Using the Petri Nets for the Learner Assessment in Serious Games

  • Amel Yessad
  • Pradeepa Thomas
  • Bruno Capdevila
  • Jean-Marc Labat
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6483)

Abstract

Game-based learning or serious games is becoming an important trend in the e-learning research area and seems address several typical e-learning problems such as high dropout rates, due to the lack of motivation to continue studying. In serious games, it is very hard to define and mix the learning situations with the game characteristics, and to integrate an assessment and guidance process of the learner without disturbing the game progress and maintain the intrinsic characteristics of the video game: fun, player motivation, immersion and interaction. In this paper, we consider the serious game as an asynchronous and concurrent system, and we propose an approach based on a Petri net to assess learners and detect misconceptions. In the game design stage, a discussion between domain experts, learning experts, and game designers is engaged in order to identify the actions in the game that imply knowledge acquisition and allow achieving the learning objectives of levels. Therefore, in our approach, the Petri net models only game actions allowing the learner to acquire knowledge. We use the reachability graph of the Petri net to track the learner in order to detect, in real time, the learner’s misconceptions, improve learner assessment and provide an accurate feed back for both the learner and the instructor.

Keywords

Game-based learning serious games learner misconception learner assessment Petri nets reachability graph 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Burgos, D., Tattersall, C., Koper, R.: Re-purposing existing generic games and simulations for e-learning. Computers in Human Behavior 23(6), 2656–2667 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Prensky, M.: Digital Game Based Learning. McGraw-Hill, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Burgos, D., Tattersall, C., Koper, R.: Can IMS Learning Design be used to model computer-based educational games? BINARIA Magazine 5 (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sutton-Smith, B.: The ambiguity of play. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salen, K., Zimmerman, E.: Rules of play: game design fundamentals. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2003)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Natkin, S., Vega, L.: A Petri Net Model for Computer Games Analysis. Int. J. Intell. Games & Simulation 3(1), 37–44 (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Araújo, M., Licínio, R.: Modeling Games with Petri NetsDigital. In: Proceedings of Digital Games Research Association, DiGRA (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Küngas, P.: Petri net reachability checking is polynomial with optimal abstraction hierarchies. In: Zucker, J.-D., Saitta, L. (eds.) SARA 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3607, pp. 149–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Yessad, A., Labat, J.M., Kermorvant, F.: SeGAE: a Serious Game Authoring Environment. To appear in Proceeding of The 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Sousse (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amel Yessad
    • 1
  • Pradeepa Thomas
    • 1
  • Bruno Capdevila
    • 1
  • Jean-Marc Labat
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratoire d’Informatique de Paris 6Université Pierre et Marie CurieParisFrance

Personalised recommendations