Game Design and Development for Learning Physics Using the Flow Framework

  • Danu PrananthaEmail author
  • Erik van der Spek
  • Francesco Bellotti
  • Riccardo Berta
  • Alessandro DeGloria
  • Matthias Rauterberg
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9221)


Instruction, in several knowledge domains, aims at achieving two goals: acquisition of a body of knowledge and of problem solving skills in the field. In physics, this requires students to connect physical phenomena, physics principles, and physics symbols. This can be learned on paper, but interactive tools may increase the learner’s ability to contextualize the problem. Computer simulations provide students with graphical models that join phenomena and principles in physics. However, a minimally guided approach may make learning difficult, since it overburdens the working memory. In particular, for developing problem solving skills, students need to be guided and exercise with a variety of physics problems. Intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) can be a useful tool to fill this gap. Thus, we have developed a physics game to support inquiry learning and retrieval practicing using simulation and knowledge based tutorship (QTut), and implemented as a puzzle game that uses driving questions to encourage students to explore the simulation. To address scalability and reusability, the game features different difficulty levels atop of a customizable format. This allows us to explore in-game adaptivity, exploiting task and user models that rely on the flow framework. User tests are being executed to evaluate the usefulness of the game.


Retrieval Practice Intelligent Tutoring System Educational Game Symbolic Level Game Mechanic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



This work was supported in part by the Erasmus Mundus Joint Doctorate in Interactive and Cognitive Environments, which is funded by the EACEA Agency of the European Commission under EMJD ICE FPA n 2010-0012. This work also is co-funded by the EU under the FP7, in the Games and Learning Alliance (GaLA) Network of Excellence, Grant Agreement nr. 258169.


  1. 1.
    Johnstone, A.H.: Why is science difficult to learn? things are seldom what they seem. Comput. Assist. Learn. 7(2), 75–83 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heyworth, R.: Procedural and conceptual knowledge of expert and novice students for the solving of a basic problem in chemistry. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 21(2), 195–211 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kirschner, P., Clark, R.: Work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educ. Psychol. 41(2), 75–86 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jong, T.D.: Technological advances in inquiry learning. Science 312(5773), 532–533 (2006). (New York, N.Y.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karpicke, J.D., Blunt, J.R.: Retrieval practice produces more learning than elaborative studying with concept mapping. Science 331(6018), 772–775 (2011). (New York, N.Y.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wouters, P., van Nimwegen, C., van Oostendorp, H., van der Spek, E.D.: A meta-analysis of the cognitive and motivational effects of serious games. J. Educ. Psychol. 105(2), 249–265 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kiili, K., de Freitas, S., Arnab, S., Lainema, T.: The design principles for flow experience in educational games. Procedia Comput. Sci. 15, 78–91 (2012). 4th International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications(VS-GAMES 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kolb, D.A., et al.: Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, vol. 1. Prentice-Hall Englewood Cliffs, Upper Saddle River (1984)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Csikszentmihalyi, I.S.: Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1992)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pranantha, D., Bellotti, F., Berta, R., DeGloria, A.: A format of serious games for higher technology education topics: a case study in a digital electronic system course. In: International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, pp. 13–17, Rome. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Elam, K.: Grid Systems: Principles of Organizing Type (Design Briefs). Princeton Architectural Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wensveen, S.A.G., Djajadiningrat, J.P., Overbeeke, C.J.: Interaction frogger: a design framework to couple action and function through feedback and feedforward. In: Designing Interactive Systems: Processes, Practices, Methods, and Techniques, pp. 177–184, New York, NY. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bellotti, F., Berta, R., De Gloria, A., Primavera, L.: Adaptive experience engine for serious games. IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. AI Games 1(4), 264–280 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bellotti, F., Kapralos, B., Lee, K., Moreno-Ger, P., Berta, R.: Assessment in and of serious games: an overview. Adv. Hum. Comput. Interact. 2013, 1 (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Danu Pranantha
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Erik van der Spek
    • 2
  • Francesco Bellotti
    • 1
  • Riccardo Berta
    • 1
  • Alessandro DeGloria
    • 1
  • Matthias Rauterberg
    • 2
  1. 1.DITENUniversity of GenoaGenoaItaly
  2. 2.Faculty of Industrial DesignEindhoven University of TechnologyEindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations