---
title: "Design Principles of the Gamified E-Assessment for Low Achievers in Introductory Programming"
source: "Design Principles of the Gamified E-Assessment for Low Achievers in Introductory Programming.pdf"
converted: "2026-10-01 10:30:13 +0800"
converter: "MarkForge (mdconvert)"
engine: "PyMuPDF4LLM (11 page(s), OCR on 11)"
conversion_warnings:
  - "No text layer on page(s) 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11: text came from OCR (Tesseract, English) - verify identifiers, numbers and symbols before trusting them."
---

Available online at ‘nttps://jcrinn.cora/ 

‘nttps://jcrinn.cora/ Journal of https://crinn.conferencehunter.com/ Computing Research and Journal of Computing Research and Innovation 10(1) 2025 Innovation 


<!-- Start of picture text -->
gCRI NN https://crinn.conferencehunter.com/<br>canteen<br><!-- End of picture text -->

## Design Principles of the Gamified E-Assessment for Low Achievers in Introductory Programming 

# Mahfudzah Othman", Aznoora Osmar2, Siti Zulaiha Ahmad}, Natrah Abdullah @ Dolah* 

125College ofComputing, Mathematics and Informatics, Universiti Teknologi MARA Perlis Branch, Arau Campus, Malaysia ‘College of Computing, Mathematics and Informatics, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Shah Alam, Malaysia 

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Article history: Designing a gamified e-assessment that tailored to the learning Received 19 Dec 2024 requirements of low-achieving students in introductory programming Revised 28 Jan 2025 always remains a challenge. By focusing on the integration of Accepted 2 Feb 2025 gamification and assessment design principles in e-learning platforms Published1 March 2025 for learning programming, this study uses a comparative analysis TTTTOO approelicit **a** tionch thatand comprisesfiltration, andof threeiii) review, main phases,analysisi)andliteraex **t** ureractionsearch,of theii) Keywords: _ design principles. Through this qualitative approach, the gamification Design Principles principles such as the achievement, progression and rules and challenges Gamification have been extracted together with the elements of levels, points, badges, Eleaning progress bars, and leader board. The assessment principles have also Low Achisvers been detived consisting of the assessment structure and assessment Introductory Programming composition with sub principles of problem-based instructional strategy, DOI: ~ formative assessment, post-test strategy, assessment levels, and 10.24191 jcrinn.v10i1.489 df **e** monstratededback strategy.throughThetheproposedapplicationdesignin theprinciplesgamifiedhavee-assessmalso b **e** ennt module in an e-learning system. 

1. 

### INTRODUCTION 

In designing instructional materials for e-learning, it is important to understand the framework of e-learning. Khan (2010) proposes a framework for flexible e-learning that highlights eight dimensions of e-learning, including institutional, management, technological, pedagogical, ethical, resource support, user interface and evaluation. Each dimension has its own focus that contributes to effective learning in an e-learning environment, such as the institutional dimension deals with administrative affairs, academic affairs and others related to student services affairs (Khan, 2010; Haron et al., 2019; Bekele et al., 2022). The management aspect deals with the e-learning system’s maintenance and information distribution (Khan, 2010; Angelia et al., 2020). Meanwhile, the ethical dimension refers to social, political, etiquette, and legal issues (Khan, 2010; Haron et al., 2019; Bekele et al, 2022). The technological aspects deal with the infrastructure, hardware and software. Resource support refers to the online support and resources required 

1 Corresponding author. E-mail address: fudzah@uitm.edu.my 

bttps/d doi org) 10.2419 rian v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


121 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

for e-learning (Khan, 2010; Haron et al., 2019). In designing instructional materials for any learning environment, the three main aspects that are crucial in enhancing user experiences are the pedagogical, user interface and evaluation dimensions (Khan, 2010; Angelia et al., 2020). 

Nevertheless, in learning computer programming through online platforms, many e-learning systems were developed for general population of students, without taking any consideration of low-achieving students, especially in the e-assessment aspects. Low-achieving students tend to be demotivated and loss interests when the learning environment becomes more challenging with difficult assessments to be completed (Mehmood et al., 2020; Kadar et al., 2021). To address this issue, some academicians have utilised the gamification elements to encourage novices for self-evaluation and monitoring to enhance their awareness of their own progression and achievement in this course such as studies by Khaleel et al. (2019) and Alsubhi et al. (2021). They have proposed using gamification elements such as unlocking levels with progress bars, and accumulation of points and badges. Even so, these studies are still lacking in identifying the assessment principles that are suitable for online assessments for low-achieving students. Therefore, this paper focuses on the e-assessment design for introductory programming course that are suitable for low-achieving students based on the gamification and assessment principles derived from the comparative analyses of previous studies. This paper also showcases how the proposed design principles were applied in the e-assessment for introductory programming to cater to the low achievers’ learning requirements. 

# 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 

# 2.1 Low Achievers in Introductory Programming 

Among novices or beginners in programming, learning introductory programming has always been challenging for many, especially for low-achieving students (Kadar et al., 2021; Othman et al., 2022). Lowachieving students in introductory programming courses can be categorised as students who are slow learners, have low motivation and interest in this subject (Alshammari, 2019; Kadar et al., 2021; Othman et al..2022). The difficulties that they are facing while learning this subject may also cause them to be less motivated and drop out of this course (Mehmood et al., 2020; Kadar et al., 2021). Other than that, the challenges in trying to grasp the fundamental concepts of introductory programming often cause them to be left behind compared to their high achievers’ colleagues (Margulieux et al, 2020; Othman et al..2022). Despite this, over the years, academicians have strived to overcome this issue by providing the novices with different teaching and learning approaches, especially with the help of educational technologies such as mobile applications, e-learning systems, interactive multimedia, and gamification (Kamunya et al., 2020; Christopher & Waworuntu, 2021). Nonetheless, designing instructional technologies with design principles suitable for the low-achieving students in introductory programming are still lacking, especially in designing the gamified e-assessments, where e-assessments are integrated with gamification and assessment principles. The idea of such integration comes from the fact that to increase students’ motivation and gain their interest, the assessment module in the e-learning platform can be gamified with elements that engage students’ attention and encourage them to self-monitor their progress (Li et al., 2024). For example, Imran (2023) utilises elements of points, badges, levels and leader board in the gamified e- assessments as the students answer the challenges and progress through each level. His study emphasises on the assessment principles such as post-test strategy and feedback mechanisms that was found useful for the students to stay motivated when test or assessment was given after the learning module with automatic feedback (Imran, 2023). Other than that, Nadja (2022) also integrates gamification principles in the design of the e-assessment where each assessment has different levels of difficulties. Furthermore, the instructional design of the e-assessment for the introductory programming course must also uses problembased instructional strategy where real-world problems were used to improve students’ ability in providing possible solutions (Alshammari, 2019; Nadja, 2022). 

‘attps/ doi org/10.24191 rina v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


122 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

# 2.2 Gamification Design in E-Learning for Programming 

Gamification, defined by Deterding et al. (2011) is "the process of adding game like elements to activities that are not normally game like". Over the years, gamification in the field of instructional technology has gained many interests among academicians. For instance, Christopher and Waworuntu (2021) applied Chao (2015) Octalysis Framework in the development of an online gamified system for teaching Java programming. Chou identified eight core motives namely epic meaning and calling, development and accomplishment, empowerment of creativity and feedback, ownership and possession, social influence and relatedness, scarcity and impatience, unpredictability and curiosity, and loss and avoidance. Christopher and Waworuntu (2021) have incorporated the game elements which include leader board, level, points, and virtual goods in an Android application to teach Java programming. The app was tried on second year students and the students’ trial participation revealed and their interest in this subject has increased. Another research done by Khaleel et al. (2019) engaged the MDA framework by Hunicke et al. (2004) to develop a gamified learning website for Java programming. This paper also explained how game mechanics, which are the tools embedded in the programming content proved to improve the students’ motivation. Meanwhile, game dynamics, which are the user’s interactions with the game mechanics, and the aesthetics of the app, which are the user’s emotions during the interaction also played a role in creating a good user interface. The MDA framework was also used to develop an online learning system which incorporated several game elements such as points, badges, levels and leader board. 

In designing the gamified e-assessment for introductory programming, it is essential in determining the gamification principles and elements that are suitable to be applied in the context of e-learning environment. Some of the most preferred gamification principles for e-learning systems are rules and challenges, achievement, progression, narrative and sensation (Khaleel et al., 2019; Nadja, 2022). Meanwhile, gamification elements that have been applied in many gamified e-learning systems are points, badges, levels, leader board, Avatar, gifts or virtual goods (Kamunya et al., 2020; Christopher & Waworuntu, 2021). Nevertheless, these studies mainly focussing on gamified e-assessment for general population of students, such as Khaleel et al. (2019) has proved that gamification application in assessment has improved 80% of students’ knowledge, motivation and achievement. Meanwhile, in terms of designing the gamified e- assessment that focuses on low achievers in introductory programming, it requires in depth investigation and analysis to determine whether these gamification principles and elements are appropriate for the target users. Further discussions on extracting the gamification design principles for these target users will be discussed in the next section. 

# 2.3 Assessment Design in E-Learning for Programming 

Shalatska et al. (2020) emphasize that when designing assessments for an e-learning environment, it is important to consider the assessment structure and composition, which should align with the target audience and the objectives of the assessment. The design should outline the skills to be assessed, offer necessary knowledge and feedback, and provide clear instructions along with explicit assessment criteria, specific characteristics, and settings. The assessment structure pertains to the overall instructional strategies and assessment formats, while the assessment composition focuses on the specific content or tasks involved, including cognitive levels, formats, and feedback strategies (Shalatska et al., 2020; Scherer et al., 2020: Santos, 2023). 

In designing the assessment in the e-learning platform especially to learn introductory programming for low achievers, several factors need to be addressed. For instance, the principles for assessment structures must consists of problem-based instructional strategy that emphasises on real-world case scenarios (Scherer et al., 2020; Santos, 2023). Other than that, determining the type of assessment is also important, such as providing the summative or formative assessments. As summative assessments deal with the grading and certification, formative assessments seem to be more appropriate to be implemented in the gamified e-learning environment for learning introductory programming (Pitoyo et al., 2020). Formative ‘attps/d doi org/10.24191 rian v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


123 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

assessments such as e-quizzes, short-structured questions, multiple choices, sequencing and arranging, true or false questions are more suitable to assess low achievers’ knowledge and understanding in introductory programming (Pitoyo et al., 2020). Other than that, for the principles of assessment composition, factors such as post-test strategy, assessment levels and feedback strategies are also essential for the gamified e- assessment. Post-test strategy is needed as low-achieving students need to be assessed after the learning have occurred, to ensure the learning have impacts on their knowledge (Zaharias, 2009). Meanwhile, assessment levels by utilising the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy Cognitive Domain (RBT) are also useful in order to show low-achieving students’ progress in solving introductory programming problems, promoting self-regulating mechanism (Santos, 2023). Furthermore, prompt and automated feedback strategies are also useful to improve low achievers’ understanding and motivation as they can self-evaluate and monitor their achievements through completed assessments (Lane et al., 2015; Pérez-Clark et al., 2020). 

# 3. METHODOLOGY 

A comparative analysis approach by Ahmad and Abdul Mutalib (2015) was adapted in the methodology. This qualitative method includes three main stages, which are i) literature review, ii) elicitation and filtering, and iii) review, analysis, and extraction of design principles. 

(i) Literature search 

To find articles related to the design principles of a gamified e-assessment in an e-learning platform, an extensive literature search was conducted throughout multiple literature databases, such as Web of Science, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, and Google Scholar. For advanced searches, other keywords have been used, such as “introductory programming AND novices”, “introductory programming AND low achievers,” “e-learning AND novices,” “e-learning AND gamification,” “e-learning AND assessment”. All related articles identified must also date from 2018 until 2023 and are primarily focusing on the design principles of the gamified e-assessment for introductory programming course. (ii) Elicitation and filtration Initially, over 50 articles were chosen based on the previously mentioned keywords. However, to identify the most relevant articles for this research, specific themes were established. These themes required that the selected studies: i) focus on e-learning for introductory programming courses in higher education institutions, ii) involve novices or first-year students in these courses, iii) address the gamification principles and elements applied, and iv) discuss the assessment design used in the studies, in terms of assessment structure and assessment composition that include problem-based instructional strategy, formative assessment, post-test strategy, assessment levels, and feedback strategy. As a result, only ten articles met these criteria and were selected for further review, analysis, and extraction of the design principles. These ten articles thoroughly examined the use of gamified e-assessments in e-learning for introductory programming in higher learning institutions, which significantly influenced the direction of this study. 

## (iii) Review, analysis and extraction of design principles 

Further review and analysis were conducted to ten selected articles by focusing to these predetermined criteria, i) gamification principles, ii) gamification elements, and iii) assessment principles, with the assessment structure and assessment composition including criteria mentioned above. All the gamification principles and elements, and the assessment principles were then extracted to be applied in the proposed gamified e-assessment for low achievers in introductory programming. Next section will discuss the findings from the review, analysis and extraction of the design principles phase. 

## 4. FINDINGS 

‘attps/ doi org/10.24191 rina v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


124 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

Table 1 depicts all ten selected studies after the thorough elicitation and filtration of the articles. 

Table 1. All ten selected studies 

|No.|Author|Studies|
|---|---|---|
|1<br>|Imran(2023)<br>|A GamifiedLeaning EnvironmentModel<br>|
|2|Nadja(2022)|APersonalizedGamificationDesignModel(PeGAM)|
|3|<br>Poonsawad et al. (2022)|<br>Problem-based Interactive Digital StoryLeaming Model|
|4|Alsubhiet al. (2021)|Engagement Framework forE-leaming Gamification|
|5<br>|Kamunyaet al. (2020)<br>|AnAdaptive GamificationModel ofE-learning<br>|
|6—|Winantietal.(2020)|GamificationFrameworkforProgrammingCourseinHigherEducation|
|<br>7|<br>Alshammari (2019)|<br>GamificationDesignModel forE-learning|
|8|Khaleel et al. (2019)|Gamification-based LeamingFramework foraProgrammingCourse|
|9|Padirayon(2019)|Gamification Application Architecture and Elements|
|10|Piteiraetal.(2018)|ConceptualFrameworkofGamificationonOnlineCourses|


Meanwhile, Table 2 shows the findings from the detailed comparative analysis that analyse the gamification principles, gamification elements, and assessment structure and assessment composition from the selected studies. 

Table 2. The findings of detailed comparative analysis 

|No.<br>1|Author<br>|Gamification<br>Principles<br>|Gamification<br>Elements<br>|‘Assessment<br>Structure<br>|‘Assessment<br>Composition<br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||Imran(2023)<br>|Progression,<br>achievement,rulesand <br>challenges, narrative<br>|Points,badges,<br>_levels,<br>leaderboard,<br>progressbar<br>|Problem-based<br>instructional strategy,<br>formativeassessment —<br>|Post-test strategy,<br>assessmentlevels,<br>_feedbackstrategy<br>|
|2<br>|Nadja(2022)<br>|Progression,<br>achievement, sensation <br>|<br>Badges,<br>_leaderboard,<br>progress bar,<br>virtualgoods<br>|Problem-based<br>instructional strategy,<br>formativeassessment —<br>|Post-test strategy,<br>assessmentlevels,<br>_feedbackstrategy<br>|
|3<br>|Poonsawadet al.<br>(2022)<br>|Rules andchallenges,<br>achievement<br>narrative, sensation<br>|<br>Points,badges,<br>levels,<br>leaderboard,<br>progress bar<br>|Problem-based<br>instructional strategy,<br>formativeassessment<br>|Post-teststrategy,<br>feedbackstrategy<br>|
|4|Alsubhiet al. (2021)|Progression,<br>achievement, rulesand <br>challenges|Points,badges,<br>_levels,<br>leaderboard,<br>progressbar,timer|Problem-based<br>instructional strategy,<br>formativeassessment —|Post-test strategy,<br>assessmentlevels,<br>_feedbackstrategy|
|5<br>|Kamunyaet al<br>(2020)<br>|Rules and challenges,<br>rewards, achievement,<br>competition, altruism<br>|<br>Badges,<br>leaderboard,<br>progress bar,<br>virtual goods<br>|Formative assessment<br>|Assessment levels,<br>feedback strategy<br>|
|6<br>|Winanti et al.(2020)<br>|Progression,<br>achievement,rulesand <br>challenges<br>|Points,badges,<br>_ levels, leaderboard<br>|Formativeassessment<br>|—Post-test strategy,<br>feedbackstrategy<br>|
|7|Alshammari(2019)|Rules andchallenges,<br>rewards, achievement,<br>|—_—_Points,badges,<br>__levels,<br>|Problem-based<br>instructional strategy,<br>|Post-teststrategy,<br>assessment levels,<br>|
|||progression<br>|leaderboard,timer<br>|formativeassessment<br>|_feedbackstrategy<br>|
|8|Khaleeletal. (2019)|Progression,<br>achievement,rulesand <br>challenges, altruism,|<br>Points,badges,<br>_levels,<br>leaderboard,<br>progressbar|<br>Problem-based<br>instructional strategy,<br>formativeassessment —|<br>Post-test strategy,<br>assessmentlevels,<br>_feedbackstrategy|


‘attps/ doi org/10.24191 rina v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


125 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

|No.<br>9|Author<br>|Gamification<br>Principles<br>|Gamification<br>Elements<br>|‘Assessment<br>Structure<br>|‘Assessment<br>Composition<br>|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
||Padirayon(2019)<br>|Progression,<br>achievement,rulesand <br>challenges,<br>|Points,badges,<br>_levels,<br>leaderboard,<br>progressbar<br>|Problem-based<br>instructional strategy,<br>formativeassessment —<br>|Post-test strategy,<br>assessmentlevels,<br>_feedbackstrategy<br>|
|10|Piteira et al. (2018)|Progression,<br>achievement,rulesand <br>challenges, narrative,|<br>Points,badges,<br>_levels,<br>leaderboard,<br>progress bar|Problem-based<br>instructional strategy,<br>formativeassessment —|Post-test strategy,<br>assessmentlevels,<br>_feedbackstrategy|
|-ass<br>able<br>chie<br>le 3. <br>No.<br>|FromTable 2, thedesi<br>essment for low achiev<br> 3 shows the extracte<br>vement, progression, a<br> Extracted gamification prin<br>Gamification Principles<br>|gnprinciples thatare <br>ers in introductory p<br>d gamification princi<br>nd rules and challeng<br>ciples<br>|deemedappropria<br>rogramming are <br>ples that are suit<br>es.<br>Des<br>|te tobeapplied inthe <br> shown in Table 3, Tab<br>able to be applied, suc<br>cription<br>|proposed gamified<br>le 4 and Table 5.<br>h as principles of<br>|
|1|Achievement|‘Achievement _ isrepr<br>andleaderboards canr|esentedascompletin<br>epresent astudents’ a|g eachlevelofchallenge. D<br>chievements or accomplishme|igital badges, points,<br>nts.|
|2<br>|Progression<br>|Progression principled<br>remain interested. A s<br>levels in each e-assessm<br>|emonstrates students<br>tudent's progress can<br>ent.<br>|’ engagement inorderto ke<br> be represented using progr<br>|ep themmotivated and<br>ess bars and unlocking<br>|
|3|Rules andchallenges|Rules are represent<br>eachassessment. Asses<br>overcomebyunlockin|d as defined goal <br>smentscanalsobese<br>glevelstoprogressto|settings, tellinguserswhat<br>enaschallenges orobstacles <br>thenextlevel.|and how toachieve in<br>where studentsneedto|


From Table 2, the design principles that are deemed appropriate to be applied in the proposed gamified e-assessment for low achievers in introductory programming are shown in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5. Table 3 shows the extracted gamification principles that are suitable to be applied, such as principles of achievement, progression, and rules and challenges. 

Table 3. Extracted gamification principles 

Meanwhile, the gamification elements that are identified based on the gamification principles extracted earlier are points, badges, levels, progress bar and leader board. These elements as listed in Table 4 represent the game mechanics that respond to each achievement, progression, and rules and challenges applied in the e-assessments. 

Table 4. Extracted gamification elements 

|‘No.<br>|GamificationElements<br>|Description<br>|
|---|---|---|
|1|Points|Pointsarerewardedwhenaleameraccomplishesamission, suchascompletinga challenge<br>or assessment.<br>It canbe accumulatedbased onthe rules and challenges designedinthe<br>gamified e-assessment|
|2<br>|Badges<br>|Badges arerewardedwhen a leameraccomplishes amission, such ascompleting achallenge<br>orassessment. It canbe accumulated basedonthe rules and challenges set inthe gamified e-<br>assessment.<br>|
|3<br>|Levels<br>|Levelsrepresenttheleamer’sadvancementinthegamifiede-assessment. Whenappliedin<br>the assessment, levels canbecategorisedbasedondifficulties, from easyto intermediate to<br>hard levels of challenges.<br>|
|4|Progress bars|The progress bar is a virtual representation ofa leamer’s linear progression as he or she<br>unlocks the challenges or assessments.<br>It helps to engage students with their progress and<br>achievement.|
|5|Leaderboard|The leaderboard displays students’ achievements andcompares accumulatedpoints or<br>badges.Itinvokesa senseofcompetitionamongstudents.|


Lastly, Table 5 shows the extracted assessment principles that will be integrated with the gamification principles and elements for the proposed gamified e-assessment. 

‘attps/ doi org/10.24191 rina v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


126 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

Table 5. Extracted assessment principles 

|‘No|AssessmentPrinciples|Sub-principles|Description|
|---|---|---|---|
|1|Assessment Structure|Problem-based instructional strategy<br>Fommative assessment|The structure ofthe eassessmentmust includereal-world<br>problemsto be solved, from easytohard questions.<br>Using formative e-assessments such as e- quizzes with<br>multiple-choice<br>questions,<br>drag and drop and<br>short-<br>structured questions.|
|2|Assessment Composition|Post-test strategy<br>Assessment levels<br>Feedback strategy|The e-assessments must adequately measure the learning<br>objectives’ accomplishment<br>The e-assessmentsmust includeRBT CognitiveDomains<br>to<br>measure<br>the<br>low-achieving<br>students’<br>cognitive<br>performances accordingtothe cognitive levels.<br>Eache-assessmentmustprovide feedbacktothe students,<br>which is given at any specifictime tailored tothe content<br>being studied, theproblembeingsolved, orthetaskbeing<br>completedbytheleamer.|


# 5. THE APPLICATION OF THE PROPOSED DESIGN PRINCIPLES OF GAMIFIED E- ASSESSMENT 

This section shows some of the examples of the application of the proposed gamified e-assessment in an e- learning system based on the extracted design principles of gamification and assessment mentioned previously. Fig. 1 demonstrates the application of gamification principles of achievement, progression, and tules and challenges with the elements of levels, progress bars, points, badges and leader board. Figure 1 also depicts the application of the assessment principles of assessment structure and composition with sub principles of problem-based instructional strategy, formative assessment, post-test strategy, assessment levels and feedback strategy in the gamified e-assessment. 

For instance, in applying the gamification principles of achievement, progression and rules and challenges, firstly, the assessments were divided into three levels of difficulty based on the RBT Cognitive Domains. The assessment module should be included after the students have completed the learning module, integrating the post-test assessment strategy. Next, each level has its own rules and challenges to be solved that were designed based on the problem-based instructional strategy with real-world problem scenarios. These challenges have variety of formative assessments such as e-quizzes, multiple choice questions, drag and drop, and short structured questions. Each answer will be provided with an automated and prompt feedback from the system, to encourage students’ learning acquisition and at the same time improves their knowledge and motivation. When a student has completed a task, the next level will be unlocked, and the system will display the progress of the student’s achievement through a progress bar. The progress bar will increase based on each unlock level of assessment. Apart from that, each completed task will contribute to accumulation of points and badges where in the end of each assessment module, the students will be able to see their accumulated points and badges. This will also determine their ranks in the leader board. 

‘attps/ doi org/10.24191 rina v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


127 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 


<!-- Start of picture text -->
‘Gamification principles: ‘hallonge: Ear your Breakthvough Badge! <Gamifcaton principles Applied<br>Spplid the principles of rales, te rani of parm ih A wun<br>challenges and pro tt | | cnatenge ra conman ) locrese stent" engageneatby 7"<br>Chatenge? at caelte ——<br>w) =<br>oe a tee SR \] So<br>Assessment principles: Assessment Challenge ate 5| = ae —<br>progressing 7<br>ne “on =<br>ThisisSenge 22°“Se ——————— ==SF<br>nama eS<br>Gamification principles ~<br>Applied the principlesof —<br>seadents' accumulated points,<br>leaderbadges,boarsand ranks inthe Samnrcinges || coer cea!<br>. ;<br>=="<br><!-- End of picture text -->

Fig. 1. Samples of application of the extracted gamification principles and elements, and assessment principles in the proposed gamified e-assessment for low achievers in introductory programming 6. CONCLUSION 

Designing e-assessments that are suitable for certain group of students in the e-learning systems have always been the interest of many academicians. Nevertheless, designing gamified e-assessments for low achievers in introductory programming possess a challenge for the course instructor. Despite this, through comparative analysis approach comprising of three main phases, the proposed design principles for the gamified e-assessment focusing on the low achievers in introductory programming can be obtained. By investigating and analysing existing studies that suit the theme of the search and filtration, the gamification principles such as principles of achievement, progression , and rules and challenges can be extracted. In ‘attps/d doi org/10.24191 rian v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


128 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

addition to the selected principles, the gamification elements that suit the principles can also be determined, such as points, badges, levels, progress bars, and leader boards. Other than that, as this study emphasises on the integration of gamification principles and assessment principles, through the extensive work of comparative analysis, the assessment principles have also been derived. Based on the findings, the assessment principles consisting of assessment structure and assessment composition, which then lead to the extraction of the sub principles that include problem-based instructional strategy, formative assessment, post-test strategy, assessment levels and feedback strategy. All these proposed design principles have been successfully applied in the design of the gamified e-assessment in an e-learning system as shown in the previous section. This shows that the proposed design principles with gamification and assessment principles for the e-learning system for low achievers in introductory programming can be effectively implemented. Future research will involve in the development of the prototype of the gamified e-learning system and experimental test with the target users. 

# 7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS/FUNDING 

The Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) Malaysia funded and supported this research with a Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) FRGS/1/2022/ICT03/UITM/02/3 grant. 

# 8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT 

The authors agree that this research was conducted in the absence of any self-benefits, commercial or financial conflicts and declare the absence of conflicting interests with the funders. 

## 9. AUTHORS’ CONTRIBUTIONS 

Mahfudzah Othman carried out the fieldwork and was the principal author of the whole article. Dr Aznoora Osman supervised the fieldwork and prepared the literature reviews. Ts. Dr. Siti Zulaiha Ahmad was involved in methodological structures and analysis and findings. Meanwhile, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Natrah Abdullah @ Dolah carried out the justifications and conclusion of the research. 

## 10. REFERENCES 

- Ahmad, S. Z., & Abdul Mutalib, A. (2015). Exploring computer assisted learning for low achieving children: A comparative analysis study. Jurnal Teknologi (Sciences & Engineering), 77(29), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v77.6803 

- Alshammari, M. T. (2019). Design and learning effectiveness evaluation of gamification in e-learning systems. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications (IJACSA), 10(9), 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2019.0100926 

- Alsubhi, M. A., Ashaari, N. S. & Wook, T.S.M.T. (2021). Design and evaluation of an engagement framework for e-learning gamification. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications (IJACSA), 12(9). littp://dx.doi.org/10.14569/IJACSA.2021.0120947 

- Angelia, F., Suharjito, S. & Ali, S.M. (2020). Improving English learning by gamification with MDA framework. Special Issue: International Conference of Games, Game Art and Gamification (ICGGAG2018), 5(2), 33-40. https://doi.org/10.21512/jggag.v5i2.7474 

- Bekele, T. A., Karkouti, I. M., & Amponsah, S. (2022). Core conceptual features of successful blended learning in higher education: Policy implications. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 30(156). https://doi.org/10.14507/epaa.30.7444 

‘attps/ doi org/10.24191 rina v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


129 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

- Chao, Y, K. (2015). Actionable gamification beyond points, badges, and leaderboard. NY: LeanPub. 

- Christopher, L., & Waworuntu, A. (2021). Java Programming Language Learning Application Based on Octalysis Gamification Framework. IJNMT (International Journal ofNew Media Technology), 8(1), 65-69. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.31937/ijnmt.v8il.2049 

- Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R. & Nacke, L. (2014). From game design elements to gamefulness. In Proceedings ofthe 15th Int. Acad. MindTrek Conf: Envisioning Future Media Environments MindTrek (pp.9-15). ACM Digital Library. 

- Haron, H., Yusof, A. R. M., Samad, H., Ismail, N., Juanita, A., Yusof, H. (2019). The platform of MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) on open learning: Issues and challenges. International Journal of Modern Education, 1(3), 01-09. 

- Hunicke, R., LeBlanc, M. & Zubek, R. (2004). MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. Northwestern University. 

- Imran, H. (2023). An empirical investigation of the different levels of gamification in an Introductory Programming course. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(4), 847-874. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633 1221144074 

- Kadar, R., Wahab, N. A., Othman, J., Shamsuddin, M., & Mahlan, S. B. (2021). A study of difficulties in teaching and learning programming: A systematic literature review. International Journal of<sup>Academic</sup> Research in Progressive Education and Development, 10(3), 591-605. http://dx.doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v10-i3/11100 

- Kamunya, S., Mirirti, E., Oboko, R. & Maina, E. (2020). An adaptive model for e-learning. In 2020 ISTAfrica Conference (IST-Africa) (pp. 1-10). 

- Khaleel, F.L., Ashaari, N.S. & Wook, T.S.M.T. (2019). An empirical study on gamification for learning programming language website. Jurnal Teknologi, 81(2), 151-162. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt-v8 1.11133 

- Khan, B. H. (2010). The global e-learning framework. In S. Mishra (Ed.), E-learning stride handbook (pp. 42-51). Indira Gandhi National Open University. 

- Lane, K. L., Menzies, H. M, Ennis, R. P.. & Oakes, W. P. (2015). Supporting behaviorfor school success: A step-by-step guide to key strategies. Guilford Press. 

- Li, L., Hew, K.F. & Du, J. (2024). Gamification enhances student intrinsic motivation, perceptions of autonomy and relatedness, but minimal impact on competency: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Education Tech Research Dev, 72, 765-796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10337-7 

- Margulieux, L.E., Morrison, B.B., & Decker, A. (2020). Reducing withdrawal and failure rates in introductory programming with subgoal labelled worked examples. International Journal of STEM Education, 7, 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00222-7 

- Mehmood, E., Abid, A., Farooq, M.S. & Nawaz, N.A. (2020). Curriculum, teaching and learning, and assessments for Introductory Programming course. JEEE Access, 8, (125961-125981). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3008321 

- Nadja, Z. (2022). PEGAM -— A Personalized gamification design model for programming language e- courses [Doctoral thesis, RWTH Aachen University, Germany]. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.30798.74567 

‘attps/ doi org/10.24191 rina v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025 


130 

Othman et al. / Journal of Computing Research and Innovation (2025) Vol. 10, No. 1 

- Othman, M., Osman, A., Abdullah, N. & Ahmad, S.Z. (2022). Impact of<sup>student’s programming experience</sup> on cognitive skills: Towards a gamified multimedia learning approach. Asian Journal of Universi-ty Education, 18(4), 944-953. 

- Padirayon, L. M. (2019). The designed gamification application architecture and elements for a C# Programming course. In Proceedings of the 2019 4th International Conference on Multimedia Systems and Signal Processing - ICMSSP 2019 (pp. 67-72). https://doi.org/10.1145/3330393.333041 

- Pérez-Clark, P., Lane, K. S., Austin, K. S., Allen, G. E., Oakes, W. P., Lane, K. L., & Menzies, H. M. (2020). Instructional feedback: A step-by-step guide to virtual learning environments. Ci3T Strategic Leadership Team. 

- Piteira, M., Costa, C. J.. & Aparicio, M. (2018). Computer Programming Learning: How to Apply Gamification on Online Courses?. Journal afInformation Systems Engineering and Management, 3(2), 11. https://doi.org/10.20897/jisem.201811 

- Pitoyo, M. D., & Asib, A. (2020). Gamification-based assessment: The washback effect of Quizizz on students’ learning in higher education. International Journal ofLanguage Education, 4(1), 1-10. 

- Poonsawad, A., Srisomphan, J., & Sanrach, C. (2022). Synthesis of problem-based interactive digital storytelling learning model under gamification environment promotes students’ problem-solving skills. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 17(05), 103-119. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v17i05.28181 

- Santos, J. S. (2023). Measuring and fostering cognitive programming skills in beginners [Doctoral thesis, Campina Grande]. http://dspace.sti.ufeg.edu.br:8080/jspui/handle/riufeg/29471 

- Shalatska, H., Zotova-Sadylo, O., Makarenko, O., & Dzevytska, L. (2020, November). Implementation of e-assessment in higher education. CEUR Workshop Proceedings, 2732, 1172-1186. 

- Scherer, R., Siddiq, F.. & Viveros, B. S. (2020). A meta-analysis of teaching and learning computer programming: Effective instructional approaches and conditions. Computers in Human Behavior, 109, 106349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2020.106349 

- Winanti, Abbas, B.S., Suparta, W., Heryadi, Y. & Gaol, F. L. (2020). Gamification framework for programming course in higher education. Journal of Game, Game Art, and Gamification, 05(02). https://doi.org/10.21512/jggag.v5i2.7479 

- Zaharias, P. (2009). Usability in the context of e-learning: A framework augmenting ‘traditional ' usability constructs with instructional design and motivation to learn. International Journal of Technology and Human Interaction (IJTHI), 5(4), 37-59. 

© 2025 by the authors. Submitted for open access publication under the terms and conditions SY of the Creative © Commons Attribution (CC BY) _ license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 

‘attps/ doi org/10.24191 rina v10i1 489 

Authors, 2025