Sewer Rats in Teaching Action: An explorative field study on students perception of a game-based learning app in graduate engineering education

Game-based technologies and mobile learning aids open up many opportunities for learners; however, evidence-based decisions on their appropriate use are necessary. This explorative study (N = 100) examines the role of game elements in university education using a game-based learning app for mobile devices. The educational goal of the app is to support students in the field of engineering to memorize factual knowledge. The study investigates how the game-based app affects learners’ motivation. It analyses the perceived impact and appeal as well as the game elements as an incentive in learners’ perception. To realize this aim, the study combines structured methods like questionnaires with semi-structured methods like thinking aloud, game diaries, and interviews. The results indicate that flexible tem-poral and spatial use of the app was an important factor of learners’ motivation. The app allowed more spontaneous involvement with the subject matter and the learners took advantage of an improved attitude toward the subject matter. However, only a low impact on intrinsic motivation could be observed. We discuss reasons and present practical implications.

💡 Research Summary

This exploratory field study investigates how a mobile game‑based learning (GBL) application influences graduate engineering students’ motivation, perception, and attitudes toward factual knowledge acquisition. One hundred graduate students participated in a mixed‑methods design that combined quantitative questionnaires with qualitative think‑aloud protocols, game diaries, and semi‑structured interviews. The app was deliberately simple: it delivered engineering facts (definitions, formulas, key concepts) in a quiz format, awarding points and level‑ups as the primary game mechanics. Its central pedagogical promise lay in offering “any‑time, any‑where” access, thereby reducing logistical barriers and encouraging spontaneous engagement.

The quantitative results revealed that perceived flexibility—temporal and spatial freedom to use the app—was the strongest predictor of increased motivation. Students reported that they could study during commutes, short breaks, or between lab sessions, which translated into higher frequency of interaction and a more positive attitude toward the subject matter. The immediate feedback loop (score display, progress bar) reinforced a sense of competence and helped learners monitor their performance, further boosting extrinsic motivation linked to grades and coursework requirements.

Qualitative data, however, painted a more nuanced picture of intrinsic motivation. While participants appreciated the novelty of a gamified interface, they consistently noted that the reward structure (points, levels) felt superficial and did not sustain long‑term interest. Think‑aloud sessions highlighted that learners quickly shifted focus from learning the content to “getting the next badge,” suggesting that the game elements lacked depth. Interviews uncovered a desire for richer narrative contexts, choice‑driven challenges, and problem‑solving scenarios that could connect the memorized facts to authentic engineering tasks. The study therefore concludes that the app succeeded in improving accessibility and attitude but fell short of fostering deep, self‑directed curiosity or sustained intrinsic drive.

Methodologically, the study’s strength lies in its triangulation of data sources, allowing the researchers to capture both measurable changes in motivation and the lived experience of using a GBL tool. Nonetheless, limitations are evident: the sample was drawn from a single institution and discipline, which restricts external validity; the study measured only short‑term motivational outcomes without tracking knowledge retention or transfer over time; and the game design itself was intentionally minimalist, limiting the ability to assess the impact of more sophisticated gamification strategies.

Practical implications for educators and instructional designers are threefold. First, any mobile learning solution for higher education should prioritize flexibility, ensuring that learners can integrate study moments seamlessly into their daily routines. Second, to move beyond extrinsic incentives, designers must embed intrinsic‑motivation‑enhancing mechanics—such as story arcs, branching decision paths, adaptive difficulty, and authentic problem contexts—into the game architecture. Third, alignment between learning objectives and game mechanics is crucial; a pure memorization task may not benefit fully from gamification unless the game explicitly ties factual recall to higher‑order application.

Future research directions include expanding the participant pool across multiple universities and engineering subfields, developing a more elaborate GBL prototype that incorporates narrative and adaptive feedback, and conducting longitudinal studies to assess effects on knowledge retention, transfer, and professional competence. By systematically varying the depth of gamification and measuring both extrinsic and intrinsic motivational outcomes, scholars can better delineate the conditions under which game‑based learning truly adds value to graduate engineering education.