TEACH-UP: Enhancing Teaching Engagement and Competency through Asynchronous, Gamified Faculty Development

Abstract

Gamification offers a promising strategy to enhance engagement in medical faculty development, yet its incremental value in asynchronous, real-world training remains uncertain. TEACH-UP (Teaching Engagement and Competency Enhancement through Asynchronous, User-centered Pedagogy) evaluated whether adding a gamified “course layer” to a mandatory online faculty development program improves teaching self-efficacy, teaching orientation, engagement, and observed teaching behaviors among medical educators at the University of Pécs Medical School. In a parallel-group randomized controlled trial (Fall 2025), 73 educators were randomized 1:1 to a gamified Moodle course (n=37) or a structurally identical standard course (n=36). Outcomes were mapped to Kirkpatrick Levels 1–3 and assessed using pre–post surveys, microteaching, and learning management system data. The primary endpoint was post-course Physician Teaching Self-Efficacy Questionnaire (PTSQ) overall score (items 1–11; self-regulatory + dyadic), analyzed via baseline-adjusted ANCOVA under intention-to-treat with complete-case estimation per outcome. Key secondary outcomes included Approaches to Teaching Inventory (ATI) student-focused conceptual change (CCSF) and a prespecified orientation index (CCSF−ITTF). Post-course engagement was measured with the Online Student Engagement Scale (OSE) and Moodle analytics. Overall teaching self-efficacy increased modestly from baseline to post-course, but gamification did not confer an incremental benefit on the primary outcome (adjusted difference β=0.00, 95% CI −0.18 to 0.18; p=0.98). Engagement did not differ between arms (OSE overall mean difference 0.04, 95% CI −0.24 to 0.33; p=0.76), and course performance metrics showed strong ceiling effects without meaningful between-arm differences. ATI-CCSF favored the gamified arm (β=0.27, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.51; p=0.041), while the CCSF−ITTF orientation index showed a larger shift toward a student-focused profile in the gamified arm (β=0.39, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.66; p=0.006, both remained statistically significant after multiplicity adjustment). Microteaching ratings were directionally favorable but not statistically different. In this high-workload setting, a well-designed asynchronous program produced small gains in teaching self-efficacy and student-centered orientation; adding gamification yielded no detectable engagement or self-efficacy advantage, with a limited signal for amplifying teaching-orientation shift. Future iterations should be mechanism-driven and weighed against development and maintenance costs.