Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer


Vol. 14 No. 1 (2023): University didactics, innovation and inclusion. Assessment and feedback

“Mentimeter” and assessment: A pilot-study with a gamified approach

gennaio 3, 2023


The new conceptions of assessment as learning and of cognitive activation are modifying the practices of the entire learning process. New digital instruments are being included in virtual and in presence classrooms, allowing students and teachers new ways to interact and exchange feedback. Multiple choice tests, through apps such as Mentimeter, are ever more common among both school and university teachers.

Through Mentimeter the teacher can create with ease opportunities of formative feedback and cognitive activation with a gamified approach. A further step is the involvement of students in the creation of questions, allowing them to participate actively in all steps of the activity.

This paper describes an experimentation in progress at the University of Foggia and University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, where during the academic course 2021-2022, the systematic use of Mentimeter at the beginning of the class has shown promising early returns and improved engagement promoting an innovative approach to feedback.


  1. Agarwal P., D’Antonio L., Roediger III H., McDermott K., and McDaniel M. (2014). Classroom-based programs of retrieval practice reduce middle school and high school students’ test anxiety. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3: 131-139. DOI: 10.1016/j.jarmac.2014.07.002.
  2. Andre T. (1997). Selected micro instructional methods to facilitate knowledge construction: implications for instructional design. In: R. D. Tennyson, F. Schott, N. Seel and S. Dijkstra, a cura di, Instructional Design: International Perspective: Theory, Research, and Models (Vol. 1) (pp. 243-267). Mahwah, NJ, USA: Law-rence Erlbaum Associates.
  3. Bevilacqua A. (2019). Un’esperienza di valutazione formante in ambito universitario. Il contributo delle tecnologie educative per la promozione della didattica attiva nelle classi numerose. Italian Journal of Educational Research, 12: 291-298. DOI: 10.7346/SIRD-1S2019-P291.
  4. Carless D. and Boud D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8): 1315-1325. DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354.
  5. Chan C.K.Y., Tam V.W. and Li C.Y.V. (2011). A comparison of MCQ assessment delivery methods for student engagement and interaction used as an in-class formative assessment. International Journal of Electrical Engineering Educa-tion, 48(3): 323-337. DOI: 10.7227/IJEEE.48.3.9.
  6. De Angelis M. and Santonicola M. (2021). La valutazione formativa negli ambienti di apprendimento online: pratiche efficaci nel primo ciclo di istruzione. Italian Journal of Educational Research, 14: 10-21. DOI: 10.7346/sird-1S2021-p10.
  7. Del Gottardo E. and De Martino D. (2020). Criteria for distance learning at the time of Coronavirus. Research on Education and Media, 12(2): 3-8.
  8. Galliani L. (2017). La valutazione educativa: dominio scientifico, definizione e paradigmi. In: P.C. Rivoltella and P.G. Rossi, a cura di, L’agire didattico. Manuale per l’insegnante (pp. 273-291). Brescia: Morcelliana.
  9. Giannandrea L. (2017). La valutazione. Il paradigma ermeneutico: prospettive, tecniche, strumenti. In: P.C. Rivoltella and P.G. Rossi, a cura di, L’agire didattico. Manuale per l’insegnante (pp. 309-328). Brescia: Morcelliana.
  10. Gokbulut B. (2020). The effect of Mentimeter and Kahoot applications on university students’ e-learning. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 12(2): 107-116. DOI: 10.18844/wjet.v12i2.4814.
  11. Grion V., and Pagani V. (2017). Autovalutazione all’università: una ricerca con studenti universitari spagnoli e italiani. In: A. M. Notti, a cura di, La funzione educativa della valutazione. Teoria e pratiche della valutazione educativa (pp. 585-598). Lecce: Pensa Multimedia.
  12. Grion V., Serbati A., Sambell K. and Brown S. (2020). Valutazione e feedback in Dad in tempo di emergenza: strategie d’azione nei contesti universitari. In: P. Limone, G.A. Toto and N. Sansone, a cura di, Didattica universitaria a distanza. Tra emergenze e futuro (pp. 75-90). Bari: Progedit.
  13. Handoko W., Mizkat E., Nasution A. and Eska J. (2021). Gamification in Learning using Quizizz Application as Assessment Tools. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1783(1): 1-6. DOI: 10.1088/1742-6596/1783/1/012111.
  14. Karpicke J.D. and Blunt J.R. (2011). Retrieval Practice Produces More Learning than Elaborative Studying with Concept Mapping. Science, 331: 772-775. DOI: 10.1126/science.1199327.
  15. Laici C. (2021). Il feedback come pratica trasformativa nella didattica universitaria. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  16. Rivoltella P.C. (2021). Regolare nel distance learning. In: P.C. Rivoltella, a cura di, Apprendere a distanza. Teorie e metodi (pp. 175-188). Milano: Raffaello Cortina.
  17. Rocha D.R. (2021, August). O uso do Mentimeter como recurso de aprendizagem em tempos de ensino remoto. In: Anais do Congresso Internacional de Educação e Geotecnologias-CINTERGEO (pp. 122-127).
  18. Rudolph J. (2018). A brief review of Mentimeter–A student response system. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 1(1): 35-37. DOI: 10.37074/jalt.2018.1.1.5.
  19. Trinchero R. (2017). L’attivazione cognitiva come principio chiave per l’istruzione e l’apprendimento. Disponibile da
  20. Trinchero R. (2018). Valutazione formante per l’attivazione cognitiva. Spunti per un uso efficace delle tecnologie per apprendere in classe. Disponibile da
  21. Vallely K. and Gibson P. (2018). Engaging students on their devices with Mentimeter. Compass: Journal of Learning and Teaching, 11(2): 1-6. DOI: 10.21100/compass.v11i2.843.
  22. Wiggins G.P. and McTighe J. (2005). Understanding by design. Ascd.


Metrics Loading ...