Gamification and Course Satisfaction in English for Specific Purposes: A Self-Determination Theory Perspective

Abstract

Gamification is widely used to enhance student engagement in higher education, yet its effects in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) contexts, particularly from a Self-Determination Theory perspective, remain underexplored. This study examines whether gamification in a Moodle-based ESP course is associated with differences in students’ course satisfaction. A total of 94 undergraduate students participated in a quasi-experimental study, enrolling in either a gamified or non-gamified course format. Gamification was implemented using the Level Up plugin and H5P interactive activities. Students’ perceptions were measured using selected items from the Course Satisfaction Questionnaire. Non-parametric analyses (Mann–Whitney U tests with Holm–Bonferroni correction) were applied. Results show statistically significant differences favoring the gamified format in engagement and enjoyment, motivation to participate, and willingness to recommend the course. Differences in perceived competence and support for individual learning were positive but not statistically significant. These findings suggest that gamification in ESP is associated with more favorable motivational and affective dimensions of course satisfaction, while effects on broader learning-related perceptions remain less conclusive. This study contributes by providing evidence from a controlled LMS-based implementation and highlights the importance of theoretically grounded gamification design.

1. Introduction

The digital transformation of higher education has profoundly altered the way knowledge is designed, delivered, and experienced. The increasing integration of information and communication technologies has enabled universities to restructure teaching and learning processes, creating more flexible, accessible, and student-centered environments (Hrastinski, 2019). Within this context, learning management systems (LMSs) have become indispensable tools for organizing course content, facilitating communication, and supporting assessment. Among these systems, Moodle is one of the most widely adopted open-source platforms, particularly in language education (Dougiamas & Taylor, 2003). Its flexibility, modularity, and capacity to support a range of interactive tasks make it particularly suitable for English for Specific Purposes (ESP) courses, which require both structured progression and opportunities for autonomous practice.

Despite these advantages, however, higher education continues to face the persistent challenge of sustaining students’ motivation and satisfaction. Course satisfaction represents a key outcome that influences students’ academic persistence, performance, and overall well-being, as shown in previous research (Hanus & Fox, 2015; Dichev & Dicheva, 2017). Furthermore, course satisfaction refers to students’ perceptions of the course as a whole, including instructional quality, structure, materials, interactions, and the general learning experience (Dicheva et al., 2015). Research shows that students with higher satisfaction are more engaged, perform better, and are more likely to persist in their studies (Kuo & Chuang, 2016; Howard et al., 2021; Reeve & Cheon, 2021). Conversely, low satisfaction is associated with disengagement, increased dropout risk, and underachievement. For institutions seeking to improve retention and quality assurance, understanding the mechanisms that shape course satisfaction is of central importance (Kuo & Chuang, 2016).

One pedagogical strategy that has received increasing attention in recent years is gamification. Gamification is commonly defined as the use of game design elements in non-game contexts (Deterding et al., 2011). Research indicates that by integrating features such as points, badges, leaderboards, progress bars, or levels, gamification aims to make learning activities more engaging, enjoyable, and motivating (Hamari et al., 2014). In higher education, gamification has been applied across diverse fields, from engineering and computer science to social sciences and language learning, with generally positive effects on motivation, participation, and learning outcomes, as shown in previous research (Subhash & Cudney, 2018). Language learning in particular benefits from gamified approaches, since acquiring vocabulary and discipline-specific terminology requires frequent repetition, which students may otherwise perceive as monotonous. Previous research highlights that by reframing repetitive tasks into game-like challenges, gamification can provide continuous reinforcement and make learning more sustainable (Dörnyei, 2001; Basturkmen, 2010; Domínguez et al., 2013; Subhash & Cudney, 2018).

The effectiveness of gamification, however, depends not merely on the presence of game elements but on how these elements align with established theories of human motivation. Self-Determination Theory (SDT) provides a powerful lens for analyzing these effects. Developed by Deci and Ryan (1985) and further elaborated by Ryan and Deci (2000), SDT posits that human motivation and well-being are grounded in the fulfillment of three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. When these needs are met, individuals are more likely to experience intrinsic motivation, sustained engagement, and greater satisfaction with their activities. In educational contexts, autonomy refers to students’ perception of choice and control over their learning, competence to the sense of mastery and effectiveness in completing tasks, and relatedness to the feeling of connection with peers and instructors (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). Courses that are designed to support students’ basic psychological needs have been shown to enhance motivation, deepen learning, and increase satisfaction, as demonstrated in previous research (Sailer et al., 2017).

Moreover, gamification has the potential to satisfy these psychological needs in digital learning environments. Autonomy can be supported through optional tasks, personalized learning paths, or the ability to self-pace through challenges. Competence is fostered through immediate feedback, levels that signify progress, and recognition of achievements. Relatedness can be encouraged through collaborative quests, peer competition via leaderboards, or shared celebrations of progress (Domínguez et al., 2013). At the same time, prior research cautions that certain gamification elements, particularly competitive leaderboards, may also trigger negative social comparison effects if not carefully designed, potentially undermining relatedness and intrinsic motivation (Hanus & Fox, 2015; Mekler et al., 2017). When aligned with the principles of Self-Determination Theory, gamification can move beyond being a superficial motivational “add-on” and instead serve as a structured way to enhance the quality of students’ learning experiences, as shown in previous research (Sailer et al., 2017; Subhash & Cudney, 2018).

Nevertheless, existing research highlights several gaps. Systematic reviews of gamification in education emphasize both its promise and its variability in outcomes, as shown in previous research (Hamari et al., 2014; Subhash & Cudney, 2018). Some studies report increased engagement but limited impact on long-term satisfaction, while others find positive effects on motivation but mixed results on achievement, suggesting that the relationship between affective and performance-related outcomes remains complex and not yet fully understood (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017; Subhash & Cudney, 2018). Moreover, most research has focused on general education or STEM fields, with far fewer studies targeting language education, and particularly English for Specific Purposes (ESP) contexts. This imbalance is notable given the specific motivational challenges associated with ESP. Research indicates that students in ESP courses often question the immediate relevance of specialized content, leading to lower intrinsic motivation and weaker affective engagement (Basturkmen, 2010). ESP instructors therefore face the dual task of teaching discipline-specific language while maintaining motivation and satisfaction in a student group that may not perceive immediate utility in the subject matter.

Across many higher education systems, ESP is a mandatory component of university programs, which makes the need to enhance student motivation and satisfaction particularly urgent (Basturkmen, 2010; Grubješić & Ivanjko, 2025). While LMS platforms such as Moodle provide flexibility and structure, their standard design often lacks features that sustain long-term engagement. By introducing gamified design elements, such as the H5P plugin for interactive tasks and the Level Up block for progress tracking, it becomes possible to transform ESP courses into more dynamic, motivating, and satisfying experiences. However, empirical studies that explicitly examine gamified Moodle-based ESP courses through the lens of Self-Determination Theory remain scarce, and detailed, replicable descriptions of concrete plugin-based implementations are rarely provided in the literature, as many studies report outcomes of gamified interventions without consistently offering sufficiently transparent accounts of the specific design and configuration of gamification elements (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017; Majuri et al., 2018).

Against this backdrop, the present study positions its contribution as contextually grounded and empirically focused. Rather than proposing a novel gamification framework, it provides empirical evidence from an underexplored instructional domain by combining (i) an ESP context, (ii) a concrete Moodle plugin-based gamification design (H5P and Level Up), (iii) an explicit SDT-informed interpretative framework, and (iv) a controlled quasi-experimental comparison under identical instructional conditions. Accordingly, the study addresses the following research question:

RQ: Is participation in a gamified Moodle-based ESP course associated with higher levels of course satisfaction compared to participation in a non-gamified ESP course?

This study therefore aims to address an underexplored area, i.e., the relationship between gamified Moodle design and course satisfaction in ESP contexts. Guided by Self-Determination Theory, the research investigates whether gamification can be associated with higher levels of students’ satisfaction by supporting their basic psychological needs. Using a quasi-experimental design with 94 undergraduate students, equally divided into control and experimental groups, the study seeks to provide empirical evidence on the role of gamification in shaping course satisfaction in higher education. In doing so, it contributes both to the growing body of gamification research and to the practical improvement of ESP teaching and learning.

Finally, unlike prior gamification studies that report affective gains in general LMS contexts, this study further contributes by isolating gamification effects within an ESP course delivered through concrete, replicable Moodle-based implementations under standardized in-lab survey administration conditions, and interpreting outcomes explicitly through Self-Determination Theory.

2. Theoretical and Empirical Background

The academic study of gamification in education has developed rapidly, moving from conceptual definitions toward extensive empirical testing across multiple fields. Gamification is generally defined as the use of game design elements such as points, badges, levels, or progress indicators in non-game contexts. Early enthusiasm led to a wide variety of implementations; however, subsequent research indicates that the effectiveness of gamification depends less on the number of elements used than on how they are integrated into pedagogical design and aligned with learners’ needs (Hamari et al., 2014). Moreover, meta-analyses and systematic reviews consistently emphasize that gamification is not a universal solution, but rather a design approach that can generate positive outcomes under specific conditions (Subhash & Cudney, 2018; Lampropoulos et al., 2025). The accumulated evidence shows that gamification can contribute to enjoyment, persistence, and satisfaction; however, results vary significantly depending on subject matter, learner population, and instructional design, as demonstrated across multiple studies (Hamari et al., 2014; Subhash & Cudney, 2018; Lampropoulos et al., 2025; Wang et al., 2025).

One of the central contributions of the literature has been the gradual recognition that gamification should not be viewed as a superficial layer of points and rewards, but as a design strategy grounded in motivational psychology. Self-Determination Theory (SDT), developed by Deci and Ryan (1985) and further elaborated by Ryan and Deci (2000), provides one of the most widely adopted frameworks for analyzing how gamification can shape learner experience. SDT identifies three basic psychological needs, autonomy, competence, and relatedness, that are essential for intrinsic motivation and well-being. Research shows that when learning environments support these needs, students demonstrate higher motivation, stronger engagement, and greater satisfaction (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). Gamification, when aligned with these principles, has the potential to enhance learning not by adding extrinsic rewards but by creating conditions in which intrinsic motivation can flourish.

Empirical studies have demonstrated how specific gamification elements can be linked to SDT constructs. For example, experimental research shows that leaderboards and performance graphs can foster competence when perceived as supportive feedback, while badges and achievements may enhance feelings of competence and progress (Sailer et al., 2017). Relatedness can be encouraged through collaborative tasks, team-based challenges, or visible progress shared with peers, while autonomy is supported by offering choices in tasks and allowing self-paced progression. Research further indicates that students in gamified higher education courses report higher levels of motivation and performance, particularly when feedback and progression are experienced as meaningful rather than controlling (Domínguez et al., 2013). Similarly, systematic reviews highlight that the alignment between gamification design and the satisfaction of basic psychological needs explains variability across studies (Subhash & Cudney, 2018). Importantly, several studies also caution that gamification may produce neutral or negative effects when design elements are experienced as controlling, overly competitive, or poorly aligned with learners’ needs, as shown across multiple studies (Hanus & Fox, 2015; Seaborn & Fels, 2015; Dichev & Dicheva, 2017; Mekler et al., 2017; Majuri et al., 2018). This suggests that gamification is most effective when implemented as a pedagogically integrated approach, grounded in established motivational theory.

Taken together, this body of research illustrates both the merits and limitations of gamification in educational contexts. While many studies report positive effects on motivation, engagement, and satisfaction, others caution that these effects are neither universal nor automatic. In particular, designs that rely heavily on external rewards, competition, or social comparison may fail to support students’ basic psychological needs, highlighting the importance of theoretically grounded and context-sensitive implementation.

Furthermore, the distribution of gamification research across disciplines shows a marked imbalance. Mapping studies and systematic reviews indicate that the majority of empirical work has been conducted in STEM fields, particularly in computer science, engineering, and mathematics (Hamari et al., 2014; Seaborn & Fels, 2015; Dichev & Dicheva, 2017; Majuri et al., 2018). By contrast, research on language education highlights persistent motivational challenges, while empirical studies on gamification in language learning, and especially in English for Specific Purposes (ESP), remain comparatively scarce (Dörnyei, 2001; Basturkmen, 2010). These domains often lend themselves to gamified design because tasks are structured, progress is measurable, and feedback can be automated.

Given this disciplinary concentration, this raises the question of what the empirical record shows about effectiveness across contexts. Evidence from meta-analyses and mapping studies indicates that gamification frequently yields short-term gains in participation and persistence, with more mixed effects on performance and satisfaction across contexts, as shown in previous research (Hamari et al., 2014; Majuri et al., 2018). Surveys of the field similarly report heterogeneous outcomes that depend on design quality and context, rather than on the mere presence of points, badges, or leaderboards (Seaborn & Fels, 2015; Dichev & Dicheva, 2017). At the course level, positive effects tend to be associated with implementations that provide informative feedback and support perceived progress, whereas designs experienced as controlling or purely competitive show weaker results, as demonstrated in previous research (Domínguez et al., 2013; Sailer et al., 2017). Collectively, these findings suggest that gamification cannot be treated as a uniform intervention. Its impact is mediated by the alignment between specific game elements, learner characteristics, and instructional goals (Subhash & Cudney, 2018).

Against this backdrop, language learning presents a distinctive case within the broader landscape. Language acquisition requires sustained practice, repetition, and the gradual accumulation of vocabulary and communicative competence, all of which can be experienced as monotonous by students. Motivational constructs are therefore particularly critical in sustaining engagement with language courses (Dörnyei, 2001). Within the subfield of English for Specific Purposes, challenges are even more pronounced. ESP courses are typically compulsory in many higher education programs; yet, students often perceive specialized terminology and discourse as distant from their immediate academic or personal interests (Basturkmen, 2010). This can result in lower intrinsic motivation and weaker affective investment, which in turn undermines course satisfaction. Classic work in ESP methodology emphasizes the importance of tailoring materials to learners’ goals and maintaining relevance (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987), yet even with these adjustments, instructors frequently encounter difficulties in sustaining motivation.

Given these challenges, gamification represents a promising strategy for ESP by making repetitive practice more engaging and by providing clear feedback on progress. This is supported by studies in general language learning contexts, which show that gamification can enhance engagement and enjoyment in vocabulary acquisition or grammar exercises, particularly when progress is made visible and achievements are recognized (Figueroa Flores, 2015; deHaan, 2019; Chen et al., 2019; Pinto et al., 2021; Almufareh, 2021; Yaccob et al., 2022). However, most of these studies focus on general EFL/ESL contexts rather than ESP, and only rarely examine course satisfaction as a primary outcome. The existing body of research demonstrates the importance of motivation and satisfaction for ESP success, but the integration of gamification into ESP design has not yet been investigated extensively. This scarcity is even more pronounced when Self-Determination Theory is considered explicitly. Although SDT has been applied in second language acquisition research, particularly in studies examining motivational dynamics in language learning (Dörnyei, 2001; Basturkmen, 2010), empirical studies that explicitly combine ESP, gamification, and SDT, especially within LMS-based instructional designs, remain largely absent from the literature. Reviews further emphasize that while gamification can be effective, its impact is context-dependent, highlighting the need for studies in underexplored domains such as ESP (Subhash & Cudney, 2018).

In summary, previous research has established that gamification can positively influence motivation, engagement, and satisfaction in higher education, particularly when aligned with Self-Determination Theory. Specific game elements have been shown to support autonomy, competence, and relatedness, but results remain heterogeneous across disciplines. In language learning, motivation is a well-documented challenge, and in ESP, the problem is especially acute because students often perceive the content as peripheral or less relevant. Despite the theoretical suitability of gamification for addressing these challenges, empirical evidence from gamified ESP courses, especially those implemented through concrete LMS tools and interpreted through SDT, remains limited. This gap highlights the significance of the present study, which seeks to contribute to the field by empirically examining whether gamified design in Moodle-based ESP courses is associated with higher levels of course satisfaction when interpreted through the lens of Self-Determination Theory.

3. Materials and Methods

The methodological framework of this study was designed to provide a rigorous yet ecologically valid test of how gamification is associated with course satisfaction in an ESP context. Given the constraints of authentic course delivery in higher education, the research employed a quasi-experimental design with two parallel groups (control and experimental) under identical instructional conditions, differing only in the presence of gamification elements in the LMS. Because group allocation was not randomized, all findings are interpreted as associations rather than causal effects. The following subsections describe the participants and context, the study procedure, the instrument used, and the analytic approach.

3.1. Participants and Context

The study was conducted at University North, Croatia, within a compulsory undergraduate ESP course delivered via the institutional Moodle platform. A total of 94 students participated (N = 94), with equal numbers in the control group (n = 47) and the experimental group (n = 47). Gender distribution was balanced across the sample (46.81% male, 52.13% female, 1.06% not disclosed), and the age range (19–22 years) reflected the typical profile of second-year undergraduates. Participants were drawn from a single undergraduate cohort enrolled in a study program within the Department of Multimedia, Design and Application in the same academic year.

All participants had previously passed the national standardized secondary school exit examination in English at the B level (the Croatian State Matura). This requirement ensured that every student entered the course with an officially verified intermediate level of English proficiency, serving as a standardized baseline of prior language competence across the sample. Individual prior English scores were not accessible to the researchers, and baseline equivalence could therefore not be statistically tested at the individual level.

The participants were enrolled in two parallel groups of the same compulsory ESP course. Allocation to groups was carried out through the Moodle “Choice” activity during the orientation phase, prior to the beginning of instruction. This represents the standard institutional procedure for group enrolment. Crucially, at the time of selection, students had no knowledge that the course would be part of a research study, nor that one group would later serve as the experimental group and the other as the control group. Their choices were therefore based solely on scheduling convenience and unrelated to the research aims, which reduces the likelihood of expectancy effects or self-selection based on instructional preferences. Although this procedure does not constitute random assignment in the strict experimental sense, it resulted in a balanced distribution of participants across the two groups.

Participation in the study was voluntary. Students were informed that the survey data would be collected anonymously and used exclusively for research purposes. They were explicitly assured that participation or non-participation would not affect their grade, course standing, or relationship with the instructor. They were also informed of their right to withdraw at any time without consequences. These safeguards, combined with the anonymous administration of the survey, ensured ethical compliance, protected participants’ autonomy, and minimized the risk of socially desirable responses.

Both groups were taught by the same instructor, under an identical syllabus, pacing, and assessment conditions. The only systematic difference between them was the presence of gamification elements in the experimental group’s Moodle course, while the control group completed equivalent tasks without gamification. No additional instructional support, grading incentives, or assessment modifications were introduced in either group during the study period. This parallel-group design strengthens internal comparability while preserving the ecological validity of authentic course delivery.

3.2. Procedure

Teaching was organized as a seven-week block, with a five-week exposure window for the instructional manipulation situated between initial course onboarding and the end-of-instruction measurement. Throughout this period, both groups covered the same ESP units, used the same materials, and met on the same weekly schedule. The control group worked within a standard Moodle course using conventional resources (files, pages, assignments) without gamified affordances. The experimental group engaged with an otherwise equivalent Moodle course in which two gamification components were integrated into weekly work: (i) H5P interactive activities (e.g., flashcards, crosswords, single-choice items) distributed across course units to support repeated practice with immediate feedback; and (ii) the Level Up block, a Moodle plugin for experience-point-based progress visualization and level tracking, configured to award experience points, track progress through levels, and visually display progression inside the course (Level Up, n.d.). Typical H5P tasks included interactive flashcards for technical terminology revision, drag-and-drop and drag-the-text exercises for vocabulary practice, single-choice items for lexical reinforcement, and crossword activities targeting key ESP terms.

H5P was selected as the primary tool for interactive practice because it enables the creation of reusable multimedia learning objects with automated, immediate feedback. Recent empirical research demonstrates that H5P interactivities can enhance learner engagement and motivation when integrated into digital instructional environments, particularly in contexts involving interactive content beyond static materials (Huff & Tseng, 2025).

The Level Up block was implemented as a non-evaluative progress-tracking mechanism designed to visualize learning advancement without linking rewards to course grades. Experience points and levels functioned exclusively as informational feedback, allowing students to monitor their progress over time while preserving identical assessment conditions across groups. This configuration was deliberately chosen to support perceived competence and autonomy rather than external performance pressure.

The layout, deadlines, and grading arrangements were kept identical across groups. The only systematic difference was the presence of gamified elements in the experimental group. Students in both groups completed the same thematic tasks and assessments on the same dates, ensuring procedural equivalence. No gamification-related rewards were linked to course grades, and experience points served exclusively as informational feedback rather than as evaluative incentives.

All survey activities were conducted on site in a computer lab to standardize conditions and ensure complete coverage. In the final week, students in both groups completed the Course Satisfaction Questionnaire via Google Forms. The survey link was posted in each group’s Moodle course, and students accessed it individually on institutional workstations. Before starting, participants were reminded that (a) participation was voluntary, (b) responses would be collected anonymously and used exclusively for research, (c) they could withdraw at any time without any consequence, and (d) participation or non-participation would not affect course grades, standing, or the student–instructor relationship. The instructor who taught both groups provided technical instructions only and did not interact with students during completion beyond logistical guidance, in order to minimize evaluation apprehension and potential demand characteristics. Completion took place in a single sitting under identical time and room conditions for both groups, yielding a 100% response rate (N = 94; 47/47).

Following administration, responses were stored automatically in the secure institutional account linked to the survey platform. No personally identifying information was collected, and data were subsequently processed only in aggregate at the group level. Anonymity was deliberately built into the procedure in order to reduce the risk of social desirability bias and the so-called Fisher effect, whereby students might adjust their evaluations out of concern that their instructor could recognize individual responses. This configuration (pre-instruction self-selection without knowledge of research conditions, balanced group sizes, identical curriculum and instructor, synchronized scheduling, and standardized, anonymous survey administration) was adopted deliberately to preserve internal validity while maintaining the ecological authenticity of routine course delivery.

3.3. Instruments

The primary outcome measure was course satisfaction, operationalized through a Course Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ) consisting of 12 closed statements rated on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree). Items were formulated to capture students’ evaluative judgments of the course as actually experienced in the LMS, covering, inter alia, course organization and sequencing, clarity and relevance of materials, perceived quality and timeliness of feedback, opportunities for interaction and support, perceived engagement during tasks, appropriateness of task difficulty, sense of competence while working through activities, support for individual study, overall satisfaction, and willingness to recommend the course format. The instrument was designed to capture subjective evaluations of the course rather than objective learning outcomes or performance measures. Higher values indicate greater satisfaction.

The CSQ was administered once, as a self-report survey completed on site in a computer lab under standardized conditions, as described in the previous section. The instrument was delivered via Google Forms embedded in the Moodle course. All 94 students (47 control/47 experimental) completed the CSQ, yielding a 100% response rate. Consequently, no missing data were present for this measure. Because administration was anonymous and occurred after exposure to the respective instructional designs, the CSQ captures students’ summative evaluations of the instructional experience without confounding effects of grading contingencies or instructor identification.

Scale reliability was high, with Cronbach’s α = 0.925, confirming that the 12 items consistently measured course satisfaction. Item distributions were examined using the Shapiro–Wilk test, which indicated significant deviations from normality for most items. Given the ordinal nature of the data and the observed violations of normality, non-parametric methods were deemed appropriate. Consequently, item-level comparisons were conducted using the Mann–Whitney U test to detect differences between the control and experimental groups. Given the exploratory focus on specific dimensions of satisfaction, the primary analytic strategy emphasized item-level comparisons rather than the construction of a composite score. To control for family-wise error due to multiple comparisons, Holm–Bonferroni correction was applied. Effect sizes (r) were calculated for statistically significant results. Statistical significance was set at α = 0.05. In Section 4, emphasis is placed on items where statistically significant differences were observed, while full test outcomes are provided in tabular form for completeness.

To preserve comparability across groups, item wording and ordering were identical for all participants, the response scale and anchors were uniform, and the administration protocol was the same for both groups. The instrument was purpose-built for higher-education course evaluation in this context and aligned with the content and delivery mode of the ESP course in Moodle. The items were developed based on established dimensions of course evaluation reported in previous research and aligned with the theoretical framework of Self-Determination Theory. Rather than claiming psychometric generalizability beyond the present context, the CSQ was intended to sensitively capture perceived differences between instructional conditions. Its focus on perceived quality, engagement, feedback, competence, and overall appraisal makes it appropriate for detecting differences associated with the presence versus absence of gamified design.

4. Results

The analysis of the Course Satisfaction Questionnaire focused on item-level comparisons between the control and experimental groups.

Table 1. Mann–Whitney U test results comparing the control and experimental groups on CSQ items.

CSQ Item	U-Value	p-Value	p_adj. (Holm)	r (Effect Size)
The course content was relevant to my professional or academic interests.	1046	0.628	1.000	—
Overall, I was satisfied with the course.	927	0.117	0.819	—
I received regular and useful feedback during the course.	1058	0.697	1.000	—
I was able to collaborate easily with the instructor and other participants in the course.	1087	0.886	1.000	—
The course engaged me, and I enjoyed working on it.	747	0.004	0.040 *	0.28
The difficulty of tasks was appropriate for my level of knowledge and skills.	1039	0.586	1.000	—
I felt motivated to participate in all course activities.	722	0.002	0.022 *	0.30
I felt competent while solving the tasks presented to me.	786	0.012	0.096	—
The course encouraged my individual learning process.	786	0.007	0.063	—
I was satisfied with the support provided by the instructor.	1088	0.896	1.000	—
The feedback I received in the course was timely and useful.	1103	0.997	0.997	—
I would recommend this course format to others.	662	<0.001	0.012 *	0.34

U = Mann–Whitney U statistic; p = unadjusted p-value; p_adj = Holm–Bonferroni adjusted p-value; r = effect size. * indicates statistical significance after Holm–Bonferroni correction (p_adj < 0.05).

presents the results of the Mann–Whitney U tests for all 12 items. Statistically significant differences were observed for a subset of items, with higher scores in the experimental group compared to the control group, indicating a consistent pattern favoring the experimental group. These differences were observed in specific dimensions of course satisfaction, as detailed in Table 1. Items without statistically significant differences are also reported in Table 1 to provide a complete overview of the results.

As shown in Table 1, the analysis of the Course Satisfaction Questionnaire revealed statistically significant differences between the control and experimental groups on three items, while the remaining items did not retain statistical significance after Holm–Bonferroni correction. Students in the experimental group reported higher scores on these items, indicating differences in perceived course satisfaction between instructional conditions, rather than uniform differences across all dimensions.

A first statistically significant difference emerged in students’ perceptions of engagement and enjoyment. Respondents in the experimental group reported that the course engaged them and that they enjoyed participating in it significantly more than their peers in the control group (U = 747, p = 0.004, p_adj = 0.040). These results indicate higher reported engagement and enjoyment in the experimental group.

A second statistically significant difference was found in students’ reported motivation to participate in all course activities (U = 722, p = 0.002, p_adj = 0.022). Students in the experimental group reported greater willingness to engage consistently with weekly assignments compared to the control group. This result indicates a difference in self-reported motivation between the two groups.

A difference in students’ perceived competence while solving course tasks was observed, with learners in the experimental group reporting feeling more capable and effective in completing the assignments compared to their peers in the control group (U = 786, p = 0.012, p_adj = 0.096). However, this difference did not retain statistical significance after Holm–Bonferroni correction.

A difference was observed in students’ perceptions that the course encouraged their individual learning process, with students in the experimental group more strongly agreeing that the course supported their personal study trajectory compared to the control group (U = 786, p = 0.007, p_adj = 0.063). However, this difference did not retain statistical significance after Holm–Bonferroni correction.

The third statistically significant difference between groups was observed in students’ willingness to recommend the course format to others (U = 662, p < 0.001, p_adj = 0.012). Students in the experimental group reported a higher willingness to recommend the course format than students in the control group.

For the three items that remained statistically significant after Holm–Bonferroni correction, effect sizes (r), calculated for the Mann–Whitney U test, ranged from 0.28 to 0.34, indicating differences in medium magnitude between the instructional conditions.

No statistically significant differences were observed on the remaining CSQ items, including those related to task difficulty, feedback, collaboration, or instructor support, after Holm–Bonferroni correction, as evident from Table 1. These results indicate similar perceptions of these aspects of the course experience across the two groups.

Overall, the results indicate that statistically significant differences between the control and experimental groups were observed for a limited set of course satisfaction dimensions, while other aspects of the course experience did not differ significantly. These findings provide the empirical basis for the interpretation presented in the following section.

5. Discussion

The observed pattern of results suggests that gamified design elements integrated into a Moodle-based ESP course were primarily associated with affective and motivational dimensions of course satisfaction rather than all aspects of the course experience. Statistically significant differences were observed in students’ engagement and enjoyment, motivation to participate, and willingness to recommend the course format, while perceived competence and support for individual learning showed the same directional pattern but did not retain statistical significance after correction. Taken together, these outcomes indicate that gamification is associated with differences across specific dimensions of course experience rather than exerting uniform effects across all aspects of the course.

First, the significantly higher levels of engagement and enjoyment reported by students in the experimental group align closely with prior research, demonstrating that gamified learning environments can increase affective involvement and sustained attention (Hamari et al., 2014; Subhash & Cudney, 2018). Recent empirical evidence from LMS-based gamified learning environments further supports these findings, showing that the integration of gamification into digital platforms is associated with higher engagement and more positive learning experiences, particularly when feedback and progress tracking are embedded into course design (Ahmed et al., 2025; Wang et al., 2025; Gejandran & Abdullah, 2024). In the present study, the use of H5P activities and the Level Up block was associated with higher reported experiential quality of participation, aligning with prior research on gamified learning environments and suggesting that routine ESP practice can be experienced as more engaging and enjoyable under gamified conditions.

From the perspective of Self-Determination Theory, increased enjoyment and engagement may be interpreted as indicators of support for autonomy and competence (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Sailer et al., 2017). Gamified elements enabled students to progress at their own pace, receive immediate feedback, and observe their advancement visually, all of which are known to support intrinsic motivation. This interpretation is consistent with findings by Sailer et al. (2017), who emphasize that gamification is most strongly associated with positive affective outcomes when it supports basic psychological needs rather than relying on external rewards.

A second key finding concerns students’ motivation to participate in all course activities. The experimental group reported significantly stronger motivation to engage consistently, which is particularly relevant in ESP contexts where sustained engagement and repetition are essential for vocabulary acquisition and skill development (Dörnyei, 2001; Basturkmen, 2010). Previous research has repeatedly shown that gamification is associated with increased motivational persistence, especially in online and blended learning environments (Hamari et al., 2014; Subhash & Cudney, 2018). More recent LMS-focused studies indicate that gamified systems that emphasize mastery, progress visibility, and learner control are associated with sustained motivation over time (Ahmed et al., 2025; Ngulube & Ncube, 2025).

Within the SDT framework, this finding suggests that the gamified design may have facilitated the internalization of learning goals by supporting autonomy and competence. Interactive H5P tasks provided low-stakes opportunities for mastery, while the Level Up system offered non-evaluative indicators of progress. As argued by Ryan and Deci (2000), such conditions are essential for transforming externally regulated participation into more autonomous forms of motivation. In ESP settings, where students may initially question the relevance of specialized content, this mechanism may be particularly important.

Although the difference in perceived competence did not retain statistical significance after correction, students in the experimental group reported a tendency toward higher perceived capability and effectiveness when solving course tasks. Competence is a central psychological need in SDT and has been consistently linked to higher engagement, persistence, and satisfaction (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). Prior studies suggest that gamification elements such as progress indicators and immediate feedback may support perceptions of competence by making learning gains visible and incremental (Domínguez et al., 2013; Sailer et al., 2017). Recent research on gamified LMS environments likewise highlights the role of structured feedback and achievement visualization in supporting learners’ perceived competence and self-efficacy (Ahmed et al., 2025; Gejandran & Abdullah, 2024).

In the context of ESP instruction, perceived competence is particularly salient due to the cognitive demands of discipline-specific terminology and discourse. The present findings suggest a tendency whereby gamified practice may help address these challenges by scaffolding learning through repeated interaction and clear progress cues, thereby supporting students’ perceived confidence in their abilities.

A further pattern observed in the data relates to students’ perceptions that the course encouraged their individual learning process. Although this difference did not retain statistical significance after correction, it suggests the potential role of autonomy, another core component of Self-Determination Theory. Students who perceive control over pacing, repetition, and engagement are more likely to experience ownership of learning and sustained motivation (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009). In this study, H5P activities enabled opportunities for students to revisit materials as needed, while the Level Up block supported self-monitoring of progress. Similar tendencies have been reported in prior research, where gamified systems have been associated with enhanced self-regulated learning and autonomy by providing learners with greater control and transparency (Sailer et al., 2017; Gejandran & Abdullah, 2024).

The strongest effect observed concerned students’ willingness to recommend the course format to others, which can be interpreted as a global indicator of satisfaction. Previous studies have identified recommendation intent as a robust proxy for overall course appraisal (Kuo & Chuang, 2016; Poondej & Lerdpornkulrat, 2020; Gaffas, 2023). The significantly higher endorsement of the gamified ESP course suggests that the combined effects of increased engagement and motivation, together with support for competence and autonomy, may be associated with a more positive holistic evaluation. From an SDT perspective, such global satisfaction may reflect the combined fulfillment of basic psychological needs (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Sailer et al., 2017).

Notably, no statistically significant differences were found for items related to task difficulty, feedback quality, collaboration, or instructor support. This pattern is consistent with prior research indicating that gamification tends to exert stronger effects on motivational and affective variables than on social or relational dimensions of learning (Dichev & Dicheva, 2017; Sailer et al., 2017). In the present study, the gamified elements primarily targeted individual engagement and self-regulated learning rather than interpersonal interaction, which may help account for the absence of differences in these areas.

Overall, the findings of this study are congruent with both earlier and recent research on gamification in higher education and e-learning. They extend existing knowledge by demonstrating that SDT-informed gamification may support selected affective dimensions of course satisfaction in ESP contexts, a domain that has received comparatively limited empirical attention. By situating the results within established motivational theory and recent empirical work on gamified LMS environments (Ahmed et al., 2025; Ngulube & Ncube, 2025; Lampropoulos et al., 2025; Gejandran & Abdullah, 2024), this study provides theoretically grounded and empirically supported evidence that thoughtfully designed gamification is associated with support for motivational and evaluative aspects of the learning experience in Moodle-based ESP courses. These findings relate to students’ subjective evaluations of the learning experience and do not directly reflect objective learning outcomes such as language proficiency or academic performance, which were beyond the scope of the present study.

6. Limitations

Several limitations should be acknowledged. The study involved a full cohort available in an authentic instructional setting, which necessarily constrained the sample size. While this limits the detection of small effects, the study was sufficiently sensitive to identify medium-sized differences, whereas smaller effects may have remained undetected.

The intervention lasted seven weeks, and results may differ under longer or more intensive implementations. The study was conducted with a single cohort at one institution, which limits generalizability. Furthermore, the design did not include longitudinal follow-up, and it therefore remains unclear whether the motivational effects observed here persist over time or translate into improved academic performance. Moreover, the Course Satisfaction Questionnaire was administered only once at the end of the course and collected anonymously, which limits inferences about individual-level change over time.

The study focused exclusively on affective outcomes and did not assess learning gains or performance-related indicators, such as improvements in language proficiency or academic performance. Accordingly, the findings primarily inform students’ subjective learning experiences rather than objective educational impact. Because group allocation was based on self-selection rather than randomization, this reflects a characteristic of quasi-experimental designs in authentic educational settings. Future research should address these aspects by replicating the study in diverse institutional settings, extending the duration of gamification, and combining affective measures with objective indicators of learning outcomes.

Additionally, the study did not account for individual differences among students, such as prior attitudes toward gamification or variations in intrinsic motivation, which may influence the effectiveness of gamified learning environments. The gamified design was implemented using two Moodle-integrated tools (H5P and Level Up), selected deliberately for their availability within standard LMS environments. This choice enhances ecological validity and practical transferability across higher education contexts, particularly given the widespread use of Moodle as a learning management system.

7. Conclusions

The present study examined the association between gamified instructional design and course satisfaction in an English for Specific Purposes course delivered via Moodle. Grounded in Self-Determination Theory, the analysis explored whether the integration of interactive H5P activities and the Level Up block was linked to more positive affective experiences compared to a non-gamified control condition. Using the Course Satisfaction Questionnaire and non-parametric statistical analysis, statistically significant differences were identified on three items, all favoring the experimental group. These differences concerned higher engagement and enjoyment, stronger motivation to participate in weekly activities, and a higher willingness to recommend the course format, while perceived competence and support for individual learning showed the same directional pattern but did not retain statistical significance after correction.

Taken together, the findings indicate that gamification aligned with Self-Determination Theory principles is associated with more favorable affective evaluations of selected dimensions of course satisfaction in higher education language courses. In particular, the gamified design was associated with support for autonomy through self-paced practice and progress visibility, while also providing conditions conducive to competence support through frequent feedback and recognition of achievement, and, to a more limited extent, relatedness through shared course structures and collective progress indicators. In line with SDT, these dimensions were reflected in students’ more positive motivational and evaluative responses to the course.

From a theoretical perspective, this study contributes to the literature on gamification by extending empirical evidence to ESP contexts, which have remained comparatively underrepresented in prior research. While previous studies have predominantly focused on STEM disciplines and general education settings, the present findings suggest that gamification may also be associated with support for selected motivational and affective aspects characteristic of ESP courses, where students may initially perceive specialized language content as less immediately relevant.

The study also offers practical implications for instructional design. The results highlight the potential of integrating readily available, open-source Moodle components to support more positive affective course experiences without modifying curricular content or assessment frameworks. Interactive H5P activities and simple progress-tracking mechanisms can be implemented with minimal technical effort, making gamification a feasible and scalable strategy for supporting student motivation and satisfaction in mandatory ESP courses.

In conclusion, the study provides empirical evidence that SDT-informed gamified design is associated with more favorable affective evaluations of selected dimensions of course satisfaction in ESP contexts. By aligning digital course design with students’ basic psychological needs, educators can create conditions conducive to more engaging and motivating learning environments. While further research is needed to examine long-term effects and learning outcomes, particularly through longitudinal designs and the inclusion of objective performance indicators, the present findings support the value of theoretically grounded gamification as a meaningful approach to supporting affective dimensions of higher education language instruction.