

































English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190  

        https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v7i3.12010        http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index         eltej@pbi.uad.ac.id  

Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement 

among EFL learners 

Yea-Ru Tsai  

I-Shou University, No. 1, Sec. 1, Syuecheng Rd., Dashu District, Kaohsiung City 84001, Taiwan 

yrtsai@isu.edu.tw  

  

A R T I C L E  I N F O 

 

A B ST R ACT   

 

 

Article history 

Received 12 October 2024 

Revised 12 November 2024 

Accepted 20 November 2024 

 In recent years, gamification has appeared to be an enjoyable and 
appealing instructional approach in educational settings. This paper 
reports the implementation and evaluation of gamified instruction to 
support learners of English as a foreign language in a linguistics 
course. Several gamification elements, such as experience points, 
badges, leaderboard and competition, were deployed on a Moodle 
course management system. A comparison of the results of the survey 
on learning motivation revealed that the experimental group had 
greater learning motivation than did the control group after the 
instruction, particularly in the dimensions of relevance and 
satisfaction, suggesting that gamification can increase learners’ 
interest and satisfaction. To illustrate learning engagement, the data of 
online activities in the course management system were analyzed and 
compared between groups. The outcomes were encouraging, showing 
that students in the gamified group were more likely to submit quizzes 
and posts on discussion forums than were those in the nongamified 
group. The analysis of the relationships between gamified learning 
activities and motivation revealed that learning motivation was 
significantly correlated with discussion forums, WordWall games and 
badges. The findings indicate that gamification elements can 
effectively promote students’ motivation and engagement in learning 
English as a foreign language context.  

 

© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Universitas Ahmad Dahlan  
This is an open access article under the CC–BY-SA license. 

    

 

 
Keywords 

Gamification 

Motivation  

Learner engagement  

EFL instruction  

Linguistics 

 

 

 

 

How to Cite: Tsai, Y. R. (2024). Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement among EFL 
learners. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 7(3), 177-190. 
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v7i3.12010     

1. Introduction  

Acquiring proficiency in English as a foreign language (EFL) is essential for engaging in 
international communication in global educational communities (Dehghanzadeh et al., 2021). The 
requirement to learn English to interact with students from other countries has increased dramatically 
as a consequence of the development of new digital technologies (Bouchrika et al., 2021). The sudden 
increase in demand for EFL necessitates a transformation from conventional to innovative teaching 
approaches (Huang et al., 2020). This change is particularly crucial, as students frequently lament that 
learning EFL is demanding, stressful, and struggling (Majuri et al., 2018). 

Several factors that may affect learning EFL processes and results include motivation, engagement, 
aptitude, and anxiety (Barata, et al., 2013). For example, students may become less confident when 
they struggle with learning linguistics, which might lead to a loss of drive and enthusiasm and 
disengagement from learning. Previous studies have suggested that gamified learning environments 
for EFL learning may increase students’ motivation (Dehghanzadeh et al., 2021), engagement (Huang, 

https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v7i3.12010
http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index
mailto:eltej@pbi.uad.ac.id
mailto:yrtsai@isu.edu.tw
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v7i3.12010
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5430-8428
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.12928/eltej.v7i3.12010&domain=pdf


ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 178 

 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

et al., 2019) and satisfaction (Metwally, et al., 2021) through the learning process. One of the 
frequently mentioned advantages of gamification is the positive impact it can have on engagement 
and learning motivation (Buckley & Doyle, 2016). However, learner engagement and motivation are 
intrinsically linked, with each serving as a critical factor in boosting students’ academic performance 
and deeper commitment (Albrecht & Karabenick, 2018). Motivation is characterized as a collection 
of interwoven ideas and emotions that drive students’ learning behaviors (Martin & Dowson, 2009). 
Both intrinsic and extrinsic motivations have been employed in gamification research to increase the 
success of learning (Alsawaier, 2018; Buckley & Doyle, 2016; Sailer & Homner, 2020). It has also 
been proven that gamified teaching can promote student engagement in language learning (Looyestyn, 
et al., 2017; Xi & Hamari, 2020). In this context, it is important to explore the attitudes and emotions 
of learners toward gamification in EFL education. As a result, instructional tactics and methods should 
be created with the experiences of the students in mind to increase their interest and motivation in 
satisfying the needs of the growing number of students who are engaged in learning EFL. 

Gamification, which is most widely defined as a design process through which game elements are 
added to existing nongame systems (Deterding et al., 2011), has become an increasingly popular 
pedagogical approach in educational contexts (Bouchrika et al., 2021). To overcome motivational 
issues and encourage active learning, this process involves the integration of gaming elements and 
design features into nongame settings (Buckley & Doyle, 2016; Landers & Landers, 2014; Looyestyn, 
et al., 2017). Research indicates that gaming elements such as points, badges, leaderboards, and 
immediate feedback are frequently employed to promote learner engagement and motivation in 
gamified learning environments. 

A study conducted by Bouchrika et al. (2021) revealed that gamified settings significantly 
increased student interaction with e-learning platforms, as leaderboards and badges were encouraged 
to compete while collaborating with their peers. This aligns with Baah et al.’s (2023) research, which 
provided insightful findings with the framework of self-determination theory and the attention, 
relevance, confidence, and satisfaction (ARCS) model, highlighting satisfaction as the key component 
in gamifying student motivation. Their study demonstrated that extrinsic rewards, such as points and 
badges, might gradually transform into intrinsic motivation. Specifically, Huang et al. (2019) explored 
how gamification elements affect undergraduate students’ learning engagement and reported that 
gamified flipped instruction significantly increased activity completion rates and accuracy, indicating 
improved behavioral and cognitive engagement. 

In the context of EFL education, gamification has proven to have notable potential in improving 
student motivation, engagement and language proficiency. One well-known application of 
incorporating gamification in language learning is Duolingo (https://www.duolingo.com/). By 
featuring skill trees, leaderboards, level-ups, and in-app rewards, Duolingo enhances motivation by 
establishing an enjoyable and dynamic environment that stimulates engagement and reduces anxiety 
for language learners (Amin, 2021, Lahji, 2024; Loewen et al., 2019). 

Previous studies have shown that game-based learning is an important and novel teaching strategy 
in the field of learning and that it can help students improve their language learning performance, 
cooperate more, and make learning more active (Belkhouche et al., 2014; Mei et al. 2018). Game-
based learning, as opposed to entertainment-oriented games, is a type of gaming with educational 
goals (Shu, 2018). It is a type of game with specific learning goals (Plass et al., 2015). Gamification 
is a relatively recent phrase that refers to the use of game aspects in nongame contexts to provide 
learners with engaging, interesting, and inspiring learning experiences (Baptista & Oliveira, 2018; 
Werbach & Hunter, 2015). Gamified learning environments bring game concepts and dynamics to 
nongame contexts to boost learners' deep learning and critical thinking (Kapp, 2012) and lead them to 
adopt specified behaviors (Rachels & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2018; Werbach & Hunter, 2015). 
According to Landers & Landers (2014), introducing gamification approaches can motivate learners' 
time on tasks, and more time at work is associated with greater student accomplishment. Games have 
been recognized as one of the most important contributions to the creation of interactive, motivating, 
and engaging learning environments during this change. Furthermore, introducing game aspects into 
learning settings is one way to increase motivation and engagement (Rowe et al., 2011). Several 
studies have indicated that students’ reactions to participation in gamified EFL settings are 
entertaining, fun, appealing, interactive, and intriguing (Baldauf et al., 2017; Gaikwad & Jain, 2017; 
Homer et al., 2018; Sun & Hsieh, 2018; Zhou, Yu, & Shi, 2017). 



179 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

Dehghanzadeh et al.'s (2021) systematic review of 22 studies on gamification revealed consistent 
positive impacts on EFL learner motivation, engagement and various language skills in several key 
areas. Among the most well-documented outcomes, vocabulary acquisition has demonstrated 
substantial improvement through gamification, which was found in fifteen out of the 22 studies 
reviewed by Dehghanzadeh et al. (2021). Tools such as Kahoot and Quizizz have been shown to be 
remarkably effective in providing instant feedback and reinforcement of correct answers (Demirbilek 
et al., 2022; Zhang, & Crawford, 2024). Gamification also enhances speaking skills by creating a less 
intimidating atmosphere, resulting in greater student engagement in speaking activities when 
presented with gamified instruction (Arnold, 2014). It has been argued that gamified environments 
offer psychologically safe spaces for language learners, who report feeling more in control of their 
learning process, contributing to reduced anxiety levels and increased engagement with language 
learning (Dehghanzadeh et al., 2021). 

Looyestyn et al. (2017) noted that although gamification generally facilitates engagement and 
motivation, the long-term effects are still inconsistent. To ascertain how gamification can be 
successfully implemented to sustain motivation over time and across diverse learner profiles, more 
solid empirical research is needed. As suggested by Baah et al. (2023), the effectiveness of 
gamification relies on precisely leveraging intrinsic and extrinsic incentives, adapting strategies to the 
learners’ background and dynamically developing gaming mechanics to maintain long-term interest. 

To date, most studies in EFL fields have investigated how gamified instruction affects language 
abilities in oral or written forms (Alvia González, 2022; Muthukumar & Neelakandan, 2019), yet the 
correlation between gamification and EFL learner motivation or engagement remains understudied 
(Zhang & Crawford, 2024). To further investigate the unsolved issues mentioned in previous studies, 
this paper intends to explore the impact of gamified instruction on EFL students’ learning motivation 
and engagement. It specifically demonstrates the relationships between gamification elements and 
motivation. Hence, the following research questions are raised: 

1. What are the possible effects of gamified instruction on EFL learners’ motivation? 

2. What are the possible effects of gamified instruction on EFL learners’ engagement? 

3. What are the relationships between gamification elements and learning motivation?  

2. Method 

2.1. Participants  

The participants of the present study were recruited from two groups of undergraduates learning 
English as a foreign language (EFL) at a university in southern Taiwan. The data were collected from 
two consecutive semesters in two English linguistics courses. In the first year, the students, serving as 
the control group (CG, n = 37), received nongamified instruction, whereas in the second year, a 
gamified version of the course was given to the participants, serving as the experimental group (EG, 
n = 43). The classes were taught using the same instructional materials. Both the CG and the EG used 
the University’s Moodle course management system (CMS) to host the learning materials. All the 
participants had studied English for more than ten years. Each class was delivered for 18 weeks. 
Ethical approval for data collection and student consent were obtained before its implementation. 

2.2. Instructional Design    

The course of the EG was implemented in a computer lab with the support of Moodle, which is 
constructed by the school and offered to all courses on campus. To enhance student motivation and 
engagement, blended gamified instruction integrated learning activities implemented in the classroom 
and on Moodle, which were carefully designed with gamification elements. Students engaged in an 
organized three-period session each week, including a lecture using teacher-made PowerPoints 
materials and collaborative problem-solving on Q&A worksheets, followed by Moodle-based 
activities, such as online quizzes, discussion forums, and Wordwall game group competitions. Based 
on the framework of gamification and the literature review, the most suitable gaming elements were 
selected and integrated to meet the purpose of the study (as shown in Table 1), as illustrated below: 

Badges. Badges are visual logos presented as awards for completing a task or achieving 
educational goals. It serves as a demonstration of behavioral engagement in the learning environment, 
which is a feedback mechanism displayed by the system. Two types of badges were used in the EG: 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 180 

 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

early bird badges and completion badges. An early bird badge was offered to the earliest 3 groups to 
submit assignments. The groups who submitted an assignment completely earned a completion badge. 
The top 3 groups for earning badges were rewarded with prizes by the end of the course. Teams with 
good-quality postings may earn hidden badges, such as movie coupons, coffee coupons, and stationary 
coupons. 

Competition. To enhance the sense of achievement by creating an atmosphere of competition, a 
contest of group project presentation was arranged. Each team should sound record their PowerPoint 
presentation and upload it to Moodle for peer evaluation. Each group receives an average score from 
peer groups and the instructor. The top three groups receiving the highest scores will be awarded a 
trophy. 

Leaderboards. This special page lists the top-scoring students with their awards so that visitors can 
view, compare and recognize their achievements. Specific rules were set for the students’ engagement 
in the online learning activities. There were ten levels in total. The students were upgraded to the next 
level at a rate of 300 experience points (XP) per level. The leaderboard webpage (see Figure 1) is 
publicly accessible through Moodle and displays students shown in descending order by level and XP. 

Games. To stimulate students’ interest in learning, the test of linguistics knowledge was integrated 
with Wordwall games (https://wordwall.net/). The games were designed based on the content of 
instruction on a weekly basis. The students played the games by the end of each session. The winners 
earned bonuses as encouragement. A screenshot of a Wordwall game is shown in Figure 2. 

Table 1.  Motivating elements, gamification elements and rules in the EG 

Motivating elements  Gamification elements  Specification  
Long-term goal; access; 
challenge; collaboration 

The 1st place trophy The team with highest votes in the group 
presentation earns the 1st place trophy. 

Long-term goal; access; 
challenge; collaboration 

The 2nd place trophy The team with the second highest votes in 
the group presentation earns the 2nd place 
trophy. 

Long-term goal; access; 
challenge; collaboration 

The 3rd place trophy The team with the third highest votes in the 
group presentation earns the 3rd place 
trophy. 

Short-term goal; 
feedback; challenge 

Movie badge; Coffee badge; Stationery 
badge 

Teams with good quality postings may earn 
badges, such as movie coupons, coffee 
coupons, and stationery coupons. 

Short-term goal; 
feedback; challenge 

Wordwall games The winners may earn bonuses on weekly 
bases. 

Long-term goal; access; 
feedback; challenge 

Level up; progress tracker; leaderboard Level 1: Completing 5 online activities 
Level 2: Completing 10 online activities 
Level 3: Completing 15 online activities 

To evaluate students’ learning engagement, rules for collecting experience points (X-points) were 
created on Moodle. Students may acquire experience points for different learning activities, such as 
viewing teaching materials or submitting assignments. The rules for collecting X-points are listed in 
Table 2. 

Table 2.  Rules of earning experience points on Moodle 

Activity description  Number of experience points   

Quiz submitted 10 points 

I want to ask questions(Post created) 10 points 

Feedback: Response submitted (1-12) 10 points 

Forum: Discussion created 10 points 

Forum: Post created 10 points 

Course: course viewed 5 points 

Course module viewed/wiki page updated 5 points 

Questionnaire (EG-posttest) 5 points 

Course: Course viewed 2 points 

https://wordwall.net/


181 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

 

 

Fig. 1.  Screenshot of the leaderboard. 

 

Fig. 2.  Screenshot of a Wordwall game. 

In contrast, the CG received a lecture-based instruction with the same textbook (O’Grady & 
Archibald, 2021) and teaching materials as scheduled in the EG. Using the same login and password 
as their university webmails, students could access the course materials, including PowerPoints and 
other online resources, on the Moodle course management system (CMS). The major difference 
between the EG and CG was that the students in the EG received the learning materials and activities 
constructed to integrate gamification theory, while the CG received a nongamified instruction, which 
was conducted face-to-face in a traditional classroom. No gamification element was integrated into 
the instruction offered to the CG. 

2.3. Procedure and Data Collection 

The study was conducted at one linguistics course offered at a university in southern Taiwan. The 
subjects received gamified instructions implemented in the CMS. The system provided detailed log 
reports of individual students’ participation time and online activities. The course was offered three 
hours per week and lasted for 18 weeks. After the first week of course introduction, the pretest of the 
questionnaire on learning motivation was conducted in week three. The same post-test was 
administered again during week 17. A consent form was provided to all the participants. 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 182 

 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

To investigate whether there was any change in students’ learning motivation after the intervention, 
a questionnaire adapted from the version used in Keller (2010) was used. The original version contains 
36 items in four dimensions: attention, relevance, confidence and satisfaction. To meet the purpose of 
this study, the revised version will contain 26 items. Prior to the actual test administration, the tests 
will be piloted for content by the students (n = 10) who are not attending the experimental course. All 
the problematic questions were removed or revised according to the students’ given feedback in the 
pilot study. Using a five-point Likert scale (code 1: not true; 2: slightly true; 3: moderately true; 4: 
mostly true; 5: very true), the questionnaire elicited students’ perceptions of their learning interest or 
motivation. The same survey will be administered twice to the EG and CG before and after the course, 
respectively. 

The CMS automatically records students’ log data, which are collected for analysis. The log 
analysis provides further information about students’ behavior engagement, which cannot be clearly 
observed in class. The following variables were selected for analysis of the students’ online learning 
activities.  

1. Discussion forum and post: The number of posts submitted to the discussion forum. 

2. Online quizzes: The number of submission rates of online quizzes. 

3. Q & A worksheets: The accuracy rates of the Q&A worksheets. 

4. Wordwall games: The accuracy rates of weekly Wordwall games on linguistic concepts. 

5. Badges: The number of badges the students had acquired. 

6. Online resource view: The total number of viewed online resources/teaching materials 
prepared for the course.  

3. Findings and Discussion 

3.1. Effects on Learning Motivation  

To investigate whether the EG participants had a higher level of perceived learning interest 
following the intervention, the pre- and post-questionnaire on motivation were compared using 
independent samples t-tests. The results of the t-tests are provided in Table 3. Both groups of students 
showed an increase in learning interest after the instruction. In the pre- and post-questionnaires, the 
EG's mean perceived learning interest increased from 3.48 (SD =0.91) to 3.93 (SD =0.87), whereas 
the CG's mean score improved from 3.56 (SD = 0.52) to 3.57 (SD = 0.46). The t-tests indicated that 
there was no difference between the groups prior to instruction (t = 1.479, p = 0.439, n.s.), but there 
was a significant difference after instruction between the EG and CG (t = 5.434, p < 0.001). Significant 
differences were also found in the post-test between the EG and CG in each subsection of attention (t 
= 0.956, p < 0.05), relevance (t = 3.517, p < 0.01), confidence (t = 1.249, p < 0.05), and satisfaction (t 
= 4.217, p < 0.001). 

The results of the SLI appear optimistic overall, as they reveal a positive effect on all four 
dimensions. The variables of satisfaction (M=4.35; SD= 0.81) and relevance (M=4.12; SD=0.63) were 
scored higher than the other two. The students were highly satisfied with the course, which was 
reflected in item 26: “It was a pleasure to work on such a well-designed lesson” (M = 4.56, SD = 
0.87). Among the most crucial elements, attention is needed to empower and engage students in 
educational activities (Barata et al., 2013). The attention level of the pupils significantly increased in 
this study as they completed their gamified assignments. Students' engagement in and completion of 
online assignments can be positively impacted by the use of gamification elements such as badges, 
leaderboard, and points (Majuri et al., 2018). However, it seems that the growth of students’ 
confidence is limited. Most of the students did not have the impression that the course was easy for 
them when they first saw the course (item 16, M = 2.18, SD = 1.16). How to increase student 
confidence in learning, especially in linguistics, remains a challenge for instructors. This result mostly 
corroborates the findings of prior research in this field that associated gamification with learning 
motivation and engagement (Baah et al., 2023; Bouchrika, et al., 2021; García-López, et al., 2023). 
The relatively strong association shown between gamification design and the cognitive theory of 
language learning could be attributed to these variables. On the one hand, gamification design 



183 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

concepts include assisting learners in choosing pertinent words and visuals, minimizing the burden on 
a single processing channel, and presenting coherent verbal and pictorial information (Kapp, 2012). 

Table 3.  Rules of earning experience points on Moodle 

Motivation 
categories  

CG (n = 37) EG (n = 43)  
t-test for equality of 

means  

Mean SD Mean SD t 
Sig. (2-
tailed) 

Pre-Attention 3.73 0.53 3.55 1.22 0.112 0.370 

Post-Attention 3.67 0.66 3.91 0.76  0.956 0.026* 

Pre-Relevance 3.41 0.81 3.54 1.17  0.813 0.478 

Post-Relevance 3.05 0.71 4.12 0.63 3.817 0.001*** 

Pre-Confidence 3.56 0.71 3.48 1.08  0.623 0.581 

Post-Confidence 3.53 0.61 3.67 0.86 1.249 0.015* 

Pre-Satisfaction 3.53 0.62 3.33 1.12 0.937 0.482 

Post-Satisfaction 3.51 0.73 4.35 0.81 4.217 0.000*** 

Pre-overall 3.56 0.52 3.48 0.91 1.479 0.439 

Post-overall 3.57 0.46 3.93 0.87 5.434 0.000*** 

Note: * p < .05, ** p < 0.01, *** P < .001. 

3.2. Effects on Learning Engagement  

Students’ participation in online activities was taken as an indicator of learning engagement. 
Online quizzes were given to evaluate students’ comprehension of the material covered in that specific 
week. Learners’ recollection of basic concepts and information was assessed through online multiple-
choice questions. The weekly post-class quiz submission rate and scores served as gauges for the level 
of cognitive engagement among the students. Figure 3 shows the submission rates of weekly quizzes 
between the groups. Moreover, both the CG and EG scores were tallied and examined. Mann–Whitney 
tests were performed to determine whether there were statistically significant differences between the 
quiz scores for the CG and EG. Significant differences were found between the groups on quizzes 3, 
4, 6 and 7. The results indicated that the EG (n = 43) significantly outperformed the CG (n = 37) in 
quiz 3 (U = 132, r = 0.34, p < 0.01), quiz 4 (U = 276, r = 0.27, p < 0.05), quiz 6 (U = 105, r = 46, p < 
0.001) and quiz 7 (U = 281, r = 41, p < 0.01). No differences were found on quizzes 1, 2, 5, and 8. 

The discussion forum was created on a weekly basis for students to raise their questions about 
learning content or reflection on learning linguistics. It is intended to increase students’ engagement 
and student–student or teacher–student interactions. The data were collected from 8 discussion 
forums. Out of 43 students in the EG, a total of 634 actions (including posting questions or responding 
to questions) were submitted over the course. This represents an average of 63 submissions per week 
and 14 actions per student. For all of the examined weeks, comparisons of submissions to the 
discussion forum were made between the CG and EG. As shown in Figure 4, in the first four 
discussions, the submission rates were similar for both groups; however, from discussions 5 to 8, the 
differences in the submission rates became more obvious. For example, in discussion 6, only 24% of 
the CGs posted or responded to the discussion, whereas 66% of the EGs did. At the end of this course, 
only 18% of the CGs submitted responses, whereas 56% of the EGs did. This indicates that whereas 
the number of students who raised questions in the CG gradually decreased over time, the submission 
rate was reasonably high and steady in the EG. 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 184 

 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

 

Fig. 3.  Weekly post-class quiz submission rates between the groups.  

 

Fig. 4.  Submission rates of the discussion forums between the groups. 

Data collected from student participation in online activities revealed that gamification had a 
positive impact on students' engagement. Specifically, the students in the EG had a higher submission 
rate for quizzes (74.25%) and discussion forums (78%) than did those in the CG (43.63% for quizzes 
and 49% for the discussion forum). This suggests that the EG was more likely to engage in thinking 
of issues related to linguistics and that the students were more willing to interact with the instructor 
and peer students. According to the results of the Mann‒Whitney tests, the scores of the EG were 
significantly better than those of the CG on four out of the eight quizzes. This provides evidence that 
the participants in the EG were involved in more cognitive activities in the gamified instructions. 

To explore possible causes that might have influenced student engagement in the EG, we consulted 
the participants for their in-depth comments. Ten participants agreed to be interviewed. The majority 
of the participants responded positively to the effects of gamification on learning linguistics. 
Concerning the key question about the most interesting activities that would increase their learning 
engagement in the course, the most intriguing activity was the Wordwall games of linguistics 
knowledge. The students commented that the atmosphere of the group competition reduced their 
anxiety in answering the questions because group members could support each other; thus, they could 

66
72

40

53
61

12
18

27

85
93 92 90

84

68

57

25

Quiz 1 Quiz 2 Quiz 3 Quiz 4 Quiz 5 Quiz 6 Quiz 7 Quiz 8 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

The submission rates of online quizzes between 
the CG and EG  

CG EG

75
81

63
74

35
24 22 18

82
94

82
89

67 66
58 56

0

20

40

60

80

100

Submission rate of discussion forum between 
the CG and EG

Control group Experimental group 



185 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

learn linguistics without feeling stressed. Next, bonuses were regarded as a motivating element to 
engage in the learning activities since collecting bonuses could help them pass the course, which was 
the most important motivation of learning for many students. Furthermore, points and leaderboard 
were equally vital for participation. For some students, the sense of achievement accompanied by 
earning badges and advancing on the leaderboard was their driving force of learning, which was 
similar to the context of playing games. 

 

3.3. Relationships between Gamified Learning Activities and Motivation  

Pearson correlation coefficients were used to examine the relationships between motivation and 
learning activities, including discussion forums, after-class online quizzes, Q&A worksheets, 
WordWall games and badges. These activities were performed on a weekly basis for 12 weeks in total. 
To run the correlation tests, the accuracy rates for the online quizzes and Q&A worksheets were 
calculated. Since there were no correct answers for the posts on the discussion forum, students’ 
submission rates, including asking and responding to questions, were collected. For WordWall games 
and badges, students’ attempts to play the games and the number of badges were recorded. The results 
of the correlation tests revealed that learning motivation was significantly correlated with discussion 
forum (r = 0.427, p = 0.017), badge (r = 0.437, p = 0.029) and WordWall games (r = 0.581, p = 0.003). 
However, no significant correlation existed between quizzes (r = 0.284, p = 0.085) and Q&A 
worksheets (r = 0.227, p = 0.062). 

Multiple regression analysis was performed to assess the extent to which learning activities could 
predict learning motivation. A significant regression was found (F (4, 41) = 5.307, p = 0.004). The R2 
was 0.515, suggesting that learning activities explained approximately 51.5% of the variance in 
learning motivation. Only the variables of discussion forum (ß = 0.518, t = 3.058, p = 0.003), 
WordWall games (ß = 0.426, t = 2.52, p = 0.012) and badges (ß = 0.707, t = 4.792, p = 0.000) were 
entered into the regression model. The discussion forum explained 32.5% of the variance in learning 
motivation (R2 = 0.325, Cohen’s f 2 = 0.47), the WordWall games explained 41.8% of the variance in 
learning motivation (R2 = 0.418, Cohen’s f 2 = 0.51), and the badges explained 51.3% of the variance 
in learning motivation (R2 = 0.513, Cohen’s f 2 = 0.49). However, no significant regression was found 
between quizzes, Q&A worksheets and learning motivation. 

The structural model was used to investigate the relationships between learning activities and 
learning motivation in four dimensions. Examining the path coefficients, the paths from the discussion 
forum to attention (ß = 0.596, t = 3.564, p = 0.002), confidence (ß = 0.462, t = 3.497, p = 0.019), 
satisfaction (ß = 0.563, t = 3.291, p = 0.003), and learning motivation overall (ß = 0.480, t = 3.213, p 
= 0.015) were significantly positive. Significant positive coefficients were also found for the paths 
from WordWall games to satisfaction (ß = 0.362, t = 2.115, p = 0.026) and learning motivation overall 
(ß = 0.548, t = 4.196, p = 0.002). Moreover, the paths (see Figure 5) from badges to attention (ß = 
0.564, t = 3.278, p = 0.003), relevance (ß = 0.542, t = 3.089, p = 0.005), confidence (ß = 0.506, t = 
2.813, p = 0.010), satisfaction (ß = 0.707, t = 4.792, p = 0.000), and overall learning motivation (ß = 
0.437, t = 2.331, p = 0.029) were significantly positive. The results indicated that discussion forums, 
WordWall games and badges were significantly correlated with learning motivation, especially in the 
dimension of satisfaction. 

To answer the third research question, the relationships between gamified learning activities and 
EFL students’ learning motivation were analyzed. The learning activities implemented in gamified 
instruction significantly influenced EFL students’ motivation. Pearson correlation tests revealed that 
learning motivation was significantly correlated with discussion forums, WordWall games and 
badges. Multiple regression analysis revealed that discussion forums, WordWall games and badges 
were significant predictors of learning motivation, explaining 32.5%, 41.8% and 51.3% of the 
variance in learning motivation, respectively. These findings suggest that interactive and gamification 
activities such as discussion forums, badges and educational games are particularly effective in 
boosting various dimensions of motivation, especially satisfaction. 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 186 

 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

 

Fig. 5. Path model of the relationships between learning activities and motivation. 

Regarding the choice of gamification elements, the results of the study indicate that discussion 
forums, WordWall games and badges were the learning activities that considerably enhanced learners’ 
motivation. In particular, the students made many positive comments in the discussion forum. The 
significance of feedback has been documented in prior studies. According to Dehghanzadeh et al. 
(2021), the most frequently applied gamification elements for learning ESL are “feedback, challenge, 
point, reward, leaderboard, and level” (p. 945). In their study, the motivational communication 
strategies used by Ucar and Kumtepe (2020) were mainly messages, emails, and videos sent to learners 
through the learning management system, which successfully increased students’ motivation to learn 
English. This finding is not surprising since feedback is a promising gamification element that is 
regularly used to improve students’ critical thinking, reasoning and argumentation skills (Noroozi, et 
al., 2020). 

Based on the results of the present study, three major findings are yielded. First, the empirical data 
support the positive effects of gamification on learning interest and engagement among EFL students, 
which suggests that motivational and gamification elements are a strong combination in instructional 
design. Second, the technical support from the CMS makes the operation and maintenance of the 
course considerably manageable for the instructors. For example, diverse options for activities and 
flexible time are vital for learners’ willingness to participate in a course. Additionally, the automatic 
presentation of the leaderboard can allow students to view the current status of their experience value 
and easily make comparisons with others. Third, in gamified instruction, individual and cooperative 
activities should be well balanced. In this course, we set up group activities (e.g., Wordwall games, 
group Q&A worksheets, and group presentations) and individual activities (e.g., online quizzes and 
discussion forums). These learning activities were designed and arranged with the weighing of 
difficulty level and duration, since frustration and challenge might affect commitment. Despite the 
abundance of research on the advantages of gamification in encouraging students in education, it is 
yet not clear how long such an effect might be retained. Earlier research (Hanus & Fox, 2015; Koivisto 
& Hamari, 2014) revealed that learners’ curiosity about new technology will eventually weaken. 
Bouchrika et al. (2021) reported that the novel effect of introducing an innovation to the university 
community might account for an increase in active users and contributions, which may be influenced 
by the platform and construction of gamification. 

4. Conclusion 

In this study, we applied gamification-enhanced instruction in linguistics to examine whether this 
approach can help enhance EFL students’ learning interest and engagement. Various gamification 
elements are incorporated, including badges, leaderboard, points and competition. The learning 



187 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

experiences of gamified and nongamified instruction, on students in two consecutive years were 
compared and analyzed from various aspects. The results were promising. A comparison of the 
questionnaires on learning motivation before and after the instruction revealed that there was no 
difference between the EG and CG in the pre-test; however, a significant difference was confirmed 
between groups in the post-test, indicating that the gamified instruction helped enhance students’ 
learning interest in different dimensions. Furthermore, the EG had higher submission rates in online 
quizzes and discussion forums than did the CG, which demonstrates that the gamified model has a 
positive effect on students’ engagement. Although the comparison of the final exam scores revealed 
that the EG significantly outperformed the CG, further evidence is needed to demonstrate that 
gamification can facilitate students’ performance. It is therefore suggested that future research focus 
more on sophisticated assessments of learning outcomes and the retention of learning interest and 
engagement. This research highlights the potential of gamification-enhanced instruction to transform 
EFL learning by fostering greater interest and engagement among students. While the enhanced 
performance in the final exam suggests the model's effectiveness, the need for more comprehensive 
assessments underscores the importance of refining this approach. These findings provide valuable 
insights for educators aiming to adopt innovative teaching strategies and emphasize the importance of 
designing gamified learning experiences that sustain long-term interest and deepen learning outcomes. 

 

 

Acknowledgment 

The author extends her gratitude to the participants involved in this study who have voluntarily 
responded positively to the inquiry.   

 

Declarations  

Author contribution : Yea-Ru Tsai is the sole author and responsible for all of this 
manuscript. 

Funding statement : The research is funded by the Ministry of Science and Technology 
(MOST), Taiwan, under the Project No. NSTC 112-2410-H-214-003. 

Conflict of interest : The author declares no conflict of interest. 

Ethics Declaration : I as author acknowledge that this work has been written based on 
ethical research that conforms to the regulations of our university and 
that I have obtained permission from the relevant institutes when 
collecting data. I support ELTEJ Journal in maintaining high 
standards of personal conduct and practicing honesty in all our 
professional practices and endeavors. 

Additional information : Research ethics approval was obtained by the Institutional Review 
Board of Human Research Ethics Committee at National Cheng Kung 
University, Taiwan. 

 

 

 

REFERENCES  

Albrecht, J. R., & Karabenick, S. A. (2018). Relevance for learning and motivation in education. The 
Journal of Experimental Education, 86(1), 1-10. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2017.1380593  

Alsawaier, R. S. (2018). The effect of gamification on motivation and engagement. The International 

Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(1), 56–79. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-

02-2017-0009  

https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.2017.1380593
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-02-2017-0009
https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-02-2017-0009


ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 188 

 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

Alvia González, G. N. (2022). The influence of gamification on speaking skills. Facultad de 

Filosofía,Letras y Ciencias de la Educación: Universidad de Guayaquil. 

https://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/6093378  

Amin, S. N. (2021). Gamification of Duolingo in rising student’s English language learning 

motivation. Jurnal Bahasa Lingua Scientia, 13(2), 191-213. 

https://doi.org/10.21274/ls.2021.13.2.191-213 

Baah, C., Govender, I., & Rontala Subramaniam, P. (2023). Exploring the role of gamification in 

motivating students to learn. Cogent Education, 10(1), 2210045. 

https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2210045  

Baldauf, M., Brandner, A., & Wimmer, C. (2017). Mobile and gamified blended learning for 

language teaching: Studying requirements and acceptance by students, parents, and teachers in 

the wild. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous 

Multimedia (pp. 13-24). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3152832.3152842  

Baptista, G., & Oliveira, T. (2018). Gamification and serious games: A literature meta-analysis and 

integrative model. Computers in Human Behavior, 92, 306-315. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.030  

Barata, G., Gama, S., Jorge, J., & Goncalves, D. (2013). Engaging engineering students with 

gamification. In Proceedings of the 2013 5th International Conference on Games and Virtual 

Worlds for Serious Applications (VS-GAMES) (pp. 1-8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/VS-

GAMES.2013.6624228  

Belkhouche, B., Al Darei, N., Ali, S., Al Mandhari, S., & Al Mehairi, M. (2014). Learning Arabic 

through games. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual Conference on Computer Games Multimedia 

and Allied Technologies (CGAT 2014). DOI:10.5176/2251-1679_CGAT14.03   

Bouchrika, I., Harrati, N., Wanick, V., & Wills, G. (2021). Exploring the impact of gamification on 

student engagement and involvement with e-learning systems. Interactive Learning 

Environments, 29(8), 1244-1257. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1623267  

Buckley, P., & Doyle, E. (2016). Gamification and student motivation. Interactive learning 

environments, 24(6), 1162-1175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.964263  

Dehghanzadeh, H., Fardanesh, H., Hatami, J., Talaee, E., & Noroozi, O. (2021). Using gamification 

to support learning English as a second language: a systematic review. Computer Assisted 

Language Learning, 34(7), 934-957. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1648298   

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://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1357095  

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 (pp. 9-15). 

https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040  

Gaikwad, G., & Jain, A. (2017). Feelbot: Reducing use of bad words in children through wearable 

using artificial intelligence and gamification. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on 

Interaction Design and Children (pp. 777-781). ACM. 

https://doi.org/10.1145/3078072.310587  

García-López, I. M., Acosta-Gonzaga, E., & Ruiz-Ledesma, E. F. (2023). Investigating the impact 

of gamification on student motivation, engagement, and performance. Education Sciences, 

13(8), 813, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13080813  

 

 

https://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/6093378
https://doi.org/10.21274/ls.2021.13.2.191-213
https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2023.2210045
https://doi.org/10.1145/3152832.3152842
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.11.030
https://doi.org/10.1109/VS-GAMES.2013.6624228
https://doi.org/10.1109/VS-GAMES.2013.6624228
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1623267
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2014.964263
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1648298
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1357095
https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
https://doi.org/10.1145/3078072.310587
https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13080813


189 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 
 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

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. Computers & Education, 80, 152-161. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019  

Homer, R., Hew, K. F., & Tan, C. Y. (2018). Comparing digital badges-and-points with classroom 

token systems: Effects on elementary school ESL students’ classroom behavior and English 

learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(1), 137-151. 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26273875  

Huang, B., Hew, K. F., & Lo, C. K. (2019). Investigating the effects of gamification-enhanced flipped 

learning on undergraduate students’ behavioral and cognitive engagement. Interactive learning 

environments, 27(8), 1106-1126. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495653  

Huang, R., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Sommer, M., Zhu, J., Stephen, A., Valle, N., & Li, J. (2020). The impact 

of gamification in educational settings on student learning outcomes: A meta-analysis. 

Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 1875-1901. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09807-z  

Kapp, K. M. (2012). The gamification of learning and instruction: Game-based methods and 

strategies for training and education. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer. 

Keller, J. M. (1987). Development and use of the ARCS model of instructional design. Journal of 

Instructional Development, 10(3), 2–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02905780  

Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach. 

New York: Springer. 

Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2014). Demographic differences in perceived benefits from gamification. 

Computers in Human Behavior, 35, 179-188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.007  

Lahji, S. (2024). Improving English Learning Motivation With the English App Duolingo. 

Morfologi: Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, Bahasa, Sastra dan Budaya, 2(5), 194-203. 

https://doi.org/10.61132/morfologi.v2i5.947  

Landers, R. N., & Landers, A. K. (2014). An empirical test of the theory of gamified learning: The 

effect of leaderboards on time-on-task and academic performance. Simulation & Gaming, 

45(6), 769-785. https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781145636  

Loewen, S., Crowther, D., Isbell, D. R., Kim, K. M., Maloney, J., Miller, Z. F., & Rawal, H. (2019). 

Mobile-assisted language learning: A Duolingo case study. ReCALL, 31(3), 293-311. DOI: 

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344019000065  

Looyestyn, J., Kernot, J., Boshoff, K., Ryan, J., Edney, S., & Maher, C. (2017). Does gamification 

increase engagement with online programs? A systematic review. PloS one, 12(3), e0173403. 

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173403  

Majuri, J., Koivisto, J., & Hamari, J. (2018). Gamification of education and learning: A review of 

empirical literature. In Proceedings of the 2nd International GamiFIN Conference, GamiFIN 

2018 (pp. 11-19). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2186/paper2.pdf.  

Martin, A. J., & Dowson, M. (2009). Interpersonal relationships, motivation, engagement, and 

achievement: Yields for theory, current issues, and educational practice. Review of educational 

research, 79(1), 327-365. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430832558  

Mei, S. Y., Ju, S. Y., & Adam, Z. (2018). Implementing Quizizz as game-based learning in the Arabic 

classroom. European Journal of Social Science Education and Research, 5(1), 194-198. 

https://doi.org/10.2478/ejser-2018-0022  

Metwally, A. H. S., Nacke, L. E., Chang, M., Wang, Y., & Yousef, A. M. F. (2021). Revealing the 

hotspots of educational gamification: An umbrella review. International Journal of 

Educational Research, 109, 101832.  

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26273875
https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1495653
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09807-z
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02905780
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.007
https://doi.org/10.61132/morfologi.v2i5.947
https://doi.org/10.1177/10468781145636
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344019000065
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0173403
http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2186/paper2.pdf
https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430832558
https://doi.org/10.2478/ejser-2018-0022


ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 190 

 Vol. 7, No. 3, December 2024, pp. 177-190 

 Tsai, Y. R. (Leveraging gamification to enhance motivation and engagement…..) 

Muthukumar, B., & Neelakandan, V. (2019). Enriching “speaking skills” through gamification with 

cultural considerations. Think India Journal, 22(4), 4062–4065. 

https://thinkindiaquarterly.org/index.php/think-india/article/view/9611/5360  

Noroozi, O., Dehghanzadeh, H., & Talaee, E. (2020). A systematic review on the impacts of game-

based learning on argumentation skills. Entertainment Computing, 35, 100369. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2020.100369  

O’Grady W. & Archibald, J. (2021). Contemporary Linguistic Analysis. Toronto: Pearson Longman. 

Plass, J., Homer, B., & Kinzer, C. (2015). Foundations of game-based learning. Educational 

Psychologist, 50(4), 258-283. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533  

Rachels, J. R., & Rockinson-Szapkiw, A. J. (2018). The effects of a mobile gamification app on 

elementary students’ Spanish achievement and self-efficacy. Computer Assisted Language 

Learning, 31(1-2), 72-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1382536   

Rowe, J., Shores, L., Mott, B., & Lester, J. (2011). Integrating learning, problem solving, and 

engagement in narrative-centered learning environments. International Journal of Artificial 

Intelligence in Education, 21, 115-133. https://doi.org/10.3233/JAI-2011-019   

Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2020). The gamification of learning: A meta-analysis. Educational 

Psychology Review, 32(1), 77–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w  

Shu, L. (2018). Student engagement in game-based learning: A literature review [Master’s thesis, 

Texas University]. Texas University Repository. 

Sun, J. C.-Y., & Hsieh, P.-H. (2018). Application of a gamified interactive response system to 

enhance the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, student engagement, and attention of English 

learners. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 21(3), 104-111. 

http://www.jstor.org/stable/26458511  

Ucar, H., & Kumtepe, A. T. (2020). Effects of the ARCS‐V‐based motivational strategies on online 

learners' academic performance, motivation, volition, and course interest. Journal of Computer 

Assisted Learning, 36(3), 335-349. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12404  

Werbach, K., & Hunter, D. (2015). The gamification toolkit: Dynamics, mechanics, and components 

for the win. Wharton Digital Press. 

Xi, N., & Hamari, J. (2020). Does gamification affect brand engagement and equity? A study in 

online brand communities. Journal of Business Research, 109, 449–460. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.058  

Zhang, Z., & Crawford, J. (2024). EFL learners’ motivation in a gamified formative assessment: The 

case of Quizizz. Education and Information Technologies, 29(5), 6217-6239. 

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12034-7  

Zhou, L., Yu, J., & Shi, Y. (2017). Learning as adventure: An app designed with gamification 

elements to facilitate language learning. In International Conference on HCI in Business, 

Government, and Organizations (pp. 266-275). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-

58481-2_21 

 

https://thinkindiaquarterly.org/index.php/think-india/article/view/9611/5360
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2020.100369
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122533
https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1382536
https://doi.org/10.3233/JAI-2011-019
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w
http://www.jstor.org/stable/26458511
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12404
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.058
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12034-7
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58481-2_21
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58481-2_21

	1. Introduction
	2. Method
	2.1. Participants
	2.2. Instructional Design
	2.3. Procedure and Data Collection

	3. Findings and Discussion
	3.1. Effects on Learning Motivation
	3.2. Effects on Learning Engagement
	3.3. Relationships between Gamified Learning Activities and Motivation

	4. Conclusion
	Acknowledgment
	Declarations


