How Fun Overcame Fear: The Gamification of a Graduate-Level Statistics Course

Abstract

Innovative instructional methods can help improve student engagement and learning outcomes when teaching difficult subjects, such as statistics. This instructional innovation article illustrates how gamification can be applied in management education to improve students’ learning experience, engagement, and acquisition of knowledge. Our purpose is to demonstrate how gamification is not only a powerful way to build on the use of games and game thinking in our field, but also a versatile application of education technology that could potentially enhance the way management knowledge is taught. Furthermore, it is a low-risk way for management educators to join and contribute to the larger virtual revolution. We document the process of combining the Technology, Pedagogy, and Content Knowledge (TPACK) competency framework and the Mechanics, Dynamics, and Aesthetics (MDA) design framework to create both theoretically and practically motivated gamification designs in a graduate-level statistics class. With student data and feedback, we demonstrate that gamification helped create a positive learning experience, facilitated interactions in the course, and assisted the learning of statistical knowledge. We offer suggestions and concrete examples for interested educators to implement gamification in their courses.

Keywords

gamification statistics online education education technology MDA design framework TPACK model

Introduction

Statistical training is an indispensable part of business school curricula, yet 75 to 80% of graduate students experience statistics anxiety (Onwuegbuzie et al., 2000) that negatively affects their learning (Onwuegbuzie & Seaman, 1995). This apprehension toward statistics is more common for students in social science programs than their counterparts in natural sciences, technology, engineering, or math (Cronin et al., 2011). These negative attitudes that students have toward statistics courses lead them to be less engaged and perform poorly (Ashaari et al., 2011; Chen et al., 2019), particularly in statistics courses offered online (Redpath, 2012). When teaching difficult subjects, innovative instructional methods are needed to help reduce anxiety and enhance engagement (Pan & Tang, 2004; Townsend et al., 1998).

Gamification is one of the most recent developments in a long history of games and play in management education (Deterding, 2019). Defined as the application of video game elements in non-game contexts to promote motivation and engagement in learning (Deterding, 2012), gamification is a step beyond the game-based learning that many management educators are accustomed to using. Game-based learning uses games as vessels for learning topical content (Issacs, 2015; Keeler, 2014; S. Schöbel et al., 2021), and student interest usually ends after they have completed the games (Folmar, 2015). In-class experiential exercises (e.g., Trinh, 2022a) and business simulation games (e.g., Gibbons et al., 2022) are examples of game-based learning. In contrast, gamification uses game elements in educational settings, such as points, badges, and leaderboards (Vesa & Harviainen, 2019), to create a playful atmosphere conducive to learning (Deterding, 2012; Landers et al., 2018) and to generate long-lasting motivation and engagement among learners (Folmar, 2015; Simões et al., 2013).

In this article, we illustrate how gamification can be applied in management education to improve students’ learning experience and engagement in order to facilitate the acquisition of knowledge. Our purpose is to demonstrate how gamification is not only a powerful way to build on the strengths of games and game thinking to teach difficult subjects in our field (Trinh, 2022b), but also a versatile application of education technology that could potentially disrupt the way management knowledge is taught. Even though the gamification process illustrates how technologies can disrupt the teaching and learning experience in a good way, we also demonstrate that implementing such a technologies-enabling disruption need not be complicated or even high-tech. We first provide a brief review of the design thinking behind gamification and the benefits of gamification in management education. We then document gamification design principles, attributes, and processes in a graduate-level statistics class. With student data and feedback, we demonstrate that gamification achieved three objectives: creating a positive learning experience for students, encouraging frequent interactions with the instructor and classmates, and facilitating the acquisition of statistical knowledge. Finally, we discuss the implications for management education.

Gamification in Management Education

Gamification: A Design Process, not a Product

The term “gamification” is generally used to describe “the design process used to identify and add game elements to an existing system in a meaningful and impactful way” (Landers, 2019, p. 137). It differs from serious games, defined as games “in which education (in its various forms) is the primary goal, rather than entertainment” (Michael & Chen, 2005, p. 17). This conceptual distinction between serious games and gamification is important for several reasons. First, experiential learning exercises and business simulations commonly used in management education should be categorized as serious games instead of gamification. In this sense, management education has a long history of using games, yet has been slow to adopt gamification. Second, because gamification is inherently a design process, it is most conceptually similar to game design, not to games (Landers et al., 2018). When management educators adopt gamification, they are not creating a game or an activity, but instead are using game elements to alter the learning experience. Third, due to these distinctions, the ways in which gamification could be used in management education differ from how games have been used. While serious games are intended to achieve a learning purpose directly, gamification creates motivational affordances that affect psychological outcomes and indirectly influence behavioral outcomes (Hamari et al., 2014; Landers, 2014). In our example of a statistics course below, the instructor used different avatars to react to students’ accurate and inaccurate answers on quizzes. Students may enjoy seeing the “correct” avatar (a positive psychological reaction) and thus try harder on the quiz (a behavioral outcome), but they are unlikely to learn from the avatars themselves (a gamification attribute). Finally, serious games are whole entities with a beginning, middle, and end, and the lesson intended to be learned must be inclusively presented within the game. Gamification, on the other hand, is composed of separate design elements utilized purposefully (S. Schöbel et al., 2021). Therefore, management educators can pick and choose different game attributes to achieve their desired outcomes.

Benefits of Gamification in Management Education

Although the use of gamification in management education has been limited (Landers et al., 2018), research thus far has shown generally favorable outcomes for students. S. M. Schöbel et al. (2022) used points and badges in an online training program in a business and information systems management course. Using an experimental research design, they found that the use of points and badges led to students having greater feelings of satisfaction and emotional engagement in the learning process, which ultimately led to their enhanced problem-solving skills. Kauppinen and Choudhary (2021) used rewards and Kahoot! in an entrepreneurship education course and found that the presence of a reward offered to the best player heightened students’ motivation to participate. In a similar vein, Huang and Hew (2021) used badges and a leaderboard in an information management course and demonstrated that their gamification design enhanced students’ completion of course assignments and the quality of the work being completed. Dias (2017) used points, badges, challenges, and leaderboards in an operations research/management science course. Students in the gamified courses had higher rates of participation and performance than those in the traditional course formats. These early research results further motivated the lead author to gamify her statistics course.

Integrating Gamification Into Teaching With the Technology, Pedagogy, and Content Knowledge (TPACK) Model

The TPACK framework, originally developed by Mishra and Koehler (2006), describes the kinds of knowledge that teachers need to successfully integrate technology into their teaching (Figure 1). There are three core components needed for effective teaching with technology: content knowledge—knowledge about the subject matter; pedagogical knowledge—knowledge about the processes, practices, and methods of teaching and learning; and technological knowledge—knowledge about information technology via mastery obtained from using them and continually adapting to their changes (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). Because technology can drastically change the way content is delivered, it can also affect what content is taught, and therefore, “integration efforts should be creatively designed or structured for particular subject matter ideas in specific classroom contexts” (Koehler & Mishra, 2009, p. 62).

Figure 1.

The technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) framework and its knowledge components.

Although a detailed explanation of the TPACK framework is outside of the scope of this article, it is introduced here because it illustrates the interdependence among different bodies of knowledge that an individual or team should possess in order to effectively drive design and implementation decisions when wanting to integrate technology with teaching efforts. In connection with gamification, the TPACK framework is needed in the context of this article for 2 reasons. First, TPACK and gamification have a mutually beneficial relationship with each other regarding instructors’ competencies. Research has suggested that engagement with the TPACK framework improved teachers’ skills in developing and using gamification in their classes (Prabawa, 2017). At the same time, learning how to gamify also improved teachers’ understanding of TPACK and how its components interact (Figg & Jaipal-Jamani, 2015, 2018). Thus, gamification may not only be an innovative use of EdTech, but also a way to help teachers learn to better integrate technology into their curricula. Second, we wish to illustrate how our design decisions when gamifying this statistics course closely followed the TPACK framework. In our description of the process below, we first explain the institutional context, as well as the content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technological knowledge. We then describe the detailed design decisions and gamification attributes as the integration of all of the TPACK components.

The Contexts for the Instructional Innovation

Institutional Context

The lead author designed and gamified a graduate-level introductory statistics course in the Master of Science degree program in Organizational Leadership at a large, public university in the United States. Students in this program were mostly nontraditional students working full-time while concurrently taking graduate-level classes. Many students had never taken a statistics class prior to this course; others last took it in their undergraduate studies many years ago. This course is offered in an asynchronously online, accelerated format using Canvas as the main learning management system (LMS). Students often take this class in the second half of the program after completing several prerequisites. The class is a requirement for students completing the thesis track of the program (approximately 10% of students) and an elective class for students pursuing the applied capstone project track (90%). The duration of the course is 7 to 8 weeks, depending on the semester. The enrollment cap is 50 students per semester.

Content Knowledge

The learning objectives of the course are to help students apply statistical techniques to answer research questions and test hypotheses, engage in critical discussions related to quantitative data analysis, analyze quantitative data using SPSS, communicate results effectively in APA format, and demonstrate the ability to conduct research responsibly and ethically. This course covers topics in univariate and multivariate statistics, from sample size, central tendencies, and principles of null hypothesis testing to t-tests, ANOVAs, correlations, and regression analyses. This course assumes no prior knowledge of statistics nor proficiency in data processing.

Pedagogical Knowledge

The lead author has extensive experience teaching statistics and research methods at the undergraduate, MBA, and PhD levels and has been well-trained in the application of experiential learning theory (Kolb, 1984, 2015). She believes that students learn best when they engage in the learning process holistically and when they have a positive learning experience. Learning from failures and mistakes (Cannon & Edmondson, 2001; Edmondson, 2011; Weinzimmer & Esken, 2017) and social learning (Bandura & Walters, 1977; Vygotsky, 1978) are both very important in this process. In her experience teaching statistics, students tend to not come to class excited about learning a new skill. Instead, they are often apprehensive about the subject and sometimes withdraw from learning at the sight of large data tables or complicated charts. From a pedagogical standpoint, she would like to help students overcome their fear of statistics and develop a positive learning identity (Kolb & Kolb, 2009; Trinh, 2019) with regard to statistics. Therefore, she adopted the humanistic gamification design (Deterding, 2019) to create a hospitable learning space (Kolb & Kolb, 2005; Trinh et al., 2021) for students to learn statistics. Specifically, she had three objectives for gamification: create a positive learning experience, encourage more interactions in the course, and facilitate effective knowledge acquisition—in other words, the “fun” of gamification would overcome the “fear” of statistics. She continually improves the course with student feedback. To date, this course is currently in its seventh offering and has been certified by Quality Matters^® as a well-conceived, well-designed, and well-presented online course.

Technological Knowledge

Students enrolled in this course already possess sufficient technological literacy to engage with course materials effectively. They have taken a number of prerequisite courses in the same asynchronously online, accelerated format, and can navigate the online learning environment (e.g., engaging with the LMS, opening videos, taking screenshots, uploading assignments, and joining virtual office hours). Thus, the instructor posted instructions and video tutorials on Canvas to introduce new software to students. The university provided technical support through a 24/7 IT help desk and instructional designers to assist instructors in choosing the appropriate technological tools for their courses. Third-party tools that integrate with Canvas were available to the instructor.

The online delivery format itself presents additional challenges for this statistics class. Prior research has suggested that online learning may be more effective in applied and qualitative than quantitative subjects (Redpath, 2012). This is especially true with upper-level economics and statistics courses (Redpath, 2012), though it is unclear if the lack of success was due to the nature of the content matter or ineffective teaching methods. This is a problem at the heart of the TPACK model that course instructors and designers must solve using their integrated knowledge of technology, pedagogy, and content.

Design Decisions and Gamification Attributes

When designing this gamified course, the instructor adopted Hunicke et al.’s (2004) Mechanics, Dynamics, and Aesthetics (MDA) framework of game design. It is a tool to help designers, researchers, and scholars decompose, understand, and create coherence among the interrelated components of a game or a gamified system. While the framework is named in the causal order of “Mechanics → Dynamics → Aesthetics,” players experience the gamification in the opposite direction (Hunicke et al., 2004). Therefore, the instructor adopted an experience-driven design approach, as opposed to a feature-driven approach, as described below. Although the entire design process was supported by technology, this technologies-enabling disruption utilizes many skills that management educators already possess.

Step One: Decide Gamification Aesthetics

In game design, aesthetics is what makes a game “fun” for players. It describes the socioemotional outcomes that game designers want to evoke in players through the activities in gameplay. Examples of aesthetics include sensation (game as sense-pleasure), fantasy (game as make-believe), narrative (game as drama), challenge (game as obstacle course), fellowship (game as a social framework), discovery (game as uncharted territory), expression (game as self-discovery), and submission (game as a pastime). A social game, such as Charades, evokes the sense of “fun” from fellowship, expression, and challenge, while a role-playing game, such as Final Fantasy, makes it fun through fantasy, narrative, expression, discovery, challenge, and submission (Hunicke et al., 2004).

In this gamified statistics class, the instructor intended to make it fun by using the elements of fantasy, challenge, fellowship, discovery, and expression. Recent research has shown that incorporating fantasy into gamification promotes student learning and the quality of online interaction (Bai et al., 2022). She chose a comic-style textbook: Field’s (2016) An adventure in statistics: The reality enigma. The textbook narrates a musician’s journey through the fantasy land of Elpis: only by learning and applying statistics can he decipher the scientific report that his genius scientist girlfriend left behind after her disappearance. Students can follow the protagonist along this clichéd “save the princess” storyline, collect game items to enrich their own adventures, and defeat zombies and dragons along the way. As they learn new statistical content, unlock new quests, and discover more territories in quantitative research and data analysis, they will also encounter more challenges. Some are in the form of weekly practice exercises to help them understand new concepts and to practice their data analysis skills in Excel and SPSS, while others are tests they must pass to demonstrate competency in the subject. Best yet, students can also develop fellowship by working together in “boss battles”—weekly comprehensive statistical assignments based on real-world data that the entire class can collaborate on. If the class average exceeds 80%, all participating students will earn an extra reward. Students’ adventures in this course are somewhat personalized and thus allow them to strategize, express themselves, and realize their own learning strengths and weaknesses.

Step Two: Outline Gamification Dynamics

The second component of the MDA framework, dynamics, describes the mechanisms through which the gamification attributes create the desired aesthetic experiences (Hunicke et al., 2004). In this class, the fantasy element was created by introducing an imaginary land (the city of Elpis, presented in the textbook) with elements not seen in real life but frequently used in video games. Challenge was created by having obstacles for students to pass, quests to complete, and quizzes to work on. Fellowship was created by allowing students to share information and help one another, encouraging student collaboration on collective quests, and facilitating frequent interactions with the instructor. Discovery was created by letting students unlock more class content as they progressed and documented their learning journey. Finally, the expression element was created by allowing customizations for each student to have their own gameplay strategy and building a game economy with items to earn, purchase, and use. Table 1 presents the gamification attributes in this class along with the technological tools used to create them.

Table 1.

Gamification Attributes in the Course and Technologies Used to Create Them.

(1) Aesthetics	(2) Dynamics	(3) Mechanics	Technological tool(s)
Fantasy	Introducing an imaginary land with components not seen in real life but frequently used in video games	Comic-style textbook with a sci-fi storyline	N/A
		Quest names and badges consistent with the sci-fi and game theme	Badgr®, Microsoft PowerPoint®
		Video-game-like homepage and navigation	Microsoft PowerPoint®, LMS
Challenge	Having obstacles for students to pass, quests to complete, and quizzes to work on	Practice quizzes	LMS
		Collaborative boss battles	LMS
		Competency badge tests	LMS
Fellowship	Allowing students to share information and help one another; encouraging collaboration on boss battles; frequent interactions with the instructor	Lecture videos and statistical tutorial videos	Microsoft PowerPoint®, Screencast-O-Matic®, Playposit®
		Community forum	Discord®
		Virtual office hours and study sessions	Zoom®
Discovery	Letting students unlock more class content as they progress and document their learning journey	Discussions	LMS
		Bonus content (readings and quizzes)	LMS
		Adventure logs	LMS
Expression	Allowing customizations so that each student can have their own gameplay strategy; building a game economy with items to earn, purchase, and use	Avatars	Avatoon®, Bitmoji®
		Game money (“Elpis coins”)	LMS
		The item shop	Microsoft PowerPoint®, Discord®

Step Three: Align Gamification Mechanics

Mechanics are components of the game—levels, assets, content, actions, and control mechanisms—presented to players that support overall gameplay dynamics (Hunicke et al., 2004). As demonstrated in Table 1, these attributes were created consistently with the aforementioned aesthetics and dynamics components. More so, these attributes utilize all of the components of TPACK and intertwine with one another to create a unique gameplay experience.

To instill a sense of fantasy, the instructor created competency badges and quest names that played along with the sci-fi textbook, such as “Zombie Wave,” “Defeat the Nightmare Shadow,” or “The Novice Geek Badge Test.” She also built a video-game-like homepage on Canvas with navigation buttons (Figure 2) that signaled that this course would be different from other courses.

Figure 2.

The course homepage.

Challenges are presented when students complete practice quizzes to familiarize themselves with the content of each module and tackle competency badge tests to demonstrate mastery of the topic. The course grade is tied to the number of badges earned during the semester: 10 badges out of 10 will be equivalent to a grade of “A+,” 9 badges will be an “A,” 8 badges will be a “B,” and so on. Out of the 10 badges in the course, 7 are competency badges, which students earn if they pass the corresponding test with a score of 90% or higher. The other three badges can be earned by accumulating enough practice (“1000 Elpis coins”), participating in class discussions (“250 discussion points”), and joining their classmates in defeating the bosses (“300 battle points”). Boss battles are comprehensive quizzes using real-world datasets in which students can collaborate with their classmates. Even though these quizzes require individual submissions, students may work with one another to find the answers; they are only forbidden to give out direct answers. All of these attributes can be set up in the LMS, with images created and edited in Microsoft PowerPoint^®. The competency badge system can be integrated into Canvas using Badgr^®, a third-party tool that awards a pre-specified badge automatically whenever a student completes a module. Setting the requirements for module completion is done in Canvas.

Regarding fellowship, throughout the course, students are encouraged to interact and assist one another. In addition to boss battle collaborations, they can also exchange comments through the discussion forum on the LMS and the community forum in Discord^®. Students are also encouraged to interact with the instructor by asking questions in Discord or attending virtual office hours on Zoom^®. The course’s lecture videos and statistical tutorial videos were also built as if the instructor was talking directly to the students. These videos were created using PowerPoint and Screencast-O-Matic^®, where Playposit^® was used to insert self-check interactive quiz questions in the middle of the lectures. The instructor’s avatar cheers the students on when they answer correctly and gives them a stern look when they get it wrong.

The discovery element was experienced progressively in the course. As students learn more about statistics and unfold more storylines through the city of Elpis, they also get exposed to more statistical content in the form of additional readings, bonus quiz questions, or discussions related to quantitative research. They are encouraged to reflect on their learning journey and what they have learned in weekly adventure logs. These features were set up in the LMS.

Finally, students may express themselves through the use of avatars, which can be created using free tools, such as Avatoon^® or Bitmoji^®, and through strategizing their gameplay. They earn game money (“Elpis coins”) by completing quests, such as practice quizzes and scavenger hunts. The course has an item shop (Figure 3) containing game items that can be purchased with these coins and used to help their learning journey. For example, students can spend 10 coins to get a hint from the instructor on any question (i.e., use of a Seeker’s Scroll) or spend 600 coins to retake a test (i.e., use of a Portal of Possibilities). At the beginning of the course, all students are given a Starter Pack consisting of a Torch of Truth, an Hourglass of Time, a Potion, a Portal of Possibilities, and 10 Seeker’s Scrolls to start their journeys. These mechanics enable students to play the game and pass the class in many more ways than traditional test-taking classes. It is noteworthy that the instructor used bots—autonomous programs that can interact with systems and users—in Discord, such as Yui, UnbelievaBoat, T4, and Mimu, to facilitate the gamified aspect of the course. She used their built-in commands to set up the entire economy and the Discord server. Students can interact at any time with the bots to check their inventories, buy items, and use items, thus eliminating the need for the instructor to keep track on a separate spreadsheet or to be online 24/7. Some game actions will still require the instructor’s execution, such as giving hints to students or adjusting scores in the grade book.

Figure 3.

The item shop.

Evidence of Learning

To recap, the objectives of the gamification of this statistics course were to (1) create a positive learning experience for students and (2) encourage interactions in the course in order to (3) facilitate effective knowledge acquisition. In this section, we present the evidence of learning and answer the research question: How did the gamification design accomplish these objectives (or not)?

Sample

Participants were 30 students (17 females and 13 males, 43.3% White) from three sections of this graduate-level statistics course at a large, public university in the United States. Data were collected from Fall 2021 to Summer 2022, with a 100% participation rate. Students were primarily nontraditional with an average age of 32 years, 80.6% of whom were working full-time. The average work experience for all students was 10.7 years. This project was granted an exemption by the Institutional Review Board at the authors’ university (ID #STUDY00014751). All participants provided written consent to participate in the research. The lead author instructed all three course sections.

Data Collected

We collected students’ weekly journals in which they reflected on their learning journey in the course, in accordance with Hamari et al.’s (2014) call to include more qualitative data about user experience with gamification. Students were instructed to write about anything, including but not limited to, what they learned, what they understood best, what they did not understand, what they liked or did not like, and their future learning plan. To avoid coercion, submission of this weekly journal was optional and students automatically received full credit for submitting it, regardless of what they wrote. On average, we had 5.7 journal entries from students; every student submitted at least two journal entries. Student reflection is an appropriate source of data to show the evidence of learning in this course because reflection has long been recognized in management education as a skill for students to develop (Albert & Grzeda, 2015; Betts, 2004; Hibbert, 2013; Pavlovich et al., 2009) and as a component of self-regulated learning (Zimmerman & Moylan, 2009) and experiential learning (Kolb, 2014; Trinh et al., 2021) as well as a self-assessment of learning (Panadero et al., 2016; Yan & Brown, 2017). We also collected students’ feedback from a mid-course evaluation, which was administered at the end of week 4 in the 7.5-week course. This evaluation asked students to identify what they liked about the course and what should be improved, with the same grading setup as the weekly journal. Twenty-seven students submitted this optional mid-course evaluation (90% response rate). In addition to students’ self-assessment of their learning processes, we also examined test scores and badge achievements as measures of cognitive learning in this course (Sitzmann et al., 2010). Finally, we had permission to use the anonymous course evaluations at the end of the course, which included numerical ratings as well as student comments. Twenty-two students submitted the final course evaluation (73.33% response rate). These response rates are well above the average student response rate in course evaluations in the lead author’s department (41% for 2021 and 34% for 2022), in similar published studies (e.g., Avery et al., 2006), and in recent instructional innovations published in the Journal of Management Education (e.g., D. B. Allen et al., 2022).

Data Analysis

Student feedback data were evaluated and coded separately by the second and third authors, both of whom were not involved in the design or implementation of the course. These two independent coders assessed the data in two ways. First, they coded the weekly journal submissions to assess whether students had a good learning experience in that particular week (0 = No, 1 = Yes). The two coders discussed and resolved any disagreements. We calculated intercoder reliability by performing an analysis of variance binary intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) in SPSS (O’Connor & Joffe, 2020). ICCs ranged from 0.698 for week 2 (lowest) to 1.000 for week 7 (highest) (p < .001), indicating substantial agreement between the two coders (O’Connor & Joffe, 2020).

Second, they then coded all student feedback line-by-line to examine whether each of the three intended objectives of using gamification was achieved. They followed Gioia’s methodology (Gioia et al., 2013) by using open and axial coding to construct first-order concepts and then summarizing these concepts into second-order themes, which, in turn, were coalesced into aggregate dimensions to build an iterative data structure (i.e., a “Gioia table”). The lead author reviewed the codes and contributed additional insights if she saw something missing. Table 2 displays the process of student reflection data being distilled into concepts and formed into themes, and ultimately, constructing the aggregate dimensions by which gamification impacted the student learning process. We included students’ quotes in Table 2 to save space in the section below.

Table 2.

Gioia Table Documenting the Emergence of First-Order Concepts and Second-Order Themes.

Objective		Second order theme	First order concept	Students’ quotes
Create a positive learning experience for students	Evidence of objective accomplishment	Fun while learning	- Enjoyed the learning process - Had ease in learning concepts by having fun while doing so - Had fun overall - Had fun using game elements - The narrative style of the textbook made the learning process more fun - Lessened stress - Created a positive attitude toward learning	• “I am enjoying learning about statistics in a way that’s more intriguing than any way in which I’ve been involved with it in the past.” (P23) • “This course has been so much fun so far! I have enjoyed the game-like theme of the course and the mystery/suspense-like theme of the textbook.” (P21) • “I really like that this course was designed using gamification. It has certainly increased my motivation and made learning statistics less dull and more fun!” (P27) • “I really enjoy the game-like theme of the course, it makes the assignments seem fun and interesting.” (P21) • “I never thought I would be enjoying a statistics class, but so far things are going well!” (P28) • “The expressions for your avatar when we get a correct answer to the video questions are encouraging and super adorable! She almost makes me feel sad when I get one wrong! It’s very funny! It is those little things that help to take our minds off of the stress of learning a course like statistics.” (P21) • “The textbook is great and makes the class fun while providing practical examples of using statistics ‘in the wild’.” (P8) • “I am finding it interesting and enjoying the textbook story and how it is incorporating stats and giving a practical use for statistics.” (P25) • “The organization of this course into a game was particularly motivating to me. I loved being able to make my own decisions to strategically tailor the course to my real life—during weeks when I was busier, I could do a little bit less and use some of the game features to keep my grade from suffering.” (anonymous)
		Shifting mindset about statistics course	- Enjoyed being in a statistics course- Had initial intimidation about the course, but enjoying the course now- Had a negative outlook on math courses, but feeling hopeful about this one- The game format helped to lessen stress surrounding a difficult course	• “Statistics freaks me out but I am enjoying the class even when I'm struggling with the assignments. I appreciate that you have areas like Seeker[’s] Scrolls and more to help us as we continue learning.” (P30)• “I am feeling hopeful about this class. In the past, I have had a negative outlook on tasks involving math, but I am trying to remain positive. I think the setup of this class has made it much easier for me to [be] positive. I feel more interested in the work and find a better connection to it with the story.” (P28)• “I am enjoying the game format, as it absolutely helps lessen the stress of taking a difficult course.” (P1)• “I do admit that I appreciate how this class is set up, definitely takes the pressure and edge off my learning curve.” (P19)• “It’s my first statistics course and I'm enjoying it.” (P24)• “I have felt very intimidated by this class, and now that I am working through the class I am feeling like I can actually do this and feel a lot of pride with how I am doing.” (P28)• “I love this class . . . The only other time I’ve been so thrilled to apply mathematical concepts was in an economics class.” (P23)• “I like the general format of the course. It makes schoolwork more interactive and fun.” (P9)• “This course is helping me gain basic knowledge and clear my basic doubts about data analytics.” (P29)• “With the gamified format, I had more control over the outcome. If I didn’t do well in one area, I could re-take assignments or do extra work to compensate.” (anonymous)• “The course was organized, helpful in my academic and practical career, and positively changed how I perceive statistics.” (anonymous)
		Eager to learn	- The textbook storyline encouraged interest in learning concepts- Was excited about completing the game and being on leader board- The textbook was engaging- Became more engaged- Rewards added motivation to complete coursework- Motivated learning- Use of game elements added motivation to do well in the course- Was eager to complete coursework- Was excited about future learning	• “I have so loved learning statistics again and the game format and this textbook were both motivating and engaging.” (P10)• “The method that book is written in was fantastic, I felt that I was reading [a] story that made me excited to keep reading to know the next events that could be happened.” (P4)• “I am having fun. The textbook is unique, compelling to read, and propels me through the course.” (P23)• “The textbook for the course makes the content engaging and I actually want to keep reading and learning.” (P22)• “Feeling good and excited to keep learning more. :)” (P3)• “I am still having fun . . . I am looking forward to the rest of the course!” (P26)• “I like the structure of the first week and it makes it more fun in my opinion so I’m excited to be able to actively work through the sets next week.” (P30)• “The narrative format of the textbook works really well, and I find myself driven to learn the statistics concepts because of how they fit into the storyline.” (P8)• “I loved the book chosen for this course . . . to see the research process and statistics explained in a novel format was quite interesting and made the process much more fun.” (P16)• “Loved the way this was set up as a game. So engaging and motivating!” (anonymous)• “I like the game concept. It was helpful to be able to be able to choose which assignments to complete.” (anonymous)• “The textbook is excellent. I used it to illustrate the lectures, and I guess I will use it in the future.” (anonymous)
	Challenges to achieving the objective	Technology concerns	- Needed time to understand new technology- Had technical issues- Was not good at technology- Relied heavily on technology	• “The methodology was a little overwhelming at first but as you start to use [D]iscord and put items such as Seeker's Scrolls to use, it does become fun.” (P13)• “This week was a bit of an adjustment, which is to be expected. I have never used Discord or been in a gamified course before, so I was a bit intimidated.” (P5)• “Incorporating gaming can be confusing to someone who doesn’t game often. Not saying it’s not a good idea, but more help is always appreciated.” (P6)• “I am still getting used to Discord as this is a new social platform for me but seem to be getting the swing of it.” (P27)• “I am also new to [D]iscord, so these first couple of weeks have been a bit difficult for me to adjust to.” (P1)• “I am still getting used to using Discord.” (P1)• “This format is difficult for me to grasp. I am not particularly good at technology.” (P2)• “I downloaded Discord the first day . . . It still didn’t work so have to download the application again.” (P2)• “I think the course relies heavily on understanding technology. I had never used Discord or SPSS, so the class had a learning curve. There could be more basic lessons about how to use those platforms.” (P26)
		Unfamiliarity with the gamified format	- The gamified format was intimidating- Was confused about how to use game elements- Was confusing for non-gamers- Was frustrating for non-gamers- Was skeptical about the gamified format- Was different from traditional formats- The format was difficult to grasp	• “I love the game format, but it can be a little confusing. I feel like everything is on different platforms and it makes it a little difficult to keep track of.” (P14)• “At first, I would say I was confused with [D]iscord and how to use the inventory, money, and items. After a few tries though it became a lot easier.” (P28)• “I was confused when reading about the way the game works, but once I started using all the features it is pretty simple.” (P14)• “It was just so different than other classes at first it threw me for a loop.” (P18)• “At first glance, I was frustrated because the layout of the course is quite different from the ones I took before. But after some time, I was able to navigate the course more easily.” (P16)• “I'm trying to be open-minded about this gamified format, but I’m still skeptical.” (P7)• “It’s a bit confusing for me who isn’t really a gamer.” (P6)• “I know I was skeptical about the gamified format, but I am enjoying it so far.” (P7)• “I have never gamed in my life so this is a brand-new concept.” (P2)• “It took a little bit of figuring out at the beginning to understand the mechanics of the game and the scoring.” (P8)• “I love the game format, but it can be a little confusing. I feel like everything is on different platforms and it makes it a little difficult to keep track of.” (P14)
Encourage interactions in the course	Evidence of objective accomplishment	Shared learning	- Created a shared learning environment- Shared learning experience with other students- Working with other students was helpful	• “I used [D]iscord to request assistance on assignments for the first time. I was delighted with how fast and how helpful my classmates were!” (P21)• “Working with my classmates helped me a lot! I was able to better understand concepts I wasn't as surefooted with.” (P16)• “It was good to think things out together with [another student] and hear that [they were] struggling with some of the same things as me.” (P3)• “I also really like the [D]iscord chat where we are able to communicate and receive help from both [the instructor] and my peers.” (P19)• “I interact with my classmates and we spend a lot of time going through the analysis and sharing tips. By the time I start a side quest or the badge test, I was comfortable with SPSS.” (P13)• “I did some collaborating in one of the chat rooms in Discord to prepare for the boss battle. We were able to help each with finding various tools and routes within SPSS to help us be successful. We each remembered small bits from the tutorials and were able to compare what we knew to find the information needed to find things like mean, median, and mode successfully.” (P11)• “I also appreciated that working together with other classmates was encouraged but not required as some of us just have such different schedules and abilities.” (anonymous)
		Instructor presence	- The instructor was available and responsive- Timely feedback on assignments	• “Easy to communicate with [the] instructor, helpful and kind.” (anonymous)• “The instructor was very helpful in providing guidance throughout the course and providing timely feedback.” (anonymous)• “The instructor was more responsive and available than any other instructor I have ever seen. If you asked for help, you got it within an hour at any time of the day. Amazing really . . .” (anonymous)• “Feedback [from the instructor] was always timely and helpful—excellent positive and encouraging engagement.” (anonymous)• “[The instructor] was always accessible and provided good feedback on assignments and tests.” (anonymous)• “[The instructor] was always available to help when we had questions . . . She also encouraged us to help each other out. Feedback was helpful and given in a timely manner.” (anonymous)• “[The instructor] was extremely available and I found this particularly helpful when I was stuck or had questions while working outside of regular ‘school’ hours. Using [D]iscord was effective, simpler to use than email for easy questions, and more immediate.” (anonymous)• “Always available and encouraged questions and encouraged us to attend Zoom meetings.” (anonymous)• “[The instructor]’s feedback was timely and effective. Even when she was sick, she let the class know and still answered questions and provided feedback.” (anonymous)• “[The instructor] is very knowledgeable about the information and is more than happy to always answer questions.” (anonymous)• “Professor was very helpful, always following up and providing valuable feedback. Professor was very encouraging and understanding. I faced many technical issues, and she could not better deal with the matter. I am so grateful.” (anonymous)• “This instructor leads by example. She is actively participating and aiding students and the gamer style makes a difficult subject fun to work through.” (anonymous)
	Challenges to achieving the objective	Participation issues	- Liked the collaborative environment, but participation was lacking- Challenge with coordinating group meetings- Decrease in participation when points were received	• “I also liked working with my team on boss battles. Although, I was disappointed that more people did not participate because it was a beneficial session.” (P5)• “The boss battles seem like a cool team concept but it can be difficult to coordinate with your classmates to complete them together with all of our different schedules and priorities. I find myself doing them alone.” (P27)• “I thought about asking another question on [D]iscord but then I realized that I have my 200 discussion points!” (P21)• “I’ll make sure to use my [S]eeker’s [S]crolls. I must remember to use them even if I have to be patient and wait out the time difference here in Japan.” (P7)• “The use of Discord is unique; I don’t know that it is really used in a way that makes it necessary to have as part of the course. Some of it could be the lack of engagement with this particular class so I wouldn’t necessarily advocate to eliminate it but perhaps make it clear how it should be used and find a way to encourage it to be used.” (P22)
Acquire content knowledge	Evidence of objective accomplishment	Learning of concepts	- Used game elements to learn SPSS- Learning of concepts were/felt accessible- Used game elements to get through tough weeks of learning concepts- Used game elements to confirm knowledge learning- Gamified format helped the learning	• “I am learning more and enjoying the journey.” (P20)• “I like that I am able to work mostly at my own pace through the materials so that I can ensure that I am understanding the concepts.” (P14)• “I’m excited to finish up the class this week. I feel a lot better about statistics than I did when I started!” (P8)• “I am very much enjoying this course . . . Surprisingly, the subject matter is very accessible to me.” (P23)• “Using the resources of the class, I feel that I learned even more . . . I feel very accomplished!” (P13)• “I finally feel that I am beginning to learn and maybe even understand statistics better than ever before.” (P13)• “It is fun to be able to use a torch to ask a question or a potion/portal to get some help. Repeating a test was also helpful for me, it seemed to [make] things sink into my head a little better.” (P3)
			- Gamified format allowed for a better understanding of concepts- Quests were useful to learn materials and to gain coins for item purchases- The textbook format helped in understanding concepts	• “I really liked how the book broke down this chapter. I was pretty confused at first but I felt that I had a pretty good grasp of the content by the end of the chapter.” (P21)• “I really like the way the authors of the textbook explain the information. For lack of a better word, they really ‘dumb’ things down, which helps so much!” (P21)• “I am honestly loving this class! I’ve said it before but the way it is set up like a game is really helpful for my learning.” (P10)• “I am doing well in this class and am learning a lot!” (P26)• “I am overall pretty happy with not only my work this week, but that I am understanding much better.” (P30)• “In comparing the methodology of this class to traditional learning (past statistics class), I would say that I learned far more in [this] class.” (P13)• “This gamified format is a great way to give people more confidence in a very challenging course. In a more traditional format, I would not have had the opportunity to retake quizzes and use my extra credit efforts to improve [my] scores. Instead, I would have tried to memorize information and apply it, then move on. I think this allows for better synthetization of the material.” (P7)• “The subject is a very intimidating one. The instructor made things more interesting and able to understand.” (anonymous)
	Challenges to achieving the objective	Textbook concerns	- Textbook did not provide real-world examples- Textbook focused too much on the storyline	• “The book only gives a few examples, wrapped in a sci-fi story, making it hard to understand.” (P5)• “The text has been a little challenging, there is a lot of fluff that takes time to read through, I find myself skipping through the dramatic narrative, trying to not get too caught up in the story which takes a long time to read. It is good to have things portrayed in that story kind of way, but it adds a lot of extra reading.” (P3)• “It is a bit difficult to translate the book examples to real-life questions.” (P10)

Note. Participants’ ID numbers are in the quotes’ parentheses.

Results

Objective 1: Gamification Creates a Positive Learning Experience

A lot of students commented on how the gamified design provided opportunities to learn while having fun. This positive learning environment helped to reduce the negative feelings or concerns that they had surrounding taking a statistics course. Better yet, students conveyed positive feelings towards statistics from being in this gamified course:

I really like that this course was designed using gamification. It has certainly increased my motivation and made learning statistics less dull and more fun! (Participant 27)

The integration of statistics concepts within the textbook’s storyline encouraged students to continue reading and learning. For example, they said:

The narrative format of the textbook works really well, and I find myself driven to learn the statistics concepts because of how they fit into the storyline. (Participant 8)

Students also remarked on how they engaged with the instructor’s avatar:

The expressions for your avatar when we get a correct answer to the video questions are encouraging and super adorable! She almost makes me feel sad when I get one wrong! It's very funny! It is those little things that help to take our minds off of the stress of learning a course like statistics. (Participant 21)

While creating a positive experience for students, the gamified course design also incited some uncertainty in students regarding the new technologies. Students faced a steep learning curve at the beginning of the course:

This week was a bit of an adjustment, which is to be expected. I have never used Discord or been in a gamified course before, so I was a bit intimidated. (Participant 5)

However, with additional time using the new technologies, students felt more at ease.

At first, I would say I was confused with [D]iscord and how to use the inventory, money, and items. After a few tries though it became a lot easier. (Participant 28)

Objective 2: Gamification Encourages Interactions

The use of Discord and “boss battle” assignments facilitated a collaborative learning environment in which students were able to help each other with grasping course concepts:

I interact with my classmates and we spend a lot of time going through the analysis and sharing tips. By the time I start a side quest or the badge test, I was comfortable with SPSS. (Participant 13)

Students also enjoyed being able to get help from the instructor quickly:

The instructor was more responsive and available than any other instructor I have ever seen. If you asked for help, you got it within an hour at any time of the day. Amazing really . . . (anonymous)

However, the asynchronous format of the course and the fact that students were located in different time zones prevented them from finding meeting times that worked for everyone in the class. As a result, students could not work together as much as they wanted:

The boss battles seem like a cool team concept but it can be difficult to coordinate with your classmates to complete them together with all of our different schedules and priorities. I find myself doing them alone. (Participant 27)

One student halted participation when they had earned enough discussion points and therefore no longer had to participate:

I thought about asking another question on [D]iscord but then I realized that I have my 200 discussion points! (Participant 21)

Objective 3: Gamification Facilitates Knowledge Acquisition

Overall, students felt that this gamified course helped them learn statistics effectively. They remarked:

I am overall pretty happy with not only my work this week, but that I am understanding much better. (Participant 30)

Moreover, students highlighted how this course allowed for greater absorption of content well beyond that of other traditional courses:

In comparing the methodology of this class to traditional learning (past statistics class), I would say that I learned far more in [this] class. (Participant 13)

The comic-style textbook also received a lot of compliments. In addition to making the learning process fun for students, it was able to simplify statistics concepts and demonstrate how to apply them to real-world problems:

I am finding it interesting and enjoying the textbook story and how it is

incorporating stats and giving a practical use for statistics. (Participant 25)

However, not all students appreciated the format of the textbook. A few students commented how the narrative style of the textbook distracted them in their learning process:

The book only gives a few examples, wrapped in a sci-fi story, making it hard to understand. (Participant 5)

Performance data from the grade book showed that students, on average, achieved the learning objectives of the course (see Table 3).

Table 3.

Student Performance in the 10 Badges in the Course.

Badge	Badge content	Badge earned percentage	Mean score	SD
(1) The Novice Geek	Variables, measurements, scientific research designs	100.00	92.58	2.90
(2) The Data Cleaner	Central tendencies, histograms, skewness, kurtosis	100.00	95.55	3.87
(3) The Data Artist	Graphing, z-scores	96.15	92.92	10.58
(4) The Probability Bridger	Probability, confidence intervals	100.00	94.25	4.01
(5) The Hypothesis Tester	Hypothesis testing, Bayes theorem, type I & type II errors, power	96.15	93.72	4.15
(6) The Relationship Broker	Chi-square tests, correlations, regressions	69.23	86.48	24.86
(7) The Data Analyst	Independent t-tests, paired-sample t-tests, one-way ANOVAs	69.23	90.87	15.13
(8) The Data Critic	Discussion and exercises related to quantitative research	100.00	N/A	N/A
(9) The Coin Collector	Practice quizzes and bonus contents	96.15	N/A	N/A
(10) The Data Slayer	Cumulative, collaborative tests using real-world datasets	92.31	N/A	N/A

Student Course Evaluations

Twenty-two out of 30 students completed course evaluations in the three sections of this course. Table 4 shows the average student ratings and their standard deviations in some key dimensions pertaining to the course. The numeric ratings are well above the departmental and university averages and suggest that this course was exceptional. Combined with the verbatim feedback, we can say that this gamified statistics course was successful and well-received by the students. The gamification not only helped alleviate students’ fear of statistics but also facilitated effective learning processes that allowed them to interact with their classmates, get the support they need, and absorb content materials in a difficult course.

Table 4.

Student Evaluations of the Gamified Statistics Class.

Item	Average score	SD
The instructor made the class intellectually stimulating.	1.27	0.70
The instructor encouraged students to express their own ideas and ask questions.	1.00	0.00
The instructor made students feel welcome in seeking help/advice.	1.00	0.00
The instructor encouraged students to think critically about the subject matter.	1.14	0.47
The instructor made the course material interesting.	1.32	0.89
Topics in this course were relevant to the course description and learning outcomes listed on the syllabus.	1.00	0.00
Required readings and assignments were valuable and facilitated mastery of the learning outcomes listed on the syllabus.	1.18	0.66
Overall, the instructor created a course that prepared me well vis-à-vis the learning outcomes.	1.27	0.77
I was very interested in the subject prior to taking this course.	2.36	1.50
The course content was difficult.	1.59	0.67

Note. N = 22. Ratings are based on a scale of 1 (“Agree”) to 5 (“Disagree”), with 1 as the highest rating.

Discussion and Implications for Management Educators

Our focus in this article has been to show how gamification can be an effective instructional strategy that incorporates technologies-enabling disruption into management education and enhances the student learning experience. The objectives for gamifying this Master’s level statistics class were to create a positive learning environment, encourage students’ interactions in the course, and enable them to learn course materials more effectively. The course instructor thoughtfully combines the TPACK competency framework and the MDA design framework to derive both theoretically and practically motivated gamification designs, making this article one of the first to document such a process. Data from student performance, reflection, feedback, and evaluation provided positive initial evidence that all of these three objectives were achieved, with some minor caveats. On the one hand, gamification worked well for most course participants: it allowed them to have fun with the course, overcome their fear of statistics, and in some cases, even create a positive impression of statistics. As a result, students delved into the statistics materials, interacted with the instructor and classmates, and learned the content materials effectively.

On the other hand, a gamified course design presents a steep learning curve to students in the beginning. It generally took students in this course one to two weeks to get used to the gamified format because the game attributes can be confusing at first, especially for people who do not play games. Since the course also introduced gamified commands (in Discord) in conjunction with a new software (SPSS), students needed time to understand the different technologies and sometimes got frustrated when they had technical issues. These concerns usually ease in a couple of weeks after students get used to the course design and functions, but future instructors should provide very clear explanations in the course shell and be prepared to answer questions at the beginning of the course. In addition to technological issues, students in this course reported a lack of participation from their classmates in collaborative assignments and challenges in coordinating group meetings across different time zones and busy schedules. While these are common issues in online courses (Redpath, 2012), future designs would need to modify motivational mechanisms to encourage collaboration in courses with it being a learning objective. Finally, the comic-style textbook did not work for everyone: some students were distracted from the storyline and wanted a more straightforward, traditional textbook; others wanted more real-world examples. Future instructors should consider the needs of their students in their textbook selection and prepare other instructional materials to complement the textbook. In our case, the instructor kept the comic-style textbook because more students liked it than disliked it and added real-world examples in her teaching videos and assignments.

From this experience, we offer the following implications for management educators. First, even though gamification may look complicated, it is not very difficult to implement and is, in fact, one example to show how technologies-enabling disruption can be quite easy and low-tech to design. As we have demonstrated, instructors can pick and choose any number of gamification attributes that fit their class and implement them with fairly easy-to-use technological tools such as their own LMS and PowerPoint. Like most other well-designed asynchronous online courses, course design took the greatest effort in our case. In this heavily gamified course, the lead author spent roughly 200 hours building the course from scratch—including creating the course outline, learning about gamification, developing content, such as lectures, tutorials, and quizzes, graphic designing, and pre-testing. However, if interested instructors want to add gamification attributes to an existing course (see examples in Table 5), it could take as little as an hour or two of work. In fact, it is recommended that future instructors start small with their gamification design and slowly add or modify attributes that make the most sense to their courses (Trinh, 2022b).

Table 5.

Examples of How Management Educators Can Use Gamification in Their Courses.

In order to improve learners’ . . .	Consider using . . .	Example	Estimated time investment (hours)
Engagement	Badges, narrative, ranking, levels, and quests	Tenório et al. (2016) used these gamification elements to engage online students in peer assessment activities. Gamification proved to be effective in enhancing the accessibility of the system for students by 64.28%, increasing the number of essays written and submitted by 10.53%, and improving both the quantity and quality of assessments for each essay.	20–30
	Avatars, badges, points, leaderboards, and time limits	Krause et al. (2015) used these gamification elements in a MOOC to improve engagement and retention. In their experiment, the retention period of students (measured by videos watched) increased significantly by 25%, and their average scores improved by 23% when the course interface was gamified.	10–20
	Social interactions and comparisons	Krause et al. (2015) added social elements on top of game mechanics and found that the incorporation of social game elements significantly enhanced the effect of game mechanics. Students showed a remarkable 50% increase in retention period and a 40% improvement in average test scores.	1–5
	Social ranking feedback	Mazarakis (2015) tested the role of four types of feedback in increasing students’ engagement, measured by participation in the course wiki. Social ranking feedback, in which a student only sees two positions above and below their own score and ranking, was found to be the most effective feedback.	1–2
Motivation	Badges	In Gooch et al.’s (2016) study of children with dyslexia who are transitioning from primary to secondary school, badges significantly improved students’ motivation.	1–2
	Non-person character, bot, or pedagogical agent	Utomo and Santoso (2015) developed a pedagogical agent to give automatic feedback to students based on their behavior in an e-learning system. Using student evaluation, the authors concluded that real-time personalized feedback helped increase learners’ motivation toward active learning behaviors.	20–200
	Badges, points, and leaderboards	Huang and Hew (2018) gamified an SPSS course in Moodle and found that badges and leaderboards were effective in motivating most of the learners. By awarding points, students were engaged and stimulated to undertake challenging tasks and extracurricular learning, while the control group showed no interest in attempting any challenge.	2–10
Collaboration	Gamified online discussion	Knutas et al. (2014) investigated the impact of a gamified online discussion system on collaborative behavior and communication among 249 students. Students were given the ability to “like” or “unlike” comments made by their peers, while a reward feedback system was implemented for those who contributed to the discussions. They found that the game elements stimulated users to contribute more by giving more answers and posting more questions, which then enhanced peer collaboration and communication.	1–10
	Competitive collaborative teams	Aldemir et al. (2018) set up competitive collaborative teams in which students share responsibility for their teammates’ achievements in the in-class challenges to gain rewards. Balancing team skills and ensuring fairness are important issues to consider.	1–5
	Points or scores	Points are the most frequently used gamification element/affordance in gamified crowdsourcing systems to encourage people to generate creative solutions together. See Morschheuser et al. (2017) for a thorough review.	1–2
Social awareness	Leaderboard	Christy and Fox (2014) found that leaderboards in virtual classrooms can evoke social comparisons in women and influence women’s academic identification and academic performance (such as math scores) and in some cases, negatively so.	1–2
Social awareness	Teams	The game mechanics and dynamics in Aldemir et al.’s (2018) example can prompt discussions about team skills, dynamics, norms, expectations, abilities, and so on.	1–5
Performance	Badges	Hakulinen et al. (2015) awarded badges for solving exercises correctly on the first attempt, doing exercises early, or solving all the exercises in a round with full points. They found that students in the treatment group (with badges) spent more time per submission than those in the control group (no badges).	1–2
	Leaderboard	Landers and Landers (2014) used leaderboards to increase students’ time-on-task. With the class project being the creation of a class wiki page, they added a leaderboard listing 10 action goals (e.g., create a wiki entry, create a profile, upload a profile image) and awarded students for being the first, second, or third to accomplish each task. They found that on average, students in the treatment condition (with a leaderboard) interacted with their project 29.61 more times than those in a control condition (no leaderboard).	1–2
	Narrative	Armstrong and Landers (2017) added game fiction to a training module to improve training outcomes. They found that the use of game fiction in training led to a higher satisfaction level among trainees compared to the control text, although there was no significant difference in declarative knowledge scores between the two conditions.	5–10

Second, guidance for gamification in higher education is available to any interested educators. The designing framework and process documented in this article, which were both theoretically and practically driven, are just one example of how to gamify. Hamari et al. (2014), as well as Landers (2014), presented the overall principles of the gamification design process: first, identify a targeted behavioral change, then identify psychological changes that would engender that behavioral change, and finally, identify gamification attributes that would create the desired psychological changes. Huang and Hew (2018, 2021) presented a five-step gamification design procedure based on the five motivational needs (i.e., goal, access, challenges, collaboration, and feedback). Most recently, Trinh (2022b) offered a beginner’s 10-step guide to gamify a course. Colombero and Dal Zotto (2022) reviewed how the LMS Moodle has functions to enable gamification. Table 5 features examples of how gamification can be utilized to affect learners’ engagement, motivation, collaboration, social awareness, and performance, following Antonaci et al.’s (2019) comprehensive review. Since gamification is a design process, similar mechanisms can be implemented in management classes to teach any content topic, ranging from leadership, power, communication, teamwork, negotiation, and human resource management to information systems, corporate social responsibility, and data analytics (Wanick & Bui, 2019). Instructors can set up a system with points, badges, and a leaderboard to encourage students to engage in desirable learning behaviors. The awarded behaviors could also vary from individual (e.g., make a discussion post) to collective (e.g., name your team), from collaborative (e.g., give constructive feedback to a classmate) to competitive (e.g., succeed in one negotiation), depending on the class topics and the instructors’ preferences. Management educators should explore the available resources to determine which fits their styles and needs the most.

Despite its strengths, gamification is not without limitations. The steep learning curve that students encounter when they are new to gamification is one source of concern for instructors. This can be mitigated by offering clear instructions, examples, and time for students to experiment with the format. In addition, an overreliance on technology could also be a potential issue. Our example of gamification was purposefully low-tech because the lead author intended it to be accessible to a wide audience, including instructors who do not work at institutions with extensive technological capability or support. However, gamification designs can get indefinitely fancy, thus risking placing a burden on students with low technological literacy. Above all of these, most importantly, we caution future instructors against “fake gamification” (Landers, 2019), or adding game elements without any reason or altering the underlying processes, as that is counterproductive and harmful to the legitimacy of the whole field of gamification. It is important to follow rigorous guidelines, such as the MDA design framework, to avoid gamifying for the sake of gamifying, as it could prevent positive, meaningful experiences through which students could learn and grow and tarnish gamification as an incentive dispenser and manipulator of human behaviors (Deterding, 2019). A more in-depth discourse around this topic can be found in the dialog on gamification led by Vesa and Harviainen (2019).

The exciting work on gamification bears a lot of implications for future research. The relatively small amount of research on gamification in management education means there are still a lot of opportunities in this area. Because gamification is not theorized to directly lead to learning (Landers et al., 2018), future research would need to carefully incorporate experimental conditions to demonstrate its effects on learning outcomes. Research could be done on the separate effects of each gamification attribute or a combination of these attributes, retention of knowledge from a gamified course in comparison to a more traditional course format, the differential effects of content-based versus participation-based assignments and points, and the alignment of gamification mechanisms and learning objectives.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this instructional innovation article contributes to the special issue by showcasing how gamification—as an instructional strategy and a technologies-enabling disruption—could enhance the teaching and learning processes in management education. We share S. J. Allen’s (2020) concern that in general, management educators are unaware, unfamiliar, and underprepared to engage with technology, thus doing a disservice to our students in the fourth industrial revolution. If we cannot keep up with current technologies, utilize them to our advantage, or at least expose students to what they might face in the workplace, then management education is truly going to be on the “chopping block” (S. J. Allen, 2020). In this context, gamification can also be considered a low-risk experiment for management educators and a high-potential intervention to combine technology and experiential learning to create a holistic experience (Trinh & Kolb, 2012) for students virtually, thus allowing management educators to join and contribute to the larger, ongoing virtual revolution. Management educators may be surprised to find out that simple changes, empowered by education technology, can have a huge impact on both what we deliver and how we deliver it. Adding a little fun can go a long way!

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Ann Magsamen for her research assistance on this article. We thank our writing editors, Terry Christenson and Elizabeth Sheets, for helping us with the flow and coherence. Last but certainly not least, we thank our peers in the Women of Organizational Behavior writing group for their companionship and support during our entire research process.

This article is part of the Special Issue, “From Taylor to Tableau: Technology as a tool, topic, and differentiator in management education.”

Author Contributions

S.R. Aurora (corresponding author): Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Resources (Lead), Writing – Original draft (Lead), Writing – Review & editing (Lead), Visualization (Lead), Supervision, Project administration. Robert J. Chico: Validation, Formal analysis (Lead), Resources (Supporting), Data curation (Equal), Writing – Original draft (Supporting), Writing – Review & editing (Supporting), Visualization (Supporting). Rachel M. Reed: Formal analysis (Supporting), Resources (Supporting), Data curation (Equal), Writing – Original draft (Supporting), Writing – Review & editing (Supporting).

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iDs

Mai P. Trinh

Robert J. Chico

References

Albert

Grzeda

(2015). Reflection in strategic management education. Journal of Management Education, 39(5), 650–669. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562914564872

Aldemir

Celik

Kaplan

(2018). A qualitative investigation of student perceptions of game elements in a gamified course. Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.10.001

Allen

D. B.

Fukami

C. V.

Wittmer

D. P.

(2022). A course on the future of work: Building the scaffold while standing on it. Journal of Management Education, 46(1), 178–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920983839

Allen

S. J.

(2020). On the cutting edge or the chopping block? Fostering a digital mindset and tech literacy in business management education. Journal of Management Education, 44(3), 362–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920903077

Antonaci

Klemke

Specht

(2019). The effects of gamification in online learning environments: A systematic literature review. Informatics, 6(3), 32. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/informatics6030032

Armstrong

M. B.

Landers

R. N.

(2017). An evaluation of gamified training: Using narrative to improve reactions and learning. Simulation & Gaming, 48(4), 513–538. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878117703749

Ashaari

N. S.

Judi

H. M.

Mohamed

Wook

M. T.

(2011). Student’s attitude towards statistics course. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 18, 287–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.05.041

Avery

R. J.

Bryant

W. K.

Mathios

(2006). Electronic course evaluations: Does an online delivery system influence student evaluations? Journal of Economic Education, 37(1), 21–37. https://doi.org/10.3200/JECE.37.1.21-37

Bai

Hew

K. F.

Gonda

D. E.

Huang

Liang

(2022). Incorporating fantasy into gamification promotes student learning and quality of online interaction. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 19(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-022-00335-9

10.

Bandura

Walters

R. H.

(1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Prentice-Hall.

11.

Betts

(2004). Theology, therapy or picket line? What’s the ‘good’ of reflective practice in management education? Reflective Practice, 5(2), 239–251. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940410001691009

12.

Cannon

M. D.

Edmondson

A. C.

(2001). Confronting failure: Antecedents and consequences of shared beliefs about failure in organizational work groups. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(2), 161–177. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.85

13.

Chen

Yin

Rong

Xiong

David

(2019). Enhanced learning resource recommendation based on online learning style model. Tsinghua Science and Technology, 25(3), 348–356. https://doi.org.10.26599/TST.2019.9010014

14.

Christy

K. R.

Fox

(2014). Leaderboards in a virtual classroom: A test of stereotype threat and social comparison explanations for women’s math performance. Computers & Education, 78, 66–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.05.005

15.

Colombero

Dal Zotto

(2022). Resource review. Moodle: A platform that enables gamification. Academy of Management Learning & Education. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2021.0453

16.

Cronin

M. A.

Weingart

L. R.

Todorova

(2011). Dynamics in groups: Are we there yet? The Academy of Management Annals, 5, 571–612. https://doi.org/10.1080/19416520.2011.590297

17.

Deterding

(2012). Gamification: Designing for motivation. Interactions, 19(4), 14–17. https://doi.org/10.1145/2212877.2212883

18.

Deterding

(2019). Gamification in management: Between choice architecture and humanistic design. Journal of Management Inquiry, 28(2), 131–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492618790912

19.

Dias

(2017). Teaching operations research to undergraduate management students: The role of gamification. The International Journal of Management Education, 15(1), 98–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2017.01.002

20.

Edmondson

A. C.

(2011). Strategies for learning from failure. Harvard Business Review, 89(4), 48–55.

21.

Field

(2016). An adventure in statistics: The reality enigma. Sage. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/discovering-statistics/book237529

22.

Figg

Jaipal-Jamani

(2015, March 2). Investigating the development of TPACK knowledge through gamification. In Rutledge

Slykhuis

(Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2015—Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, Las Vegas, NV, United States (pp. 3148–3156). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/150440/

23.

Figg

Jaipal-Jamani

(2018). Developing teacher knowledge about gamification as an instructional strategy. In I. Management Association (Ed.). Teacher training and professional development: Concepts, methodologies, tools, and applications (pp. 1215–1243). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-5631-2.ch056

24.

Folmar

(2015). Game it up! Using gamification to incentivize your library (Vol. 7). Rowman & Littlefield.

25.

Gibbons

Fernando

Spedding

(2022). Innovation through developing a total enterprise computer simulation: Teaching responsible decision making. Journal of Management Education, 46(1), 16–42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920987591

26.

Gioia

D. A.

Corley

K. G.

Hamilton

A. L.

(2013). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16(1), 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112452151

27.

Gooch

Vasalou

Benton

Khaled

(2016, May 7–12). Using gamification to motivate students with Dyslexia [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, United States (pp. 969–980). https://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858231

28.

Hakulinen

Auvinen

Korhonen

(2015). The effect of achievement badges on students’ behavior: An empirical study in a University-level computer science course. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 10(1), 18–29. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v10i1.4221

29.

Hamari

Koivisto

Sarsa

(2014, January 6–9). Does gamification work? A literature review of empirical studies on gamification [Conference session]. 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, United States (pp. 3025–3034). https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2014.377

30.

Hibbert

(2013). Approaching reflexivity through reflection: Issues for critical management education. Journal of Management Education, 37(6), 803–827. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562912467757

31.

Huang

Hew

K. F.

(2018). Implementing a theory-driven gamification model in higher education flipped courses: Effects on out-of-class activity completion and quality of artifacts. Computers & Education, 125, 254–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.018

32.

Huang

Hew

K. F.

(2021). Using gamification to design courses: Lessons learned in a three-year design-based study. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 24(1), 44–63. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26977856

33.

Hunicke

LeBlanc

Zubek

(2004). MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. Proceedings of the AAAI Workshop on Challenges in Game AI, 4(1), 1722.

34.

Issacs

(2015). The difference between gamification and game-based learning. Edutopia. http://inservice.ascd.org/the-difference-between-gamification-and-ga-me-based-learning

35.

Kauppinen

Choudhary

A. I.

(2021). Gamification in entrepreneurship education: A concrete application of Kahoot! The International Journal of Management Education, 19(3), 100563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2021.100563

36.

Keeler

(2014). Beyond the worksheet: Playsheets, GBL, and gamification. Edutopia, p. 1–3.

37.

Knutas

Ikonen

Nikula

Porras

(2014, June 27–28). Increasing collaborative communications in a programming course with gamification: A case study [Conference session]. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies, Ruse, Bulgaria (pp. 370–377). https://doi.org/10.1145/2659532.2659620

38.

Koehler

Mishra

(2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK)? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1), 60–70.

39.

Kolb

D. A.

(1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.

40.

Kolb

D. A.

(2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. FT Press.

41.

Kolb

D. A.

(2015). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). Pearson.

42.

Kolb

A. Y.

Kolb

D. A.

(2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2005.17268566

43.

Kolb

A. Y.

Kolb

D. A.

(2009). On becoming a learner: The concept of learning identity. In Bamford-Rees

Doyle

Klein-Collins

Wertheim

(Eds.), Learning never ends: Essays on adult learning inspired by the life and work of David O. Justice (pp. 5–13). CAEL Forum and News.

44.

Krause

Mogalle

Pohl

Williams

J. J.

(2015, March 14–18). A playful game changer: Fostering student retention in online education with social gamification [Conference session]. Proceedings of the Second (2015) ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale, Vancouver, BC, Canada (pp. 95–102). https://doi.org/10.1145/2724660.2724665

45.

Landers

R. N.

(2014). Developing a theory of gamified learning: Linking serious games and gamification of learning. Simulation & Gaming, 45(6), 752–768. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878114563660

46.

Landers

R. N.

(2019). Gamification misunderstood: How badly executed and rhetorical gamification obscures its transformative potential. Journal of Management Inquiry, 28(2), 137–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492618790913

47.

Landers

R. N.

Auer

E. M.

Collmus

A. B.

Armstrong

M. B.

(2018). Gamification science, its history and future: Definitions and a research agenda. Simulation & Gaming, 49(3), 315–337. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878118774385

48.

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/10.1177/1046878114563662

49.

Mazarakis

(2015). Using gamification for technology enhanced learning: The case of feedback mechanisms. Bulletin of the Technical Committee on Learning Technology, 17(4), 6–9.

50.

Michael

D. R.

Chen

S. L.

(2005). Serious games: Games that educate, train, and inform. Muska & Lipman/Premier-Trade.

51.

Mishra

Koehler

M. J.

(2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017–1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x

52.

Morschheuser

Hamari

Koivisto

Maedche

(2017). Gamified crowdsourcing: Conceptualization, literature review, and future agenda. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 106, 26–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.04.005

53.

O’Connor

Joffe

(2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220

54.

Onwuegbuzie

A. J.

Seaman

M. A.

(1995). The effect of time constraints and statistics test anxiety on test performance in a statistics course. The Journal of Experimental Education, 63(2), 115–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1995.9943816

55.

Onwuegbuzie

A. J.

Slate

J. R.

Paterson

F. R.

Watson

M. H.

Schwartz

R. A.

(2000). Factors associated with achievement in educational research courses. Research in the Schools, 7(1), 53–65.

56.

Pan

Tang

(2004). Examining the effectiveness of innovative instructional methods on reducing statistics anxiety for graduate students in the social sciences. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31(2), 149–159.

57.

Panadero

Brown

G. T.

Strijbos

J. W.

(2016). The future of student self-assessment: A review of known unknowns and potential directions. Educational Psychology Review, 28, 803–830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-015-9350-2

58.

Pavlovich

Collins

Jones

(2009). Developing students’ skills in reflective practice: Design and assessment. Journal of Management Education, 33(1), 37–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562907307640

59.

Prabawa

H. W.

(2017). A review of gamification in technological pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 812(1), 012019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/812/1/012019

60.

Redpath

(2012). Confronting the bias against on-line learning in management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 11(1), 125–140. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0044

61.

Schöbel

S. M.

Janson

Leimeister

J. M.

(2022). Gamifying online training in management education to support emotional engagement and problem-solving skills. Journal of Management Education, 47(2), 166–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/10525629221123287

62.

Schöbel

Saqr

Janson

(2021). Two decades of game concepts in digital learning environments: A bibliometric study and research agenda. Computers & Education, 173, 104296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104296

63.

Simões

Redondo

R. D.

Vilas

A. F.

(2013). A social gamification framework for a K-6 learning platform. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(2), 345–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.007

64.

Sitzmann

Ely

Brown

K. G.

Bauer

K. N.

(2010). Self-assessment of knowledge: A cognitive learning or affective measure? Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9(2), 169–191. https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.9.2.zqr169

65.

Tenório

Bittencourt

I. I.

Isotani

Pedro

Ospina

. (2016). A gamified peer assessment model for on-line learning environments in a competitive context. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 247–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.049

66.

Townsend

M. A. R.

Moore

D. W.

Tuck

B. F.

Wilton

K. M.

(1998). Self-concept and anxiety in university students studying social science statistics within a co-operative learning structure. Educational Psychology, 18(1), 41–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341980180103

67.

Trinh

M. P.

(2019). Learning identity, flexibility, and lifelong experiential learning. In Aldag

(Ed.), Oxford Research encyclopedia of business and management. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190224851.013.187

68.

Trinh

M. P.

(2022a). Can you escape? Using mobile app escape games to create a holistic experiential learning process online. Management Teaching Review, 7(3), 236–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/23792981211056921

69.

Trinh

M. P.

(2022b). Teaching a difficult subject? Try gamifying your class. Nature. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-022-01945-z

70.

Trinh

M. P.

Kolb

D. A.

(2012). Eastern experiential learning: Eastern principles for learning wholeness. Career Planning and Adult Development Journal, 27(4), 29–43.

71.

Trinh

M. P.

van Esch

Martinez

H. A.

Messer

(2021). Appreciating large classes: Using Appreciative Inquiry to foster a hospitable learning space for experiential learning. Journal of Management Education, 45(5), 786–819. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920980125

72.

Utomo

A. Y.

Santoso

H. B.

(2015, April 8–10). Development of gamification-enriched pedagogical agent for e-Learning system based on community of inquiry [Conference session]. Proceedings of the International HCI and UX Conference in Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia (pp. 1–9). https://doi.org/10.1145/2742032.2742033

73.

Vesa

Harviainen

J. T.

(2019). Gamification: Concepts, consequences, and critiques. Journal of Management Inquiry, 28(2), 128–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/1056492618790911

74.

Vygotsky

(1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children, 23(3), 34–41.

75.

Wanick

Bui

(2019). Gamification in management: A systematic review and research directions. International Journal of Serious Games, 6(2), 57–74. https://doi.org/10.17083/ijsg.v6i2.282

76.

Weinzimmer

L. G.

Esken

C. A.

(2017). Learning from mistakes: How mistake tolerance positively affects organizational learning and performance. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53(3), 322–348. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886316688658

77.

Yan

Brown

G. T.

(2017). A cyclical self-assessment process: Towards a model of how students engage in self-assessment. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42(8), 1247–1262. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2016.1260091

78.

Zimmerman

B. J.

Moylan

A. R.

(2009). Self-regulation: Where metacognition and motivation intersect. In Dalam Hacker

D. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 311–328). Routledge.