Claims

The gamified class achieved a higher average final grade (61% vs 53%), with correlation to gamification unconfirmed

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

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q2 i? The experimental class had an average final grade of 61% compared to the control class's 53%, but the authors state additional studies are needed to identify possible correlations. → 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

Comparison of final academic performance between the two cohorts; course evaluation (6 quizzes 30%, exam 35%, project 35%) was identical across years. The authors explicitly hedge the grade difference due to the small sample.

"Finally, EC had the best overall academic performance with an average final grade of 61% compared to C G's 53%. However, due to the relatively low number of participants, additional studies are needed to identify possible correlations between gamification and academic performance."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-11-02
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.