Applied Intelligence

"Puzzle Java" Experimentation

--Manuscript Draft--

Manuscript Number: APIN-D-23-08153

Full Title: "Puzzle Java" Experimentation

Article Type: Original Submission

Keywords: Serious Games, Training, Pedagogy, Learning, Experimentation, Java Programing

Corresponding Author: Ali abarkan

Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University: Universite Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah
Nador, MOROCCO

Corresponding Author Secondary

Information:

Corresponding Author's Institution: Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University: Universite Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah

Corresponding Author's Secondary

Institution:

First Author: Ali abarkan

First Author Secondary Information:

Order of Authors: Ali abarkan

Majid Benyakhlef

Rachid Boufouss

Order of Authors Secondary Information:

Funding Information:

Abstract: The serious games are becoming increasingly important as teaching and training tools.
Through the new technological tools, the serious games have been used in several
fields of application, constituting a new and promising alternative for knowledge
transfer in many different fields. One of the strategies proposed to facilitate the
teaching and learning of programming; is the use of serious gaming technologies in
educational contexts. This article focuses on the "Puzzle Java" game, which aims to
learn Java programming in a serious context. This is a game designed to help
learners/players acquire basic skills and different Java programming structures. In the
experimental part of the "Puzzle Java" game, carried out by a group of more than a
hundred students, and following the evaluation of the results obtained, it was observed
that the participants in the test expressed their satisfaction with the game. They saw it
as a means of improving their skills and abilities in learning Java programming.

Powered by Editorial Manager® and ProduXion Manager® from Aries Systems Corporation
 Click here to view linked References

1 Puzzle Java Experimentation

2
3
4
5
6 Abstract – The serious games are becoming increasingly important as teaching and training tools. Through the new
7 technological tools, the serious games have been used in several fields of application, constituting a new and promising
8 alternative for knowledge transfer in many different fields. One of the strategies proposed to facilitate the teaching and
9 learning of programming; is the use of serious gaming technologies in educational contexts. This article focuses on the
"Puzzle Java" game, which aims to learn Java programming in a serious context. This is a game designed to help
10
learners/players acquire basic skills and different Java programming structures. In the experimental part of the "Puzzle
11 Java" game, carried out by a group of more than a hundred students, and following the evaluation of the results obtained,
12 it was observed that the participants in the test expressed their satisfaction with the game. They saw it as a means of
13 improving their skills and abilities in learning Java programming.
14
15 Keywords – Serious Games, Training, Pedagogy, Learning, Experimentation, Java Programing.
16
17
18
19 1. INTRODUCTION
20
21 Continuous advances in hardware and software, combined with the widespread use of technological
22 tools, offer the opportunity to rapidly increase student participation in learning through practical and
23 interactive experience. Therefore, traditional pedagogy focused on lectures could evolve towards active
24 learning. For example, we find that games offer learners the opportunity to learn through fun activities with
25 clear objectives, but they also offer immediate feedback on the actions of players, which can have a positive
26 effect on their performance (Fotaris et al., 2017) (Pellas et al., 2016).
27 Today, students are very involved in new technologies. Because they grew up with computers,
28 smartphones and the Internet. Furthermore, they are impatient with conventional methods because of their
29 habit of quickly obtaining information, answers or results (Nikolaos Pellas and al., 2019) (Hamari et al.,
30 2016). Teachers and researchers understand the importance of creativity and interaction in the learning
31 process. The use of interactive and innovative technologies can therefore have a positive impact on the
32 learning experience by allowing students to engage personally and deeply in topics (Phipps et al., 2016).
33 A new typology of digital games has emerged, namely serious games (SG) intended for education
34 and training, designed with a main pedagogical objective. This category of games has become more and more
35 widely accepted educational tools in the last ten years. The idea of manipulating the great strength of modern
36 video games for educational purposes has grown considerably. The motivating sensations of games offer a
37 promising approach from a pedagogical point of view, to make learning more engaging, satisfying and
38 probably more effective. However, both factors, play and learning motivation, are fragile, and proper
39 adaptation is crucial to achieve and maintain pleasure on the one hand, and to design effective and successful
40 learning on the other. A good dosage stimulates the appetite to learn and encourages students to work with
41 this new category of games.
42 Worldwide, the failure rate or abundance of introductory programming courses at undergraduate
43 level varies from 25% to 80% (Kaasbøll J, 2002). On the one hand, the programming discipline can bring
44 together learners with heterogeneous levels of education. On the other hand, the difficulty is due to the fact
45 that learning programming requires analytical and critical skills, many hours of practice, complex syntax and
46 a large amount of information to retain. It can be noted that among problems mentioned in learning
47 programming; complexities at the level of manipulation and use of loops, the construction of programs and
48 the structuring of algorithms and control instructions (Yassine A et al., 2017) (Azmi S et al., 2016) (Rubiano
49 S M et al., 2015). To remedy the problems mentioned above, some researchers have turned their attention
50 towards the evaluation of environments and programming languages for beginners. Some others, turned to
51 the articulation on serious games to attract attention through the motivational aspects evoked in this category
52 of games (Kroustalli, C., & Xinogalos, S, 2021) (Montes H et al., 2021). Indeed, the use of a serious game
53 vision remains the most effective if we take into account the spread of the game culture in the minds of the
54 majority of learners in recent years (Ali Abarkan & Majid Benyakhlef, 2021).
55 In this article we will present the experiment of "Puzzle Java". It is a serious game modeled by the
56 DICES approach (A. Abarkan et al., 2022) that aims to help learners learn Java programming. The main
57 objective of this experiment is to determine whether the game can adequately support all learners in various
58 situations, for a practice focused on developing a deeper understanding of Java programming.
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 To ensure this evaluation, we tested our game on a group of learners of different ages following the
1
learning of Java programming in their program. Players complete a survey that includes five sections of
2
closed questions in the questionnaire, each of which addresses part of our evaluation methodology.
3
4 In order to approach this experimentation, we discuss and present the following elements in this
5 article: 1) We review the literature on the emergence of the notion of serious games, in order to focus on a
6 global and reduced definition. 2) An analysis of some of the serious games currently available, designed to
7 support the teaching and learning of programming. 3) Exposure of some of the strengths noted in the
8 integration of Gamification and its role in attractive learning. 4) A description of the "Puzzle Java" game
9 environment developed, including the layout of all the screens and the proposed scenarios that describe the
10 game. 5) Initial feedback on the game from respondents to a survey, all of whom were computer science
11 students with experience of classical java programming learning. 6) Discussion of the results obtained and
12 the participants' expectations of the experiment.
13
14
15 2. LITERATURE ON THE SERIOUS GAMES NOTION
16 The American author Clark Abt (Abt Clark, 1970) first proposed the notion of "serious game" as it
17 is defined today in the 1970s. He approached this notion for games that dealt with mathematical or
18 humanities problems and are intended to be consumed in schools:
19 «We are concerned with serious games in the sense that these games have an explicit and
20 carefully thought-out educational purpose and are not intended to be played primarily for
21 amusement» (Abt Clark, 1970).
22
23 Through the identification of serious games (Abt Clark, 1970), several authors have proposed their
24 views on the notion of serious games, starting with the video game expert Natkin Stéphane (Natkin Stéphane,
25 2004), who defined in the work "Video games and the media of the 21st century", a serious game as a tool:
26 «Uses video game principles and technologies for applications that are not strictly playful » (Natkin
27 Stéphane, 2004).
28
29 For their part, the video game designers [Link] and all, consider a serious game as:
30 «Any game whose primary purpose is other than simple entertainment» (Chen Sande & David R.
31 Michael, 2005).
32 During the same period, Zyda Michael, director of the serious games laboratory "Game PiPe7",
33 proposed a precise definition of serious games:
34 «A mental contest, played with a computer in accordance with specific rules, that uses
35 entertainment to further government or corporate training, education, health, public policy, and
36 strategic communication objectives» (Zyda Michael, 2005).
37
After giving this definition, Mr. Zyda added that the playful aspect must be more important than the
38
pedagogical aspect. If the game is fun and attractive, it will encourage the player to acquire more
39
40 information. In addition, the president of the American computer development company "Digitamill" Sawyer
41 Ben refined his own definition of serious games, including:
42 «Any meaningful use of computerized game/game industry resources whose chief mission is not
43 entertainment» (Sawyer Ben, 2007).
44 Following the study of the previous definitions (of Zyda and Sawyer), the president of the
45 association Ludo Sciences, Alvarez Julian, assembled their views to identify the definition that is
46 characterized by the integration of the pedagogical factor for the first time. According to Alvarez, a serious
47 game is:
48 «A computer application whose initial intention is to combine, with coherence both serious aspects
49 (Serious), in a non-exhaustive and non-exclusive way teaching, learning, communication, or information, with
50 playful springs from the video game (Game). Such an association, which takes place through the implementation of
51 a "pedagogical scenario", and on the computer level, would correspond to implementing a dressing (sound and
52 graphic), a story and appropriate rules, therefore aims to move away from simple entertainment. This gap seems
53 indexed to the importance of the pedagogical scenario» (Alvarez J, 2007).
54
55 Similarly, Damien Djaouti defined the serious games as:
56 «The Serious Game is an object mixing two dimensions: a serious dimension, referring to any type of
57 utility purpose, and a playful dimension, corresponding to a game materialized on any type of support» (Damien
58 Djaouti, 2011).
59 Based on the definitions present in this section, we can generally and reducedly assume that a
60 serious game is:
61
62
63
64
65
 «A tool that uses computer technologies to transmit well-chosen didactic content, through the playful
1 springs integrated in video games, with a very high consistency rate».
2 Later, we'll present some of the serious games designed for learning programming, to clarify our
3 opinion of these environments.
4
5 3. SERIOUS GAME AND PROGRAMMATION LEARNING
6
7 In the literature, many programming environments for beginners have been developed. Before
8 getting into the experimentation details of our game, we decided to briefly review some serious games for
9 computer thinking: Learning programming. The systematic reviews mentioned above, as well as other games
10 sought on the Internet under the title «serious games for programming», are the sources of the games we have
11 identified.
12 In this context, most games are based on two principles: Some use block-based programming
13 languages, such that each block represents an element of the language (control structure, operator, variable,
14 function, etc.). The blocks can be combined according to the «drag and drop» principle to build the
15 appropriate program (Figure 1).
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Fig. 1 Example of a "Drag & Drop" programming environment
31
32
Others require entering codes to manage robots in a scene. The goal is to fight other robots
33
34 programmed by other players or according to the game scenario (Figure 2).
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49 Fig. 2 Example of a programming environment by program writing mode
50
51 The table below represents the serious games identified that aim to learn programming, which could
52 be adapted or easily consumed by learners.
53
54
55 Table 1 Games identified for learning programming
56 Category
57 Name Language Learning Discussion
(Game or App)
58 Block2Py The editing of programs by blocks in order to translate
59 (Declercq et Nény, Application Python them into textual language, is oriented towards a
60 2020) translation tool more than a learning environment
61
62
63
64
65
 The CodeCombat scenario, in combination with learning
1 to program, continues to be incoherent and difficult to
2 CodeCombat Game
Java & Python
accept for the novice and beginner generation of
3 (CodeCombat) (2D RPG) apprentice programmers. Indeed, if players fail to type
the code correctly, they remain stuck in front of the
4 screen and are unable to progress in the game.
5 "May’s Journey" is based on the CodeCombat game and
6 aims to make the programming more attractive and
7 May’s Journey interesting for girls. To solve the puzzles in the game,
Game Non-specific
8 (Jemmali, C., & Yang, there are two methods: drag blocks and type code from
(3D Puzzle) Programming Concepts
Z., 2016) time to time. Although the game is intended for girls, the
9 design of May’s Journey does not indicate any signs or
10 touches that suggest it.
11 The general idea is based on the debugging principle:
12 Debug the program to control the Robot in a 3D virtual
RoboBUG
Game Different world. Working on the principle of error detection as a
13 (Miljanovic &
(3D Puzzle) programming languages game scenario, directs them downright to be consumed
14 Bradbury, 2017)
only by the category of samples that are programming
15 professionals.
16
17
18 4. GAMIFICATION IN CLASSROOMS
19
20 Fighting against the boredom of learners is a daily struggle of the teacher, in order to increase the
21 interest of learners and foster their curiosity in the less stimulating themes. Scientifically, Gamification has
22 been shown to facilitate information retention and learning acquisition in various educational situations.
23 Several definitions of this element suggest the use of game design elements in contexts such as
24 learning (C. Dichev and D. Dicheva, 2017) (Palomino, P et al., 2019). The integration of the playful aspect
25 and the spirit of competition in the training programs, not only make the training programs more dynamic,
26 but also significantly increase the engagement of learners (SEABORN K & FELS D. I, 2014) (Mulkeen. D,
27 2018) (SQUIRES Tasha, 2016).
28 a. Improvement of dopamine levels
29 When implementing Gamification during a learning session, the most important benefit observed
30 was the increase in the level of the neurological factor «Dopamine» in the learner. This quality naturally
31 increases the attention of learners throughout the course and integrates elements of pleasure and motivation:
32 This is certainly what any teacher wants in his courses.
33
34 b. Increase student engagement
35 During Gamification, learners will be active, allowing each learner to see exactly the progress they
36 are making on the material they have learned. This helps students overcome their weaknesses and become
37 more aware of their own learning.
38
c. Involvement of the emotional factor
39
Games generally have great potential for developing emotions such as curiosity, optimism and
40
pride. For learning to meet their needs, the motivational touch creates a positive learning experience for
41
learners.
42
43
44 5. " PUZZLE JAVA" ENVIRONMENT
45 5.1. Modelling aspect
46
47 "Puzzle Java" is a serious game designed to improve learners' java programming skills. Its main aim
48 is to help learners apply their skills in a fun way, overcoming the limitations imposed when learning this
49 programming language. The pedagogical content presented in the game (java programming course) is
50 modeled in the form of levels a competency-based pedagogy whose objective is to enable learners to acquire
51 well-structured programming skills, to enable learners to assimilate several competencies (Architecture of a
52 program, Use of variables, Conditions, Loops).
53 The modeling of the "Puzzle Java" game is based on an approach called DICES (A. Abarkan et al.,
54 2022). This approach is characterized by the interpretation of the serious aspect using the pedagogical model;
55 the integration of the motivational key inspired by the ARCS factors of motivation and also allows teachers
56 to make alterations at the content levels without going into the details of the design.
57 The scenario proposed in the "Puzzle Java" is of the linear form, in which the content of the game is
58 treated as a linear course composed by several levels. Each level is filled with a skill set to be acquired by the
59 learner/players.
60
61
62
63
64
65
 5.2. Game environment
1 To start "Puzzle Java", it is necessary to run the «[Link]» file from the Play Store
2 application or download a virtual emulator to give you access to the start of the game. The player is
3 immersed in a scenario in which he/she has to sort out the various blocks of instructions in order to create the
4 executable program. The learning objectives of "Puzzle Java" focus on the basics of Java programming.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Fig. 3 "Puzzle Java" interface
27
28
In each game session, the learner has the opportunity to encounter problems in order to acquire a set
29
of java programming skills. A high level of concentration on syntax, architecture and instruction
30
implementation is required to master the skills targeted in each part of the game, provided by the sorting of
31
the puzzle.
32
33 The game scenario is divided into levels that cover the various aspects of the Java programming
34 course. These levels are designed to enable learners to progressively tackle the difficulties of the game. Each
35 level gives learners the opportunity to reach objectives in order to continue and progress in the game.
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53 Fig. 4 "Puzzle Java" game session
54
55 Each level poses problems to be solved by the learners. The first level focuses on creating basic
56 instructions and structuring a Java program. The game sessions for the second level focus on the use of
57 conditions and the different categories of loops, as well as their syntax in a Java program. The problems
58 associated with declaring and populating arrays using the knowledge acquired in the previous levels are very
59
similar to the last level. The challenge is to come up with problems that highlight the knowledge to be taught,
60
and that are closely linked to the game scenario.
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2 6. "PUZZLE JAVA" EXPERIMENTATION
3 Like any educational tool, evaluation is necessary to guarantee its validity. The methodology used to
4 evaluate the "Puzzle Java" game is based on measuring the behavior of a sample of learners towards the use
5 of this new tool for learning Java programming. This measurement is based on the submission of a
6 questionnaire in MCQ format describing the interaction of this sample of learners with: Java programming as
7 a subject, the notion of serious games and towards the proposed "Puzzle Java" environment. The aim was to
8 gather learners' quantitative opinions on the game.
9 We were able to experiment the game prototype proposed in a class of the Mathematical Science
10 and Computer Science stream at the Polydisciplinary Faculty Taza, composed of more than 100 learners with
11 different levels of Java programming. During a 45-minute session and after a quick presentation, learners are
12 invited to use the game independently. Teachers were asked to intervene only at their request.
13 The experimental approach consisted in proposing "Puzzle Java" to players, studying their impact
14 and determining how they felt about the game's modeling and scripting. It is therefore not necessary to carry
15 out preliminary tests with players; but through direct questions we can determine it. We also asked them what
16 they thought of the name "Serious Game", and what problems they had in learning Java programming as a
17 module. This helped us to determine the effectiveness, results and smooth running of the game.
18 In a preliminary part, we also asked them identification questions, such as age and the technological
19 tool usually used by participants (personal use) with the possibility of selecting several tools. The results of
20 this part of the questionnaire show that for an average age of 22 between male and female, the technological
21 tools most used by participants are laptops (95%) and smartphones (68%), suggesting that the majority of
22 learners are up to date with new technology (Figure 6&7 below).
23
24
25 With an average age of 22
26
27
28 23%
29
30
77%
31
Male
32
33 Female
34 Fig. 5 Gender distribution for the participant group
35
36
37
38
39 95%
40 100%
68%
41 80%
42 60%
43 40%
44 9% 5%
20%
45
0%
46
Desktop Laptop Smartphone Tablet
47
computer
48
49
50 Fig. 6 Diagram summarizing the technological supports usually used by participants
51
52 The feedback collected since the results presented in figure 7 below indicate that participants accept
53 the teaching methods followed, but more than half disagree with the tools and equipment used to teach this
54 module. This led almost all of them to accept the idea of integrating new, more motivating tools. The serious
55 games we proposed as a solution appeared to 59% of participants, despite the fact that they had never had the
56 opportunity to use this category of games in an educational setting (figures 8 below).
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 95%
1 100%
77%
2 80% 64%
3
4 60%
5 Yes
40% 23% 18%
6 14% No
7 20% 5% 0% 5% Indifferent
8 0%
9 Training & material Teaching methods Integration of other
10 equipment more motivating
11 tools
12 Fig. 7 Diagram represents the satisfaction rate for teaching java programming among participants
13
14
15
16 95%
17 100%
18
19 80% 59% 59%
20 60% 41% 41%
21 Yes
22 40%
23 5% No
20%
24
25 0%
26 General intention Played Integration of other
27 more motivating
28 tools
29 Fig. 8 Diagram showing participants' intentions regarding the concept of Serious Games
30
31
Next, we asked participants to measure the different intentions they felt about "Puzzle Java" as a
32
learning universe on a scale of 0 to 10. The average responses are shown in Table 2. The results are all
33
positive and above expectations (almost an average of 7 out of 10 for the quality of the universe and serious
34
effectiveness). However, the average of 5.73 out of 10 for fun remains acceptable with possible
35
improvements in future versions.
36
37
Table 2 Average obtained for the "Puzzle Java" participant intention measure on a scale of 0 to 10
38
39
40 Universe quality 6,91
41
42 "Puzzle Java" Intention Playful pleasure 5,73
43
44 Serious efficiency 7,03
45
46
To understand the degree of complexity, we also asked them to evaluate the level of difficulty
47
presented in "Puzzle Java" (figures 10 Below). The variation in reviews is quite acceptable as participants'
48
knowledge and prerequisites vary from one learner to another. Therefore, the difficulty of the game varies
49
according to the level.
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1
2 45%
3 50%
4 40% 32%
5 30% 23%
6
7 20%
8 10% 0%
9 0%
10 Very hard Hard Easy Very easy
11
12
13 Fig. 9 Diagram summarize participants' opinions on the difficulty rate in "Puzzle Java"
14
15 After several game sessions, we then asked the participants to present the different
16 emotional levels they had felt on a scale of 0 to 10. Table 3 below shows the degree of satisfaction expressed
17 by participants on the criteria for improving training skills, and for "Puzzle Java" as a pedagogical tool to
18 help learning Java programming. The results show higher than average scores for all criteria; this means that
19 participants accepted this game idea.
20
21 Table 3 Evaluation of "Puzzle Java" by participants after use
22
23
General satisfaction 6,86
24
25
Educational tool 5,73
26
27
Improve training 6,50
28
29 6,41
Improving skills
30
31
32
33 From the results shown in Figure 10, we can see that the participants agreed with the concept of the
34 "Puzzle Java", which shows that they are much more open to this learning method. This leads them to want
35 to reproduce the concept of this game for learning other programming languages or modules. This is clearly
36 shown in their responses to figure 11.
37
38
39
40
41 50%
42 50%
43
40%
44 27%
45 30%
46 14%
47 20% 9%
48 10%
49
50 0%
51 I had a great I had fun I was bored Without
52 time opinion
53
54 Fig. 10 Diagram summarizing how participants felt about using "Puzzle Java"
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
 1 73% 73%
80%
2
3 60%
4
5 40% 23% Yes
18% No
6 9%
20% 5%
7 Indifferent
8 0%
9 Other programming Other modules
10 languages
11
12
13 Fig. 11 Diagram summarizing participants' responses to the duplication of the "Puzzle Java" concept
14
15
16 7. DISCUSSION
17
18 According to the study, "Puzzle Java" achieved good results in all categories considered (learning
19 success, motivation, pleasure, satisfaction). This serious game is therefore recommended to teach the learning
20 content while adding a captivating playful aspect. The components of the game scenario motivated players
21 and learners, increasing their active participation and immersion in the game. The general averages obtained
22 in Table 2 for the serious effectiveness indicators presented in the game scenario, and for the overall quality
23 of the universe, confirmed that "Puzzle Java" had a positive impact on learning success.
24 The evaluation showed that players/learners were visibly more satisfied with the "Puzzle Java"
25 approach. Motivation and fun were considerably higher in "Puzzle Java". We found from the analysis of the
26 results in Table 3 that players had a higher degree of satisfaction and skill acquisition, although the game is
27 suitable for all levels of learning Java programming.
28 The students' preference for video games is reflected by this minor difference. The results on
29 usability and experience between players and students are very positive. Students find the overall design of
30 "Puzzle Java" acceptable. In particular, they consider the game to be useful, relevant, entertaining and simple
31 to use.
32
33 8. CONCLUSION AND PERSPECTIVES
34
35 The results presented by this systematic study show that the use of serious games to enrich the
36 programming knowledge of players/ learners is of great interest. If we consider the potential of learning
37 programming through serious gaming, we can emphasize that research in this area is a strategy that is
38 expanding and promising. "Puzzle Java" in its design was focused on encouraging, engaging, motivating and
39 improving the perceptual strength in players. It should be noted that the results indicate that the game
40 provided learners/players with a functional version. Being a game has the advantage of being much more
41 affordable and entertaining than other teaching methods. To meet the expectations of learners and players,
42 we then gave a great interest in improving the playful side of the game. The next version of "Puzzle Java"
43 takes into account the desired programming language to learn in order to generalize this game idea for
44 learning other modules, while participants are very motivated from this perspective.
45
46
47
48  Availability of data and material: The datasets used and analysed in this research are available
49 from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
50  Funding: Not applicable.
51
52  Acknowledgements: The authors are indebted to the participating students.
53
54 REFERENCES
55
56 Fotaris, P., Mastoras, T., Leinfellner, R., & Rosunally, Y. (2017). Climbing Up the Leaderboard; An Empirical Study of
Applying Gamification Techniques to a Computer Programming Class. Electronic Journal of e-Learning, 14 (2), 94-
57 110.
58
59 Pellas, N., Konstantinou, N., Kazanidis, I., & Georgiou, G. (2016). Exploring the educational potential of three-
60 dimensional multi-user virtual worlds for STEM education: A mixed-method systematic literature review. Education
& Information Technologies, 22(5), 2235-2279.
61
62
63
64
65
 Nikolaos Pellas, Panagiotis Fotaris, Ioannis Kazanidis, et David Wells (2019). Augmenting the learning experience in
1 primary and secondary school education : A systematic review of recent trends in augmented reality game-based
2 learning. Virtual Reality, 23(4) :329–346.
3
Hamari, J., Shernoff, D. J., Rowe, E., Coller, B., Asbell-Clarke, J., & Edwards, T. (2016). Challenging games help
4
students learn: an empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human
5 Behavior, 54, 170-179.
6
7 Phipps, L., Alvarez, V., de Freitas, S., Wong, K., Baker, M., & Pettit, J. (2016). Conserv-AR: A Virtual and Augmented
Reality Mobile Game to Enhance Students’ Awareness of Wildlife Conservation in Western Australia. In
8
Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning (mLearn 2016), Sydney, Australia, 1,
9 214-217.
10
11 Kaasbøll. J (2002). Learning Programming, Univ. Oslo.
12 Yassine, A., Chenouni, D., Berrada, M., & Tahiri, A. (2017). A Serious Game for Learning C Programming Language
13 Concepts Using Solo Taxonomy. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET), 12, No 03.
14 Azmi, S., Iahad, N. A., & Ahmad, N. (2016). Attracting students’ engagement in programming courses with
15 gamification; IEEE Conference on e-Learning, e-Management and e-Services, IC3e, 112–115.
16 Rubiano, S.M.M., López-Cruz, O., and Soto, E.G. . (2015). "Teaching computer programming: Practices, difficulties and
17 opportunities", in IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE).
18
Kroustalli, C., & Xinogalos, S. (2021). Studying the effects of teaching programming to lower secondary school students
19 with a serious game: a case study with Python and CodeCombat. Education and Information Technologies.
20 [Link]
21
Montes, H., Hijón-Neira, R., Pérez-Marìn, D., & Montes, S. (2021). Using an Online Serious Game to Teach Basic
22
Programming Concepts and Facilitate Gameful Experiences for High School Students. IEEE Access, 9, 12567–
23 12578. [Link]
24
25 Abarkan Ali, Ben Yakhlef Majid (2022). Learning game development: Java shooter. Education and Information
Technologies. DOI: [Link]
26
27 Ali Abarkan, Abderrahim Saaidi, Majid BenYakhlef (2022). New serious games modeling: application to learn Java
28 programming; International Journal of Computer Aided Engineering and Technology, Vol. 17, No. 4, 2022.
29 Abt Clark (1970). Serious Games, University Press of America, Viking Press.
30 Natkin Stéphane (2004). Jeux vidéo et médias du XXIe siècle, Paris: Vuibert.
31
Chen Sande et David R. Michael (2005). Serious Games: Games that educate train and inform, Boston: Thomson Course
32
Technology.
33
34 Zyda Michael (2005). From visual Simulation to Virtual Reality to Games, IEEE Comp.
35 Sawyer Ben (2007). The "Serious Games" Landscape, Presented at the Instructional & Research Technology Symposium
36 for Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, Camden, USA.
37 Alvarez J (2007). Du jeu vidéo au Serious Game, approches culturelle, pragmatique et formelle, PhD Thesis, Toulouse,
38 France : Université de Toulouse, 17 Décembre.
39 Damien Djaouti (2011). Serious Game Design : considérations théoriques et techniques sur la création du jeu vidéo à
40 vocation utilitaire, Doctoral dissertation Toulouse 3. [Link]
41 students-through-gamification/
42
Declercq, C., & Nény, F. (2020). Block2Py, un éditeur de blocs pour l'apprentissage du langage Python. Atelier présenté
43 à Didapro 8 – DidaSTIC , Lille, France.
44
45 CodeCombat: Learn how to code by playing a game. [Link] , accessed: 2023-03-09.
46 JEMMALI, Chaima et YANG, Zijian (2016). May’s Journey: A serious game to teach middle and high school girls
47 programming. Master's thesis. Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
48 Miljanovic, M.A., Bradbury, J.S (2017). RoboBUG: A serious game for learning debugging techniques. In: Proc. of the
49 2017 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER ’17). pp. 93–100.
50 C. Dichev and D. Dicheva (2017). "Gamifying education: what is known, what is believed and what remains uncertain: a
51 critical review", p. 9, dec 2017.
52 Palomino, P. T., Toda, A. M., Oliveira, W., Cristea, A. I., & Isotani, S. (2019). Narrative for gamification in education:
53 why should you care?. In 2019 IEEE 19th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT)
54 (Vol. 2161, pp. 97-99). IEEE.
55
SEABORN, Katie, FELS, Deborah I (2014). Gamification in theory and action: A survey. International journal of
56
Human-Computer Studies. Octobre 2014. Vol. 74, pp. 14-31.
57
58 Mulkeen, D. (2018). Découvrez les 5 principaux avantages de la Gamification de la formation. Site web:
59 [Link] formation/
60 SQUIRES, Tasha (2016). Engaging students through Gamification. American Libraries Magazine. Mars et avril 2016.
61
62
63
64
65