1 Motivating Students Through Gamification by Curtis Armstrong A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF EDUCATION with an emphasis in CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION WEBER STATE UNIVERSITY Ogden, Utah 04/09/25 2 Abstract This study examined how gamification influences student motivation in a middle school classroom setting, drawing on the perspectives of students, teachers, and parents. Framed by Self-Determination Theory, the research explored how gamified learning strategies support intrinsic motivation through autonomy, competence, and relatedness. A mixed-method, nonexperimental design was used, with data collected through three separate surveys distributed to 42 students, 15 teachers, and 9 parents. Quantitative data was analyzed using descriptive statistics, while open-ended responses were coded for recurring themes. The findings indicated that gamification enhances student engagement when used purposefully and in moderation. Students reported increased focus and enjoyment, teachers observed higher participation and effort, and parents acknowledged both motivational benefits and concerns about screen time. Common themes across groups included the importance of competition, novelty, and balanced implementation. While the study addressed how gamification is used and perceived, it only partially explored the connection between home gaming habits and classroom motivation, indicating a need for future research. These findings support the use of gamified strategies to foster meaningful learning experiences in middle school education. 3 Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................ 2 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................ 4 Literature Review ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Motivation ......................................................................................................................................................... 5 Autonomy .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 Competence ...................................................................................................................................................... 7 Relatedness....................................................................................................................................................... 8 A Departure from Traditional Teaching Methods ............................................................................... 8 The Familiarity of Games ............................................................................................................................. 9 Gamification and Education ...................................................................................................................... 10 Gamification Frameworks ......................................................................................................................... 13 Framework Models ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Gamification and Motivation .................................................................................................................... 15 An Argument Against Gamification ........................................................................................................ 17 Summary.......................................................................................................................................................... 18 Method........................................................................................................................................................ 19 Participants .................................................................................................................................................... 19 Setting ............................................................................................................................................................... 20 Instruments .................................................................................................................................................... 20 Analysis ............................................................................................................................................................ 21 Results ........................................................................................................................................................ 21 Teacher Survey Responses ........................................................................................................................ 23 Student Survey Responses ......................................................................................................................... 24 Parent Survey Responses ........................................................................................................................... 25 Discussion ................................................................................................................................................. 26 Limitations and Opportunities for Future Research ........................................................................ 29 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................................................... 30 References ................................................................................................................................................. 32 Appendix A ................................................................................................................................................ 37 Appendix B ................................................................................................................................................ 38 Appendix C ................................................................................................................................................ 39 4 Introduction Students perform better when motivated and engaged in the classroom. Research from Muhammad et al. (2023) concluded that motivation is necessary for students to be engaged in the educational environment. Eighth grade students who were more engaged in school were more likely to matriculate and eventually graduate from college (Finn, 2006). Ryan and Deci (2020) provided some possible insight into students’ motivation in the classroom derived from their research of the Self Determination Theory (SDT). The psychological elements of autonomy, competence, and relatedness significantly increase student motivation. Research has shown a connection between the principles of SDT and gamification frameworks (Alsawaier, 2018; Buckley & Doyle, 2016; Manzano-León et al., 2021). Gamification provides an opportunity to increase students’ motivation by offering levels of achievement and rewards beyond the traditional grading system. The concept of using gamification in education has presented teachers with alternatives to capture students’ attention and increase their motivation for successful learning opportunities in the classroom. Traditional educational methods, while established, frequently fall short in facilitating autonomy, competence, and relatedness that are central to motivation. (Putz et al., 2020) The gap between the principles of SDT and the reality of conventional teaching emphasizes the need for innovative approaches, such as gamification, to truly engage and motivate students. Educational curriculum is often presented as a “one-size-fits-all” solution that limits opportunities for students to customize their learning. Traditional classroom experiences have largely been teacher-based as teachers lecture, students are expected to take notes and memorize facts. In teacher-centered classrooms, opportunities for personalized learning are notably limited. (Shemshack & Spector, 2020) 5 To better understand how gamification is perceived in education, this study gathered input from three key stakeholder groups: students, teachers, and parents. Each group completed a survey designed to capture their unique perspectives on the use and effectiveness of gamified learning. By triangulating these responses, the study examined how gamification influences student motivation from multiple viewpoints. In doing so, it contributes to the broader conversation about gamification’s role in K-12 education, particularly at the middle school level—a population underrepresented in existing research. This study also responds to a gap identified by Dichev and Dicheva (2017), who noted that most gamification research has focused on higher education, with limited exploration of its effects in secondary school settings. Literature Review This literature review identifies connections between student motivation in the classroom and the gamification of educational curriculum. It examines various studies and theories that explore how gamification frameworks influence key motivational factors in an educational setting. By synthesizing current research, this review aims to understand the role gamification plays in enhancing student motivation. Additionally, this review highlights the differences between these studies and traditional teaching methods. Motivation Motivation is a key indicator of academic success largely due to its significant influence on the time and effort students spend on learning activities (Linehan et al., 2011). It is the driving force that propels students to engage in their education. Effective motivation arises when students are presented with content that is not only relevant to their interests and goals but is also structured in a manner that supports scaffolded learning. Allowing students to make choices that align with their individual learning styles and preferences provides students with opportunities to 6 exercise autonomy in the classroom. Fostering motivation is essential for creating an educational environment that encourages active participation and a sense of personal achievement. One theory that provides insight about motivation is the Self Determination Theory (SDT). The SDT proposes that human motivation is driven by the need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Ryan and Deci (2020) provided some possible insight into students’ motivation in the classroom discussing the importance of autonomy, competence, and relatedness. According to Ryan and Deci (2020), the combination of these three psychological principles increases students’ motivation to thrive in an educational environment. Autonomy Autonomy, the first principle of SDT as outlined by Ryan and Deci (2020), is the feeling of having power over one’s own actions that promotes a sense of control and personal fulfillment. In education, autonomy refers to students taking ownership of their learning. This ownership manifests when students make choices that align with their interests and learning styles, leading to enhanced engagement, deeper learning, and increased motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2020). Using gamification in the classroom can support autonomy by offering choices in learning paths, challenges, and pacing (Ling, 2018). This approach not only aligns with the principle of autonomy but also with differentiated learning, recognizing, and addressing the unique strengths and challenges of each student. Allowing the student to engage with content in ways that reflect their individual preferences, needs, and skill levels. Adaptive scaffolding, as mentioned by Ling (2018), further facilitates autonomy, allowing learners to navigate through tasks at their own pace and according to their personal learning goals. Bomia et al. (1997) provided insight from their research that offering different learning materials to students may enhance a sense of autonomy. Such strategies ensure that autonomy is not merely about choice, 7 but about meaningful engagement with the content, fostering an environment where students are motivated to learn not because they must but because they want to. This intrinsic motivation, rooted in autonomy, is fundamental to the SDT and is critical for fostering a lifelong love of learning and discovery in students. Competence Competence, defined as the feeling of mastering a skill and experiencing a sense of accomplishment, is a critical component of intrinsic motivation in educational settings. When students are presented with tasks that are both challenging and achievable, they not only engage more deeply with the material but also develop a stronger sense of mastery over their educational goals. Gamified learning environments as noted by Chapman and Rich (2018) provided an ideal setting for fostering this sense of competence, allowing students to acquire a deeper understanding of the content through interactive and engaging tasks. Additionally, Holman et al. (2013) highlighted how gamification enhances the learning process by making achievements more visible and rewarding, thereby reinforcing a student’s sense of competence. The key to fostering competence through gamification lies in the careful planning of challenges to match the student’s abilities, as suggested by Kyewski and Krämer (2018). This balance ensures that students are neither bored with tasks that are too easy nor overwhelmed by difficulty. Incorporating elements such as immediate feedback (Bai et al., 2020) and recognition of achievements into the gamified system can satisfy the learners’ sense of competence. The principle of competence in the context of SDT and gamification is more than simple task completion because it creates a sense of achievement and progress that is necessary for sustained engagement and motivation in educational pursuits. 8 Relatedness Relatedness, the desire to connect with others and have a sense of belonging, is a fundamental element of SDT that plays a crucial role in educational environments. In a gamified classroom, collaborative tasks or group challenges can create a strong sense of community and facilitate meaningful peer connections, thereby enhancing the relatedness among students. Such collaborative settings not only encourage students to engage with the learning material but also provide them with the social support necessary for overcoming challenges and celebrating successes together. Alternatively, gamification can introduce a healthy level of competition, as noted by Huang and Hew (2021), offering levels of achievement and rewards that frame learning within a familiar and engaging context. In addition to peer connections, the role of teacherstudent interactions within a gamified framework should not be overlooked. Teachers can leverage gamification to personalize learning experiences and provide feedback in a manner that resonates with each student, thereby fostering a deeper sense of relatedness. When students feel that their individual efforts are recognized and valued within the broader classroom community, their sense of belonging is enhanced, contributing to a more inclusive and supportive learning environment. A Departure from Traditional Teaching Methods Educational curriculum is often presented as a “one-size-fits-all” solution that limits opportunities for students to customize their learning. As a result, students may be disengaged in the classroom and unmotivated to complete their work. Teaching in the traditional classroom environment with lectures and presentations offers little engagement to motivate students. If a student does not have intrinsic motivation, then teacher efficacy will not be enough to help the student succeed in the classroom (Johnson-Smith, 2014). While extrinsic incentives such as good 9 grades, teacher praise, or positive feedback can motivate some learner, these strategies do not consistently produce sustained engagement across diverse student population (Ryan & Deci, 2020). According to the Self Determination Theory, external motivators may be internalized over time when students begin to see value in the learning activity itself, particularly when they are supported in developing autonomy, competence, and relatedness. This internalization process helps shift motivation from external rewards to internal goals. As Hung (2017) noted, intrinsic motivators are more likely to produce lasting behavioral and motivational change, especially when the learning environment fosters personal relevance and student ownership. In a traditional teacher-centered classroom, the focus is on a singular direction of information from teacher to student with the expectation of the memorization of facts rather than true learning to take place. Students are passive participants in a traditional classroom and are not given the opportunity to express their creativity. (Sobirova & Karimova, 2021) The Familiarity of Games Leveraging the widespread appeal of video games, educators are exploring gamification as an alternative approach to enhance student motivation in the classroom with video games capturing the imagination of a significant portion of the global population. Video games have become commonplace in society. As reported by Alswaier (2018), 58 percent of the population in the United States play video games. In fact, Angry Birds has more than one billion downloads and the game World of Warcraft has over 10 million subscribers that have logged more than 50 billion hours of gameplay (Chapman & Rich, 2018). Adapting the familiarity of game design to education offers promising pedagogy methods that have the potential to increase student motivation in the classroom (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017). 10 Emerging research indicates that gamification enhances student engagement by increasing motivation and fostering a deeper understanding of academic content. Alsawaier (2018) showed that gamification has a positive impact on intrinsic motivation leading to student engagement and increased participation. Meaningful gamification motivates students to understand key concepts (Ling, 2018). Manzano-Leon et al. (2021) reported that “gamification can have positive effects on motivation, engagement, and academic performance at different education levels” (p. 9). Gamification can be defined as using gaming elements in a non-game environment such as education to increase intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Buckley & Doyle, 2016; Deterding et al., 2011; Kyewski & Krämer, 2018). When gamification is introduced into learning activities, it often results in engaging experiences for the learner (Codish & Ravid, 2014), and the participation and involvement of students increases leading to an improvement in their academic performance (Kyewski & Krämer, 2018). Gamification and Education Key stakeholders in education include teachers, students, and students’ parents. These three target groups have unique perspectives on various aspects of education. Prior research has focused on two of the three stakeholders though research including all three groups is notably limited. Additionally, Dichev and Dicheva (2017) provided a meta-analysis of 51 studies related to gamified education between June 30, 2014, and December 31, 2015. From those studies, only two studies reported results involving middle school students. In contrast, 44 studies were conducted at the university level. One explanation offered by the researchers was that it may have been easier for college professors to experiment using gamification. 11 Research involving all three groups of stakeholders is notably limited. The research study from Hidayat (2022) surveyed parents and teachers at a primary school in Indonesia and Ebrahimi et al. (2023) research involved fifth grade students and teachers at an international school in Oman. These two studies focused on only two groups, thereby overlooking the triangulation of perspective from all three groups of key stakeholders. A research study from Hidayat (2022) identified a gap in existing studies from the perspectives of game-based learning of teachers and parents but did not survey the students. The study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic and collected data from two different surveys, one from teachers and another from parents of primary school children in East Java, Indonesia. The teacher survey included 20 questions in four different phases including demographic information, teaching experience, digital tools ability, and gamification experience. The teacher survey received 35 responses and of those 77% of the teachers had used games as learning activities in the classroom. Although 42% of teachers worried about game addiction, 28% felt that technical problems would inhibit the process, and 14% argued about the uncertainty of the game’s effectiveness. The parent survey had 25 questions in the following categories including demographic data, children’s screen-time, and digital tools ability. The parent survey received 42 responses and 62% of parents had purchased their child a digital device (mostly smartphone) for the following reasons: to facilitate their child’s learning process (42%); to teach children about technology (38%); and to ease the communication with their child (16%). When asked about their child’s screen time, 35% of parents permitted their child to use their device 1-2 hours per day, another 35% allowed 2-4 hours per day, and 16% tolerated their child to have 4-6 hours of 12 daily screen time. When asked about the concerns of their child having a digital device, health issues, screen time addiction, and access to inappropriate content were at the top of the list of concerns. Screen time and video games in the home can provide a familiar context for students when gamified learning is introduced in the classroom. Therefore, the correlation between a parent survey and gamification in the classroom establishes how students may respond when teachers implement gamified curriculum in a learning environment. The critical missing piece to this study was the students’ perspectives of game-based learning. A student survey asking questions about their motivation could provide helpful insight into the effects of gamification in education. A research study from Ebrahimi et al. (2023) used a mixed methods approach to understand the impact of gamification. The study was conducted at an international school in Oman and collected survey data from students and 11 teachers. Fifth grade students were taught a science lesson by the teachers and students played an educational game developed for the study called Water Matters. The objective of the game was to increase the learning outcome by turning the content into an educational game. Feedback from 15 students was collected in a Google Form survey containing four simplified questions rated the game as fun (93%) / not fun (7%), hard (64%) /easy (36%), on a scale from 1-10 (Mean Opinion Score of 8.07), and the students’ preferred video game genres (shooting, racing, educational, horror). Educational games received the lowest priority as only one student selected it as their preferred video game genre. A separate survey was created for the 11 teachers to gather information about their familiarity with gamification, how often they used it in their teaching, and their feedback on using it with their students. All 11 teachers that were surveyed said they use some form of gamified learning in their classroom. Through open-ended questions, feedback provided by 13 teachers included comments such as “students and parents love it,” “created a good and engaging environment,” and “the game was fascinating, time flies, and so much fun that we learned more than we expected.” Though this research study included students and teachers, it neglected to gather feedback from parents that could provide insightful context to students’ experiences playing games outside of the classroom. Gamification Frameworks Game design is deployed through a framework, a system of game design elements that set the rules, aesthetics, and rewards of the gamified curriculum. Game design elements are organized and deployed through a gamification framework. The most common game design elements include user avatars, virtual rewards, storyline or quest (Alsawaier, 2018), points and badges (Hung, 2017), and leaderboards (Legaki et al., 2021; Manzano-León et al., 2021). Lee and Hammer (2011) pointed out similarities between game design elements (points and badges) and traditional classroom environments (points on assignments and grades rather than badges). Framework Models Game design uses frameworks to help designers determine how the various game design elements affect the players. While many gamification frameworks exist, this literature review will focus on the frameworks closely related to motivation and the SDT. The mechanics, dynamics, aesthetics (MDA) framework was first introduced at a Game Developer Conference, San Jose 2001-2004 (Kusuma et al., 2018). Manzano-Leon et al. (2021) analyzed 14 research papers that identified the components of the MDA framework. The implications of this analysis suggest that gamification can have a positive effect on student motivation, engagement, and academic performance at different education levels. The mechanics refer to the courses, components, and control of the game. This typically includes the game engine and elements 14 (Kusuma et al., 2018) and the actions during the mechanics of the game (Manzano-León et al., 2021). Dynamics are the constraints within the game as well as the choices and consequences of the player and the competition or cooperation of the group as a whole (Kusuma et al., 2018). Manzano-Leon et al. (2021) research referred to dynamics as the players’ actions and behaviors within the context of the game. Aesthetics are the emotional responses within the players. Kusuma et al. (2018) divide aesthetics into eight different categories which are sensation, challenge, discovery, fellowship, expression, fantasy, submission, and narrative. Of the 33 studies that Kusuma et al. (2018) researched, all were reported to use the gaming aesthetics of sensation and challenge, while only three were reported to have submission (a player’s devotion to the game.) Sapturo et al. (2019) outlined a gamification framework useful to gamify educational curriculum. The MARC (meaningful purpose, autonomy, relatedness, and competence) framework attaches common game design elements to one of four areas. It’s worth noting the similarities between this framework and the research of SDT from Ryan & Deci (2016). For example, a task, quest, or experience points are game elements closely related to competence. An avatar and allowing the student to choose their path to skill mastery allows for autonomous opportunities for learning. A collaborative gaming environment falls into the category of relatedness. Lastly, an example of meaningful purpose can be completing objectives on a virtual map or on a hero’s journey. Another framework to consider in the field of gamified education is Massive Open Online Course (MOOC). Sapturo et al. (2019) conducted a study to research the intrinsic motivation of students within a MOOC framework based on elements from Ryan and Deci (2016) SDT. The outcome suggested that MOOC was unable to support the students’ intrinsic 15 motivation and recommended that a different gamification framework be used. Kyewski & Krämer (2018) also came to a similar conclusion stating that badges in a MOOC had little effect on student motivation. Gamification and Motivation Exploring the dynamic relationship between gamification and student motivation, recent studies offer insights into its efficacy within an educational context. Tsay et al. (2018) delved into gamification’s impact on a Personal and Professional Development course, employing SDT to foster student motivation through autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Their findings suggest a positive correlation between gamified learning and student motivation. This section of the literature review will further examine these outcomes alongside other pivotal research, including Chapman and Rich’s (2018) investigation into student motivation and Putz et al.’s (2020) longitudinal study on the impact of gamification on student learning. Additionally, Welbers et al. (2019) examined the role of feedback within gamified frameworks revealing the effects on student motivation. Collectively, these studies underscore the potential of gamification to enhance student motivation. Notable research studies have used the SDT as a model to understand student motivation within the context of gamification in education. Tsay et al. (2018) conducted a study of gamification during the 2015 – 2016 academic school year that included 136 college students enrolled in a Personal and Professional Development (PPD) course. It was one of three PPD courses offered to undergraduate students in the business school at a university in the United Kingdom. Before the study, the course was delivered through traditional teaching methods including lectures, PowerPoint presentations, and seminars taking place on alternating weeks during two terms. This study applied the principles of SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2016) to increase the 16 motivation of students. For example, students had a sense of autonomy to choose which learning activities to complete. To give the students a sense of competence, badges were awarded, and a leaderboard was displayed. Finally, students were given a sense of relatedness through tasks designed to allow students to "co-create knowledge" and "express individuality." Participants were invited to give feedback at different stages of the system development. The outcomes of the Tsay et al. (2018) study showed students' engagement and motivation in the gamified course is positively related to their course performance and students' course performance is higher in the gamified course than in the non-gamified course. Interestingly, female students participated significantly more in the gamified learning activities than male students. Students with jobs engaged significantly more in gamified learning activities than students without jobs. A major limitation of this study was that the researchers only examined a limited number of student background variables such as personality, gamer type, and attitudes toward game-based learning and experience with games (Tsay et al., 2018). In their 2018 study, Chapman and Rich explored the impact of gamification on student motivation surveying 124 undergraduate students from six organizational behavior courses during the 2014-2015 academic year. The findings revealed that a significant portion, 67.7% of students, perceived gamified courses as more motivating than traditional ones. However, 25.8% of students reported no difference in motivation levels, and 6.5% found gamified courses less motivating. These results indicate that while gamification generally increases motivation, its effectiveness varies, highlighting a need for further research to understand and cater to those students who find gamification less engaging. Noteworthy research of educational gamification is the longitudinal study by Putz et al. (2020), spanning from June 2015 to May 2017 with 617 participants from upper schools and 17 universities. This research utilized full-day workshops, including field trips focused on sustainable supply chain methods, to assess gamification’s impact on learning. The study used three evolving workshop designs, each featuring both gamified and non-gamified sessions for direct content comparison. Post-workshop modifications were based on insights gained, enriching the study’s iterative nature. Overall, gamification had a positive effect on student’s knowledge retention. However, the notable limitations such as class-based participant randomization, potentially influencing outcomes due to social dynamics, and the study’s reliance on memorization skills as a primary learning metric. These factors could have significant implications for the relevancy of gamification in diverse educational settings. Welbers et al. (2019) conducted a study to analyze the impact of feedback in a university program introductory gamified app. Contrary to expectations, the study found no significant difference between specific feedback, general feedback, and no feedback conditions in enhancing student engagement. While initial engagement was a challenge, once involved, many students showed high levels of sustained participation. This finding underscores the complexity of designing effective gamified educational tools and highlights the need for further research on optimizing initial student engagement. Other researchers suggest that “more substantial empirical research is needed to determine whether both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation of the learners can be actually influenced by gamification” (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017). An Argument Against Gamification The effectiveness of gamification may vary among students, contingent upon their individual learning preferences and styles. Oliveira et al. (2023) found that gamification does not uniformly improve student outcomes, with some participants exhibiting no significant improvement in learning achievements. Research by Almeida et al. (2023) highlights several 18 potential drawbacks of gamification, including lack of effort, worsened performance, motivational challenges, a lack of understanding of the material, and perceived irrelevance of the game elements to educational objectives. Kyewski and Krämer (2018) stated that if gamification systems solely rely on elements that reinforce behaviors with external rewards, students may become demotivated leading to a reduction in participation and learning over time. Hung (2017) claims the effects of gamification may be different for a required course because students aren’t necessarily intrinsically motivated by the gaming elements. Additionally, the effect of gamification on student motivation could be less or even produce a negative effect if only one or two gaming elements are used (Manzano-León et al., 2021). Summary Recent research underscores the critical role of motivation in student engagement within the classroom, as highlighted by Muhammad et al. (2023). Central to understanding this motivation is the Self Determination Theory, proposed by Ryan and Deci (2020), which proposes that autonomy, competence, and relatedness are fundamental psychological elements driving motivation. Gamification, defined by deploying game design elements into non-game contexts like education, emerges as a promising approach to enrich these motivational elements. While traditional methods may not adequately support the psychological needs outline by the SDT. On the other hand, gamification, with its roots in the engaging world of video games, offers innovative opportunities for educators to increase student motivation. Dichev and Dicheva (2017) note the potential of gamification frameworks that align game design elements with the psychological elements of motivation, suggesting a prime opportunity for enhancing student engagement in the classroom. 19 Method There is potential to explore the opportunities of gamification strategies in secondary education to assess how teenagers’ motivation in the classroom is affected by gamification. Previous studies have reported positive outcomes of gamification but left gaps in research that this study filled by collecting data from teachers, students, and parents. The purpose of this study was to collect diverse perspectives of the effect of gamification on student motivation at the middle school level. Research Question (RQ1): What is the effect of gamification on student motivation in a middle school classroom? Research Question (RQ2): How do teachers use gamification in their classroom and how are their students responding to it? Research Question (RQ3): What connections exist between student’s video game habits in the home and how students are motivated with gamification in the classroom? This study applied a mixed method non-experimental survey design to examine the role of gamification in student motivation. By surveying students, parents, and teachers, the study triangulated perspectives to better understand how gamified learning impacts engagement in the classroom. The study also explored possible connections between students’ gaming behaviors at home, as observed by parents, and classroom motivation, as perceived by teachers, alongside students’ own views of gamified instruction. The research hypothesis of this study was that gamification increases student motivation in a middle school classroom. Participants Three groups participated in the study: teachers, students, and parents. Participation was voluntary and anonymous. A total of 42 students completed the survey, consisting of 8th grade 20 (67.44%) and 9th grade (32.56%) students from the same middle school. Parents of these students were then invited to participate, with nine parents completing the parent survey. In addition, 15 teachers participated in the study of the 39 teachers that were invited to participate. These teachers represented a variety of subject areas, 12 reported teaching 8th grade, and 9 reported teaching 9th grade. Six teachers taught both grade levels, while six taught only 8th grade and three taught only 9th grade. This distribution reflects a cross-section of educators who work directly with the student population targeted in this study. Responses from these three groups provided insight into common themes and perspectives on gamified learning. Setting This study took place at a middle school located in a semi-rural area in northern Utah. The school serves students in grades 8 and 9 and has an enrollment of approximately 840 students. It is part of the Box Elder School District and serves the northern portion of Box Elder County. Instruments This study used Google Forms as the main instrument to collect survey responses from all three participant groups. Each group received a separate survey tailored to their role. The surveys consisted of both multiple-choice and open-ended questions, designed to capture perception of gamified learning in a middle school setting. The full versions of each survey are included in the appendices: the student survey in Appendix A, the parent survey in Appendix B, and the teacher survey in Appendix C. These instruments were developed by adapting questions from prior studies by Hidayat (2022) and Ebrahimi et al. (2023) to align with the scope and research questions of this project. The surveys included a combination of multiple-choice, 21 Likert-scale, and open-ended questions designed to explore perspectives on gamification in middle school education. Analysis Survey data from Google Forms were automatically imported into Google Sheets for analysis. Quantitative data from the survey responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics to identify general trends across participant groups. Frequencies and percentages were calculated to summarize responses to multiple-choice questions, including the use of gamification, perceived motivation, and observed concerns. This analysis was conducted separately for each group to allow for comparative insight. Open-ended responses were analyzed using a thematic coding approach. Responses were reviewed and grouped according to recurring phrases, keywords, and patterns that emerged across the three participant groups. Initial codes were developed inductively based on participant language, and similar codes were then organized into broader themes such as motivation, competition, engagement, distraction, and balance. To enhance consistency and support the interpretation of themes, ChatGPT (OpenAI, 2023) was used as a supplementary tool to generate thematic summaries of the qualitative data. These summaries were compared with the researcher’s independently developed codes to identify areas of alignment. Any differences were reviewed and resolved through closer examination of the original data. The final coding structure and all interpretations were determined by the researcher. Results The data for this study was collected through three separate surveys—one for each group—teachers, students, and parents. The following sections summarize the findings for each group, organized by key themes that emerged from both the quantitative and qualitative 22 responses. Quantitative results revealed strong patterns across all three participant groups. Among teachers, 93.3% reported using gamification in their instruction, with 80% observing increased student motivation. Student responses supported this observation, with the majority indicating that gamified learning activities helped them stay focused, engaged, and motivated. Parent responses were more varied, but approximately two-thirds acknowledged some educational or behavioral benefits of gaming at home, while others expressed concerns related to screen time and overuse. The results of this study directly addressed the first two research questions. Regarding Research Question 1, quantitative data showed that 80% of teachers observed increased motivation, and approximately 85% of students reported that gamified activities made learning more engaging or enjoyable than traditional teaching methods. This consistency between groups supported the conclusion that gamification positively influences student motivation in a middle school setting. Research Question 2, 93.3% of teachers indicated they frequently used gamified strategies in their instruction. The most common tools were Kahoot! (57.1%), Blooket (42.9%), and Gimkit (21.4%), with games most often used at the end of instructional units. Student feedback aligned closely, with many citing competition, rewards, and interactivity as motivating factors. However, Research Question 3, which explored the connection between students’ home gaming habits and their motivation in the classroom, was only partially answered. Although 66% of parents identified potential benefits of gaming at home, such as improved memory, confidence, or problem solving, the student survey did not collect data on gaming frequency or behaviors outside of school. As a result, no direct comparisons could be drawn, and the relationship between home gaming and classroom engagement remains inconclusive. Thus, highlighting an area for future research. 23 Teacher Survey Responses The responses from the teacher survey indicated that gamification increases motivation and engagement in the classroom. Many teachers observed that students, particularly those who are competitive, were more likely to participate when lessons included point-based or rewarddriven game elements. Several teachers also noted that students often ask to replay the games, showing a sustained interest in the activity. Gamification was most used during end-of-unit review sessions accounting for 60% of the teacher responses. Students appeared more focused during test preparation when the review was structured as a game. Although gamification was seen as an effective strategy for increasing participation, some teachers expressed concerns about its effect on long-term learning. Based on the qualitative teacher, four teachers noted that students were sometimes more interested in winning than in understanding or retaining the academic content, suggesting that while competition may enhance participation, it does not always promote deeper learning. Notable teacher responses included statements such as, “Students are very motivated to win the game, but it doesn’t always translate into learning the content.” and “Their focus is getting to play the game, more than what the questions are asking.” When games prioritized speed over accuracy, students rushed through questions without processing the content. Teachers emphasized the importance of selecting games that support content mastery rather than focusing solely on competition. Another theme that emerged was the decline in student excitement when gamification was overused. Approximately 20% of teachers reported that student enthusiasm declined when gamified tools like Kahoot! were overused. To maintain interest, some teachers introduced a variety of games, including offline alternatives like Trashketball or Jeopardy. Teachers also observed mixed responses from students—while competitive students enjoyed gamified lessons, 24 quieter students were sometimes less willing to participate if there was a mention of their name or attention was drawn to them. Three teachers (20%) reported that certain game features led to distraction, noting some students were more focused on elements like buying virtual items with points collected or upgrading their virtual characters than on the academic task itself. There were also instances where students created their own games with nonsensical questions and answers just to access the gameplay. These examples highlight the need for thoughtful implementation to ensure that gamification supports both engagement and learning. Student Survey Responses The student survey responses indicated that most students view gamified learning as more engaging than traditional teaching methods. Twenty-eight students (85%) reported that games help them stay focused and motivated by adding an element of excitement that is often missing from conventional lessons. Additionally, 14 students (34%) mentioned that traditional teaching can feel repetitive, while gamified activities offer a fun and interactive way to learn that makes it easier to concentrate and understand the content. A recurring theme among the responses was the motivational impact of competition. Students reported that the desire to win pushes them to try harder, remember more, and stay more involved in the lesson. Some students explained that to succeed in the game, they needed to learn the correct information, which helped reinforce the material. However, a few students noted that sometimes the focus shifts to winning rather than fully learning the content. Gamified learning also appeared to support different learning styles. One student with ADHD mentioned that they could focus better when the lesson involved a game instead of a 25 lecture. Other students described how interactive games helped them connect ideas more easily, remember details, and improve their overall understanding of the topic. Despite these positive experiences, some students shared concerns about using gamification too often. A few noted that platforms like Kahoot! and Blooket have lost their appeal because they are used too frequently. This observation was consistent with teacher feedback about students losing interest when games are repeated without variation. In addition, a small number of students felt that games could sometimes be distracting and said they preferred more traditional teaching methods. Overall, student responses suggest that gamified learning can be a valuable strategy for increasing motivation and engagement. When used strategically, especially with a balance of competition and interactivity, it can support both attention and learning. However, the findings also show the importance of variety and purpose, making sure that games enhance instruction rather than distract from it. Parent Survey Responses The responses from the parent survey reflected a range of perspectives on the role of gaming and gamification in education. Five parents (56%) noted cognitive and social benefits from gaming at home, including improved communication, problem solving, memory, and handeye coordination. Two parents (22%) described how gaming worked as a reward system in their home, encouraging their children to complete tasks and persevere through challenges. However, three parents (33%) reported seeing limited or no academic value in gamified learning, suggesting that its benefits may be tied only to specific topics or interests. Concerns about gamification were also mentioned. Three parents (33%) expressed caution about the amount of screen time associated with gamified instruction, while two parents 26 (22%) were concerned that frequent classroom use of digital games might increase their child’s dependence on technology. Two parents (22%) believed that gamification may be more appropriate for younger students, suggesting that middle school learners could become disengaged or distracted without deep processing of the content. Several were worried that frequent use of gamification in school might increase their child’s dependence on technology or reduce their interest in hand-on, traditional learning activities. Others emphasized the importance of balance, noting that while gamification can be useful, it should not replace non-digital learning experiences. Despite these concerns, six parents (67%) saw potential in gamification to increase student motivation, engagement, and classroom focus. They noted that when used purposefully, gamification can make lessons more enjoyable and help students concentrate more effectively. However, two parents (22%) raised concerns about students rushing through tasks to advance in the game or becoming overly attached to the digital format. Overall, parents supported gamification when it was implemented with purpose, especially when it helped reinforce academic content and encouraged meaningful learning. Discussion The results of this study support the conclusion that gamification has a positive impact on student motivation in a middle school classroom. Table 1 summarizes key themes that emerged across stakeholder groups, revealing consistent perspectives among teachers, students, and parents. Students often described gamification as more enjoyable and engaging that traditional instruction, and their feedback reflected strong alignment with teacher observations regarding student participation and enthusiasm. This shared perception supports previous research by 27 Chapman and Rich (2018), who found that game-based strategies increase student involvement by creating interactive and learner-centered environments. Table 1 Common Themes Among Stakeholders Theme Teachers’ Perspective Students’ Perspective Effectiveness of Gamification Increases participation but doesn’t always lead to deep learning. Competition Motivates students but may overshadow content learning. Retention and Learning Impact Works best when games reward accuracy over speed. More fun and engaging, but some just play to win. Makes learning exciting, encourages effort and memorization. Helps recall information, especially when tied to a game’s structure. Potential Downsides Overuse reduces effectiveness, can be distracting. Some students feel they don’t learn—just focus on winning. Parents’ Perspective Beneficial if balanced with real learning. Not a major focus; more concerned with engagement and skillbuilding. Some parents see cognitive benefits like memory and problemsolving. Concerned about screen time and balancing gamification with hands-on learning. Both teachers and students noted that repeated use of the same gamified platforms can lead to diminished interest. These observations echo the findings of Dichev and Dicheva (2017), who emphasized the risk of novelty fatigue when gamification is implemented without variety or clear instructional purpose. In response, some teachers reported success when diversifying their approach by integrating offline games such as Trashketball or Jeopardy or custom-designed activities, reinforcing the importance of variation in sustaining student engagement (Linehan et al. 2011). Students consistently noted that competition was one of the most motivating aspects of gamification. Many said they were more likely to participate and study when the activity involved points, leaderboards, or rewards. This supports previous research by Huang and Hew 28 (2021), who found that competitive elements in gamified instruction can foster higher levels of student engagement, particularly among learners with a preference for achievement-oriented tasks. Teachers made similar observations but also shared concerns that some students focused more on winning than learning. This concern reflects principles of the SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2020), which stress the importance of structuring competition in ways that enhance competence and promote meaningful learning. Parent perspectives added another layer to the findings. While most expressed support for gamification when implemented with balance, some raised concerns about screen time and the risk of students becoming reliant on digital rewards. Some parents observed that gaming helped their children develop cognitive or social skills from gaming at home, such as problem-solving or communication skills. These observations are consistent with findings by Ebrahimi et al. (2023), who reported that well-structured gamification can foster transferable skills beyond academic content. Others worried that too much exposure to games might lead students to expect gamified learning all the time or lose interest in traditional methods. These concerns from all three groups echoed the findings of Dichev and Dicheva (2017) who cautioned that the motivational benefits of gamification can diminish when tools are overused or applied without clear instructional purpose, reinforcing the need for balanced and intentional use in classroom settings. While the study effectively answered the first two research questions—how gamification impacts student motivation and how teachers use it—it only partially addressed the third question about connections between home gaming habits and school engagement. Although some parent responses pointed to possible links like persistence and screen-based behaviors, the student survey did not directly ask about gaming at home. 29 Overall, the findings suggest that gamification is a useful strategy for motivating students in middle school. However, to be most effective, it should be used with purpose and variety. When aligned with academic goals and student needs, gamification can support motivation and engagement while also promoting autonomy, competence, and connection within the classroom, which are central to the framework of Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2020). Limitations and Opportunities for Future Research While this study offers meaningful insights into the role of gamification in education, there are a few limitations to consider. One limitation is the small sample size, particularly among parents. Only nine parents completed the survey, which limits how these findings could apply to a larger population. A larger sample size could provide more comprehensive data and increase the strength of future conclusions. Another limitation is that the study relied on selfreported perceptions from students rather than academic performance data. Although students and teachers reported increased engagement, the long-term effects of gamification on achievement remain unclear. Future research could include student performance metrics, such as test scores or retention rates, to measure how gamification influences academic outcomes. This study is somewhat unique in that it gathered responses from three groups—teachers, students, and parents. Most previous research has focused on one or two of these groups, but not all three. Triangulating responses from all three perspectives allowed for a broader view of gamification’s impact. However, more research is needed to explore areas of agreement and difference among these stakeholders at a larger scale. Future studies could examine how student motivation aligns with both teacher strategies and parent expectations to provide a more complete understanding of how gamification functions across different educational environments. 30 Several participants noted that the effectiveness of gamification may change over time. Both teachers and parents mentioned that students could lose interest in certain games if they are used too often. These concerns mirror the observations of Dichev and Dicheva (2017), who warned that the novelty of gamified tools can diminish when overused, potentially reducing long-term effectiveness unless instructional variety is maintained. Longitudinal studies that follow students across multiple grade levels could help determine whether gamification remains effective in the long term or if its impact decreases with repeated use. Future research could also explore how gamification affects students with different learning needs, including those with ADHD or other attention-related challenges, to better understand how game-based strategies can support a wider range of students. Lastly, this study intended to identify possible connections between students’ video game habits at home and their motivation when participating in gamified learning at school (RQ3). However, this question was only partially addressed, as the student survey did not include items related to gaming behaviors outside the classroom. As a result, the connection between home gaming and classroom motivation remains unclear. Further research is needed to explore this relationship, particularly through instruments that directly examine how students’ personal gaming experiences may influence their engagement with gamified instructional strategies. Conclusion This study examined how gamification affects student motivation in a middle school classroom, using feedback from teachers, students, and parents. Guided by Self-Determination Theory, the research explored how gamified learning can support students’ intrinsic motivation by encouraging autonomy, competence, and relatedness. 31 The findings showed that gamification can improve student engagement when used intentionally and with variety. Students reported that game-based activities made lessons more interesting and helped them focus. Teachers observed greater participation, especially among students who responded well to competition. While competition was a motivating factor, teachers also noted the importance of using games that support accuracy and learning—not just winning. Parents recognized benefits like increased motivation and problem-solving, but some expressed concerns about screen time dependency and the need to balance digital tools with more traditional learning experiences. Although the study addressed how gamification influences motivation and how it is used in the classroom, it only partly explored the connection between students’ gaming habits at home and their engagement with gamified learning at school. This gap suggests an opportunity for future research, particularly studies that examine students’ out-of-school gaming behavior alongside their classroom performance. Overall, gamification shows potential as a teaching strategy when applied with purpose and moderation. When aligned with instructional goals and student needs, gamified learning can help create a more engaging environment that supports academic development and encourages meaningful participation. 32 References Almeida, C., Kalinowski, M., Uchôa, A., & Feijó, B. (2023). Negative effects of gamification in education software: Systematic mapping and practitioner perceptions. Information and Software Technology, 156, 107142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2022.107142 Alsawaier, R. S. (2018). The effect of gamification on motivation and engagement. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 35(1), 56–79. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-02-2017-0009 Bai, S., Hew, K. F., & Huang, B. (2020). Does gamification improve student learning outcome? Evidence from a meta-analysis and synthesis of qualitative data in educational contexts. Educational Research Review, 30, 100322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100322 Bomia, L., Beluzo, L., Demeester, D., Elander, K., Johnson, M., & Sheldon, B. (1997). The Impact of Teaching Strategies on Intrinsic Motivation. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED418925 Chapman, J. R., & Rich, P. J. (2018). Does educational gamification improve students’ motivation? If so, which game elements work best? Journal of Education for Business, 93(7), 315–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/08832323.2018.1490687 Codish, D., & Ravid, G. (2014). Academic Course Gamification: The Art of Perceived Playfulness. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Skills and Lifelong Learning, 10, 131–151. https://doi.org/10.28945/2066 Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining "gamification". Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040 33 Dichev, C., & Dicheva, D. (2017). Gamifying education: What is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a critical review. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-017-0042-5 Ebrahimi, R., Alhumairi, A., & Asri, H. E. (2023). Investigating the Impact of Gamification in Education in an International School in Oman: An Analysis of Students, Teachers. Research Gate. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/367807218_Investigating_the_Impact_of_Gami fication_in_Education_at_the_Finland_Oman_School_An_Analysis_of_Students_Teache rs_and_Parents Finn, J. D. (2006). The adult lives of at-risk students: The roles of attainment and engagement in high school (NCES 2006-328). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Holman, C., Aguilar, S., & Fishman, B. (2013). GradeCraft: What can we learn from a gameinspired learning management system? Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, 260–264. https://doi.org/10.1145/2460296.2460350 Huang, B., & Hew, K. F. (2021). Using Gamification to Design Courses: Lessons Learned in a Three-year Design-based Study. Educational Technology & Society, 24(1), 44–64. Hung, A. C. Y. (2017). A Critique and Defense of Gamification. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 15(1). Johnson-Smith, T.R. (2014). Student Engagement and Academic Achievement in Technology Enhanced and Traditional Classroom Environments (Doctoral dissertation, Liberty 34 University). Liberty University Digital Commons. https://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/889/ Kusuma, G. P., Wigati, E. K., Utomo, Y., & Putera Suryapranata, L. K. (2018). Analysis of Gamification Models in Education Using MDA Framework. Procedia Computer Science, 135, 385–392. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2018.08.187 Kusumawati Hidayat, I. (2022). Teachers’ and Parents’ Viewpoints of Game-Based Learning: An Exploratory Study. KnE Social Sciences, 77–84. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v7i13.11647 Kyewski, E., & Krämer, N. C. (2018). To gamify or not to gamify? An experimental field study of the influence of badges on motivation, activity, and performance in an online learning course. Computers & Education, 118, 25–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.11.006 Legaki, N.-Z., Karpouzis, K., Assimakopoulos, V., & Hamari, J. (2021). Gamification to avoid cognitive biases: An experiment of gamifying a forecasting course. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 167, 120725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.120725 Ling, L. T. Y. (2018). Meaningful Gamification and Students’ Motivation: A Strategy for Scaffolding Reading Material. Online Learning, 22(2), 141–155. Manzano-León, A., Camacho-Lazarraga, P., Guerrero, M. A., Guerrero-Puerta, L., AguilarParra, J. M., Trigueros, R., & Alias, A. (2021). Between Level Up and Game Over: A Systematic Literature Review of Gamification in Education. Sustainability, 13(2247), 2247. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13042247 35 Muhammad, N., Siddique, A., Jabeen, S., & AKhtar, M. S. (2023). Academic Motivation and Engagement: A Correlational Study of Students’ Perspective at Secondary School Level. Journal of Social Sciences Review, 3(2), 852–863. https://doi.org/10.54183/jssr.v3i2.31 Oliveira, W., Hamari, J., Shi, L., Toda, A. M., Rodrigues, L., Palomino, P. T., & Isotani, S. (2023). Tailored gamification in education: A literature review and future agenda. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1), 373–406. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11122-4 OpenAI. (2023). ChaptGPT (Mar 14 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61, 101860. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2020.101860 Shemshack, A., & Spector, J. M. (2020). A systematic literature review of personalized learning terms. Smart Learning Environments, 7(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-02000140-9 Sobirova, S. U., & Karimova, R. (2021). Advantages and disadvantages of traditional and nontraditional lessons, goals, objectives, and types. European Journal of Innovation in Nonformal Education, 1(2), Article 2. Tsay, C. H.-H., Kofinas, A., & Luo, J. (2018). Enhancing student learning experience with technology-mediated gamification: An empirical study. Computers & Education, 121, 1– 17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.01.009 Welbers, K., Konijn, E. A., Burgers, C., de Vaate, A. B., Eden, A., & Brugman, B. C. (2019). Gamification as a tool for engaging student learning: A field experiment with a gamified 36 app. E-Learning and Digital Media, 16(2), 92–109. https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753018818342 37 Appendix A Student Survey Questions For this survey, “gamified learning” means participating in a game with the purpose of learning something new or reviewing what has been taught in the classroom. 1. What grade are you in? (8th grade / 9th grade) 2. Have you participated in gamified learning activities in the classroom? (Yes/No) a. If yes, which class(es) used a gamified learning activity to help you learn a new concept? (Check all that apply) i. Math ii. Language Arts iii. Science iv. Social Studies (History, Geography, etc.) v. CTE (Computers, FACS, Ag Science) vi. Physical Education/Health vii. Arts/Music viii. Languages (Spanish) 3. How motivated were you to learn something new during a gamified activity? (More motivated, no difference, less motivated) 4. Do you feel more motivated to complete tasks when they are part of a game? (Yes/No) 5. Do you think gamified activities help you learn better than traditional teaching methods? (Yes/No) 6. Why or why not? (Open ended) 38 Appendix B Parent Survey Questions Questions for parents focused on their perceptions of their child’s learning and the connection between their child’s game habits in the home and their motivation in the classroom. The following are questions created for parent survey. For this survey, “gamified learning” means participating in a game with the purpose of learning something new or reviewing what has been taught in the classroom. 1. Does your child play video games or participate in other gaming activities at home? (Yes/No) 2. If yes, how often does your child engage in these gaming activities? (Rarely, Occasionally, Frequently) Rarely=Less than one day per week. Occasionally=3-4 days per week. Frequently=5 or more days per week. 3. Have you observed any skills or behaviors from gaming at home that you think are beneficial for your child’s learning? (Open ended) 4. Do you think gamified learning in the classroom positively impacts your child’s learning at school? (Yes/No/Not Sure) 5. Do you have any concerns about the use of gamification in your child’s education? (Open ended) 6. What outcomes would you expect from the use of gamification in your child’s education? (Open ended) 39 Appendix C Teacher Survey Questions The survey questions for teachers asked them about their perspectives on gamification in the classroom. The following questions are intended for middle school teachers (8th or 9th grade) teaching any content area. 1. What subject(s) do you teach? a. Math b. Language Arts c. Science d. Social Studies (History, Geography, etc.) e. CTE (Please specify) f. Physical Education/Health g. Arts/Music h. Languages (Spanish) 2. What grade level(s) do you teach? (8th grade, 9th grade) 3. Do you use gamification strategies in your classroom? (Yes/No) 4. If yes, what specific tools, games, or websites do you use for gamification in your classroom? (Choose all that apply) a. Kahoot b. Blooket c. Gimkit d. NearPod (Time to Climb) e. QuizWhizzer 40 f. Quizlet g. Quizizz h. Prodigy i. Other (Please specify - Custom game, offline game, etc.) 5. How often do you use these gamification tools in your teaching? (Daily, weekly, at the end of a unit, other) 6. Have you observed an increase in student motivation in your classes when applying gamification strategies? (Yes/No) 7. Can you provide specific examples or observations of how gamification has affected student motivation? (Open-ended)