skip to main content
10.1145/2658537.2658696acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschi-playConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Instructional objectives to core-gameplay: a serious game design technique

Authors Info & Claims
Published:19 October 2014Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper explores a gap within the serious game design research. That gap is the ambiguity surrounding the process of aligning the instructional objectives of serious games with their core-gameplay i.e. the moment-to-moment activity that is the core of player interaction. A core-gameplay focused design framework is proposed that can work alongside existing, more broadly focused serious games design frameworks. The framework utilises an inquiry-based approach that allows the serious game designer to use key questions as a means to clearly outline instructional objectives with the core-gameplay. The use of this design framework is considered in the context of a small section of gameplay from an educational game currently in development. This demonstration of the framework brings shows how instructional objectives can be embedded into a serious games core-gameplay.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

p121.mp4

mp4

377.4 MB

References

  1. Adams, E. Fundamentals of Game Design. New Riders, Berkeley, CA, 2013. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Amory, A. Game object model version II: A Theoretical Framework for Educational Game Development. Educational Technology Research and Development 55, 1 (2006), 51--77.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnab, S., Lim, T., Carvalho, M.B., et al. Mapping Learning and Game Mechanics for Serious Games Analysis. British Journal of Educational Technology, (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Ausubel, D.P. Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, NY, USA, 1968.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruckman, A. Can Educational be Fun. Proc. Game Developers Conference 1999, (1999).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Chamberlin, B., Trespalacios, J., and Gallagher, R. The Learning Games Design Model. International Journal of Game-Based Learning 2, 3 (2012), 87--110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Connolly, T., Stansfield, M., and Hainey, T. Development of a General Framework for Evaluating Games-Based Learning. Proc. 2nd European Conference on Games Based Learning, Academic Conferences Limited (2008), 105--114.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Csikszentmihalyi, M. Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper and Row, New York, 1990.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. The -- What -- and -- Why -- of Goal Pursuits?: Human Needs and the SelfDetermination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry 11, 4 (2000), 227--268.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Djaouti, D., Alvarez, J., and Jessel, J. Classifying Serious Games?: the G / P / S model. In Handbook of Research on Improving Learning and Motivation through Educational Games: Multidisciplinary Approaches. 2011, 118--136.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dondi, C. and Moretti, M. A methodological proposal for learning games selection and quality assessment. British Journal of Educational Technology 38, 3 (2007), 502--512.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Dondlinger, M.J. Educational Video Game Design?: A Review of the Literature. Journal of Applied Educational Technology 4, 1 (2007), 21--31.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Gosper, M. and Mcneill, M. Implementing Game-Based Learning: The MAPLET Framework as a Guide to Learner-Centred Design and Assessment. In Assessment in Game-Based Learning. Springer New York, New York, 2012, 217--233.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Habgood, J. and Ainsworth, S. Motivating Children to Learn Effectively: Exploring the Value of Intrinsic Integration in Educational Games. Journal of the Learning Sciences 20, 2 (2011), 169--206.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Hays, R.T. The Effectiveness Of Instructional Games?: A Literature Review And Discussion. Orlando, FL, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Krathwohl, D.R. A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice 41, 4 (2002), 212--218.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Lundgren, S. and Björk, S. Game Mechanics?: Describing Computer-Augmented Games in Terms of Interaction. Proc. Technologies for Interactive Digital Storytelling and Entertainment (TIDSE), (2003).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Mager, R. Preparing Instructional Objectives: A critical tool in the development of effective instruction. Center for Effective Performance, 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Martin, M.W. Serious Game Design Principles?: The Impact Of Game Design On Learning Outcomes. 2012, 163.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Marzano, R.J. Designing & teaching learning goals & objectives. Marzano Research Laboratory, Bloomington, IN, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Norman, D. The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition. Basic Books, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Novak, J.D. and Canas, A.J. The theory underlying concept maps and how to construct and use them. 2008. http://cmap.ihmc.us/Publications/ResearchPapers/Theor yUnderlyingConceptMaps.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Przybylski, A.K., Rigby, C.S., and Ryan, R.M. A motivational model of video game engagement. Review of General Psychology 14, 2 (2010), 154--166.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Salen, K. and Zimmerman, E. Rules of play: Game design fundamentals. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Shelton, B.E. and Scoresby, J. Aligning game activity with educational goals: following a constrained design approach to instructional computer games. Educational Technology Research and Development 59, 1 (2011), 113--138.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Sherry, J. and Pacheco, A. Matching Computer Game Genres To Educational Outcomes. Electronic Journal of Communication 16, (2006), 10--14.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Sicart, M. Defining Game Mechanics. Game Studies, 2008. http://gamestudies.org/0802/articles/sicart.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Sweetser, P. and Wyeth, P. GameFlow: a model for evaluating player enjoyment in games. Comput. Entertain. 3, 3 (2005). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Sweller, J. Element Interactivity and Intrinsic, Extraneous, and Germane Cognitive Load. Educational Psychology Review 22, 2 (2010), 123--138.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Tang, S. and Hanneghan, M. Designing Educational Games?: A Pedagogical Approach. In Design and Implementation of Educational Games: Theoretical and Practical Perspectives. IGI Global, Hershey, PA, 2010, 108--125.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Watson, W.R. Formative Research on an Instructional Design Theory for Educational Video Games. 2007, 203.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Instructional objectives to core-gameplay: a serious game design technique

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Conferences
        CHI PLAY '14: Proceedings of the first ACM SIGCHI annual symposium on Computer-human interaction in play
        October 2014
        492 pages
        ISBN:9781450330145
        DOI:10.1145/2658537

        Copyright © 2014 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 19 October 2014

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        CHI PLAY '14 Paper Acceptance Rate30of104submissions,29%Overall Acceptance Rate421of1,386submissions,30%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader