Students face several difficulties in introductory programming courses (CS1), often leading to high dropout rates, student demotivation, and lack of interest. The literature has indicated that the adequate use of gamification might improve learning in several domains, including CS1. However, the understanding of which (and how) factors influence gamification’s success, especially for CS1 education, is lacking. Thus, there is a clear need to shed light on pre-determinants of gamification’s impact. To tackle this gap, we investigate how user and contextual factors influence gamification’s effect on CS1 students through a quasi-experimental retrospective study ( \( N = 399 \) ), based on a between-subject design (conditions: gamified or non-gamified) in terms of final grade (academic achievement) and the number of programming assignments completed in an educational system (i.e., how much they practiced). Then, we evaluate whether and how user and contextual characteristics (e.g., age, gender, major, programming experience, working situation, internet access, and computer access/sharing) moderate that effect. Our findings indicate that gamification amplified to some extent the impact of practicing. Overall, students practicing in the gamified version presented higher academic achievement than those practicing the same amount in the non-gamified version. Intriguingly, those in the gamified version that practiced much more extensively than the average showed lower academic achievements than those who practiced comparable amounts in the non-gamified version. Furthermore, our results reveal gender as the only statistically significant moderator of gamification’s effect: in our data, it was positive for females but non-significant for males. These findings suggest which (and how) personal and contextual factors moderate gamification’s effects, indicate the need to further understand and examine context’s role, and show that gamification must be cautiously designed to prevent students from playing instead of learning.

As programming skills are increasingly required world-wide and across disciplines, many students use online platforms that provide automatic feedback through a Programming Online Judge (POJ) mechanism. POJs are very popular e-learning tools, boasting large collections of programming problems. Despite their many benefits, students often struggle when solving problems not compatible with their prior knowledge. One important cause of this is that usually statements of problems are not classified according to programming topics (paradigms, data structures, etc.) and, hence, students waste time and effort in trying to solve exercises that are not tailored to their level and needs. Thus, to support students, we propose a new, "front-heavy" pipeline method to predict topics of POJ problems, using Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT) for contextual text augmentation over the problem statements and further allowing for (lighter-weight) classical machine learning for classification. Our model outperformed all current state-of-the art, with an F1-score of 86% using stratified 10 fold cross-validation in a classically challenging multi-classification problem with seven categories. As a proof of concept, we conducted an experiment to show how our predictive model can be used as a human-AI hybrid complement for POJ, where learners would use AI-based recommendations to find the most appropriate problems.