Advertisement

Exploring Bloom’s Taxonomy as a Basis for Interactive Storytelling

  • Sarah HarmonEmail author
  • Seth Chatterton
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11318)

Abstract

Prior work has called for Bloom’s taxonomy of learning objectives to be incorporated in educational games, but little research has explored how to achieve this within a generative context. We formalize aspects of Bloom’s taxonomy as logical assertions, thereby enabling metaphorical bridges to be generated between learning objectives and narrative elements. Through this lens, we present an example of a dynamic narrative framework driven by Bloom’s cognitive model.

Keywords

Bloom’s taxonomy Computer-supported cooperative work Educational interactive narrative 

References

  1. 1.
    Barzaq, M.: Integrating sequential thinking thought teaching stories in the curriculum. Action Research, AlQattan Center for Educational Research and Development QCERD (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bers, T., Swing, R.L.: Championing the assessment of learning: The role of top leaders. Higher education assessment: Leadership matters, pp. 3–26 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Buchanan, L., Wolanczyk, F., Zinghini, F.: Blending Bloom’s taxonomy and serious game design. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Security and Management (SAM), p. 1. The Steering Committee of The World Congress in Computer Science, Computer Engineering and Applied Computing (WorldComp) (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Case, R.: The unfortuate consequences of Bloom’s taxonomy. Soc. Educ. 77(4), 196–200 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gregory, G.H., Chapman, C.: Differentiated Instructional Strategies: One Size Doesn’t Fit All. Corwin press, Boca Raton (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gunter, G., Kenny, R.F., Vick, E.H.: A case for a formal design paradigm for serious games. J. Int. Digit. Media Arts Assoc. 3(1), 93–105 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Harmon, S.: An expressive dilemma generation model for players and artificial agents. In: Twelfth Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment Conference (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Harmon, S., Jhala, A.: Revisiting computational models of creative storytelling based on imaginative recall. In: Schoenau-Fog, H., Bruni, L.E., Louchart, S., Baceviciute, S. (eds.) ICIDS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9445, pp. 170–178. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27036-4_16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harmon, S.M.: Narrative encoding for computational reasoning and adaptation. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Santa Cruz (2017)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ibrahim, R., Yusoff, R.C.M., Omar, H.M., Jaafar, A.: Students perceptions of using educational games to learn introductory programming. Comput. Inf. Sci. 4(1), 205 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kowalski, R., Sergot, M.: A logic-based calculus of events. In: Schmidt, J.W., Thanos, C. (eds.) Foundations of knowledge base management. Topics in Information Systems, pp. 23–55. Springer, Heidelberg (1989).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-83397-7_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Krathwohl, D.R.: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: an overview. Theory Pract. 41(4), 212–218 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    QM: Quality matters: Higher education rubric. Annapolis, MD (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schwartz, S.H.: The refined theory of basic values. In: Roccas, S., Sagiv, L. (eds.) Values and Behavior, pp. 51–72. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56352-7_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Söbke, H., Londong, J.: Educational opportunities of a social network game. In: Göbel, S., Ma, M., Baalsrud Hauge, J., Oliveira, M.F., Wiemeyer, J., Wendel, V. (eds.) JCSG 2015. LNCS, vol. 9090, pp. 63–76. Springer, Cham (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19126-3_6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tearse, B., Mawhorter, P., Mateas, M., Wardrip-Fruin, N.: SKALD: minstrel reconstructed. IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. AI Games 6(2), 156–165 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Teo, N.H.I., Joy, M.: Evaluation of an automatic question generation approach using ontologies. In: European Conference on e-Learning, p. 735. Academic Conferences International Limited (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Turner, S.R.: Minstrel: a computer model of creativity and storytelling (1993)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vahldick, A., Mendes, A.J., Marcelino, M.J., Roberto, P.: Computational thinking practiced with a casual serious game in higher education. Gamification-Based E-Learning Strategies for Computer Programming Education, p. 26 (2017)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Whitton, N.: Learning with Digital Games: A Practical Guide to Engaging Students in Higher Education. Routledge, New York (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    William, W.A.I., Tait, R.J.: Game having multiple game activities, US Patent 6,279,909 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bowdoin CollegeBrunswickUSA

Personalised recommendations