An Open-Source Gamified Programming Learning
Environment
José Carlos Paiva #
CRACS - INESC-Porto LA, Portugal
DCC - FCUP, Porto, Portugal
Ricardo Queirós #↸
CRACS - INESC-Porto LA, Portugal
uniMAD - ESMAD, Polytechnic of Porto, Portugal
José Paulo Leal #↸
CRACS - INESC-Porto LA, Portugal
DCC - FCUP, Porto, Portugal
Jakub Swacha #↸
University of Szczecin, Poland
Filip Miernik #
University of Szczecin, Poland
Abstract
The importance of e-learning tools facilitating the process of learning to program is growing, especially
as the pandemic-caused lockdown enforced distance learning in many countries. The key success
factor in this process is the provision of an instant and relevant feedback to students. In this paper,
we describe a novel open-source programming learning environment featuring automatic assessment
of studentsŠ solutions and customized gamiĄcation. This environment has been developed as a part
of the FGPE framework.
2012 ACM Subject Classification Applied computing → Computer-managed instruction; Applied
computing → Interactive learning environments; Applied computing → E-learning
Keywords and phrases learning environment, programming exercises, gamiĄcation, programming
learning, automatic assessment
Digital Object Identifier 10.4230/[Link].2021.5
Category Short Paper
Funding This paper is based on the work done within the Framework for GamiĄed Programming
Education project supported by the European UnionŠs Erasmus Plus programme (agreement no.
2018-1-PL01-KA203-050803).
1 Introduction
The role of feedback in improving knowledge and skill acquisition is considered crucial ([29]
and works cited therein). In programming education, particularly, an instant feedback can be
generated automatically based on the submission code, providing the student with relevant
information about general concepts, task constraints, mistakes made, hints on how to proceed
or even meta-cognition [16].
There is also a major concern amongst educational researchers with the disengagement
of the students from the learning activities, which frequently leads to academic failure and,
lastly, dropout. This issue is even more noticeable in distance learning [28], which became
the default way of learning in many countries in times of the current pandemic. One way to
counteract this problem is through gamification, which has been proven as a capable tool to
reduce the dropout rate [10].
© José Carlos Paiva, Ricardo Queirós, José Paulo Leal, Jakub Swacha, and Filip Miernik;
licensed under Creative Commons License CC-BY 4.0
Second International Computer Programming Education Conference (ICPEC 2021).
Editors: Pedro Rangel Henriques, Filipe Portela, Ricardo Queirós, and Alberto Simões; Article No. 5; pp. 5:1–5:8
OpenAccess Series in Informatics
Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, Dagstuhl Publishing, Germany
5:2 An Open-Source Gamified Programming Learning Environment
In this paper, we describe a novel open-source programming learning environment address-
ing both the above-mentioned needs, featuring automatic assessment of students’ solutions
and customized gamification. As the environment has been developed within the Framework
for Gamified Programming Education (FGPE) project [9], we called it FGPE PLE.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the current state
of gamification in education, focusing on empirical studies describing experiments which
applied game elements into a learning environment. Section 3 presents the FGPE PLE, its
architecture and user interface. Finally, Section 4 summarizes the contributions of this work
and indicates some future directions.
2 Related Work
Gamification of education has been a top trending in the last years [30], which can be
explained by the positive boost in motivation and user experience it is accredited with. There
are several case studies in the literature, particularly performed in high school and universities,
covering different learning subjects, ranging from Computer Science / Information Technology
(CS/IT) [34, 1, 2, 4, 11, 22, 33] to Mathematics (Maths) [8, 35, 6, 25], Foreign Languages
(FL) [13, 26], Communication and Multimedia (C&M) [3, 12, 14, 15], and Medicine / Biology
(M/B) [27, 20, 5]. A search for experimental studies that apply gamification methods
in educational learning environments was conducted in Google Scholar and ScienceDirect
databases, using combinations of the following keywords: gamification, serious games,
education, and learning. From the returned results, only studies published since 2014 which
have reported findings in high school and university subjects of the previously mentioned
areas were considered. The result was a set of about 50 empirical research studies, of which
20 were selected according to their relevance. Table 1 presents a comparative study of the
collected research papers, regarding the applied game elements.
Table 1 Game elements reported in the selected research papers.
CS/IT Maths FL C&M M/B
Game Elements [34] [1] [2] [4] [11] [22] [33] [8] [35] [6] [25] [13] [26] [3] [12] [14] [15] [27][20] [5]
Badges ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Collaboration ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Direct Competition1 ✓
Content Disclosure ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Exhaustible Resources ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Leaderboards ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Levels ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Points2 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Progress Indicator ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Quests ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Real-world Rewards ✓
Serious Games / Immersion ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
SLP3 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Status ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
1
Only core competition, i.e., one player (or team) plays against other, if one wins, the other loses.
2
Includes experience points (XP), skill points (score), inĆuence points (rating, reputation), and automatic grades.
3
Similar Learning Path (SLP) consists of using data from other students to predict and display the current progress of a student (not leaderboards).
From this study, we can observe that badges, points, and leaderboards are the most
applied game elements in general. This was expected as those are the easiest elements to apply,
and reuse in distinct educational scenarios. Only a few works use, for instance, quests (5),
content disclosure (5), status (4), and direct competition (1) as these are harder to implement
and less reusable. Surprisingly, even though there is much more work on gamification of
CS/IT education compared to other areas of education, no significant difference in game
elements could be found.
J. C. Paiva, R. Queirós, J. P. Leal, J. Swacha, and F. Miernik 5:3
Regarding experimental results, the effects on students are mostly slightly positive or
neutral, with a few exceptions [12, 6]. Nevertheless, in the area of CS/IT the results are
overall positive, i.e., they either promote engagement, participation, dedicated time, or
learning outcome.
3 Programming Learning Environment
FGPE Programming Learning Environment (PLE) is an open-source progressive web ap-
plication designed to engage learners while learning to program. To this end, it combines
automated assessment with a meaningful composition of gamification elements, both provided
by the Framework for Gamified Programming Education (FGPE) ecosystem. The PLE is
effortlessly reusable across distinct courses and programming languages, being independent
of the gamification layer linking the activities.
The following subsections provide an in-depth overview of the FGPE PLE. Subsection 3.1
details the architecture of the environment. Subsection 3.2 presents its user interface.
3.1 Architecture
The FGPE PLE is a web-based environment that aims to deliver a single interface to a
complete ecosystem for gamified programming education. This PLE handles two types of
users: students – who register and play the games (i.e., courses) in which they are enrolled,
by solving the proposed challenges – and teachers – who manage the courses, enroll students,
assign them into groups, and collect/analyze data about their progress. As users must also
be able to access other tools of the same ecosystem, particularly authors, and use different
authentication mechanisms, authentication and authorization is managed by Keycloak [17].
Keycloak is an open-source identity and access management solution providing numerous
features for the applications, such as centralized user management, authentication, single
sign-on and identity brokering, and user federation and social login.
Figure 1 presents the FGPE ecosystem, in which the FGPE PLE plays a key role.
This ecosystem is composed of two formats, one for describing programming exercises –
YAPExIL [24] – and another for gamification layers – GEdIL [31], three tools including an
authoring tool, a gamification service, and an evaluation engine, and GitHub.
stores
FGPE AuthorKit
Repository creates
(Github) YAPExIL
Programming
Exercises
Gamified
Exercises adhere to
stored in Gamification
Layers
GEdIL
uses
uses FGPE Gamification
Mooshak 2.0
Service
uses
FGPE PLE
Figure 1 Architecture of the FGPE ecosystem, highlighting the FGPE PLE.
ICPEC 2021
5:4 An Open-Source Gamified Programming Learning Environment
The FGPE ecosystem supports seven distinct types of programming exercises, in particular:
BLANK_SHEET, which asks the students to develop their solution from scratch; EXTENSION,
which presents a partial solution for the student to complete; IMPROVEMENT, which provides a
correct initial source code that needs some optimization; BUG_FIX, that gives a buggy solution
for the student to find the right code; FILL_IN_GAPS, which provides code with missing parts;
SPOT_BUG, that asks students to indicate the location of the bugs in a buggy solution; and
SORT_BLOCKS, which asks students to sort the several blocks of code of a solution. To this
end, programming exercises are defined in YAPExIL [24], a novel JSON format introduced
to address the lack of support for non-traditional programming exercises in existing formats.
Furthermore, YAPExIL does not target a specific evaluation engine, heading all efforts to
maximize expressiveness and facilitate the conversion from/to other programming exercise
formats.
Gamification layers are specified separately from programming exercises using GEdIL [31],
an open format for the specification of gamification layers for educational contents. Even
though it does not target a specific course, GEdIL was initially designed to cover particular
requirements of gamification for programming courses [32], including a vast collection of
rewarding mechanisms, such as points, badges, virtual items, and leaderboards to provide
extrinsic motivation, as well as unlockable and secret content, different activity modes (e.g.,
speedup and duels), among others. The game dynamics and mechanics are, then, parsed and
applied in the referenced collection of activities by the gamification service.
FGPE Gamification Service [21] is a GraphQL service designed to fulfil this goal, con-
suming a GEdIL layer and transforming it into a game, played by enrolled students. Hence,
the service has complete support for various rewarding mechanisms such as points, badges,
coupons, virtual items, leaderboards, locked and secret content, and different activity modes
(e.g., time-bomb and speedup). Furthermore, the FGPE Gamification Service is the single
point of access of the FGPE PLE to this ecosystem. Consequently, it should not only apply
gamification rules, but also deliver the challenge and activity statements as well as handle
the automated assessment of activities. To this end, the service uses plugins, i.e., consumers
of the evaluation engine APIs, that leverage on the evaluation engine connected that is
adequate to assess that type of activity.
An automated evaluation engine guarantees accurate and timely feedback to students.
Such an engine is responsible for marking and grading exercises. In this ecosystem, an
evaluation engine will: (1) receive the identification of the student, a reference to the exercise,
and the student’s attempt to solve it; (2) load the exercise by reference from the repository
(if necessary); (3) compile the solution and run the tests against the student’s program,
comparing the obtained output to the expected; and (4) build report of the evaluation with
passed/failed test cases, the grade, and, possibly, some feedback. Therefore, Mooshak 2 has
been selected. Mooshak [18] is an open-source web-based system for managing programming
contests, which includes automatic judging of submitted programs. Version 2 inherits all
features from its original version, improving feedback and attaching support for different
types of exercises. Moreover, Mooshak supports custom static and dynamic analysis scripts
which enables assessment for the non-traditional programming exercises previously described.
Finally, having defined two new formats, this ecosystem required a tool to facilitate the au-
thoring of new programming exercises adhering to and importing exercises in existing formats
into such new programming exercise format as well as their connection with gamification
rules. FGPE AuthorKit [23] is a web application designed to support the authors through
the entire process of preparing gamified programming exercises, including (1) creation of
exercises with their associated metadata, (2) design of the gamification techniques for a
J. C. Paiva, R. Queirós, J. P. Leal, J. Swacha, and F. Miernik 5:5
specific exercise or their collection, (3) definition of the content structure and sequencing
rules, and (4) importing and exporting the content in several popular programming exercise
formats, using YAPExIL and GEdIL as the base. The user can share content with other
peers, internally or via a GitHub repository where all exercise data is synchronized.
3.2 User Interface
The FGPE PLE is a progressive web application developed in ReactJS [7] – “a JavaScript
library for building user interfaces” –, meaning that it is an application software delivered
through the web intended to work on any platform that utilizes a standards-compliant browser,
including both desktop and mobile devices. It uses the Apollo Client, a community-driven
effort to build an easy-to-understand, flexible, and powerful GraphQL client, to manage
and consume remote data from the FGPE Gamification Service without worrying about
infrastructure code for networking and caching.
Figure 2 Exemplary screenshot of the FGPE PLE User interface.
The User Interface (UI), whose exemplary view is presented in Figure 2, follows a
component-driven development approach, which consists in dissecting and splitting the
interface into small repeatable patterns, develop these patterns, and join them together to
form larger components and pages. The main components of the PLE are the following.
Code Editor is based on Monaco Editor [19], the editor that powers Visual Studio Code.
This editor allows students to code in almost any programming language, starting from a
skeleton provided by the exercise author, taking advantage of a vast set of features such
as syntax highlighting, parameter hints, smart code navigation, and code completion. For
challenges that can be solved in more than one programming language, a language switch
is attached at the top of the editor allowing the student to choose the programming
language of the editor.
Console is where the results and feedback from executions and submissions is presented.
The execution consists in taking the inputs provided by the student through a popup
and running the program against these inputs. Submissions follow a similar process
but run against the complete set of test cases provided by the exercise author. Unlike
an execution, a submission is considered for statistics and can unlock new resources of
the course.
ICPEC 2021
5:6 An Open-Source Gamified Programming Learning Environment
Statement Viewer is where the activity statement is displayed. This component can display
either MarkDown, HTML, or raw text files.
Leaderboard is the component responsible for displaying the usernames and scores, sorted
according to certain metrics. Leaderboards can be challenge-scoped or course-scoped, use
any of the available metrics to sort users by, and optionally have group visibility.
Push Notifications are small rectangle boxes displayed based on events received from re-
gistered GraphQL subscriptions. For instance, received rewards, results of both processed
submissions and validations, and other updates.
Profile is the student’s space to show off her achievements, including badges, virtual items,
experience points, leaderboards’ top positions, and course progress.
4 Conclusion
Although gamification has its effectiveness demonstrated in engaging students with learning
activities, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, until now there has been no programming
learning environment that would be, at the same time, open-source, reusable across distinct
courses on various programming languages, and enabling instructors to compose their own
gamification layer providing a good selection of components to choose from.
This paper introduces a novel programming learning environment having all the traits
mentioned above. It is implemented as a progressive web application that constitutes a single
interface to a complete ecosystem for gamified programming education developed within
the Framework for Gamified Programming Education project [9]; particularly, it renders
exercises in the YAPEXIL format [24] and connects with the FGPE GS [21], which processes
students’ submissions and gamification rules defined in the GEdIL [31] format, generating a
relevant instant feedback to the students. Both the programming exercises and gamification
layers can be created with the companion FGPE AuthorKit tool [23].
The work described here constitutes the final artifact to complete the ecosystem proposed
by the Framework for Gamified Programming Education project [9]. A complete validation
of the work developed in this project with a large group of students is the immediate next
step in our agenda. Furthermore, the FGPE project will have its continuation in the FGPE
Plus project, which aims to make the PLE embeddable in any LTI-compliant Learning
Management System as well as enhance the PLE’s user experience on mobile devices.
References
1 Paul E. Anderson, Thomas Nash, and Renée McCauley. Facilitating Programming Success in
Data Science Courses Through GamiĄed Scaffolding and Learn2Mine. In Proceedings of the
2015 ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, ITiCSE
Š15, pages 99Ű104, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM. doi:10.1145/2729094.2742597.
2 Tapio Auvinen, Lasse Hakulinen, and Lauri Malmi. Increasing studentsŠ awareness of their
behavior in online learning environments with visualizations and achievement badges. IEEE
Transactions on Learning Technologies, 8(3):261Ű273, 2015. doi:10.1109/tlt.2015.2441718.
3 Gabriel Barata, Sandra Gama, Joaquim Jorge, and Daniel Gonçalves. Studying student
differentiation in gamiĄed education: A long-term study. Computers in Human Behavior,
71(Supplement C):550Ű585, 2017. doi:10.1016/[Link].2016.08.049.
4 Andrija Bernik, Goran Bubas, and Danijel Radosevic. A Pilot Study of the InĆuence of
GamiĄcation on the Effectiveness of an e-Learning Course. In Central European Conference
on Information and Intelligent Systems, pages 73Ű79, Varaždin, Croatia, 2015. University of
Zagreb, Faculty of Organization and Informatics.
J. C. Paiva, R. Queirós, J. P. Leal, J. Swacha, and F. Miernik 5:7
5 Mads T. Bonde, Guido Makransky, Jakob Wandall, Mette V. Larsen, Mikkel Morsing, Hanne
Jarmer, and Morten O. A. Sommer. Improving biotech education through gamiĄed laboratory
simulations. Nature biotechnology, 32(7):694Ű697, 2014. doi:10.1038/nbt.2955.
6 Katheryn R. Christy and Jesse Fox. Leaderboards in a virtual classroom: A test of stereotype
threat and social comparison explanations for womenŠs math performance. Computers &
Education, 78(Supplement C):66Ű77, 2014. doi:10.1016/[Link].2014.05.005.
7 Facebook. React: A JavaScript library for building user interfaces. [Link]
2021. accessed on 16 Jan 2021.
8 Usef Faghihi, Albert Brautigam, Kris Jorgenson, David Martin, Angela Brown, Elizabeth
Measures, and Sioui Maldonado-Bouchard. How gamiĄcation applies for educational purpose
specially with college algebra. Procedia Computer Science, 41(Supplement C):182Ű187, 2014.
5th Annual International Conference on Biologically Inspired Cognitive Architectures, 2014
BICA. doi:10.1016/[Link].2014.11.102.
9 FGPE Consortium. Framework for GamiĄed Programming Education. [Link]
[Link], 2018. accessed on 19 Mar 2021.
10 Wad Ghaban and Robert Hendley. How Different Personalities BeneĄt From GamiĄcation.
Interacting with Computers, 31(2):138Ű153, March 2019. doi:10.1093/iwc/iwz009.
11 Lasse Hakulinen, Tapio Auvinen, and Ari Korhonen. The Effect of Achievement Badges on
StudentsŠ Behavior: An Empirical Study in a University-Level Computer Science Course.
International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 10(1):18Ű29, 2015. doi:10.3991/
ijet.v10i1.4221.
12 Michael D. Hanus and Jesse Fox. Assessing the effects of gamiĄcation in the classroom: A
longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic
performance. Computers & Education, 80:152Ű161, 2015. doi:10.1016/[Link].2014.08.
019.
13 Tatsuhito Hasegawa, Makoto Koshino, and Hiromi Ban. An English vocabulary learning
support system for the learnerŠs sustainable motivation. SpringerPlus, 4(1):99, 2015. doi:
10.1186/s40064-015-0792-2.
14 Caitlin Holman, Stephen J. Aguilar, Adam Levick, Jeff Stern, Benjamin Plummer, and
Barry Fishman. Planning for Success: How Students Use a Grade Prediction Tool to Win
Their Classes. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Learning Analytics And
Knowledge, pages 260Ű264, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM. doi:10.1145/2723576.2723632.
15 Jincheul Jang, Jason J. Y. Park, and Mun Y. Yi. GamiĄcation of online learning. In Cristina
Conati, Neil Heffernan, Antonija Mitrovic, and M. Felisa Verdejo, editors, Artificial Intelligence
in Education, pages 646Ű649, Cham, 2015. Springer International Publishing.
16 Hieke Keuning, Johan Jeuring, and Bastiaan Heeren. Towards a Systematic Review of
Automated Feedback Generation for Programming Exercises. In Proceedings of the 2016
ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, pages 41Ű46,
Arequipa Peru, 2016. ACM. doi:10.1145/2899415.2899422.
17 Keycloak. Keycloak: open source identity and access management solution. [Link]
[Link], 2014. accessed on 9 Jan 2021.
18 José Paulo Leal and Fernando Silva. Mooshak: A Web-based multi-site programming contest
system. Software: Practice and Experience, 33(6):567Ű581, 2003. doi:10.1002/spe.522.
19 Microsoft. Monaco Editor. [Link] 2021. accessed
on 16 Jan 2021.
20 Christa R Nevin, Andrew O Westfall, J Martin Rodriguez, Donald M Dempsey, Andrea
Cherrington, Brita Roy, Mukesh Patel, and James H Willig. GamiĄcation as a tool for
enhancing graduate medical education. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 90(1070):685Ű693, 2014.
doi:10.1136/postgradmedj-2013-132486.
21 José Carlos Paiva, Alicja Haraszczuk, Ricardo Queirós, José Paulo Leal, Jakub Swacha, and
Sokol Kosta. FGPE GamiĄcation Service: A GraphQL Service to Gamify Online Education.
ICPEC 2021
5:8 An Open-Source Gamified Programming Learning Environment
In Proceedings of the 9th World Conference on Information Systems and Technologies, Terceira
Island, Azores, Portugal, 2021. Springer. (to appear).
22 José Carlos Paiva, José Paulo Leal, and Ricardo Alexandre Queirós. Enki: A Pedagogical
Services Aggregator for Learning Programming Languages, page 332Ű337. ACM, New York,
NY, USA, 2016.
23 José Carlos Paiva, Ricardo Queirós, José Paulo Leal, and Jakub Swacha. FGPE AuthorKit Ű
A Tool for Authoring GamiĄed Programming Educational Content. In Proceedings of the 2020
ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, ITiCSE Š20,
page 564, New York, NY, USA, 2020. ACM. doi:10.1145/3341525.3393978.
24 José Carlos Paiva, Ricardo Queirós, José Paulo Leal, and Jakub Swacha. Yet Another Pro-
gramming Exercises Interoperability Language (Short Paper). In Alberto Simões, Pedro Ran-
gel Henriques, and Ricardo Queirós, editors, 9th Symposium on Languages, Applications
and Technologies (SLATE 2020), volume 83 of OpenAccess Series in Informatics (OASIcs),
pages 14:1Ű14:8, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2020. Schloss DagstuhlŰLeibniz-Zentrum für Informatik.
doi:10.4230/[Link].2020.14.
25 Mads Kock Pedersen, Anette Svenningsen, Niels Bonderup Dohn, Andreas Lieberoth, and
Jacob Sherson. DiffGame: Game-based Mathematics Learning for Physics. Procedia - Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 228(Supplement C):316Ű322, 2016. 2nd International Conference
on Higher Education Advances,HEAdŠ16, 21-23 June 2016, València, Spain. doi:10.1016/j.
sbspro.2016.07.047.
26 Bernadette Perry. Gamifying French Language Learning: A Case Study Examining a Quest-
based, Augmented Reality Mobile Learning-tool. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,
174(Supplement C):2308Ű2315, 2015. International Conference on New Horizons in Education,
INTE 2014, 25-27 June 2014, Paris, France. doi:10.1016/[Link].2015.01.892.
27 Robin K. Pettit, Lise McCoy, Marjorie Kinney, and Frederic N. Schwartz. Student perceptions
of gamiĄed audience response system interactions in large group lectures and via lecture capture
technology. BMC medical education, 15(1):92, 2015. doi:10.1186/s12909-015-0373-7.
28 Bardh Prenkaj, Giovanni Stilo, and Lorenzo Madeddu. Challenges and Solutions to the Student
Dropout Prediction Problem in Online Courses. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM International
Conference on Information & Knowledge Management, CIKM Š20, page 3513Ű3514, New York,
NY, USA, 2020. ACM. doi:10.1145/3340531.3412172.
29 Valerie J. Shute. Focus on Formative Feedback. Review of Educational Research, 78(1):153Ű189,
2008. doi:10.3102/0034654307313795.
30 Jakub Swacha. State of Research on GamiĄcation in Education: A Bibliometric Survey.
Education Sciences, 11(2):69, 2021. doi:10.3390/educsci11020069.
31 Jakub Swacha, José Carlos Paiva, José Paulo Leal, Ricardo Queirós, Raffaele Montella, and
Sokol Kosta. GEdILŰGamiĄed Education Interoperability Language. Information, 11(6):287,
May 2020. doi:10.3390/info11060287.
32 Jakub Swacha, Ricardo Queirós, José Carlos Paiva, and José Paulo Leal. DeĄning requirements
for a gamiĄed programming exercises format. Procedia Computer Science, 159:2502Ű2511,
2019. Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems: Proceedings of
the 23rd International Conference KES2019. doi:10.1016/[Link].2019.09.425.
33 Alexandru Topîrceanu. GamiĄed learning: A role-playing approach to increase student in-class
motivation. Procedia Computer Science, 112(Supplement C):41Ű50, 2017. Proceedings of KES
2017, Marseille, France. doi:10.1016/[Link].2017.08.017.
34 Andika Y. Utomo, AĄfa Amriani, Alham F. Aji, Fatin R. N. Wahidah, and Kasiyah M. Junus.
GamiĄed E-learning model based on community of inquiry. In Advanced Computer Science and
Information Systems (ICACSIS), 2014 International Conference on, pages 474Ű480, Jakarta,
Indonesia, 2014. IEEE, IEEE. doi:10.1109/icacsis.2014.7065830.
35 Ibrahim Yildirim. The effects of gamiĄcation-based teaching practices on student achievement
and studentsŠ attitudes toward lessons. The Internet and Higher Education, 33(Supplement
C):86Ű92, 2017. doi:10.1016/[Link].2017.02.002.