Machine Learning, Gamification, and Critical Thinking in Adaptive Educational Platforms: A Systematic Literature Review

Darkhan Zhaxybayev, Madina Sambetbayeva, A. A. Dnekeshev, Aidar Igenov, Aizada Vakhitova, Tokabay Zhussip

Information, 2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3390/info17070619
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

Background: The convergence of machine learning (ML), gamification, and critical thinking assessment within adaptive educational platforms has accelerated since 2020, driven by large language models (LLMs) and graph neural networks (GNNs). No prior systematic review has jointly addressed all three dimensions, and Central Asian educational contexts remain underrepresented. Methods: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we searched Scopus (n = 4396) and OpenAlex (n = 4152) for publications from 2016 to 2026. Quality assessment used the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT 2018; threshold ≥ 2), yielding 82 papers. Five research questions addressed ML personalization (RQ1), gamification and engagement (RQ2), critical thinking assessment tools (RQ3), recommendation algorithms (RQ4), and regional applicability in Kazakhstan and Central Asia (RQ5). Results: Transformer-based and GNN models dominate the recent literature (52% of corpus from 2025), with an accuracy of 91–97% for dropout prediction and learning path recommendation under single-institution conditions. Gamification studies report up to 90% student satisfaction; LLM-based critical thinking assessment shows promise but faces validity concerns. Thirteen papers address Central Asian contexts. Conclusions: Significant gaps persist: no integrated gamification–critical thinking framework exists, recommendation systems lack explainability, and Kazakh-language datasets are severely underrepresented. Future research should prioritize multilingual adaptive systems, explainable algorithms, and privacy-preserving federated learning for low-resource contexts.