Zainuddin, Z., Chu, S. K. W., Shujahat, M., & Perera, C. J. (2020). The impact of gamification on learning and instruction: A systematic review of empirical evidence. Educational Research Review, 30, 100326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100326
Zainudan et al. (2020) conducted a systematic literature review of 46 empirical studies published between 2016 and 2019 in the Web of Science Database to determine how gamification impacts learning and instruction in various education contexts. Their objectives included understanding the methodology and theoretical models used in these studies, exploring the effects of implementing gamification across different education contexts, and finding unexplored future avenues for gamification research. This review highlights how gamification can significantly enhance engagement, motivation, academic performance, and social interaction among students. However, it also identifies contradictions in literature regarding the effectiveness of various gamification elements and calls for further research to address these inconsistencies. The authors concluded that teachers should use gamification in addition to other contemporary pedagogies such as flipped classroom or inquiry-based learning to ensure a teaching method that is motivating and engaging for students. This study uses a qualitative literature review method through a blend of thematic and content analysis of the selected studies. The majority of studies analyzed used a quantitative or mixed-methods approach, but a select few used a purely quantitative approach.
This review provides a thorough synthesis of current research on gamification in education and offers valuable insights into the potential benefits and challenges of gamification. Furthermore, it focuses on empirical evidence, ensuring that its conclusions are based on observable and measurable outcomes which enhances the reliability of its findings. However, the reliance on a single database and only current studies limits the scope of the review. This article is unique as it critically examines the inconsistencies and gaps in gamification research, highlighting the need for future research into these issues.
Powers, R., & Moore, J. (2021). When failure is an option: A scoping review of failure states in game-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 69(5), 2451-2472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-021-10006-8
Power and Moore (2011) conducted a scoping review of 14 peer-reviewed articles to explore the role of failure in game-based learning. Their study investigates how failure states have been explored within education gaming contexts, and identifies the advantages and disadvantages of their use based on the extent and intensity of failure states in these contexts. Through their review, the authors identify key insights into how failure mechanics can be applied to achieve instructional goals, emphasizing the importance of balancing the risk and consequences of failure with their educational utility. The key findings from this article indicate that failure must be balanced with adequate rewards, that learners vary greatly in their perceptions of risk and consequences, and that the unlimited use of failure through multiple attempts was not effective as a learning strategy. Furthermore, the authors found that the existing literature on failure states was limited and varied greatly in depth.
This study uses a qualitative research method through a scoping review of existing literature on failure states. This method differs from a systematic review as researchers formulate their research questions based on the results mapped during the initial phase rather than using the research question as a starting point. This review is unique as it explores an aspect of game-based learning that is often overlooked and provides a nuanced understanding of how failure can be used for educational purposes. This article’s strengths lie in the depth of analysis through examining both the benefits and drawbacks of failure states, and the comprehensive mapping of existing literature which identifies themes and gaps for future research. However, this article also has some weaknesses which include the limited number of studies reviewed and the variability in methods and variables used in these studies.