@article{KoehlerRoepkeWolf2021,
  author    = {K{\"o}hler, Klemens and R{\"o}pke, Ren{\´e} and Wolf, Martin},
  title     = {Through a mirror darkly - On the obscurity of teaching goals in game-based learning in IT security},
  series = {ISAGA 2019: Simulation Gaming Through Times and Disciplines},
  journal   = {ISAGA 2019: Simulation Gaming Through Times and Disciplines},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address   = {Cham},
  doi       = {10.1007/978-3-030-72132-9_6},
  pages     = {61 -- 73},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Teachers and instructors use very specific language communicating teaching goals. The most widely used frameworks of common reference are the Bloom's Taxonomy and the Revised Bloom's Taxonomy. The latter provides distinction of 209 different teaching goals which are connected to methods. In Competence Developing Games (CDGs - serious games to convey knowledge) and in IT security education, a two- or three level typology exists, reducing possible learning outcomes to awareness, training, and education. This study explores whether this much simpler framework succeeds in achieving the same range of learning outcomes. Method wise a keyword analysis was conducted. The results were threefold: 1. The words used to describe teaching goals in CDGs on IT security education do not reflect the whole range of learning outcomes. 2. The word choice is nevertheless different from common language, indicating an intentional use of language. 3. IT security CDGs use different sets of terms to describe learning outcomes, depending on whether they are awareness, training, or education games. The interpretation of the findings is that the reduction to just three types of CDGs reduces the capacity to communicate and think about learning outcomes and consequently reduces the outcomes that are intentionally achieved.},
  language  = {en}
}