Mixed-methods analysis reveals gamification enhances student engagement and historical understanding in PSTs, suggesting educational innovation.
Situated in the context of an increasing demand for interactive, student-centred education, this study examines the potential of digital games to enhance students’ application of industrialisation by fostering active learning and critical engagement. This study aimed to explore the views of how a group of pre-service teachers’ (PST’s) engagement with a gamified environment in applying their knowledge about industrialisation in History Education. A mixed methodology was employed with twenty-one students who were registered for a History Education module focusing on how History can be taught with Information and Communication Technologies. The Self-Determination Theory (SDT) provided the foundation for understanding how gamification can support student motivation, perspective, engagement, and game design in relation to industrialisation. Data was collected through a questionnaire consisting of open and closed questions and Likert-type questions. The findings support the key factors: student motivation, student engagement, student perspectives and game design. The students demonstrated increased interest, motivation, and an acute historical understanding of the aspects of industrialisation, such as technological advancements and socio-economic and environmental changes. Interestingly, the students highlighted topics related to colonialism and the lack of African representation in the game, thus illustrating how a gamified experience can support deeper conceptual understanding. Essentially, gamification facilitated the application of content and critical thinking by enabling students to explore the complexities of industrialisation in a gamified environment with challenging, problem-solving scenarios.This study contributes to educational innovation by illustrating how gamification can positively impact knowledge acquisition, skill development, and student satisfaction compared to traditional learning methods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Govender et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: