Investigating the impact of a gamified learning analytics dashboard: Student experiences and academic achievement
Open accessAbstract
Background The substantial growth in gamification research has connected gamified learning to enhanced engagement, improved performance, and greater motivation. Similar to gamification, personalized learning analytics dashboards can enhance student engagement. Objectives This study explores the student experiences and academic achievements using a gamified dashboard in a large, introductory STEM course. Methods We examined two groups of students enrolled in different sections of a one‐semester‐long physical geology course with a total enrollment of 223 students. The only difference between the groups was that one had access to the dashboard. The data collection included students' assignments, overall performances, and exam scores. Students in both sections completed a Science Literacy Concept Inventory survey at the beginning and end of the term. Additionally, students completed an end‐of‐term survey containing open‐ended questions on their experience and interactions with specific elements. Results Students shared mostly positive comments about their experience with the dashboard, and the final grade of students with access to the dashboard was 13% higher, on average, compared to their peers in the non‐dashboard section. Conclusion With low costs and little time invested, gamified dashboards could have a significant impact on student performance in large STEM lecture courses.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Some LA interventions caused anxiety.
“Likewise, students also need to understand how to use the digital tools available to them and why they are being used, as some LA interventions caused anxiety (e.g., Abdi et al., 2020;Alam et al., 2023), including the frequency and tone of nudges (Brown et al., 2023).”
From Unpacking student engagement in higher education learning analytics: a systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as Alam et al., 2023
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 52 · Cited by 35
- Authors
- Alam, M. I., Malone, L., Nadolny, L., Brown, M., & Cervato, C.
- Affiliations
- Iowa State University (US)
- University of Tampa (US)
- Rightpoint Consulting LLC Chicago Illinois USA
- School of Education Iowa State University Ames Iowa USA
- Corresponding author
- Alam, Md. I.
- Venue
- Journal of Computer Assisted Learning
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2023-08-06
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1436-1449
- ISSN
- 0266-4909 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2729
- OpenAlex
- W4385633299
- Cited by
- 35
- References
- 52
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 3
- FWCI
- 16.98
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Computer Assisted Learning (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Iowa State University Digital Repository (Iowa State University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
- Keywords
- gamification, learning analytics dashboards, student engagement, academic performance, student experience, physical geology, student motivation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review