Gaming the Lecture Hall: Using Social Gamification to Enhance Student Motivation and Participation

  • Sebastian MaderEmail author
  • François Bry
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 916)


The traditional lecture is a teaching format that offers students few opportunities for interaction turning them into passive listeners of the lecturers’ presentations what negatively impacts on their learning. With audience response systems, that is technology supporting classroom quizzes, breaks that re-activate the students can be introduced into the lecturers’ presentations. This article reports on an audience response system coupled with a social gamification of quizzes based on teams: Each student is assigned to a team and the students’ answers to quizzes contribute to their teams’ success. An immediate overview of responses to quiz questions and the team standings motivates students to participate in the quizzes. The contribution of this article is threefold: First, a team-based social gamification of quizzes aimed at boosting participation in quizzes and attendance at lectures, second, original technological tools supporting the proposed team-based social gamification, and third, an evaluation of the approach demonstrating its effectiveness.


Gamification Audience Response Systems Online Learning Environments 



The authors are thankful to Jacob Fürst for the implementation of the quizzes and the groundwork for the team-based social gamification described in the article which he did as part of his unpublished bachelor’s thesis.


  1. 1.
    Bry, F., Pohl, A.Y.S.: Large class teaching with backstage. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 9(1), 105–128 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Byrd, G.G., Coleman, S., Werneth, C.: Exploring the universe together: cooperative quizzes with and without a classroom performance system in astronomy 101. Astron. Educ. Rev. 3(1), 26–30 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carroll, J.A., Rodgers, J., Sankupellay, M., Newcomb, M., Cook, R.: Systematic evaluation of GoSoapBox in tertiary education: a student response system for improving learning experiences and outcomes. In: INTED2014 Proceedings (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Crouch, C.H., Mazur, E.: Peer instruction: ten years of experience and results. Am. J. Phys. 69(9), 970–977 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Danelli, F.: Implementing game design in gamification. In: Gamification in Education and Business, pp. 67–79. Springer (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Darley, J.M., Latane, B.: Bystander intervention in emergencies: diffusion of responsibility. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 8(4, Pt.1), 377 (1968)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., Nacke, L.: From game design elements to gamefulness: defining gamification. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments, pp. 9–15. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Festinger, L.: A theory of social comparison processes. Hum. Relat. 7(2), 117–140 (1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., Sarsa, H.: Does gamification work?–a literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In: 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2014), pp. 3025–3034. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hunsu, N.J., Adesope, O., Bayly, D.J.: A meta-analysis of the effects of audience response systems (clicker-based technologies) on cognition and affect. Comput. Educ. 94, 102–119 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Inbar, O., Tractinsky, N., Tsimhoni, O., Seder, T.: Driving the scoreboard: Motivating eco-driving through in-car gaming. In: Proceedings of the CHI 2011 Workshop Gamification: Using Game Design Elements in Non-Game Contexts, pp. 7–12 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kay, R.H., LeSage, A.: Examining the benefits and challenges of using audience response systems: a review of the literature. Comput. Educ. 53(3), 819–827 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kelly, G.E.: Lecture attendance rates at university and related factors. J. Furth. High. Educ. 36(1), 17–40 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Latulipe, C., Long, N.B., Seminario, C.E.: Structuring flipped classes with lightweight teams and gamification. In: Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 392–397. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mazur, E.: Peer Instruction. Springer (2017)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    McGonigal, J.: Reality is Broken: Why Games Make Us Better and How They Can Change the World. Penguin (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mekler, E.D., Brühlmann, F., Opwis, K., Tuch, A.N.: Do points, levels and leaderboards harm intrinsic motivation?: an empirical analysis of common gamification elements. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Gameful Design, Research, and Applications, pp. 66–73. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nicholson, S.: A recipe for meaningful gamification. In: Gamification in Education and Business, pp. 1–20. Springer (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pohl, A.: Fostering Awareness and Collaboration in Large-Class Lectures. Doctoral thesis, Institute for Informatics, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich (2015)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Polya, G.: How to Solve It: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method. Princeton University Press (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Reeves, B., Read, J.L.: Total Engagement: How Games and Virtual Worlds Are Changing the Way People Work and Businesses Compete. Harvard Business Press (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Russell, G., Shaw, S.: A study to investigate the prevalence of social anxiety in a sample of higher education students in the United Kingdom. J. Ment. Health 18(3), 198–206 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L.: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: classic definitions and new directions. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 25(1), 54–67 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shi, C., Lee, H.J., Kurczak, J., Lee, A.: Driving infotainment app: gamification of performance driving. In: Adjunct Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications, pp. 26–27 (2012)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Skinner, B.F.: About Behaviorism. Vintage (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tversky, A., Kahneman, D.: Loss aversion in riskless choice: a reference-dependent model. Q. J. Econ. 106(4), 1039–1061 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Voelkl, K.E.: School warmth, student participation, and achievement. J. Exp. Educ. 63(2), 127–138 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for InformaticsLudwig Maximilian University of MunichMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations