Comparing Gamified and Traditional Assessment Environments: A Quasi-Experimental Study in a University Python Course

This study examines student-performance outcomes by comparing two distinct assessment environments—a traditional paper-based exam and a complex gamified digital format—in a university-level introductory Python programming course. A quasi-experimental comparison with student self-selection was conducted at John von Neumann University (Hungary) with 63 first-year Information Technology students. Twenty-seven students took a conventional paper-based exam, while 36 completed the assessment in CodingUs, a custom-built “Among Us”-inspired web application. This gamified condition operated as a package intervention, incorporating not only game design elements but also individualized AI-generated tasks, disabled clipboard operations, and a distinct user interface. Isomorphic Python tasks were produced by an AI-assisted generation pipeline using GPT-4o-mini and GPT-4o. Performance was compared using the Mann–Whitney U test as the primary procedure, with an independent-samples t-test as a supplementary parametric analysis. The two groups did not differ significantly in mean performance (gamified: M = 63.06%, SD = 31.61; traditional: M = 68.89%, SD = 34.68; Mann–Whitney U = 423.50, p = .383; t(61) = −0.70, p = .490; Cohen’s d = −0.18; 95% CI for the mean difference [−22.61, +10.94]). While no statistically significant difference in performance was detected in this sample, the wide confidence interval and the self-selection nature of the design preclude claims of equivalence. Informal classroom observations and unsolicited student feedback offered preliminary indications of elevated engagement and favourable perceptions of the anti-cheating provisions in the gamified cohort; because no validated self-report instrument was administered, these impressions are reported as exploratory rather than confirmatory. The study contributes a replicable AI-supported pipeline for generating isomorphic programming items and motivates further research employing randomised allocation and validated measurement instruments.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences)
Published
2026-09-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.24368/jates418
Primary Topic
Educational Games and Gamification
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Comparing Gamified and Traditional Assessment Environments: A Quasi-Experimental Study in a University Python Course

József Cserkó
Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences)
Educational Games and Gamification
article

Comparing Gamified and Traditional Assessment Environments: A Quasi-Experimental Study in a University Python Course

József Cserkó
article en

Abstract

This study examines student-performance outcomes by comparing two distinct assessment environments—a traditional paper-based exam and a complex gamified digital format—in a university-level introductory Python programming course. A quasi-experimental comparison with student self-selection was conducted at John von Neumann University (Hungary) with 63 first-year Information Technology students. Twenty-seven students took a conventional paper-based exam, while 36 completed the assessment in CodingUs, a custom-built “Among Us”-inspired web application. This gamified condition operated as a package intervention, incorporating not only game design elements but also individualized AI-generated tasks, disabled clipboard operations, and a distinct user interface. Isomorphic Python tasks were produced by an AI-assisted generation pipeline using GPT-4o-mini and GPT-4o. Performance was compared using the Mann–Whitney U test as the primary procedure, with an independent-samples t-test as a supplementary parametric analysis. The two groups did not differ significantly in mean performance (gamified: M = 63.06%, SD = 31.61; traditional: M = 68.89%, SD = 34.68; Mann–Whitney U = 423.50, p = .383; t(61) = −0.70, p = .490; Cohen’s d = −0.18; 95% CI for the mean difference [−22.61, +10.94]). While no statistically significant difference in performance was detected in this sample, the wide confidence interval and the self-selection nature of the design preclude claims of equivalence. Informal classroom observations and unsolicited student feedback offered preliminary indications of elevated engagement and favourable perceptions of the anti-cheating provisions in the gamified cohort; because no validated self-report instrument was administered, these impressions are reported as exploratory rather than confirmatory. The study contributes a replicable AI-supported pipeline for generating isomorphic programming items and motivates further research employing randomised allocation and validated measurement instruments.

Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences)
John von Neumann University (HU)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Educational Games and Gamification
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Comparing Gamified and Traditional Assessment Environments: A Quasi-Experimental Study in a University Python Course — József Cserkó · Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS