Refine
Year of publication
- 2021 (282) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (102)
- Bachelor Thesis (89)
- Conference Proceeding (50)
- Part of a Book (17)
- Book (9)
- Master's Thesis (4)
- Report (3)
- Doctoral Thesis (2)
- Review (2)
- Other (1)
- Part of Periodical (1)
- Preprint (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Keywords
- Corporate Design (6)
- Animation (5)
- Fotografie (4)
- Illustration (4)
- Nachhaltigkeit (4)
- UX Design (4)
- App (3)
- Botanik (3)
- Dokumentation (3)
- Gamification (3)
- Gesundheit (3)
- Holz (3)
- Layout (3)
- Lebensmittel (3)
- Mode (3)
- Museum (3)
- Redesign (3)
- Baukastensystem (2)
- Bookazine (2)
- Corona (2)
Institute
- Fachbereich Gestaltung (94)
- Fachbereich Medizintechnik und Technomathematik (55)
- IfB - Institut für Bioengineering (36)
- Fachbereich Elektrotechnik und Informationstechnik (26)
- Fachbereich Energietechnik (23)
- Fachbereich Wirtschaftswissenschaften (21)
- Fachbereich Luft- und Raumfahrttechnik (20)
- INB - Institut für Nano- und Biotechnologien (15)
- Fachbereich Bauingenieurwesen (13)
- Fachbereich Chemie und Biotechnologie (11)
- Fachbereich Maschinenbau und Mechatronik (11)
- Solar-Institut Jülich (11)
- ECSM European Center for Sustainable Mobility (9)
- MASKOR Institut für Mobile Autonome Systeme und Kognitive Robotik (7)
- Nowum-Energy (5)
- IBB - Institut für Baustoffe und Baukonstruktionen (3)
- Fachbereich Architektur (2)
- IMP - Institut für Mikrowellen- und Plasmatechnik (2)
- ZHQ - Bereich Hochschuldidaktik und Evaluation (2)
- Arbeitsstelle fuer Hochschuldidaktik und Studienberatung (1)
Through a mirror darkly – On the obscurity of teaching goals in game-based learning in IT security
(2021)
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.