You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
MDPIMDPI
Search all articles
Information
Download PDF
  • Review
  • Open Access

10 December 2025

Gamification in Learning Management Systems: A Systematic Literature Review

,
and
1
Department of Applied Informatics, School of Information Sciences, University of Macedonia, 54636 Thessaloniki, Greece
2
Department of Education, School of Education, University of Nicosia, 2417 Nicosia, Cyprus
3
Department of Computer Science and Communication, Østfold University College, 1757 Halden, Norway
4
Department of Physical Education and Sport Science, School of Physical Education and Sports Sciences, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, 57001 Thermi, Greece
Information2025, 16(12), 1094;https://doi.org/10.3390/info16121094 
(registering DOI)
Version Notes
Order Reprints

Abstract

Gamification and learning management systems (LMSs) are increasingly being used across educational levels. Hence, the adoption of gamified LMSs, that is, LMSs that integrate gamification elements, is also gaining ground due to the potential benefits they can yield. This study aims to examine the integration of gamification into LMSs through a systematic literature review by exploring 139 related studies from Scopus, Web of Science, and IEEE that were published from 2013 to 2025. This study focuses on identifying the most prominent gamification elements and the main implications in terms of benefits and challenges. Based on the outcomes, gamified LMSs can positively affect the overall educational process. Specifically, gamified LMSs showcase great potential to improve the educational process, support education stakeholders, provide meaningful learning opportunities, satisfy students’ innate needs, and increase their learning outcomes, including academic performance, motivation, engagement, interest, enjoyment, and satisfaction. Gamified LMSs can enrich existing teaching and learning practices and are positively assessed by education stakeholders. They can improve students’ self-regulated learning and satisfy their innate needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competences. They support social and collaborative learning, foster a sense of accomplishment, and provide new methods of assessment and new metrics to analyze students’ learning. However, the effectiveness of gamified LMSs is ultimately determined by the quality of their design and the extent to which gamification strategies and activities are pedagogically grounded and appropriately aligned with the learning goals, population, and context.

1. Introduction

The integration of technology in education has changed the way traditional learning takes place as it has affected both teaching and learning practices. In recent years, Learning Management Systems (LMSs) have seen widespread adoption across educational institutions. Specifically, LMSs can serve as essential platforms for supporting, managing, and monitoring the delivery of educational content while providing functions that facilitate a range of instructional activities, streamline administrative tasks, and enhance both teaching effectiveness and student engagement [1,2]. Among the different educational levels, LMSs are most commonly being used in higher education, in which the subjects are more diverse and complex but students also are more mature and digitally literate [3].
LMSs are web-based or software platforms that facilitate the creation, delivery, management, and tracking of educational courses and content while supporting both synchronous and asynchronous learning and offering tools for communication, assessment, and learner progress monitoring [4,5,6,7]. LMSs support face-to-face, online, and blended learning and are designed to resemble traditional classroom instruction settings [8,9]. They offer teachers new tools to support their students and students with new means to support their learning [10].
Studies that have examined the effectiveness of LMSs in different educational settings have highlighted the positive impact that they can have on students’ self-regulated learning, motivation, and engagement [4,11,12]. The organizational aspects of LMSs and the way educational material and activities are presented and are accessible to students through them also support and promote personalized learning [13]. In higher education in particular, using LMSs has also demonstrated a positive effect on students’ learning performance and retention rates [14].
Given the extensibility of LMSs, studies have explored integrating different technologies and learning approaches within them to increase learning outcomes. Gamification, which involves the use of game-like features and mechanisms in non-game related settings, is gaining ground due to the educational benefits it can yield [15,16]. Studies have highlighted the positive impact that the use of gamification can have on students’ learning motivation, engagement, and academic performance across different settings [12,15,17]. Additionally, they have revealed the positive impact that gamification can have on the educational process and commented upon the need to carefully design educational gamification activities [18,19].
Moreover, recent studies have highlighted the close relationship between gamification and educational theories, including self-determination theory and constructivism, and reported that when carefully designed and integrated, gamification can provide opportunities for meaningful learning [20]. On this note, studies have revealed that gamification can increase students’ academic performance, sense of accomplishment, active involvement, interest, and creativity [21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29]. As there are various gamification elements (e.g., points, badges, leaderboards, etc.), studies have pointed out that the change to students’ learning outcomes might differ according to the elements used [15,30].
Given the educational benefits that it can bring, gamification is increasingly being used in education to enrich existing practices [18]. As a result, there is growing interest in its integration into LMSs [31], as it has the potential to further enhance students’ learning outcomes, including engagement and motivation, through mechanisms that promote active and self-directed learning [10,32]. Previous related studies have mostly focused on the design of gamified experiences. For example, studies have looked into using gamification elements, plugins, and microlearning within LMSs [33]. Other studies have focused on combining gamification elements with learning analytics to provide personalized learning and enhance learning outcomes [34]. Recent review studies on the use of gamification on virtual learning environments have also revealed the positive impact that gamification has on students’ learning [35]. Other studies have explored how different gamification tools can affect classroom management and educational material distribution [36].
As the use of gamification in LMSs is increasing and the research into the topic is growing, there is a clear need to examine the existing literature through a systematic approach to identify and synthesize the key outcomes of the related studies. To the best of our knowledge, there is no study that has examined this topic following such an approach as there is an emphasis on experimental studies that assess their influence on students’ learning outcomes. The fact that several studies are being conducted across different educational settings using various LMSs, gamification elements, and assessment methods further highlights the need to more cohesively examine these aspects. To address this gap in the literature, this study aims to carry out a systematic literature review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework [37] to examine how gamification is being applied in LMSs and how the use of gamified LMSs influences learning. This study contributes to the existing body of knowledge by identifying related studies of various categories, examining different factors, and synthesizing the related outcomes to identify the key advantages and challenges of using gamified LMSs as well as the most commonly used gamification elements. To better understand how gamification can be integrated into LMSs and the implications it can have, it is important to examine the main characteristics of the related studies that have focused on gamified LMSs and to identify the most commonly used gamification elements. Additionally, to identify the impact of gamification on the educational process it is important to examine its implications. Therefore, this study seeks to address the following three research questions (RQs): (RQ1) What are the main characteristics of the related studies? (RQ2) What are the most commonly used gamification elements within LMSs? (RQ3) What are the main implications of integrating gamification into LMSs? The remainder of this manuscript presents the methodology used (Section 2), goes over the result analysis (Section 3), further discusses the outcomes and implications (Section 4), and provides conclusive remarks and future research directions (Section 5).

2. Materials and Methods

To identify relevant to the topic of integrating gamification into LMSs studies, a systematic literature review was carried out following the PRISMA framework [37]. This approach was selected due to its rigorous and transparent methodology as well as it being widely used in similar studies and being validated across different contexts. Specifically, following this approach, a well-defined set of questions is examined and data from studies related to the topic is identified, chosen, and analyzed [38].

Systematic Review Process

To identify relevant to the topic studies, IEEE Xplore, Scopus and Web of Science (Wos) were selected due to their rigor, their containing quality and related documents, and their being commonly used as the main source of information in other systematic literature review studies [39,40]. The query used consists of two main parts, one dedicated to gamification and one dedicated to LMS. Specifically, the query used was the following: (“learning management system” OR “learning management systems” OR “lms” OR “course management system” OR “course management systems” OR “cms”) AND (“gamif*”). Related terms, acronyms, and wildcards were used to ensure that all related documents are identified. However, this also introduced some out-of-scope studies being identified which were removed during the initial stages of processing. The query was last used on the 1st of October 2025 and the only limitation applied was for the study to be written in English. In total, 286 documents from IEEE, 331 from Scopus, and 190 from WoS were identified. While processing the data and retrieving the related information, the researchers worked independently and the outcomes were later crosschecked between the researchers. In case differences were observed, they were further compared and discussed to ensure that the most valid results were considered. The 807 total documents were searched for duplicates using their title and DOI. A total of 195 duplicates were removed and the remaining 612 documents were screened for eligibility based on their title and abstract. For a study to be further considered, it had to satisfy the inclusion criterion set which was for the study to focus primarily on the use of gamification within LMS. Given the broad scope of the study and its aim to provide an overview of the field, the population of the studies examined included all educational stakeholders across all educational contexts and levels, including primary education, secondary education, and higher education. The interventions examined were related to the integration of gamification elements into LMSs. The outcomes investigated referred to all related learning outcomes, including performance, engagement, and motivation. The exclusion criteria set referred to studies that did not focus on the use of gamified LMSs within educational settings or studies that did not apply gamification within LMSs. The studies that did not meet the inclusion criteria were regarded as being out of scope and were removed.
After processing the documents, 411 were regarded as out of scope since they did not meet the inclusion criterion and were removed. The remaining 201 documents were sought for retrieval; however, despite the efforts made, 3 of the documents were not retrieved. Hence, 198 were further assessed for eligibility based on the full text of the documents. At this stage, the inclusion criterion was for the study to have either examined the adoption and integration of gamification within LMS from a theoretical perspective, developed and presented a gamified LMS, or conducted case studies to evaluate the educational impact of gamified LMSs. In total, 54 additional documents were removed since they did not meet the inclusion criteria, 3 were removed since their full text was not written in English, and 2 were removed since they were short communications. Therefore, the document collection examined within this study consisted of 139 documents. The complete process following the PRISMA flowchart is presented in Figure 1.
Figure 1. PRISMA flowchart.

3. Result Analysis

To provide a more detailed review of the existing literature, all different types of studies were considered and examined. Hence, the 139 relevant documents identified were separated into two categories. The specifications of the categories are presented below:
  • Experimental and Case studies: These studies have explored and used gamification aspects within LMSs and evaluated their impact based on case studies across different settings.
  • Theoretical, Proposal, and Showcase studies: These studies focused on concepts, theoretical aspects, or literature reviews without collecting or assessing any primary empirical data or focused on developing and presenting novel models, methods, frameworks, and applications but not having applied them in actual educational settings.
In this section, the main specifications of the complete document collection containing studies from both categories are presented and the results of the content analysis of the Experimental and Case studies are provided. Given the diverse nature of the studies within the Theoretical, Proposal, and Showcase studies a content analysis similar to that of the other category was not feasible. Additionally, although these studies have not followed an experimental research approach, they contribute valuable inputs regarding the integration of gamification into LMSs from a theoretical standpoint, either by examining the existing literature or by developing and presenting prototype applications and systems. Therefore, the outcomes of the Theoretical, Proposal, and Showcase studies are further discussed and synthesized in Section 4.

3.1. Analysis of the Document Collections

To address RQ1, this subsection focuses on analyzing the characteristics and the specifications of the document collection examined in this study. The variables examined in this subsection included: type of study, country, outlet type, and year of publication.
Based on the distribution of the studies to the related categories which is showcased in Figure 2 and Table 1, it can be seen that most documents fall under the Experimental and Case studies category (n = 93, 66.9%), followed by those in the Theoretical, Proposal, and Showcase Studies (n = 46, 33.1%). These results indicate that the related literature is predominantly empirical in nature, with experimental and case studies forming the majority of the research output. This fact suggests a strong emphasis on practical implementation and real-world evaluation over theoretical development or conceptual exploration.
Figure 2. Distribution of studies based on their type.
Table 1. Distribution of studies based on their type.
To obtain a better understanding of the global interest regarding the integration of gamification into LMSs, the country of the studies was examined. Specifically, the country of the corresponding author was considered and in case a corresponding author was not indicated the country of the first author was used. The related results were cross-checked with the bibliometric data reported by the databases used. The studies of the document collection derived from 45 countries in total. In addition to the total number of studies published, the type of study was also explored in relation to the country. As can be seen in Figure 3, most related studies have been published by Indonesia (n = 18), Germany (n = 12), and the United States (n = 10). Having three countries from three different continents being among the ones with the most published documents highlights the global interest and potential impact of the integration of gamification into LMSs. Furthermore, when considering the different document types, authors from Indonesia (n = 13), the United States (n = 10), and Germany (n = 8) have contributed the most Experimental and Case studies. Bulgaria (n = 5), Indonesia (n = 5), Portugal (n = 5), and Germany (n = 4) have contributed the most Theoretical, Proposal, and Showcase studies.
Figure 3. Distribution of published documents per country.
Furthermore, the different outlet types, in which the related studies were published, were examined. As can be seen in Figure 4 and Table 2, most documents were published as conference and proceedings papers (n = 70, 50.4%), followed closely by those published as journal articles (n = 65, 46.8%). On the other hand, only a limited number of related studies were published as book chapters (n = 4, 2.9%). These findings show that the majority of research in the field is disseminated through conferences and journals, indicating an active and ongoing engagement within the academic community. The minimal number of book chapters suggests that the topic is primarily shared through venues emphasizing recent and rapidly evolving research.
Figure 4. Distribution of studies based on their outlet type.
Table 2. Distribution of studies based on the outlet type.
Finally, the annual number of publications was examined to better understand the interest that the topic received over the years. As depicted in the annual number of publications (see Figure 5), research activity in the field has shown a clear upward trend since 2013, with a noticeable increase beginning around 2017. The number of studies peaked in 2023 (n = 19) and remained consistently high in subsequent years, suggesting sustained scholarly interest and productivity. The relatively lower count for 2025 (n = 8) can be attributed to the data collection period ending in September, rather than a genuine decline in publication output. Overall, the data reflects a growing and stable research trajectory over the past decade.
Figure 5. Annual number of publications.

3.2. Analysis of the Experimental and Case Studies

This subsection focuses on the content analysis of the Experimental and Case studies. Specifically, the studies analyzed have examined and assessed the use of gamification into LMSs within actual learning environments. To obtain a better understanding of the topic, aspects, such as educational level, participants, courses, research approaches, were examined. Additionally, emphasis was placed on identifying the most commonly used gamification elements and on revealing the key advantages and disadvantages reported in the literature. Specifically, the variables examined included: educational level, participants, courses/subjects used, research approach followed, gamification elements used, as well as the advantages and disadvantages reported by the related studies.
As can be seen in Figure 6, there is a clear emphasis on the use of gamified LMSs within higher education with the vast majority of studies examining their influence on higher education students’ learning outcomes and experiences (n = 79, 84.9%). A few studies have looked into the integration of gamification into LMSs (n = 12, 12.9%) while only two studies (2.2%) examined its influence on primary education. These outcomes indicate that research into gamified LMSs is concentrated on higher education contexts, highlighting a significant gap in studies addressing their application in secondary and primary education. This fact highlights the need to further examine the potential and impact of gamified LMSs across educational levels.
Figure 6. Distribution of studies based on the educational level examined.
Furthermore, when examining the participants involved in the studies, there is a clear emphasis on looking into the experiences of students and how gamified LMSs influence their learning outcomes (see Figure 7). Specifically, the vast majority of studies focused solely on students (n = 82. 88.2%) while only three studies (3.2%) focused solely on teachers. A few studies looked into and compared the experiences and perspectives of both students and teachers (n = 4, 4.3%) and four studies (4.3%) involved various education stakeholders. These outcomes reveal a strong research emphasis on students’ perspectives, with limited attention given to teachers or other educational stakeholders. This fact highlights the need for future studies to adopt a more holistic approach that considers the experiences and insights of all education stakeholders.
Figure 7. Distribution of studies based on the participants used.
Given the fact that LMSs can support a variety of courses, emphasis was placed on identifying the courses and subjects in which gamified LMSs are most commonly being adopted. Based on the results presented in Figure 8, most studies have examined the integration of gamification into LMSs in the context of Computer Science (n = 33, 35.5%). The use of gamified LMSs was also examined in the context of Language Learning (n = 8, 8.6%) and STEAM subjects (n = 8, 8.6%). Fewer studies looked into the use of gamified LMSs within Business and Economics (n = 6, 6.5%), Education (n = 5, 5.4%), as well as in Medical and Healthcare (n = 4, 4.3%). Nonetheless, several studies have also examined and compared its use across various courses and subjects (n = 15, 16.1%) while a considerable number of studies (n = 14, 15.1%) looked into the use of gamified LMSs into diverse courses that could not be grouped up in any of the aforementioned categories nor constituted a big enough sample to create a new category. These results indicate that research into gamified LMSs has been predominantly concentrated on Computer Science education, with comparatively limited exploration in other disciplines. Hence, there is a clear need for future studies to look into the integration of gamification into LMSs in a wider range of academic fields.
Figure 8. Distribution of studies based on the course/subject used.
When examining the research approaches followed (see Figure 9), studies have adopted quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approaches. Specifically, most studies adopted a quantitative research approach using ad hoc questionnaires and system related data (n = 52, 55.9%). A considerable number of studies adopted a mixed methods approach (n = 28, 30.1%) while only 13 studies (14.0%) adopted a qualitative approach utilizing either interviews, open-ended surveys, or text-based data. This outcome demonstrates a predominant reliance on quantitative research approaches in studies of gamified LMSs, with comparatively fewer employing qualitative or mixed methods approaches. Additionally, it reveals the need for diverse research methods and tools to be used to better understand user experiences and the factors that affect learning outcomes within gamified LMSs. Finally, as the vast majority of studies adopted ad hoc tools, there is a clear need for standardized assessment tools, which take gamification elements and activities into consideration, to be developed.
Figure 9. Distribution of studies based on the research approach followed.
To address RQ2, the most commonly used gamification elements within LMSs were examined. Based on the related outcomes presented in Figure 10, a clear emphasis on the adoption of achievement-oriented gamification elements can be observed. Specifically, badges (n = 58, 62.4%), points and scores (n = 57, 61.3%), as well as leaderboards (n = 49, 52.7%) emerged as the most frequently implemented gamification elements. These elements primarily focus on influencing students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation by providing measurable indicators of achievement, progress, and social comparison. Moreover, several studies have incorporated quests, challenges, and gamified activities (n = 41, 44.1%) as well as stages and levels (n = 35, 37.6%), reflecting a focus on structured progression and goal-oriented engagement. To further enhance students’ learning motivation and engagement, studies have also integrated digital rewards, awards, and achievements (n = 26, 28.0%). Given the increasing emphasis on formative assessment and self-regulated learning, interactive quizzes (n = 24, 25.8%), feedback mechanisms (n = 23, 24.7%), as well as progression and tracking mechanisms (n = 20, 21.5%) have also been commonly utilized to provide real-time performance insights and promote reflective learning. In contrast, fewer studies have employed avatars (n = 11, 11.8%) to enhance personalization and immersion or timers and time-based challenges (n = 4, 4.3%) to promote focus and timely task completion.
Figure 10. Most commonly used gamification elements.
These outcomes reveal that research surrounding gamified LMSs has largely centered on traditional, achievement-based elements designed to reward performance, involvement, effort, and progression. While such features can effectively stimulate motivation and engagement, future studies should aim to incorporate and empirically examine a wider range of intrinsically motivating elements that can promote students’ engagement and autonomy and enable them to acquire a deeper understanding of the concepts taught. Additionally, there is a clear need to examine how different gamification elements influence learning outcomes and to provide evidence-based design guidelines for the effective integration of gamification elements into LMSs.
To obtain a better understanding of how the integration of gamification into LMSs influences teaching and learning and to address RQ3, the main advantages and disadvantages reported were identified. It should be noted that the vast majority of the studies reported solely positive implications of applying gamified LMSs and did not provide any inputs regarding the potential drawbacks. The main advantages identified are presented in Figure 11. Specifically, the integration of gamification into LMSs has showcased great potential in improving students’ learning engagement and active participation (n = 62, 66.7%) as well as their learning motivation and interest (n = 58, 62.4%). Studies have also reported that students who learnt through gamified LMSs demonstrated improved learning outcomes and academic performance (n = 33, 35.5%). Given the interactive and social activities that can be created through the use of gamification, studies have highlighted that when appropriately integrated, gamified LMSs can promote and support collaborative learning (n = 21, 22.6%) and social learning (n = 10, 10.8%). Such learning experiences have proven to improve students’ learning enjoyment (n = 20, 21.5%), learning experience (n = 7, 7.5%), and satisfaction (n = 6, 6.5%). Simultaneously, this approach is positively perceived by education stakeholders (n = 15, 16.1%) as, in addition to students, it can also support educators (n = 18, 19.4%). Other benefits reported in the literature include fostering a sense of accomplishment (n = 16, 17.2%), improving students’ skills (n = 9, 9.7%), enhancing feedback and assessment (n = 7, 7.5%), and reducing stress and tension (n = 3, 3.2%). Finally, it was revealed that the integration of gamification into LMSs has the potential to improve the overall educational process (n = 11, 11.8%).
Figure 11. Key advantages of integrating gamification into LMSs.
The outcomes reported in the literature highlight the merits of adopting gamified LMSs and indicate that they can effectively support and enrich existing practices. Nonetheless, a few studies also reported some challenges and limitations of adopting and using gamified LMS environments.
For example, studies have highlighted that the design of effective gamified learning experiences is a complex and demanding task for teachers, specifically when they have not been trained on how to effectively adopt such approaches, creating suitable material and activities, and designing gamified learning experiences [105]. Not only that but poorly designed gamified learning experiences can lead to the development of poor learning habits and to reduced students’ satisfaction, interest, and involvement [29,110]. The selection of improper gamification elements and their careless integration can result in students feeling unrewarded (e.g., by leaderboard rankings) [121] and demotivated (e.g., from badges and digital rewards) [79,108,123] and in the creation of an unhealthy competitive atmosphere which might affect students’ learning [22,105]. It is important to note that gamification can be very rewarding especially for competitive students whereas less competitive students may be less or even negatively affected [66]. The improper selection and use of gamification elements in addition to the promotion of unhealthy competition can lead to students being less involved in the learning process, presenting reduced levels of social interactions, and feeling anxious [64,66,114,124].
Studies have also reported the over-reliance on technology [28] as well as the shift of teachers’ role within the educational process [103] as additional aspects that need to be carefully considered. Similarly and in contrast to the majority of studies, a few studies reported that students increased engagement within gamified LMSs did not result in improved learning outcomes [76,113]. The novelty factor of learning through gamification approaches needs to be further examined as studies indicate that students’ increased learning motivation, engagement, and performance as well as their improved learning behavior at the beginning may decrease over time [62,66,69,78,110].

4. Discussion

Gamification has shown great potential to improve learning outcomes and enriching teaching and learning practices across learning settings. Simultaneously, with the increase in the number of available LMSs and the improvements in terms of the functions they offer [3], LMSs are being more widely used in all educational levels [164] to support the educational process by offering interactive and personalized experiences in online, face-to-face, and blended learning environments [165,166]. By integrating gamification into LMSs, favorable learning outcomes can be achieved [4,11,12] and students’ innate psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness can be met [94]. Hence, the outcomes of this study further validate and highlight the close relationship between educational theories (e.g., digital constructivism, self-determination theory, etc.) and gamification. Additionally, gamified LMSs can support both students and teachers [10] and enable them to cultivate essential 21st century skills [70] which further highlights their important role in education. However, to design effective gamified learning experiences within LMSs, both learners’ interactions with the LMSs and the content of the courses need to be gamified [91]. Similarly, to ensure the successful integration of gamification, education stakeholders’ needs and preferences as well as several contextual aspects need to be considered [117]. Therefore, the design of effective gamified learning experiences within LMSs using suitable instructional design approaches and assessment methods remains imperative [167,168].
In addition to the Experimental and Case studies identified and examined, several Theoretical, Proposal, and Showcase studies relevant to the topic were also identified. The outcomes of these studies are discussed below to further explore the implications of integrating gamification into LMSs. Specifically, recent studies have showcased that game mechanisms, microlearning, gamification elements, and gamified activities are more commonly being applied in LMSs and MOOCs [33,132] and highlighted the positive influence gamification can have on students’ learning engagement, satisfaction, and academic achievements when being integrated into LMSs and virtual learning environments [35,131]. They also revealed the potential of gamified LMSs to aid in achieving specific learning goals and to positively influence students’ learning motivation [129]. Other studies examined the use of gamification in combination with learning analytics in the context of LMSs and highlighted the positive effect that they can have on students’ learning experiences and outcomes [34].
Furthermore, studies have pointed out that gamification can be used across different aspects of the LMSs to improve students’ overall learning experience and as a result, it is being more positively viewed by education stakeholders as a suitable educational approach [36,151]. It also offers opportunities to extend approaches derived from adaptive learning theory and provides enjoyable and personalized learning experiences which track and adapt to each individual’s requirements [154]. In this note, studies highlighted the potential of gamification to enrich and transform existing courses [155] and commented upon the need to align gamification activities with learning outcomes and course goals.
Studies have also indicated the use of gamified LMSs as an effective means to promote students’ learning engagement and facilitate their understanding of complex concepts [25]. Such learning environments can also be effectively used in the context of assessment, peer evaluation, and self-evaluation [149]. Other recent studies emphasized the transformative role of gamification in creating stimulating and interactive learning environments [128,130,134] and revealed the potential of gamification elements to be effectively integrated into both simple and complex learning activities [162].
Moreover, studies highlighted the potential of gamified LMSs to enrich existing teaching and learning practices. For example, recent studies presented frameworks, tools, and approaches for utilizing gamification to modernize curriculum within e-learning courses and to support learning in both formal and informal settings while improving students’ engagement and reducing their levels of anxiety [141,143]. In this note, several studies focused on presenting frameworks and methods of adapting gamification elements within LMSs as a means to promote students’ personalized learning and engagement within different educational settings while considering different aspects, such as students’ learning style, hard and soft skills, knowledge, and preferences [7,136,137,142,152]. Studies have looked into the integration of gamification aspects and activities within existing practices to improve students’ assessment, monitoring, and tracking by providing new metrics to quantitatively analyze students’ experience, abilities, skills, and accomplishments [144,158].
Studies highlighted the importance of adjusting the learning experience, material, and activities according to students’ personality models by analyzing their interaction with the system to boost students’ motivation and engagement [126]. Similarly, it is important to design such gamified systems in a way that enables students to actively engage with the learning material outside the classroom to obtain a deeper understanding [99]. As a result, studies have examined the enrichment of LMSs through the use of gamification mechanisms, emphasized the need to adopt interactive design practices to enhance students’ autonomy, relatedness, enjoyment, and competences and, in turn, improve their learning experience and emotional engagement [138,160,161,163]. Hence, studies have focused on developing suitable guidelines for integrating gamification elements into LMSs [127] and on creating effective assessment instruments to evaluate the affordances of gamification within LMSs [159]. However, it should be noted that despite their differences, there are several similarities in terms of the gamification approaches, activities, and elements used across different LMSs [159].
Given the importance of designing effective gameful experiences, several studies focused on outlining and presenting the design considerations and development process of integrating gamification aspects into LMSs through the use of specialized instructional models [23,140], customized interfaces [147], interactive chatbots [135], and gameful activities [133]. Additionally, studies presented LMSs that integrated different gamifications elements, including leaderboard, rewards, points, badges, and avatars to influence students’ interaction with the learning platform and offer them enjoyable and personalized learning experiences [139,150,157].
An increased emphasis on the enrichment of students’ learning motivation, collaboration, and involvement is clear within the related studies. As such, several studies have provided inputs regarding the potential influence of gamified LMSs on these factors. For example, Simionescu et al. [153] presented a gamified plugin, Sriratnasari et al. [145] suggested a gamification framework and went over its use within LMSs, and Limantara et al. [26] commented upon the use of various gamification elements to enhance students’ learning motivation by engaging them in more enjoyable learning activities. Students’ learning motivation and engagement are highly connected to their learning outcomes. Hence, using gamified LMSs has the potential to positive affect students’ learning performance. However, there is a clear need to utilize suitable gamification elements and adopt appropriate design approaches to achieve a balance between students’ extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Therefore, studies have also pointed out the need to identify the most effective gamification elements and to define suitable methods and approaches to effectively design learning experiences that combine various gamification aspects and activities [148]. Finally, studies have commented upon the need to assess how gamification affects students’ learning behavior and to evaluate the performance and success of gamified LMSs while considering various aspects, such as academic performance, design choices, multimedia content, and other pedagogical aspects [146].
All in all, in both categories of studies, the potential of gamified LMSs to enhance students’ learning engagement, active participation, motivation, interest, as well as their academic performance and overall learning outcomes is highlighted. Additionally, their ability to provide more enjoyable learning experiences that increase students’ satisfaction is noticed. Their ability to support education stakeholders and the overall education process is evident and as a result, their adoption is positively assessed by education stakeholders. When effectively designed and used, gamified LMSs can support and promote social learning and collaborative learning, foster a sense of accomplishment, and enhance students’ competences and knowledge. Moreover, gamified LMSs can enrich existing teaching and learning practices, aid in achieving specific learning goals, create stimulating and interactive learning environments, and be integrated into both simple and complex learning activities. By integrating gamification into LMSs, students’ self-regulated learning and personalized learning can be improved and their innate needs for autonomy, relatedness, and competences can be satisfied. In this note, studies have also reported students experiencing reduced levels of stress, anxiety, and tension when learning within such environments. Gamified LMSs also provide new methods of assessment, peer evaluation, and self-evaluation as well as new metrics to quantitatively analyze students’ performance and interactions. However, studies the design of the learning process, activities, and material is particularly important when integrating gamification into LMSs. Specifically, different educational and student-related aspects should be considered, interactive design practices should be adopted, suitable guidelines and assessment instruments should be used, and gamified activities should be carefully aligned with clearly defined learning outcomes and overall course objectives. If such practices are not followed, negative effects might be observed.

5. Conclusions

This systematic literature review examined 139 studies on the topic of gamified LMSs to examine the implications of integrating gamification into LMSs. Specifically, this study examined both Experimental and Case as well as Theoretical, Proposal, and Showcase studies to provide a more cohesive look into the use of gamified LMSs. This study examined the main characteristics and specifications of the related studies, carried out a content analysis to identify key aspects, and highlighted the most commonly used gamification elements as well as the main benefits and challenges of integrating gamification into LMSs. Furthermore, there are some limitations that characterize this study. Specifically, this study focused on identifying related studies from three data sources and only considered English documents.
Based on the outcomes of this study, it can be inferred that gamified LMSs showcase great potential to improve the educational process, enrich existing practices, support education stakeholders, provide meaningful learning opportunities, satisfy students’ innate needs, and increase their learning outcomes (e.g., performance, motivation, engagement, interest, enjoyment); however, their effectiveness is highly dependent on their careful design and context alignment. Variations in implementation strategies, design choices, game mechanics, gamification elements, and technological platforms make it difficult to draw consistent conclusions about the effectiveness of specific gamification components. Furthermore, limited attention has been given to potential negative effects, such as overreliance on extrinsic rewards, cognitive overload, and lack of social interactions. Ethical matters and security concerns should also be further examined. Given the nature of the studies examined, and the duration of the interventions in particular, there is a clear need for more experiential, comparative, and longitudinal studies to examine how the integration of gamification within LMSs can influence learning outcomes over time and to identify the most effective gamification aspects, elements, and activities that lead to long-term positive behavioral or cognitive changes. Additionally, there is a need for more targeted meta-analysis studies to be conducted to provide a more in-depth look and analysis of the related aspects to better understand the implications of gamification. Emphasis should also be placed on examining the implications of gamified LMSs in all educational levels as there is currently a predominant focus on higher education. A deeper understanding of how specific gamification elements are related to students’ characteristics, instructional design, and subject matter could provide valuable insights for developing effective guidelines to create meaningful learning experiences. However, to create effective design guidelines and standardized frameworks that increase learning outcomes, enhance cognitive engagement, and foster pedagogical effectiveness, future studies need to examine both the benefits and the limitations of gamified LMSs across diverse educational settings and learner profiles.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, G.L.; methodology, G.L., B.G.M., T.A.; data curation, G.L.; formal analysis, B.G.M.; validation, T.A.; writing—original draft preparation, G.L. and T.A.; writing—review and editing, G.L. and T.A.; visualization, G.L., B.G.M., T.A.; supervision, G.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Phan, T.-T.T.; Vu, C.-T.; Doan, P.-T.T.; Luong, D.-H.; Bui, T.-P.; Le, T.-H.; Nguyen, D.-H. Two decades of studies on learning management system in higher education: A bibliometric analysis with Scopus database 2000–2020. J. Univ. Teach. Learn. Pract. 2022, 19, 09. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Prahani, B.K.; Alfin, J.; Fuad, A.Z.; Saphira, H.V.; Hariyono, E.; Suprapto, N. Learning management system (LMS) research during 1991–2021: How technology affects education. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. (iJET) 2022, 17, 28–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Dobre, I. Learning management systems for higher education—An overview of available options for higher education organizations. Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 180, 313–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Alias, N.A.; Zainuddin, A.M. Innovation for better teaching and learning: Adopting the learning management system. Malays. Online J. Instr. Technol. 2005, 2, 27–40. [Google Scholar]
  5. Mohd Kasim, N.N.; Khalid, F. Choosing the right learning management system (LMS) for the higher education institution context: A systematic review. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. (iJET) 2016, 11, 55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Nasser, R.; Cherif, M.; Romanowski, M. Factors that impact student usage of the learning management system in qatari schools. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 2011, 12, 39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Shamsuddin, S.N.W.; Selman, M.F.; Ismail, I.; Amin, M.M.; Rawi, N.A. A conceptual framework for gamified learning management system for LINUS students. Indones. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2018, 12, 1380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Berestok, O.V. Synchronous and asynchronous e-learning modes: Strategies, methods, objectives. Eng. Educ. Technol. 2021, 9, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Osman, S.Z.M. Combining synchronous and asynchronous learning: Student satisfaction with online learning using learning management systems. J. Educ. e-Learn. Res. 2022, 9, 147–154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Yuliana, O.Y.; Palumian, Y. Gamification of learning management system improves students’ engagement, active learning and performance. In Proceedings of the 2023 14th International Conference on Information & Communication Technology and System (ICTS), Surabaya, Indonesia, 4–5 October 2023; pp. 62–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Duangjai, W.; Rutaikarn, S. Effectiveness of Moodle e-learning for students enrolment of GENL 1101 ‘learning resources and skills’ at Asia-Pacific international university. Abstr. Proc. Int. Sch. Conf. 2020, 7, 1661–1676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Widodo, J.P.; Slamet, J. Developing LMS through Moodle in teaching ‘article writing for journal’ for post graduate students. In Proceedings of the Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, Virtual, 6 January 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Ismail, H.; Rahmat, A.; Emzir, E. The effect of Moodle E-Learning material on EFL reading comprehension. Int. J. Multicult. Multirelig. Underst. 2020, 7, 120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mpungose, C.B. Beyond limits: Lecturers’ reflections on Moodle uptake in south African universities. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2020, 25, 5033–5052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lampropoulos, G.; Sidiropoulos, A. Impact of gamification on students’ learning outcomes and academic performance: A longitudinal study comparing online, traditional, and gamified learning. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, 367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Majuri, J.; Koivisto, J.; Hamari, J. Gamification of education and learning: A review of empirical literature. In Proceedings of the 2nd International GamiFIN Conference, GamiFIN 2018, Pori, Finland, 21–23 May 2018; CEUR-WS: Aachen, Germany, 2018; pp. 11–19. [Google Scholar]
  17. Oliveira, W.; Hamari, J.; Shi, L.; Toda, A.M.; Rodrigues, L.; Palomino, P.T.; Isotani, S. Tailored gamification in education: A literature review and future agenda. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2023, 28, 373–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Caponetto, I.; Earp, J.; Ott, M. Gamification and education: A literature review. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Games-Based Learning, Berlin, Germany, 9–10 October 2014; Academic Conferences International Limited: Reading, UK, 2014; Volume 1, p. 50. [Google Scholar]
  19. Hamari, J.; Koivisto, J.; Sarsa, H. Does gamification work?—A literature review of empirical studies on gamification. In Proceedings of the 2014 47th Hawaii International Conference On System Sciences, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 6–9 January 2014; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lampropoulos, G.; Kinshuk. Virtual reality and gamification in education: A systematic review. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 2024, 72, 1691–1785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Boskic, N.; Hu, S. Gamification in higher education: How we changed roles. In Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Games-Based Learning—ECGBL 2015, Steinkjer, Norway, 8–9 October 2015. [Google Scholar]
  22. Chen, C.-C. Gamify online courses with tools built into your learning management system (LMS) to enhance Self-Determined and active learning. Online Learn. 2018, 22, 41–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Jayalath, J.; Esichaikul, V. Gamification to enhance motivation and engagement in blended eLearning for technical and vocational education and training. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 2022, 27, 91–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. John, I.; Fertig, T. Gamification for software engineering students—An experience report. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Tunis, Tunisia, 28–31 March 2022; pp. 1942–1947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Király, S.; Balla, T.; Kusper, G. Code school: Learn to code by practicing. In Proceedings of the 11th Joint Conference on Mathematics and Computer Science, Eger, Hungary, 20–22 May 2016; pp. 136–143. [Google Scholar]
  26. Limantara, N.; Meyliana, N.; Gaol, F.; Prabowo, H. Designing gamified learning management systems for higher education. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2023, 13, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Tran, T.M.; Beuran, R.; Hasegawa, S. Gamification-based cybersecurity awareness course for self-regulated learning. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2023, 13, 724–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Xiangze, Z.; Abdullah, Z. Station rotation with gamification approach to increase students’ engagement in learning English online. Arab. World Engl. J. AWEJ 2023, 105–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Zhao, D.; Playfoot, J.; De Nicola, C.; Guarino, G.; Bratu, M.; Di Salvadore, F.; Muntean, G.-M. An innovative Multi-Layer gamification framework for improved STEM learning experience. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 3879–3889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Utomo, A.Y.; Santoso, H.B. Development of gamification-enriched pedagogical agent for e-learning system based on community of inquiry. In Proceedings of the International HCI and UX Conference in Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia, 8–10 April 2015; pp. 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Bervell, B.; Arkorful, V. LMS-enabled blended learning utilization in distance tertiary education: Establishing the relationships among facilitating conditions, voluntariness of use and use behaviour. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2020, 17, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Brehmer, M.; Reinelt, R. Gamifying a learning management system: Narrative and team leaderboard in the context of effective information security education. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Maui, HI, USA, 3–6 January 2023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Nastase, M.M.; Popescu, E. Towards integrating learnersourcing, microlearning and gamification in Moodle. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Corfu, Greece, 2–5 June 2023; Lecture Notes in Computer Science; Springer: Cham, Switaerland, 2023; pp. 352–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Upadhyaya, D.; Garg, A. Leveraging on gamification and learning analytics for improved student learning. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Computing, Power and Communication Technologies (GUCON), Greater Noida, India, 27–28 September 2019; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 132–138. [Google Scholar]
  35. Zhang, Y.; Zhu, Y. Effects of educational robotics on the creativity and problem-solving skills of k-12 students: A meta-analysis. Educ. Stud. 2022, 50, 1539–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Lolo, S.; Pratama, B.C.; Mufarih, M.; Wang, G. An analysis of the gamification use in learning management system. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference of Computer Science and Information Technology (ICoSNIKOM), Medan, Indonesia, 28–29 November 2019; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int. J. Surg. 2021, 88, 105906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. BMJ 2009, 339, b2535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Mongeon, P.; Paul-Hus, A. The journal coverage of web of science and Scopus: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics 2015, 106, 213–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Zhu, J.; Liu, W. A tale of two databases: The use of web of science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics 2020, 123, 321–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Singh, N.T.; Yadav, K.; Kumar, R.; Yadav, V.; Bhardwaj, P.; Chaurasia, A. AI-Powered learning management system for enhanced education. In Proceedings of the 2025 6th International Conference on Intelligent Communication Technologies and Virtual Mobile Networks (ICICV), Tirunelveli, India, 17–19 June 2025; pp. 460–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Slamet, J.; Basthomi, Y. Assessing gamification-based LMS for EFL students: A self-directed learning framework. Stud. Linguist. Cult. FLT 2024, 12, 100–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Ferdiansyah, H.; Rafi, M.F.; Utama, A.P.; Aprilia, T.; Slamet, J. Assessing learning outcomes and self-directed learning through gamification in LMS. Soc. Sci. Humanit. Open 2025, 12, 101696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Zandvakili, R.; Liu, D.; Li, A.T.; Santhanam, R.; Schanke, S. Design and evaluation of a gamified generative AI chatbot for Canvas LMS courses. In Communications in Computer and Information Science, Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, HCII 2024; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024; pp. 259–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Saputra, J.P.B. Development of Gamification-Based learning management system (LMS) with agile approach and personalization of FSLSM learning style to improve learning effectiveness. J. Appl. Data Sci. 2025, 6, 714–725. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Ahmed, H.M.M.; El-Sabagh, H.A.; Elbourhamy, D.M. Effect of gamified, mobile, Cloud-Based learning management system (GMCLMS) on student engagement and achievement. Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2025, 22, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Khan, S.; Srivel, V.; Wong, M. Enhancing engagement in a learning management system through a raffle ticket system. Teach. Learn. Inq. 2025, 13, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Rachmadi, P.; Situmorang, R.; Sukardjo, M.; Indrajit, R.E.; Gautama, E. Enhancing entrepreneurial competencies and student engagement through gamification in learning management systems. Aptisi Trans. Technopreneurship (ATT) 2025, 7, 593–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Radif, M.; Hameed, O.M. Enhancing virtual learning environments: A strategic approach to gamifying learning management systems for increased engagement and competency. Eurasian J. Educ. Res. 2024, 111, 122–135. [Google Scholar]
  50. John, I.; Fertig, T. Evaluation of a gamified elearning course for agile methods. In Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Kos Island, Greece, 8–11 May 2024; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Sotirov, M.; Petrova, V.; Nikolova-Sotirova, D. Exploring the impact of educational serious game in a gamified LMS. In Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference Automatics and Informatics (ICAI), Varna, Bulgaria, 10–12 October 2024; pp. 307–312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Sikkink, B. Increasing online student engagement with a gamified logic puzzles project. Int. Rev. Econ. Educ. 2025, 49, 100322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Vapiwala, F.; Pandita, D. Leveraging gamified learning management systems to enhance E-Learning outcomes. In Proceedings of the 2024 International Conference on Innovation and Intelligence for Informatics, Computing, and Technologies (3ICT), Virtual, 17–19 November 2024; pp. 535–540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Santos, L.F.D.; Oliveira, W.; Corrêa de Lima, A.; de Castro Junior, A.A.; Hamari, J. The effects of gamification on learners’ engagement according to their gamification user types. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 2025, 18, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Alrashedi, N.T.; Alsulami, S.M.H.; Flatah, A.I.; Najmi, A.H.; Alhalafawy, W.S. The effects of gamified platforms on enhancing learners’ ambition. J. Ecohumanism 2024, 3, 3393–3403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Brandl, L.C.; Schrader, A. Student player types in higher Education—Trial and clustering analyses. Educ. Sci. 2024, 14, 352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Mellado, R.; Cubillos, C. Gamification improves learning: Experience in a training activity of computer programming in higher education. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2024, 40, 1959–1973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Romsi, A.; Widodo, J.P.; Slamet, J. Empowering slow learners: Gamification’s impact on students’ engagement and academic performance in an LMS for undergraduate students. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2024, 14, 193–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Subiyantoro, S.; Degeng, I.N.S.; Kuswandi, D.; Ulfa, S. Developing gamified learning management systems to increase student engagement in online learning environments. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2024, 14, 26–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Jolly, A.K.; Selvarajah, D.; Micallef, J.; Torres, A.; Button, D. Adapting the gamified educational networking online learning management system to test a decentralized Simulation-Based education model to instruct Paramedics-in-Training on the emergency intraosseous access and infusion skill. Cureus 2024, 16, e55493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Neugebauer, M.; Tousside, B.; Frochte, J. Success factors for mathematical e-learning exercises focusing First-Year students. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, Prague, Czech Republic, 21–23 April 2023; pp. 306–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Berglund, A.; Jedel, I. Higher education students’ perceptions of point-based gamification in a learning management system. In Proceedings of the 7th International GamiFIN Conference, Lapland, Finland, 18–21 April 2023; Volume 3405, pp. 144–153. [Google Scholar]
  63. Barua, A.M.; Bharali, S.S. Gamification and its challenges in e-learning: A case study of computer science learners in KKHSOU. Asian Assoc. Open Univ. J. 2023, 18, 233–245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Khoshnoodifar, M.; Ashouri, A.; Taheri, M. Effectiveness of gamification in enhancing learning and attitudes: A study of statistics education for health school students. J. Adv. Med. Educ. Prof. 2023, 11, 230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Qi, X.; Sun, G.; Yue, L. Applying Self-Optimised feedback to a learning management system for facilitating personalised learning activities on massive open online courses. Sustainability 2023, 15, 12562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Aguilos, V.; Fuchs, K. The perceived usefulness of gamified E-Learning: A study of undergraduate students with implications for higher education. Front. Educ. 2022, 7, 945536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Hooda, A.; Nousiainen, T.; Vesisenaho, M.; Ahlstrom, E.; Fort, S.; Subirats, L.; Sacha, G.M. School of digital wizards: Exploring the gamification user types in a blended IT course. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Uppsala, Sweden, 8–11 October 2022; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Venter, M. Online programming learning platform: The influence of gamification elements. In Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE IFEES World Engineering Education Forum—Global Engineering Deans Council (WEEF-GEDC), Cape Town, South Africa, 28 November–1 December 2022; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Rabu, S.N.A.; Ismail, N.H.; Osman, N.; MOHAMAD, S.K. Motivation, engagement, enjoyment, and learning achievement toward gamified classroom via learning management system to enhance learning attitude. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 2022, 100, 19. [Google Scholar]
  70. Moseikina, M.; Toktamysov, S.; Danshina, S. Modern technologies and gamification in historical education. Simul. Gaming 2022, 53, 135–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Qushem, U.B.; Christopoulos, A.; Laakso, M.-J. Learning management system analytics on arithmetic fluency performance: A skill development case in K6 education. Multimodal Technol. Interact. 2022, 6, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Pal’ová, D.; Vejačka, M. Implementation of gamification principles into higher education. Eur. J. Educ. Res. 2022, 11, 763–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Andrés, G.Á. Gamification project in Japanese higher education for Spanish as a foreign language. J. High. Educ. Theory Pract. 2022, 22, 255–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Aguilos, V.; Gallagher, C.; Fuchs, K. Gamification of virtual language learning: A case study with Thai undergraduate students. Int. J. Inf. Educ. Technol. 2022, 12, 1098–1103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Polestico, D.T.; Torotoro, P.N.; Taytayon, M.J.A.; Astoveza, Z.-J.M. Eductainment: A gamified learning management system for senior high school subjects with randomized algorithm. In Proceedings of the 2022 2nd International Conference in Information and Computing Research (iCORE), San Carlos, Philippines, 10–11 December 2022; pp. 110–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Balci, S.; Secaur, J.M.; Morris, B.J. Comparing the effectiveness of badges and leaderboards on academic performance and motivation of students in fully versus partially gamified online physics classes. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2022, 27, 8669–8704. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Handle-Pfeiffer, D.; Winter, C. Playing and reflecting games: The production of gamified learning artefacts in teacher education. In Proceedings of the 15th European Conference on Games Based Learning, Brighton, UK, 23–24 September 2021; Academic Conferences. Publishing International Limited: Morton Grove, IL, USA, 2021; pp. 306–314. [Google Scholar]
  78. Palmquist, A.; Jedel, I. Influence of gender, age, and frequency of use on users’ attitudes on gamified online learning. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Human Interaction and Emerging Technologies: Future Applications (IHIET—AI 2021), Paris, France, 27–29 August 2021; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2021; pp. 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Fajri, F.A.; Haribowo, P.R.Y.K.; Amalia, N.; Natasari, D. Gamification in e-learning: The mitigation role in technostress. Int. J. Eval. Res. Educ. (IJERE) 2021, 10, 606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Alosaimi, M.A.S.; Umar, I.N.; Rabu, S.N.A. Factors affecting schools teachers behavioural intention to use gamified learning activities in learning management systems (LMS) in Saudi Arabian schools. Int. Trans. J. Eng. Manag. Appl. Sci. Technol. 2021, 12, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Lin, C.-C. EFL learners’ perceptions of a game-based and technology-assisted writing course. Taiwan Int. ESP J. 2021, 12, 1–21. [Google Scholar]
  82. Raju, R.; Bhat, S.; Bhat, S.; D’Souza, R.; Singh, A.B. Effective usage of gamification techniques to boost student engagement. J. Eng. Educ. Transform. 2021, 34, 713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Ng, A.K.; Atmosukarto, I.; Cheow, W.S.; Avnit, K.; Yong, M.H. Development and implementation of an online adaptive gamification platform for learning computational thinking. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), Lincoln, NE, USA, 13–16 October 2021; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Handayani, P.W.; Raharjo, S.R.; Putra, P.H. Active student learning through gamification in a learning management system. Electron. J. e-Learn. 2021, 19, 601–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Zainuddin, Z.; Shujahat, M.; Haruna, H.; Chu, S.K.W. The role of gamified e-quizzes on student learning and engagement: An interactive gamification solution for a formative assessment system. Comput. Educ. 2020, 145, 103729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Almotairi, K.M.; Abdullah, S.; Meccawy, M. The effect of gamification on students’ engagement: A preliminary study. In Proceedings of the GamiFIN Conference 2020, Levi, Finland, 1–3 April 2020; pp. 52–61. [Google Scholar]
  87. Barcomb, M.; Cardoso, W. Rock or lock? Gamifying an online course management system for pronunciation instruction. CALICO J. 2020, 37, 127–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Pranata, S.; Suhada, H.; Aini, Q.; Rahardja, U.; Amrikhasanah, O. I Learning Management System Using Shari’a Gamification Method for Qur’an hafiz. J. Adv. Res. Dyn. Control Syst. 2020, 12, 2532–2540. [Google Scholar]
  89. Pal’ova, D.; Vejacka, M. Gamification tools improving university students’ involvement in the education process. In Proceedings of the 2020 43rd International Convention on Information, Communication and Electronic Technology (MIPRO), Opatija, Croatia, 28 September–2 October 2020; pp. 581–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Bernik, A.; Radošević, D.; Dvorski, J. Gamification after almost a decade: Is it still relevant? A case of Non-STEM hybrid e-learning university course. J. Comput. Sci. 2020, 16, 626–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Donath, L.; Mircea, G.; Rozman, T. E-Learning platforms as leverage for education for sustainable development. Eur. J. Sustain. Dev. 2020, 9, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Mystakidis, S. Distance education gamification in social virtual reality: A case study on student engagement. In Proceedings of the 2020 11th International Conference on Information, Intelligence, Systems and Applications (IISA), Piraeus, Greece, 15–17 July 2020; IEEE: New York, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Swacha, J.; Queiros, R.; Paiva, J.C. Towards a framework for gamified programming education. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Symposium on Educational Technology (ISET), Hradec Králové, Czech Republic, 2–4 July 2019; pp. 144–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Zainuddin, Z.; Shujahat, M.; Chu, S.K.W.; Haruna, H.; Farida, R. The effects of gamified flipped instruction on learner performance and need satisfaction. Inf. Learn. Sci. 2019, 120, 789–802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Saputro, R.E.; Salam, S.; Zakaria, M.; Baihaqi, W. The effectiveness of the gamified LMS platform to increase students’ motivation in online courses. Int. J. Adv. Trends Comp. Sci. Eng 2019, 8, 327–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Vanduhe, V.z.; Hassan, H.f.; Oluwajana, D.; Nat, M.; Idowu, A.; Agbo, J.j.; Okunlola, L. Students’ evidential increase in learning using gamified learning environment. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC), Lviv, Ukraine, 17–20 September 2019; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 1109–1122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Mackavey, C.; Cron, S. Innovative strategies: Increased engagement and synthesis in online advanced practice nursing education. Nurse Educ. Today 2019, 76, 85–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Hasan, H.F.; Nat, M.; Vanduhe, V.Z. Gamified collaborative environment in Moodle. IEEE Access 2019, 7, 89833–89844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Ayub, M.; Toba, H.; Wijanto, M.C.; Yong, S.; Wijaya, B. Gamification for blended learning in higher education. World Trans. Eng. Technol. Educ. 2019, 17, 76–81. [Google Scholar]
  100. Karra, S.; Karampa, V.; Paraskeva, F. Gamification design framework based on self-determination theory for adult motivation. In Communications in Computer and Information Science, Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop, LTEC 2019, Zamora, Spain, 15–19 April 2019; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. DeMers, M.N. Structural gamification of a university GIS course. In Advances in Geographic Information Science; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2018; pp. 195–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Calderón, A.; Boubeta-Puig, J.; Ruiz, M. MEdit4CEP-Gam: A model-driven approach for user-friendly gamification design, monitoring and code generation in CEP-based systems. Inf. Softw. Technol. 2018, 95, 238–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Pastushenko, O.; Hruška, T.; Zendulka, J. Increasing students’ motivation by using virtual learning environments based on gamification mechanics. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for enhancing Multiculturality, Salamanca, Spain, 24–26 October 2018; pp. 755–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Ofosu-Ampong, K.; Boateng, R. Gamifying Sakai: Understanding game elements for learning. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New Orleans, LA, USA, 16–18 August 2018. [Google Scholar]
  105. Fischer, H.; Heinz, M.; Breitenstein, M. Gamification of learning management systems and user types in higher education. In Proceedings of the ECGBL 2018 12th European Conference on Game-Based Learning, Sophia Antipolis, France, 4–5 October 2018; Volume 91. [Google Scholar]
  106. Efendy, G.F.; Jupiter. Gamification analysis and implementation in online learning. ICIC Express Lett. 2018, 12, 1195–1204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Bartel, A.; Hagel, G.; Wolff, C. Emendo—A toolchain for creating gamified learning arrangements for online learning settings. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Higher Education Advances (HEAd’18), Valencia, Spain, 20–22 June 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Facey-Shaw, L.; Specht, M.; Bartley-Bryan, J. Digital badges for motivating introductory programmers: Qualitative findings from focus groups. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), San Jose, CA, USA, 3–6 October 2018; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Yalagi, P.S.; Gandhmal, D.P.; Dixit, R.K. Business intelligence tools—Content generation using Moodle for self-learning as an elective module. J. Eng. Educ. Transform. 2018, 31, 243–249. [Google Scholar]
  110. Ozdamli, F. ARCS motivation model adapted to gamification applications on a programming language course. Int. J. Learn. Technol. 2018, 13, 327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Sitra, O.; Katsigiannakis, V.; Karagiannidis, C.; Mavropoulou, S. The effect of badges on the engagement of students with special educational needs: A case study. Educ. Inf. Technol. 2017, 22, 3037–3046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Barber, C.; Smutzer, K. Leveling for success: Gamification in IS education. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Americas Conference on Information Systems, Boston, MA, USA, 10–12 August 2017; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar]
  113. Ortiz Rojas, M.E.; Chiluiza, K.; Valcke, M. Gamification in computer programming: Effects on learning, engagement, self-efficacy and intrinsic motivation. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Game-Based Learning (ECGBL), Graz, Austria, 5–6 October 2017; Academic Conferences LTD: Reading, UK, 2017; pp. 507–514. [Google Scholar]
  114. Alabbasi, D. Exploring graduate students’ perspectives towards using gamification techniques in online learning. Turk. Online J. Distance Educ. 2017, 18, 180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Kifor, Ş. Content development approaches in e-learning lessons. In Proceedings of the Balkan Region Conference on Engineering and Business Education, Sibiu, Romania, 19–22 October 2017; Volume 2, pp. 342–348. [Google Scholar]
  116. Bernik, A.; Radosevic, D.; Bubas, G. Introducing gamification into e-learning university courses. In Proceedings of the 2017 40th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), Opatija, Croatia, 22–26 May 2017; pp. 711–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Schöbel, S.; Söllner, M.; Leimeister, J.M. The agony of choice–analyzing user preferences regarding gamification elements in learning management systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information systems (ICIS), Dublin, Ireland, 11–14 December 2016; pp. 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Saraguro-Bravo, R.A.; Jara-Roa, D.I.; Agila-Palacios, M. Techno-instructional application in a MOOC designed with gamification techniques. In Proceedings of the 2016 Third International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG), Sangolqui, Ecuador, 30 March–1 April 2016; pp. 176–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Fischer, H.; Heinz, M.; Schlenker, L.; Follert, F. Gamifying higher education. Beyond badges, points and leaderboards. In Proceedings of the Workshop Gemeinschaften in Neuen Medien (GeNeMe), Dresden, Germany, 2016; TUDpress: Dresden, Germany, 2016; pp. 93–104. [Google Scholar]
  120. Paiva, J.; Leal, J.; Queirós, R. Gamification of learning activities with the Odin service. Comput. Sci. Inf. Syst. 2016, 13, 809–826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Frost, R.D.; Matta, V.; MacIvor, E. Assessing the efficacy of incorporating game dynamics in a learning management system. J. Inf. Syst. Educ. 2015, 26, 59–70. [Google Scholar]
  122. Haaranen, L.; Hakulinen, L.; Ihantola, P.; Korhonen, A. Software architectures for implementing achievement badges—Practical experiences. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Teaching and Learning in Computing and Engineering, Kuching, Malaysia, 11–13 April 2014; pp. 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Haaranen, L.; Ihantola, P.; Hakulinen, L.; Korhonen, A. How (not) to introduce badges to online exercises. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, Atlanta, GA, USA, 5–8 March 2014; pp. 33–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. De-Marcos, L.; Domínguez, A.; Saenz-de-Navarrete, J.; Pagés, C. An empirical study comparing gamification and social networking on e-learning. Comput. Educ. 2014, 75, 82–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Holman, C.; Aguilar, S.; Fishman, B. GradeCraft. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, Leuven, Belgium, 8–13 April 2013; pp. 260–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Chang, C.-F.; Chuang, T.-Y.; Chen, W.-F.; Su, Y.-N. Cultivating effective classroom management: The implementation of an adaptive gamification platform. In Proceedings of the 2024 16th IIAI International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI), Takamatsu, Japan, 6–12 July 2024; pp. 202–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Queirós, R. Enhancing gamified LMS with the integration of games experiences. In Communications in Computer and Information Science, Proceedings of the ARTIIS 2024 International Workshops, Santiago, Chile, 21–23 October 2024; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2025; pp. 324–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Sotirov, M.; Petrova, V.; Nikolova-Sotirova, D. Enhancing student engagement through gamified learning in Moodle LMS. In Proceedings of the 2024 23rd International Symposium on Electrical Apparatus and Technologies (SIELA), Bourgas, Bulgaria, 12–15 June 2024; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Kurochkina, A.A.; Lukina, O.V.; Krasnov, S.V.; Kalinina, A.S. Improving the efficiency of using LMS Moodle in the educational process by implementing gamification technologies. In Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2024; pp. 419–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Sotirov, M.; Petrova, V. The Nine-Steps gamification process: Increasing student engagement in LMS. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference Automatics and Informatics (ICAI), Varna, Bulgaria, 5–7 October 2023; pp. 496–501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Torres, A.; Sivanathan, M.; Mutombo, P.; Micallef, J.; Wahab, S.; Abdo, S.; Matheou, V.; Wilcocks, K.; Franco, L.Y.; Kapralos, B.; et al. The gamified educational network learning management system for medical education. In Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Remote Engineering and Virtual Instrumentation, Thessaloniki, Greece, 1–3 March 2023; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 771–779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Alonso-Fernández, C.; Cobos, R. Meta-Review of recognition of learning in LMSs and MOOCs. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Kuwait, Kuwait, 1–4 May 2023; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Queirós, R.; Pinto, C.; Cruz, M.; Mascarenhas, D. Integrating gamified educational escape rooms in learning management systems. In Proceedings of the 12th Symposium on Languages, Applications and Technologies (SLATE 2023), Vila do Conde, Portugal, 26–28 June 2023; pp. 15:1–15:8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Sotirov, M.; Petrova, V.; Nikolova-Sotirova, D. Implementing gamified learning in university environment. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Conference Automatics and Informatics (ICAI), Varna, Bulgaria, 5–7 October 2023; pp. 476–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Hidayatulloh, I.; Sukardiyono, T.; Surjono, H.D.; Pambudi, S. Gamification on chatbot-based learning media: A platform perspective. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Technology and Vocational Teachers (ICTVT 2021), Yogyakarta, Indonesia, 5 October 2021; Volume 2714, p. 030013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  136. Karavidas, L.; Tsiatsos, T.; Stamelos, I. Enhancing skills in bachelor classes by gamifying learning management systems. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Kuwait, Kuwait, 1–4 May 2023; pp. 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Ezzoubair, Z.; Mohammed, O.; Haddioui, E.I. A gamified e-learning model based on the one size fits all model and the static and dynamic adaptation model. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 2023, 101, 7181–7190. [Google Scholar]
  138. Palmquist, A.; Gillberg, D. Eye of the beholder. In Research Anthology on Game Design, Development, Usage, and Social Impact; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2022; pp. 557–583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Nabil, R.; Mohamed, N.E.; Mahdy, A.; Nader, K.; Essam, S.; Eliwa, E. EvalSeer: An intelligent gamified system for programming assignments assessment. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Mobile, Intelligent, and Ubiquitous Computing Conference (MIUCC), Cairo, Egypt, 26–27 May 2021; pp. 235–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Moreira, F.; Ferreira, M.J.; Escudero, D.F.; Pereira, C.S.; Durao, N. Teaching and learning modelling and specification based on gamification. In Proceedings of the 2020 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), Seville, Spain, 24–27 June 2020; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Mele, E.; Tatsiopoulou, A.; Ktena, A. Gamifying e-learning course content. In Proceedings of the 2020 9th Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing (MECO), Budva, Montenegro, 8–11 June 2020; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Chtouka, E.; Guezguez, W.; Amor, N.B. Reinforcement learning for new adaptive gamified LMS. In Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Proceedings of the 4th International Conference, ICDEc 2019, Beirut, Lebanon, 15–18 April 2019; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 305–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Karmanova, E.v.; Chernova, E.v.; Dokolin, A.s. Modeling knowledge assessment with gamification technology on E-Learning platform. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Multi-Conference on Industrial Engineering and Modern Technologies (FarEastCon), Vladivostok, Russia, 1–4 October 2019; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Boytchev, P.; Boytcheva, S. Gamified evaluation in STEAM. In Communications in Computer and information Science, Proceedings of the 25th International Conference, ICIST 2019, Vilnius, Lithuania, 10–12 October 2019; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2019; pp. 369–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Sriratnasari, S.R.; Wang, G.; Kaburuan, E.R. Applying innovative learning management system (LMS) with gamification framework. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Seminar on Application for Technology of Information and Communication (iSemantic), Semarang, Indonesia, 21–22 September 2019; pp. 569–573. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Kuo, M.-S.; Chuang, T.-Y.; Su, Y.-N.; Chen, T.-Y.; Cheng, B.-Y. What are the better gamification tools for elementary school teachers? In Proceedings of the 2018 7th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics (IIAI-AAI), Yonago, Japan, 8–13 July 2018; pp. 346–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Garcia-Iruela, M.; Hijon-Neira, R. Proposal of a management interface for gamified environments in moodle. In Proceedings of the 2018 International Symposium on Computers in Education (SIIE), Jerez, Spain, 19–21 September 2018; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Schöbel, S.; Ernst, S.-J.; Söllner, M.; Leimeister, J.M. More than the sum of its parts–towards identifying preferred game design element combinations in learning management systems. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS), Seoul, South Korea, 10–13 December 2017; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  149. Tuparov, G.; Keremedchiev, D.; Tuparova, D.; Stoyanova, M. Gamification and educational computer games in open-source learning management systems as a part of assessment. In Proceedings of the 2018 17th International Conference on Information Technology Based Higher Education and Training (ITHET), Olhao, Portugal, 26–28 April 2018; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Meyers, J.; Cain, A.; Renzella, J.; Cummaudo, A. A proposal for integrating gamification into Task-Oriented portfolio assessment. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE), Wollongong, NSW, Australia, 4–7 December 2018; pp. 1022–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Rana, M.E.; Ahsan, M.; Rahman, W. A detailed analysis on the use of gamification in cloud-based learning management systems. J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol. 2019, 97, 2179–2194. [Google Scholar]
  152. Klamma, R.; Arifin, M.A. Gamification of Web-Based learning services. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Web-Based Learning, Cape Town, South Africa, 20–22 September 2017; Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2017; pp. 43–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Simionescu, S.; Sunikova, D.; Kubincova, Z. Gamification of peer assessment in learning management system. In Proceedings of the 2017 18th International Carpathian Control Conference (ICCC), Sinaia, Romania, 28–31 May 2017; pp. 571–575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Bartel, A.; Hagel, G.; Wolff, C. Effective integration of gamification and learning management systems for creating gamified learning arrangements. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Higher Education Advances, Valencia, Spain, 21–23 June 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Kermek, D.; Strmecki, D.; Novak, M.; Kaniski, M. Preparation of a hybrid e-learning course for gamification. In Proceedings of the 2016 39th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), Opatija, Croatia, 30 May–3 June 2016; pp. 829–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Baldeón, J.; Rodríguez, I.; Puig, A. LEGA: A LEarner-centered GAmification Design Framework. In Proceedings of the XVII International Conference on Human Computer Interaction, Salamanca, Spain, 13–16 September 2016; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Paiva, J.C.; Leal, J.P.; Peixoto de Queirós, R.A. Design and implementation of an IDE for learning programming languages using a gamification service. In Advances in Game-Based Learning; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2017; pp. 295–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Azmi, M.A.; Singh, D. Schoolcube: Gamification for learning management system through Microsoft SharePoint. Int. J. Comput. Games Technol. 2015, 2015, 589180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Broer, J.; Breiter, A. Potentials of gamification in learning management systems: A qualitative evaluation. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Proceedings of the 10th European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning, EC-TEL 2015, Toledo, Spain, 15–18 September 2015; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 389–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Paiva, J.C.; Leal, J.P.; Queirós, R. Odin: A service for gamification of learning activities. In Communications in Computer and Information Science, Proceedings of the 4th International Symposium, SLATE 2015, Madrid, Spain, 18–19 June 2015; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; pp. 194–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Lubis, F.F.; Rosmansyah, Y.; Supangkat, S.H. Math workout series: Enhancing learning application with gamification. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on Information Technology Systems and Innovation (ICITSI), Bandung, Indonesia, 24–27 November 2014; pp. 290–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  162. Swacha, J. An architecture of a gamified learning management system. In Proceedings of the ICWL 2014 International Workshops, SPeL, PRASAE, IWMPL, OBIE, and KMEL, FET, Tallinn, Estonia, 14–17 August 2014; Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; pp. 195–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. de Almeida Souza-Concilio, I.; de Almeida Pacheco, B. How to make learning management systems more exciting and entertaining: Games, interaction and experience design. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services, Kuching, Malaysia, 2–4 December 2013; pp. 18–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Paulsen, M.F. Experiences with learning management systems in 113 European institutions. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 2003, 6, 134–148. [Google Scholar]
  165. Cavus, N. Distance learning and learning management systems. Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015, 191, 872–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Dias, S.B.; Diniz, J.A.; Hadjileontiadis, L.J. Towards an Intelligent Learning Management System Under Blended Learning: Trends, Profiles and Modeling Perspectives; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014; ISBN 9783319020785. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Kats, Y. Learning Management Systems and Instructional Design: Best Practices in Online Education: Best Practices in Online Education; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  168. Rabiman, R.; Nurtanto, M.; Kholifah, N. Design and development e-learning system by learning management system (LMS) in vocational education. Online Submiss. 2020, 9, 1059–1063. [Google Scholar]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Journal Statistics
Article metric data becomes available approximately 24 hours after publication online.
Download PDF
The Feasibility and Acceptability of AI-Based eGuide for Healthcare Centers in Oman
Previous