1 / 25

WP2 R&D Coordination

WP2 R&D Coordination. TC Activity. Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011. Agenda. Overview Aim and Objectives Technical Committees Roadmap Deliverable 2.1 Issues Work in progress and next step. Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011. WP2 Aim and Objectives.

wyman
Download Presentation

WP2 R&D Coordination

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. WP2 R&D Coordination TC Activity Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  2. Agenda • Overview • Aim and Objectives • Technical Committees • Roadmap • Deliverable 2.1 • Issues • Work in progress and next step Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  3. WP2 Aim and Objectives • Activities coordinated under the technical committees (TCs) addressing the different elements essential for the success of R&D of serious games. • TCs aim: • to aggregate, systemize and synthesize the research activities, • addressing within-area possible fragmentation aspects and pinpointing solutions, • highlighting hot-themes, best practices, critical situation. • Applications and Implications: best practices, gaps and fragmentation issues – to contribute towards the actual R&D carried out by the special interest groups operated under WP3. Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  4. Technical Committees – A Recap Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  5. Roadmap Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  6. Year 1: Foundation • Aim: Best practices, research gaps and fragmentation issues • Activities • Literature Review • Case studies (ongoing) • Deliverable 2.1: Research Field Report 1 (month 10) • To feed into activities within WP3 • MS3: TC Activity Report (month 12) Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  7. Deliverable 2.1: Research Field Report 1 • BACKGROUND • State of the art • Hot topics and gaps • Fragmentation issues • METHODOLOGIES (TC Activity strategy) • DISCUSSIONS • Best practices within the area • Gaps and solutions • Solutions to fragmentation • Roadmap • COLLABORATIVE POTENTIALS • Cross TCs/SIGs links • Cross TCs/SIGs activities • Joint research and publication activities Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  8. Peer-Review TC2.1 to review: 2.3 and 2.5 TC2.2 to review: 2.3 and 2.5 TC2.3 to review: 2.1 and 2.4 TC2.4 to review: 2.1 and 2.2 TC2.5 to review: 2.6 and 2.9 TC2.6 to review: 2.8 and 2.9 TC2.7 to review: 2.6 and 2.8 TC2.8 to review: 2.1 and 2.7 TC2.9 to review: 2.2 and 2.4 Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  9. TC 2.1: Mechanics • Research Background • Investigate relationship between elements of fun and pedagogy within a gaming context • Comprehensive survey of game mechanics and game patterns • Spectrum, constituents and relationship of game (serious or otherwise) mechanics and pedagogy • Main findings • Highlighted issues and problems in dissociating game-play mechanisms from pedagogical output • The lack of a consistent taxonomy (including semantics) makes the game genre a poor candidate for the labelling of games • Limited framework provision to support assembling game patterns into an appropriate game • No direct connection has been made between game design patterns and pedagogical theories applicable for serious games • The term ‘game mechanics’ is a conundrum that evades a unified resolution • Similar to games, the domain of pedagogy is fragmented • It comprises a variety of non-exclusive learning theories, each favouring a particular view on learning and each focussing on a subset of variables • Conclusions • No clear theories how effective learning mechanisms map relevantly in a gaming experience • A pedagogy-game-mechanics mapping model has been developed as a test case • A bottom-up approach to identify design implementations of pedagogical intentions Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  10. TC 2.2: Personalisation and AI • Research Background • Aim: aggregate and synthesize research activities concerning the accommodation player’s differences regarding learning styles, difficulties, needs and learning rates. • Method: Skype meetings and categories distribution between collaborators. • Main Findings • 13 sub-categories overviewed including 27 different AI techniques >40 relevant publications catalogued > 16 game examples • Conclusions • most relevant research isn’t used in SG’s fast development cycles. • discussion about the contribution of AI to SG’s is getting relevance in this TC. Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  11. TC 2.3: Serious Games Architecture • Four areas have been defined as the major areas of interest within the TC: • Game engines and graphical engines • Collaborative gaming: Multiplayer and massive multiplayer • Support for social networking • Tracking and integration • Aim is to produce a white paper for each of the four areas outlining the state of the art, challenges and advantages, and potentially proposing both best practice and alternative solutions for the future of serious game architecture. • The report is based on the main activity of the first year centering around area 1, Game engines, with regards to • what defines a game engine and • the considerations involved in choosing a game engine (ex. knowledge of end-user, knowledge of pedagogical approach, resources available, etc.). Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  12. TC 2.4: HCI • Research Background • State of the art • WIMP vs Post WIMP (VR) • Hot topics, gaps and solutions • Immersion and Haptics • News uses / user needs • Mixed Interactive Systems, Contextualized Interaction • Fragmentation • Technique dispersion, heterogeneity • Designing interaction mechanics complexity • Methodologies • Literature and technology survey • Main Findings • Best practices • Human Centred Design method • Solutions to fragmentation • Global approach to interaction technologies • Development methods suited for efficient advanced technics • Roadmap • Characterisation and evaluation of • Gaps between technology and use. • Technology / usages fragmentation • Priority topics for prototyping solutions within projects. • Collaborative potentials • TCs or SIGs can provide case study of games in their research fields / application domains. • We can provide recommendation or constraint, best practice rules to design an interaction well fitted to these applications Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011 Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011 12

  13. TC 2.5: Interoperability and Semantics • Research background • The core objective is to generate best practices and recommendations that would fundament in-depth understanding, cost-efficient development and large-scale implementation of reusability in the serious games (SG) environment based on a serious game multidimensional interoperability framework (SG-MIF). • Methods: literature review; case studies (SCORM; LOM); concept map (SG-MIF). • Main findings • Overlaps in research; isolate developments; redundancy. • Low, but increasing acceptance & assimilation rates . • Poor practice-driven interconnections between the education and businesses. • Lack of agreement on concepts, development processes, instructional design, etc. • Research needs • Enable the development of an interoperability – oriented mentality at the academic and business level. • Facilitate joint efforts that focus on implementing the interoperability between games and LMSs, the interoperability between game components, and the semantic interoperability. • Develop the Serious Games Glossary of Terms to potentiate semantic understanding across communities and software components. • Extend the Serious Games Multidimensional Interoperability Framework that integrates: the SG components, the SG ecosystem, and external factors beyond SG. Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  14. TC 2.6: Assessment • Research Background • What is the scope of the TC? • Initial literature review (UCM) + detailed literature review (all partners) • Main findings • Wide field with a broad definition: “research topics related to assessment and serious games”. • 14 initial research areas, categorized in two overarching branches: • Assessment of serious games. • Assessment in/with serious games. • Some areas barely explored in the literature. • Conclusion • Identification of common approaches, open gaps and fragmentation issues. • Empty areas likely to become hot research topics Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  15. TC 2.7: Psychology • Research Background • AIM The aim of TC2.7 Psychology is to identify areas where existing theories and research in psychology can assist in designing better games, exploring the potential of serious games in learning and behaviour change and evaluating their effectiveness. • Agreed topics: learning outcomes; engagement in games; soft skills: self regulation in games & working in groups; decision making in games; cognitive biases in games; individual differences; explicit and implicit learning • Literature review of learning outcomes • Literature review of engagement in games • Literature review of group learning in games • Main Findings • Overlaps in areas of engagement with TC2.9; soft skills with TC2.8; assessment of engagement and individual differences with TC2.6 • Possible seed projects on engagement in games; cognitive biases in decision making • Conclusions • Psychological aspects of games to be explored in case studies • Many areas of overlap with other TCs • Piloting of ESADE’s group learning game in different content area Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  16. TC 2.8: Pedagogy • Research Background • AIM To investigate the pedagogical aspects of SGs design and deployment that can enhance educational processes. • Method • online discussions on key challenges, gaps/fragmentation, definition of literature review approach • collaborative authoring of position papers • joint undertakings to initiate games-based projects • Main Findings • Identification of : • some game features potentially enhancing SGs pedagogical effectiveness • pedagogical paradigms to be analysed in relation to SGs • Definition of a method for dynamic /comprehensive literature search /reviews • Literature review- based drafts of : (to be shared with other TCs SIGs and WPs) • Serious Games definition • Serious Games positioning with respect to related fields • Field analysis of existing SGs taxonomies focusing on pedagogy coming from different web services • 2 joint papers • 2 research projects proposed and approved • Conclusions • Case studies • Investigation of how relevant pedagogical paradigms and learning outcome frameworks can be applied to SG design and deployment Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  17. TC 2.9: Neuroscience • Research Background • The main objective of TC2.9 is to fill the gap between serious game (SG) research and neuroscience. TC2.9 aims to integrate, support and develop new joint research and development activities across the GaLA partners in areas which link neuroscience and serious games. • Main findings • Literature Review about the state of the art “SG and Neuroscience”: • Results of literature search and outline of the literature findings provided at the TC2.9 wiki at the GaLA homepage • Each member wrote a first draft of their contribution to the literature review • Empirical study examining cortical correlates during gaming (EEG & NIRS) • Literature review should build a basis for a subsequent empirical study • Based on this research findings future proposals should be developed • Collaboration between UniGraz and CovUni: Planning of a first empirical study is already in progress • Conclusions • TC2.9 members have begun to exchange knowledge and expertise and they are working on a common understanding of serious games and neuroscience • There is an already on-going cross linking between TC2.9 and other TCs/SIGs/WPs • The resulting collaborations and research findings will be the basis for future proposals Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  18. Publications ECGBL 2011: Designing Serious Games for education: from Pedagogical principles to Game Mechanisms 1 DIBE-UNIGE, Genova, Italy, 2 ITD-CNR, Genova, Italy, 3 Serious Games Institute, University of Coventry, UK 4 Serious Games Institute ,University of Coventry, UK, 5 Tampere University of Technology, Pori, Finland ECGBL 2011: Serious Games in Formal Education: Discussing Some Critical Aspects 1Carol I National Defence University, Bucharest, Romania,2Serious Games Institute, University of Coventry, UK 3University of Genova, Italy,4Institute for Educational Technology, Italian National Research Council, Genova, Italy,5 Serious Games Institute , University of Coventry, UK,6Escuela Superior de Administración y Dirección de Empresas (ESADE), Barcelona, Spain VS-Games 2011: Building Social Communities around Alternate Reality Games Coventry University, Playgen Continuum Press: Digital Games and Learning Coventry University, UNIGE Routledge: Digital Games and Learning book series Coventry University, UNIGE + others? ICVL 2010: Serious Games in Miltary Life Long Learning Environment MAN, UNIGE Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  19. Funding • PROJECT GEL (Game Enhanced Learning) • Financed in the second call for Theme Teams (network of researchers) by the Stellar NoE • Coordinator: ITD-CNR; partners: TAMPERE University, ESADE-Barcellona; MAN Bucharest, Coventry University, LIG Grenoble • PROJECT MAGICALMAking Games In CollAboration for Learning. • Call for Proposal LLP 2011 (DG EAC/49/10). Transversal Programme: KA3 (Key Activity 3 ICT) • Coordinator: ITD-CNR; partners: TAMPERE University; Manchester Metropolitan University; Leuven University. • PROJECT eSG Stimulating entrepreneurship through Serious Games. • Call for Proposal LLP 2011 (DG EAC/49/10). Sub-Programme Erasmus • Coordinator: DIBE, Università di Genova; partners: ITD-CNR; Delft University, ESADE-Barcellona • ICASE Studentship • Playgen and COVUNI Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  20. General Issues Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  21. Work in progress and next step Year 1: Foundation covered Review and case studies are ongoing NEXT... Year 2: Solutions Year 3: Applications Year 4: Review Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  22. Year 2: Solutions • Case study of existing serious games based on the recommendations from WP3 under the Special Interest Groups (SIGs). • Based on the extracted best practices from Year 1 activities and the case studies (Year 2), each TC is expected: • To document the parameters, attributes, criteria and tools within the technical area as a taxonomy and/or ontology (D2.2). • To feed back solutions to gaps and potential research ideas to the R&D activities within the SIGs and seed projects. Framework Taxonomy Ontology Tools Best Practices and Research Gaps Research Ideas: seed projects, solutions to gaps, etc. Case Studies WP3 (SIGs) Games Repository from SIGs Applications and R&D within the SIGs Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  23. Year 3: Applications • Best practices within the area to be replicated and applied in relevant R&D carried out under the SIGs. • The overall framework based on the taxonomy, ontology and tools identified by each TC can be implemented and applied. • The application of the specific frameworks from the different technical areas will allow defragmentation to be carried out. • The solutions to the fragmentation issues will include the interrelated taxonomies from the different TCs. • D2.3 will document findings based on the ongoing R&D Application of framework Fragmentation solutions Research Ideas: seed projects, solutions to gaps, etc. Applications and R&D within the SIGs Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  24. Year 4: Review Improved framework based on ongoing assessment, best practices within the R&D, solutions to gaps and fragmentation, ongoing literature review • The success of the framework and the defragmentation will be evaluated based on the outcome of the R&D activities within the SIGs. • The criteria will include the interrelation between the different taxonomies with regards to the application of the framework to address and support specific SIG areas. • Best practices within the areas will be re-evaluated and matched against the findings based on the actual R&D activities. • The outcome from Year 4 (D2.4) will include the proven and tested framework which can be applied in other areas beyond the lifespan of the GALA project Evaluations of technical contributions to R&D activities Applications and R&D within the SIGs Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

  25. Conclusions • The first year activities of the technical committees revolve around understanding the current status of serious games with regards to the specific areas. • It has been identified that cross links activities are important to ensure overlaps within these areas are addressed, fragmentation issues to be solved and a more standardised approach is reached. • ‘Common framework’ to be extracted in Year 2 of the project. • The first deliverable from all the TCs will provide essential findings to support the activities in Year 2, which includes more case studies based on the collected games (WP3) and the extraction of best practices and gaps based on these existing games and deployment of games. • Lesson learnt from Year 1 of the project include the importance of cross links activities between the TCs and SIGs, standardisation in terms of the shared framework ( taxonomy, ontology) and team work to ensure deliverables are met, quality research findings are produced and smooth translation of knowledge to the activities in Year 2. Bremen, 19-21 Sept 2011

More Related