Introduction

During my three years of teaching in 6th Grade Science, I have used gamified

educational games to review with my students for quizzes or tests. I have mostly used

Gimkit because students are fully engaged in the activity and seem to understand the

information while they play the review game. However, when students complete their

assessments, I see inconsistencies with their scores and how they seem to understand

the topic during the Gimkit review. What I have noticed over time is when students miss

a question on Gimkit, they don’t take the time to read what the correct answer is

because they are solely focused on winning the game instead of the educational value

of the game. This led me to my question: Does playing Kahoot for review at least

once a week increase unit test scores? My goal for this investigation is to see if a

more educational centered review game such as Kahoot can impact overall test scores

in my students during our Plant, Protist, and Fungi Unit. My research was conducted

during our hybrid model where I saw half of my students two days a week. I conducted

my research by splitting my four classes into two groups. My first and second academic

classes, 50 students in total, only played Kahoot when we reviewed whereas my third

and fourth academic classes, 49 students in total, played Gimkit when we reviewed.

Review of Literature

Before I conducted my investigation into my research question, I was intrigued to

search scholarly literature that could give me insight into answering my question. It was

interesting how many scholars have researched this question and the conclusions they
made. Here are the five scholarly articles that aided in finding the answer to my

research question.

The first article I researched was entitled, Analyzing the Efficacy of the Testing

Effect Using Kahoot™ on Student Performance by Iwamoto by Hargis, Taitano, &

Vuong. This article explores how utilizing Kahoot can make an impact on high-stakes

examination scores. The research study focused on analyzing two groups of students;

one group received content through Kahoot, group discussions, and lectures while the

second group received content through only lectures and group discussions. For the

last ten minutes of pre-determined classes, the experimental group played a seven

question Kahoot game while the other group continued through with lectures. At the end

of the experiment, the control group received a study guide for the test whereas the

experimental group played all of the Kahoot review games without a study guide. The

results from the experiment concluded that utilizing Kahoot had a significant impact on

the experimental group's test scores compared to the control group's scores.

The second article I researched was entitled, Gamifying the 9 Events of

Instruction with Different Interactive Response Systems: The Views of Social Sciences

Teacher Candidates by Çetin & Solmaz. This article focused on 23 teacher candidates

evaluating gamification-based interactive response systems (IRS) tools for three weeks.

These candidates were taught how to use a variety of these tools including Kahoot

while looking at Gagne's nine instructional steps. Then, they created question activities

for their peers to participate in. Data was collected from an open-ended questionnaire

on each of the IRS tools presented. The results found that Kahoot mostly contributed to
gaining attention, providing learning guidance, assessing performance, enhancing

retention and transfer, provides feedback, and elicits performance.

The third article I researched was entitled, Game-Based Student Response

System: The Effectiveness of Kahoot! on Junior and Senior Information Science

Students' Learning by Owen & Licorish. This article investigated how Kahoot could

increase student learning and knowledge retention higher than traditional methods. The

study also looked at whether the positive impacts of Kahoot change with student

subject-knowledge between junior and senior students. 27 students in total used Kahoot

in seven lectures for 30 minutes and were interviewed about what they thought about

Kahoot's effectiveness. The results found that Kahoot increased student learning and

knowledge retention. Senior students thought Kahoot was more useful in learning new

content and reviewing previous knowledge. However, junior students had concerns with

Kahoot in the limited and shallow content coverage, time-consuming, and how the game

was distracting even though they also experienced positive learning from Kahoot.

The fourth article that I researched was entitled, Investigating the Effectiveness

of Gamification on Group Cohesion, Attitude, and Academic Achievement in

Collaborative Learning Environments by Uz Bilgin & Gul. This article aimed to investigate

gamification and its effect on student attitudes towards academic achievement, the

course, group cohesion, and group learning environments. One group of students

utilized gamification in the class whereas the second group only utilized traditional

learning. The study found no significant difference in terms of student attitude toward

the course and group learning environments, however the gamified group outscored the

traditional group in team evaluation scores and group cohesion scores.

 The last article I researched was entitled, Comparison of Traditional and

Gamified Student Response Systems in an Undergraduate Human Anatomy Course by

Yabuno, Luong, & Shaffer. The goal of this study was to analyze the impact of a

traditional student response system (iClickers) and a gamified student response system

(Kahoot) with student performance. The in-class active learning utilized both iClicker

questions and Kahoot questions. On each day, students were given iClickers questions

over 23 days and during seven non-consecutive days, students played Kahoot games.

The study found that both systems had similar exam scores with similar ratings in fun

and effectiveness. However, students thought Kahoot should be used less frequently in

class compared to iClickers due to a sense of a "burn out" or "wear out" effect.

After researching these articles, I knew that I chose an intriguing topic to

investigate. I wanted to incorporate both sides on whether Kahoot is an effective

educational game for students because I may not see the results that I hypothesized at

the beginning. Unfortunately, I didn’t receive the results that I initially predicted and my

quantitative as well as my qualitative data represents this finding in my students’

responses.

Methodology

After researching my scholarly articles, I implemented a plan on how to conduct

my investigation with my 6th grade students. As mentioned in my introduction, I

conducted my investigation during a hybrid model instruction where I only saw half of

my students two days a week in class. To create my groups for the investigation, I split

my classes based on the performance of previous quantitative data collected. The

groups of students collectively that underperformed were placed in the Kahoot review

group. The other groups of students collectively that overperformed were placed in the

Gimkit review group. I utilized both educational games as an exit slip at the end of a

lesson and as a warmup activity to review the previous topic discussed in class. To

monitor progress of my students, I analyzed the quantitative data collected by our 6th

Grade department. The assessments created by our department were assigned through

USA TestPrep with roughly 10-12 questions on a quiz to 25-30 questions on a test that

were all multiple choice. For the final unit test, I administered the Common Assessment

developed by the district to test each student’s understanding of the standards covered

throughout the Plant, Protist, and Fungi Unit. The Common Assessment data collected

were used to measure whether or not playing Kahoot for review at least once a week

increased unit test score. For qualitative data, I administered a Google Form survey with

exit slip style questions that asked students to describe their thoughts on whether or not

the Kahoot review games helped them understand and retain the content knowledge

covered in the tests, quizzes, and Common Assessment. I also implemented a Google

Form survey for my Gimkit group to compare data on how students felt prepared for the

Common Assessment and whether they thought they could have been more prepared

playing Kahoot for review. Here are the links to each Google Form administered to my

groups: Kahoot Google Form (https://forms.gle/MnVNyQugJKdPiLUR9) and Gimkit

Google Form (https://forms.gle/xXtF2tHrL1rWkN4e7).

I also compiled qualitative data from observations and class discussions while

walking around the room when students were completing their review game and

throughout the duration of the game. For my Kahoot group, I was taking mental and
physical notes on how many students would drop out of the game to get on a different

website or students who were not answering questions all together. I also was taking

notes of a percentage of students who were participating during our discussions and

those who were not participating. For my Gimkit group, I was analyzing the number of

students who would skip questions they missed throughout the game and compared it

to those who stopped and read the correct answer. I also analyzed if students would

drop out of the game and get on a different website to compare the difference between

Kahoot and Gimkit.

Analysis

After implementing my methodology for this research project, compiling

qualitative data while students were working in the review game, and conducting a

student survey, I began to analyze the data. When looking at the quantitative data, I

went onto Performance Matters to analyze how each of my groups did collectively

against not just the other classes, but even the school average and district average.

While the data showed that students who used Kahoot to review for this unit test were

lower than the Gimkit group, these students did considerably better than the school

average. Even though this data shows that Kahoot may not be the best educational

game to play for review, the qualitative data showed that students like Kahoot in the fact

that they enjoy having the teacher go over each question especially when they get the

question wrong.
 Quantitative Data

Kahoot Group 1 (Academic 1)

Kahoot Group 2 (Academic 2)

Gimkit Group 1 (Academic 3)

Gimkit Group 2 (Academic 4)

Qualitative Data

Kahoot Group
*Scale: 5- Very Much / 1- Not at All
Gimkit Group
*Scale: 5- Very Much / 1- Not at All
Findings

After analyzing both the quantitative and qualitative data, I was able to determine

that even though my Kahoot group didn’t score higher on the unit test compared to my

Gimkit group, however the Kahoot group did better than the district average. In looking

at the quizzes leading up to the Common Assessment, my Kahoot group stayed

consistently in the 70-79% class average range whereas the Gimkit group ranged from

74-85% class average. From looking at data from previous units, my Kahoot group was

still in the 70% percentages as a class. This tells me that playing Kahoot as long as we

did during this unit didn’t increase student performance. From looking at the qualitative

data, 51% of the class thought that Kahoot prepared them well for the test. This was

interesting to me because I used the same questions for both Kahoots and Gimkits. I

also thought it was interesting how the majority of the students would like for me to

incorporate Kahoot more in my class, however they prefer the Gimkit style self-paced
game. This aligns with my findings while I was observing the students while they were

playing Kahoot compared to Gimkit. Roughly 48% of my Kahoot students said that they

were “burnt out” by playing Kahoot as much as we did in class. These findings also

align with Yabuno, Luong, & Shaffer when they talked about the “burn out” effect of

playing Kahoot by stating, “With regards to Kahoot!, “wear out” may occur if it is played

too often and thus students lose interest and are not as enthusiastic about Kahoot! as

they were initially. Indeed, in this study, while we did not measure longitudinal

engagement with Kahoot!, we did anecdotally notice that students were not as

motivated to play Kahoot! near the end of the course after it had been used multiple

times” (Yabuno, Luong, & Shaffer, 2019). With regards to aiding my lower achieving

students, or my Kahoot group, utilizing solely digital review games such as Gimkit and

Kahoot don’t positively affect their scores. Even though students are engaged

throughout the review game when we play them, I need to incorporate more station or

small group rotations to review the content and to ensure that the students are retaining

the material for higher achievement on assessments.

 References

Çetin, E., & Solmaz, E. (2020). Gamifying the 9 Events of Instruction with Different
Interactive Response Systems: The Views of Social Sciences Teacher
Candidates. Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Technology, 8(2), 1–15.

Iwamoto, D. H., Hargis, J., Taitano, E. J., & Vuong, K. (2017). Analyzing the Efficacy of
the Testing Effect Using Kahoot™ on Student Performance. Turkish Online
Journal of Distance Education, 18(2), 80–93.

Owen, H. E., & Licorish, S. A. (2020). Game-Based Student Response System: The
Effectiveness of Kahoot! on Junior and Senior Information Science Students’
Learning. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 19, 511–553.

Uz Bilgin, C., & Gul, A. (2020). Investigating the Effectiveness of Gamification on Group
Cohesion, Attitude, and Academic Achievement in Collaborative Learning
Environments. TechTrends: Linking Research and Practice to Improve Learning,
64(1), 124–136.

Yabuno, K., Luong, E., & Shaffer, J. F. (2019). Comparison of Traditional and Gamified
Student Response Systems in an Undergraduate Human Anatomy Course.
HAPS Educator, 23(1), 29–36.