In short
- Gamification is the use of game design elements in non-game contexts, which is different from teaching through a complete game.
- Meta-analyses found small to medium positive effects on learning, with weaker and less stable effects on motivation.
- Different elements seem to do different jobs: badges and progress graphs support a sense of competence, while teammates and stories support belonging.
- Reviews of English classes report positive effects, but they cannot yet say which elements caused them, and public rankings carry real risks.
Few classroom ideas have spread as fast as gamification. Points, badges and leaderboards now sit inside most learning apps, and many English teachers run their own versions on paper. The research has grown too, and it gives a more careful answer than the enthusiasm suggests. This article explains what gamification is and is not, reports what the meta-analyses found, and looks at which elements seem to matter. It then covers the evidence for English classes, the risks, and a set-up you can try.
What is gamification in the language classroom?
Gamification is the use of game design elements in non-game contexts. That is the definition Deterding, Dixon, Khaled and Nacke (2011) proposed, and most research uses it. In an English class, the context is ordinary language learning. The elements are things like points for practice, badges for stories finished, levels, team goals or a story frame around a unit.
It helps to be clear about what gamification is not:
- It is not game-based learning. Playing a complete game, such as a word game or a simulation, to learn something is a different approach with its own research.
- It is not simply fun. A lively lesson with no game elements is not gamified, and a gamified lesson can be dull.
- It is not one thing. A leaderboard and a team quest are both gamification, but they may affect pupils in opposite ways.
The distinction matters for evidence. Research on games tells you little about points and badges, and the reverse. For word games themselves, see Do Word Games Really Improve Vocabulary Retention?
What meta-analyses found for learning and motivation
Sailer and Homner (2020) pooled experimental studies of gamification in education. They found small positive effects on cognitive learning outcomes (g = 0.49, 19 studies), motivational outcomes (g = 0.36, 16 studies) and behavioural outcomes (g = 0.25, 9 studies). Only the effect on learning held up when they kept the most rigorous studies. The effects on motivation and behaviour were less stable.
Bai, Hew and Huang (2020) analysed 30 interventions from 24 studies, with 3,202 participants in all. They found a medium effect on academic performance in favour of gamification (g = 0.504). The size of the effect did not differ significantly with the type or the number of game elements used.
The same paper synthesised qualitative data on what students said. Students liked gamification because it fostered enthusiasm, gave feedback on performance, met a need for recognition and helped them set goals. Those who disliked it said it added nothing useful, or that it caused anxiety or jealousy.
Games themselves offer a useful caution. Wouters, van Nimwegen, van Oostendorp and van der Spek (2013) pooled studies of serious games. Games produced more learning (d = 0.29) and better retention (d = 0.36) than conventional teaching. But they were not significantly more motivating. A fun format does not guarantee measurably higher motivation.
Two limits apply to all of this. Most of the studies in Sailer and Homner (2020) took place in higher education, and only a few in schools. And average effects hide a wide spread: some gamified courses did much better than their comparison, and some did worse.
Which game elements seem to matter?
Sailer, Hense, Mayr and Mandl (2017) tested specific elements in a randomised study using an online simulation. Badges, leaderboards and performance graphs raised participants' sense of competence and of the task's meaningfulness. Avatars, a meaningful story and teammates raised their sense of social relatedness. No element changed how free participants felt to make decisions. The authors conclude that gamification is not effective in itself; specific elements have specific effects.
Sailer and Homner (2020) found two features that stood out for behavioural outcomes: game fiction, meaning a story or game world around the task, and competition combined with collaboration. The combination of competition and collaboration may also help motivation. The authors still describe the factors behind successful gamification as somewhat unresolved.
| Element | In an English class | What it seems to do | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Badges | A badge for finishing five stories at A2 | Supports a sense of competence | Sailer and colleagues (2017) |
| Progress graph | A chart of words learned each week | Supports a sense of competence and meaningful work | Sailer and colleagues (2017) |
| Leaderboard | A ranked list of pupils' points | Supports competence for some; can lower motivation for others | Sailer and colleagues (2017); Hanus and Fox (2015) |
| Story frame | A unit framed as a journey with stages | Supports belonging; helped behavioural outcomes | Sailer and colleagues (2017); Sailer and Homner (2020) |
| Teams | Groups that pool points against other groups | Supports belonging; competition plus collaboration did well | Sailer and colleagues (2017); Sailer and Homner (2020) |
| Number of elements | Adding more elements at once | No significant difference in learning effects | Bai, Hew and Huang (2020) |
Read the table as a set of leads, not rules. The single study of specific elements used an online simulation, not a language class.
What the evidence says for English classes
For English as a second language, the main review is by Dehghanzadeh, Fardanesh, Hatami, Talaee and Noroozi (2021). They studied 22 publications from 2008 to 2019 on digital gamification for learning English. The studies reported positive effects on learners' experiences and on their learning outcomes. Learners described gamified English learning as enjoyable, engaging, motivating and fun.
The review's key limit is a striking one. None of the 22 publications linked specific gamification elements to the experiences or outcomes they reported. So for English classes, the honest summary is this: gamified practice is usually received well, but nobody can yet say which elements did the work.
We found no meta-analysis of gamified reading in English for pupils aged 8 to 16. Much of the general evidence comes from university courses. Treat any gamified English scheme as a trial, and check what it does for your own pupils. The pillar guide sets gamification beside the wider research on reading motivation.
The risks: when gamification backfires
The clearest warning comes from Hanus and Fox (2015). University students on one course had a leaderboard and badges for 16 weeks; a second course had the same curriculum without them. Students on the gamified course showed less motivation, satisfaction and empowerment over time, and scored lower on the final exam. Fair Reading Competitions: Why Level Matching Matters looks at what this means for leaderboards.
Four risks follow from the research above, and the last two are our reasoning:
- Public ranking. Students in Bai, Hew and Huang (2020) reported anxiety and jealousy. A pupil near the bottom of a public list may stop trying.
- No added value. Some students said gamification added nothing. Points stuck onto an unchanged worksheet give pupils little reason to care.
- Points become the goal. If points come from logging in or clicking fast, pupils will chase them in those ways. Points must come from the language work itself.
- Rewards that crowd out interest. Points work partly as rewards. Reading Rewards, Badges and Streaks covers when rewards help and when they lower later interest.
How to gamify an English class without the downsides
This plan applies the findings above. It has not been tested as a package, so adjust it to your class.
- Start from the language task. Decide what pupils should read, practise or produce, then add elements that make progress on it visible.
- Show progress first, rank later or never. Badges and progress graphs supported a sense of competence without needing a public ranking.
- Compete as teams. Pupils cooperate inside a team and teams compete, so every member's work counts.
- Add a story frame if it fits. A unit framed as a journey through stages costs little and may help.
- Keep individual results private. Show team totals in public.
Classroom example: a reading quest for a B1 class
A class of 30 pupils aged 13 reads a graded reader over four weeks, framed as a journey with four stages, one per week. Teams of five earn points for chapters read and checked with three quick questions, and for new words used correctly in a short weekly retelling. A progress map on the wall shows each team's stage. Badges mark a first chapter finished without help and a full week of reading. The teacher shows team totals only, and talks individual progress through with each pupil privately.
To build a team score that depends on every pupil, see House Reading Competitions.
How iRead handles this
In iRead, four word games are regenerated every 24 hours from the vocabulary of the story the class is reading, with no teacher setup. Badges unlock automatically in tiers and track streaks, hint-free clears and mastery across games. In the daily run, reading is the only way to score, and schools are matched only against schools at the same CEFR level. Public leaderboards show school-level results only, never individual students.
The core principle: Gamify the language work, not the screen time. Each element should make real progress visible, and teams should compete rather than individuals being ranked in public.
See it in iRead: In the daily run, students on the same global pack read the same levelled story and play the same daily game. Reading is the only way to score, and leaderboards show school results only.
See the daily competitionKey takeaway
Gamification helps learning a little on average, and its effect on motivation is less certain. Choose elements that show progress, prefer teams to public rankings, and check what your own pupils do with it.
Frequently asked questions
What is gamification in ESL?
It is the use of game design elements, such as points, badges, levels, team goals or a story frame, in ordinary English lessons. It differs from game-based learning, where pupils learn by playing a complete game. Deterding and colleagues (2011) define gamification as game design elements in non-game contexts.
Does gamification improve language learning?
On average, a little. Meta-analyses found small to medium positive effects on learning across subjects. A review of 22 studies on learning English reported positive effects, but none of those studies linked specific game elements to the gains (Dehghanzadeh and colleagues, 2021). Evidence for school-age readers is thin.
Does gamification increase student motivation?
Sometimes. Sailer and Homner (2020) found a small positive effect on motivation, but it was less stable than the effect on learning. In Hanus and Fox (2015), a leaderboard and badges lowered motivation over a semester. The elements chosen, and how results are shown, make the difference.
Are leaderboards good for the language classroom?
Use them with care. Leaderboards can support a sense of competence, but public rankings were linked to lower motivation in one course study, and students elsewhere reported anxiety and jealousy. Team leaderboards, with individual results kept private, are a safer choice for mixed-level classes.
Is gamification the same as game-based learning?
No. Gamification adds game elements, such as points, badges or team goals, to ordinary tasks. Game-based learning uses a complete game as the task. The evidence differs too: Wouters and colleagues (2013) found that serious games improved learning and retention but were not significantly more motivating than conventional teaching.
Sources
- Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining "gamification". Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference, 9-15. ACM. doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040
- Sailer, M., & Homner, L. (2020). The gamification of learning: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32(1), 77-112. doi.org/10.1007/s10648-019-09498-w
- Bai, S., Hew, K. F., & Huang, B. (2020). Does gamification improve student learning outcome? Evidence from a meta-analysis and synthesis of qualitative data in educational contexts. Educational Research Review, 30, 100322. doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100322
- Sailer, M., Hense, J. U., Mayr, S. K., & Mandl, H. (2017). How gamification motivates: An experimental study of the effects of specific game design elements on psychological need satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 371-380. doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.12.033
- Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., & van der Spek, E. D. (2013). A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(2), 249-265. doi.org/10.1037/a0031311
- Dehghanzadeh, H., Fardanesh, H., Hatami, J., Talaee, E., & Noroozi, O. (2021). Using gamification to support learning English as a second language: A systematic review. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(7), 934-957. doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1648298
- Hanus, M. D., & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152-161. doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.08.019