Understanding participation as a general form of involving individuals or groups in democratic decision-making processes, participatory action staged by teachers when designing learning environments is finally a form of "enacted participation" (Mayrberger, 2013: 1) in systemic structured educational contexts. This critical view is supported by the research findings to reveal contradictions in staged participation and describe the resulting tensions conducted by Bonk et al. (2009) using web-based surveys, e-mail interviews and Budde (2010) analysing video protocols. Although participation in substantive decision-making is considered ambivalently in the context of university courses, procedural democratic actions can take place between learners indeed.

In our paper, the research context results from students' interaction within a first-year course in the master's programme in Primary Education at the Free University of Bolzano. The enhancing learning environment in the EduSpace Lernwerkstatt facilitates collaborative work in a range from instruction to co-construction (cf. Hildebrandt et al., 2014) as well as fairly interaction at partnership on equal terms (Rumpf & Schmude, 2021: 57). The framework is a university seminar on general didactics, in which the students translate their theoretical knowledge of general didactics into a learning game for themselves and their fellow students. A digital medium is to be actively used for this purpose.

The opted task sets the content development of a media based educational game for repeating didactic basic concepts. Therefore, nine digital game formats are offered for selection in a technical application. According to Knapp, the implementation of game elements, approaches and mechanics in a non-game context (Kapp 2013) is a central feature of gamification. Following Deterding’s et al. (2011) definition of non-game contexts, the study programme Master in Educational Sciences for the Primary Sector represents the corresponding setting. The students are encouraged to conduct a communicative negotiation on the presentation of relevant content, to agree on a suitable game format and to try out the result together with their fellow students. In this way, they interweave factual knowledge on lesson planning with their own teaching perspectives and play experiences.

Based on the model of Autenrieth, Baumbusch, and Marquardt (2020: 241), the issue whether and how media education in the university stimulates aesthetic education, democratic education, and political education is analytically reflected. Furthermore, the question is on both how the few participatory approaches find a place in the narrow structure of teacher education (cf. Grell & Rau 2011) and whether this claim can be fulfilled in a seminar, even to a certain extent.

In our contribution, we describe the participatory design process and the democratic negotiation processes within the development stages of a digital game. On the other hand, the students' work results are evaluated regarding aspects of general didactic, gamification and participation in university courses.

Initially, the students' work results and the lecturers' systematic observations are analysed and presented. Analysis criteria for the student results are: Fit between the content and the chosen game form, degree of gamification according to Kapp et al. (2013) and Deterding et al. (2011), as well as reaction and comments of fellow students to the offered game. By means of the observations, the student’s working methods can be considered. Participative possibilities and democratic negotiation processes become visible. These are even different in each student group. Secondly, the two-step analysis is used to determine the extent to which the model of political-cultural media education according to Autenrieth, Baumbusch and Marquardt (2020: 241) becomes visible. Subsequently, the question can be answered whether their idea of a transversal competence education can be proven in media education, democracy education and aesthetic education. Thirdly, the growth of student's knowledge achievement is recorded. If students have actually learned something in terms of subject matters by implementing the content in a digital game can be proved with results of the module examination. The formative assessment measurement instrument of the portfolio is used for this purpose. In their portfolio, the students must reflect on the development process of the digital game and describe their own learning progress. Finally, the students also have to comment on the digital tool with which they implement their game. Considering that, they also have to assess the possibilities and the usefulness of the technical tool for the primary education. The students' portfolio is evaluated following the same criteria as described above. The combination of the different survey methods results in an almost comprehensive picture of the seminar and the students' learning process.

This explorative study examines the didactic setting of a seminar more closely. Van Staalduinen et al. (2011: 51) emphasise that it is important for the research design to ensure that different aspects - such as instruction, player behavior and engagement as well as user feedback - are connected and aligned. Thus, to illustrate the student's work as encompassing as possible, various analytical perspectives and approaches are combined. Given that a seminar in academic teacher education is seen as an integral part of developing future teacher's professionalism, greater attention must be paid to this element of higher educational didactic. The aim of this presentation is to show how didactic thinking can be specified. The transformation on part of students will become more apparent: their altered perspective on didactic theory, their assured handling of a digital device and their explorative attitude towards didactic methods

Autenrieth, D., Baumbusch, C.; Marquardt, A., (2020) «Lehren und Lernen mit und über Medien in Kooperation von Schule, Hochschule und Museen: Am Beispiel des Projekts ‹Reuchlin digital›». MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung 17 (Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik): 531–63. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/jb17/2020.05.21.X. Autenrieth, D., & Nickel, S. (2022). KuDiKuPa – Kultur der Digitalität = Kultur der Partizipation?! Verschränkung von Theorie und Praxis in partizipativ angelegter Hochschullehre durch Gaming und Game Design – ein Praxisbeispiel. MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie Und Praxis Der Medienbildung, 18(Jahrbuch Medienpädagogik), 237–265. https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/jb18/2022.02.26. Bonk, C. J., Mimi Miyoung L., Nari K., & Meng-Feng G. L. (2009). The tensions of transformation in three cross–institutional wikibook projects. The Internet and Higher Education 12.3–4, S. 126–135. Budde, J. (2010). Inszenierte Mitbestimmung?! Soziale und demokratische Kompetenzen im schulischen Alltag - In Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 56(3), S. 384-401. Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Defining “Gamification”., Tampere. http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2181037.2181040 Grell, P. & Rau, F. (2011). Partizipationslücken - Social Software in der Hochschullehre. In MedienPädagogik, (21/1), S. 1-23. Hildebrandt, E., Peschel, M& Weißhaupt, M. (Eds) (2014). Lernen zwischen freien und instruiertem Tätigsein. Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt Kapp, Karl M.; Blair, Lucas; Mesch, Rich (2013): The Gamification of Learning and Instruction Fieldbook: Ideas into Practice. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Mayrberger, Kerstin. 2013. Partizipatives Lernen Mit Dem Social Web Gestalten. Zum Widerspruch Einer Verordneten Partizipation. MedienPädagogik: Zeitschrift für Theorie Und Praxis Der Medienbildung 21, S. 1-25. Rumpf, D., & Schmude, C. (2021). Von der Herausforderung, die Vielfalt von Hochschullernwerkstätten in einer Definition abzubilden. In B. Holub, K. Himpsl-Gutermann, K. Mittlböck, M. Musilek-Hofer, A. Varelija-Gerber, & N. Grünberger (Eds.). lern.medien.werk.statt. Hochschullernwerkstätten in der Digitalität (p. 53-69). Bad Heilbrunn: Klinkhardt. van Staalduinen; Jan-Paul; Freitas, Sara de (2011). A Game-Based Learning Framework: Linking Game Design and Learning Outcomes. In M. Swe Khine (Ed.): Learning to play. exploring the future of education with video games. New York: Peter Lang, p. 29–54.