Winter, M. (2009) Location Based Games Authoring. Literature review to inform the development of a
location based games authoring tool for secondary school children. Project deliverable, July 2009.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education
1
Introduction
The rapid spread and integration of mobile devices, wireless networks and GPS technology have
created a technological platform for location based services, including games that rely on real-time
information about players‟ location to control game flow and deliver context-aware player
experiences.
Education seems a promising application area for such Location Based Games (LBGs), as they
potentially combine the virtues of Mobile learning and Games based learning, which both have been
extensively researched and discussed in the literature in recent years. Comprehensive literature reviews
are given by Naismith et al. (2004) for mobile technologies and learning, and by Kirriemuir and
McFarlane (2004) for games and learning.
However, while the technology has been available for some years, and was predicted in 2000 to appeal
to a mass market audience and generate $26 billion by 2005 (Forrester, 2000), LBGs are still relatively
unknown to the wider public and have been used in schools only in isolated instances, usually in the
context of small-scale research projects (e.g. Chen et al., 2004; Cheung, 2003; Facer et al., 2005;
Halloran et al., 2005; Klopfer et al., 2004; Rogers et al., 2004; Schrier, 2006).
Learners were typically assigned a user role in these projects, playing LBGs to acquire subject
knowledge or to scaffold other learning activities, often in a cross-curricular context. Where
researchers employed participative design methods (e.g. Verhaeh et al, 2006), learners additionally
contributed to the design of LBGs, but again in a user or domain expert role without actually making
design decisions themselves.
While playing LBGs for instructional purposes has strong theoretical groundings, constructivist and
constructionist conceptions of learning suggest that it would be even more valuable for learners to
switch from a consumer role to a producer role and actively develop games themselves (e.g. Kafai,
2006, Hayes and Alex, 2008). While in the past this has been problematic because low-level LBG
development requires considerable technical knowledge and programming skills (cf. Girardin, 2005)
that are considered far too complex for the average teacher or student to handle (Johansson and
Winter, 2008), there are now mature and feature-rich high-level authoring tools available that hide
technical implementation details and enable school children to build their own LBGs (e.g. Mscape,
2009, 7scenes 2009).
This literature review aims to inform the development of an LBG authoring tool for secondary school
children and their teachers. It first explores educational aspects of LBG authoring by considering
possible educational uses of LBG authoring mapped to learning theory and described in the literature,
and then looks at existing authoring tools and design studies for LBGs and other location based
experiences to derive design guidelines based on previous research and experience.
The two leading questions in this review are:
1. How can LBG authoring support learning, and how can it be integrated with educational
practices?
2. What design recommendations can be drawn from existing authoring tools for location based
experiences?
To answer these questions, this review draws on a wide range of studies, research reports and metaresearch relating to LBGs in educational contexts, as well as the wider literature on mobile learning
and game based learning where appropriate. Reflecting the emergent character of the research field,
the review uses not only material published in books and peer-reviewed journals, but also includes
conference presentations and technical reports produced by research groups and other agencies
informing and advancing LBGs in education.
2
Definitions
2.1 Game
Games are being researched in a wide range of contexts, all of which offer different perspectives and
have their own, sometimes conflicting, definitions and terminologies, e.g. Orwant (2000), taking an
anthropological perspective, defines game as all leisure activities that are not play or sport, with play
having no explicit goal and sport involving a test of physical ability, while Prensky (2001), taking an
educational perspective, understands game as a subset of play that is organised and helps us to learn.
Further complicating the discussion is the cleavage between narratologist and ludologist
understandings of game, with the former emphasising representation and narrative structure and the
latter focusing on the underlying abstract rule systems. In addition, while play has been called the
primary formative element in human culture (Huizinga, 1950), games are understood differently
throughout different cultures and what might be considered a game in one country might not be
considered a game or even appropriate in another country (Hinske et al. 2007). Acknowledging that
there is no universal understanding of what constitutes a game, this section only seeks to clarify how
game is understood in the context of this review.
Given that LBGs are a relatively new phenomenon with many unexplored possibilities, a wide
definition of game is used throughout this review, synthesised from Dempsey et al. (1996), Fabricatore
(2000), Presnky (2001) and Hinske et al. (2007), the latter being itself an amalgam of definitions by
Salen and Zimmermann (2003), Lindley (2002), Klabbers (2003), Juul (2003), Costikyan (2002) and
Crawford (2003).
A game consists of actors, resources, and a set of structural elements:
Framework of agreed constraints and/or rules
Challenge and/or opposition and/or competition, either with oneself or others
Management of resources and/or time
Pursuit of objectives and goals
Outcomes and Feedback
Representation or Story
This definition excludes 'Emotional attachment' which is mentioned in some other definitions, usually
in the context of video games and entertainment, as it would unnecessarily narrow down the design
space for LBGs in education, for example in the context of serious games (Abt, 1970).
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 2 of 31
2.2 Location based games
This review uses Location Based Games (LBGs) as an umbrella term for mobile games that use the
geographic position of players to control game flow and determine player success with respect to
challenges and objectives. Depending on the type of game, player positions can be interpreted either
absolute in reference to the real world, or relative in reference to a virtual playing field:
Context-dependent games interpret player positions absolute and are embedded in a specific
geographical area. They reference specific objects and places in that area and cannot be
transferred to another geographic area. For example, Treasure-Hunt is a context-dependent
game genre, and specific treasure hunts only make sense in the specific location they are
written for.
Context-agnostic games interpret player positions relative to a previously agreed virtual
playing field. They do not reference real objects or places in a specific location and can be
transferred to any other geographic area large enough to accommodate the virtual playing
field. For example, Maze is a context-agnostic game genre, and specific maze games can be
played in any location large enough to host them.
In contrast to Kampmann (2005), who proposes that "a location based game is a game that includes
relative or absolute but static position/location in the game rules", the definition used here does not
require positions/locations to be static, thereby extending the design space for LBGs to include rules
based on the position of moving objects and/or players relative to each other, e.g. in multi-player
LBGs.
Various technologies can be employed to determine geographic position, including GPS1, sensor-based
technologies, and triangulation of wireless network signals. While Laine and Joy (2008) identified
RFID2 as the most commonly used technology in pervasive learning environments, this review focuses
on GPS due to its low cost and ubiquity in modern mobile phones, PDA's3 and discrete GPS units. In
contrast to RFID, GPS requires no tagging of the physical environment, works over large distances,
and supports navigation between points, which make the technology suitable for large-scale outdoor
pervasive experiences. Unless otherwise stated, design guidelines for LBG authoring tools therefore
assume the use of GPS technology to define locations and track player positions.
2.3 Class, genre and game
Mirroring the problems in formulating a universal definition for the term game, the literature offers no
universal taxonomy of games and often uses fuzzy and inconsistent terminology in describing and
classifying games. Björk et al. (2003) observe that in the literature taxonomies of games often are
simple genre collections, with the definition of genres strongly depending on the popularity of various
games. For the domain of computer games, Crawford (2003) suggests that no correct taxonomy can be
formulated due to the great variety in computer games. In the domain of video games, Apperley (2006)
talks of a "fragmented genre-based approach" and relates classification problems to tensions between
narratologist and ludologist understandings of games.
1
GPS: Global Positioning System
2
RDID: Radio Frequency Identification
3
PDA: Personal Digital Assistant
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 3 of 31
Aiming to simplify the discussion of LBGs and LBG authoring tools, and expressly without any claim
of universality, this review uses the terms class, genre and game at different abstraction levels as
shown in Figure 1:
Figure 1: Abstraction levels for the terms class, genre and game as used in this review. Examples on the Game level
refer to games developed for the LocoMatrix (2009) platform.
2.4 Authoring tool
There are different design and development processes for LBGs described in the literature, with phases
ranging from ideas generation and storyboarding to simulating, testing and deploying games, all of
which potentially could be supported by an authoring tool. Without preempting any findings regarding
design guidelines, the term authoring tool in the context of this review implies the minimum
requirement of being able to generate a readily playable LBG (as opposed to a non-functional design
artefact).
3
LBG authoring in education
This literature review in first place looks at LBG authoring in educational contexts, however, it would
be problematic to separate that completely from LBG playing. Firstly, exploratory field trips (e.g. to
collect media) and LBG playing (e.g. to test a game) are integral parts of the development process.
Secondly, students developing LBGs in school need to tailor the experience to the needs of a specific
target audience (e.g. younger students) and therefore think carefully about the player experience. The
relationship between authoring and playing is therefore not mutually exclusive but containing, and
LBG authoring cannot be looked at in an educational context without also considering aspects of LBG
playing.
The following sections relate the specific qualities of LBG authoring to learning theory, explore
pedagogical approaches, and discuss potential barriers to LBG authoring in schools.
3.1 Theoretical grounding
Learning in authentic context-rich settings
The notion of authentic, meaningful, context-rich learning situations resonates with a range of modern
learning theories. Situated learning theory addresses the separation of school learning from experience
and cognition outside the school. It suggests that learning is a function of the activity, context and
culture in which it occurs (Lave, 1988; Brown et al., 1989). As learning processes are inextricably
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 4 of 31
linked to, and located within, a particular context, learning is more effective in context-rich authentic
settings than in school settings (Brown et al., 1989; Engeström, 1991). Closely related, Cognitive
Flexibility theory is concerned with learners' ability to transfer their knowledge to new contexts,
typically from a theoretical school setting to a practical out-of-school setting. It proposes that effective
learning is context-dependent and that learners must be given the opportunity to construct their
knowledge from concrete and detailed experiences in order to gain a deeper, multifaceted
understanding, which in turn enables them to transfer skills and knowledge to other problem domains
(Spiro et al., 1988).
These ideas sit well with authoring and playing LBGs for educational purposes. Context-aware games
in particular enable students to explore topics in authentic settings and to relate information delivered
through their handset to the real places and objects around them. For example in Riot! 1831 (Reid et al,
2005), an interactive audio drama based on the riots in Queens Square, Bristol, England in 1831,
players walk around the historic square and through their movement trigger the playback of various
audio clips on headphones connected to a PDA. Instead of learning about these events in an out-ofcontext setting like a classroom, participants in Riot! 1831 learned in-situ and therefore were able to
directly relate the audio information to the real, authentic place they walked in, resulting in empathy
with the people involved in the riots and a sense of walking in their footsteps, as reported in interviews
with participants (ibid).
Context-agnostic LBGs, too, can help to make the learning experience more authentic and meaningful.
For example in AmbientWood (Rogers et al., 2004) and Environmental Detectives (Klopfer et al.
2004), players carry out contextualized scientific enquiry including taking samples on site for later
scientific analysis. Doing this in an authentic naturalistic environment (as opposed to a school lab, or
just using samples provided by a teacher) adds valuable context to the overall scientific enquiry and
makes the learning experience more authentic. Even enacting concepts on a bare field in multi-player
LBGs, where learners have to use their imagination to make the experience credible, can add
authenticity, as time, chance and spatial relationships between actors come into play. For example in
Savannah (Facer et al., 2005), a research project that aimed to encourage the development of
children‟s conceptual understanding of animal behaviour, players pretended to be lions in an outside
playing field, interacting with a virtual Savannah and exploring the opportunities and risks to lions in
that space.
Learning through collaboration and cooperation
Collaborative learning, where students discuss and test concepts, ideas and processes, negotiate
meaning, and together construct new knowledge relevant to their common task, is now widely
accepted to be more effective than individual learning. Grounded in social learning theories, it draws
on Bandura's (1977) and Vygotsky's (1978) ideas of learning through communication, social
interaction, and imitation, Lave and Wenger's (1990) idea that the focused exchange of ideas amongst
peers engaged in the same learning activity helps them to develop a deeper understanding of the
subject, and Kolb's (1984) idea that reflection, triggered and supported by feedback and discussions
with co-learners, helps to conceptualise experiences and drive experiential learning.
As game development is a complex, multi-layered process involving a wide range of artistic and
technical skills (Crawford, 1982), especially when it involves merging virtual content with physical
spaces (Stenton et al., 2007), LBG authoring in educational contexts typically involves cross-curricular
projects with collaborative and cooperative learning activities. For example, in Mudlarking in
Deptford (Futurelab, 2006) 11 to 14 year old students set out in small teams to test an interactive
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 5 of 31
experience and add their own material to it. The project report notes that collaboration between
students happened not only inside groups, but also between groups, as students talked about their
experiences, gave feedback to other groups about their interactive tours, and shared information about
hidden experiences (ibid).
The emphasis on cross-curricular, collaborative activities is also pointed out in Loveless et al.s' (2007)
Create-A-Scape evaluation report, which mentions as key findings that LBG authoring projects tended
to integrate different curriculum areas and offered opportunities for collaboration at various levels,
ranging from paired activities in tutorial classes to whole year groups and even clusters of local
schools.
In multi-player LBGs the game itself often requires collaboration between players. For example, in
CatchBob! (Nova et al., 2005) groups of three team-mates have to find a virtual object and surround it
with a triangle, requiring them to communicate and work out a common strategy, while in Savannah
(Facer et al., 2005) players are part of a lion pride and have to work together to survive.
Learning by designing and making artefacts
Constructivist perspectives on learning, based on the works of Piaget (1970), Bruner (1973) and
Vygotsky (1978), oppose the idea that knowledge can simply be passed on from one person to other,
e.g. from teacher to student (Rieber et al., 1998), and instead understand learning as an active process
of knowledge construction through meaningful interactions with the world (ibid). Constructionism
(Papert, 1993) takes some of these ideas further and relates them explicitly to artefact creation in
technological contexts. It proposes that learning is most effective when learners are involved in
constructing a meaningful public product, the result and manifestation of their active experimentation.
These artefacts can then serve as a focus in group discussions that offer opportunities for reflection and
meta-learning.
These ideas tie in well with authoring LBGs for learning purposes, which gives students an
opportunity to develop and externalise their own gaming ideas on mobile phones, a familiar and muchused medium. With 88% of 11-15 year olds in the UK playing games on a regular basis (Ofcom,
2008), 82% of 12-15 year olds owning a mobile phone (Ofcom, 2006), and 58% of 11-15 year olds
regarding mobile phones as their preferred gaming platform (Pratchett, 2005), LBG authoring clearly
has the potential to be perceived as a meaningful learning activity by school children.
There is a growing recognition of the educational value of design projects (Resnick, 1998) and LBG
authoring involves artefact creation at several levels ranging from media collection and preparation to
the development of storyboards and finally the LBG itself. All of these stages involve regular
discussions and review sessions in class, where students not only talk about the created artefacts but
also about the techniques and processes involved in producing them, leading to rich learning
opportunities.
Engagement and motivation
Motivation is a key concept in most theories of learning, with behavioural theories focusing mainly on
extrinsic motivation and cognitive theories looking primarily at intrinsic motivation (Weiner, 1990).
Csikszentmihalyi (1990) suggests that the chief impediments to learning are not cognitive, but a lack
of motivation and a failure to make learning enjoyable. Motivating learners to engage with a subject is
therefore key to creating an environment in which meaningful learning opportunities can arise.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 6 of 31
The motivating and engaging aspects of games-based and mobile learning are well documented in the
literature. Jones et al. (2006) present no less than six reasons why mobile learning might be more
motivating than traditional classroom activities, and the motivational effects of computer games have
been recognised and studied for nearly thirty years (e.g. Malone, 1980). Drawing on this research it
can be assumed that LBGs, which combine mobile learning with game-based learning, increase
motivation and engagement, and in fact most research reports about LBGs in educational contexts (e.g.
Cheung, 2003; Facer et al., 2005; Halloran et al., 2005; Loveless et al., 2007; Schrier, 2006) mention
increased engagement and motivation as one of the more obvious learning benefits, with positive
effects ranging from better participation levels to longer attention spans, deeper involvement and more
independent learning.
3.2 Pedagogical approaches
This section discusses the main approaches to LBG authoring from a pedagogical perspective,
exploring in which contexts LBG authoring might be used and how it can be matched to subject areas
or overarching educational themes and objectives. As the literature search yielded only one single
evaluation report of LBG authoring in schools, this section also takes into account research into
computer games authoring in educational contexts.
Computer programming
Before games authoring software became available that was simple enough for students and teachers
to use, computer programming seemed the most obvious educational context for games development,
as the creation of digital games necessarily involved programming. In this context, games are seen as
abstract rule systems (Salen and Zimmerman, 2003), and are studied in terms of their core mechanics
and relationship to other games, focusing on their underlying mathematical structures. Modern LBG
authoring tools typically try to shield users from the underlying technical details of games
development. While some tools still provide code-based (e.g. Mscape, 2002) or diagrammatic (e.g.
InStory, 2005) programming interfaces for advanced users, these seem to play only a secondary role
while most of the design and development is done in map-based graphical environments by defining
areas and selecting and parameterising generic events and interactions.
ICT
LBG authoring in the broader context of ICT education emphasises primarily the technical aspects of
games development as students use a wide range of ICTs to collect, manipulate, share and manage
resources, and to construct and test games. Hayes and Alex (2008) point out that the motivational
aspects of games and game development also have been leveraged to address gender issues in ICT
engagement and education, e.g. to get more girls interested in these technologies.
Literacy education
Games can be understood as interactive media. As such they have an inherent, although often nonlinear, narrative (Burn, 2004), and can be examined from a literary theory perspective. In this context,
games are essentially dramatic presentations and can be used to analyse how familiar narrative
structures and textual components such as genre, characterisation, and audience are re-formulated in
interactive texts (Beavis, 1998). Games in the context of language and literacy learning have been
extensively covered by Gee (2003), and form part of the wider discussion about literacy education in
the digital age, where communication increasingly shifts towards electronic media (cf. Bazalgette,
2009; Buckingham, 1993; Burn and Leach, 2003; Gilster, 1997; Hofstetter, 1998).
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 7 of 31
Game design
While game design is often seen in the context of literacy education based on the argument that
literacy essentially is about texts as sharable, reproducible human communication, including image
texts, moving image texts and interactive texts (Bazalgette, 2009), games can be seen as ludic
configurations (Pelletier, 2005) that have their own vocabulary and mechanisms, and therefore should
be studied on their own terms rather than from a literary theory perspective (Eskelinen, 2001). Trying
to bridge these positions, Burn (2007) proposes the notion of game-literacy acknowledging the
specific properties, structures, and semiotic affordances of computer games. However, no instances of
game design as an educational activity in its own right (outside specialist schools for game designers)
have been found in the literature about LBG authoring.
Other subject areas
By far the widest and most diverse application space for LBG authoring in educational contexts is
based on an understanding of games as interactive media (Rollings and Adams, 2003). Here the
emphasis is on representation and how the generic structural elements of a game can be realised in
different ways, thereby influencing how players find meaning in games. From this perspective, the rule
system and core mechanics of a game are just an empty vessel that can be filled with actual content
relating to an specific educational contexts. Loveless et al.'s (2007) evaluation report of the Create-AScape project found that the LBG authoring tool and resources were used in a wide range of topics,
usually in a cross-curricular manner, integrating curriculum areas as diverse as literacy, mathematics,
geography, social studies, languages, arts and ICT. Only one of six projects was in the context of
mathematics education, and, crucially, the project focused not on the underlying rule system, but on
solving practical mathematical problems in an outdoor space simulation.
3.3 Barriers to adoption
The literature mentions numerous issues that can pose barriers to LBG authoring in schools, ranging
from simple hardware issues to complex technological and cultural problems.
Technical
Hardware issues, including interoperability standards and battery life (Ley, 2007, Sharples, 2007) as
well as inadequate display technology for outdoor use (Futurelab, 2006) can be expected to be
resolved in the future as handsets are continually improved and further standardised. Likewise,
familiar limitations of GPS, such as reliability under cloudy conditions or next to buildings (Benford et
al., 2005; Futurelab, 2006; Ley, 2007) and limited coverage and accuracy (Iacucci et al., 2004;
Opperman, 2006) can be expected to be addressed as the technology matures.
While technical issues can be frustrating in individual use, they can become a critical issue for teachers
responsible for a whole group of students grappling with these problems. However, users are often
able to overcome technical and interaction issues if they find the task itself engaging, as research in
other contexts has shown (e.g. Gutwin and Greenberg, 2000). Application developers, too, have shown
creative ways to deal with such problems, e.g. Chalmers et al. (2005) have developed a game inspired
by Weiser's (1994) concept of seamful design, where players equipped with a GPS enabled PDA
collect virtual coins from outside the wireless network, and then run back into network range to upload
the coins and gain points.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 8 of 31
Conceptual
Conceptual issues include problems thrown up by the outdoor use of mobile devices that impact on the
anticipated benefits of this use. For example, one of the key arguments for LBGs is that it supports
situated learning in authentic locations, the rich details of which are taken in by players as they engage
in the game. This however can be defeated by a phenomenon known as the heads-down effect (Lyons,
2009) where users of visually rich mobile applications constantly look at their screen instead of the
environment the applications relate to. On a similar note, for mobile applications promoting co-located
collaboration, Benford et al. (2005) found that complex interactions between player behavior and the
underlying technologies can inhibit players from establishing a shared context, even though they are
physically co-located, leading to difficulties in coordinating their actions. Whether these are just user
interface issues deriving from bad design or in fact deeper rooted conceptual issues remains to be seen.
Cultural
Cultural issues include a lack of relevance to the current curriculum in schools which does not
encourage the use of novel technologies like LBG authoring, objections from parents relating to games
in general and the perceived inappropriate nature of game content in particular, and teachers‟ lack of
knowledge about games, platforms and related software (Williamson, 2009). More profoundly, Facer
et al. (2005) point out that the use of games is unlikely to sit well with traditional classroom power
relations as gamers typically control their own learning alongside more knowledgeable peers and
subsequently act as mentors to novice learners, which may require some degree of courage from
teachers and some reorganisation of the school setting. In combination, these issues can pose
significant barriers to LBG authoring in school.
Logistical
Logistical issues include lack of technical support in schools, problems accessing equipment, and
considerable costs for handsets and network contracts (Williamson, 2009), all of which pose serious
challenges that can prevent the use of games in classrooms and do need addressing.
4
Existing LBG authoring tools
The literature describes a number of LBG authoring tools ranging from concepts and design studies to
prototypes and fully functional production systems, that can be used to create location based
experiences. These tools vary considerably in their approach, scope and functionality, ranging from insitu to desktop authoring, and supporting different authoring phases ranging from ideas generation and
storyboarding to simulating, testing and deploying LBGs.
While there are some recurring concepts like maps based authoring, graphical editing and support for
simulations, the tools in general are too diverse to make a meaningful direct comparison. Instead, the
following sections briefly describe some of the more prominent authoring tools with the aim of
illustrating the variety and breadth of available authoring approaches.
As the review aims to draw design recommendations and guidelines for LBG authoring tools, only
authoring tools for which sufficient technical information is available, and which have been evaluated
in some form, are described. Not included for this reason are WildMap (WildMap, 2009) and the
Games Creation Kit for Environmental Detectives (Klopfer et al., 2004).
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 9 of 31
4.1 Mscape and Create-A-Scape
(a)
(b)
Figure 2: Mscape authoring tool with (a) script editor programming interface, and (b) layout editor graphical interface.
Source: (a) Create-A-Scape (2009) and (b) Hull et al. (2004b)
Mscape (Mscape 2009) is a collection of tools developed by Hewlett Packard (HP, 2009) and Mobile
Bristol (MB, 2009) to create, play, manage, test and share location-based experiences, games and
tours. The authoring tool allows non-technical authors to associate physical locations with digital
media including video, flash, music, images, text and html. This can be done via a graphical interface
(Figure 2b), where authors import maps and media, specify regions on the map, and then drop media
content onto the regions where they should be played. More advanced authors can use the built-in
scripting language (Figure 2a) to program complex experiences based on trigger events and state
variables.
Mscape has a modular architecture that allows technically inclined users to extend the platform, e.g. to
add new contexts and drivers for additional sensing devices. A key architectural concept in Mscape is
the development and use of the XML4-based markup language MBML5, which is used as a common
format to define, share and interpret LBGs (Hull et al, 2004a).
The system has been used in numerous educational projects (cf. Stenton et al, 2007). For example, a
trimmed-down version of Mscape was used in the Create-A-Scape (Create-A-Scape, 2009) project
which aimed to promote LBG authoring in schools by providing a rich set of high-quality support
materials that help to further structure and simplify the authoring process. Teaching materials included
tutorials, step-by-step instructions, project ideas, and detailed accounts of other LBG projects, as well
as an online community for teachers to share and discuss their ideas and experiences.
The developers of Mscape propose that authors with a broad range of skills and perspectives should be
able to explore new applications of the technology, and that the challenge therefore is to keep the
authoring interface simple and accessible as the complexity of sensed activity and context states
increases (Stenton et al., 2007). Based on their experiences in designing, developing and supporting
the Mscape range of tools, they postulate that an authoring tool should support:
an extensible language for describing context
4
XML: eXtensible Markup Language
5
MBML: Mobile Bristol Markup Language
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 10 of 31
the specification of context events and consequences
a representation of contextual state
the storage and management of media files
an authoring interface that allows nonprogrammers to explore new genres of mediascape
an emulator for testing the contextual states and consequences.
The Create-A-Scape project, and by extension Mscape, was extensively evaluated (Loveless et al.,
2007) and led to specific requests for improvements, including:
ability to associate multiple resources or multiple layers of resources with a given zone
ability to use other formats including video, html and PowerPoint slides
easier ways of obtaining maps and images
transparent map regions
4.2 7scenes and Games Atelier
(a)
Figure 3: Screenshots of (a) the 7scenes authoring tool and (b) the player experience. Source: 7scenes (2009)
(b)
7scenes (7scenes, 2009) is a commercial platform for creating and playing LBGs and tours with
tracing and multi-user functionality as well as real-time communication (chat, messaging). The
platform is completely web based, subscribing organisations get their own web space where authors
can create, edit, share and discuss LBGs online. The powerful online authoring tool is implemented as
a Google Maps application, augmenting the map interface with highly dynamic widgets and forms to
describe game content, rules and triggers (Figure 3a).
Games Atelier (Games Atelier, 2009) is an educational project based on the 7scenes platform,
promoting LBG authoring for secondary education in the Netherlands. Games Atelier enables students
to create, play, share and view LBGs. The website provides a range of educational resources ranging
from tutorials and workshops to lesson plans and background information.
The Games Atelier project draws on the work of Veelo (2007) and Pape (2008) who carried out
empirical and theoretical research, with the aim to inform the on-going improvement and development
of Games Atelier. Their works contain detailed recommendations and guidelines. While most of these
recommendations relate to educational objectives and uses of Games Atelier, some of them imply
specific functionality for the authoring tool and player software.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 11 of 31
Veelo's (2007) recommendations include:
Adapt interface to the individual level of teachers and students, based on their educational
level, interest and experience with the system (dynamic, personalised interface)
Offer support to the teacher and students when needed (help-function and tutorial)
Support the student in reflecting on their learning activities and giving each other feedback
(provide a simulation mode and the possibility to trace players for later review).
Pape's (2008) recommendations include:
A messaging tool or chat function could be added to enable communication between players,
with tool availability possibly being part of the game rules and constraints.
Players could receive text messages from the system that are not linked to specific locations
but give them more information about the story (time-based or random events)
Players could have to find RFID tagged objects in the streets, which flash on their screen as
soon as they get close to them, earn them additional points (RFID sensor support)
4.3 Chawton House Project
(a)
(b)
Figure 4: Screenshots of (a) recording audio in-situ and (b) replay journals used in the classroom to facilitate reflection
on the outdoor experience. Sources: (a) Weal et al. (2006b) and (b) Weal et al., 2007.
Weal et al. (2006a, 2006b) describe their experiences developing an authoring system based on a
reusable pervasive information infrastructure at Chawton House Library, a historic building that now
operates as a study centre of early English women‟s writing and is frequently visited by tourists and
schools. The system consists of in-situ (Figure 4a) and desktop-based authoring tools that enable
curators and teachers to build up and edit a network of digitally annotated locations on the grounds of
Chawton House, and use this material to create visitor tours and augmented literary fieldtrips for
students. With a view to better integrate the system with educational practices, the system can
automatically record the playing experience in a replay journal (Weal et al, 2007), where challenges
and actions (e.g. questions and answers) are logged. The replay journal is used later in the classroom to
facilitate individual and group-based reflection, which is a critical aspect of the learning process.
In order to identify requirements for the system, the project used a co-design approach involving two
workshops, one with curators and one with teachers, authoring content and location based experiences.
Identified requirements include:
Support for quick and simple ad-hoc authoring to capture new ideas
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 12 of 31
Support for in-situ authoring, particularly for context-dependent mobile experiences
Support for revisiting and refining content; content should be open to ongoing changes.
Observations when testing the authoring tool with teachers and curators include:
There may be a need at the outset to fill the system with basic content.
There should be different ways to define locations both a-priori and post-hoc
There should be an option to „relocate‟ content after creating it
The trial confirmed the viability of incremental building up and changing of content
In a two-phase authoring process, support preliminary audio notes capture in-situ; the notes
can later be expanded and typed in on a desktop
Using the same device for authoring and experiencing tours facilitates rapid development as
users can utilize the device as a feedback mechanism
4.4 Geogames Creator
Figure 5: Screenshots of the Geogames Creator authoring tool prototype. Source: Johansson and Winter (2008)
Geogame Creator (Figure 5) is the result of a design study aiming to inform the development of
authoring tools for educational games that rely on location-based services (Johansson and Winter,
2008). The emphasis in the project was on user interface design, not on implementing the underlying
technical functionality and infrastructure.
With the aim to address pedagogical aspects of LBG authoring and integrate it with formal education,
the authors carried out seven design sessions with participating teachers, resulting in a detailed
prototype that addressed teachers' needs and goals.
A fundamental design decision taken early on was to limit possible formats to games that consist of a
series of tasks and events triggered at different geographical areas, as teachers agreed that this would
be a game design approach simple enough for them to grasp. To avoid restricting the authoring tool to
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 13 of 31
linear games, the authors introduced an action library that allows conditional branching in narrative
and play. Example triggers and control structures suggested by Johansson and Winter (ibid) include:
onEnterArea
onExitArea
onAreaTime
ifCorrect
ifFalse
In addition, the authors (ibid) suggest to automate the following design aspects:
manage geographical coordinates by letting the user mark areas on a map
manages tasks as questions and answers (with conditional branching)
manage layout in a WYSIWYG approach (eliminate need to write any code)
add and manage content from inside authoring tool
drag and drop to connect media files such as video, sound or text to a geographical area
user can decide and control when the player should get access to features such as distance
measure tool and communication tools
support emulating a game on a virtual mobile device in order to be able to test it without first
having to export (publish) it.
export (publish) via Bluetooth, serial connection or by sending a text message containing a
WAP link
An overview of the Geogame design process is available in Appendix A1.
4.5 Urban Tapestries
Figure 6: Urban Tapestries web interface and mobile client. Source: Urban Tapestries (2009)
Urban Tapestries (Urban Tapestries, 2009) enables members of the public to create an organic local
archive of memory and history. Local residents and visitors can add GPS coordinates and associated
media items such as pictures, short movies or sounds, either in-situ using a PDA, or on a web site
(Figure 6), making the system a dynamic public authoring platform for non-technical users.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 14 of 31
Building on the infrastructure of tagged locations, authors are able to create their own threads (paths)
through an area, usually consisting of their specific points of interest, and then upload them to the
system for others to experience the area in an organised way.
The project has been researched from a range of perspectives including social research, cultural
production and interaction design (Lane, 2003; Lane and Thelwall, 2005). Observations and findings
with relevance to the design of LBG authoring tools include:
users wanted to be able to take a call or send a text while authoring / playing
the map interface was deemed to be problematic, although there was not much agreement
amongst participants as to what would make the map interface easier to use
despite technical problems, nearly all participants responded favourably to the concept of
mobile authoring, and expressed a strong desire to engage with it further in the future
the addition of sound and image capturing would make authoring more spontaneous as events
and locations could be 'grabbed' on the fly
4.6 Topiary
Figure 7: Topiary‟s Active Map workspace for designing location based applications. Source: Li et al. (2004)
Topiary (Li et al., 2004) is a high-level tool for prototyping location-based applications, focusing on
interaction and user experience rather than technical implementation. The system enables users to
create an active map (Figure 7) showing the location of people, places and objects. In addition, the
authoring tool supports storyboarding and simulation of mobile experiences. The tool can model
indoor or outside locations and is independent of any specific sensing technology.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 15 of 31
The authors (ibid) emphasise that the design of location-based applications is fundamentally different
from GUI applications, because they have a wider input space and more complex interaction
sequences due to additional sensor input and the location-dependent interpretation of user input. In
addition, location based applications are more difficult to test because they depend on the location
context. The authoring tool therefore offers a simulation mode to make testing easier for designers.
The requirements analysis for Topiary was based on the analysis of a range of different location based
applications, resulting in a common subset of functionality:
display current location
find specific or nearest person, place, or thing
dynamically update maps to show location of people, places, and things
triggers to activate arbitrary functions based on own or other's location
tagging, associating location data to another arbitrary piece of data
To address these requirements, the authoring tool is split into the three workspaces Active Map,
Storyboard and Test. The system was evaluated by a small number of users (eight), the majority of
which found the visual Active Map approach easier to understand than textual or logic based
approaches.
4.7 M-Studio
Figure 8: M-Studio Storyboard. Source: Pan et al. (2002)
M-Studio (Pan et al. 2002) is a desktop based authoring tool for context-aware stories that are viewed
in mobile environments. The tool provides authors with a graphical interface to associate video content
with geographic locations (Figure 8). In addition, the tool supports storyboarding and simulated
located playback to support the design process (described in Appendix A2).
To test and evaluate the functionality of M-Studio, the authors (ibid) designed and produced a
location-aware video story. Findings included:
as context-aware multimedia exists on two platforms, the desktop for authoring and the
mobile consuming, it is difficult for authors to imagine and examine multimedia content as
viewed in mobile environments while engaged in the desktop-based authoring process
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 16 of 31
users found the story simulator helpful, as it allowed them to browse through a sequence of
clips as they would appear along the game path
4.8 eDiary
(a)
(b)
Figure 9: eDiary with (a) media recording and Atelier environment and (b) Path Creator . Source: Iacucci et al. (2004)
eDiary (Iacucci et al., 2004) was developed for architecture students to record their paths during site
visits and map photos and notes to locations. It consists of a mobile tool to record GPS locations, take
photographs and notes, and a desktop tool to edit and calibrate the paths for specific maps, and to
move and expand notes (Figure 9a, 9b). The tool was not aimed at authoring mobile location-based
experiences, but instead was used in multi-media presentations.
The tool was evaluated in laboratory and field studies with various user groups over the duration of
one year, informing the on-going development. Lessons learned include:
it would be useful to be able to combine the multimedia content and path locations of multiple
students to provide richer representations of a visit
editing of paths and multimedia content has proven to be essential in order to integrate the
media paths in the ongoing work after the visits
4.9 InStory
(a)
(b)
Figure 10: InStory authoring environment comprising (a) the InAuthor graphical story/game editor and (b) the
InContent visual editor for creating screen areas. Source: Barrenho et al. (2006)
InStory (Barrenho et al., 2006) is a platform for mobile storytelling, gaming and tours. It focuses on
the exploration of cultural and historical spaces, promoting interaction between users. During their
explorations, users have access to contextual multimedia, either for knowledge acquisition or for
engaging in story/gaming activities together with other users. The authoring environment comprises
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 17 of 31
InAuthor (Figure 10a), a graphical story/game editor, and InContent (Figure 10b), a visual editor for
creating screen areas to be associated with activity nodes created in InAuthor.
Key design objectives for the InStory platform and authoring environment included:
ability to visually create and edit stories/games
support for non-linear stories/games
support for a wide range of media
support for multiple sensing technologies (GPS, Wi-Fi triangulation, explicit positioning)
5
Design guidelines for LBG authoring tools
This section aims to formulate a set of design guidelines for LBG authoring tools by synthesising the
main requirements and recommendations described in the reviewed literature. The synthesis primarily
draws the requirements analyses, implemented functionality and empirical evaluations of the authoring
tools described in the previous section, but also includes findings from the evaluation of player
experiences that highlight the usefulness of specific functionality.
5.1 Support authoring of non-linear games
A common theme in the reviewed literature is support for non-linear stories and games (e.g. Barrenho
et al., 2006; Johansson and Winter, 2008; Stenton et al., 2007), an idea that seems to reconcile
educational and developer perspectives on LBG authoring: While teachers seem to like the idea of
limiting the design space to genres involving a series of tasks and events triggered at different
geographical areas (Johansson and Winter, 2008), developers emphasise the need to provide authors
with a rich set of tools that enable them to come up with novel applications for the technology (e.g.
Stenton et al., 2007).
Johansson and Winter (2008) propose to manage tasks as questions and answers with conditional
branching, and suggest providing authors with an action library consisting of basic triggers and events
that can be used to design non-linear games where users find their individual path through an
experience. In addition, the authors (ibid) suggest that game designers should be able to control when
players get access to specific features such as communication tools.
Taking a more technical stance, Stenton et al. (2007) argue for an abstract and universal approach as
implemented in Mscape. They propose that authoring tools should offer an extensible language for
describing context, specifying context events and consequences, and representing contextual state in a
game. Their argument is that while such a programming language requires more initial investment
from authors, it offers a far greater design space potentially resulting in richer and more efficient
authoring in the long term.
Other ideas for functionality to create non-linear games include the ability to associate multiple
resources or layers of resources with a given zone (Loveless et al., 2007), and the option to send time
based or random text messages to players during game play that are not linked to specific locations but
provide additional information or give feedback on players' performance to augment the gaming
experience (Pape, 2008).
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 18 of 31
5.2 Support visual authoring
Stenton et al. (2007) call for an authoring interface that allows nonprogrammers to create novel
location based experiences. Eight out of the nine tools discussed in this review answer this by
supporting map-based authoring as their primary authoring environment, or plan to implement a mapbased interface to complement an in-situ authoring tool.
Map interfaces generally seem to be more intuitive for LBG development, as geographic trigger areas
can be laid out graphically. The majority of users in Li et al.'s (2004) evaluation found a maps based
approach easier to understand than textual or logic based approaches. Only one single evaluation
report mentions that users found the map interface problematic, however the same report points out
that there was not much agreement amongst participants as to what would make the map interface
easier to use (Lane and Thelwall, 2005).
The preference for a visual interface extends to familiar GUI interaction metaphors, e.g. users want to
drag and drop media files onto a geographical area, mark geographical areas directly on a map, and
manage their layout in a WYSIWYG approach (Johansson and Winter, 2008). As illustrated by the call
for transparent map regions in Loveless et al.'s (2007) Create-A-Scape evaluation report, users' wishes
in this respect can be quite detailed and seem to be informed by the use of sophisticated end-user
software.
5.3 Support in-situ authoring
A frequently recurring theme in the literature is the gap between desktop based authoring and outdoor,
location based playing of LBGs, for example Pan et al. (2002) point out that because context-aware
multimedia exists on two platforms, the desktop for authoring and the mobile consuming, it is difficult
for authors to imagine and examine multimedia content as viewed in mobile environments while
engaged in the desktop-based authoring process.
With respect to in-situ authoring, Lane and Thelwall (2005) found in their evaluation of Urban
Tapestries that despite technical problems, nearly all participants responded favourably to the concept
of mobile authoring, and expressed a strong desire to engage with it further in the future. The authors
point out that functionality to capture sound and images would make the authoring process even more
spontaneous as events and locations could be 'grabbed' on the fly.
This view is supported by Weal et al. (2006b), who report that curators and teachers found it much
easier in-situ to come up with facts and anecdotes relating to specific locations, resulting in richer,
more relevant, expressive and lively content than that produced in a desktop authoring process. They
suggest that in-situ authoring is particularly suitable for context-dependent mobile experiences, as it
allows for quick and simple ad-hoc capture of new ideas. As some activities, like refining text or
optimising images, are better suited for a desktop environment, the authors propose a two-phase
authoring process with rough and ready in-situ authoring complemented by later refinement and
expansion on a desktop (Weal et al., 2006b).
The authors (ibid) also point out an additional benefit of in-situ authoring: using the same device for
authoring and playing enables the rapid development of LBGs, as developers can test their games
immediately in location and users can utilize the device as a feedback mechanism when testing and
evaluating games. In-situ testing is more reliable than desktop based game simulation as it overcomes
the emulation gap (Hull et al., 2004b), which is created by the authoring tool emulating an idealized
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 19 of 31
representation of the real world, free of the noise and uncertainty that distinguishes the real from the
virtual and needs to be factored into games to make them work.
5.4 Support simulation mode
Several reports mention the importance of a simulation or emulation mode that enables authors to test
LBGs as part of the authoring process without actually being in location. As LBGs have a wide input
space and complex interaction sequences involving user and sensor input, functionality for on-the-fly
testing is seen as critical.
Stenton et al. (2007) mention an emulator for testing the contextual states and consequences as one of
their six basic requirements for LBG authoring tools, and this view is supported by Johansson and
Winter (2008), who found in their requirements analysis for an LBG authoring tool that the ability to
emulate a game on a virtual mobile device is critical as this enables authors to test an LBG without
first having to publish it. These calls are echoed in empirical evaluations with users, e.g. Pan et al.
(2002) report that users found the story simulator helpful as it allowed them to browse through a
sequence of video clips as they would appear along the game path.
5.5 Support communication
Support for communication while playing or authoring an LBG is often mentioned a common theme in
the literature, mentioned in various contexts: It enables students to collaborate remotely while playing
an LBG, it allows communication with a central 'command centre', and it provides a basis for locationindependent messages that can augment the game experience.
Lane and Thelwall (2005) report that users wanted to be able to take a call or send a text while
authoring / playing. Pape (2008) in her recommendations on how to improve Games Atelier suggests
that a messaging tool or chat function could be added to enable communication between players. She
also points out that game authors should be able to control the availability of these communication
tools by making them part of the game rules and constraints.
5.6 Support reflection
Reflection is an important part of experiential, project based learning, as it promotes meta-learning and
helps students to analyse and conceptualise their own and others' experience. To aid reflection, classes
usually have group discussions after an event, where learners talk about their experience and the
artefacts they created.
LBG authoring tools should support this process by providing functionality that scaffolds discussion
between learners. For example, Veelo (2007) proposes a simulation mode where groups of learners
can simulate a game together, and a tracing tool that traces players' outdoor actions for later review,
while Weal et al. (2007) describe a replay journal that logs players' actions and later presents them in a
journal format to aid reflection.
5.7 Support collaboration and cooperation
Collaboration and cooperation are key aspects of LBG authoring in educational contexts. While this
point is partly covered in the design guidelines to support communication while playing and authoring,
and to support reflection through functionality to simulate, log and review outdoor experiences, LBG
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 20 of 31
authoring tools should additionally provide functionality to combine the multimedia content and path
locations of multiple students to provide a richer playing experience and to support distributed LBG
authoring (Iacucci et al., 2004).
5.8 Support re-use and re-editing of games
Most of the discussed authoring tools support editing of existing location based experiences that allow
authors to refine, share and re-appropriate work. Iacucci (2004) reports that path editing has been
essential in the eDiary project, which is echoed by Weal et al. (2006a, 2006b) who emphasise that
content should be open to ongoing changes to enable authors to revisit, refine, relocate and build up
content incrementally. Game paths, too, should be editable, including the possibility to define locations
both a-priori and post-hoc (Weal et al. 2006b).
5.9 Support multiple media formats
Support for a wide range of media has a high priority in existing authoring tools and is mentioned as
essential in several research reports (e.g. Barrenho et al., 2006; Loveless et al., 2007). While support
for text, images and audio seems to be the minimal functionality implemented in most existing
authoring tools, some systems offer far more sophisticated capabilities including support for HTML
formatted text, various video formats, and Flash files (e.g. Mscape, 2009).
From a user point of view, the list of supported media types and formats can never be long enough, as
illustrated by the call for PowerPoint support in Loveless et al.'s (2007) evaluation report of the
Create-A-Scape project. The project was based on the Mscape authoring tool which already has fairly
comprehensive media support.
While some of these formats would be nice to have (e.g. HTML, Flash), others are based on more
fundamental requirements. For example, Stenton et al. (2007) emphasise that in some situations using
audio to augment the visual nature of the physical environment is necessary to keep the fusion of the
physical and digital in balance and spare users to spend most of their time looking at a mobile device‟s
screen. This point is also emphasised by Reid et al. (2005), who interviewed 563 people for their
evaluation of Riot 1831, and note that in every interview remarks were made on how great the sounds
were. Secondary effects, too, can impact on the player experience. For example Riot 1831, which is
played using headphones and requires no manual interaction, was evaluated in cold weather and
participants noted that they enjoyed the act of 'strolling' and having their hands free: “I did find on a
cold day like today it was nice to be able to put your hands in your pockets and not have to hold
anything and just listen” (ibid).
5.10 Support multiple sensing technologies
Several reports mention support for multiple sensing technologies in their requirements analysis or
their recommendations based on evaluation results. This not only applies to different positioning
technologies like GPS and Wi-Fi triangulation as mentioned in Barrenho et al. (2006), but also to other
sensor based technologies like object identification as in the example by Pape (2008) where players
have to find RFID tagged objects in the streets, which flash on their screen as soon as they get close to
them.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 21 of 31
5.11 Support adding and managing content
The storage and management of media files is mentioned as a basic requirement for LBG authoring
tools by Stenton et al. (2007), and the idea is extended by other authors to include support for the
acquisition of content like maps or images from inside the authoring tool (Johansson and Winter,
2008; Loveless et al., 2007). Li et al. (2004) further extend the idea by suggesting that authors should
be able to tag content and associate it with multiple locations, while Weal et al. (2006b) point out that
it may be useful in some cases to fill a system with generic, re-usable content at the outset.
5.12 Support customisation and personalisation
As an LBG authoring tool may be used by teachers and students of varying abilities and age groups, it
is important that users can adapt the user interface to their individual needs, based on their educational
level, interest and experience with the system (Veelo, 2007). This not only relates to the layout and
availability of tools and functionality, but also the help system as the authoring tool should offer
support to teachers and students when needed and appropriate to their level of expertise (ibid).
6
Summary and Conclusions
The aim of this literature review was to explore educational aspects of LBG authoring and to compile a
set of design guidelines based on a review of authoring tools and experiences described in the
literature. The dual focus on educational aspects on the one hand, and design guidelines on the other
hand, naturally divides the review into two parts. While these parts may seem only loosely connected,
they are in fact two perspectives on the same problem: enabling students to author location based
games in educational settings.
Regarding educational aspects of LBG authoring, the specific research question was:
1. How can LBG authoring support learning, and how can it be integrated with educational
practices?
It was found that LBG authoring has a solid grounding in learning theory. As learning takes place in
authentic contextualised environments, it resonates with key aspects of situated learning that
emphasise relevant and transferable knowledge and skills. Because LBG authoring involves a wide
range of different skills, it usually is embedded in collaborative cross-curricular projects offering rich
opportunities for social learning where students discuss contents and processes, engage in peer
tutoring, and give each other valuable feedback for reflection. These learning activities promote active
experimentation and knowledge construction, and result in meaningful artefacts that can scaffold
further discussions, as proposed by constructivist and constructionist ideas of learning. Last but not
least, LBG authoring offers an engaging and motivating learning context that relates to students' outof-school interests, thereby making the experience more enjoyable and removing one of the chief
impediments to learning.
Pedagogical approaches to LBG authoring in the main derive from narratologist or ludologist
perspectives on games. Based on narratologist understandings of games as interactive media, game
authoring can be integrated with literacy education, and by extension with a whole range of other
subject areas, as the emphasis here is on representation and how generic game structures can be
implemented and made meaningful in different ways. By contrast, ludologist conceptions of games
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 22 of 31
focus on the underlying rule systems, and game authoring therefore can be a platform for learning
about logic, systems design and computer programming. A more perfunctory approach is to focus on
the technological aspects of LBG authoring in the context of ICT education.
Balancing the potential applications and benefits of LBG authoring, a wide range of issues have been
identified that can pose barriers to its use in education. These include technical issues like
interoperability standards, battery life and service reliability, conceptual issues like the conflict
between learning in authentic environments and the heads-down effect, cultural issues like a bias
against game based learning frequently expressed by parents and teachers, and logistical issues like
technical support and the costs for handsets and network contracts. While some of these problems will
inevitably be addressed be technological advances, others seem rooted more deeply and will require
changes in policies and mindsets.
The second part of this review focused on existing LBG authoring tools and what can be learned from
their design and evaluation. Specifically, the second research question asked:
2. What design recommendations can be drawn from existing authoring tools for location based
experiences?
To answer this question, a range of authoring tools for location based experiences was reviewed,
including design studies and prototypes as well as fully functional production systems. As these
authoring tools vary considerably in their remit, approach and implementation, no direct comparison
was made. Instead, the tools were briefly discussed, and their specific functionality, design guidelines
and recommendations based on evaluation results were identified.
The discussed functionality and recommendations were then synthesised into twelve design guidelines
for educational LBG authoring tools:
1. Support authoring of non-linear games - provide tools for conditional branching that allow
the construction of more complex, non-linear stories and games
2. Support visual authoring - provide an interface to visually layout interactive areas and
assign triggers, media and activities
3. Support in-situ authoring - provide tools for in-situ definition of locations and game paths,
including note-taking and recording of different types of media
4. Support a simulation mode - provide a simulation or emulation mode that enables authors to
test location based games inside the authoring environment
5. Support communication - provide tools for ad-hoc communication between players, and
tools for authors to control this functionality
6. Support reflection - provide tools that support reflection by scaffolding discussions on game
authoring and game play
7. Support collaboration and cooperation - provide tools supporting collaboration,
communication and content sharing between authors
8. Support re-use and re-editing of games - use an editable, flexible and shareable format to
define games and provide appropriate editing tools
9. Support a wide range of media formats - provide support for popular media formats that
authors are used to work with
10. Support multiple sensing technologies - provide support for alternative sensing technologies
that widen the design space
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 23 of 31
11. Support adding and managing content - provide integrated resource management that
reduces complexity and the need to switch programs
12. Support customisation and personalisation - provide support for customising the user
interface according to personal needs and preferences
Together, these design guidelines reflect the most salient points described in the literature on end-user
authoring tools for location based experiences in educational and other contexts. Some of the
guidelines overlap, for example support for communication, reflection and collaboration are all based
on key aspects of social-constructivist learning. Other guidelines can be in conflict with each other, for
example support for in-situ authoring conflicts with many other guidelines if not implemented as part
of a two-stage authoring process involving both, ad-hoc in-situ authoring and more reflective
refinement and expansion of LBGs on the desktop.
In conclusion, LBG authoring seems well suited for educational applications. It resonates with many
key ideas in modern learning theory and supports various pedagogical perspectives and subject areas.
There are however many potential barriers that need to be overcome in order to realise the educational
potential. This review provides a set of design guidelines to inform the development of suitable LBG
authoring tools that meet the needs of students and teachers, and thereby hopefully can contribute to
efforts to make learning more enjoyable.
References
7scenes. (2009). 7scenes homepage: http://7scenes.com
Abt, C. (1970). Serious Games. New York: The Viking Press.
Apperley, T.H. (2006). Genre and game studies: Toward a critical approach to video game genres.
Simulation & Gaming, (37)1, pp. 6-23.
Barrenho, F., Romão, T., Martins, T. and Correia, N. (2006) InAuthoring environment: interfaces for
creating spatial stories and gaming activities. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM SIGCHI
international Conference on Advances in Computer Entertainment Technology, ACE '06, vol.
266.
Bazalgette, C. (2009). Literacy in time and space. Journal of the Media Education Association, PoV
1(1), pp. 12-16.
Beavis, C. (1998). Computer games, culture and curriculum. In Snyder, I. (ed.). Page to Screen: taking
literacy into the electronic age. London, Routledge, 1998, pp. 234-255.
Benford, S., Rowland, D., Flintham, M., Drozd, A., Hull, R., Reid, J., Morrison, J., and Facer, K.
(2005). Life on the edge: supporting collaboration in location-based experiences. In
Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '05,
ACM Press, pp. 721-730.
Björk,S., Lundgren,S., Holopainen, J. (2003). Game Design Patterns. In Copier, M. and Raessens, J.
(eds.) Proceedings of Level Up: Digital Games Research Conference. Utrecht: Universiteit
Utrecht, pp. 180-193.
Brown, J.S., Collins, A. and Duguid, S. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18(1), pp. 32-42.
Bruner, J. (1973). Going Beyond the Information Given. New York: Norton.
Buckingham, D. (1993). Children Talking Television: The Making of Television Literacy. London:
Falmer.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 24 of 31
Burn, A. (2004). From The Tempest to Tomb-Raider: computer games in english, media and drama.
English, Drama, Media, June 2004, pp. 19-25.
Burn, A. (2007). „Writing‟ computer games: Game literacy and new-old narratives. L1 – Educational
Studies in Language and Literature , 7(4), p. 45-67.
Burn, A., and Leach, J. (2003). ICT and the Moving Image. In R. Andrews (Ed.), The impact of ICT
on literacy. London: Routledge-Falmer.
Chen, Y., Kao, T., Yu, G. and Sheu, J. (2004). A mobile butterfly-watching learning system for
supporting independent learning. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Wireless
and Mobile Technologies in Education. JungLi, Taiwan, IEEE Computer Society, pp. 11-18.
Cheung, P. (2003). Charles River City: An Educational Augmented Reality Simulation Pocket PC
Game. Massachusetts Institute of technology. [online]
http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/27096/56829592.pdf [retrieved] 15 June 2009.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Literacy and Intrinsic Motivation. Deadalus 119(2), pp. 115-140.
Costikyan, G. (2002). I Have No Words & I Must Design. Proceedings of Computer Games and
Digital Cultures, Tampere University Press, pp. 9-33.
Crawford, C. (1982). The art of computer game design. Vancouver, WA: Washington State University.
[online] http://www.vancouver.wsu.edu/fac/peabody/game-book/Coverpage.html [retrieved]
16 June 2009.
Crawford, C. (2003). Chris Crawford on Game Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: New Riders Publishing.
Create-A-Scape (2007). Create-A-Scape homepage: http://www.createascape.org.uk
Dempsey, J.V., Lucassen, B.A., Haynes, L.L. and Casey, M.S. (1996). Instructional applications of
computer games. Paper presented to the American Educational Research Association, 8–12
April 1996, New York. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 394 500.
Engeström, Y. (1991). Non scolae sed vitae discimus: Toward overcoming the encapsulation of school
learning. Learning and Instruction, 1, pp. 243–259.
Eskelinen, M. (2001). The gaming situation. Game Studies, 1(1), July 2001. [online]
http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/eskelinen/ [retrieved] 28 June 2009.
Fabricatore, C. (2000). Learning and videogames: an unexploited synergy. [online]
www.learndev.org/dl/FabricatoreAECT2000.pdf. [retrieved] 3 June 2009.
Facer, K., Stanton, D., Joiner, R., Reid, J., Hull, R., & Kirk, D. (2005). Savannah: Mobile gaming and
learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 20, pp. 399-409.
Fisher, T., Higgins, C. and Loveless, A. (2006). Teachers Learning with Digital Technologies. Bristol:
Futurelab. [online]
http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Teachers_Review.pdf.
[retrieved] 3 June 2009.
Forrester (2000). Pervasive Gaming Goes Mainstream. Forrester Research Report, August 2000.
FutureLab (2006). Mudlarking in Deptford. Project report. Bristol: FutureLab. [online]
http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/project_reports/mini_reports/mudlarking_m
ini_report.pdf [retrieved] 18 June 2009.
Games Atelier. (2009). Games Atelier homepage: http://www.gamesatelier.nl
Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Gilster, P. (1997). Digital literacy. New York: Wiley.
Gutwin, C. and Greenberg, S. (2000) The Mechanics of Collaboration: Developing Low Cost Usability
Evaluation Methods for Shared Workspaces. Proceedings of the 9th International Workshops
on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises (WET ICE'00), pp. 98103.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 25 of 31
Halloran, J., Hornecker, E., Fitzpatrick, G., Millard, D. E. and Weal, M. J. (2005) The Chawton House
Experience - Augmenting the Grounds of a Historic Manor House. In: Workshop - ReThinking Technology in Museums: Towards a New Understanding of People's Experience in
Museums, June, Limerick, Ireland.
Hayes, E.R. and Alex, I. (2008) Making Computer Games and Design Thinking: A Review of Current
Software and Strategies. Games and Culture, vol.3, pp. 309-332.
Hinske, S., Lampe, M., Magerkurth, C., and Röcker, C. (2007). Classifying Pervasive Games: On
Pervasive Computing and Mixed Reality. In Magerkurth, C., Röcker, C. (eds). Concepts and
technologies for Pervasive Games - A Reader for Pervasive Gaming Research. Vol. 1, Shaker.
Hofstetter, F.T. (1998). Internet Literacy. Boston: Irwin/McGraw-Hill.
HP. (2009). Hewlett Packard Labs, Bristol: http://www.hpl.hp.com/bristol/
Huizinga, J. (1950). Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play Element in Culture. Boston: The Beacon
Press.
Hull, R., Clayton, B., Melamed, T. (2004a) Rapid Authoring of Mediascapes. In Proceedings of 6th
International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, UbiComp2004, pp. 125-142
Hull, R., Clayton, B., Melamed, T. (2004b) Rapid Authoring of Mediascapes. Presentation at the 6th
International Conference on Ubiquitous Computing, UbiComp2004, 7 September 2004.
[online] http://www.mobilebristol.co.uk/present/ubicomp04rhPPT.pdf [retrieved] 14 July
2009.
Iacucci, G. , Kela, J. and Pehkonen, P. (2004). Computational Support to record and re-experience
visits. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 2004(8), pp. 100-109.
Johansson, D. and Winter, S. (2008). Designing authoring tools for m-learning geo-games.
Proceedings of the second international DREAM conference, Odense, Denmark, 18-20
September, 2008, pp. 2-14.
Jones, A., Issroff, K. and Scanlon, E. (2006). Affective factors in learning with mobile devices. In
Sharples, M. (ed.) Big Issues in Mobile Learning. Report of a workshop by the Kaleidoscope
Network of Excellence Mobile Learning Initiative. University of Nottingham, 2007. [online]
http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/Publications_PDFs/BIG_ISSUES_REPORT_PUBLISHED.
pdf. [retrieved] 15 June 2009.
Juul, J. (2001). Games telling stories? a brief note on games and narratives. Game Studies, 1(1), July
2001. [online] http://www.gamestudies.org/0101/juul-gts/. [retrieved] 28 June 2009.
Juul, J. (2003). The Game, the Player, the World: Looking for a Heart of Gameness. In Copier, M. and
Raessens, J. (eds.) Level Up: Digital Games Research Conference Proceedings. Utrecht:
Universiteit Utrecht, 2003, pp. 30-45.
Kafai, Y. B., Franke, M., Ching, C., and Shih, J. (1998). Game design as an interactive learning
environment fostering students‟ and teachers‟ mathematical inquiry. International Journal of
Computers for Mathematical Learning, 3(2), pp. 149–184.
Kafai, Y. B. and Ching, C. C. (2001). Affordances of collaborative software design planning for
elementary students‟ science talk. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 10(3), pp. 323–363.
Kafai, Y. B. and Ching, C. C. (2004). Children as instructional designers: Principles of learning with
guided discoveries. In N. Seel & S. Dijkstra (Eds.), Instructional Design: International
Perspectives, Volume 3, Curricula, Plans and Processes. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Kafai, Y. B. (2006). Playing and making games for learning: Instructionist and constructionist
perspectives for game studies. Games and Culture, 1(1), pp. 36-40.
Klabbers, J. (2003) The gaming landscape: a taxonomy for classifying games and simulations. In
Copier, M. and Raessens, J. (eds) Level Up: Digital Games Research Conference Proceedings.
Utrecht: Universiteit Utrecht, 2003, pp. 54-67.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 26 of 31
Klopfer, E., Squire, K. and Jenkins, H. (2004). Environmental Detectives: PDAs as a window into a
virtual simulated world. In Kerres, M., Kalz, M., Stratmann, J., de Witt, C. (eds), Didaktik der
Notebook-Universität, (pp.259-274). Münster: Waxmann Verlag.
Laine,T.H. and Joy, M. (2008). Survey on Context-Aware Pervasive Learning Environments. In
Traxler, J., Riordan, B. and Dennet, C. (eds) Proceedings of the mLearn2008 Conference,
University of Wolverhampton, pp. 192-199.
Lane, G. (2003) Urban tapestries: Wireless networking, public authoring and social knowledge.
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 7(3-4):169–175, July 2003
Lane, G. and Thelwall, S. (2005) Urban Tapestries: Public Authoring, Place and Mobility. London:
Proboscis. [online] http://socialtapestries.net/outcomes/reports/UT_Report_2006.pdf.
[retrieved] 3 June 2009.
Lave, J. (1988). Cognition in Practice: Mind, mathematics, and culture in everyday life. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1990). Situated Learning: Legitimate Periperal Participation. Cambridge,
UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ley, D. (2007) Ubiquitous Computing. Emerging Technologies for Learning, Volume 2, Becta, 2007.
Li, Y., Hong, J. I. and Landay, J. A. (2004) Topiary: a tool for prototyping location-enhanced
applications. In Proc. of the ACM Symposium on User interface Software and Technology
(UIST ‟04), pages 217–226. ACM Press, New York, NY, 2004.
Lindley, C. A. (2002) The gameplay Gestalt, narrative and interactive storytelling. Proceedings of
Computer Games and Digital Cultures, Tampere University Press, pp. 1-11.
LocoMatrix. (2009). LocoMatrix homepage: http://www.locomatrix.com
Loveless, A., Denning, T., Fisher, T. and Higgins, C. (2007). Create-A-Scape Evaluation Report.
Futurelab. [online]
http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/project_reports/Create_A_Scape_evaluation
_report.pdf [retrieved] 3 June 2009.
Lyons, L. (2009). Designing Opportunistic User Interfaces to Support a Collaborative Museum
Exhibit. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported
Collaborative Learning, CSCL2009, pp. 375-384.
Malone, T. W. (1980). What makes things fun to learn? Heuristics for designing instructional
computer games. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSMALL Symposium and the First
SIGPC Symposium on Small Systems, SIGSMALL '80, ACM, New York, NY, pp. 162-169.
Maloney, J., Burd, L., Kafai, Y., Rusk, N., Silverman, B. and Resnick, M. (2004). Scratch: a sneak
preview. Proc. Second International Conference on Creating, Connecting and Collaborating
through Computing, 2004, pp. 104- 109.
MB. (2009). Mobile Bristol homepage: http://www.mobilebristol.com
Mscape. (2009). Mscape homepage: http://www.mscapers.com
Naismith, L., Lonsdale, P., Vavoula, G., Sharples, M. (2004). Mobile Technologies and Learning.
Bristol: FutureLab. [online]
http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/Mobile_Review.pdf. [retrieved]
3 June 2009.
Nova, N., Girardin, F. and Dillenbourg, P. (2005). 'Location is not enough!': an Empirical Study of
Location-Awareness in Mobile Collaboration. IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and
Mobile Technologies in Education, WMTE2005, pp. 21-28.
Ofcom (2006). Media Literacy Audit: Report on media literacy amongst children. Office of
Communications, May 2006. [online]
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media_literacy/medlitpub/medlitpubrss/children/children.pdf
. [retrieved] 29 June 2009.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 27 of 31
Ofcom (2008). Media Literacy Audit: Report on UK children by platform. Office of Communications,
May 2008. [online]
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/advice/media_literacy/medlitpub/medlitpubrss/ml_childrens08/cann
ex.pdf. [retrieved] 29 June 2009.
Oppermann, L., Broll, G., Capra, M., Benford, S. (2006). Extending Authoring Tools for LocationAware Applications with an Infrastructure Visualization Layer. Ubicomp 2006, Orange
County
Orwant, J. (2000). EGG: The Extensible Graphical Game Generator. PhD Thesis, MIT. [online]
http://www.orwant.com/eggg.html. [retrieved] 18 June 2009.
Pape, C. (2008). Games Atelier - A Challenge for Collaborative Experience. Amsterdam: Waag
Society. [online] http://www.waag.org/download/37058 [retrieved] 23 June 2009.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books
Papert, S. (1993). The children‟s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York:
Basic Books.
Piaget, J. (1970). The Science of Education and the Psychology of the Child. NY: Grossman.
Pratchett, R (2005) Gamers in the UK: Digital play, digital lifestyles. BBC, December 2005. [online]
http://open.bbc.co.uk/newmediaresearch/files/BBC_UK_Games_Research_2005.pdf.
[retrieved] 29 June 2009.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital game-based learning. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pan, P., Kastner, C., Crow, D. and Davenport, G. (2002) M-Studio: an authoring application for
context-aware multimedia. In Proc. of the Tenth ACM international Conference on
Multimedia (MULTIMEDIA ‟02), pages 351–354. ACM Press, New York, 2002.
Papert, S. (1993). The children‟s machine: Rethinking school in the age of the computer. New York:
Basic Books.
Pelletier, C. (2005). Studying Games in School: a Framework for Media Education, Digra Online
Proceedings. [online] http://www.digra.org/dl/db/06278.32248.pdf. [retrieved] 18 June 2009.
Randel, J.M., Morris, B.A., Wetzel, C.D. and Whitehill, B.V. (1992). The effectiveness of games for
educational purposes: a review of recent research. Simulation and Gaming, 23(3), pp. 261–
276.
Reid, J., Geelhoed, E., Hull, R., Cater, K., and Clayton, B. (2005). Parallel worlds: immersion in
location-based experiences. In CHI '05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing
Systems, ACM, pp. 1733-1736.
Resnick, M., Bruckman, A. and Martin, F. (1996). Pianos not stereos: creating computational
construction kits. Interactions, 3 (6), pp. 64-71.
Resnick, M. (1998). Technologies for Lifelong Kindergarten. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 46(4), pp. 43-55.
Rieber, L. P., Luke, N. and Smith, J. (1998). Project KID DESIGNER: Constructivism at work
through play. Meridian: Middle School Computer Technology Journal, 1(1), pp. 1-9.
Rogers, Y., Price, S., Fitzpatrick, G., Fleck, R., Harris, E., Smith, H., Randell, C., Muller, H.,
O'Malley, C., Stanton, D., Thompson, M., & Weal, M. (2004). Ambient wood: designing new
forms of digital augmentation for learning outdoors. In Proceedings of 2004 conference on
Interaction design and children: building a community, IDC 2004, pp. 3-10.
Rollings, A. and Adams, E. (2003) Andrew Rollings and Ernest Adams on Game Design. Indiana:
New Riders Press.
Salen, K. and Zimmerman, E. (2003). Rules of play: the fundamentals of game design. Cambridge
MA: MIT Press.
Schrier, K. (2006). Using augmented reality games to teach 21st century skills. In ACM SIGGRAPH
2006 Educators Program, SIGGRAPH '06. ACM, New York, NY, 15.
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 28 of 31
Sharples, M. (ed) (2007) Big Issues in Mobile Learning. Report of a workshop by the Kaleidoscope
Network of Excellence Mobile Learning Initiative. University of Nottingham, 2007. [online]
http://www.lsri.nottingham.ac.uk/Publications_PDFs/BIG_ISSUES_REPORT_PUBLISHED.
pdf [retrieved] 15 June 2009.
Spiro, R.J. et al (1988). Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured
domains. In V. Patel (ed.), Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference of the Cognitive
Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stenton, S.P., Hull, R., Goddi, P.M., Reid, J.E., Clayton, B.J., Melamed, T.J. and Wee, S. (2007).
Mediascapes: Context-Aware Multimedia Experiences. Hewlett-Packard Laboratories. IEEE
Multimedia, 14(3), pp. 98-105.
Urban Tapestries (2009). Urban Tapestries homepage: http://urbantapestries.net
Veelo, K. (2007). Games Atelier. Learning environment for producing and playing location-based
mobile games. Master Thesis. [online] http://www.waag.org/download/29501. [retrieved] 9
July 2009.
Verhaeh, J., Soute, I., Kessels, A., Markopoulos, P. (2006) On the design of Camelot, an outdoor game
for children. Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Interaction design and children table of
contents, Tampere, Finland, pp: 9 - 16.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Walther, B. K. (2005). Atomic actions - molecular experience: Theory of pervasive gaming. Computer
and Entertainment, 3(3), (Jul. 2005), pp. 1-13.
Weal, M.J., Michaelides, D.T., Millard, D.E., De Roure, D.C., Hornecker, E., Halloran, J. and
Fitzpatrick, G. (2006a). A Reusable, Extensible Infrastructure for Augmented Field Trips. In
Proc. PerCom 2006 workshops, 2nd International Workshop on PervasivE Learning (PerEL
2006), IEEE Press, pp. 201-205.
Weal, M. J., Hornecker, E., Cruickshank, D. G., Michaelides, D. T., Millard, D. E., Halloran, J., De
Roure, D. C., and Fitzpatrick, G. (2006b). Requirements for in-situ authoring of location
based experiences. In Proceedings of the 8th Conference on Human-Computer interaction
with Mobile Devices and Services, MobileHCI '06, ACM Press, pp. 121-128.
Weal, M. J., Cruickshank, D. C., Michaelides, D. T., Millard, D. E., De Roure, D. C., Howland, K. and
Fitzpatrick, G. ( 2007 ) A Card Based Metaphor for Organising Pervasive Educational
Experiences . In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive
Computing and Communications, PerCom '07, pp. 165-170.
Weiner, B. (1990). History of motivational research in education. Journal of Educational Psychology,
82(4), pp. 616-622.
Weiser M. (1994). Building Invisible Interfaces. Keynote talk, Proc. ACM UIST, 1994 [online]
http://nano.xerox.com/hypertext/weiser/UIST94_4up.ps [retrieved] 01 July 2009.
Williamson, B. (2009). Computer games, schools, and young people: A report for educators on using
games for learning. Bristol: Futurelab. [online]
http://www.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/project_reports/becta/Games_and_Learning
_educators_report.pdf. [retrieved]
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 29 of 31
Appendices
Appendix A1: Overview of the geo-game design process
Overview of the geo-game design process. Source: Johansson and Winter (2008)
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 30 of 31
Appendix A2: M-Studio design process overview
Overview of the M-Studio design process. Source: Pan et al. (2002)
Location Based Games Authoring in Education. Draft 28 July 2009. Marcus Winter, ITRG, University of Brighton
Page 31 of 31