Boosting Higher Education Learning Outcomes: The Structural Impact of Adaptive Gamified Environments on Students’ Cognitive Skills

Widya  Darwin; Yogi  Dian Alfana; Melri  Deswina; Jusmardi; Novi Febrianti

doi:10.69725/jebi.v3i1.365

Authors

Widya Darwin Department of Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651
Yogi Dian Alfana Department of Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651
Melri Deswina Department of Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651
Jusmardi Department of Informatics, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651
Novi Febrianti Department of Informatics, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.69725/jebi.v3i1.365

Keywords:

Adaptive Gamification, Computational Thinking, Real-World Problem-Solving, Higher Education, PLS-SEM

Abstract

Purpose—This study examines the effectiveness and structural impact of adaptive gamified learning environments on students’ computational thinking and real-world problem-solving in higher education. It specifically investigates whether Scratch-based adaptive gamification improves learning achievement and whether computational thinking contributes to students’ ability to solve authentic and complex problems.

Design/methodology/approach—This study employed a quasi-experimental nonequivalent control group design involving 60 undergraduate informatics students, equally divided into an experimental group receiving Scratch-based adaptive gamified instruction and a control group receiving conventional instruction. Learning outcomes were assessed using pre-tests, post-tests, project-based assessments, and structured classroom observations. Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s chi-square test were used to evaluate academic achievement, while Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling was applied to examine the structural relationships among adaptive gamification, computational thinking, and real-world problem-solving.

Findings—The experimental group’s mean score increased from 65.30 in the pre-test to 84.70 in the post-test, representing a gain of 19.40 points, whereas the control group’s mean score increased from 64.90 to 72.50, representing a gain of 7.60 points. Pearson’s Chi-Square test confirmed a statistically significant association between the instructional method and categorized academic achievement, χ²(1, N = 60) = 5.690, p = .017, with Cramér’s V = .308. The structural model further showed that computational thinking positively affected real-world problem-solving (β = .301, p = .006), while adaptive gamification exerted a stronger positive direct effect on real-world problem-solving (β = .553, p < .001). However, the mediating role of computational thinking requires confirmation through a bootstrapped specific indirect-effect analysis.

Originality/value—This study integrates quasi-experimental evidence of instructional effectiveness with PLS-SEM-based structural validation in a unified analytical framework. It extends adaptive gamification research beyond motivation, participation, and general academic achievement by focusing on higher-order cognitive outcomes and positioning Computational Thinking as a potential cognitive pathway connecting adaptive learning experiences with real-world problem-solving.

Implications—Higher education institutions, lecturers, instructional designers, and educational technology developers should implement adaptive gamification as an integrated instructional system rather than as a superficial collection of rewards. Personalized challenges, progressive task difficulty, diagnostic feedback, repeated experimentation, and authentic project-based scenarios should be aligned with learning objectives to strengthen computational reasoning and transferable problem-solving capabilities.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Widya Darwin, Department of Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651

Widya Darwin, S.Pd, M.Pd.T, is an academic and lecturer in the Informatics Study Program, Faculty of Engineering, Padang State University (UNP). She is active in research and community service, focusing on information technology, information systems, and technology integration in education.
Yogi Dian Alfana, Department of Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651

Yogi Dian Alfana, M.Pd.T, is an academic and lecturer at the Faculty of Engineering, specifically in the Mechanical Engineering Study Program and the Pesisir Selatan Campus Community Academy, Padang State University (UNP). He has expertise in Design and Manufacturing and is active in research, community service, and writing educational modules.
Melri Deswina, Department of Electronic Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651

Melri Deswina, S.Pd., M.Pd.T, is an academic and lecturer at Padang State University (UNP). She teaches in the field of technology and engineering education and actively conducts various research, community service, and creates intellectual property rights (IPR) in the field of appropriate technology innovation.
Jusmardi, Department of Informatics, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651

Jusmardi, S.Kom., M.Pd.T, is an academic and lecturer in the Informatics undergraduate program at the Pesisir Selatan Campus of Padang State University (UNP). His expertise and research focus lie in Vocational Education, Information Technology, and Computer Management. In addition to his active teaching career, he is known for his prolific work in higher education research, writing technology textbooks, and developing interactive teaching media and system applications.
Novi Febrianti, Department of Informatics, Faculty of Engineering, State University of Padang, Indonesia 25651

Novi Febrianti, S.ST, M.Pd.T, is an academic, lecturer, and researcher in Indonesia, known for her active publications and community service. Her expertise and research focus lie in technology and vocational education, interactive teaching media (such as Augmented Reality and animated videos for education), and entrepreneurship and culinary development.

References

Åkerfeldt, A., Kjällander, S., & Petersen, P. (2024). A research review of computational thinking and programming in education. In Technology, Pedagogy and Education (Vol. 33, Number 3). https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2024.2316087

Anderson-Gough, F., Edgley, C., Robson, K., & Sharma, N. (2022). Organizational responses to multiple logics: Diversity, identity and the professional service firm. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 103, 101336. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.AOS.2022.101336

Argelagós, E., Garcia, C., Privado, J., & Wopereis, I. (2022). Fostering information problem solving skills through online task-centred instruction in higher education. Computers and Education, 180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104433

Becker, J. M., Cheah, J. H., Gholamzade, R., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2023). PLS-SEM’s most wanted guidance. In International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management (Vol. 35, Number 1). https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-04-2022-0474

Boom, K. D., Bower, M., Siemon, J., & Arguel, A. (2022). Relationships between computational thinking and the quality of computer programs. Education and Information Technologies, 27(6). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-10921-z

Chang, T. S., Wang, H. C., Haynes, A. M. D., Song, M. M., Lai, S. Y., & Hsieh, S. H. (2022). Enhancing student creativity through an interdisciplinary, project-oriented problem-based learning undergraduate curriculum. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101173

Dybro Liengaard, B. (2024). Measurement invariance testing in partial least squares structural equation modeling. Journal of Business Research, 177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2024.114581

Gao, F. (2024). Advancing Gamification Research and Practice with Three Underexplored Ideas in Self-Determination Theory. TechTrends, 68(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-024-00968-9

Hair, J., & Alamer, A. (2022). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027

Hurt, T., Greenwald, E., Allan, S., Cannady, M. A., Krakowski, A., Brodsky, L., Collins, M. A., Montgomery, R., & Dorph, R. (2023). The computational thinking for science (CT-S) framework: operationalizing CT-S for K–12 science education researchers and educators. In International Journal of STEM Education (Vol. 10, Number 1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-022-00391-7

Hwang, G. J., Yang, C. L., Chou, K. R., & Chang, C. Y. (2022). An MDRE approach to promoting students’ learning performances in the era of the pandemic: A quasi-experimental design. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13208

Jung, J., Wang, Y., & Sanchez Barrioluengo, M. (2024). A scoping review on graduate employability in an era of ‘Technological Unemployment.’ In Higher Education Research and Development (Vol. 43, Number 3). https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2023.2292660

Kang, C., Liu, N., Zhu, Y., Li, F., & Zeng, P. (2023). Developing College students’ computational thinking multidimensional test based on Life Story situations. Education and Information Technologies, 28(3). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11189-z

Khaldi, A., Bouzidi, R., & Nader, F. (2023). Gamification of e-learning in higher education: a systematic literature review. In Smart Learning Environments (Vol. 10, Number 1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-023-00227-z

Kırmacı, Ö., & Kılıç Çakmak, E. (2025). The impact of scenario-based online gamified learning environment tailored to player types on student motivation, engagement, and environment interaction. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 57(4). https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2024.2323447

Kurtaliqi, F., Lancelot Miltgen, C., Viglia, G., & Pantin-Sohier, G. (2024). Using advanced mixed methods approaches: Combining PLS-SEM and qualitative studies. Journal of Business Research, 172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2023.114464

Lee, S. J., Francom, G. M., & Nuatomue, J. (2022). Computer science education and K-12 students’ computational thinking: A systematic review. International Journal of Educational Research, 114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2022.102008

Li, L., Hew, K. F., & Du, J. (2024). Gamification enhances student intrinsic motivation, perceptions of autonomy and relatedness, but minimal impact on competency: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72(2). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10337-7

Lucas, M., Bem-haja, P., Santos, S., Figueiredo, H., Ferreira Dias, M., & Amorim, M. (2022). Digital proficiency: Sorting real gaps from myths among higher education students. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13220

Martella, A. M., Martella, R. C., Yatcilla, J. K., Newson, A., Shannon, E. N., & Voorhis, C. (2023). How Rigorous is Active Learning Research in STEM Education? An Examination of Key Internal Validity Controls in Intervention Studies. In Educational Psychology Review (Vol. 35, Number 4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-023-09826-1

Maxwell, J. A. (2022). Response to David Morgan on Triangulation. In Journal of Mixed Methods Research (Vol. 16, Number 4). https://doi.org/10.1177/15586898221122758

Murillo-Zamorano, L. R., López-Sánchez, J. Á., López-Rey, M. J., & Bueno-Muñoz, C. (2023). Gamification in higher education: The ECOn+ star battles. Computers and Education, 194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104699

Nguyen-Viet, B., Nguyen-Duy, C., & Nguyen-Viet, B. (2025). How does gamification affect learning effectiveness? The mediating roles of engagement, satisfaction, and intrinsic motivation. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2414356

Oliveira, W., Hamari, J., Joaquim, S., Toda, A. M., Palomino, P. T., Vassileva, J., & Isotani, S. (2022). The effects of personalized gamification on students’ flow experience, motivation, and enjoyment. Smart Learning Environments, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00194-x

Oliveira, W., Hamari, J., Shi, L., Toda, A. M., Rodrigues, L., Palomino, P. T., & Isotani, S. (2023). Tailored gamification in education: A literature review and future agenda. Education and Information Technologies, 28(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11122-4

Qiao, S., Yeung, S. S. sze, Shen, X., & Chu, S. K. W. (2022). The effects of a gamified morphological awareness intervention on students’ cognitive, motivational and affective outcomes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13178

Ringle, C. M., Sarstedt, M., Sinkovics, N., & Sinkovics, R. R. (2023). A perspective on using partial least squares structural equation modelling in data articles. Data in Brief, 48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dib.2023.109074

Santhosh, M., Farooqi, H., Ammar, M., Siby, N., Bhadra, J., Al-Thani, N. J., Sellami, A., Fatima, N., & Ahmad, Z. (2023). A Meta-Analysis to Gauge the Effectiveness of STEM Informal Project-Based Learning: Investigating the Potential Moderator Variables. In Journal of Science Education and Technology (Vol. 32, Number 5). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-023-10063-y

Sarstedt, M., Hair, J. F., Pick, M., Liengaard, B. D., Radomir, L., & Ringle, C. M. (2022). Progress in partial least squares structural equation modeling use in marketing research in the last decade. Psychology and Marketing, 39(5). https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21640

Scheuring, F., & Thompson, J. (2025). Enhancing graduate employability–exploring the influence of experiential simulation learning on life skill development. Studies in Higher Education, 50(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2334837

Seraji, F., & olsadat Musavi, H. (2023). Does applying the principles of constructivism learning add to the popularity of serious games? A systematic mixed studies review. Entertainment Computing, 47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.entcom.2023.100585

Veldkamp, A., Rebecca Niese, J., Heuvelmans, M., Knippels, M. C. P. J., & van Joolingen, W. R. (2022). You escaped! How did you learn during gameplay? British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(5). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13194

Xiao, Y., & Hew, K. F. (2024). Personalised gamification enhances student participation but produces mixed effects on emotional and cognitive engagements: a systematic review. In Interactive Learning Environments (Vol. 32, Number 10). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2023.2299977

Xu, W., Xu, G. R., & Xing, Q. W. (2025). The impact of different combinations of game elements for gamified learning in higher education on student learning outcomes: a multilevel meta-analysis. Studies in Higher Education, 50(11). https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2416498

Zhang, H., Li, F., & Yan, H. (2025). Causal mechanisms of the psychological needs for online gamified learning and the impact on learning engagement among college students. Interactive Learning Environments, 33(3). https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2412088

Zheng, Q. M., Li, Y. Y., Yin, Q., Zhang, N., Wang, Y. P., Li, G. X., & Sun, Z. G. (2023). The effectiveness of problem-based learning compared with lecture-based learning in surgical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Medical Education, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-023-04531-7

Zhong, L. (2022). Incorporating personalized learning in a role-playing game environment via SID model: a pilot study of impact on learning performance and cognitive load. Smart Learning Environments, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-022-00219-5

Zitouniatis, A., Lazarinis, F., & Kanellopoulos, D. (2023). Teaching computational thinking using scenario-based learning tools. Education and Information Technologies, 28(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11366-0