Gamification in teacher education

Trend or sustainable transformation

Bibliographic Data

ID22164012
AuthorsMiguel Alberto Rincón Pinzón (0000-0002-6827-5209, Universidad de La Sabana), Ana Dolores Vargas Sánchez (0000-0002-5633-0901, Universidad de La Sabana), Juanita del Pilar Pedraza Córdoba (Universidad Carlos III de Madrid), Juanita Pedraza Córdoba (0000-0002-0168-1392, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid)
Year2026
Volume11
Publication date2026-07-03
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFrontiers in Education (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2504-284X • E-ISSN: 2504-284X
PublisherFrontiers Media SA (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3389/feduc.2026.1837318
OpenAlexW7167261621
LanguageEN
References cited29

Gamification has become a recurrent reference in educational discourse in recent years, appearing alongside concepts such as motivation, participation, and innovation in teacher education programs, pedagogical forums, and conferences. The term originated in the business sector as a strategy for employee engagement and has since been adopted in education as a phenomenon that engages both instructors and students, challenging traditional pedagogical methods. Its integration has been shown to foster motivation, promote student participation, and develop critical thinking (Agustín, 2023;Amorim et al., 2023;Guerrero Puerta, 2024;Manzano-León et al., 2022;Navarro-Mateos and Pérez-López, 2024). This prevalence, however, raises a consequential question: is gamification merely another educational trend, or does it represent a structural and sustainable transformation of the teaching profession?This opinion article focuses on a critical aspect of modern teacher development: the integration of technological gamification into teacher education. Although analogous non-digital experiences hold value (Guerrero Miguel et al., 2024;Marczewski, 2018), the emphasis here is on technology-mediated gamification, which has gained particular prominence in virtual, hybrid, and technology-mediated face-to-face training environments (Amutha Rani and Vasimalairaja, 2024). Through the analysis of recent trends and specialized literature, we argue that gamification represents a long-term pedagogical evolution provided it is accompanied by the structural conditions necessary for sustained institutional adoption. The arguments presented draw on a narrative and critical reading of specialized literature retrieved primarily from Scopus and Web of Science, with priority given to publications from 2018 to 2025, selected on the basis of thematic relevance to gamification in teacher education, professional competency development, and the sustainability of pedagogical innovation.Gamification involves the deliberate application of video game design mechanics such as point systems, levels, challenges, and rewards in non-gaming contexts (Deterding et al., 2011). This approach enhances learning by incorporating dynamics that foster engagement, curiosity, and self-regulation. Teachers using gamification empower students to take an active role by confronting challenges, navigating varying difficulty levels, and receiving continuous feedback (Kapp, 2012;Werbach and Hunter, 2012). This methodology is founded on fundamental principles: the establishment of clear objectives that direct learning toward measurable and achievable goals; continuous feedback that enables reflection, strategy adjustment, and progress (Su and Cheng, 2015); and reward systems that reinforce desirable behaviors such as perseverance and collaboration, in accordance with reinforcement theory (Skinner, 1965) and self-determination theory (Deci and Ryan, 1985). A well-organized gamified environment also features a progressive narrative and adjustable challenge levels, allowing each student a unique experience that promotes advanced cognitive development (Zichermann and Cunningham, 2011).Despite this evidence, there is still considerable opposition in school and university settings, most often rooted in the belief that play detracts from the seriousness of the educational process. Paradoxically, in contexts where demotivation is growing, gamification can improve teaching and reconnect students emotionally with content (Hamari et al., 2014). Gamification does not replace established approaches; rather, it enhances them by providing experiences that reignite the desire to learn.The harsh reality of structural implementation: barriers that cannot be overlooked Despite growing enthusiasm, widespread implementation of gamification confronts significant hurdles. Teaching staff resistance to change is one of the primary obstacles: many educators with established careers in traditional methods report unease when confronted with gamified approaches that require them to alter familiar practices (Flores-Aguilar et al., 2023;Morera et al., 2024). This resistance reflects a reasonable concern that integrating playful elements considerably increases workload and complicates structured planning, while outcomes remain uncertain.A structural limitation compounds this challenge: the absence of sufficient resources and specific training to guarantee successful implementation. Many educational institutions, particularly those in high-vulnerability or budget-constrained environments, are unable to provide their teaching staff with the financial, technological, and human resources required to adopt gamified platforms or emerging digital methodologies (Cavalcante Pimentel et al., 2020;Liu et al., 2023;Botella Nicolás and Cabañero Castillo, 2020;Sampedro-Martín et al., 2023;Santos-Villalba et al., 2020). This preparation disparity restricts access to quality training opportunities and perpetuates exclusionary dynamics, widening the digital divide.These barriers, however, are not uniformly distributed. In contexts with strong digital infrastructure and institutional autonomy, such as parts of Northern Europe and East Asia, gamification tends to be implemented through purpose-built platforms, supported by structured teacher training and clear pedagogical guidelines (Liu et al., 2023). By contrast, in Latin American and sub-Saharan African educational systems, where resource constraints are compounded by centralized curricula and limited continuing professional development, gamification frequently remains confined to isolated, low-cost adaptations driven by individual teacher initiative rather than institutional design (Sambo et al., 2025;Ikpat, 2025). This disparity shows that gamification's transformative potential is not solely a function of its pedagogical merit, but of the structural and cultural conditions that either enable or constrain it. Cultural attitudes toward play as a legitimate pedagogical tool, institutional expectations around formalized instruction, and the degree of teacher autonomy all mediate how gamification is received and sustained in different educational settings (Mediavilla et al., 2025;Saavedra et al., 2024). These challenges are structural rather than individual or anecdotal. The prerequisites for change are not evenly distributed. Addressing them requires action on two fronts: establishing coherent education policies that sustain teacher development and resource allocation; and transforming institutional cultures to recognize play as a legitimate pedagogical tool, allowing educators to adopt flexible and innovative methodologies without institutional penalty.The comparative analysis of gamification against traditional techniques in teacher education (Table 1) underscores methodological and conceptual distinctions that directly affect the teaching and learning experience. The conventional methodology predominantly emphasizes the passive dissemination of content (Sánchez et al., 2024), wherein the teacher assumes a central role as the purveyor of knowledge while the student remains a passive recipient. Gamification transforms these dynamics by fostering active, interactive learning within meaningful experiences, redefining the teacher as a designer of learning environments that cultivate curiosity, motivation, and emotional engagement (Flores-Aguilar et al., 2023).In terms of motivation and assessment, gamification encourages intrinsic motivation based on personal performance, overcoming obstacles, and symbolic rewards whereas conventional approaches rely on extrinsic motivation tied to grades and task fulfillment. This enables a shift from summative assessment to formative evaluation with continuous progress tracking and instantaneous feedback, improving meaningful learning and sustained involvement (Álvarez et al., 2024). In terms of competencies, traditional methods emphasize memorization and repetition, whereas gamification fosters critical thinking, problem-solving, creativity, and collaborative work all deemed indispensable for 21st-century education (Álvarez et al., 2024). This collection of contrasts does not suggest that traditional methods are entirely disqualified; rather, it encourages exploration of the potential for integrating both approaches. The issue is not one of substitution but of synergy developing more comprehensive, contextualized, and effective educational experiences. Gamification represents an opportunity to reconsider the roles of teacher, student, and knowledge, provided it is accompanied by training, resources, and educational regulations that acknowledge its transformative potential.Beyond the methodological contrast, three emerging developments reinforce gamification's long-term relevance in teacher education: the integration of augmented reality into gamified scenarios, the use of artificial intelligence and learning analytics to adapt difficulty and feedback in real time, and the formation of cooperative online communities where aspiring educators exchange practices and build collective knowledge. Together, these developments suggest that gamification is not approaching obsolescence but deepening integration, which is a trajectory consistent with sustainable pedagogical transformation.What distinguishes gamification in teacher education from its application in other disciplinary contexts is the particular alignment of its mechanisms with the competencies demanded of professional educators. When pre-service teachers encounter progressive challenges modeled on authentic classroom scenarios, such as managing differentiated instruction or navigating conflicting pedagogical demands, they engage in situated problem-solving that mirrors professional decision-making (Villalustre-Martínez, 2024). Role-based simulations and criterionreferenced feedback prompt iterative reflection rather than passive reception, directly supporting instructional design skills and pedagogical adaptability. Gamified rubrics, where assessment criteria are made visible and negotiable, strengthen formative evaluation competencies while cultivating digital literacy (De la Serna-Monge et al., 2025).Collaborative missions and shared narrative structures require pre-service teachers to negotiate curricular priorities, practice professional communication, and exercise self-regulation under structured uncertainty, competencies that lecture formats do not reliably produce (Passarelli et al., 2022;Pozzi and Persico, 2024). This sequence of challenge, feedback, reflection, and pedagogical transfer constitutes a coherent, if provisional, model for competency formation through gamification. Its effectiveness remains contingent on intentional instructional design, alignment between game mechanics and professional outcomes, and institutional contexts that support experimentation.This opinion article has argued that gamification, rather than a transitory trend, carries genuine transformative potential in teacher education, provided its implementation is intentional, technology-mediated, and grounded in sound pedagogical design. Evidence from teacher education contexts suggests that, under these conditions, gamification can support self-regulation, strengthen intrinsic motivation, and encourage reflective practice (Passarelli et al., 2022;Wu et al., 2023). Its capacity to reconceptualize error as a productive learning resource, through progressive challenges, immediate feedback, and adaptive reward systems, represents a meaningful departure from penalty-based assessment models. However, effects on academic achievement are not uniformly positive: a longitudinal study spanning ten years in a teacher education program found that game elements contributed to participation but did not consistently improve academic outcomes, underscoring the importance of design quality over mere gamification adoption (Svanberg & Bergh, 2023).For educators, engaging with gamification requires more than familiarity with digital platforms; it demands competency in instructional design and the capacity to align game mechanics with specific learning objectives. When supported by adequate institutional training and resources, gamification may reposition educators as designers of learning environments rather than transmitters of content (Liu et al., 2023;Flores-Aguilar et al., 2023). This shift is neither automatic nor universal: in contexts where teacher professional development is fragmented or underfunded, gamification tends to remain a peripheral experiment driven by individual initiative rather than institutional commitment.At the institutional level, sustainable adoption depends on structural conditions that extend beyond technology access. A systematic review of barriers in developing countries identifies cultural misconceptions about play, limited infrastructure, and insufficient teacher training as the primary obstacles to meaningful gamification integration (Sambo et al., 2025). Similarly, evidence from Nigerian primary schools indicates that teacher perceptions of gamification vary considerably depending on prior training and institutional support, with skepticism more prevalent where those conditions are absent (Ikpat, 2025). These findings reinforce the article's central argument: gamification may contribute to sustained pedagogical transformation, but only where institutional policy, cultural relevance, and continuous professional development converge to support it.Several limitations of this article warrant acknowledgment. As an Opinion piece, it does not present original empirical data, nor does it follow a systematic review protocol; the arguments are grounded in a critical and interpretive reading of specialized literature rather than in primary research. The conclusions should therefore be understood as reasoned academic positions supported by available evidence, not as causal claims. Additionally, the evidence base on gamification in teacher education is still uneven across institutional levels, educational systems, and cultural contexts, which means that the applicability of the arguments presented here will vary depending on local infrastructure, teacher training conditions, and curricular policy. These constraints do not diminish the article's analytical contribution, but they do underscore the need for empirical research that tests and refines the propositions advanced here across diverse educational settings.Gamification in teacher education represents more than a methodological innovation; it reflects a broader reconceptualization of how professional competencies are formed in digital learning environments. The evidence reviewed in this article shows that, when deliberately designed and institutionally supported, gamification can contribute meaningfully to the development of instructional design skills, formative assessment competencies, self-regulation, and collaborative professional practice in pre-service teachers. These gains, however, are not automatic: they depend on the quality of pedagogical design, the alignment between game mechanics and learning objectives, and the structural conditions that either enable or constrain sustained implementation.For universities, this means treating gamification not as a peripheral enrichment activity but as a component of institutional digital transformation, supported by stable infrastructure, recognition of pedagogical innovation in faculty evaluation, and communities of practice for collaborative instructional design. For teacher education programs, it calls for explicitly integrating gamification design into didactics and digital competency courses, preparing future educators to construct challenge sequences, formative rubrics, and feedback mechanisms aligned with professional teaching competencies. For educational policymakers, the priority should be ensuring that digital transformation strategies include sustained teacher training, equitable technology access, and mandated pedagogical accompaniment rather than tool adoption alone.Realizing gamification's potential as a driver of sustainable pedagogical transformation ultimately requires coherence across these three levels. Isolated institutional experiments, however well designed, are unlikely to produce systemic change without policy frameworks that recognize the conditions under which pedagogical innovation genuinely takes root. Future empirical research should examine how these enabling conditions interact in different educational systems and whether the competency formation mechanisms identified here hold across diverse cultural and institutional contexts

Narrative · Phenomenon · Sustainability · Thematic analysis · E-Learning and Knowledge Management · Educational Games and Gamification · Technology-Enhanced Education Studies

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access