Conference Agenda

Over the last decade, and with intensity following the transition to emergency remote teaching, the use of digital technologies in higher education has expanded significantly (Syahrin et al., 2023; Tang, 2022). This scenario has increased research interest in the field; however, available evidence shows that a large share of this academic production remains focused on access to resources and technical mastery of technologies, reinforcing a predominantly instrumental orientation of professional digital competence, to the detriment of approaches that critically and reflectively address its pedagogical and epistemological implications (Aagaard et al., 2025).

In this context, various studies warn that the educational effectiveness of digital technologies does not depend on their mere availability or frequency of use, but rather on how teachers mobilize pedagogical skills to integrate them into the design of active learning activities and on the degree of participation assumed by students in these processes (Lohr et al., 2024). Nevertheless, a gap persists in the literature, characterized by descriptions of technological advances without sufficient analysis of the pedagogical principles that guide their use toward high-quality learning, which limits understanding of how these tools effectively contribute to the teaching–learning process (Almithqal & John, 2024; Ansari & Waheed, 2024).

Within this scenario, design thinking emerges as a critical framework for understanding educational innovation. It is defined as an analytical and creative process that enables experimentation, prototyping, and redesigning solutions to complex problems (Razzouk & Shute, 2012). Its relevance is such that Tsai and Chai (2012), expanding on Ertmer’s (1999) original proposal, position it as a third-order barrier. From this perspective, design thinking functions as an approach that enables teachers to reinterpret and negotiate infrastructural constraints and professional beliefs within specific contexts, rather than addressing them as isolated barriers. This perspective helps explain why, even under similar institutional conditions, profoundly different pedagogical practices emerge (Blundell, 2025).

Alongside this design capacity, digital pedagogical intentionality plays a decisive role. It is understood as the deliberate orientation that guides decisions regarding instructional design, defining the educational purposes that structure the use of methods and resources. However, there is a scarcity of studies that explicitly articulate teachers’ digital pedagogical intentionality with design thinking. This absence hinders understanding of the mechanisms that enable the transformation of the learning experience rather than the mere reproduction of traditional models. Addressing this gap is critical in initial teacher education, where university practices shape future school teaching. Based on the above, the purpose of this study was to analyse the relationship between three forms of digital pedagogical intentionality (teaching-focused, learning-focused, and didactic modelling-focused) and three levels of design thinking (initial, intermediate, and advanced) among academics involved in initial teacher education.

Background

The growing use of tools like Kahoot!, Mentimeter, and Padlet has fostered greater participation and real-time feedback, which enhances student engagement and promotes interest in theoretical concepts (Kloos et al., 2022). SRS are recognized for their pedagogical benefits, as they align with several educational theories, including Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory, Constructivism, Cognitive Multimedia Learning, Just-in-Time Teaching, and Game-Based Learning. These theories support active student engagement and motivation (Kolb et al., 2014; Chaiyo & Nokham, 2017). Kolb’s model, for instance, emphasizes the interplay between perception and processing, where learning emerges from students' concrete experiences and reflective observations. Studies investigating Student Response Systems highlight key factors influencing their adoption, such as ease of use, usefulness, and social influence. Research on tools like Padlet has shown that these factors positively influence tool acceptance among students. Similarly, tools such as Mentimeter, Wooclap, Microsoft whiteboard, and Miro have been explored for their ability to enhance learning orchestration and facilitate collaboration among students (Kloos et al., 2022; Avila & Castillo, 2021; Juhary, 2021; Karsen et al., 2022). Research highlights the positive impact of SRS on student outcomes, including improved motivation, retention of content, and critical thinking skills (Chien et al., 2016; Roschelle et al., 2004). The adoption of digital and web-based systems has further expanded the capabilities of SRS, allowing integration with mobile devices, laptops, and other platforms. This evolution has made SRS accessible and scalable for a wide range of learning environments, from large lecture halls to small group discussions (Beatty, 2004). However, despite the benefits, challenges such as technical difficulties and internet connectivity issues, as well as teachers' limited pedagogical expertise, have been identified as barriers to the effective integration of these tools in classrooms (Qurbani, 2022).

Aim and Research Questions

The aim of this research paper is to explore the integration of Student Response Systems (SRS) into classroom settings, focusing on how these tools enhance the teaching and learning experience. This study examines the practical implementation of SRS in real-life classroom scenarios, analyzing their effectiveness in fostering student engagement, participation, and interaction. Additionally, it investigates the extent to which the use of SRS impacts class dynamics. By evaluating both the benefits and challenges associated with SRS, this research seeks to provide actionable insights into their role in transforming traditional teaching methods into more interactive and student-centered learning environments.

The research is driven by the following research questions:

RQ1: What are students' perspectives on the use of Student Response Systems (SRS) in classroom settings?

RQ2: What specific Student Response Systems (SRS) are currently available for facilitating real-time feedback in classroom settings?

RQ3: What is the overall sentiment of students toward the integration of SRS in their learning experience?

Digital games offer powerful opportunities for learning, meaning making, and engagement across educational contexts (Gee, 2003; Ehret et al., 2022). Narrative-driven and exploratory games, in particular, have been shown to support critical literacy, systems thinking, ethical reasoning, and identity development (Burn, 2021; Theodoulou & Curwood, 2023). Educational research is increasingly called upon not only to understand learning but also to intervene in the conditions that shape educational practice. The ECER 2026 theme, Knowing and Acting, foregrounds the dynamic relationship between research, institutional infrastructures, and pedagogical action, asking how educational research can respond to changing technological, cultural, and material conditions. This presentation addresses these concerns by examining a critical infrastructural gap that limits the educational use of digital games: the absence of scalable, sustainable models for libraries to purchase, license, and lend digital-only games to students.

Unlike eBooks, films, or journals, games sit outside existing institutional procurement and distribution models, leaving educators to rely on ad hoc solutions that are costly, inequitable, and pedagogically limiting. This is a significant problem in secondary schools where games can support immersive and interactive learning as well as in higher education contexts where games are increasingly used in disciplines such as game design, digital humanities, media studies, and teacher education. Without a library-based solution, students may be excluded due to cost or platform restrictions, and educators have limited scope to leverage game-based pedagogy. These constraints undermine the educational potential of games and restrict their integration into formal curricula.

As researchers working across education, human-computer interaction, and game studies, we have developed Ludolio, a digital platform designed to enable school and university libraries to make games accessible to students and educators. By positioning games as lendable, playable texts within library systems, Ludolio seeks to address a critical infrastructural barrier to game-based learning. In this presentation, we share key findings from interviews with teachers, co-design workshops with game developers and educators, and surveys, interviews, and observations with university students that informed the development of learning analytics, dashboard features, and curriculum materials that support teaching with games. Our aim is to contribute empirical evidence and design principles for integrating games into higher education teaching and learning infrastructures.

Our research is informed by sociocultural theories of learning and game-based pedagogy, particularly theories that position learning as situated, participatory, and mediated by cultural tools (Lave & Wenger, 1991). From this perspective, games are understood as designed learning environments that invite players to engage in problem solving, narrative exploration, and identity experimentation (Burn, 2021). The study also draws on digital literacy and multiliteracies frameworks, which emphasise the importance of engaging learners with multimodal, interactive, and digitally mediated texts (Cope & Kalantzis, 2024; Ehret et al., 2022). Games are treated as complex cultural texts that combine narrative, mechanics, visuals, sound, and player agency, requiring new forms of literacy instruction and assessment.

In addition, the research is shaped by participatory design and co-design theories, which positions educators as co-creators rather than end-users of educational technologies (DiSalvo et al., 2017). By involving educators in iterative design workshops, the project seeks to align technological affordances, such as dashboards and analytics, with pedagogical values rather than surveillance-oriented metrics (Selwyn, 2019). Finally, the study engages with emerging critiques of learning analytics, foregrounding ethical considerations related to transparency, agency, and meaningful interpretation of student data. Ludolio’s analytics are conceptualised not as measures of compliance, but as pedagogical supports that help educators understand how students engage with games as learning texts.