The gamified class attended more sessions and arrived late less often than the control class (78% vs 65% average attendance)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Average class attendance was 78% in the gamified experimental class versus 65% in the control class, and late arrivals were 1-2 versus 4-5 students per week. → Fotaris P 2016

Evidence¶

Fotaris P 2016¶

Fotaris P, Mastoras T, Leinfellner R and Rosunally Y. (2016). Climbing Up the Leaderboard: An Empirical Study of Applying Gamification Techniques to a Computer Programming Class. The Electronic Journal of e-Learning Volume 14 Issue 2, pp94-110. www.ejel.org. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1101229

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Administrative data comparison of attendance and late arrivals between the control class (N=54, first year) and the gamified experimental class (N=52, second year) over 12 weeks. The authors state both findings "suggest that gamification motivated EC students to be more punctual and attend classes more often".

"Average class attendance for CC was 65% ( ≈35 students), while EC had an average class attendance of 78% (≈42 students). Additionally, an average of 4 to 5 CC students and 1 to 2 EC students arrived to class late every week, respectively."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Time and Continuity — outcome: instruction changes it

Related Claims¶

• Gamified students downloaded reference material more consistently (1.7 vs 1.2 files per student weekly) without exam-period spikes — related
• Freshmen who miss more than two weeks of school per semester fail at least two classes on average, regardless of incoming test scores — related
• The gamified class achieved a higher average final grade (61% vs 53%), with correlation to gamification unconfirmed — related