Claims

Gamified students downloaded reference material more consistently (1.7 vs 1.2 files per student weekly) without exam-period spikes

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? Experimental-class students downloaded 1.7 files per week on average versus 1.2 for control students, and the experimental downloads showed no significant deviations across the semester. → 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

Analysis of weekly download logs of lecture notes and further-reading files uploaded to Blackboard, comparing control and experimental classes (Fig. 10). Control downloads spiked only before exams; the authors link steady EC downloads to preparing for classroom games.

"CC students demonstrated a relative lack of interest with an average of 1.2 weekly file downloads per student (an av erage of 65 total downloads per week), which spiked only during the two weeks preceding the final exams; in comparison, every EC student downloaded 1.7 files every week (an average of 89 total downloads per week) without showing any significant deviations"

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.