{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,7,14]],"date-time":"2026-07-14T04:11:47Z","timestamp":1784002307695,"version":"3.55.0"},"reference-count":0,"publisher":"Informing Science Institute","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2020,1,1]],"date-time":"2020-01-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1577836800000},"content-version":"unspecified","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-nc\/4.0\/"}],"content-domain":{"domain":[],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["JITE:Research"],"abstract":"<jats:p>Aim\/Purpose: We aimed to investigate the circumstances under which Kahoot! (a Game-based Student Response System (GSRS)) increases junior and senior Information Science university students\u2019 learning and knowledge retention beyond that of traditional teaching methods. We also explored whether the positive learning impacts of Kahoot! vary as a function of student subject knowledge (i.e., junior vs senior students).\n\nBackground: The effectiveness of game-based student response systems (GSRSs) as learning tools in the classroom remains unclear, given inconsistent findings across educational research. Kahoot! enhances secondary and tertiary students\u2019 attention and motivation during class, but its effectiveness on learning and retention of course knowledge may vary depending on situational and individual factors. In New Zealand universities, students spend three years studying towards a Bachelor\u2019s degree, majoring in subject(s) of their choice. By the end of their third year of study, students are eligible to graduate with a sound knowledge of their chosen major. Thus, first-year students (referred to as \u201cjunior students\u201d) and third-year students (\u201csenior students\u201d) may differ in terms of their learning styles and their ability and willingness to integrate Kahoot! use into their course work and revision. It is hypothesised that differences in subject knowledge between junior versus senior students will influence the perceived effectiveness of Kahoot!. \n\nMethodology: Thirteen first-year (junior) and fourteen third-year (senior) Information Science students (total n = 27), who used Kahoot! in seven lectures (for 30 minutes per lecture) were interviewed about their perception of Kahoot!\u2019s effectiveness. We conducted a mixed-methods case study of students\u2019 interview transcripts, demographic records and student scores, where thematic (content) analysis was used to analyse interview responses. Then, we quantified themes for a one-way ANCOVA, with student subject knowledge predicting Kahoot!\u2019s effectiveness, when controlling for students\u2019 duration of tertiary study and study habits (i.e., hours dedicated to course work per week) as potential confounders.\n\nContribution: This study addresses the conflict in existing literature around whether GSRSs improve student learning beyond traditional teaching methods. To our knowledge, this is the first study that shows GSRSs (namely Kahoot!) use improves, or at least, supplements tertiary students\u2019 learning and knowledge retention of lecture content. This study also reveals how student characteristics (i.e., accumulated tertiary experience) and their subject knowledge influence the effectiveness of Kahoot! as a learning tool.   \n\nFindings: Kahoot!\u2019s use increased students\u2019 learning and knowledge retention, among other positive impacts (e.g., attention and engagement). However, the perceived learning impact of Kahoot! was greater for senior students. Senior students found Kahoot! more useful for learning new knowledge and revising previously acquired knowledge. On the other hand, while junior students also experienced positive learning impacts using Kahoot!, they reported concerns regarding limited and shallow content coverage, and the time-consuming and distracting nature of the platform.\n\nRecommendations for Practitioners: Educators should take care to ensure GSRSs are appropriately implemented to support rather than replace traditional teaching methods (e.g., \u201cchalk and talk\u201d style presentations, PowerPoint use). In addition, lecturers using GSRSs should clearly inform students about the examinable content and their expectations for performance in formal assessments.\n\nRecommendation for Researchers: The positive impact of Kahoot! use on students\u2019 learning and knowledge retention may be due to stronger interactions and engagement during class. Researchers should more closely explore how student-lecturer interactions and in-depth discussions following GSRS use influence learning. Thus, there is a need to re-evaluate Malone\u2019s (1980) intrinsic motivation theory in relation to the \u201cinteractive\u201d or \u201cenjoyability\u201d components experienced during Kahoot! use.\n\nImpact on Society: The positive impacts of Kahoot! use on student learning vary for junior and senior students. However, our findings indicate that both cohorts of students benefit from 15-minute Kahoot! sessions at the end of a lecture or course unit, allowing them to test their knowledge and revise* previously taught material. Kahoot! provides a comfortable platform that allows students to ask and answer questions without embarrassment. More experienced students can also evaluate their learning by creating their own Kahoot! quizzes and providing feedback to the lecturers. Overall, Kahoot! use could have a positive impact on teaching and learning globally.\n\nFuture Research: Beyond the recommendation for researchers above, future research should explore how differences in lecturers\u2019 teaching styles and students\u2019 self-regulation of learning impact Kahoot!\u2019s effectiveness as a learning tool.\n\n<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.28945\/4608","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2020,8,5]],"date-time":"2020-08-05T22:11:52Z","timestamp":1596665512000},"page":"511-553","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":13,"title":["Game-Based Student Response System: The Effectiveness of Kahoot! on Junior and Senior Information Science Students\u2019 Learning"],"prefix":"10.28945","volume":"19","author":[{"given":"Helen","family":"E. Owen","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Otago"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Sherlock","family":"A Licorish","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"University of Otago"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"11490","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2020]]},"container-title":["Journal of Information Technology Education: Research"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"http:\/\/www.jite.org\/documents\/Vol19\/JITE-Rv19p511-553Owen6289.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"http:\/\/www.jite.org\/documents\/Vol19\/JITE-Rv19p511-553Owen6289.pdf","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"},{"URL":"http:\/\/www.jite.org\/documents\/Vol19\/JITE-Rv19p511-553Owen6289.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2020,8,11]],"date-time":"2020-08-11T19:21:19Z","timestamp":1597173679000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/www.informingscience.org\/Publications\/4608"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2020]]},"references-count":0,"alternative-id":["4608"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.28945\/4608","relation":{},"ISSN":["1547-9714","1539-3585"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1547-9714","type":"print"},{"value":"1539-3585","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2020]]}}}