Why Leaderboards Fail and How EdTech Can Design Real Engagement

When people in EdTech discuss engagement, they often refer to one of two things: attention or entertainment. We ask whether students are “hooked,” “motivated,” or “having fun.” But as I learned during my conversation with Clarence Tan, that is only half the story.

In our recent episode of Tech In EdTech, we explored what makes game-based learning stick for younger learners. We also talked about why good ideas often lose their power once they move into classroom technology. For anyone leading a product or design team in education, that difference matters more than it seems.

The Leaderboard Irony

During our chat, Clarence mentioned that “Leaderboards are a very powerful mechanic that’s often overused.” It is a line that should make every product designer pause.

Everyone knows the leaderboard. It is quick to build and looks impressive on screen. But as Clarence pointed out, it often rewards the few who are already ahead while quietly discouraging everyone else. That is not just a theory. Studies show that digital tools can drive short bursts of activity without improving sustained learning outcomes.

The OECD’s report on the impact of digital technologies on students’ learning also emphasizes that while digital tools can enhance learning, they can introduce challenges such as increased anxiety among students, especially when competitive elements like leaderboards are involved.

For product leaders, this insight translates into actionable strategies:

• Design with Intent: Ensure that leaderboards are thoughtfully implemented, considering their impact on all users.
• Foster Inclusive Competition: Create environments where all users feel they have an opportunity to succeed, reducing potential negative effects.
• Monitor User Engagement: Regularly assess how users interact with competitive features and adjust accordingly to maintain a positive experience.

Recognizing the nuanced role of leaderboards is crucial. While they can drive engagement, it is essential to balance competition with support to foster a healthy learning environment. Those patterns matter because engagement is not the same as growth. Game-based learning works when it builds skill through curiosity, not rivalry.

Balancing Challenge and Practice

A second key insight in game-based learning comes from how challenges are presented to learners. Simply giving students tasks that push them to their limits can create mental fatigue and reduce engagement. This reflects the classic Goldilocks problem in education: content should not be too easy or too hard, but just right.

Clarence highlighted the importance of meeting students where they are: designing tasks that align with each learner’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) ensures challenges are achievable with effort, rather than frustratingly out of reach.

Research and classroom practice support this approach. For example, studies show that mixing higher-difficulty problems with opportunities for mastery practice improves engagement and learning outcomes. Introducing tasks that allow repeated practice and moments of success helps learners stay motivated and reduces cognitive fatigue.

For product and design teams, the takeaway is clear: sustained engagement in educational technology comes from cognitive rhythm. It comes from a carefully balanced mix of challenge and competence. It does not rely solely on flashy mechanics or competitive features. This principle bridges naturally into thinking about how real learning unfolds over time, beyond moment-to-moment activity.

Designing EdTech That Supports Real Learning

Our conversation highlighted a key truth: engagement is not the same as meaningful learning. As Clarence put it, “You can see students clicking and smiling, but that does not tell you whether they are actually building skills.” For platform and product teams, that distinction has direct implications for design strategy.

5 Non-Negotiable Lessons for the EdTech Leaders

Here are the practical, non-negotiable lessons for CEOs, founders, product heads, and design leads:

In short, real engagement comes from thoughtful design that balances challenge, support, and usability, rather than flashy mechanics or superficial interactions. Clarence’s insight reminds us that careful attention to cognitive rhythm and user experience is the backbone of learning-focused EdTech.

Aligning Business Model and Product Design

One insight that often gets overlooked in EdTech is how the business model shapes product decisions. A product designed for one buyer can look very different from one built for districts or institutions. As Clarence noted, “You have to design the product around the chosen business model.” Misalignment here is where many EdTech products fail to scale.

Consider the broad differences between B2C and B2B approaches:

Designing a product solely for B2C engagement often creates challenges when attempting a B2B sale. Features like single sign-on, data integration, and administrative flexibility are easy to overlook until scaling becomes urgent. The strategic takeaway is clear: product, revenue, and buyer alignment must happen early, not retroactively.

Product leaders must understand that durable learning experiences rely on systems thinking. The sequence architecture, mastery opportunities, social mechanics, and personalization must all operate in harmony. The business model acts as the invisible framework that either supports or constrains those design choices.

What Real Engagement Looks Like

Walking away from this episode, my biggest realization was that engagement in education is not about adding excitement, but about designing possibility.

When design, psychology, and empathy align, students play and progress simultaneously. For CEOs, founders, and design heads, maybe the question is not “How do we make learning fun?” but rather, “How do we make learning flow?” That is the version of engagement worth chasing.

Magic EdTech works with teams to translate these principles into practical strategies, helping designers and product leaders turn engagement from a metric into a meaningful learning experience.