1 / 18

WP1 – Strategic Coordination

WP1 – Strategic Coordination. ELIOS Lab – DIBE – University of Genoa. Target. Strategic coordination of the NoE on 3 major axes Research Integration De-fragmentation of topics & processes in SG R&D Joint Research Activities Addressing hot topics in SG research Spreading of Excellence

zelda
Download Presentation

WP1 – Strategic 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. WP1 – Strategic Coordination ELIOS Lab – DIBE – University of Genoa

  2. Target • Strategic coordination of the NoE on 3 major axes • Research Integration • De-fragmentation of topics & processes in SG R&D • Joint Research Activities • Addressing hot topics in SG research • Spreading of Excellence • Supporting international visibility of the SG field and a proper coordination among SG research activities at EU level

  3. Criticism 1 – Shaping other WPs • “Level of coordination in this WP is rather negligible” • What we presented/delivered: • Summary of requirements from business meetings: • Users & stakeholders • Show to potential customers effectiveness of educational value • Examples of good practices of integration • Designers & developers • Rules/tools from pedagogy/objectives • Researchers • Outlets for publications • Common ground among disciplines • Closer relationships with end-users industries • Industries • Huge production costs for the educational part • Lack of suited business models for SGs • Markets • Gamification • Gaming on social network platforms

  4. Crit. 1 – Negligible coord. in shaping other WPs • Suggested actions • Showing in D1.1 the mapping to tasks • Objectives and outcomes stated in both D1.1 and DX.Y, for all the deliverables • Metrics • Number of mapped tasks • Year 2 target: 9 (at least one ) • To be agreed with every WP leader in London. So, please remember the list • Considered in the partner performance evaluation (WP leader) • Percentage of coordination achieved for every mapped task • Y2 target: at least 80% of the tasks over 80% in the year expected

  5. Suggested actions • Performance metrics coordination • All discussed, coordinated with WP1 + Quality Manager • Final approval needed • Status • WP2 – Advanced paper discussion • WP9 – No feedback from Wp1 • WP3 – Discussion in course • Other WPs - No • Partner assessment • For every metrics, consider per-partner numbers • Every WP leader to check feasibility • (Retroactive in Y1) • Score system to be defined • Fair, challenging, compelling • Integration with the GaLA Game

  6. Criticism 1 – Shaping other WPs • Associate partnership • There were 4 partners • Situation now is: • Xx new partners • Yy are in contact • Associate partner list on the website • Cito participating in London • Imaginary and Games2Growth showed interest • Actions • Invite GaLA partners to be proactive. • Metrics • Number of associate partners • Year 1: 4 • Year 2 target: 8 • Per GaLA partner

  7. Sustainability of integration methodologies/tools • Virtual Research Environment (T8.1) • WP1: guarantee a global view over the SG landscape • Considering the various WPs, stakeholders • Living Labs (T8.2) • WP1: guarantee a global view over the SG landscape • Young Academy (T5.1) • WP1: synergies with website, conferences, publications, didactics • New: student competition (T5.8, Damien Djaouti) • Suggested actions • WP leaders to refer to Y1 Del1.1 (see also target mapping – slide 4) • Check carefully slides before the reviews • More detailed description in next version of D1.1 • Metrics: • Nr. of covered integration methodologies/tools • Joint assessment (WP1 and WP/Tx.y lead + QM) - % achieviem. of the y. targets • Yearly targets to be set here in London

  8. Sustainability • PhD and MSc projects • 32 PhD projects active • Several joint effort business-academia • Metrics: • Stand-alone projects, target: 40 • To be briefly reported by each partner: • Joint PhD projects, target: 8 • Double score? (per each partner) • But overlap with Seed projects. If the same, we drop here

  9. 2- Joint research activities • Coordinate WPs based on: • Fundamental research (WP2&3); external stakeholder requirements • Major indications: • WP2 – Scientific and Technological R&D • Map pedagogical objectives to game meachanics • Assessment of learning effectiveness • Interoperability and content re-use • WP3 - Applications • Learning impact • Best practice on development and adoption of SGs • Understand discrepancies among app domains • WP4 – Industrial engagement • Definition of business models • Branding of SGs • WP5 – Education • Interdisciplinary knowledge in Alignment Schools • Multidiscplinary paths for SG design education

  10. Major indications to WPs • WP6 – Integration in educational process • User studies to demonstrate effectiveness of SGs for education • Good practice examples of integration of SG into formal education • Meta-analysis of learning outcomes • WP7 – Integration in corporate training • User studies to demonstrate effectiveness of SGs for education • Provide good practice examples of SG integration into companies • WP8 – Services • User-centered design for the VRE and the LLs • VRE design to support a wide inter-sectorial view on the SG field • Establish of a common ground among SG disciplines • WP9 – Spreading of excellence and dissemination • Appropriate publication outlets (conference) • Coverage of all social media • High-quality contents

  11. Major indications to WPs • Actions: • Performance metrics: • Nr of reccomendations provided • 18 (at least 2 per WP) • To be agreed here in London with all WP leaders • % of achievement (score shared with the relevant WP/T leader, score ) • Target: at least 80% with at least 80% • Self-assigned score. Validation by the QM

  12. Promote joint R&D projects • Identification of topics • Key issues from R&D and app domains (WP2 and WP3) • Evaluation of SG effectiveness (Impact on learning) • User assessment • Pedagogically-driven design • Adaptation, personalization and recommendation in serious games • Integration of SGs in curricular activities • SG character development • Simulations • Deployment of SGs and user studies • Actions • Identification of topics for Y2 • Based on the new version of D2.1 • Check correspondence with the Y1 list (above) – WP2/3 leaders

  13. Promote R&D team forces • Seed projects • Strong concern by the reviewers! • Increase the number (PhD/MSc projects) • Short report (Max 2 pages, template to be provided) • No joint proposals (despite explicitly cited in the contract as an objective proof of collaboration among partners) • GaLA game Tuesday and Wednesday • Metrics • Template for seed project activity description. Target: done • Number of collaborative seed projects: 8 (Y1: 3) • Partner assessment

  14. 3- Spreading of excellence • Relationships with other EU-TEL projects • Stellar, 80Days, eCircus, Elektra, Target, Siren • Most of them are finished • Other • Terence, xDELIA, Segan, eSG, Magika, chernug, ecute, new ones? • What objectives? • Metrics • Number of EU projects in contact (per partner assessment as well) • Target: 10 • Number of joint activities (per partner assessment as well) • Target: 5?

  15. T1.2 – SG metrics • Work done on taxonomies, state of the art etc. • Rule for taxonomies • High level: WP1 (game types, pedagogies, game mechanisms) • To be agreed (if probs, discussion in the next slot) and used by all WPs • WP3 SIGs: domain-specific taxonomies • WP4 Market taxonomies (if relevant) • Proposal for GaLA VRE game description and classification • Targets • In-depth understanding of SGs through a detailed description of their mechanisms (Serious game studies) • Apply existing games into learning and training contexts, considering appropriate pedagogies • Design new games and enhance existing games, identifying weak points • SG assessment metrics are included as well • Multidisciplinary approach described in the next slot

  16. T1.3 – Roadmap • Johann Riedel leader • Contribution expected by all WPs

  17. T1.4 - Constitution of the European Society on SGs • Issues: name • European Serious Game Association • 2 points: • European • Criticized by reviewers • Serious Game Association, just born in the US • Simulation • Simulation for learning is an emerging concept • Realism, no «contraddiction in terms», as for serious games • Game and Simulation for Learning Society • GSLS, G&S, G&S 4L, GS4L • In a short time, UniGe account system open again after end-of-year inventary • Estimated costs • Registration tax: 170€, Legal costs: 500 € • Metrics • Number of partners. Target: 45?

  18. Further suggestions by reviewers • Stronger emphasis on NoE identity • Focus on impact on learning • Game studies • Assessment modalities • User studies • Game mechanics • Serious use of games • All WPs, TCs, SIGs should modulate this topic/ into their goals an practices • Overlap among TCs • Discussion with WP and TC leaders • Attention in presentations: be focused

More Related