This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
This study presents a gamification-driven project-based learning (PBL) approach to enhance formative learning in chemical engineering education for biotechnology students. The core methodology, ChEngBoost , consists of the incardination of five progressively challenging in-class problem-solving sessions on mass and energy balances under steady and non-steady conditions. Gamification principles such as exclusivity, opportunity, surprise, and competition were incorporated to boost intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. A pass/fail grading criterion for each submission, at limited times, was focused on efficacy and efficiency. A structured scoring system to vitaminise the challenges, awarded individual 5% bonuses, up to a maximum 20%, to be assigned to either exam or task marks, with no penalty for non-delivery or incorrect solutions. Grade inflation was controlled by capping improvements within 10% of students’ individual marks. The actual grade increases were therefore modest, although, remarkably, engagement and motivation significantly improved, as over 90% of students rated their experience at levels 4 or 5 on Likert-scale evaluations. Beyond academic engagement, the methodology contributed to foster key transversal skills such as problem-solving, teamwork, and decision-making under uncertainty. These findings support the potential of gamified PBL to enhance not only learning outcomes but also future professional performance. The positive reception and willingness to adopt this methodology in other subjects highlighted its potential for broader application in engineering education. • Gamification-driven project-based learning (PBL) approach. • Enhance learning in chemical engineering for biotechnology students. • Gamification principles were exclusivity, opportunity, surprise, and competition • Engagement and motivation was ranked 4/5 by 90% of students • Willingness to adopt this methodology in other subjects.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Badía et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: