Wp3 sg application fields
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 23

WP3 – SG Application Fields PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 56 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

WP3 – SG Application Fields. Michela Mortara , Chiara Eva Catalano, Bianca Falcidieno CNR – IMATI Marco Luccini CEDEP. Outline. Overview of WP3 mission and objectives Synthesis of Year 1 – activities and outcomes Year 2 Focus, strategy, outcomes Plan for user studies

Download Presentation

WP3 – SG Application Fields

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Wp3 sg application fields

WP3 – SG Application Fields

MichelaMortara, Chiara Eva Catalano, Bianca Falcidieno

CNR – IMATI

Marco Luccini CEDEP


Outline

Outline

  • Overview of WP3

    • mission and objectives

  • Synthesis of Year 1 – activities and outcomes

  • Year 2

    • Focus, strategy, outcomes

    • Planforuserstudies

  • Plan for year 3 (4)


Overview of wp3

Overview of WP3

  • Mission: Understand the current practices, needs and desiderata of customers and developers of SGs in different application domains

  • 6 specific Tasks, or Special Interest Groups

    • Business and Management (T3.1, CEDEP)

    • Engineering and Manufacturing (T3.2, POLIMI)

    • Health and Fitness (T3.3, HWU)

    • Security, Safety & Crisis Management (T3.4, NURC)

    • Humanities & Heritage (T3.5, CNR)

    • Personal & Social Learning & Ethics (T3.6, INESC-ID)

  • 1 Harmonization & Integration Task(T3.7, CEDEP)


Synthesis of year 1

Synthesis of Year 1

S

T

A

R

questionnaires, interviews


Main findings of year 1

Main findings of year 1

  • High demand of evidence based practice

  • Lack of a formal methodology to assessgame effectiveness perceived as the mainbarrier to SG adoption

  • Scepticism about SG effectiveness

  • Low adoption, small market

  • Uncertain return of investment

  • Few skilled developers, low budget projects


Focus of year 2

Focus of Year 2

“The panel recommends that this WP develop a plan to design and conduct one or more empirical studies of SGs now in use which are generally regarded as effective but which lack empirical evidence of impact. Such a research plan could be developed in year two and conducted in year three”

Based on the 1st year outcomes and the reviewers’ recommendation, the focus of year 2 has been on the learning impact of SGs.


Strategy

Strategy

SG collection (year 1)

SG monitoring (year 2)

  • Educational objectives & exploitation styles

  • Technological features

  • Availability to test

  • Success

    • Diffusion / Popularity

    • Awards

  • Learning Impact

    • Evidence from the literature

    • Recognised potential

  • Game workshops

  • Game testing and evaluation

  • Collaborative SG descriptions


Strategy1

Strategy

SG collection (year 1)

SG monitoring (year 2)

  • Game workshops

  • Game evaluation and testing

  • Collaborative SG descriptions

  • For each SIG:

  • Best practices wrtmaximizing the learning impact

  • Current/best practices in the assessment methodology

  • Identification of the SGs for user studies


Bps and recommendations on how to maximize and evaluate the learning impact t3 7

BPs and recommendations on how to maximize and evaluate the Learning Impact [T3.7]

  • Minimum cognitive overload

  • Facilitate the learning

  • R1

  • Engage the learner experientially/constructively

  • Situate the learning

R1

R2

Minimizing the cognitive overload

Maximizing the learning experience

  • Clear Evaluation strategies

  • Comprehensive evaluation plan

  • R3

  • Flexibility, reusability, exploitation

  • Facilitate the learning

R3

R4

Designing learning evaluation as an Impact project

Design the SG as an integral part of a learning program


Bps and recommendations on how to maximize and evaluate the learning impact t3 71

BPs and recommendations on how to maximize and evaluate the Learning Impact [T3.7]

  • Minimum cognitive overload

  • Facilitate the learning

R1

Minimizing the cognitive overload

  • User friendly game interface & Intuitive navigation (Playing History, Plantville, Siqur)

  • No previous knowledge required, gradually increasing difficult learning tasks (Shortfall, Thiatro)

  • Use facilitation when the embedded complexity is relevant


Bps and recommendations on how to maximize and evaluate the learning impact t3 72

BPs and recommendations on how to maximize and evaluate the Learning Impact [T3.7]

  • R1

  • Situate the learning

  • Engage the learner experientially/constructively

R2

Maximizing the learning experience

  • Minimization of cognitive overload a necessary condition

  • A suitable environment and proper interactions to fit the context of use at best

    • Immersive 3D environments (Thiatro, Boarders’ Ahoy!, TARGET, Innov8)

    • Interaction among players (EagleRacing)

  • Engage learners in building their new knowledge (Icura, MeTycoon)

    • Fun but also emotional tension and frustration


Bps and recommendations on how to maximize and evaluate the learning impact t3 73

BPs and recommendations on how to maximize and evaluate the Learning Impact [T3.7]

  • Identify as early as possible the learning goals and the kinds of data to be collected in order to identify the suitable learning metrics.

  • If the game is part of an educational strategy the stakeholders will be involved for the design and evaluation phase

  • Facilitation to raise attention, provide learning guidance and consolidate the learning

  • Maximization of the learning impact and effective evaluation

  • Clear Evaluation strategies

  • Comprehensive evaluation plan

  • R3

  • Facilitate the learning

R3

R4

Designing learning evaluation as an Impact project

Design the SG as an integral part of a learning program


Plan for user studies objectives

Plan for user studies – objectives

  • Selected SGs generally regarded as effective

    • Go beyond available studies (if any)

    • Validate the GALA evaluation (description template -WP1)

  • Evaluate SG effectiveness per se / with respect to or coupled with other means

  • Assess long term retention / actionability

  • Not only cognitive gain, higher levels in Bloom’s / Kirkpatrick’s models


User studies

EagleRacing(collaboration dynamics)

MetaVals (finance)

Seconds (supply chain management)

Cosiga (product development process)

SBCE (lean manufacturing)

Re-Mission(supportto treatment)

Squire’s Quest (food and nutrition)

Afghanistan pre-deployment course (defence, cultural awareness)

Boarders Ahoy! (defence, ship boarding operations)

PlayingHistory – The Plague (History)

ICURA (cultural awareness, japaneseetiquette)

Stop Disaster! (risk awareness)

Darfur is Dying (human rights)

User studies


User studies1

User studies

  • EagleRacing(collaboration dynamics)

  • MetaVals (finance)

  • Seconds (supply chain management)

  • Cosiga (product development process)

  • SBCE (lean manufacturing)

  • Re-Mission(supportto treatment)

  • Squire’s Quest(food and nutrition)

  • Afghanistan pre-deployment course (defence, cultural awareness)

  • Boarders Ahoy! (defence, ship boarding operations)

  • PlayingHistory – The Plague (History)

  • ICURA (cultural awareness, japaneseetiquette)

  • Stop Disaster! (risk awareness)

  • Darfur is Dying (human rights)

Is part of some company specific programs and other education programs at CEDEP and at INSEAD

The evaluation will benefit of a PGLC, never done before


User studies2

User studies

  • EagleRacing(collaboration dynamics)

  • MetaVals (finance)

  • Seconds (supply chain management)

  • Cosiga (product development process)

  • SBCE (lean manufacturing)

  • Re-Mission(supportto treatment)

  • Squire’s Quest(food and nutrition)

  • Afghanistan pre-deployment course (defence, cultural awareness)

  • Boarders Ahoy! (defence, ship boarding operations)

  • PlayingHistory – The Plague (History)

  • ICURA (cultural awareness, japaneseetiquette)

  • Stop Disaster! (risk awareness)

  • Darfur is Dying (human rights)

Developed and adopted at POLIMI

Summative evaluation including scenario questions


User studies3

User studies

  • EagleRacing(collaboration dynamics)

  • MetaVals (finance)

  • Seconds (supply chain management)

  • Cosiga (product development process)

  • SBCE (lean manufacturing)

  • Re-Mission (support to treatment)

  • Squire’s Quest (food and nutrition)

  • Afghanistan pre-deployment course (defence, cultural awareness)

  • Boarders Ahoy! (defence, ship boarding operations)

  • Playing History – The Plague (History)

  • ICURA (cultural awareness, japanese etiquette)

  • Stop Disaster! (risk awareness)

  • Darfur is Dying (human rights)

Largely adopted and well studied

BUT will be evaluated from the point of view of game mechanics and narrative


User studies4

User studies

  • EagleRacing(collaboration dynamics)

  • MetaVals (finance)

  • Seconds (supply chain management)

  • Cosiga (product development process)

  • SBCE (lean manufacturing)

  • Re-Mission(supportto treatment)

  • Squire’s Quest(food and nutrition)

  • Afghanistan pre-deployment course (defence, cultural awareness)

  • Boarders Ahoy! (defence, ship boarding operations)

  • PlayingHistory – The Plague (History)

  • ICURA (cultural awareness, japaneseetiquette)

  • Stop Disaster! (risk awareness)

  • Darfur is Dying (human rights)

Is part of education programs at CEDEP and at INSEAD and at some company specific programs.

The evaluation will benefit of a PGLC, never done before

Both considered BP for CA in defence operations – different technological solutions

Planned a comparative study on different user profiles


User studies5

User studies

  • EagleRacing(collaboration dynamics)

  • MetaVals (finance)

  • Seconds (supply chain management)

  • Cosiga (product development process)

  • SBCE (lean manufacturing)

  • Re-Mission (support to treatment)

  • Squire’s Quest (food and nutrition)

  • Afghanistan pre-deployment course (defence, cultural awareness)

  • Boarders Ahoy! (defence, ship boarding operations)

  • Playing History – The Plague (History)

  • ICURA (cultural awareness, japanese etiquette)

  • Stop Disaster! (risk awareness)

  • Darfur is Dying (human rights)

Largely adopted in Danish schools.

Evaluation at DIS (Genova) in march, to be repeated over time


User studies6

User studies

  • EagleRacing(collaboration dynamics)

  • MetaVals (finance)

  • Seconds (supply chain management)

  • Cosiga (product development process)

  • SBCE (lean manufacturing)

  • Re-Mission(supportto treatment)

  • Squire’s Quest(food and nutrition)

  • Afghanistan pre-deployment course (defence, cultural awareness)

  • Boarders Ahoy! (defence, ship boarding operations)

  • PlayingHistory – The Plague (History)

  • ICURA (cultural awareness, japaneseetiquette)

  • Stop Disaster! (risk awareness)

  • Darfur is Dying (human rights)

Large diffusion (supported by U.N.)

positive perception of learning impact but no empirical studies yet

Evaluation of experimental vs control group


Further sig activities wp3 handbook

Further SIG activities (WP3 Handbook)

  • Set-up and maintain dedicated SIG web pages (as suggested by the reviewers) [joint effort with WP8]

  • Contribute to SG description

  • Publish scientific papers [16 ref. proc, 2 ref. journals] , organize Special Issues [1] and Workshops [3]

  • Attract Associate Partners

  • Monitoring SG proposition, stakeholders, dissemination channels


Next steps

Next steps

  • Main efforts in year 3:

    • Conduct the user studies

    • Disseminate the outcomes

    • Recommendationsformaximizing the total valueofSGs: revision, update, validationthrough the userstudies

    • Continue Evaluating/describing SGs, Monitoring SG proposition, Updating the SIG pages

  • Outlook to year 4:

    • describing and prioritizing the kinds of research that is needed to measure the learning impact (reviewers’ rec.) from the application perspective

    • SIG Final Thematic Workshops


Wp3 sg application fields

Thankyouforyourattention


  • Login