Interweaving Task Design and In-Game Measurement

  • Fengfeng Ke
  • Valerie Shute
  • Kathleen M. Clark
  • Gordon Erlebacher
Part of the Advances in Game-Based Learning book series (AGBL)


There are two important design issues related to game-based learning (GBL) in school settings: (a) the intrinsic integration of content-related tasks in gameplay and (b) the real-time capture and analysis of in-game performance data. In this chapter, we describe an integrative design approach that is aimed to interweave game-based task design with in-game assessment of learning. Extending other GBL projects in which the mechanism of data mining for assessment was created after game development, in E-Rebuild we have designed the evidence-centered, data-driven assessment during the course of game design. Design-based research findings on emergent core design processes and functional conjectures on the approaches of task generation and evidence accumulation are discussed, with support of infield observations on the implementation feasibility and outcomes of various design assumptions.


Educational data mining Real-time assessment Intrinsic learning integration Evidence-centered design Stealth assessment 


  1. Almond, R. G., Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L., Yan, D., & Williamson, D. (2015). Bayesian networks in educational assessment. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2010). Transformational play: Using games to position person, content, and context. Educational Researcher, 39(7), 525–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dede, C. (2012, May). Interweaving assessments into immersive authentic simulations: Design strategies for diagnostic and instructional insights. In Invitational research symposium on technology enhanced assessments.Google Scholar
  5. Habgood, M. P. J., & Ainsworth, S. E. (2011). Motivating children to learn effectively: Exploring the value of intrinsic integration in educational games. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 169–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kaller, C. P., Unterrainer, J. M., Rahm, B., & Halsband, U. (2004). The impact of problem structure on planning: Insights from the tower of London task. Cognitive Brain Research, 20(3), 462–472.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ke, F. (2016). Designing and integrating purposeful learning in game play: A systematic review. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(2), 219–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ke, F., & Shute, V. J. (2015). Design of game-based stealth assessment and learning support. In C. Loh, Y. Sheng, & D. Ifenthaler (Eds.), Serious games analytics (pp. 301–318). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ke, F., Shute, V., Clark, K., Erlebacher, G., Smith, D., Fazian, P., Lee, S., & Xu, X. (2017). Math learning through game-based architectural design and building. Paper presented at 2017 American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX.Google Scholar
  10. Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., & Salen, K. (2009). Moving learning games forward: Obstacles, opportunities, & openness. Boston: The Education Arcade. Retrieved 28 April 2011 from
  11. Levy, R. (2014). Dynamic Bayesian network modeling of game based diagnostic assessments. CRESST Report 837. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).Google Scholar
  12. Messick, S. (1994). The interplay of evidence and consequences in the validation of performance assessments. Educational researcher, 23(2), 13–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Miller, C. S., Lehman, J. F., & Koedinger, K. R. (1999). Goals and learning in microworlds. Cognitive Science, 23(3), 305–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mislevy, R. J., Almond, R. G., & Lukas, J. F. (2003). A brief introduction to evidence-centered design. ETS Research Report Series, 2003(1), i–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Mislevy, R. J., & Haertel, G. D. (2006). Implications of evidence-centered Design for Educational Testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 25(4), 6–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pratt, D., & Noss, R. (2002). The microevolution of mathematical knowledge: The case of randomness. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(4), 453–488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Resnick, L. B., & Resnick, D. P. (1992). Assessing the thinking curriculum: New tools for educational reform. In Changing assessments (pp. 37–75). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Richards, J., Stebbins, L., & Moellering, K. (2013). Games for a digital age: K-12 market map and investment analysis. New York, NY: Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.Google Scholar
  19. Sandoval, W. A., & Bell, P. (2004). Design-based research methods for studying learning in context: Introduction. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 199–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Schell, J. (2014). The art of game design: A book of lenses. Boca Raton: CRC Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schoenfeld, A. H. (2014). Mathematical problem solving. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  22. Shaffer, D. W. (2006). Epistemic frames for epistemic games. Computers & Education, 46(3), 223–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Shaffer, D. W., Hatfield, D., Svarovsky, G. N., Nash, P., Nulty, A., Bagley, E., et al. (2009). Epistemic network analysis: A prototype for 21st-century assessment of learning. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1(2), 33–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Shute, V. J., & Ventura, M. (2013). Measuring and supporting learning in games: Stealth assessment. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  25. Shute, V. J., & Ke, F. (2012). Games, learning, and assessment. In D. Ifenthaler, D. Eseryel, & X. Ge (Eds.), Assessment in game-based learning (pp. 43–58). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Shute, V., Ke, F., & Wang, L. (2017). Assessment and adaptation in games. In P. Wouters & H. van Oostendorp (Eds.), Instructional techniques to facilitate learning and motivation of serious games (pp. 59–78). Chem, Switzerland: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wiggins, G. (1990). The case for authentic assessment. Washington, DC: ERIC Digest.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fengfeng Ke
    • 1
  • Valerie Shute
    • 1
  • Kathleen M. Clark
    • 2
  • Gordon Erlebacher
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Educational Psychology and Learning SystemsFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  2. 2.School of Teacher EducationFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA
  3. 3.Department of Scientific ComputingFlorida State UniversityTallahasseeUSA

Personalised recommendations