Information from the abstract
Purpose This study aims to examine the role of gamification, conceptualized as a reflective lesson improvement cycle in the areas of engagement, motivation and language proficiency at the higher education level. Design/methodology/approach A quasi-experimental design spanning 14 weeks was conducted with 300 undergraduate university students as part of a collaborative lesson study process consisting of a cyclical process of: plan, teach, reflect. Statistical analysis was conducted with the use of ANOVA, Cohen’s d and Kruskal–Wallis tests. Findings The findings showed significant improvement in all language skill areas, with a large effect size (d = 1.37) suggesting gamification made a considerable contribution to engagement and learning outcomes for the students. Research limitations/implications This study was conducted at one university, and involved a 14-week intervention. These factors may limit the generalization of findings. Although we employed appropriate statistical analyses (ANOVA, Cohen’s d, Kruskal–Wallis), more extensive longitudinal studies are necessary to confirm the meaning of sustained findings. Qualitative understanding related to teachers’ reflections could add depth to contextual understandings. Nevertheless, these findings signal a route by which reflective, gamified learning cycles can inform evidence-based approaches to instructional reform, and drive experimental research on language education and engagement-oriented pedagogical innovation. Practical implications The results suggest that using gamification in a reflective lesson-study framework has a positive impact on student motivation, engagement and language proficiency. Educators can implement the plan–teach–reflect cycle to enhance lessons by addition integration of game-like components such as; levels and badges, and include feedback to improve lessons in a continual means, while higher education institutions could integrate this into professional learning programs, allowing for teachers use of gamified reflection, as a data-informed application, to improve teaching quality viewed as fostering active learning in varied contexts at higher education institutions. Social implications Gamification encourages students to experience inclusion, collaboration and empowerment through the reflective cycle of gamification experiences within higher education. The collaborative structure of gamification experiences allows for teamwork, self-reflection and accountability. Collaborative activities promote building resilience, creativity and social/environmental responsibility – core competencies for education around Industry 5.0. Gamification experiences strengthen the academic and interpersonal dimensions, making it easier for students to experience challenges as areas of growth. As a socially engaged pedagogical model, gamification promotes equity, engagement and human-centered learning, and supports global commitments to adaptive, sustainable educational reform initiatives. Originality/value This study provides context-rich, practice-oriented evidence from a 14-week, multi-component gamified language intervention in higher education (n = 300). This investigation adds to predominantly short-term literature by examining longer-term implementation across layers-including sustainable engagement over practice in speaking, listening, reading and writing, and plotting out how a lesson-study cycle hones instruction iteratively. The study does not isolate individual game mechanics; it evaluates the entire instructional package in a real-life classroom environment.
Why this record is monitored
This record has an Impact Signal of 76/100 based on recency, source, collaboration, and bibliographic signals. It prioritizes monitoring and is not a judgment of research quality.
Related topics: Educational Games and Gamification · EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning · Student Assessment and Feedback
Thai researcher and institutional participation
Mark Treve · Walailak University
Data limitations
This page is a bibliographic record based on abstract-level information, not a full analysis or quality assessment. Verify the DOI and original article before citation.