A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF SERIOUS GAMES

FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

Conceptual Framework of the Game INNOV8 to Train Students

in Business Process Modelling

Rebecca Bulander

Pforzheim University of Applied Science, Tiefenbronnerstr 66, 75175 Pforzheim, Germany

Keywords: Serious Gaming, Computer-based Training, Digital Game Studies, Business Process Modelling,

Framework.

Abstract: Educational computer games also known as serious games are a new method to teach students. Serious

games are considered to be motivation in themselves especially for younger people and seem to be a

suitable method to teach students in higher education. The authors of this paper present a conceptual

framework of the computer game Innov8 – a business process modelling game to learn the notation BPMN

and also how to model business processes. The purpose of the proposed framework is to measure the

effectiveness of some aspects of the learning subject business process modelling. Therefore the authors

describe the classification of serious games and give a summary about conducted studies in this area of

research. After that they describe the framework itself. The paper concludes with a description of further

steps of research in the context of a computer course at university.

1 SERIOUS GAMES TO ENRICH

EDUCATION

Computer games have become a huge global, cul-

tural phenomenon and also in higher education and

training of students. The achievements by using

games are enormous, e. g. improved artwork and

graphics or immensely impressive physical simu-

lation engines. (Aarseth, 2005). Especially the

younger generation is used to this kind of enter-

tainment but also in the context of learning. To some

of them, computer games are more important than

movies. If computer games don’t belong to the vio-

lent genres, they can offer opportunities to involve

students in special situations and to emphasize

specific aspects and interrelations of a given situa-

tion while playing. Therefore serious games might

be a good opportunity to enrich higher education, to

simulate a scenario of the real world and to enhance

the didactics for students. Serious games are now

taken seriously by scholars and academics (Aarseth,

2005). Serious games can have different positive

outcomes. On the one side they are allowing learners

to experience situations that are impossible in the

real world for reasons of e. g. cost, time or safety

(Corti, 2006; Squire, 2003); on the other side serious

games can positively influence the learners’ de-

velopment of different skills for example team work

(van Eck, 2006). Thinking skills of motivated lear-

ners can be described by the following adjectives

enthusiastic, motivational, learner-driven, incremen-

tal, contextualised, concentrated, interesting or iden-

tificational. These attributes are sometimes difficult

to generate by a conventional learning session. Seri-

ous games themselves can advance these attributes

and therefore boost the learning effects (Schwan,

2006). Other advantages of serious games can be to

perform real tasks and scenarios in a virtual context,

discovery learning through risk taking/failure, im-

mediate feedback and lots of practice. (Clark, 2006)

The development of serious games largely de-

pends on the development of computers, display

possibilities, graphical design, interconnectivity and

mobility. Based on these advancements and tech-

nology development the market of serious games is

characterised by high growth rates (Susi, 2007).

In literature we can find several definitions for seri-

ous games. Susi et al (Susi, 2007) define them as

games that engage the user and contribute to the

Bulander R. (2010).

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF SERIOUS GAMES FOR HIGHER EDUCATION - Conceptual Framework of the Game INNOV8 to Train Students

in Business Process Modelling.

In Proceedings of the International Conference on e-Business, pages 95-100

DOI: 10.5220/0003033300950100

 SciTePress

achievement of predefined objectives. The adjective

serious refers to products used by industries like

education, scientific exploration, health care etc. The

differences between serious and entertainment

games can be summarised, that serious games focus

on problem solving of a special task, containing

important elements of learning and reflect natural

communication (Susi, 2007).

According to the definition above the field to

apply serious games is very wide. The focus of the

paper is on the programs of higher education where

students take specific courses at university in

business process management. Besides the general

understanding of processes this course aims to

educate and trains the students in the process model-

ling language Business Process Modelling Notation

(BPMN). Therefore we selected the software

INNOV8 of IBM. This software is specifically for

educational purposes and used to train employees

and students to the modelling language. Usually

BPMN and the phases of business process modelling

can be trained by a conventional lecture using slides

and also by reading the specific literature to this

subject. In this case it depends on the capabilities of

the lecturer to impart the knowledge about the

notation and also about the whole modelling pro-

cess. To point out the obstacles of the modelling

process in reality e. g. when gathering required in-

formation from several departments, especially

Innov8, offer a good opportunity to enrich didactics

and to demonstrate a specific scenario of reality.

Hence the students get the opportunity to have their

own experience.

In this paper we will present a conceptual frame-

work of the computer game Innov8. The purpose of

the proposed framework is to measure the effect-

tiveness of some aspects of the learning subject

business process modelling. In chapter 2 the authors

therefore give a summary about conducted studies in

this area of research and describe the classification

of serious games. In chapter 3 they describe the

framework itself. In chapter 4 the research metho-

dology and design for further steps of research are

described. The paper closes with a conclusion.

2 RELATED WORK

In this chapter we will bring up some related work in

the field of research of digital game studies. First we

provide a classification of digital games. Second we

mention some important studies in this field of

research. Third we refer to related frameworks.

2.1 Classification of Games

To classify serious games there are two aspects: the

commercial sector and the genre of the game. There

are diverse industries for which serious games are

utilised to educate people (Susi, 2007): Application

area, military, government, education, corporate,

healthcare and others.

In literature we can find several genres of games.

A game genre is the type or category of the game

played (Yussof, 2009). A game can be assigned to

one or more genres. The following enumeration con-

tains the main common genres (Schwan, 2006):

 Action game: computer game that focuses on

physical challenges, including reaction-time and

hand-eye coordination e.g. shooting games.

 Adventure game: computer game in which the

players assume the role of protagonists in an

interactive story that is driven by puzzle-solving

and exploration.

 Role-playing game: computer game in which

players assume the roles of characters or take

control of an avatar in a fictional setting.

 Strategy game: computer game in which players’

decisions have a high significance in determining

the outcome.

 Puzzle: computer game that emphasizes puzzle

solving.

 Simulations: imitation of real world scenarios,

state of affairs or process e. g. flight simulation.

For this paper we selected the commercial sector

education and in choosing the game Innov8 the

game genres role-playing game.

2.2 Learning Principles

Gee (Gee, 2003) summarised 36 learning principles

that mean the mechanisms by which players learn in

the context of computer games. Some of these lear-

ning principles are e. g.: active, critical learning

principle, self-knowledge principle or situated mean-

ing principle. Computer games always use several of

these learning principles. The learning principles

(Clark, 2006) which are mainly used in the serious

game INNOV8 are the following eight:

 Active, critical learning principle: Learner-

driven, massively participative.

 Semiotic principle: Understanding complex

environments and inter-relationships.

 Committed learning principle: Massive moti-

vational commitment through virtual identities

and participation in a complete world.

 Amplification of input principle: Massive

ICE-B 2010 - International Conference on e-Business

amounts of feedback, failure and rewards, often

in real time.

 Achievement principle: Intrinsic goals with

satisfying achievements and rewards

 Probing principle: The learner has to learn by

constantly probing – try things out, test them and

try again.

 Situated meaning principle: Performance in

meaningful and contextualised – not abstract

 Discovery principle: Narrative is kept to a mi-

nimum, forcing the learner to explore and

discover.

2.3 Related Digital Game Studies

In literature we find some studies about digital

games. However the focus of these studies varies

widely. Because of the extended and continuing

debate concerning negative effects of (violent) com-

puter games we find a lot of studies dealing with the

related matters. Susi et al (Susi, 2007) summarize

ten studies about these topics and come to the con-

clusion that several effects of computer games and

also serious games can be measured, but they can’t

find an evidence of effects related to aggressiveness.

The effects that had been measured are: Motor skills,

educational and informational, social as well as

physiological. As well Susi et al (Susi, 2007) men-

tion that a need for more investtigation in some spe-

cific areas concerning the increase but also the

decrease in aggressiveness.

Blunt (Blunt, 2008) describes the result of three

causal-comparative exploratory studies conducted

with the purpose to find out more about the relation-

ship between the use of video games and learning.

The result was that the classes using the game had

significantly higher means of learning than those

classes that did not use the game. Thus these results

point out positive effects of the use of serious

games.In addition to these results of computer

gaming studies further studies can be found. Most of

them address special computer games. From this it

concludes that the results are difficult to compare.

Especially because we know that serious games vary

to a great extent in terms of the industry themes they

cover, the game genre and the learning principles.

2.4 Related Frameworks of Digital

Games

Garries et al (Garries, 2002) describe a generic mo-

del about the input-process-outcome framework of

games in their paper. The key component of this

framework is the game cycle that includes the steps:

user judgement, user behaviour and system feed-

back. The inputs of the framework are instructional

content and game characteristic. The outcome is the

learning outcome. The game cycle is an iterative

process while the learner is playing the game again

and again (see figure 1). One focus of the framework

lays on the iterative loop in the game cycle.

The model in figure 1 describes the learning

process for serious games in education very well and

also fits into modern didactic theories (Schwan,

2006). This model will be considered when we for-

mulate the framework in this paper. An important

aspect which is the mission in the model is the

motivation of the learner to play a game.

Another very common model was invented by

Keller in 1983 (Keller, 1983) and describes a model

of motivation design. The model contains four steps

for promoting and sustaining motivation in the lear-

ning process: Attention, Relevance, Confidence, and

Satisfaction (ARCS). The model is very often used

in literature and will be characterised in more detail

in chapter 3. The ARCS model will also be applied

to measure the motivation in learning.

Figure 1: Input-process-outcome framework (Garris,

2002).

3 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

The following conceptual framework to measure the

effects of serious games combines the model of

Garries et al (2002) and the ARCS model of Keller

(Keller, 1983). The model of Garries contains the

steps of a learning process. The ARCS model

measures the motivation of the student for learning.

Therefore we will give a short overview of the

framework and explain single parts of it.

3.1 Overview of the Framework

The framework displayed in figure 2 is an advance-

ment and combination of the two models of Garries

et al (Garries 2002) and Keller (Keller, 1983). While

Garries et al describes the whole gaming process the

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF SERIOUS GAMES FOR HIGHER EDUCATION - Conceptual Framework of the

Game INNOV8 to Train Students in Business Process Modelling

ARCS model reflects on the motivation of the user

to play a game and keep on learning while playing.

Another point which was missing is the goals

and the objectives to play a serious game. There can

be different kinds of goals and objectives which in-

fluence the learning process. This aspect is added in

figure 2. To measure and interpret the learning

effects it is also important to consider what kind of

type the player is e. g. frequent player.

Figure 2: Learning framework for serious games to enrich

education.

3.2 Type of the Player

In student education we find a very homogenous

group. They are nearly of the same age. But we can

still find different types of players. In literature four

patterns of types are differentiated (Schwan, 2006):

 Impassioned player: ~ 15 % of all players. These

kinds of players are looking for challenges. They

have a high frustration tolerance and a high

intrinsic motivation.

 Wanna-be-Player: ~ 15 % of all players. These

players identify themselves with the impassioned

players and want to be like them. They also show

a much lower frustration tolerance than the im-

passioned players do.

 Fun player:

25 % of all players. These players

consider playing of games as one alternative as a

recreational activity.

 Occasional player: ~ 45 % of all players. These

kinds of players only play a game sometimes,

most of the time only as amusement.

The affiliation to one of these different types of

players can have an influence on the effectiveness of

the outcome of a serious game. Therefore this is also

mentioned in the framework.

3.3 ARCS Model

The ARCS model consists of the four elements for

promoting and sustaining motivation in the learning

process. These four aspects will be explained in the

next sections.

3.3.1 Attention

There are many simple ways to win the attention of

a learner, but the difficulty lies in sustaining atten-

tion. The attention to play a game can be gained in

two ways (Keller, 1987):

 Perceptual arousal: to surprise the user and gain

his interest.

 Inquiry arousal: to stimulate curiosity by posing

challenging questions or problems to be solved.

Therefore different methods for grabbing the lear-

ners’ attention can be applied like active partici-

pation, variability, humor or inquiry. It is most im-

portant to find a balance between boredom and in-

difference versus hyperactivity and anxiety.

3.3.2 Relevance

To make the relevance of a game for a learner clear

e. g. for their future career and keep it present in

their awareness even if they may be intrinsically

motivated, there are several strategies by Keller. One

of them is, to point out the learner’s future use-

fulness of the subject; another strategy would be to

show the learner, how the new learning will use and

extend their existing skills. (Keller, 1987)

3.3.3 Confidence

According to Keller (Keller, 1987) it is very impor-

tant that one has the feeling of confidence in the

possibility of success regardless of external factors

or innate ability for a learner. Therefore it may be

necessary to provide performance requirements or

evaluation criteria and also to establish feedback

loops. Another fact is to develop the learner by

letting him achieve rising steps of success in the

learning process.

3.3.4 Satisfaction

The last element of the ARCS model contains satis-

faction of the learning game. The learner must get

some kind of satisfaction after a learning period; this

can be the achievement of any objective, any praise

or entertainment. The learner should get some moti-

vation that the newly acquired skills can help to

ICE-B 2010 - International Conference on e-Business

solve their problems in a real setting. Thereby care

has to be taken that the learner will not be patronized

by over-rewarding easy achievements.

3.4 Instructional Content

The instructional content can be described as the

subject matter learners should learn by playing the

serious game. The subject can vary to a great extent

and depend on the objectives and the use as well as

the target group of the serious game. Gilbert et al.

(Gilbert, 2008) differentiate four types of content:

facts, procedures, concepts and principles.

The instructional content of the software Innov8

about business process modelling uses the two con-

tent types procedures by addressing business pro-

cesses and concepts by focussing on the business

process modelling notation.

3.5 Game Characteristics

The title game characteristic summarises both topics

game mechanics and game rules, by which the de-

tails of a game are defined (Thompson et al, 2007).

Under the topic game mechanics all technical,

graphical and game steering information is sum-

marised; this also contains the user interface and the

help function. The importance of game mechanics

shouldn’t be underestimated because e. g. the attrac-

tion of a game with pore graphical design can lose

attraction for learners in comparison to other options

of games. Also the use e. g. of the help function

must be clear and understandable. Otherwise if he

gets stuck a learner will be frustrated about con-

tinuing the game.

Games take place away from the real world in a

fixed space and time period. While playing games

the rules and constraints of ordinary life are tempo-

rarily interchanged by a set of game rules (Garris,

2002). Rules must be described very clearly and

carefully as well as be easy to understand; otherwise

the motivation of learners will decrease. The game

mechanics of the software Innov8 can be categorised

in an average level; it has deficits in the steering of

the avatar and the graphical design. The help

function contains all the information needed. The

game rules are understandable and clearly formu-

lated.

3.6 Game Goals and Objectives

The game goals and objectives are established by the

game’s rules. The goals contain the criteria of win-

ning and the victory conditions (Blunt, 2008). Ac-

cording to a research of Locke et al (Locke, 1990)

clear, specific and difficult goals motivate learners

to enhance their performance and engagement; such

defined goals allow the learner to compare their

achievements during the game and these can be seen

as a crucial trigger for greater attention and moti-

vation.

The objectives in the game Innov8 are clearly

defined and specific but they can’t be seen as very

difficult. The learners can always compare their

current achievements with the end achievement and

results.

3.7 Learning Outcome

The learning outcome is the new skills a learner

gained after playing a serious game. The learning

outcome can be coupled with the game achievement

in playing the game. The learning outcome can be

modified based on the game achievement’s feed-

back.In one scenario of the game Innov8 the learner

has to redesign the process of a call centre including

the staffing with people of different skill levels. The

learner can always check in a simulation, what the

result of the new process will be, if he left the

process in the modelled state like it currently was.

When reaching a specific score range, the result of

the remodelling of the process will be accepted. The

score of the game will be displayed and the game is

over.

4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

AND DESIGN

At the beginning of this chapter we want to point out

some important aspects of the proposed framework.

Then we will describe the next steps of research.

Therefore we will explain the research methodology

and design.

4.1 Important Aspects of the Framework

The framework described contains modern didactic

theories of the constructivism in which the learner

has a central controlling role in the learning process.

Learning happens in the willful actions of the learner

during a serious game.

Another advantage is that the framework con-

tains all important structures and aspects of modern

learning in one model. The ARCS model is also

integrated into this framework. Therefore the model

doesn’t only focus on single aspects like game cha-

racteristics or game features.

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF SERIOUS GAMES FOR HIGHER EDUCATION - Conceptual Framework of the

Game INNOV8 to Train Students in Business Process Modelling

The framework is adaptable to different kinds of

serious games. Previous to the actual adaption all

variables have to be checked.

4.2 Research Methodology and Design

The proposed research framework can be transferred

in a model which contains hypotheses between the

different variables. For example one variable would

be instructional content, another one game charac-

teristics. The relationships between the variables are

hypotheses which refer to the influence between the

variables. The variable “types of player” influences

the relationship between the ARCS model and the

learning outcome. The aspect if a learner is used to

computer games or not makes a difference for the

game results and the learning outcome. This model

and the hypotheses then represent a structural equa-

tion path model. This model can be tested by the

Partial Least Squares (PLS) analysis. The PLS

procedure was invented by Hermann Wold. It is a

second-generation multivariate technique which has

the ability to model latent constructs under condi-

tions of non-normality (Chin 1999).

To collect the required data to prove the pro-

posed research model we have already prepared a

questionnaire which contains questions for all va-

riables mentioned above (see also figure 1). This

questionnaire will be distributed at a university in a

class of students who finished their IT laboratory

including the lesson of the serious game Innova8.

The students are assigned to the course “business

administration and engineering”. A pre-test has al-

ready been conducted and the latest result has been

inserted in the proposed model.

5 CONCLUSIONS

In this paper a conceptual framework of serious

games for higher education for the game Inno8 has

been proposed and explained. The game Innov8 con-

tains learning sessions about the process how to

retrieve information of business processes in a vir-

tual company and also how to model and optimize

these processes. The result of the game is an opti-

mized process of a call centre. At the end of the

game the students can see their result of optimi-

zation.

The proposed model is based on modern didactic

theories of learning and has a holistic view of the

whole learning process. Therefore it takes care of the

input and the outcome of the process but also of the

game cycle. Consequently the framework also ad-

dresses the aspects that learning from games can be

challenging for multiple reasons.

REFERENCES

Aarseth, E. (2005). Game Studies: What is it Good For?.

In: The International Digital Media & Arts As-

sociation Journal, No. Vol 1, no 3, pp. 3-7.

Blunt, R. (2008): Does Game-Based Learning Work?

Results from three recent studies. Defence Gaming –

Swedish initiative for linking commercial games with

defence. (http://www.defencegaming.org/).

Chin, W. W.; Newsted, P. R., 1999: Structural equation

modeling analysis with small samples using least

squares. In: Statistical strategies for small sample

research. Hoyle, R., Thousand Oaks et al. pp. 307-342.

Clark, D. (2006): Games and e-learning. Caspian Learning

Ltd, (www.caspianlearning.co.uk).

Corti, K. (2006) Games-based Learning; a serious

business application. PIXE Learning Limited.

(www.pixelearning.com).

Garris, R., Ahlers, R., Driskell, J. E. (2002): Games,

motivation, and learning: A research and practice

model. In: Simulation and Gaming, Vol. 33, No. 4,

December 2002, pp. 441-467.

Gee, J. P. (2003): What Video Games Have to Teach Us

About Learning and Literacy, Palgrave Macmillan.

Gilbert, L., Gale, V. (2008): Principles of E-Learning

Systems Engineering. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

Keller, J. (1983): Motivational design of instruction. In C.

M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and

models: An overview of their current status Hillsdale,

NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. pp. 383-434.

Keller, J. (1987): Development and use of the ARCS

model of motivational design. Journal of Instructional

Development. Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 2-10.

Locke, E. A., Latham, G. P. (1990): A theory of goal

setting and task performance. Englewood, Cliffs, NJ,

Prentice Hill.

Schwan, S. (2006): Game Based Learning

(www.e-teaching.org).

Susi, T., Johannesson, M., Backlund, P. (2007): Serious

Games. University of Skövde, Sweden, Technical

Report HS-IKI-TR-07-001.

Squire, K.. Jenkins, H. (2003) Harnessing the power of

games in education. Insight, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 5-33.

Thompson, J., Berbank-Green, B., Cusworth, N. (2007):

The computer game design course. Thames and

Hudson, London.

van Eck, R. (2006) Digital game-based learning.

EDUCAUSEreview, March/April, pp. 16-30.

Yusoff, A., Crowder, R. M., Gilbert, L., Wills, G. B.

(2009): A Conceptual Framework for Serious Games.

Ninth IEEE International Conference on Advanced

Learning Technologies – ICALT 2009: pp. 21-23.

ICE-B 2010 - International Conference on e-Business

100