Fables – Exploring Natural Ways of Expressing Behavior to Create Digital Simulations

  • Andrea ValenteEmail author
  • Emanuela Marchetti
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10919)


We are interested in simplifying digital game design and programming for primary school teachers and their pupils. A central problem in this area is how to express knowledge about interactive digital systems in a simple yet powerful enough way, so that new digital games or interactive simulations can be generated automatically by teachers and pupils descriptions. We propose a novel approach that builds on Simon [4] and Schön [5] and the concepts of simulation and repertoire of exemplars. Instead of looking at programming concepts like conditionals and loops, we draw inspiration from soft methods like rich pictures, and formalisms like concept maps and mobile ambients. In this paper, we define the concept of fables, where a simple fable represents an exemplar and it can be interacted with digitally, as a simulation. A web-based prototype tool is under development, and we are conducting a series of workshops (last semester of 2017 and first semester of 2018) to discuss, co-develop and test our incremental prototype of the fable editor/player. Early tests and interviews indicate that fables are a viable concept with potential applicability in various domains, and that the current prototype is usable enough for further participatory development.


Design thinking Game development Education Knowledge management Visualization 


  1. 1.
    Marchetti, E., Valente, A.: It takes three - re-contextualizing game-based learning among teachers, developers and learners. In: Connoly, T., Boyle, L. (eds.) Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning, pp. 399–406. Academic Conferences International (2016)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Valente, A., Marchetti, E.: Digital game development for kids, mediated by board game inspired paper prototypes. Accepted for publication, IEE: Information Engineering Express, IIAI (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aivaloglou, E., Hermans, F.: How kids code and how we know: an exploratory study on the Scratch repository. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, pp. 53–61. ACM (2016)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Simon, H.A.: The sciences of the Artificial. MIT press, Cambridge (1996)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schon, D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Ashgate, Aldershot (1986)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Klein, G.: The fiction of optimization. Gigerenzer, G., Selten, R. (eds.) Bounded Rationality: The Adaptive Toolbox, pp. 103–121, Dahlem Workshop Reports (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sangiorgi, D., Valente, A.: A Distributed Abstract Machine for Safe Ambients. In: Orejas, F., Spirakis, Paul G., van Leeuwen, J. (eds.) ICALP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2076, pp. 408–420. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fowler, M.: Domain-Specific Languages. Pearson Education, Boston (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Marchetti, E., Valente, A.: Quiz-R-Us – Re-conceptualizing quizzes to enrich blended learning in occupational therapy study lines. In: The International Conference of Human Computer Interaction, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer (2018, accepted for publications)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cardelli, L.: Abstractions for mobile computation. In: Vitek, J., Jensen, Christian D. (eds.) Secure Internet Programming. LNCS, vol. 1603, pp. 51–94. Springer, Heidelberg (1999). Scholar
  11. 11.
    Love, S., Gkatzidou, V., Conti, A.: Using a rich pictures approach for gathering students and teachers digital education requirements. In: Little, L., Fitton, D., Bell, Beth T., Toth, N. (eds.) Perspectives on HCI Research with Teenagers. HIS, pp. 133–149. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  12. 12.
    Valente, A., Marchetti, E.: Development of a Rich Picture editor: a user-centered approach. Int. J. Adv. Intell. Syst. 3(3, 4), 187–199 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Razzouk, R., Shute, V.: What is design thinking and why is it important? Rev. Educ. Res. 82(3), 330–348 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P. Hillgren, P.A.: Participatory design and “democratizing innovation.” In: Proceedings of the Participatory Design Conference, pp. 41–50. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Königs, K.D., McKenney, S.: Participatory design of (built) learning environments. Euro. J. Educ. Editor. 52, 247–252 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Möllerup, P.: Simplicity: A Matter of Design. BIS Publishers, Amsterdam (2015)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Costikyan, G.: Where stories end and games begin. Game Dev. 7(9), 44–53 (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Marchetti, E., Valente, A.: Learning via game design: from digital to card games and back again. Electron. J. E-learn. 13(3), 167–180 (2015)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Henriksen, D., Mehta, R.: A beautiful mindset: Creative teaching practices in mathematics. J. Math. Educ. 9(2), 81–89 (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Marchetti, E.: If it looks like a duck. Names as shared signifiers for discussing “cuteness” in healthcare robotics. In: The 9th International Conference on Multimodality, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark (2018, submitted)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Preece, J., Sharp, H., Rogers, Y.: Interaction Design. Beyond Human Computer Interaction. Wiley, New York (2015)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Krippendorf, K.: Content Analysis. An Introduction to its Methodology. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Maersk Mc-Kinney Moller Institute, Embodied Systems for Robotics and LearningUniversity of Southern Denmark (SDU)OdenseDenmark
  2. 2.Media Studies, Department for the Study of CultureUniversity of Southern Denmark (SDU)OdenseDenmark

Personalised recommendations