Designing User Experience for Mobile Game-Based Learning

2011 International Conference on User Science and Engineering (i-USEr)

Designing User Experience for Mobile Game-Based Learning Norshuhada Shiratuddin1 and Syamsul Bahrin Zaibon2 School of Multimedia Technology and Communication College of Arts and Sciences Universiti Utara Malaysia Sintok, Malaysia [email protected], [email protected] followed by the aims of the study, the proposed mGBL model and the user experience findings.

Abstract— Mobile game-based learning (mGBL) is a game played on any handheld devices such as mobile phones. Although many game methodologies have been introduced, studies show that customized phases and steps to develop games for learning in mobile environment are substantially required. Therefore, this study addresses this gap by proposing a mGBL Engineering Model based on a number of game and learning theoretical and developmental foundations. In particular, the study identified the key steps of development methodology to be considered in developing mGBL applications which consist of phases, components, steps and deliverables. In verifying the proposed model, a mGBL was developed following the phases suggested in the model. User experience designs such as mGBL interactions design, learning model, game flows, and interface design were further discussed in this paper. Subsequently, the findings indicate that the proposed mGBL Engineering Model exhibits useful development indicators for mGBL application and user experience, and is indeed a theoretical and practical contribution of the study.

II.

Keywords – mGBL; mobile game based learning; user experience

I.

INTRODUCTION

The first category, the general GBL models include: InputProcess-Outcome Game Model [14], Experiential Gaming Model [8], Integrated Model for Educational Game Design [15], The (Fuzzified Instructional Design Development of Game-like Environments) FIDGE Model [16], Four Dimensional Framework [17], Adaptive Digital GBL Framework [18], Games for Activating Thematic Engagement (GATE) [19], The Digital Game Involvement Model [20], Framework for Designing GBL for Children [21], and GBL Model for History Courseware Design [22]. These listed models are all game design models which cater the specifications, concepts, requirements, or components need to be included when designing GBL. Although this is the case, all of them do not suggest step-by-step process of game development. Besides, the models also do not specify on how to develop game on mobile platform.

Mobile game for learning or mobile game-based learning (mGBL) is a game specifically utilized for learning which is also played on a mobile phone, smart phone, PDA or handheld devices. Similarly to game-based learning (GBL), the main aim of mGBL is to use game play to enhance motivation in order to learn, engage in knowledge acquisition, to enhance effectiveness of learning content transfer or other specific learning outcome [1]. The research on GBL increases dramatically worldwide [2] and this is due to the fact that the growing usage and popularity of exploiting game to support learning [3]. Given such issues as the popularity of GBL and their impact on those playing them, it is advisable to look beyond the practice uses of the mGBL. The most important part is the design and methodology to develop mGBL. Developing a good game is very important in ensuring the player is motivated enough to keep playing the game until the game goal has been achieved [4]-[7]. The first section of this article discusses thoroughly the research gap identified in this study. This is

978-1-4577-1655-3/11/$26.00 © 2011 IEEE

RESEARCH PROBLEMS AND AIMS

Various game design models and development methodologies have been proposed by a number of researchers and are made available in different genre of games, with each having their own requirements [8]-[10]. However, the research literature contains very few studies on methodologies how to develop educational games [11], and research on the design of educational video games is very limited [12]. To date, there is lack of comprehensive development methodology to create mGBL. The current available game design models and methodologies are gathered and can be categorized into two: (i) General GBL Models and (ii) Mobile Game Development Methodologies. The separation between the two analyzed categories is based on the differences of definition on the design model and development methodologies. As stated by [13], design model is a set of propositions which expresses the relationship between components or concept. On the other hand, development methodology is a set of steps or guidelines used to perform a task.

The second category, the mobile game development methodologies are: Best Practice for Mobile Game Development [23], Scrum Methodology [24], Game Development Methodology [25], Game Life Cycle [26], and

89

Design-Protect-Build-Test-Market-Sell [27]. Methodologies in the second category, suggest the phases and methodologies of developing game but not specifying to GBL. The drawbacks all of these methodologies are (i) for general use for developing mobile game and (ii) are not suitable for mGBL as no instructional design (ID) model or learning theories are considered. Most of the design methodologies are guidelines and general approach for developing mobile game and not mGBL.

B. Research Aims The aims of the study are: (i) to propose a mGBL engineering model that incorporates ID models and structured processes, and (ii) to measure user experience of playing mGBL developed using the proposed model. In this study mGBL engineering model is defined as the application of a systematic approach that includes process and methods to the development of a mGBL. While Hahn [35] define engineering model: “An engineering model is a schematic drawing as a mechanism that includes all components and data needed to fulfil its purpose. Therefore, an engineering model as a mechanism is very dependent on the purpose of the model.”

It is acknowledged that, the development of a game is a complicated and often an expensive task, and there has been limited research in game design in general [28] and also to educational game design [12], [29]. The literatures also suggest that the development of GBL should be a combination of two models; game development method and ID model [14]. This is because ID models contain valuable insights and guidelines for development of instructions. Each model addresses various problems effectively and it would be imprudent to ignore them in an attempt to create any learning based technology [30]. Furthermore the variation of ID models offers different components to cater for specific purposes [12], [31]. In addition, Moser [12] stated that ID model should be incorporated into new setting especially in different media for designing learning object and the ability to provide the necessary element of learning. Therefore, ID models should be incorporated in mGBL development methodologies. In addition, IGDA [32] states that embedding learning content into mobile games can be complicated, because mobile games particularly educational games differ from the application software [33]. Another concerning aspect to propose a mGBL development method is the restrictions on the mobile platform. The aspects that are considerably important when designing in mobile environment are screen design, interaction, and software or hardware dependent [32], [34]. The guidelines on how to align with these restrictions should be clearly specified in the development method, so that the game developers, especially the inexperienced ones, will put into consideration these aspects when they produce any mGBL.

III.

MGBL ENGINEERING MODEL

In developing the mGBL engineering model, few activities (as listed in Table I) were conducted prior to proposing the model phases, components, flows, and activities. Phases are distinct general stages of the model that can be performed in order (from phase one to three). Components can be described as constituent parts of the model that contribute to each phase and give specific stages of each phase. These components are seen fundamental to be included during the product development. Flows in the model define the way and manner of progress from one phase or activity to another. Activities in the model are specific steps or processes that are suggested to be conducted during the product development. All these model elements were combined and made up as the mGBL engineering model. The gathered model elements were also reviewed through the expert consultation. The proposed mGBL engineering model comprises phases, components, activities and deliverables for the development of mGBL application. It is divided into two layers, where the first inner layer is called as general phases; pre-production, production and post-production. In the second layer, there are components should be included for each respected phase as illustrated in Fig. 1. The three phases are executed in a sequential manner starting from pre-production phase followed by production phase and then post-production (the clockwisedirection arrows represent the flows of the phases). After completing the first phase, all designs are sent for review before second phase is taken place. Any amendments are made and corrected after review. If the design are approved and signed off, the production phase is carried on next. The similar review activity also should be conducted after completing the

A. Research Problems and Gap Based on the discussion in this section, the research problems can be summarized as follows: (i) development methodology to engineer mGBL structuredly is highly scarce, (ii) most of mobile game methodologies exclude the ID models for developing GBL, and (iii) some design restrictions and aspects that should be considered when developing game on mobile platform are not clearly specified in the existing methodologies and models. Hence, there is a clear research gap and a need for a comprehensive methodology which not only clearly defines how to design an effective mGBL, but also focuses on providing the necessary support for implementation to improve its learning effectiveness. It is therefore proposed that in order to engineer a mGBL systematically, it is crucial for developers to refer to a comprehensive design and development methodology that incorporates a number of aspects, mainly, the ID, interaction and technology in mobile environment.

TABLE I. Elements

90

ACTIVITIES PERFORMED PRIOR TO PROPOSING THE MODEL Activities

Phases

Expert consultation, Comparative study of mobile game development methodology

Components

Content analysis of the literature, Comparative study of the GBL model, Mobile Game Methodologies, ID Models

Flows

Expert consultation, Comparative study of the GBL model, Mobile Game Methodologies, ID Models

Activities

Expert consultation, Comparative study of the GBL model, Mobile Game Methodologies, ID Models

While for sound and music of the mGBL, MP3 format was used.

Discover

Delivery

Application size. The size for the mGBL was prepared in small and not large for running in mobile platform. This is why the mGBL was developed using Flash, since Flash file is relatively small.

•

Interruptible. The mGBL can be interrupted such as phone calling and text messaging while playing in progress

•

Evolving technologies. By using Flash tool, the mGBL can be easily enhanced for future needs such as the availability of mGBL versions.

Dream

Another important component of user experience to mGBL is the learning model. The learning model that suits mGBL approach is the experiential learning theory [36]. The experiential learning theory is found to be suitable to use as a learning model for mGBL. This is based on several reasons, particularly the theory:

Design Figure 1. mGBL engineering model.

production phase. All errors and inaccuracy of technical aspects of the game are rectified before it continues to the final phase. IV.

USER EXPERIENCE OF MGBL

In verifying the proposed mGBL engineering model, a mGBL was developed following the phases suggested in the methodology. The mGBL game was produced based on the needs of Malaysian local content, where the 1Malaysia concept was adopted as it is the current national agenda. The game is named 1M’sia which is abbreviated from one Malaysia. The mGBL development is primarily based on the concept of “game-based learning” [33]; which focuses on intertwining learning and gaming.

Mobile platforms or operating system. The targeted platforms for the mGBL are considered for all platforms which have installed Flash player software.

•

Screen sizes. To deal with the diversity in screen sizes, the mGBL was developed using Flash tool because the game display size is adjustable to the screen size of mobile phone.

•

Input and navigation controls. The chosen input controls include joystick-like navigation keys and selection key where all mobile phones have the capabilities.

•

Colour and sound support. The mGBL was designed in simple two-dimensional graphics using web-safe colors.

•

Is applied in accordance with the game because the players will be doing activities (challenges) to seek knowledge through the concept of exploration in a game environment.

•

Makes the learning process exciting, challenging, and relevant thus applicable to other situations in daily activities.

•

Provides opportunities for the players to take on challenges and step out of their comfort zones in a game environment.

•

Builds transferable experiences and skills gained in the game that are valuable in real life situations.

•

Provides player’s with concrete experiences that can simulate (in a game) to the real situations.

In term of the 1M’sia game flow, the player acts as a Malay character and then is triggered with several situations which provide the 1Malaysia values. Such situations are an ATM machine, a traditional costume shop, a house, a group of people, a school, and religious places. The player then has to enter the situation for the game environment. The player’s skills and knowledge will determine how well he is able to do the right things, and the values will either be mastered or not. Fig. 2 shows the 1M’sia game flow that lays out the flow of the game and shows the navigation structures the player can interact.

The 1M’sia game interactions were designed considering the capabilities of the general mobile. The interactions are based on device capabilities by using joystick-like navigation keys for moving to left and right, and enter key for selection. These keys are the natural choice for mobile phone control and easy for players to navigate in the game. Based on views from the technical analysis, few limitations of the mobile devices were approached properly, including: •

•

The screen shots Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 depict the user interface and screens of the 1M’sia mGBL. At first when the game is loaded, the main page is displayed. Players can continue to start playing the game by pressing start button or selecting other buttons for instructions. The game will start at the main game environment, and players can control the game by pressing the arrow and selection keys. The figures show the main environment of the 1M’sia mGBL, where examples of situations that players will be triggered. For example when a player enters the situation, a short animation will be displayed that shows the 1M’sia value and then a simple quiz is presented. There are also examples of a mix-and-match game

91

Nine Events of Instructions • Gain attention (player name) • Enhance retention & transfer (marks) Nine Events of Instructions • Inform learner of objective (game objective) PBL • Provides adventure/ exploration theme PBL • Using Malay character as avatar

Figure 2. 1M’sia main environment gam me flow. Experiential Learning Model • Player/ learner starts play the game by entering the game environment • The game environment provides learning content and objective.

where the players need to match the correct c traditional costumes for the specific ethnic group in Malaysia. The game immediately informs the player whether the answer is right or wrong. Fig. 4 shows the school rules game thatt requires a player to collect as many correct rules as possiblee. Finally, a short summary is given at the end of the game, where w the player is informed of his total percentage achievedd. The percentage indicates the level of player comprehensiion of 1Malaysia values.

• • • •

Multiple Intelligences Spatial (game environment with 2D and colours) Naturalist (trees and hills) Musical (music intro) Bodily kinesthetic (player controls the character

Figure 3. Main envvironment of 1M’sia.

Nine Events of Instructions

L A. Heuristics Evaluation Strategy for mGBL Heuristics evaluations are developed for f evaluating the effectiveness of an application. In fact, this kind k of evaluation is commonly applied in usability evaluaation. A usability evaluation is conducted to users in order too find out how the users can easily and efficiently reach the application objectives. There are many usability evaluatiion methods; most are originally developed by Jakob Nielsen. These heuristics however are more focused on the general appplications and are not specific to game. Specifically to edducational games, Malone has created the first heuristicss for evaluating educational games [37]. In addition to not beeing developed for evaluating mGBL, the existing heuristics do not deal with mobility issues and do not cover learning content c evaluation. Therefore, in evaluating the 1M’sia mGBL, m a set of heuristicsare adapted from [38], [39] byy adding a new component that deals with learning contennt and context in mGBL [40]. In particular, the heuristics evaluation strategy used in this study consists of four dimensionns: Game Usability (GU), Mobility (MO), Game Play (GP), andd Learning Content (LC), which made up the playability of the game.

•

Game provides instructions and help to the player before the

Multiple Intelligences •

Using symbols for recognizing the good and

Figure 4. Schhool rules game.

complete the questionnaire. In I some cases, especially for young respondents (age 9-12), questions were reworded verbally to make sure they understand u the meaning of the questions. Since 5-point Likerrt scale is adopted, Brace [41] suggested these response classiifications:

Sixty four (64) respondents played the mGBL using the devices that were provided to them. Then, they were asked to

92

•

if the response is 1.00 to 1..80, it is classified as highly low;

•

if the response is 1.81 to 2..60, it is classified as low;

if the response is 2.61 to 3.40, it is classified as moderate;

•

if the response is 3.41 to 4.20, it is classified as high and

•

if the response is 4.21 to 5.00, it is classified as highly high.

1M'SIA GAME PLAY 4.6 4.4 4.2 Scale

•

The playability of the game is counted as the average of total average 1alue of the responses gained for the four dimensions [42]. The higher the value, then the game is considered as indicating higher playability. The first dimension of the evaluation is game usability. The overall mean is 3.66 and the highest score is GU7 (the game gives feedback on the player’s actions). Fig. 5 depicts the scores. In general, the results show that the usability aspects of the 1M’sia mGBL is considered on the high side. The second dimension is the mobility (MO) issue. The overall mean is 3.93 which indicate that the 1M’sia mGBL highly meets the mobility components (Fig. 6).

3.6 3.4 GP1

Scale

0 LC1

Scale

LC4

From all the means, the playability value is found to be as follows indicating a high value. GAME PLAYABILITY = Average (GU + MO + GP + LC) = Average (3.66 + 3.93 + 4.08 + 4.43) = 4.025 Note: Detail explanations of items (GU, MO, GP and LC can be found in [40] and [42].

CONCLUSION

This study portrays a mapping between some learning theories and approaches to mGBL characteristics. Having these mGBL characteristics, a mGBL application was developed specifically for Malaysian local content. The study also briefly describes the design and development process and suggests that key design decisions are strengthen by application of theory in the learning sciences. The development stages employed into the mGBL development were successfully implemented. In this respect, this may be of interest to fellow game developers.

GU10

Figure 5. Game usability components.

As a general rule, heuristics evaluations are proposed for evaluating how usable an application is to the users. However, from the literatures, current heuristics evaluations are not really feasible to be implemented for mGBL because of the mobility aspects, game features, and learning content issues. Therefore, in this study, a heuristics evaluation strategy is developed for evaluating the playability of the mGBL application. The strategy is intended to evaluate mGBL with respect to game usability, game mobility, game play, and learning content. The findings indicate that the proposed mGBL Engineering Model exhibits useful development indicators for mGBL application and is indeed a theoretical and practical contribution of the study.

1M'SIA GAME MOBILITY 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.1 4 3.9 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.5 3.4 MO2

LC3

Figure 8. Learning content components.

Dimensions

Scale

LC2 Dimension

0

MO1

GP10

1

1

GU9

GP9

3

V.

GU8

GP8

2

2

GU7

GP7

4

3

GU6

GP6

5

4

GU5

GP5

1M'SIA LEARNING CONTENT

5

GU4

GP4

6

1M'SIA GAME USABILITY

GU3

GP3

Figure 7. Game play components.

Lastly, the component that is important for learning objective is the learning content (LC) (Fig. 8). It is obvious that the overall mean which is calculated to be 4.43 indicates that the learning content is highly informative, understandable and easy to learn. The highest score is LC4 (The content is understandable).

GU2

GP2

Dimension

The next dimension is the game play (GP). The overall mean is 4.08, indicating a high response. The highest score is GP5 (challenge, strategy, and pace are in balance) and the lowest are GP1 and GP7. Fig. 7 depicts these values. Based on the overall mean, it can be concluded that the respondents agreed that the game provides clear goals, rewards that are included are meaningful, the player is in control, and challenges and pace are in balance. Although this is the case, the respondents felt that first-time experience and the game story supports the game play and is meaningful could be improved.

GU1

4 3.8

MO3

Dimension

Figure 6. Mobility components.

93

[21] M. Noor Azli, M. Nor Azan, and C. Shamsul Bahri, “Digital game-based learning for children,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Symposium on Information Technology 2008 (ITSim’08), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2008. [22] M. Nor Azan, S. Wong, and A, Jaafar, “Digital game-based learning (DGBL) model and development methodology for teaching history,” W. Trans. on Comp. vol.8, no. 2, pp.322-333, 2009. [23] M. Dholkawala. (2007). Cryptic Capers: Best Practices for Mobile Game Development. [Online]. Available: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/devices/articles/cryptic_capers.html. [24] R. McGuire (2006) Paper burns: Game design with agile methodologies. [Online]. Available: http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20060628/mcguire_01.shtml. [25] Dynamic Ventures, Inc., Proven agile software development process, Dynamic Ventures, Inc. Software Development Services. [Online]. Available: http://www.dyve.com/dv/methodology.htm.. [26] S. Janousek. (2007). “The art and zen of mobile game creation with flash”. [Online]. Available: http://www.slideshare.net/scottjanousek/fitc-2007-the-art-and-zen-ofmobile-game-creation-with-flash/ [27] R. Edwards and P. Coulton, “Providing the skills required for innovative mobile game development using industry/academic partnerships”, Innovation in Teaching and Learning in Information and Computer Sciences (ITALICS), vol. 5, no. 3, 2006. [28] S. Bjork, S. Lundgren, and J. Holopainen, “Game design patterns”, in Proceeding of the Level Up: Digital Games Research Conference, Utrecht, The Netherlands, 2003. [29] J. V. Dempsey, B. A. Lucassen, L. L Haynes and M. S. Casey, “Instructional applications of computer games,” in Proceedings of the 1996 Annual Meeting of the AERA, NYC, 1996. [30] K. Becker, “Pedagogy in commercial video games,” in Games and simulations in online learning: Research and development framework, D. Gibson, C. Aldrich, M. Prensky, Eds. Idea Group Inc, 2006. [31] K. L. Gustafson and R. M. Branch, A Survey of Instructional Development Model, Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, NY: “Clearinghouse on Information and Technology, 2002. [32] IGDA, Mobile Game White Paper. [Online]. In Game Developers Conference, International Game Developers Association. Available: http://www.igda.org/online/IGDA_Mobile_Whitepaper_2005.pdf.2005 [June 18, 2007]. [33] M. Prensky, Digital Game-Based Learning, New York: McGraw-Hill, 2001. [34] J. H. Lee, “The educational use of mobile games,” in Proceedings of the OLT 2005 Conference, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, 2005, pp. 143-149. [35] H. Hahn, Rigid body dynamics of mechanisms, New York: Springer, 2002. [36] D. A. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, Englewood Cliffs, N. J: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1984. [37] T. W. Malone, “Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction,” Cognitive Science, vol. 5, 1981 pp. 333-369. [38] H. Korhonen and E. M. I Koivisto, “Playability heuristics for mobile games,” in Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (MobileHCI '06), ACM, 2006, pp. 9-16, DOI=10.1145/1152215.1152218. [39] E. M. I. Koivisto and H. Korhonen. (2006). Mobile game playability. [Online]. Available: http://www.forum.nokia.com. [40] S. B. Zaibon, and N. Shiratuddin, “Heuristics Evaluation Strategy for Mobile Game-Based Learning,” in Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Wireless, Mobile and Ubiquitous Technologies in Education (WMUTE 2010), pp.127-131, 2010. [41] I. Brace, Questionnaire Design: How to Plan, Structure and Write Survey Material for Effective Market Research, London: Market Research in Practice Serie, 2004. [42] N. Shiratuddin and S. B. Zaibon, mGBL Development Methodology, Universiti Utara Malaysia, Research Report, 2011.

REFERENCES [1]

[2]

D. Goodman, N. L. Bradley, B. Paras, I. J.Williamson, and J. Bizzochi, “Video gaming promotes concussion knowledge acquisition in youth hockey players,” Journal of Adolescence, vol. 29, no. X, 2006, pp. 351360. K. Corti. (2006). Games-based learning: A serious business application. PIXELearning. [Online]. Available: http://www.pixelearning.com/docs/seriousgamesbusinessapplications.pdf

[3] [4] [5] [6]

[7] [8] [9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

B. Sawyer and R. Smith. (2008). Serious games initiative. [Online]. Available: http://www.seriouagames.org/index2.html. A. Rollings and D. Morris, Game Architecture and Design, Berkeley: New Riders, 2004. J. P. Gee, What Video Games have to Teach us about Learning and Literacy, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. K. Becker, Classifying Learning Objectives in Commercial Video Games, Institute - Linking Research to Professional Practice, , University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Technical Report, 2006. S. Egenfeldt-Nielsen, “Overview of research on the educational use of video games,” Digital Kompetanse, vol. 1, no. 3, 2006, pp. 184-213. K. Kiili, “Digital game-based learning: Towards an experiential gaming model”, The Internet and Higher Education, vol. 8, 2005, pp. 13-24. C. Quinn, “Designing educational computer games”, In Interactive Multimedia in University Education: Designing for Change in Teaching and Learning, K. Beattie, C. McNaught, and S. Wills, Eds. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1994, pp. 45-57. A. Amory and R. Seagram, “Educational game models: Conceptualization and evaluation,” South African Journal of Higher Education, vol. 17, no. 2, 2003, pp. 206-217. J. D. Fletcher and S. Tobias, “Using computer games and simulations for instruction: A research review”. in Proceedings of the Society for Applied Learning Technology Meeting, Orlando, FL, 2006. R. B. Moser, A Methodology for the Design of Educational Computer Adventure Game, Ph.D. dissertation, University of New South Wales, Australia, 2002. V. Vaishnavi and W. Kuechler, Design Science Research Methods and Patterns: Innovating Information and Communication Technology. New York: Auerbach Publications, 2007. R. Garris, R. Ahlers, and J. E. Driskell, “Games, motivation, and learning: A research and practice model, Simulation & Gaming, vol. 33, no. 4, 2002, pp. 441-467, B. Paras and J. Bizzochi, “Game, motivation, and effective learning: An integrated model for educational game design”. in Proceedings of the Digital Games Research Association Conference (DiGRA 2005), Vancouver, 2005. B. Paras and J. Bizzochi, “Game, motivation, and effective learning: An integrated model for educational game design”, in Proceedings of the Digital Games Research Association Conference (DiGRA 2005), Vancouver, 2005. G. K. Akilli and K. Cagiltay, “An instructional design/development model for the creation of game-like learning environments: The FIDGE model,” in Affective and Emotional Aspects of Human-Computer Interaction: Game-Based and Innovative Learning, M. Pivec, Ed. IOS Press, 2006, pp. 93-112. S. de Freitas and M. Oliver, “How can exploratory learning with games and simulations within the curriculum be most effectively evaluated?”, Computers and Education, vol. 46 no. 3, 2006, pp. 249-264. P. H. Tan, S. W. Ling, and C.Y. Ting, “Adaptive digital game-based learning framework,” in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Digital Interactive Media in Entertainment and Arts (DIMEA 2007), Perth, Western Australia, 2007. W. R. Watson, Formative Research on an Instructional Design Theory for Educational Video Games, Ph.D. dissertation, Indiana University, 2007. G. Calleja, “Revising immersion: A conceptual model for the analysis of digital game involvement,” in Proceedings of the 2007 DiGRA Conference: Situated Play, Japan, 2007.

94