Kahoot vs LectaMe: gamification of teaching for your classroom quiz?

Kahoot is worldwide the best‑known classroom quiz tool — ask each student what they know and you’ll hear the music back. LectaMe's quiz function is far less game‑oriented; quiz questions are embedded in the presentation as a didactic instrument. Which works better? The answer depends on your goal, and on what research says about gamification in learning. Here is the honest analysis.

What does the research say about gamification?

Gamification in education is not a magical accelerator — it sometimes works and sometimes doesn’t. Three findings that guide thinking:

Short‑term motivation versus retention

Sailer & Homner (2020) conducted a meta‑analysis of 38 studies on gamification in learning. Conclusion: gamification increases motivation (effect size 0.36) and cognitive outcomes in the short term (0.49), but the effect on long‑term retention is small to insignificant. Translation: a Kahoot quiz at the end of your lesson feels great, but two weeks later students usually don’t remember the questions.

Leaderboard effect: not for everyone

Hanus & Fox (2015) compared gamified education with traditional education over a semester. Result: students in the gamified group scored on average lower on the final test. Mechanism: the leaderboard motivated the top, but students in the middle or at the bottom felt marginalized and gradually dropped out. It works for competitive personalities; for half the class it does not.

Quiz timing more important than quiz format

Roediger & Karpicke's research on the "testing effect" shows that the timing of quizzes — spaced throughout the lesson — has a much larger impact on retention than whether the quiz is gamified or not. Short quiz questions spread across your lesson stick better than one long quiz at the end.

What this means for your choice: Kahoot's gamification works for closing energy moments and one‑off events. For structured teaching where retention is more important than fun, a didactically integrated quiz (as in LectaMe) is better supported by research.

The concrete format difference

Kahoot's format: events

Students open kahoot.it, type a pin, choose a nickname. Questions appear with 4 coloured answer buttons. Music plays, a timer counts down. Speed counts for the points — who answers quickly and correctly climbs the leaderboard. At the end: top‑3 podium, shouts of joy and disappointment. It is theatre, and that’s what it was made for.

LectaMe's format: part of the lesson

Students join a session with a code, receive a question in the slide at the right moment. No central leaderboard, no music, no timer pressure. The question is part of the explanation — usually right after a new concept to check understanding. Answers are anonymous or with name (you choose). As a teacher you see results as a bar chart; for the class it is optionally visible.

Neither is “better” — they serve different purposes.

5 scenarios: which tool would you choose?

Scenario 1: End of a teaching week, class is fatigued

Friday afternoon, fourth lesson of the day, energy low. You want to finish with a review moment that is also fun.

More logical: Kahoot. This is exactly what Kahoot was made for. Music, points, speed — shaking a tired class awake. LectaMe would be much more subdued here.

Scenario 2: Theory lesson with 3 new concepts

You explain 3 new concepts (e.g., acidosis, alkalosis, normal pH). You want a short comprehension test after each concept.

More logical: LectaMe. One quiz question per concept in the slide right after the explanation — no need to start and stop the Kahoot app three times per lesson. Plus: LectaMe's answers are more anonymous, so students are more likely to give a wrong answer.

Scenario 3: One‑off study information event, 60 students

You lead an information session for prospective new students. Goal: inspire, not teach. Quiz about the programme as an interaction moment.

More logical: Kahoot. An information event is event energy. Brand recognition of Kahoot helps — students recognize it and join immediately without explanation.

Scenario 4: Compliance training with measurable results per employee

L&D wants to see who masters the compliance material. Results per participant are needed for HR reporting.

More logical: Lectame. Per‑participant tracking, export to Excel/PDF, learning‑path mode for those who want to practice afterwards. Kahoot's gamification does not help with measurability here.

Scenario 5: Differentiation within one class (different levels)

Mixed MBO class (N3 and N4), you want quiz questions at different levels without singling anyone out.

More logical: Lectame. Layered slides support quiz questions per layer — N3 students receive the basic question, N4 students can click through to the deeper question. Kahoot's leaderboard would actually demotivate N3 students.

Instructional designers often choose to combine

Practice shows that experienced teachers use both tools side by side — not as competitors but as complementary instruments.

• Lectame for structural lessons — weekly use, quiz questions as a didactic instrument, layered depth for differentiation.
• Kahoot for energy moments — quarterly wrap‑up, theme‑week event, one‑off information session.

This is not an evasion — it is how tools work. A hammer and a screwdriver are both useful, but for different jobs.

Kahoot‑style gamification in Lectame

If you still want competitive elements in Lectame: you can, but deliberately limited. You can:

• Make answers visible to the whole class (peer‑comparison element)
• Show response speed in the overview
• Set up a scoring system via Pro features

But Lectame deliberately does not include music, a countdown timer, or stage animation. The research cited above is the reason—those elements work for entertainment, not for learning.

Price comparison

Plan	Kahoot	Lectame
Free	Max. 40 participants, basic features	Up to 5 presentations, all interaction types, no participant limit per session
Starter (per teacher)	$3.99/month (Kahoot 360 Standard)	€9/month Pro — unlimited presentations
School licence	From $30/month for 20 teachers	Custom — contact us via info@lectame.com

Kahoot's free tier is more generous for pure quizzes; Lectame's free tier is more generous for complete lessons. For weekly use in a school context the prices are comparable.

When Kahoot remains the more logical choice

• You mainly run closing energy quizzes or festive wrap‑ups.
• Your audience expects and enjoys the Kahoot format (music, competition, leaderboard).
• You do not need a pedagogical structure around it.
• The school already has a Kahoot licence and SSO integration.

When Lectame is the more logical choice

• You teach weekly or more often and want to embed interaction structurally.
• You want quiz questions directly in the lesson flow, not as a separate event.
• Differentiation within a single class is important (layered slides).
• Retention of learning material matters more than short‑term engagement.
• You work blended — live and self‑study via learning‑path mode.
• EU data and GDPR compliance are required.

Conclusion

Kahoot and Lectame solve different problems. Kahoot is a quiz‑event tool: maximum energy in a defined moment. Lectame is a lesson platform: didactic structure with quiz questions as an instrument. The question “which is better?” misses the point — you choose based on what you want to achieve this week or this semester.

For most teachers with weekly lessons or trainers with blended programmes, Lectame is the structural tool. Kahoot remains useful for moments where pure energy is desired.

Want to experience it yourself? Try Lectame for free and build a lesson with 3‑5 quiz questions spread throughout the slides. Compare that with your last Kahoot session — you’ll feel the difference in didactic focus.

Further reading

• Kahoot alternative — Lectame landing page
• Mentimeter vs Lectame — deep comparison
• 10 active learning activities that work digitally
• What is layered teaching? (differentiation through layers)
• Compare Lectame with 7 other presentation tools

Sources

• Sailer, M. & Homner, L. (2020). The Gamification of Learning: a Meta‑analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 32, 77–112.
• Hanus, M. D. & Fox, J. (2015). Assessing the effects of gamification in the classroom: A longitudinal study on intrinsic motivation, social comparison, satisfaction, effort, and academic performance. Computers & Education, 80, 152–161.
• Roediger, H. L. & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). The Power of Testing Memory: Basic Research and Implications for Educational Practice. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(3), 181–210.
• Karpicke, J. D. & Blunt, J. R. (2011). Retrieval Practice Produces More Learning than Elaborative Studying with Concept Mapping. Science, 331(6018), 772–775.
• Kahoot Pricing (accessed May 2026): kahoot.com/schools