**Abstract:** Confinement due to the COVID-19 pandemic has hastened an educational shift from face-to-face to online classrooms. This distanced education seeks to achieve learning goals mediated by technology as they would be achieved in the face-to-face classroom, without ignoring the psychological and social impact that COVID-19 has had on students and teachers. Faced with this situation, the use of online educational escape rooms has been proposed as a motivating strategy for students to review curriculum content in a cooperative and fun way. A qualitative investigation was carried out to explore the perceptions of university students in the Social Education degree program after the implementation of an educational escape room. Our main findings are that most students found that it allowed them to interact with their peers beyond traditional education, that it was useful for their learning and that it was a pleasant activity. However, it was also mentioned that it can be a stressful activity as being an online activity, some students may have connectivity problems. It is concluded that online escape rooms can be active and effective learning strategies for university students.

**Keywords:** escape room; educative innovation; cooperative learning; higher education

#### **1. Introduction**

During the period of health emergency and confinement caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the educational system from early childhood education to university education has had to adapt its face-to-face methodology to an online methodology in a hasty and forced manner [1]. The transition to that virtual model was the only opportunity to continue teaching. However, it was limited by different factors, including the digital divide across students, the lack of digital resources and the scarce training of teachers in digital skills [2].

In addition, the witnessing of a global pandemic and the confinement have been a challenge for the mental health of both teachers and students due to increased feelings of uncertainty, stress, and anxiety [3]. These feelings can create unfavorable effects on learning and psychological health [4].

To try to alleviate these negative effects on the mental health of students and promote motivating teaching, it is necessary to implement active learning strategies that can be recreated in online teaching. This research explored the perceptions of university students regarding the use of a playful learning strategy, educational escape rooms, during confinement in Spain in the second quarter of the 2020–2021 academic year. Escape rooms are immersive narrative games in which participants are required to solve puzzles to escape from a room. Escape rooms are currently a popular leisure activity for young people. A global survey found that 19% of escape room players are young, under 21 years old [5], so it could be an interesting activity to adapt it and use it in college education. Escape rooms are an innovative and playful educational strategy that is increasingly incorporated into education and research. Their main benefit is that they can facilitate motivation toward learning through playful challenges.

**Citation:** Manzano-León, A.;

Aguilar-Parra, J.M.; Rodríguez-Ferrer, J.M.; Trigueros, R.; Collado-Soler, R.; Méndez-Aguado, C.; García-Hernández, M.J.; Molina-Alonso, L. Online Escape Room during COVID-19: A Qualitative Study of Social Education Degree Students' Experiences. *Educ. Sci.* **2021**, *11*, 426. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci11080426

Academic Editor: Huei Tse Hou

Received: 22 July 2021 Accepted: 10 August 2021 Published: 12 August 2021

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

Escape rooms have a direct relationship with gamification due to their playful nature that favors positive behavior [6]. Different systematic and meta-analysis reviews indicate that this playful strategy has an overall positive effect on student learning, participation, and academic performance, as well as an improvement in school motivation [7–9].

Mainly in university education, research has been carried out in health sciences, particularly in nursing, showing that escape rooms can be very effective in consolidating routines, concepts, and basic procedures for professional development and at the same time, teach important skills to deal with stressful situations under time pressures [10–12]. They are also used in other areas of knowledge such as social sciences. For example, after conducting an escape room, master's students showed a statistically significant improvement in their academic performance, educational flow, and classroom climate, as well as qualitatively confirming that escape rooms can be fun and motivating for students [13]. However, escape rooms, like other playful strategies such as game-based learning or gamification, have possible disadvantages to consider, such as potentially consuming too much time, excessive competitiveness between students, too much noise can be generated or the playful content can exceed educational objectives [14].

Recent studies on their educational use during the pandemic confinement offer promising results with some limitations. For example, the study carried out by Da Silva [15] showed that the use of an interactive game-based application created a pleasant learning environment, although both the control group (that conducted their class in a traditional way) and the experimental group obtained similar results in learning outcomes. On the other hand, the use of gamified digital platforms such as Classcraft were also effective in improving student engagement during confinement, however, in the long term, students may have difficulties participating with asynchronous tools [16].

Other studies indicate that educational escape rooms under normal conditions have benefits in the motivation, engagement, and learning outcomes of the students [17–19]. For this reason, we proposed a qualitative research study that explores the reflections of university students in educational sciences on the use of escape rooms to review curricular content during the confinement of COVID-19. Our research hypotheses are: (1) the students will consider the escape room fun and motivating; (2) the escape room will have a positive impact on their learning; and (3) the escape room is going to be an effective strategy for online teaching.

#### **2. Materials and Methods**

#### *2.1. Participants*

This study implemented an educationally innovative program through escape rooms in the subject of "Socio-educational Programs in Children, Youth, Adults and Seniors" in the degree of Social Education at the University of Almería during the 2019/2020 academic year. This subject is part of the annual training itinerary for the degree in Social Education, which is divided into 5 subjects per semester. The main objective of this subject is to explore and design socio-educational programs for different groups in situations of social vulnerability.

This subject is divided into a theoretical part where the teacher traditionally exposes the curricular contents and a practical part where the students delve into the design of social programs. The objective of using an escape room is to sensitize students to gender violence in a relationship and learn about programs to prevent or alleviate gender violence, since gender violence is a topic of the subject.

This escape room was designed so that the students of this subject could participate voluntarily. The teams that participated in the escape room got 0.25 extra points in the practices of the subject.

To select the participants, a convenience sample was chosen. The inclusion criterion for the experimental group was a willingness to participate in the escape room organized by the teaching staff. A total of 56 students (41 women and 15 men, aged between 19 and 44 years) participated in the escape room and voluntarily answered the online survey of open questions.

All participants received information about the project and gave written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Prior to data collection, the students were informed about the nature of the study and were assured of their anonymity. Ethics approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Almería (Ref. UALBIO 2021/01).

#### *2.2. Design and Implementation of the Educational Escape Room*

In the second semester (a four-month period) of the 2019/2020 academic year, home confinement occurred in Spain, therefore all theoretical and practical teaching was carried out online. For this reason, the escape room was designed online, with the Wix and Genially platforms, and was implemented cooperatively through the Blackboard teaching platform.

The escape room (see Figure 1) consisted of 4 rooms in a family home where each team of students determined what happened since María (a fictional character) disappeared. After several puzzles and challenges, the narrative is resolved when the students learn that María has managed to report her abusive husband and is in a safe shelter together with her young son. The escape room is available at the following link: https://diversatics.wixsite. com/escapeduso (accessed on 11 August 2021).

**Figure 1.** Escape room design.

In the class schedule, it was explained to the students that they were going to complete an escape room and what is involved. The students were randomly divided into teams of 4 to 6 players in the online work rooms and the escape room link was provided. The teacher acted as a game master for any doubts that students had throughout the escape room.

#### *2.3. Instruments*

After conducting the escape room, the students were asked to voluntarily answer a qualitative online questionnaire with open questions [20]. An ad hoc questionnaire with six open questions was designed, with the Google Forms platform, to find out the opinions of the students about their experience in the escape room. This format was used to respect anonymity so that students could freely express their opinions regarding the escape room. The general rules of the escape room were:

Table 1 summarizes the challenges for each room, mechanics, and related learning objectives.

With these playful challenges, it was intended that students reinforce this part of the subject's content (gender violence) through an attractive experience. Previous research shows how escape rooms, thanks to their challenging design and cooperative learning capacity, facilitate student learning [21,22].

#### *2.4. Data Analysis*

An online open question survey was proposed for the students to voluntarily answer once they had completed the escape room. The data analysis was carried out through content analysis based on grounded theory [23]. As the survey was online, the transcription was automatic and was introduced in the ATLAS.ti software for Mac (version 9, ATLAS.ti Scientific Software Development GmbH, Berlin, Germany). An in-depth analysis of categories with labels was carried out. Related codes were grouped into subtopics, and overlapping subtopics were grouped together (See Figure 2).

#### **3. Results**

After the analysis of the interviews were conducted with the students, the following categories were identified (see Figure 2 and Table 2).

**Table 2.** *Cont.*

#### *3.1. Fun Experience*

Escape rooms have been established as a recreational leisure mode and their use in education is beginning to be investigated due to students' interest. Based on the opinions of the students, it can be affirmed that the majority of students perceive the use of educational escape rooms as a playful and immersive experience, coinciding with previous research [13,19,24].

The students considered the different challenges to be balanced with their abilities and to be a pleasant challenge for them, thus they had fun and were motivated to get out of the escape room. This translated into a greater educational flow [25] and in turn, to greater participation and engagement [26], as mentioned by the students. For example, a student stated that "(The escape room) has been very dynamic. It makes you focused on getting out on time and solving the case, you want to know what happened to the woman and you understand the background of the character and feel relieved when you find out that she is fine". The fact that the escape room had a narrative related to the profession of the students encouraged a greater connection and participation.

Positive emotions have a direct relationship with fun and engagement [27]. The students primarily mentioned the enjoyment of completing the escape room. Previous research has found that playful strategies connect with students and can make them enjoy the teaching [28]. When a situation is pleasant and excites students, it encourages their commitment. On the contrary, some students mentioned that they felt nervous or confused during the escape room, which is an aspect for improvement when designing these strategies in the classroom. To reduce these feelings, an initial tutorial could be added on how escape rooms and clues work in each of the rooms, just like other escape room-themed board games.

#### *3.2. Learning and Teamwork*

This research aimed to explore the use of escape rooms as an educational strategy to strengthen curricular knowledge in university education. The students considered that in addition to the fun that an escape room can produce, it can also be an effective tool to raise awareness about a certain topic, in this case gender violence, and strengthen the theoretical knowledge taught in the subject.

Additionally, working in teams was well-received by the students. The cooperation and relationships between classmates were highly valued. They affirmed that they felt cohesive and enjoyed working in a group, for example: "It has been easy to coordinate as a team, it has been a long time since we met to do things together in class and I liked going back to that" and "I liked learning to play escape room, and more with my classmates, like this it was very enjoyable to learn and review what we saw in class".

#### *3.3. Possible Improvements*

During the interview, students were asked to mention what they did not like about the escape room or what could be improved. It should be noted that some of the students said that there was nothing to improve. However, any educational activity has a range of improvement. When designing educational escape rooms, it must be taken into account that it is likely that some students have not completed an escape room before or have not played a game for years, making it necessary for the explanation, prior to beginning the escape room, of what they have to do and what they can expect from a team escape room. Still, the perceptions of some students showed that they felt stress or fear of failing from not knowing how to continue without continuous cues.

Technical difficulties are also mentioned regarding hardware (problems with headphones to talk to other colleagues) and software (slow internet connection and problems loading web pages). This has been a big problem for tele-teaching, especially during the confinement period. The university educational system particularly has had problems adjusting from face-to-face teaching to 100% online teaching and some students did not have the necessary resources for its adequate implementation. The lack of resources and the digital divide have been great challenges during the confinement by the COVID-19 pandemic [29]. One of the reasons for conducting the escape room cooperatively was so that the students could help each other if there was a problem, being able to share their screen and carry out the missions as a team. However, it would be highly recommended to be able to offer technical solutions to the students on top of this to facilitate online teaching.

#### **4. Discussion and Conclusions**

The main purpose of the application of an online escape room in a university degree course was to offer an innovative learning experience different from the traditional classroom during the COVID-19 pandemic. Designing active learning experiences for students during forced online classes was and continues to be a challenge for university faculties.

The objective of this research was to analyze the perception of the students of the Social Education degree program on the use of educational escape rooms during the 2019–2020 academic year. For this, an escape room was designed related to its content on gender violence in the subject of "Socio-educational Programs in Childhood, Youth, Adults and Seniors", based on a case of gender violence during confinement due to COVID-19 restrictions.

Firstly, it sought to provide new learning experiences that are motivating for students, with the aim of producing positive feelings about the subject to increase their participation, beyond connecting to the online class. This escape room was also made to simulate a real case that they could have as social education professionals, so they have interactive resources that could be useful for their professional future. Previous studies mention the importance of teaching practical content to university students and the benefits of simulations [30], as well as the playful and motivating nature of educational escape rooms [31]. Our results confirmed that escape rooms in university education can awaken the curiosity, participation, and motivation of students. Coinciding with our results, the motivation achieved in the escape rooms has been one of the main advantages found in most of the research on this strategy [32–34].

In addition, the cooperative character of the game allows students to work on other essential competencies in their professional future, communication, and teamwork. The students widely emphasized that they enjoyed working as a team with other classmates. Facilitating activities where students must cooperate favors their social skills such as communication, empathy, respect, and negotiation [35]. Our results coincide with previous studies that indicate escape rooms can be valid tools to promote teamwork, favoring

interaction between students in small groups, and working on the curricular content in a playful and cooperative way [36].

In general, the students perceived this activity as pleasant and educational, except for a small percentage who suggested that they felt nervous during the activity. In future applications of the escape room, we will try to offer a better initial orientation and offer more feedback during the activity so that participants do not feel incapable of solving the puzzles. This limitation of the tool has been found in other investigations, for example, after the application of an escape room in the degree program of Social Education, the majority of students gave a positive assessment to the activity, however a minority of participants reported having suffered stress and frustration [37].

This study has limitations. First, as it was not an interview, it was not possible to delve into the students' responses that could offer a greater perspective and reflection on the use of escape rooms in the classroom. Second, being a qualitative study and having a relatively small sample, the results are not generalizable.

Future research could study the quantitative impact of escape rooms on academic performance, motivation, and the acquisition of social skills through longitudinal experimental studies with a control group. In addition, its use in combination with other active learning strategies, such as cooperative learning and project-based learning, could be investigated.

This research was concluded by evaluating the use of educational escape rooms specifically our escape room for the degree program of Social Education—to strengthen the knowledge of university education students and to value them as a motivating strategy, which favors cooperative learning and encourages participation and engagement, even in such adverse circumstances as confinement due to COVID-19.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, A.M.-L. and J.M.R.-F.; methodology, J.M.A.-P.; formal analysis, L.M.-A. and M.J.G.-H.; investigation, M.J.G.-H.; data curation, J.M.A.-P.; writing—original draft preparation, A.M.-L., R.C.-S. and C.M.-A.; writing—review and editing, A.M.-L.; visualization, R.C.-S. and C.M.-A.; supervision, R.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research has been funded, in part, by the Ministry of Universities through the University Teacher Training Program (FPU2019). The support of the Ministry does not imply acceptance of its contents, which is the sole responsibility of the authors.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of University of Almería (UALBIO 2021/01).

**Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

**Data Availability Statement:** The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**

### *Systematic Review* **Gamification in Physical Education: A Systematic Review**

**Víctor Arufe-Giráldez 1,\*, Alberto Sanmiguel-Rodríguez 2, Oliver Ramos-Álvarez 1,3 and Rubén Navarro-Patón <sup>4</sup>**

**Abstract:** Background: In the last 10 years, gamification has entered the educational field incrementally. The subject of Physical Education has been one of the scenarios where multiple gamified learning environments were carried out. The objective of this work was to evaluate and analyze the scientific evidence of the pedagogical proposals and didactic experiences that have used gamification in the Physical Education classroom in Kindergarten, Elementary School and Middle, Junior and High School. Methods: A systematic review has been carried out following the recommendations set by the PRISMA Declaration. A total of five international databases were used: Web of Science (WoS), Scopus, Sport Discus, ERIC and Psycinfo. The descriptors "gamification", "gamify" and "Physical Education" were used, limiting the search to December 2021. Several inclusion and exclusion criteria have been established, selecting only empirical research articles. Results: The search yielded a total of 177 eligible articles, and finally, 17 scientific articles that addressed the effects of gamification in Physical Education were selected. No gamified didactic experiences have been found in Early Childhood Education, but they have been found in Elementary School (7 experiences) and Middle, Junior and High School Education (10 experiences). Most of the studies have confirmed an improvement in motivation and commitment toward physical exercise in students; only one study has confirmed improvements in academic performance. The diversity of the applied protocols and the different evaluation instruments used by the researchers prevent a meta-analysis of the data. Some studies that have used a hybrid pedagogical model are recorded, combining gamification with other pedagogical models, and confirmed positive effects on different variables such as intrinsic motivation or autonomy in learning. Conclusion: The results of this review suggest the need to continue evaluating the effects of applying gamification, as an active methodology, in the Physical Education classroom.

**Keywords:** gamification; physical education; pedagogical models; active methodologies; motivation

#### **1. Introduction**

A recent literature review on what quality Physical Education is like concludes, among other aspects, that it should use active methodologies [1].

Active methodologies are those that seek greater learning by students, enhancing their sociability and teamwork, meaningful learning and critical thinking, and learning interactivity [2].

The student becomes an active part in the process of building knowledge, following the principles of neuroeducation: experimentation, curiosity, emotion, motivation and attention [3]. On the other hand, the teacher assumes the role of a guide or facilitator of learning. In recent years, active methodologies have captured the attention of many researchers and adopted an exponential growth evolution [4]. In addition, multiple benefits are confirmed, in its implementation, not only in face-to-face education and in different areas of knowledge and educational stages [5–9] but also in non-attendance [10]. Among

**Citation:** Arufe-Giráldez, V.; Sanmiguel-Rodríguez, A.; Ramos-Álvarez, O.; Navarro-Patón, R. Gamification in Physical Education: A Systematic Review. *Educ. Sci.* **2022**, *12*, 540. https:// doi.org/10.3390/educsci12080540

Academic Editor: Huei Tse Hou

Received: 18 July 2022 Accepted: 8 August 2022 Published: 10 August 2022

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

the so-called active methodologies is gamification, in addition to Inverted Learning, Project-Based Learning and Game-Based Learning, among others.

Educational gamification is a technique that consists of transferring the mechanics of games and video games to the educational field, with the aim of seeking behavior modification. Thus, it creates attractive and interesting didactic experiences to increase the motivation of the students, their commitment and learning of the contents of the subject or the enjoyment of the pedagogical tasks themselves, always using the motivational elements of the games [11].

Well-planned and correctly implemented gamification in the classroom generates in students a certain sense of control and assumption of responsibility in the teaching–learning process. Being able to also contribute effectively so that students focus and enjoy more in the construction of learning than in studying just to pass the exam [12].

The latest literature reviews carried out by different authors on gamification in education confirm an annual increase in the number of publications on this subject [13–17] and a focus on three aspects: the use of video games in educational settings, the effects of technology on learning and the study of flipped classroom experiences [18]. One of these reviews [16] used the scientific mapping method, visualizing that gamification has been implemented in different areas, but highlighted the educational field. This has attracted the largest number of investigations related to improving the motivation, commitment and performance of students participating in gamified experiences, as well as the study of gamification combined with other technologies, such as social networks, virtual and augmented reality or mobile applications.

It should also be noted that the application of gamification in the Physical Education (PE) classroom is compatible with other active methodologies and/or PE pedagogical models that have shown positive effects on student learning, such as cooperative learning, service learning, sports education, adventure education or the movement-oriented practice model, among others, addressed by multiple authors [19–24]. Even some researchers [25,26] confirm greater advantages in the hybrid implementation of pedagogical models over isolated implementation, justifying that the former can promote results in many different domains, overcoming the limitations of individual pedagogical models.

Due to all these antecedents, the objective of this work was to carry out a systematic review of the empirical research articles that have addressed the effects of the creation of gamified learning environments (GLE) in the PE classroom in Kindergarten, Elementary School and Middle, Junior and High School. This article seeks to compile and synthesize, in a single document, all the results of original research related to gamification in PE that were published until 2021 (inclusive) in peer-reviewed scientific journals indexed in five leading international databases.

#### **2. Materials and Methods**

A systematic review has been carried out on the creation of GLE in PE in the different educational stages. Given the heterogeneity of the nomenclature of the educational stages in the educational systems of countries around the world, in this study, it has been decided to establish 3 school educational stages based on the age range of the subjects of the research sample, thus establishing the following: Kindergarten (0–6 years), Elementary School (6–12 years) and Middle, Junior and High School (12–18 years). Systematic review has been chosen because it is a type of research through which researchers summarize evidence in a certain field of knowledge or topic, using a rigorous process (to minimize biases) through which the studies are identified, evaluated and synthesized in order to respond to the research objective and establish the main conclusions about the analyzed documents [27].

#### *2.1. Protocol and Registration*

The recommendations of the PRISMA Declaration [28] were used to carry out this systematic review. A total of 27 items indicated by said declaration were fulfilled.

#### *2.2. Eligibility and Risk Criteria*

With the aim of evaluating the possible risks of biasing the information, the following inclusion criteria have been developed (Table 1), applied in the search phase of the manuscripts and in the phase of preparing the results.

**Table 1.** Publication selection process and inclusion and exclusion criteria.

#### *2.3. Information Sources*

To ensure the correct choice of information sources, it was decided to include 5 international databases in the search, arguing the following reasons:

#### *2.4. Search*

The search was carried out in January 2022. The scientific articles that resulted from the combination of the following descriptors were included: ["Gamification" OR "Gamify"] AND "Physical Education"; selecting as search fields: title, keywords, abstract or subject. The search deadline was set to 31 December 2021. Subsequently, all the references that were extracted were uploaded to the Proquest© Refworks bibliographic manager, where the filtering was carried out to find duplicates, and the registered articles were filtered.

Five phases of the systematic review were established. In the first, the databases in which the search for bibliographic references on gamification and PE would be carried out were determined and the terms to be searched and the combination of Boolean operators were agreed upon. In the second phase, the articles resulting from the application of the first one were selected, incorporating the inclusion criteria 1.a., 1.b., 1.c., 1.d and 1.e and obtaining a total of 177 eligible papers. In the third phase, the articles were transferred to the Refworks bibliographic manager for the purification of the files and elimination of duplications, leaving a total of 87 articles after applying the exclusion criterion 2.e.

In the fourth phase, all the papers were read carefully and the exclusion criteria 2.a., 2.b., 2.c. and 2.d were applied, resulting in a final sample of 17 articles. Among the articles that were rejected are gamified didactic proposals that were not carried out, gamified didactic experiences in PE but in the university stage, didactic experiences in PE but outside the school teaching environment (not in PE class) and others causes (Figure 1).

**Figure 1.** Flowchart of the review on gamification in Physical Education.

#### *2.5. Study Selection*

Once the filtering was performed, each of the references was carefully read, analyzing the title, abstract and full text. In the case of articles whose full text was not open access, the authors were contacted to request a copy of the manuscript. Contact with the authors was established through their institutional email or through the international research platform Researchgate. All studies that did not meet any of the inclusion criteria were excluded. A total of 70 scientific articles were eliminated. The selection of the studies was carried out by three researchers independently, subsequently agreeing on their selection based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria previously established in Table 1.

#### *2.6. Data Extraction Process and Listing of These*

All the data of the articles were incorporated into an Excel sheet, breaking down the information into different categories. The data dump process to the Excel file was carried out by two researchers and a third researcher acted as reviewer/auditor.

A total of 5 broad categories of analysis were established, with a total of 30 subcategories listed in Table 2.

**Table 2.** Categories and subcategories established for the analysis of the articles of the systematic review. Note: Category 1. Publication Data; Category 2. Research Design; Category 3. Characteristics of the Sample; Category 4. Characteristics of the Gamified Learning Environment; and Category 5. Objectives and Results.

#### **3. Results**

To present the results of the articles that have been incorporated in this review on the creation of PGL in PE, it has been chosen to group the works according to the educational stage where gamification was applied. Initially, and in order to contextualize all the research, a table (Table 3) is presented with the articles found in each of the educational stages. Subsequently, a narrative description of the main contributions and/or findings of each of the scientific articles is made, accompanied by a summary table with some of the categories analyzed. A meta-analysis could not be performed due to the lack of uniformity in the protocols of the analyzed studies and the impossibility of calculating the effect size.

**Table 3.** Number of articles that addressed research in Physical Education and gamification.

Note: The study by Fernández-Río et al. [23] mainly addresses the Elementary School stage but also incorporates a small sample with ages from Middle, Junior and High School.

Given that the names of the different educational stages may vary from one country to another, depending on the type of educational system it has, the age group to which each stage refers has been included so that the data from the studies can be extrapolated to the educational context of different countries.

#### *3.1. Gamification in Physical Education in Kindergarten (0–6 Years)*

At this stage, no research articles have been found that address the creation of a GLE in PE.

#### *3.2. Gamification in Physical Education in Elementary School (6–12 Years)*

In the field of Elementary School, a total of seven scientific articles have been found (Table 4). The vast majority of them investigate the creation of a GLE with the aim of improving motivation and commitment toward the practice of PE on the part of students. A study analyzed the possible impact of gamification on the academic performance of students, finding an improvement in this. The study by Parra-González et al. [33] found that Elementary and Middle, Junior and High School students who had a gamified learning environment obtained better scores in the student–student relationship, autonomy, collaboration and resolution dimensions than pre-university students.

The total sample size for studies with a mixed design (quantitative and qualitative) was *n* = 516 and *n* = 142 for quantitative. Three investigations had a control group and an experimental group, four with pretest and post-test variables measurements and three studies presented only an experimental group. As for the most present elements of gamification, there are points and badges, and a single article talks about the narrative. A great diversity of the evaluation instruments used and the means to evaluate the objectives are also detected, from discussion groups and portfolios to ad hoc questionnaires or validated questionnaires, among other instruments. The duration of the GLE ranges from 1 month to a full school year.

gamification

 in PE in Elementary

 School.

**Table 4.** Analysis of the articles that provide scientific evidence on

**Table 4.** *Cont.* of the same variables after a short, medium or long period of time. The

Parra-González

 [33] study is a work that also addresses Middle, Junior and High School.

3.2.1. Improved Commitment and/or Motivation to Practice PE and/or Physical Activity

The article developed by Bellamy [29] focuses on a Primary Education school in Carmarthenshine, Wales, which partnered with an e-commerce company to develop and improve PE and the school gym through a health and fitness gamified program. In this program, they provide rewards using a badge system to enhance the development of children's motor skills.

Another investigation with a quasi-experimental design carried out in six children with sensory integration dysfunction assesses the efficacy of a sensory and motor stimulation program based on the use of video games that promote motor skills [30].

The authors, Fernandez-Río Javier et al. [23], present an interesting quantitative and qualitative study where they work with a sample of 290 students of Primary and Secondary Education, creating a GLE based on the theme of superheroes during 30 sessions distributed over 15 weeks. PE teachers from four educational centers are involved in the gamification and there is an increase in the intrinsic motivation of the students. Four of the five elements identified as central to promoting meaningful experiences in PE and sport are present in this work [44], these being social interaction, fun, challenge and learning, lacking the analysis of motor competence. They also highlight that the teachers expressed that the gamified process involved a large workload. Parra-González et al. [33] highlight that there is a greater motivation for students to use gamification in Primary Education compared to the last years of Secondary and Baccalaureate. The article by Serrano Durá et al. [34] found that girls assimilated the contents better with the gamified intervention than with the traditional methodology and, in general, both sexes had greater motivation and effort with the gamification.

#### 3.2.2. Improved Academic Performance and Motivation and Enjoyment of PE

Exergames and gamification have been present in a work carried out by Spanish authors [31] and that had a scientific design carrying out a natural experimental investigation with a control and experimental group and, pretest–post-test, measuring the motivation of the Primary Education students and their predisposition for learning dance activities. The control group received a total of nine sessions with a traditional methodology and the experimental group enjoyed the experience of a video game linked to dance and the use of the gamification platform called Classdojo. The results confirm a higher level of motivation and academic performance in the experimental group, who also had a better disposition for learning these contents. Some of these authors [32] also addressed a qualitative analysis of the fusion of gamification and used exergames to teach content related to dance in Primary Education, verifying that the attitudes shown by the teachers and students were very positive, but their expectations about its future use were not conclusive. Correct compatibility with the study plan was also verified, and in general, the students and teachers perceived more enjoyment, motivation, a taste for dance, creative inspiration and autonomous learning.

#### *3.3. Gamification in Physical Education in Middle, Junior and High School (12–18 Years)*

At this stage, 10 articles were selected that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria (Table 5). All studies have addressed gamification as a means to improve student motivation and greater involvement in PE class. In addition, several studies have been observed that have analyzed the effects of gamification combined with other pedagogical models, thus opting for a hybrid pedagogical model. Some of the models with which gamification has been combined are: flipped learning, cooperative learning or the pedagogical model of personal and social responsibility.

#### *Educ. Sci.* **2022**, *12*, 540

**Table 5.** Analysis of the articles that provide scientific evidence on

gamification

 in PE in Middle, Junior and High School.

**Table 5.** *Cont.*

**Table 5.** *Cont.*

190

Note: The

Parra-González

 study [33] is a work that also addresses Elementary School.

The largest sample size recorded was 414 students and the smallest was 30 students. Five investigations had a control group and an experimental group, five studies had only an experimental group and there were seven with pretest and post-test variables measurements. Regarding the most present elements of gamification, there are points, levels, badges, leaderboards, challenges and rewards, and in a single article, esthetics are discussed. The vast majority of researchers used questionnaires for data collection, these being of various kinds. The duration of the GLE ranges from one month to one year, the most frequent period of time.

#### *Improved Commitment and/or Motivation to Practice PE and/or Physical Activity*

Some authors have approached gamification as an alternative to traditional PE teaching models based on textbooks and the standardization of learning. Thus, Quintero-González, Jiménez-Jiménez and Area Moreira [38] present a gamification experience for the Secondary Education classroom in which students are invited to overcome a series of challenges in a GLE with a futuristic theme and demonstrating an outstanding use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) with a focus on a transmedia narrative and cooperative learning. Through this environment, different competences and objectives of the PE subject have worked and confirm an increase in student motivation and a greater effective involvement in class work.

In Secondary Education, there is also another gamified didactic experience [36] with a duration of 3 months and through which about 100 students of the 2nd Year of Secondary Education improved their motivation toward learning the contents of the subject after experiencing a gamified Didactic Unit. The evaluation instrument was a questionnaire created ad hoc by the study authors and a qualitative socio-critical methodology was used. Another similar study [37] confirmed an increase in the commitment to learning in the group that underwent a gamification project. Its authors conclude that a strategy for learning healthy habits and practicing physical activity through gamification could improve student motivation. Reducing, through gamification, the prevalence of overweight and obesity in adolescents has also been one of the challenges for some researchers. Thus, a study [38] was carried out in 65 Brazilian adolescents with overweight and/or obesity. The objective was to implement a program of 12 sessions of 50 min of active video games (AVG). The authors used a randomized intervention with a control group that only played these video games and another experimental group that underwent challenge-based gamification in order to stimulate a greater amount of physical activity. The results confirm an increase in the time of adherence to the physical exercise program. This study is pioneering in addressing this concern for the health of students within the school setting.

Other authors [39] have carried out an investigation with a sample of 64 secondary students, confirming an increase in satisfaction and enjoyment, as well as an increase in intrinsic motivation and a predisposition toward learning after having used a hybrid teaching model that combined gamification with flipped learning. The authors of this study report on the need to make the scientific community aware of the potential of combining active methodologies, both face-to-face and digital, in the teaching and learning process in the field of PE, in order to raise awareness in the field teaching group of the benefits reported after its application. In the study of Real, M. et al. [43], the results suggest that the use of gamification improves student motivational variables such as: support for autonomy, support for social relations, autonomy, intrinsic motivation, identified motivation and external motivation.

In another study [40] with a hybrid methodological approach, the model of personal and social responsibility was combined with gamification in a sample of 28 girls and 27 boys from Compulsory Secondary Education with a mean age of 14.29 years. The intervention took place over 10 sessions distributed over a quarter. The authors highlight, as the main finding, the prevalence of the transfer of autonomy and responsibility in the teacher's behaviors to the participants, which generated a more self-determined motivation among the students, thus improving the levels of autonomy, responsibility

and motivation. In a similar study by Melero-Cañas [41] with the hybridization of the social and personal responsibility model and gamification, it was confirmed that the gamified hybrid intervention produced improvements in cardiorespiratory fitness, agility and speed-agility, in addition to reducing the time of sedentary lifestyle during the week and weekend. The students in the control group obtained a greater increase in Body Mass Index. These same authors, in another similar study [42], confirmed improvements in the experimental group in cognitive performance but not in academic performance. However, in the work of Arufe-Giráldez et al. [45], a higher academic performance was observed in university students in a gamified intervention during an academic year. This indicates that more studies are necessary to confirm a possible higher academic performance with gamified techniques.

The study by Parra-González et al. [33] is a study that compared the effects of a gamified Didactic Unit versus a flipped classroom Didactic Unit. As the main findings, the authors highlight that both active methodologies favor different psychological and psychosocial variables of the students, highlighting that the flipped classroom is more successful in pre-university stages with older adolescents and gamification in students of Primary Education and first years of Secondary.

#### **4. Discussion**

The objective of this systematic review was to analyze all the scientific literature published on gamification and PE in the different educational stages, specifically to evaluate and analyze the effects produced by the GLE in the PE classroom in Kindergarten, Elementary School and Middle, Junior and High School.

Gamification is presented in the educational field as a technique that can have different positive effects on students, from improvements in their social behavior to increases in levels of motivation or academic performance [18].

The vast majority of studies have focused on studying the motivation of students toward PE or learning the contents of the subject, confirming an increase in this. It can be argued that the use of rewards or punishments through points (health, experience or damage points) in the creation of a GLE can have a double motivational aspect, increasing motivation in some students and not affecting, or even decreasing, motivation in others [46]. In our review, all studies have confirmed improvements in student motivation; however, not all studies used a randomized controlled design with a control and experimental group and a pretest and post-test. In an investigation that addressed the effects of a GLE in the university classroom with a randomized controlled design, an increase in external regulation was recorded only in the experimental group. Furthermore, this group achieved significantly better academic performance. The findings of this study suggest that gamified implementation is beneficial for academic performance in college, although intrinsic motivation does not change. Furthermore, the nature of rewards or punishments, as a characteristic of this pedagogical approach, could play an important role in the expected results, because external regulation increased significantly after the intervention [47].

Escaravajal-Rodríguez and Martín-Acosta [48] conducted a literature review related to gamification in PE using the databases Dialnet, EBSCOhost and Web of Science and the academic search engine Google Scholar. A total of 19 works were selected and confirmed that 42.1% corresponded to didactic experiences and 31.6% to didactic proposals. Most of the works dealt with gamification in the Secondary Education stage (52.2%) followed by the university level with 26.1%. The authors conclude that gamification presents positive results and that teachers use it more and more.

In another study [49] that addressed a review of the literature on gamification and PE, a greater number of articles published on this subject were found in the Elementary School stage, followed by the stage of Middle, Junior and High School and Higher Education. These results are different from those found in our review. The reason may be that these researchers took into account all types of work, most of the articles being didactic experiences (69.2%) followed by research articles (23.1%) and reflections on gamification and PE (7.7%), similarly noting the scarcity of articles that investigate the effects of this technique on the different elements or variables related to learning. In our work, we have only selected scientific articles that provide scientific evidence, using research protocols with greater or lesser scientific rigor. It should be noted that only 4 of the 17 studies analyzed followed a controlled study design, one being random and the rest non-random.

Another aspect to discuss is that no scientific evidence has been found for the use of gamification in PE in Kindergarten. This may be due to the fact that at this stage, some authors have confirmed that in itself the student's motivation is high and perhaps the creation of a GLE is not so necessary to improve the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation of students [50,51]. However, in a study [52] that compared the levels of physical activity of children aged 4–6 years in the Early Childhood Education classroom, during the school day and according to the methodology used, it was found that they spend most of their time in class in a sedentary way, while in the experimental group that used active methodologies, they registered the highest amount and intensity of physical activity. Although children in Early Childhood Education have high levels of motivation, some studies confirm that 90% of Early Childhood Education centers only teach 1 or 2 sessions of Physical Education a week, often being taught by professionals who are not experts in Physical Education [53]. Therefore, the contribution of more scientific evidence at this stage could be interesting.

Another reason that can justify the scarcity of scientific production related to gamification in PE in the stage of Kindergarten, Elementary School and Middle, Junior and High School may be the lack of training in active methodologies in the faculties of teacher training. In a study [51] carried out in a sample of 220 PE teachers in Primary and Secondary Education, it is concluded that active methodologies are applied by a small number of PE teachers in their lessons, while a combination of methodologies predominates. In addition, teachers highlight the lack of training in active methodologies, despite the fact that the learning they try to encourage is in line with those associated with active methodologies. Another qualitative study [54] carried out in PE teachers in Secondary Education suggests that although teachers recognize the benefits of active teaching that endows students with autonomy, traditional, reproductive and directive teaching styles prevail in their professional practices. These results are in line with other research [55] carried out in a sample of 205 PE teachers in Early Childhood and Primary Education that confirms that traditional methods are mostly accepted in all stages of professional experience, being higher in teachers with a range of 6 to 11 years of experience, with teachers opting more for individualizing, cognitive and creative styles than female teachers, although in both cases they use traditional styles. However, in a recent work [56] that investigated the perception of a sample of more than 300 university students (future teachers of PE in Secondary Education) in relation to the use of active methodologies by its teachers, it was detected that they perceived that their teachers make use of different organizational modalities, methodological strategies and evaluation systems that favor the use of active methodologies.

Discussing the hybridization of pedagogical models and the incorporation of gamification in the teaching–learning processes, although there are few works in the literature that address this, the evidence points to possible improvements in the motivation of the students and in the learning of the contents of PE using a hybrid pedagogical model. Thus, in a study [57] not included in this review due to not meeting one of the inclusion criteria, the effects of gamification combined with the pedagogical model flipped learning in the matter of Natural Sciences, using a pretest–post-test design. The findings obtained showed that the application of this hybridization increased the motivation of the students, as well as their autonomy and self-regulation when facing the contents of the course. In another recent study [25], the authors proposed an educational intervention in Secondary Education students using a hybrid model that combines cooperative learning, adventure education and gamification; on this occasion, the study does not present scientific evidence and is published only as a didactic proposal, showing the reader educational guidelines for its implementation.

It should be noted that the link between video games and PE class and gamification is also present in the literature on gamification, having found a total of three works that addressed the use of active video games or exergames and their positive effects [30–32]. A study carried out in a sample of 47 university students, future PE teachers in Primary Education on a gamified session based on the adaptation of the Fortnite video game, confirms that said didactic proposal improved the motivation of students toward sports practice and their adherence to it, favoring collaborative teamwork and the promotion of values [58]. This last work is focused on the stage of Primary and Secondary Education, but it was not included because the experience was carried out in university students.

It should be noted that in the gamification proposals of the 17 scientific documents selected for this review, not all the elements recommended by the authors were present when establishing gamified learning environments.

There are multiple existing models that can explain the processes involved in gamification. Some models are not typical of the educational field, such as Chou's explanatory model, the Octalysis Framework [59], or the Kaleidoscope of Effective Gamification [60], both more ascribed to the business field. However, others do, such as the taxonomy of Toda et al. [61] and the model called Edu-Game [62], a system that facilitates the mechanics of creating a gamified learning environment, paralleling the elements of the educational curriculum and the game. Or finally, the model based on four blocks [63], presented here in Figure 2, which are limited to the educational field and can be a reference model for all the research on gamification in all educational stages. This model is based on four large blocks of elements, educational, motivational, game and prior knowledge elements, and explains how each of the large elements and their corresponding sub-elements should be planned in order to have a certain coherence and synergy between all of them to guarantee the success of the gamification.

**Figure 2.** Creating a Gamified Learning Environment (GLE) [63].

In order to achieve the greatest effects of gamification, it is recommended that pedagogical proposals are gamified in PE use and to correctly plan the use of these elements. In agreement with other authors [15], gamification has become a research focus with enormous potential but more work with appropriate designs is necessary as the available studies have their limitations and many of them are not scientifically sound enough.

Finally, it is necessary to discuss the relevance of Physical Education to promote healthy lifestyle habits and avoid physical inactivity in infancy, childhood and adolescence. Some authors have addressed multiple systematic reviews on the importance of working on student health in Physical Education [64,65]. Teachers must not only choose what health content to teach or work on but also how to teach it, with what methodology they can cause a change in the student's lifestyle, favoring the practice of physical activity beyond

school, and thus avoiding the appearance of multiple diseases associated with a sedentary lifestyle [66].

Abundant scientific evidence confirms multiple benefits of practicing physical activity in school educational stages [67–69], including obtaining benefits in cognitive competence [70,71]. Gamification can be presented as a means to cause positive changes in the behavior of students by increasing the levels of physical activity and the emotional state, as well as favoring the attitude and motivation toward the practice of physical activity [72].

#### **5. Conclusions**

The analysis of the systematic review carried out on the use of gamification in PE reveals a low scientific production in the stages of Primary and Secondary Education and an absence of this in Early Childhood Education. The vast majority of the studies that addressed gamification in the PE classroom confirmed improvements in the motivation of students toward learning the contents of the subject and an increased commitment to the practice of PE/physical activity. Only one study analyzed the positive impact on academic performance, and another study did not find any effect on academic performance, but it did on cognitive performance.

The diversity of the research protocols and instruments used to evaluate the different variables studied stands out. On the other hand, a very low number of studies that used randomized controlled designs and a certain lack of planning of all the elements involved in a gamified system are also confirmed. All this suggests the need to continue investigating the possible positive effects that the implementation of gamified pedagogical proposals may have in the PE classroom, whether incorporated in isolation or using a hybrid model in combination with other active methodologies, such as the flipped classroom, the model of personal and social responsibility or cooperative learning.

#### **6. Limitations and Proposals**

This systematic review has several limitations, among them the difficulty in finding, in some scientific articles, clear and concise information on the protocol used in the re-search and in the creation of the gamified learning environment, although most of the authors were contacted personally to collect more information about their studies, this contact was not successful with some authors, obtaining only the information published in the article itself.

For future studies, it is recommended to use common protocols to be able to perform a meta-analysis with the data of various investigations. It is also necessary that more gamified pedagogical proposals be addressed using all the necessary elements for the creation of a gamified learning environment in order to accurately measure the effectiveness of this technique in the PE classroom.

The use of a control and experimental group, and a pretest and post-test, guarantees greater scientific solidity. On the other hand, using the same test to measure how the students' commitment, their motivation or another variable changed will allow a metaanalysis to be carried out and to create a greater scientific base on educational gamification. For example, in relation to the measurement of the physical condition or psychomotricity of students, it could be interesting to use standardized test batteries such as Eurofit or the MABC-2, respectively.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, V.A.-G., A.S.-R. and O.R.-Á.; methodology, V.A.-G., A.S.-R., O.R.-Á. and R.N.-P.; validation, V.A.-G., A.S.-R., O.R.-Á. and R.N.-P.; formal analysis, V.A.-G. and R.N.-P.; investigation, V.A.-G., A.S.-R., O.R.-Á. and R.N.-P. resources, V.A.-G., A.S.-R., O.R.-Á. and R.N.-P. data curation, V.A.-G., A.S.-R., O.R.-Á. and R.N.-P. writing—original draft preparation, V.A.-G., A.S.-R., O.R.-Á. and R.N.-P.; writing—review and editing, V.A.-G., A.S.-R., O.R.-Á. and R.N.-P. project administration, V.A.-G. All authors contributed to the manuscript writing. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript, and agree with the order of presentation of the authors.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** The study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA Declaration.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**

## *Systematic Review* **Models of Instructional Design in Gamification: A Systematic Review of the Literature**

**Alberto González-Fernández 1,\*, Francisco-Ignacio Revuelta-Domínguez <sup>2</sup> and María Rosa Fernández-Sánchez <sup>2</sup>**

**Abstract:** Gamification allows for the implementation of experiences that simulate the design of (video) games, giving individuals the opportunity to be the protagonists in them. Its inclusion in the educational environment responds to the need to adapt teaching–learning processes to the characteristics of homo videoludens, placing value once again on the role of playful action in the personal development of individuals. The interest that has arisen in studying the implications of gamification processes in the different educational stages, in order to determine their impact and suitability, has led to an increase in scientific publications. With the intention of studying the presence and implications of gamification in teacher training as a methodological principle implemented in the teaching–learning process, both in its initial and permanent stages, this systematic review of the literature identifies those instructional design models applied in the field of gamification, as well as its educational significance. Thus, the need to introduce gamified practices in the field of teacher training is observed, providing an experiential learning that allows teachers to apply this methodology in a relevant way in their professional development, based on their own experience.

**Keywords:** gamification; teacher training; gamification design frameworks; systematic review

#### **1. Introduction**

The proliferation of educational experiences that propose the implementation of active methodologies in teaching–learning processes has provoked the academic interest of the research community. In relation to gamification, there are numerous practices that introduce, in one way or another, elements of (video) games in educational contexts to increase student motivation and involvement. The interest in studying the implications of gamification processes in the different educational stages, in order to determine their impact and suitability, has led to an increase in scientific publications in recent years. As such, the difficulties that at present still persist in clearly defining what gamification is, a term that is often confused with (video) game-based learning, when associated with its root game or with the concept of fun learning, has promoted a massification of studies in this field.

Thus, knowing the state of the literature in relation to gamification becomes a complicated task, a challenge that requires a major investment of time that, on many occasions, is not productive. Therefore, it is necessary to resort to research methodologies that allow the collection of relevant evidence in relation to a specific topic.

To this end, prior to conducting a systematic review of the literature (SRL or SR), it is necessary to determine those scientific productions that implement this methodology as a means of synthesizing the available evidence on the area of interest covered by this article, serving as a precedent for conducting a new SR that updates the results found or delves into other areas of interest related to gamification and its instructional design.

**Citation:** González-Fernández, A.; Revuelta-Domínguez, F.-I.; Fernández-Sánchez, M.R. Models of Instructional Design in Gamification: A Systematic Review of the Literature. *Educ. Sci.* **2022**, *12*, 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/ educsci12010044

Academic Editor: Huei Tse Hou

Received: 10 November 2021 Accepted: 6 January 2022 Published: 13 January 2022

**Publisher's Note:** MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

**Copyright:** © 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/).

After a thorough reading of 20 systematic reviews, the areas of knowledge for the selected SLRs relate to teaching in the fields of health, science, and English as a second language; at the level of higher education and primary education; with other educational models such as e-learning; and with other methodologies such as flipped learning or peer assessment activities.

In an initial study, Alomari et al. [1] analyzed 40 publications related to the promotion of learning in university students after the implementation of gamification techniques between 2016 and 2018. The presence of a series of common strategies is determined and grouped under the acronym PBL (points, badges, and leaderboards) with a presence of 75%, 65%, and 63%, respectively. As evidenced by the authors, these gamification elements allow for the emergence of a controlled competitive environment that leads to an increase in student motivation and participation.

Along the same lines, Rauschenberger et al. [2] developed a systematic review of the term gamification in the field of learning environments, extracting the relationship between dynamics present in the 10 studies analyzed: emotions and progress (relationships, narrative, choices, and restrictions); mechanics: rewards, (opportunities, resource acquisition, and victory states), feedback, and challenges (cooperation, competition, and transactions); and gamification components: badges, avatars, points, rewards, missions, etc.

Elsewhere, Bozkurt and Durak [3] performed a meta-analysis of 208 studies on gamification published between 2008 and 2016. Through it, they highlight those methodologies most commonly used in gamification research. They also perform a lexical analysis to determine the relationship and reiteration of words in the titles and abstracts of the articles that make up the sample. Gamification is the most used term, related to education, learning, students, training, etc. In a second cluster, the terms game, engagement, social, elements, motivation, experience, behavior, effectiveness, etc., appear. Finally, gamification is related to words such as design, technology, software, online, tools, etc. The study by Zainuddin et al. [4] also addresses issues related to platforms and apps found in the scientific literature on gamification (ClassDojo, ClassBadges, Kahoot!, Duolingo, etc.).

Of interest is the review conducted by Cordero-Brito and Mena [5], representing the evolution of gamification and its influence in the social domain. For this purpose, they analyze a total of 136 articles published between the years 2011 and 2016. The authors establish the temporal trend in publications on gamification, with a considerable increase in recent years. They also identify the most representative model of instructional design, called MDA: mechanics, dynamics, and aesthetics. Finally, the authors establish a list of gamification components and tools and their impact on the motivation of individuals.

Similarly, Mora et al. [6] analyze gamification design frameworks through their background and scope of application (education, business, and healthcare), the suitability of such models for student engagement in the university environment, as well as the elements included in the design process. To this end, they review a sample of 40 studies published between 2011 and 2015, highlighting the need to turn design into an iterative, user-centered process with a technological presence. They also point out that the studies analyzed include the 6D model, MDA, as well as Werbach's or DMC. Based on the results, they propose three differentiated design approaches for gamification systems: user-centered, game-centered, and technology-centered.

Other selected systematic reviews restrict the area of analysis to studies related to gamification and English as a second language acquisition [7], health care and medical studies [8,9], education and science [10], as well as experiences related to virtual education [11], flipped classroom [12], and peer assessment activities [13]. It is necessary to highlight the deep analysis performed by Kalogiannakis et al. [10], pointing out educational level, contents related to science curriculum, educational context, underlying learning models or theories, methods, results, gamification elements, and assessment tools of each of the analyzed articles.

Regarding the different educational stages, systematic reviews such as that of Fadhli et al. [14] are proposed. Such reviews analyze studies published between 2014 and 2018 on the effectiveness of gamification in the acquisition of conceptual, procedural, and attitudinal content in students aged 6 to 10 years, corresponding to primary education. Meanwhile, Pegalajar Palomino [15] identifies the main findings in the scientific literature, from 20 studies published between 2010 and 2019, on the perception of university students towards the implementation of gamification strategies in their teaching–learning processes. Subhash and Cudney [16] also focus their review on the university setting, attending to the areas of knowledge (computer science, business, science, pedagogy, etc.), the countries of production (Spain in first place, followed by the United States and Germany), the gamification elements employed (badges, feedback, collaboration, levels, narrative, etc.), and the benefits of gamification (motivation, attitude, engagement, enjoyment, etc.) found in 41 articles between 2012 and 2017.

Finally, Navarro-Mateos et al. [17] propose a review of the term gamification in Spanish education. This would allow for knowledge regarding the impact of gamification in the different educational stages through the analysis of 15 studies published until 2020. In addition, it is pointed out that, in general, the main objective of these interventions is to influence student motivation, as well as to improve the learning experience and academic performance.

Based on the study of these previous systematic reviews, it has become necessary to propose an integrative perspective that encompasses the most relevant approaches to the aspects analyzed above. Therefore, based on the proposals made by Zainuddin et al. [4], Kalogiannakis et al. [10], and Navarro-Mateos et al. [17], who study, among other aspects, instructional design models, (video) game mechanics involved in gamification systems, digital resources related to this methodology, and potential effects on the teaching–learning process, this SLR aims to analyze the situation of gamification in the field of teacher training, both in its initial or university stage and in continuing education.

#### **2. Materials and Methods**

Systematic reviews, according to Manterola et al. [18], "are studies whose population comes from already published case articles; that is, they are studies of studies" (p. 150). Thus, SLR makes it possible to concentrate knowledge of a specific area, giving it meaning through the results obtained in different studies, in order to identify prospective research priorities. According to Ferreria González et al. [19], "they constitute an essential tool for synthesizing the available scientific information, increasing the validity of the conclusions of individual studies and identifying areas of uncertainty where research is needed" (p. 688).

Conducting an SLR involves the specification of a series of research steps to guide the review process towards a specific area of study. To this end, it is necessary to establish, as a starting point, a series of issues or research questions that determine the object of interest or focal element of the review.

Using the aforementioned systematic reviews as references, the need arises to update the data provided in these publications, as well as to specify and orient the scope of the SLR study in order to approach other research priorities that have not yet been addressed. To this end, a structured process is followed through a pre-established design, which provides validity, quality, and rigor. With the intention of providing objective criteria for the publication of systematic reviews, the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) statement, published in 2009 (recently updated in 2020), presents a series of recommendations and guidelines for their preparation. Through a checklist of 27 items [20], it establishes an optimal planning process that simplifies the researcher's task in conducting an SLR. Thus, the systematic review process applied in this study consists of different phases [21]:

• Phase 1: Research questions (RQ). They are organized around three areas: (a) conceptual framework, to analyze the relationships between the keywords identified in the literature (RQ1); (b) documentary characteristics, to identify geographical location and research methodologies used (RQ2,RQ3); and (c) pedagogical dimension (RQ4,RQ5), to recognize the methodological strategies for the inclusion of gamified practices in

the field of teacher training and their relationship with other active methodologies, as well as instructional design models applied in the studies analyzed (Table 1).

**Figure 1.** Literature selection process flowchart.

**Table 1.** Areas, questions, and initial coding criteria.

#### **3. Results**

Based on the sample obtained as a result of the methodological process established for this SLR, we outline details of the aspects related to the analysis of the information obtained from the 28 scientific publications related to the implementation of gamified practices in the field of teacher training.

To this end, the aim is to answer the research questions (RQ1-RQ5) posed above and thus to obtain an accurate picture of the state of the situation in relation to scientific production on gamification.

#### *3.1. What Is the Conceptual Relationship Surrounding the Term Gamification?*

In order to analyze the network of concepts as an answer to question 1, it has been necessary to highlight the terminological relationships existing among the publications that make up the review sample. In this way, it was possible to identify a series of clusters or categories generated by the co-occurrence of the key words in the studies, as can be seen in Figure 2.

**Figure 2.** Co-occurrence map by keywords (frequency = 1).

Through VOSviewer, a series of clusters have been identified that make it possible to highlight those areas of interest in the studies reviewed. Obtained from the co-occurrence of keywords established by the authors of the publications, four different and interconnected main categories can be observed. The red cluster encompasses aspects related to teaching– learning processes, such as "continuous assessment," "educational innovation," "digital competence," or "cooperative learning".

Similarly, the blue cluster, from a more generic perspective, connects elements linked to teacher training. The purple cluster is related to the design process of gamification systems through (video) game elements and mechanics. Finally, the green cluster identifies, in a more segregated way, methodological aspects related to "distance education," "active methodologies," or "motivation".

Likewise, through the LitMaps tool, a relationship is established between the articles that make up the review sample that present DOIs, as well as their temporal distribution, as shown in Figure 3. Thus, connections can be observed between Villalustre Martínez and del Moral Pérez [23] and Castañeda Vázquez et al. [24], as well as between Kopcha et al. [25] and Falcó Boudet and Huertas Talón [26]. It also allows the identification of the most cited reference authors in the field of gamification [27–32].

**Figure 3.** List of authors and citations between articles.

#### *3.2. What Is the Geographical Distribution of the Publications?*

The selection of countries in the publications that make up the established sample are specified according to the nationality of the reference author of each article. Thus, from RQ2, it is possible to determine the geographical distribution of those studies related to gamified experiences in the field of teacher training, allowing us to observe the interest aroused by this topic from a global perspective.

Spain is the country with the highest number of scientific productions related to gamification and teacher training, both in its initial and permanent stages, with 16 articles out of the 28 that make up the sample. Next, 5 publications each are attributed to the United States and Brazil. Finally, Italy and Turkey complete the geographical distribution with 1 article in each country.

In relation to the language of the scientific productions, Spanish is the language most used in the selected sample, with a total of 14 articles (50%). English is the second most common language, with 11 publications (39.29%). Finally, in coherence with the geographical distribution detailed above and with the search process carried out in the three databases consulted, Portuguese is another of the languages present in the articles reviewed, specifically in 3 (10.71%).

#### *3.3. What Research Methodologies Are Used in the Selected Studies and What Is the Sample Size?*

Through RQ4, which refers to the research methodologies used in the selected studies, as well as the sample size of the publications, it is possible to determine the most relevant methodological strategies in research processes in the field of gamification.

Thus, it is possible to observe that the qualitative approach is the most frequent among studies related to gamified educational practices (53.57%). In second place, the quantitative approach (39.29%), followed finally by mixed research (7.14%).

Likewise, it is possible to establish a relationship between the methodological approaches identified and the research methods applied in the articles that make up the review sample. In relation to qualitative techniques, in Figure 4 can be observed that 12 of the publications use the case study; in 1 publication, formative research [33]; in another, the phenomenological study [34]; and finally, in 1 of the publications narrative research is applied [35]. Regarding quantitative techniques, 4 articles are identified that implement questionnaires as a research instrument, 2 that apply program evaluation, 2 of a quasiexperimental type, 1 study of a descriptive nature [36], 1 descriptive–interpretative [37], and 1 case study [23]. Finally, in relation to mixed techniques, 1 case study [38] and 1 design-based research [39] were identified.

**Figure 4.** Research methods identified in the studies.

In summary, the most frequent research method in the publications that make up the sample is the case study (50%). In second place, we see research based on questionnaires (14.29%). With the same percentage (7.14%) are quasi-experimental studies and program evaluation. Finally, methodologies such as formative research, descriptive studies, descriptive-interpretative, design-based research, phenomenological studies, and narrative research appear with the same level of presence (3.57%).

#### *3.4. What Instructional Design Models Applied to Gamification Systems?*

The specification of the elements, strategies, and resources that make up the gamification systems implemented in the experiences analyzed responds to a series of instructional design criteria established by the various models or frameworks that allow for the development of gamified educational interventions. Based on RQ4, a series of instructional design models have been identified among the publications that make up the review sample, which in turn, make it possible to determine the level of depth or insertion of the approach taken.

As can be seen, the instructional design model with the greatest relevance among the publications reviewed is the PBL or points, badges, and leaderboards strategy with 35.71%, including variants such as PBL+K and PL. In second place, we see the MDA or mechanics, dynamics & aesthetics architecture, with 28.57% presence. This is followed by Pyramid DMC or dynamics, mechanics and components with 14.28%. With the same percentages (7.14%) are the 6D approach and Learning Tangram. Finally, the Bonk and Dennen model, as well as the social gamification approach, also with the same proportion (3.57%). It should also be noted that the PBL and MDA instructional design models are present in more than 50% of the sample (Figure 5).

**Figure 5.** List of instructional design models identified in the sample.

From the descriptions of the gamification systems implemented in the various educational practices analyzed, the depth of the designs carried out can also be evidenced. For this purpose, the elements that make up the gamifications proposed in the publications that make up the sample have been recorded, as well as their pretensions and their temporality, in order to determine their penetration capacity.

From this analysis, it is observed that 53.57% of the gamification systems present a superficial configuration or thin layer level gamification. 46.43% correspond to deep level gamification designs. In relation to the identified models, it is possible to evidence the relevance of elements that make up the gamified experience, being determinant to assess its effectiveness in relation to design. The PBL strategy is the most representative among surface gamification systems, while the DMA and DMC models are more related to deep gamification designs (Figure 6).

#### *3.5. What Are the Effects of Gamified Practices in the Teaching–learning Process?*

To determine the impact of gamified educational interventions detailed in publications that make up the review sample, we begin with RQ5 to identify those results most highlighted by their authors. To this end, it was necessary to establish a series of categories that would allow grouping such evidence, presenting a direct relationship between (1) student motivation, mainly related to intrinsic motivation; (2) educational commitment, related to engagement and involvement with respect to the educational intervention; (3) student participation in activities related to the educational process; (4) attitudes towards their own learning; (5) communication; (6) perception of knowledge acquired and competencies developed; (7) academic results; and finally, (8) updating of knowledge, in relation to continuing teacher training. Similarly, seven of the studies included in the sample present results regarding the perceptions or opinions of the participating students themselves, so they have not been taken into account in the previous categorization.

As can be seen in Figure 7, engagement or educational commitment is one of the main implications of gamification in educational practice identified in the sample, with 29.41%. Next, the impact of gamification processes on student motivation is evident (26.47%) through an increase in motivation. Based on the practice of Pérez-López et al. [40], gamification, as a methodological strategy, creates an improvement in student motivation and an increase in their involvement. With the same percentage (11.77%), there are results related to student participation and attitudes, as a consequence of the previous elements. Likewise, an improvement in the students' perception of the knowledge acquired has been identified (8.82%) [41], followed by aspects related to the updating of pedagogical, technological, and conceptual knowledge, as a consequence of ongoing teacher training (5.88%) [42]. Finally, with the same percentage (2.94%), results related to the improvement of communication and academic results of participating students were observed.

**Figure 6.** Instructional design models and their relationship with gamification type.

**Figure 7.** Categories established to analyze the effects of gamified practices.

#### **4. Discussion and Conclusions**

Through the systematic review process developed, it has become possible to know the impact of gamified practices in the field of teacher training, both in its initial and permanent stage, through implementation strategies of elements of this methodology in teaching–learning processes. In this way, we have provided answers to five research questions concerning the conceptual framework that has been configured around the concept of gamification; the documentary characteristics of the articles that make up the review sample in relation to gamification practices, the thematic areas from which they are studied, and the research methodologies used; and finally, attending to the pedagogical dimension of the studies, the identification of various instructional design models, and a list of gamification elements and technological resources related to this methodology.

The most relevant results of this systematic review are found, on the one hand, in the identification of the conceptual network that emerges from the analysis of the research that makes up the review sample. The key concepts linked to gamification processes are evidenced, as well as the relationship established between them. Through this representation of the state of knowledge, a terminological framework can be established that allows an in-depth exploration of those unknown areas that require a reflective dissection. In this sense, there is little reference to specific models of instructional design for the configuration of gamification systems, identifying, on the contrary, certain elements typical of this methodology.

Furthermore, this systematic review provides a detailed description of the documentary characteristics of the studies, allowing recognition of research processes related to gamified practices, as well as the instructional design models identified in the review process. Thus, a relationship between qualitative research approaches, mainly through case studies, and the field of gamification applied to teacher training has been evidenced. This is contrary to Zainuddin et al. [4], who observes a greater presence of quantitative studies in practices that implement a gamified methodology; Ekici [12], who identifies a predominance of mixed methods; or Bozkurt and Durak [3], who observe a majority of theoretical or conceptual–descriptive type articles. However, from the present systematic review, other research methods in trend in the field of education and gamification, such as design-based research [39], can also be appreciated.

Finally, this study has made it possible to identify the main instructional design models for gamification systems. For this purpose, it has been necessary to establish a relationship with elements implemented in the practices proposed, since in many cases the model involved in the design of the gamified practice has not been explicitly established. In this sense, coinciding with the study by Navarro-Mateos et al. [17], there is a general lack of knowledge of the process of gamification systems or specific models of instructional design by teachers, causing the introduction of gamification elements without a specific criterion or without a configuration that has a specific purpose.

The systematic review has shown the prevalence of PBL, i.e., gamification practices that introduce, in isolation, three components: points, badges and leaderboards. Although other studies [17] dismissed those gamification proposals based on PBL, considering that gamification "is a more abstract, complex and strategic process that aims to go beyond the use of points, badges and rankings" (p. 512), the reality is that it represents one of the most widely used gamification models in the field of instructional design [1,10,12,43,44]. However, other more complex models have been identified that require a more reflective and elaborate design process, resulting in deep gamification systems, such as the MDA architecture, coinciding with the study conducted by Bozkurt and Durak [3], the Elements Pyramid and the 6D approach.

In relation to the educational implications of gamification in the teaching–learning processes, through the proposals analyzed in the articles that make up the sample, a direct relationship between this methodology and increase in motivation, commitment, participation, and attitudes of the participating students has been evidenced. Conclusions that can also be observed in other studies [5,10,12,17,44], which identify a series of implications of

gamification at all educational levels, are those such as improved academic performance and increased student engagement and motivation. Pegalajar Palomino [15] states that, "at the cognitive level, it is worth noting how the practice of gamified learning experiences allows an improvement in the academic performance of students, helping them to maximize learning" (p. 178).

The results of this systematic review of the literature allow us to conclude that an adequate educational approach to gamification requires a deep knowledge of the implications derived from the implementation of this methodology. To this end, it is necessary to assess the importance of instructional design models that allow an adequate development of gamified practices. The interconnection of elements that make up a system of these characteristics requires a process of reflection, planning, and arrangement of its components, avoiding improvisation and arbitrariness.

Educational implications, which aim to go beyond the improvement of students' academic performance, pursue an increase in motivation, commitment, and positive attitude towards the teaching–learning process itself, through the entertainment and uniqueness provided by gamified practices. It also becomes necessary to implement experiences in the field of teacher training, both in its initial and permanent stage, providing experiential learning that allows teachers to introduce, in their professional development, this methodology in a relevant way, based on their own experience.

Some limitations apply to this review. This study focused only on experimental academic research regarding gamification experiences in the teacher training field, both in its initial and continuous stage, published in academic journals. Consequently, the number of articles reviewed is limited, evincing the need of developing more gamification experiences in this scope of action. The issues limit the generalizability of the review results. However, this study allows to determine some implications of gamification as an active methodology, bringing together several experiences in the teacher training field, studying the gamification instructional design models and the gamification elements most used.

**Supplementary Materials:** The following supporting information can be downloaded at: Selection https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/educsci12010044/s1.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, A.G.-F.; methodology, A.G.-F. and F.-I.R.-D.; software, A.G.-F.; validation, A.G.-F. and F.-I.R.-D.; formal analysis, A.G.-F. and F.-I.R.-D.; investigation, A.G.-F., F.-I.R.-D. and M.R.F.-S.; resources, A.G.-F.; data curation, F.-I.R.-D.; writing—original draft preparation, M.R.F.-S.; writing—review and editing, M.R.F.-S.; visualization, F.-I.R.-D.; supervision, F.-I.R.-D. and M.R.F.-S.; project administration, A.G.-F.; funding acquisition, A.G.-F. and F.-I.R.-D. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This publication has been made possible thanks to funding granted by the Consejería de Economía, Ciencia y Agenda Digital de la Junta de Extremadura and by the European Regional Development Fund of the European Union through the reference grant GR18071.A.G-F. is supported by a predoctoral contract granted by Ministry of Education, Culture and Sport of Spain (FPU15/05851).

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable. The data for this study originated from secondary desk research.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.

#### **References**

MDPI St. Alban-Anlage 66 4052 Basel Switzerland Tel. +41 61 683 77 34 Fax +41 61 302 89 18 www.mdpi.com

*Education Sciences* Editorial Office E-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>www.mdpi.com/journal/education

Academic Open Access Publishing

www.mdpi.com ISBN 978-3-0365-7515-5


*2.1. Leucocyte Isolation*

Whole blood samples were lysed with five volumes of hypotonic erythrocyte lysis buffer (RBCL, A&A Biotechnology, Gdynia, Poland) from at least 20 mL of peripheral blood. After 15 min of incubation on ice and centrifugation (3000× *g*), the plasma-free leukocytes were re-suspended in PBS solution at a concentration of 2 × 107 cells/mL.

### *2.2. Fabrication of Membrane-Based SERS Platforms (MBSP) via Electrospinning*

Poly(l-lactic acid)-co-poly(ε-caprolactone) (P(LLA-CL)) with a ratio of 70:30 used for fiber fabrication was purchased from Evonik (Witten, Germany). Prior to electrospinning, two types of P(LLA-CL) solutions with concentrations of 10% and 14% (w/v) were prepared by dissolving polymer powder (crystals) in 1,1,1,3,3,3-hexafluoro-2-propanol (Fluorochem, Hadfield, Derbyshire, UK) and stirring overnight in ambient conditions. The solutions were then individually placed in 10 mL plastic syringes.

The electrospinning process was carried out under optimized conditions with the use of NANON-01A (MECC Co., Ltd.; Fukuoka, Japan). Two 27 G steel needles were connected with syringes using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) tubes, fixed to the moving head with a constant linear velocity of 100 mm/min, and attached to high voltage of 15 kV provided by a built-in power supply. The distance between the needles was 25 mm, and the tips-to-collector distance was set at 150 mm. The feed rate for both solutions was 1.0 mL/h. The working width of the moving head was 100 mm. The nanofibrous meshes were collected on the aluminum covered steel plate and dried in a vacuum drier for 24 h (25 ◦C, 50 mb).

### *2.3. Sputtering of the Thin Layer of SERS Active Metal*

The PVD device (Leica, EM MED020, Heerbrugg, Switzerland) was applied to sputter 40 nm of Ag:Au alloy directly on the polymer fibers. No adhesion layer, i.e., chromium or titanium, was used between the polymer and the Ag:Au alloy layer. The sputtering conditions were: current of 25 mA and pressure of 10−2 mbar.