Personalized Support, Guidance, and Feedback by Embedded Assessment and Reasoning: What We Can Learn from Educational Computer Games

  • Michael D. Kickmeier-Rust
  • Dietrich Albert
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 332)


Software that intelligently interprets the goals and needs of its users on the basis of their behaviors without interrupting the work flow and consequently disturbing concentration and software that can support the users in a personalized, smart, yet unostentatious way is a desirable vision, for sure. One attempt to such support system was Microsoft’s famous paperclip. The underlying logic, unfortunately, was rather simple and the users did not accept the feature very well. This paper introduces a psychologically and formally sound approach to a non-invasive, hidden assessment of very specific needs of the users as well as their competencies and corresponding tailored support and feedback. The approach was developed in the context of adaptive digital educational games and is based on the concepts of Competence-based Knowledge Space Theory as well as that of Problem Spaces. The purpose of this paper is to broaden the concept and elucidate a possible bridge from computer games to regular software tools.


Embedded Assessment Micro Adaptation Support Methods Feedback User Model 


  1. 1.
    de Freitas, S.: Learning in immersive worlds. A review of game-based learning (2006), (retrieved August 28, 2007)
  2. 2.
    Prensky, M.: Digital game-based learning. McGraw-Hill, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Van Eck, R.: Digital game-based learning. It’s not just the digital natives who are restless. Educause Review (March/April 2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kickmeier-Rust, M.D., Peirce, N., Conlan, O., Schwarz, D., Verpoorten, D., Albert, D.: Immersive digital games: Interfaces for next-generation e-learning. In: Stephanidis, C. (ed.) HCI 2007. LNCS, vol. 4556, pp. 647–656. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kafai, Y.B.: Playing and making games for learning. Games and Culture 1(1), 36–40 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper and Row, New York (1990)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    De Bra, P.M.E.: Adaptive hypermedia. In: Adelsberger, H.H., Kinshuk, J.M.P., Sampson, D. (eds.) Handbook on Information Technologies for Education and Training, pp. 29–46. Springer, Berlin (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kickmeier-Rust, M.D., Albert, D., Hockemeyer, C., Augustin, T.: Not breaking the narrative: Individualized Competence Assessment in Educational Games. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Games-based Learning (ECGBL), Paisley, Scotland, October 25-26 (2007)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Albert, D., Lukas, J. (eds.): Knowledge spaces: Theories, empirical research, and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (1999)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Korossy, K.: Extending the theory of knowledge spaces: A competence-performance-approach. Zeitschrift für Psychologie 205, 53–82 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Doignon, J.-P., Falmagne, J.-C.: Spaces for the assessment of knowledge. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 23, 175–196 (1985)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Doignon, J.-P., Falmagne, J.-C.: Knowledge spaces. Springer, Berlin (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Newell, A., Simon, H.: Human Problem Solving. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1972)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Newell, A.: Unified Theories of Cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Azevedo, R., Bernard, R.M.: A meta-analysis of the effects of feedback on computer-based instruction. Journal of Educational Computing Research 13, 111–127 (1995)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tan, J., Biswas, G., Schwartz, D.: Feedback for metacognitive support in learning by teaching environments. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Vancouver, Canada, pp. 828–833 (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kickmeier-Rust, M.D., Albert, D.: The ELEKTRA ontology model: A learner-centered approach to resource description. In: Leung, H., Li, F., Lau, R., Li, Q. (eds.) ICWL 2007. LNCS, vol. 4823, pp. 78–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kickmeier-Rust, M.D., Marte, B., Linek, S.B., Lalonde, T., Albert, D.: The effects of individualized feedback in digital educational games. In: Conolly, T., Stansfield, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference on Games Based Learning, Barcelona, Spain, October 16-17, pp. 227–236. Academic Publishing Limited, Reading (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael D. Kickmeier-Rust
    • 1
  • Dietrich Albert
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of GrazGrazAustria

Personalised recommendations