Formative evaluation demonstrates high usability but polarized reception toward gamification in undergraduate students, indicating the necessity of opt-in design features.
Students in higher education often face challenges related to motivation, self-regulation, and engagement. This article presents TIRIA, a user-centered learning analytics dashboard designed for Moodle and adaptable to other Learning Management Systems (LMSs), and reports a formative evaluation of its high-fidelity prototype. The design followed a Design Thinking methodology informed by a targeted literature review, interviews with 10 instructors and 9 students, and iterative prototyping. TIRIA integrates visual analytics, personalized feedback, and a gamification layer (points, badges, goal-setting, and a virtual assistant), aligned with Self-Regulated Learning (SRL) theory and interpreted through Self-Determination Theory (SDT). Because the evaluation used a Figma prototype populated with mock data rather than a deployed integration, the study reports perceptions rather than learning outcomes. Six undergraduate students completed think-aloud sessions, a semi-structured interview, and a survey combining the System Usability Scale (SUS), a Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) measure, and two five-item measures adapted from learning analytics quality indicators and from gamification research. Participants rated usability highly (SUS = 93.75, PEOU = 4.75) and consistently valued organizational features, while responses to the gamification layer were markedly polarized (individual means ranging from 1.2 to 5.0). The article contributes a documented design case mapping features to SRL phases and SDT constructs, formative evidence supporting an opt-in approach to gamification, and implementation considerations covering privacy and Moodle integration. Findings are exploratory and require confirmation through deployment in an authentic learning environment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Azad et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: