Exploring Students’ Perception of Quizizz as a Learning Media in Higher Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of game in education has been evidenced to improve students’ engagement in learning. However, much research shows that the use of game in learning is only effective for high school students, while its use for students of higher education is limited. Research on game in education has predominantly been occupied by Kahoot! while Quizizz has received less analysis. This research aims to explore student perception of Quizizz as a learning media and the related obstacles experienced in a library science study program of State Islamic University of North Sumatera in Indonesia. The research uses a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods, such as survey and focused group discussion, with a sample of 272 undergraduate students. The study found that the use of games in learning actively increased student engagement and led to a significant improvement in independence and self-control in learning. During the learning activity students maintain that they gain their self-confidence while enjoying the game. The research suggests that to increase learning achievement, educators should use various teaching strategies that encourage students’ active mental and physical engagement. Additionally, it is expected that this learning experience and content will enhance students' retentive memory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".