off.

Technical challenges such as software glitches, internet disruptions, or incompatible devices can also hinder the smooth execution of gamified lessons (Demirbilek et al., 2022). Educators must be prepared with contingencies to avoid frustration and lost instructional time.

Finally, the long-term sustainability of gamification remains uncertain. Rodrigues et al. (2022) observed that gamification’s initial boost in engagement can diminish as novelty fades. Their longitudinal study showed a decline in participation over time unless new content or incentives were introduced. This suggests that successful gamification requires ongoing updates and sustained attention.

4.5. Distinguishing Gamification from Game-Based Learning

Gamification and game-based learning are closely related yet fundamentally distinct instructional approaches. Gamification refers to the use of game-like elements, such as points, badges, leaderboards, or progress tracking, in non-game contexts to increase student engagement (Zeng et al., 2024). In contrast, game-based learning involves designing entire educational activities as games, making the learning process itself intrinsically game-like (Centre for Teaching Excellence, n.d.). Rather than simply layering game mechanics onto existing tasks, game-based learning transforms the entire experience into a playful, goal-driven environment that fosters exploration and problem-solving (Centre for Teaching Excellence, n.d.).

The distinction has concrete implications. As Zhang and Yu (2022) emphasize, gamification and game-based learning are “two distinct game-related pedagogies” that yield different impacts on motivation and academic achievement. In a comparative meta-analysis, they found that gamification showed a higher effect size on overall motivation (ES = 0.77) compared to game-based learning (ES = 0.60). However, game-based learning produced a more stable effect on academic achievement (ES = 0.54) than gamification, despite the gamification’s higher effect size being less consistent due to wider confidence intervals. The study also found that gamification exerted more stable effects on intrinsic motivation (ES = 0.64), while game-based learning had more consistent effects on extrinsic motivation (ES = 0.56) (Zhang & Yu, 2022).

These findings carry practical significance for high school educators. If the goal is to ignite interest and increase immediate engagement—especially when introducing new content—gamification may offer a compelling solution (Zhang & Yu, 2022). For example, awarding points for participation can drive initial enthusiasm. However, as Ratinho and Martins (2023) caution, the motivational effects of gamification may diminish over time as novelty wears off. On the other hand, if the aim is to foster deep, sustained learning, game-based learning may be a more reliable strategy, as it provides immersive practice and reinforces knowledge through repeated feedback loops.

Therefore, educators should strategically choose between gamification and game-based learning based on the intended learning outcomes. Gamification is well-suited for enhancing short-term motivation and engagement, while game-based learning appears more effective for achieving long-term academic performance. These approaches should not be used interchangeably, but rather as complementary tools aligned with specific instructional goals and curriculum standards in high school settings.

5. Limitations of the Study

This systematic qualitative literature review, though comprehensive, has several limitations that affect the interpretation and applicability of its findings.

First, the scope of this review includes only publicity available, peer-reviewed studies identified via specified databases and keywords. No primary data were collected, so conclusions are synthesized solely from existing research, which may omit unpublished or inaccessible works, especially those with null or negative findings.

Second, the methodological designs of the included studies vary considerably. Many lack rigorous controls, such as randomized or quasi-experimental designs, limiting the ability to attribute outcomes directly to gamification interventions (Smiderle et al., 2020; Zeng et al., 2024). Additionally, some meta-analyses report a dominance of studies conducted in specific countries (e.g., Turkey), which may restrict generalizability to U.S. high school settings (Zeng et al., 2024). The significant heterogeneity observed in effect sizes further underscores the challenge of making broad, cross-context comparisons (Hamari et al., 2019).

Third, while the primary focus of this review is high school education, some included snippets or underlying studies might encompass data from middle school or university levels. Although efforts were made to interpret their relevance within the high school context, this can introduce subtle biases or require careful extrapolation.

Finally, the quality and design of the individual studies included in the review vary. While efforts were made to prioritize peer-reviewed articles and meta-analyses, inherent limitations in the original research, such as insufficient statistical data for synthesis in some cases (Dikmen, 2021), could influence the depth and certainty of the conclusions drawn. While some meta-analyses explicitly checked for publication bias, it remains a general limitation inherent in all literature reviews, where studies with significant or positive results might be more likely to be published.

6. Conclusions and Recommendations for Future Research

6.1. Conclusion

This systematic literature review highlights the multifaceted role of gamification in enhancing high school education. Across various studies, gamification has consistently demonstrated positive effects on student motivation and, to a more nuanced extent, academic performance. Its success is particularly evident in disciplines such as social studies, foreign language learning, and science, where narrative-driven or role-play-compatible content lends itself well to gamified strategies. Key gamification elements, such as badges, leaderboards, challenges, real-time feedback, and autonomy, were repeatedly shown to foster engagement and promote meaningful learning experiences when carefully aligned with pedagogical goals.

However, the review also underscores that gamification is not a panacea. Its impact is moderated by subject area, implementation design, duration, and the presence or absence of supporting conditions like teacher training and technological infrastructure. The distinction between gamification and game-based learning is also critical: while gamification tends to spark immediate motivation, game-based learning appears to yield more stable academic gains over time.

6.2. Recommendations for Future Research

Context-Specific Studies in U.S. High Schools: Although international research is abundant, there remains a need for longitudinal, high-quality, U.S.-based studies that focus exclusively on high school settings across diverse socio-economic and cultural contexts.
Comparative Designs: Future studies should directly compare gamification and game-based learning within the same learning environment to validate differences in motivational and academic outcomes, particularly in STEM subjects where gamification effects are less consistent.
Long-Term Impact Assessments: There is a paucity of research examining the sustainability of gamification’s effects. Longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether motivational gains translate into long-term academic achievement and knowledge retention.
Equity and Accessibility Considerations: More research is needed on how gamification affects students with limited access to digital tools or those from underrepresented groups, ensuring equitable outcomes across populations.
Teacher Professional Development: Given the complexity of designing effective gamified interventions, future research should explore scalable models of teacher training that enhance gamification literacy and instructional integration.
Interdisciplinary Frameworks: Applying theories from psychology (e.g., Self-Determination Theory, Flow Theory) and instructional design can enrich the development and evaluation of gamified learning environments, providing a more theoretically grounded and holistic understanding.

7. Final Thoughts

The integration of gamification into high school education represents a transformative potential for addressing persistent challenges related to student motivation and engagement. While not a universal panacea, when applied strategically and thoughtfully, guided by robust theoretical frameworks and informed by empirical evidence, gamification offers a promising avenue to create more dynamic, interactive, and effective learning environments for the next generation of learners. Its capacity to foster a sense of purpose, mastery, and connection can significantly enhance the educational experience, preparing students not just for academic success but for lifelong learning and engagement.

References

Alabbasi, D. (2017). Exploring graduate students’ perspectives towards using gamification techniques in online learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 18(3), 180-196.

Aldemir, T., Celik, B., & Kaplan, G. (2018). A qualitative investigation of student perceptions of game elements in a gamified course. Computers in Human Behavior, 78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.001

Alsadoon, E., Alkhawajah, A., & Suhaim, A. B. (2022). Effects of a gamified learning environment on students’ achievement, motivations, and satisfaction. Heliyon, 8(8). E10249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10249

Alsawaier, R. S. (2018). The effect of gamification on motivation and engagement. International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(1), 56–79. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-02-2017-0009

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Barata, G., Gama, S., Jorge, J., & Gonçalves. D. (2013). Improving participation and learning with gamification. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design, Research, and Applications, 10-17. https://doi.org/10.1145/2583008.2583010

Bovermann, K., & Bastiaens, T. (2018). Using gamification to foster intrinsic motivation and collaborative learning: A comparative testing. EdMedia + Innovative Learning, 1128-1137.

Buckley, P., & Doyle, E. (2014). Gamification and student motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 24(6), 1162-1175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.964263

Burguillo, J. C. (2010). Using game theory and competition-based learning to stimulate student motivation and performance. Computers & Education, 55(2), 566-575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.02.018

Centre for Teaching Excellence, University of Waterloo. (n.d.). Gamification and game-based learning. University of Waterloo. Retrieved June 24, 2025, from https://uwaterloo.ca/centre-for-teaching-excellence/catalogs/tip-sheets/gamification-and-game-based-learning

Cheong, C., Filippou, J., & Cheong, F. (2014). Towards the gamification of learning: Investigating student perceptions of game elements. Journal of Information Systems Education, 25(3), 233-244.

Christy, K. R., & Fox, J. (2014). Leaderboards in a virtual classroom: A test of stereotype threat and social comparison explanations for women’s math performance. Computer & Education, 78, 66-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.005

Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). E-learning and the science of instruction: Proven guidelines for consumers and designers of multimedia learning (4th ed.). Wiley.

Collie, R. J., Granziera, H., & Martin, A. J. (2019). Teachers’ motivational approach: Links with students’ basic psychological need frustration, maladaptive engagement, and academic outcomes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102872.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row.

Dahlstrøm, C. (2017). Impacts of gamification on intrinsic motivation [Master’s thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology]. NTNU Open.

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. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627-668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627

Demirbilek, M., Talan, T., & Alzouebi, K. (2022). An examination of the factors and challenges to adopting gamification in English Foreign Language teaching. International Journal of Technology in Education, 5(4), 654-668. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijte.358

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, 9-15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040

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(9). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0042-5

Dikmen, M. (2021). Does gamification affect academic achievement? A meta-analysis of studies conducted in Turkey. International Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 13(3), 3001-3020.

Domínguez, A., Saenz-de-Navarrete, J., de-Marcos, L., Fernández-Sanz, L., Pagés, C., & Martínez-Herráiz, J. J. (2013). Gamifying learning experiences: Practical implications and outcomes. Computers & Education, 63, 380-390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.020

Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A. (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 109-132.

Facey-Shaw, L., Specht, M., van Rosmalen, P., & Bartley-Bryan, J. (2019). Do Badges Affect Intrinsic Motivation in Introductory Programming Students? Simulation & Gaming, 51(1), 33-54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878119884996

Fuentes-Riffo, K., Salcedo-Lagos, P., Sanhueza-Campos, C., Pinacho-Davidson, P., Friz-Carrillo, M., Kotz-Grabole, G., & Espejo-Burkart, F. (2023). The Influence of Gamification on High School Students’ Motivation in Geometry Lessons. Sustainability, 15(21), 15615. https://doi.org/10.3390/su152115615

Gaurina, M., Alajbeg, A., & Weber, I. (2025). The power of play: Investigating the effects of gamification on motivation and engagement in physics classroom. Education Sciences, 15(1), 104. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010104

Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., & Sarsa, H. (2014). Does gamification work? – A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 3025-3034. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377

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. Computer & Education, 80, 152-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019

Hernanz, V., Latorre-Cosculluela, C., Suárez, C., & Lanchares-Sancho, E. (2024). Revitalising learning in three university contexts: Unleashing the power of the Quizizz app to increase self-efficacy, intrinsic motivation, satisfaction and performance. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 23917–23935.

Huang, B., & Hew, K. F. (2015). Do points, badges and leaderboards increase learning and activity? A quasi-experiment on the effects of gamification. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computers in Education (pp. 275-280).

Huang, B., Hew, K. F., & Lo, C. K. (2019). Investigating the effects of gamification-enhanced flipped learning on undergraduate students’ behavior and cognitive engagement. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(8), 1106-1126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495653

Jaramillo-Mediavilla, L., Basantes-Andrade, A., Cabezas-González, M., & Casillas-Martín, S. (2024). Impact of Gamification on Motivation and Academic Performance: A Systematic Review. Education Sciences, 14(6), 639. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14060639

Kabilan, M. K., Annamalai, N., & Chuah, K. -M. (2023). Practices, purposes and challenges in integrating gamification using technology: A mixed-method study on university academics. Education and Information Technologies, 28, 14249-14281. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11723-7

Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and strategies for training and education. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Khoshnoodifar, M., Ashouri, A., & Taheri, M. (2023). Effectiveness of gamification in enhancing learning and attitudes: A study of statistics education for health school students. Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism, 11(4), 230–239. https://doi.org/10.30476/JAMP.2023.98953.1817

Kim, S., Song, K., Lockee, B., & Burton, J. (2018). Gamification in learning and education: Enjoy learning like gaming. Springer Nature.

Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2019). The rise of motivational information systems: A review of gamification research. International Journal of Information Management, 45, 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.10.013

Krath, J., Schürmann, L., & von Korflesch, H. (2021). Revealing the theoretical basis of gamification: A systematic review and analysis of theory in research on gamification, serious games and game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 125, 106963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106963

Landers, R. N., Auer, E. M., Collmus, A. B., & Armstrong, M. B. (2017). Gamification science, its history and future: Definitions and a research agenda. Simulation & Gaming, 48(6), 727–762. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878118774385

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. Education Technology Research and Development, 72(2), 765-796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10337-7

Li, M., Ma. S., & Shi, Y. (2023). Examining the effectiveness of gamification as a tool promoting teaching and learning in educational settings: a meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, 14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1253549

Luaran, J., Ramli, H. B., & Jain, J. (2025). Addressing challenges in aligning technology with educational objectives: Issues in gamification and game-based learning. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Applied Science, 387–392.

Luarn, P., Chen, C., & Chiu, Y. (2023). The influence of gamification elements in educational environments. International Journal of Game-based Learning (IJGBL), 13(1), 1-12. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJGBL.323446

Maryono, D., Sajidan, Akhyar, M., Sarwanto, W., Wicaksono, B. T., & Prakisya, N. P. T. (2025). NgodingSeru.com: an adaptive e-learning system with gamification to enhance programming problem-solving skills for vocational high school students. Discover Education, 4(157). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00581-9

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370-396. http://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346

Nurhayati, & Fathurrohman (2025). Gamification in School Education: A Systematic Review of Its Effectiveness in Improving Student Motivation and Academic Outcomes. Al-Islah: Journal of Education, 17(2), 2356-2368.

Peng, W., Lin, J.-H., Pfeiffer, K., & Winn, B. (2012). Need satisfaction supportive game features as motivational determinants: An experimental study of a self-determination theory guided exergame. Media Psychology, 15(2), 175-196. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2012.673850

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6.

Putz, L.-M., Hofbauer, F., & Treiblmaier, H. (2020). Can gamification help to improve education? Findings from a longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior, 110, 106392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106392

Ratinho, E., & Martins, C. (2023). The role of gamified learning strategies in students’ motivation in high school and higher education: A systematic review. Heliyon, 9(8), e19033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19033

Rigby, S., & Ryan, R. M. (2011). Glued to games: How video games draw us in and hold us spellbound. Praeger/ABC-CLIO.

Rodrigues, L., Pereira, F. D., Toda, A. M., Palomino, P. T., Pessoa, M., Carvalho, L. S. G., Fernandes, D., Oliveira, E. H. T., Cristea, A., & Isotani, S. (2022). Gamification suffers from the novelty effect but benefits from the familiarization effect: Findings from a longitudinal study. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(13).

Ruiz, J. J. R., Sanchez, A. D. V., & Figueredo, O. R. B. (2024). Impact of gamification on school engagement: A systematic review. Frontiers in Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1466926

Sahito, F. Z., & Sahito, Z. H. (2024). Gamification as a pedagogical tool for enhancing critical thinking and problem-solving skills in STEM education: A case study of high school classrooms. Journal of Development and Social Sciences, 5(4), 316-331.

Sailer, M., Hense, J. U., Mayr, S. K., & Mandl, H. (2017). How gamification motivates: An experimental study of the effects of specific game design elements on psychological need satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 371–380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.033

Sal-de-Rellán, A., Hernández-Suárez, Á., & Hernaiz-Sánchez, A. (2025). Gamification and motivation in adolescents. Systematic review from Physical Education. Frontiers in Psychology, 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1575104

Sánchez-Mena, A., & Martí-Parreño, J. (2017). Drivers and barriers to adopting gamification: Teachers’ perspectives. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 15(5), 434–443.

Seaborn, K., & Fels, D. I. (2015). Gamification in theory and action: A survey. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 74, 14-31.

Shen, Z., Lai, M, & Wang, F. (2024). Investigating the influence of gamification on motivation and learning outcomes in online language learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1295709

Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Macmillan.

Smiderle, R., Rigo, S. J., Marques, L. B., de M. Coelho, J. A. P., & Jaques, P. A. (2020). The impact of gamification on students’ learning, engagement and behavior based on their personality traits. Smart Learning Environments, 7(3).

Su, C. H., & Cheng, C. H. (2015). A mobile gamification learning system for improving the learning motivation and achievements. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 31(3), 268-286.

Subhash, S., & Cudney, E. A. (2018). Gamified learning in higher education: A systematic review of the literature. Computers in Human Behavior, 87, 192-206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.05.028

Toda, A. M., Klock, A. C., Oliveira, W., Palomino, P. T., Rodrigues, L., Shi, L., Bittencourt, I., Gasparini, I., Isotano, S., & Cristea, A. I. (2019). Analysing gamification elements in educational environments using an existing Gamification taxonomy. Smart Learning Environments, 6(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-019-0106-1

Wang, A. I., & Lieberoth, A. (2016). The effect of points and audio on concentration, engagement, enjoyment, learning, motivation, and classroom dynamics using Kahoot!. Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning.

Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & van der Spek, E. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249-265. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031311

Xu, J., Lio, A., Dhaliwal, H., Andrei, S., Balakrishnan, S., Nagani, U., & Samadder, S. (2021). Psychological interventions of virtual gamification within academic intrinsic motivation: A systematic review. Journal of Affective Disorders, 293, 444-465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2021.06.070

Yazzie-Mintz, E. (2007). Voices of students on engagement: A report on the 2006 high school survey of student engagement. Center for Evaluation and Education Policy, Indiana University.

Yıldırım, İ., & Şen, S. (2019). The effects of gamification on students’ academic achievement: a meta-analysis study. Interactive Learning Environments, 29(8), 1301–1318. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1636089

Zainuddin, Z., Chu, S. K. W., Shujahat, M., & Perara, C. J. (2020). The impact of gamification on learning and instruction: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Educational Research Review, 30(1), 100326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100326

Zhang, Q., & Yu, Z. (2022). Meta-analysis on investigating and comparing the effects on learning achievement and motivation for gamification and game-based learning. Education Research International, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1519880

Zeng, J., Sun, D., Looi, C.-K., & Fan, A. C. W. (2024). Exploring the impact of gamification on students’ academic performance: A comprehensive meta-analysis of studies from 2008 to 2023. British Journal of Educational Technology, 55(6), 2478-2502. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13471