interactive narrative for adaptive educational games ... ?· interactive narrative for adaptive...

Download Interactive Narrative for Adaptive Educational Games ... ?· Interactive Narrative for Adaptive Educational…

Post on 04-Jun-2018

214 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • Interactive Narrative for AdaptiveEducational Games:

    Architecture and an Application toCharacter Education

    Rania Hodhod

    Ph.D. ThesisThis thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirementsfor the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Computer Science.

    Artificial Intelligence GroupDepartment of Computer ScienceUnited Kingdom

    February 2010

  • To my dad, the absent the present

  • Abstract

    This thesis presents AEINS, Adaptive Educational Interactive Narrative System, that

    supports teaching ethics for 8-12 year old children. AEINS is designed based on Kellers

    and Gagnes learning theories. The idea is centered around involving students in moral

    dilemmas (called teaching moments) within which the Socratic Method is used as the

    teaching pedagogy. The important unique aspect of AEINS is that it exhibits the presence

    of four features shown to individually increase effectiveness of edugames environments,

    yet not integrated together in past research: a student model, a dynamic generated

    narrative, scripted branched narrative and evolving non-player characters. The student

    model aims to provide adaptation. The dynamic generated narrative forms a continuous

    story that glues the scripted teaching moments together. The evolving agents increase

    the realism and believability of the environment and perform a recognized pedagogical

    role by helping in supplying the educational process.

    AEINS has been evaluated intrinsically and empirically according to the following

    themes: architecture and implementation, social aspects, and educational achievements.

    The intrinsic evaluation checked the implicit goals embodied by the design aspects and

    made a value judgment about these goals. In the empirical evaluation, twenty participants

    were assigned to use AEINS over a number of games. The evaluation showed positive

    results as the participants appreciated the social characteristics of the system as they

    were able to recognize the genuine social aspects and the realism represented in the

    game. Finally, the evaluation showed indications for developing new lines of thinking for

    some participants to the extent that some of them were ready to carry the experience

    forward to the real world. However, the evaluation also suggested possible improvements,

    such as the use of 3D interface and free text natural language.

    3

  • Contents

    List of Figures 8

    List of Tables 8

    Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

    Declaration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

    1 Introduction 14

    1.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

    1.2 Contribution to the State of the Art . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

    1.3 Thesis Outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

    1.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

    2 Technical Aspects 23

    2.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

    2.2 Artificial Intelligence Educational Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

    2.3 Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITSs) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

    2.3.1 Domain Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

    2.3.2 Student Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

    2.3.3 Pedagogical Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

    2.3.4 Related Work on ITSs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

    2.4 Knowledge Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

    2.5 Interactive Narrative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

    2.6 Agents as Human-like Characters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

    2.7 Why Educational Games? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

    4

  • CONTENTS 5

    2.7.1 Entertaining Computer Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

    2.7.2 Educational Computer Games (Edugames) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

    2.7.3 Evolution of Edugames Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

    2.7.4 Related Work on Edugames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

    2.7.4.1 Non interactive Narrative Edugames . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

    2.7.4.2 Narrative-Based Edugames . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34

    2.8 Summary on Educational Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

    2.9 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

    3 Human Aspects 44

    3.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

    3.2 Situated Learning and Learning theories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

    3.3 Ill-Defined Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48

    3.4 Moral Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49

    3.4.1 Kohlbergs Stages of Moral Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

    3.5 Character Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

    3.6 Socratic Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

    3.7 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

    4 Proposed Model and Architecture 55

    4.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

    4.2 Design Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

    4.3 Proposed Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

    4.3.1 Tutoring Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

    4.3.1.1 The Domain Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

    4.3.1.2 The Pedagogical Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

    4.3.1.3 The Student Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

    4.3.2 Narrative Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

    4.3.2.1 The Story Generator . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62

    4.3.2.2 The Presentation Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

    4.4 Chapter Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

    5 AEINS 66

    5.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

    5.2 AEINS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

    5.2.1 How AEINS works? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

    5.3 Domain Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

    5.3.1 Kohlbergs Dilemmas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71

    5.3.2 Teaching Moments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

  • 6 CONTENTS

    5.4 Pedagogical Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76

    5.5 Student Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77

    5.6 Story Generation in AEINS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

    5.6.1 Agency in AEINS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

    5.7 Story World in AEINS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

    5.8 Presentation Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

    5.9 Learning Theories Employed in AEINS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

    5.10 A Typical Student-System Interaction Scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91

    5.11 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

    6 Evaluation 100

    6.1 Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

    6.2 Thesis Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

    6.3 Evaluation of Design Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101

    6.4 Intrinsic Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

    6.5 Game Aspects in AEINS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

    6.5.1 Empowered Learners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

    6.5.1.1 Co-Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

    6.5.1.2 Customize . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105

    6.5.1.3 Identity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

    6.5.1.4 Manipulation and Distributed Knowledge . . . . . . . . 106

    6.5.2 Problem Solving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

    6.5.2.1 Well-ordered Problems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

    6.5.2.2 Pleasantly Frustrating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

    6.5.2.3 Cycles of Expertise; Skills as Strategies . . . . . . . . . . 108

    6.5.2.4 Information On-Demand and Just-In-Time . . . . . . . . 108

    6.5.2.5 Fish Tanks; Sandboxes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108

    6.5.2.6 Skills as Strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

    6.5.3 Understanding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

    6.5.3.1 System Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

    6.5.3.2 Meaning as Action Image . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109

    6.6 Empirical Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

    6.6.1 The Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111

    6.6.2 Study Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Recommended

View more >