242 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
as organizations, and as societies [1]. As a result, creativity has been identified as
the backbone of the skills demanded in order to fully participate in the twenty-first
century society both in professional setting but also in daily challenging situations.
Consequently, educative polices with a focus on creativity, innovation, and entre-
preneurship have been applied internationally during the last decade to the schools’
curricula. Notwithstanding the intensive policy discourse in this area, there is little
research on the status, barriers, and enablers for creativity and innovation in second-
ary education [2].
Creativity is defined as an imaginative activity fashioned so as to produce out-
comes that are both novel and valuable. Creativity has been theorized from different
theoretical paradigms (recent revisions: [3, 4]). Our study is based on the sociocul-
tural psychology of creativity conceiving creativity as a relational, intersubjective
phenomenon which can be aided and enabled by a range of mediating tools. In this
way, there is a widespread consensus among education that ICT and digital media
can make creative learning more likely to thrive [2].
The main purpose of this chapter is to contribute to the social and cultural nature
of creative acts by studying how to enhance creative behaviors in collaboration
while innovatively using technology in secondary education. To this end, firstly, a
technology-enhanced pedagogical framework for collaborative creativity in
Secondary Education will be presented. Secondly, the technology-enhanced peda-
gogical framework in real secondary classrooms will be implemented in order to
study its impact on students’ development of key collaborative creative processes.
14.2 Collaborative Creativity from Sociocultural Psychology
Sociocultural psychology stresses the role of the social context in shaping the
human brain. Vygotsky [5] pointed to the importance of cultural mediation through
tools and signs for the development of all higher mental functions. What transpires
from the cultural-historical perspective is that creators use culturally constructed
symbols and tools to produce new cultural artifacts [6]. Furthermore, Vygotsky was
primarily interested in the ontogenesis and microgenesis of creativity and in creativ-
ity as a process occurring in real-life “collaborations.”
Glăveanu [7] highlighted three aspects that have to be considered in the sociocul-
tural psychology conceptualization of creativity, which are important in designing
technology-enhanced pedagogy for creativity:
1. It considers creative acts as sociocultural in nature and origin. Cultural traditions,
social practices, and social artifacts regulate, express, transform, and permute the
human mind [8]. There is a strong interdependence between individuals and their
sociocultural context. Therefore, the transactions, interactions, and activities
between these two “systems” are the origin of collaborative creativity [9].
14 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework to Promote Collaborative… 243
2. Sociocultural psychology’s conceptualization of creativity stresses the role of
intersubjectivity and dialogical interaction in the creative expression. Prominent
scholars highlight several social aspects to be considered in order to create room
for creativity. For instance, Glâveanu [7] claims creativity is located in the space
of interrelations. Therefore, how creativity emerges in relations and how dia-
logue becomes an instrument for collaborative creativity processes’ develop-
ment need to be researched [10]. Another author Sonnenburg [11], whose
theoretical framework to create in collaboration, highlights the importance of the
communicative and social dimension. According to this researcher, participants
have to be mutually engaged in the process of communication during the col-
laborative resolution of a task, and they have to present a working style distin-
guished by a series of dispositions that can favor the emergence of creativity in
collaboration. This author highlights an open and free communication in which
all collaborators have the same chance to equally contribute to the course of
performance. Mutual trust and risk-taking are other key dispositions in collab-
orative creativity. Wegerif et al. [12] claims that the emergence of creative pro-
cesses in a collaborative learning situation depends more on the tensions between
different perspectives rather than a shared framework. Thus, creative thinking
emerges when opposing ideas and disagreements are thoroughly discussed in
such a way that divergent opinions and conceptions are related to each other.
3 . Sociocultural psychology’s conceptualization of creativity looks at how cultural
symbolic elements come to form the texture of new and creative products.
Creators use culturally constructed symbols and tools to produce new cultural
artifacts [6]. Zittoun, Baucal, Cornish, & Gillespie [13] developed the notion of
symbolic resources; the thesis of this notion is that a group of people will recon-
struct meaning, when facing a challenge, using symbolic tools and cultural arti-
facts in a new way that can lead them to externalize a new and creative
outcome.
The use of technology is emphasized herein as a cultural and symbolic tool
that enables groups to create new artifacts in order to face social challenges using
innovative solutions. Technology makes more visible and diverse the social level
processes that are developed during group thinking and promotes the intra-
mental appropriation of these processes [14]. Research in the area of computer-
supported collaborative learning has given a great account about how
communication technologies can provide scaffolds to support and enable col-
laboration and creativity [15]. However, educational researchers agree that it is
the way how technology is used that explains its positive impact on students’
creative thinking (e. g. [14, 16]). Therefore, there is a need for a more developed
discourse to conceptualize the relationship between diverse technology types,
the way in which it is used and any impact it may have on the users’ creative
thinking [17].
All these basic premises are at the core of the design of the technology-enhanced
pedagogical framework for collaborative creativity to be presented in the next
section.
244 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
14.3 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework
for Collaborative Creativity
Recent approaches claim creativity as a potential all people are capable of display-
ing, and it can be expressed at various situations of everyday life. This claim has
promoted the identification of three different categories of defining creativity [18,
19]. The “big-C” creativity typically concerned with exceptionally creative activity
of some very talented, genius but rare individuals. This creativity expression is con-
nected to the generation of novel ideas and products which are acknowledged by
experts as contributing substantially to the advancement of a domain.
The “little-c” or everyday creativity that is when a person realizes a new,
improved, and creative way to approach an issue or accomplish a task, and it is not
necessarily an outstanding contribution [20].
The “middle-c” creativity takes place in peer-group communities, through inter-
action between members of the group and through their participation in situations
where they actively and imaginatively display their intentions and negotiate new
alternatives to accomplish a common task. This approach activates the creative
potential of wider social groups to effectively deal with a social challenge [21].
“Little-c” and “middle-c” creativity represents a democratic conceptualization
of creativity and the possibility to be promoted and developed in all people.
However, one important request that education has to face is how to develop a
pedagogy that can promote the development of these two facets of creativity in
young people and equip them to face upcoming challenges of twenty-first century
society [22, 23]. The study herein approaches this educational cornerstone through
the design of a pedagogical framework in which technology and collaboration
have a central role in the development of “little-c” and “middle-c” creative think-
ing in secondary education.
The technology-enhanced pedagogical framework for collaborative creativity is
framed on the sociocultural theory presented in the previous section, and it is based
on Sawyer’s creative process [24, 25] who conceives the creativity “in” and “as”
action. Creativity takes place over time, and most creativity occurs while carrying
out tasks in a joint activity. Social relations foster and improve creativity at the same
time. Sawyer’s creative process is often explained as a set of mental activities that
people are engaged in when they are creating [24, 26] such as: find and formulate
the problem; generate a large variety of ideas; combine ideas in unexpected way;
select the best ideas by applying relevant criteria or externalize the idea using mate-
rials and representations.
The technology-enhanced pedagogical framework for collaborative creativity
developed involves the seven pedagogical variables depicted in Fig. 14.1 to be
explained next.
1. Challenge: The starting point is a social challenge to be solved collaboratively
and creatively. The social challenge is open-ended, real, and significant to the
students’ community. In order to reinforce the social side of the challenge, it is
14 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework to Promote Collaborative… 245
Fig. 14.1 The seven educative variables embedded in the technology-enhanced pedagogical
framework for collaborative creativity
presented by real actors. For example, in the project “a creative writing story,”
we invited an editor who proposed to the students to write a creative and appeal
story for teenagers. The best students’ piece of writing would be published online
in the editorial’s web page, and the writers would have a professional meeting
with an experienced local writer in order to exchange with him their writing
strategies and feelings.
2 . Solution: The arrival point is the creation and communication of a product
which has to be a novel and valuable solution to the proposed challenge.
Therefore, students have to clearly define, plan, and implement a solution to the
proposed challenge. The solution has to bear the next three characteristics: to
seek a clear purpose, to include a novel and value approach to solve the chal-
lenge, and it has to be orientated to promote a social action which can generate a
kind of social transformation. Besides, the solution has to be communicated to
the society. Therefore, firstly, students have to carefully design the target audi-
ence: what characteristics do they have? What do they need to know? Secondly,
students have to plan how they are going to communicate and implement their
transformative and valuable solution to the target audience and how are they
going to involve the target audience in the proposed solution to the challenge?
3. The use of technology during the creative process: Research has already
pointed out that technology shapes our thinking, and technology can provide
scaffolds to support and enable collaboration and creativity [15]. Educational
researchers also agreed that it is the way how technology is used that explains its
246 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
impact on students’ creative thinking [27]. The pedagogical model designed in
this chapter promotes the use of technology as a medium for creative thinking
[14]. The features of digital technologies can make a distinctive contribution to
creative processes, providing new tools, media, and environments to learn to be
creative and learn by being creative. Therefore, digital technologies display fea-
tures which can be exploited and experimented to support elements of creative
processes.
Loveless [16] highlighted that learners and teachers need to have a range of
experiences in which they can engage, play, and become familiar with the dis-
tinctive contributions that ICT can make to their creative practices which other
media and tools do not offer. Therefore, digital technologies can address stu-
dents’ opportunities for creative practices as its access assists interaction, partici-
pation, and the active demonstration of imagination, production, purpose,
originality, and usefulness.
The proposed pedagogical model enhances the use of digital technologies as
a medium that supports the whole creative process. Specifically, we have used
the distinctive features of ICT tools to promote the next four creative activities:
• Creative emergence and structure of group ideas. It is used technology
that allows multiple representations of group ideas in a common work
space. For example, students used a tool named Cacoo (https://cacoo.com)
to collect information, organize, structure, and plan the creative process.
Figure 14.2 presents an example about how students used Cacoo to struc-
ture the group ideas.
• Plan and organization of the creative process. Technology that allows plan-
ning the group work in different phases and discussing and reflecting about
the work flow and its results is promoted. For example, students used a tool
named Trello (https://trello.com). Trello provides boards, lists, and cards that
Fig. 14.2 Example about the use of technology for emerging and organizing group ideas
14 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework to Promote Collaborative… 247
Fig. 14.3 Graphic representation of group ideas
enable a group to set up the main tasks of a project, organize them and priori-
tize in a flexible and rewarding way.
• Enhance communication for thinking together. Students solve the different
project tasks in a common workspace with synchronic communication as
chats and blogs. This communication takes place at two different levels:
amongst the group members and between groups. Both types of communica-
tion pursued the objective of finding the best solution to the challenge by
enhancing collaboration and thinking together.
• Visual representation of the group ideas. Technology that allows the use of
different type of information, both linguistic and graphical information as
images, maps, graphs, photos, etc., has been used. Figure 14.3 presents an
example about how students used technology to visually represent the
group ideas.
4 . Collaboration: Creativity emerges when high-quality interaction takes place.
Therefore, it is important to help students to orchestrate their actions and the
language they use in order to solve the proposed challenge collaboratively and
creatively [28]. Social conception of creativity stands out by the importance of
248 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
the agreement of the rules of teamwork or “ground rules” [29] and by the rele-
vance of dialogue and language in the creative communication between students.
In our project, we worked on these two aspects, firstly, stimulating students into
creating their own ground rules in order to promote all group members’ active
participation and work. And secondly, giving students well-designed scaffolds to
improve dialogue and enhance collaboration.
5. Divergent phase—“Open the mind”: In this phase, students should be open to
new ideas and others’ point of view. It is quantitative phase for idea generation
which can be useful to work further in the next phase. In order to reach the objec-
tives of this phase, the next three methods have been used and analyzed:
• Different brain storming techniques.
• Well-designed activities that activate previous experiences and previous
knowledge of the different members of the group which could be valuable to
promote group idea generation. For example: images and pictures display in
order to decide the theme of the “design of an environmental-friendly wall of
the common playground” project.
• Interviews to relevant people able to bring in different points of view about
the challenge. For example, in the project of “designing an environmental-
friendly wall of the common playground,” students interviewed the school
caretaker and the head teacher.
6. Exploration phase—“Understanding”: The students work together on the
ideas emerged in the previous phase and on new relevant information. The objec-
tives of this phase are to creatively understand the relevant information and
search for new solutions to the challenge. In order to reach the objective of this
phase, specific strategies to select and organize information with technology
such as tables, graphs, or conceptual maps have been applied.
7 . Convergence phase—“Close” the process: This phase promotes to search for
a conclusion, a decision or a concrete action. It refers to the phase in which the
ideas and information are evaluated in a critical and realistic way in order to
converge on one decision and action. This phase should conclude with a tangible
and defined product/solution. The methodological strategies that define this
phase are the next two:
• Explicit argumentation of the proposed ideas.
• Democratic voting and selection of best ideas by the group members. For
example: students decide to design book trailers as a way to communicate the
creative pieces of writing that they created collaboratively.
14.4 Objectives of the Study
1 . To implement the technology-enhanced pedagogical framework to foster col-
laborative creativity in two real secondary education classrooms.
14 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework to Promote Collaborative… 249
2. To explore the role of technology in shaping collaborative and creative processes.
To this end, next two research questions will be answered: which technology do
students use to orchestrate their collaborative and creative project? And how do
students use this technology?
3. To study students’ perception about the collaborative and creative processes
developed during the educative project.
14.5 M ethod
This study took the form of a case study. Through an established partnership, two
secondary schools of Lleida (Spain) agreed to participate in this research and two
ordinary secondary school classes were involved in this study. In the first school,
two female language teachers and twenty-six 13/14-year-old students participated.
Both teachers conducted a project based on collaboratively and creatively writing.
A real editor came to the school and asked for students’ collaboration on writing
short stories that could be interesting to teenagers. Students, in groups of four,
should write the stories and explore how to raise teenagers’ interest in their stories.
The most interesting story would be published on the publisher’s website, and the
winning group of students would be given money to spend in a popular bookshop.
In the second school, three female secondary teachers who respectively taught
Technology, Science, and English language and twenty-five 12/13-year-old students
participated. The three teachers conducted an interdisciplinary project about design-
ing a playground wall in order to raise awareness about the importance of being
environmentally friendly. With this project in mind, the school’s environmental
committee asked the students to come up with a proposal for decorating one of the
playground walls. The group proposal had to include the design of the playground
wall using environmentally friendly materials, be within the budget, and finally,
students had to communicate their proposition to the school community in English
and in Spanish. The proposals and their presentation would be uploaded to the
school’s website and presented within the program of the yearly held environmental
conference in Lleida city.
14.5.1 Procedure
One seminar of 12 h of training was organized in which teachers and researchers
participated. The five teachers that participated in this study also attended the semi-
nar. In this seminar, through experiential activities, teachers and researchers jointly
constructed and agreed about the pedagogical components of the technology-
enhanced framework for collaborative creativity. Besides, during the seminar,
teachers and researchers designed the objectives and the main activities of the two
creative projects to be carried out in the two schools. The first researcher of this
chapter led the seminar.
250 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
14.5.2 Data Collection and Analyses
Data for the study was collected from two instruments:
• Students’ work on computers was video-taped using Atube screen recorder soft-
ware. We carried out an analysis of the students’ products in the different tech-
nologies they used. All the technological tools students chose and used during
the projects will be listed together with some examples to illustrate the objectives
students had when they used a specific technology to solve the challenge cre-
atively and collaboratively. This data will provide detailed information about the
type of technology students used and for what purposes.
• After students participated in the creative projects, all students individually
answered a questionnaire. This questionnaire consisted of seven open questions
in which students were asked about their perception of “what” and “how” they
learnt in relation to the three main variables of our study: creativity, collabora-
tion, and technology. Examples of the questions are: What have you learnt dur-
ing the project? List three actions carried out in the group that was helpful to find
the solution to the challenge.
In order to inform the third research objective: to study students’ perception
about the collaborative and creative processes developed during the educational
project; a detailed content analysis of the students’ answers in the questionnaire was
made. Two researchers reviewed all the data and divided them into units of meaning
by using semantic features such as ideas, argument chains, and discussion topics, or
by regulating activities such as making a plan, asking for an explanation, or explain-
ing unclear information. Each unit is often a sentence. Then the researchers read
each segment to provide analysis of the meaning and features of it using a content
analytical approach.
A series of codes were built during this analysis, and, later, these series were
grouped, reviewed, and categorized. At the end of this process, a coding scheme was
created to characterize students’ contributions. Nvivo software was used during this
analysis. The different codes that emerged from the experimental data are presented
in Fig. 14.4 and in Annex 14.1; the reader can find examples of each categories.
Validity and reliability aspects were considered in the study.
As it can be seen in Fig. 14.4, the coding scheme created has two axes:
1. Creativity axis. In this variable, we analyzed students’ perception about the two
main creative processes:
(a) Divergent processes: Students acknowledge they generate new ideas and
new ways of thinking. Besides, students share and acquire new information
that was a creative source of inspiration for the group.
(b) Convergent processes: Students are aware of the necessity to define the chal-
lenge and its characteristics and conditions in order to find the best creative
solution. Also, students are sentient that selecting the best ideas and combin-
ing them a better idea can emerge. This also involves finding the best way to
communicate the originality and advantages of the solution found.
14 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework to Promote Collaborative… 251
CREATIVITY COLLABORATION
Divergent · Generate new ideas Distributed · Establish ground rules
Thinking Leadership
· New ways of · Management the task
thinking
· Distributed responsibilities
· Inspiration and roles
· Share and acquire · Joint attention
new information · Shared opinion
· Explicitsupport
Mutual
Engagement
Convergent · Define the · Reflect on the process
Thinking challenge · Reflect on the progress
· Reflect on the strategies
· Select and combine Group
ideas Reflection
· Externalize and
communicate the
idea
Fig. 14.4 Students’ perception about the collaborative and creative processes developed during
the project
2. Collaboration axis. In this variable, we analyzed students’ awareness about the
next three learning processes to learn together:
(a) Distributed leadership: Students propose efficient ways to organize the team
and to manage the task. This also involves agreement on ground rules and
distributing responsibilities and roles.
( b) Mutual engagement: Students recognize the need to exchange each other’s
opinions. This also involves developing an attitude based on joint attention
and helping disposition.
(c) Group reflection: Students reflect on the process followed to solve the chal-
lenge, the progress, and the collaborative strategies that help the group to
solve the challenge.
14.5.3 Results and Discussion
14.5.3.1 How Students Used Technology to Orchestrate Their
Collaborative and Creative Project
Table 14.1 shows the different technologies students used in the two projects and the
creative activities they developed using a specific technology. Besides, the screenshots
provided exemplifies students’ use of technology to develop the creative projects.
As it can be seen in Table 14.1, students employed different types of technology
to solve the challenge. This is first evidence that students exploited purposely the
features of digital technologies for solving creatively the challenge. Besides, students
used the different features of a technology tool for different purposes. For example,
students used Cacoo to collect information but also to organize group ideas.
252 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
Table 14.1 Technology used, creative activities promoted, and examples
ICT tool Creative activity Exemplification
CACOO
Collect group information visual mapping
of group information
Brain storming
Organize/structure group ideas
Sketchboard Creative design
Elaboration of group ideas
Drive Build/Write
Revise/Modify
Discuss
Movie Maker Synthesize
Communicate
Design
QR Communicate
Externalize
Furthermore, the collaborative usage of the technology to solve the challenge
triggered key creative activities. We could distinguish the use of technology to fulfil
the next creative activities: brain storming; organize and structure group ideas;
design and elaboration of creative ideas; visual synthesis of information and group
ideas; and find creative ways of externalizing and communicating to the society the
group ideas and solutions to the challenge. In this line, the technological features of
tools as Cacoo or Sketchboard increased and expanded students’ opportunities for
exploration and playing with group ideas and group information and make a distinc-
tive contribution to the group creative activities.
14 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework to Promote Collaborative… 253
14.5.3.2 S tudents’ Perception of the Creative and Collaborative Processes
Developed During the Project
Students’ answers to the questionnaire refer both to creative (45% of students’
opinions) and collaborative processes (55% of students’ opinions) developed dur-
ing the projects.
Figure 14.5 shows the results in relation to students’ perception of the creative
processes developed during the creative projects. As it can be seen, students are
aware of the development of key creative processes related to the divergence and
convergence processes.
The technology-enhanced pedagogical framework for collaborative creativity
implemented in the two projects promoted divergent processes (41% of students’
opinions); the students perceived that their participation in these projects enriched
their strategies to generate new ideas and new ways of thinking. In this line, stu-
dents’ stated: “I have learnt to have more creative ideas and more elaborated ones”
or “we have thought a lot and this has been helpful.”
Besides, students found inspiration in their group discussions, particularly when the
different members of the group shared and represented new information in the com-
mon work space. Sawyer [26] claimed that creativity is always based on mastery, prac-
tice, and expertise. In this respect, some examples of students’ views are the next two:
“The new ideas came up listening to my groupmates” or “the ideas came up after
observing things and pictures of different websites contributed by my team members.”
Therefore, the students that participated in this study understood the necessity to look
for relevant information and learned it in order to creatively solve the challenge.
Students highly perceived that during the project they developed convergent pro-
cesses (59% of students’ contributions). Students were aware of the importance to
identify and formulate the challenge in such a way that it was more likely to lead to
a creative solution [30]. For example, students’ stated: The wall is dark and we need
bright colors.
Fig. 14.5 Student’s Student’s perception of creativity processes
perception of creativity
processes developed during
the projects
Divergent
thinking
41%
Convergent
thinking
59%
254 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
Furthermore, an in relation to the convergent processes developed in this study, one
student wrote: considering the other groupmates’new ideas and my ideas, we came up
with a more original idea. This is an example of how students realized that many cre-
ative ideas result from a combination of existing mental concepts or ideas [31].
Research in creativity has claimed the importance of learning how to externalize
and communicate an idea to the society. This issue was especially taken into account
in the pedagogical model proposed in which the arrival point: the solution of the
challenge, had to be designed and concretized in a specific product. This product
had to be presented and communicated to the school community. Our data shows
that the fact of communicating their projects to the school community had been
important for students’ engagement in creative processes. Some examples of
students’ answers include: “create a book trailer, which is explaining the story visu-
ally, was enjoyable and imaginative for us and for the rest of the school.”
“It was great to explain our story in a book trailer.”
In terms of students’ perception about the collaborative processes cultivated dur-
ing the projects, the data shows that students solved the challenges collaboratively.
In this respect, one student wrote in the questionnaire: All the members of the group
have collaborated really well. As it can be seen in Fig. 14.6, group reflection is the
collaborative process that stands out the most in students’ view (48% of students’
opinions). Reflection on the group progress involves a strong intersubjectivity ori-
entation because students show high concern for other’s contributions: as a reaction
towards their own work and as a process that can have an impact on group work.
Besides, reflection on group progress provides a critical view of the collaborative
work as reflections offer students opportunities and a venue to regulate their learn-
ing in group and plan the next step. In the following example, one student is aware
about the importance of reflecting on the group progress for the collective work: We
have learnt to evaluate our process and I did like it because then we were aware
about what we had done wrong and how we had to improve it.
Also students unfolded collaborative processes related to create a mutually and
jointly environment for being engaged in thinking and creating together (27% of
students’ opinions). Educational research claims that interactive technologies can
afford opportunities for learners to deeply engage with key ideas. Notwithstanding,
Fig. 14.6 Student’s Students' perception of collaborative processes
perception of collaborative
processes developed during Distributed
the projects Leadership
25%
Group
reflection
48%
Mutual
engagement
27%
14 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework to Promote Collaborative… 255
the extent to which collaboration is productive in ways that lead to content under-
standing depends on high quality of collective engagement in a shared activity [32].
The experimental data of our study gives evidence that the students indeed revealed
collaborative processes that lead to recognize and respect each other’s opinions and
elaborate on other’s ideas in which students develop and further extend the idea
proposed by other members of the group.
Finally, students in our study developed distributed leadership processes in
which the different members of the groups organized and managed the tasks and
collectively distributed responsibilities among group members. Management of the
task and moving it forward had been seen as vital leadership elements of the group
effectiveness process [33] in which students’ moves are focused on group improve-
ment and orientated to master the group task. In this respect, for example, students
stated: “Everybody has to be responsible to bring the elements we have agreed”; or
“everybody has to do a task and be involved in the project.”.
14.6 Conclusion
Our study aimed to develop one potentially useful technology-enhanced pedagogi-
cal framework to promote key collaborative creativity processes in Secondary
Education. The implementation and evaluation of the proposed pedagogical frame-
work in real classroom settings suggest positive impact on students’ development of
creative processes.
Our work showed a definite use of technology to orchestrate students’ creativity
in a collaborative context. In this way, the educative use of the affordances of some
web 2.0 tools such as Cacoo or Drive have been proven to be powerful tools (a) to
support the promotion of all students’ ideas, (b) to foster the representation and
organization of students’ ideas in a significant way, and (c) to communicate effec-
tively among the members of the group. Therefore, the pedagogical framework
designed helped students integrate current technology for creative learning prac-
tices successfully. However, from our perspective, there is a need to design technol-
ogy that can support these key creativity processes in the same and shared workspace.
Therefore, our study can give powerful insights to technologists to design efficient
technology to support key collaborative and creative processes.
Likewise, the technology-enhanced pedagogical framework has been successful
in developing key collaborative creativity processes because students reported the
employment of both key divergent and convergent processes to solve the social
challenge. Furthermore, students highlighted the use of relevant collaborative learn-
ing processes related mostly to group reflection and mutual engagement.
Moreover, our study showed that the technology-enhanced pedagogical model-
supported students in finding a collective and creative solution to the challenge
posed. Specifically, students were engaged in a creative and collaborative experience
in which they produced new and shared knowledge and developed group reflection
skills, positive mutual engagement strategies, and distributed leadership moves.
Overall, our findings demonstrate that students were engaged in collaborative
interactions that create room for the development of collaborative creativity processes.
256 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
However, our study did not provide information about the characteristics of the dia-
logical interactions that took place and how dialogue became an instrument for col-
laborative creativity processes’ development. Our intention is to design future research
in order to study thoroughly students’ interaction during their collective and creative
practices and shed light to the role of dialogue and its characteristics as an instrument
for enhancing collaborative creativity.
Although the relatively small sample size may limit the generalizability of the
findings to other secondary classrooms, this study nevertheless contributes to the
limited amount of research on effective technology-enhanced creative practices in
secondary education and handle to enrich both the theory and pedagogy of collab-
orative creativity in secondary education.
Acknowledgments This research was funded by the Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad
of the Spanish Government (projects number: EDU2012-32415 and EDU2016-80258-R).
Annex 14.1 Students’ perception about the collaborative and creative processes developed during
the project and examples
Creativity Examples
Divergent Generate new ideas This project has helped me to think new ideas. Every
thinking group member has proposed an idea. I have learnt to
have more creative ideas and more elaborated
Convergent
thinking New ways of thinking We have thought a lot, and this has been helpful
Collaboration Inspiration The groupmates’ ideas help me to think
Distributed
leadership Share and acquire The new ideas came up listening to my groupmates. The
new information ideas came up observing things and pictures of different
Mutual web sites
engagement
Define the challenge The wall is dark and we need bright colors
Group
reflection Select and combine Considering the other groupmates’ new ideas and my
ideas ideas, we came up with a more original idea
Externalize and Our solution is interactive and this will involve other
communicate the idea people
Examples
Establish ground rules We have learnt to establish and agree group rules.
We have learnt to respect mates’ opinions
Management the task We have divided the tasks and organized really well
Distributed Everybody has to be responsible to bring the elements
responsibilities and we have agreed. Everybody has to do a task and be
roles involved in the project
Joint attention Everybody has to work
Shared opinion We have discussed all proposed ideas
Explicit support We have helped each other and this has made our work
more original
Reflect on the process All the members of the group have collaborated really well
Reflect on the We have learnt to evaluate our process and I did like it
progress because then we were aware about what we have done
wrong and how to mend it
Reflect on the We have learnt ways to discuss and combine efficiently
strategies our different ideas
14 A Technology-Enhanced Pedagogical Framework to Promote Collaborative… 257
References
1. Westwood, R., & Low, D. (2003). The multicultural muse: Culture, creativity and innovation.
Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 3(2), 235–259. Retrieved from http://journals.sage-
pub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/14705958030032006.
2. Cachia, R., Ferrari, A., Ala-Mutka, K., & Punie, Y. (2010). Creative learning and innovative
teaching. JRC Scientific and Thechnical Reports. https://doi.org/10.2791/52913.
3. Kaufman, J. C., & Sternberg, R. J. (2010). The Cambridge handbook of creativity. New York:
Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from www.cambridge.org.
4. Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Wisdom, intelligence, and creativity synthesized. New York: Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511509612
5. Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The history of the development of higher mental functions. In R. W.
Rieber (Ed.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. IV, pp. 1–251). New York: Plenum
Press.
6. Moran, S., John-Steiner, V., & Sawyer, R. (2003). Creativity in the making. Creativity and
development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
7. Glăveanu, V. (2010). Principles for a cultural psychology of creativity. Culture & Psychology,
16(2), 147–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X10361394
8. Shweder, R. (1990). Cultural psychology—What is it? In J. Stigler, R. Shweder, & G. Herdt
(Eds.), Cultural psychology: Essays on comparative human development (pp. 1–43).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important
to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research.
Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83–96. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
1 0. Hämäläinen, R., & Vähäsantanen, K. (2011). Theoretical and pedagogical perspectives on
orchestrating creativity and collaborative learning. Educational Research Review, 6(3), 169–
184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2011.08.001
1 1. Sonnenburg, S. (2004). Creativity in communication: A theoretical framework for collabora-
tive product creation. Creativity and Innovation Management, 13(4), 254–262. https://doi.
org/10.1111/j.0963-1690.2004.00314.x
1 2. Wegerif, R., McLaren, B., Chamrada, M., Scheuer, O., Mansour, N., Miksatko, J., & Williams,
M. (2010). Exploring creative thinking in graphically mediated synchronous dialogues.
Computers & Education, 54(3), 613–621. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/
science/article/pii/S0360131509003054.
1 3. Zittoun, T., Baucal, A., Cornish, F., & Gillespie, A. (2007). Collaborative research, knowledge
and emergence. Psychological and Behavioral Science, 41(2), 208–217. Retrieved from http://
link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12124-007-9021-z.
14. Wegerif, R. (2015). Dialogic, education and technology. Springer Science & Business Media:
Expanding the space of learning.
15. Jeong, H., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2016). Seven affordances of computer-supported collabora-
tive learning: How to support collaborative learning? How can technologies help? Educational
Psychologist, 51(2), 247–265. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2016.1158654
1 6. Loveless, A. (2006). Creativity, technology and learning—A review of recent literature. Report
4 update, 21. Retrieved from http://archive.futurelab.org.uk/resources/documents/lit_reviews/
Creativity_Review_update.pdf.
17. Daskolia, M., Kynigos, C., & Makri, K. (2015). Learning about urban sustainability with digi-
tal stories: Promoting collaborative creativity from a constructionist perspective. Constructivist
Foundations, 10(3), 388–396.
1 8. Craft, A., Gardner, H., & Claxton, G. (Eds.). (2007). Creativity, wisdom, and trusteeship:
Exploring the role of education. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
1 9. Simonton, D. K. (2010). Creativity in highly eminent individuals, The Cambridge handbook of
creativity (pp. 174–188). New York: Cambridge University Press.
20. Craft, A. (2003). Creativity across the primary curriculum: Framing and developing practice.
London: Routledge.
258 M. Pifarré and L. Martí
21. Moran, S. (2010). Creativity in school. In K. Littleton, C. Woods, & J. Kleine-staarman (Eds.),
International handbook of psychology in education (pp. 319–359). Bingley, UK: Emerald
Group Publishing Limited.
22. Andiliou, A., & Murphy, P. K. (2010). Examining variations among researchers’ and teach-
ers’ conceptualizations of creativity: A review and synthesis of contemporary research.
Educational Research Review, 5(3), 201–219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.003
23. Kampylis, P. (2010). Fostering creative thinking: The role of primary teachers. Jyväskylä:
University of Jyväskylä.
2 4. Sawyer, K. (2013). Zig zag: The surprising path to greater creativity. New York, NY: Wiley.
25. Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for innovation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 41–48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2005.08.001
26. Sawyer, R. K. (2012). The science of human innovation: Explaining creativity. New York, NY:
Wiley.
27. Gijlers, H., Weinberger, A., van Dijk, A. M., Bollen, L., & van Joolingen, W. (2013).
Collaborative drawing on a shared digital canvas in elementary science education: The
effects of script and task awareness support. International Journal of Computer- Supported
Collaborative Learning, 8(4), 427–453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-013-9180-5
2 8. Mercer, N. (2013). The social brain, language, and goal-directed collective thinking: A social
conception of cognition and its implications for understanding how we think, teach, and learn.
Educational Psychologist, 48(3), 148–168. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2013.804394
29. Mercer, N., & Littleton, K. (2007). Dialogue and the development of children’sthinking: A
sociocultural approach. London: Routledge.
3 0. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York:
Harper Collins.
3 1. Gray, D., Brown, S., & Macanufo, J. (2010). Gamestorming: A playbook for innovators, rule-
breakers, and changemakers. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media.
3 2. Sinha, S., Rogat, T. K., Adams-Wiggins, K. R., & Hmelo-Silver, C. E. (2015). Collaborative
group engagement in a computer-supported inquiry learning environment. International
Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 10(3), 273–307. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s11412-015-9218-y
3 3. Li, Y., Anderson, R. C., Nguyen-Jahiel, K., Dong, T., Archodidou, A., Kim, I.-H., & Miller,
B. (2007). Emergent leadership in Children’s discussion groups. Cognition and Instruction,
25(1), 1–2. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000709336703
34. Jones, S. (2014). Distributed leadership: A critical analysis. Leadership, 10(2), 129–141.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715011433525
Chapter 15
NanoCity: An Immersive Game
to Transform Student Perceptions
of Science
Karen J. Murcia, C. Paul Newhouse, and Julie Boston
Abstract This chapter reports on the design and trial of a virtual reality
transformational game aimed at promoting the study of nanotechnology among
s econdary science students. Nanocity is a prototype game purposefully designed to
create an engaging and immersive learning environment. The game was tested with
87 lower secondary students in two Western Australian schools. After the e xperience,
these students were surveyed and some participated in focus group interviews.
These data, along with observation of the students using the game, provided
evidence that the experience was not only engaging but had a transformational
effect on the attitudes and perceptions of students towards nanotechnology as a field
of study and work. These results supported the suggestion that transformational
games can be used to support the learning of students in science and in particular
improve their attitudes and perceptions of future engagement with science.
15.1 I ntroduction
Statistical forecasts reveal an increasing need for STEM (science, technology,
engineering and mathematics)-based skills in Australia and internationally, which is
paralleled with a continuing decline in students transitioning from schools into STEM
higher education degrees [1]. In 2014, the Office of the Chief Scientist of Australia [2]
released a report Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics: Australia’s
future imploring the government to prioritise STEM education and training to “prepare
a skilled and dynamic STEM workforce, and lay the foundations for lifelong STEM
literacy in the community” (p. 24). As part of a strategic pipeline to achieve this, STEM
educational reform in K-12 education is now considered a national priority in Australia.
K. J. Murcia (*) 259
School of Education, Curtin University, Bentley, WA, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
C. Paul Newhouse · J. Boston
School of Education, Edith Cowan University, Mount Lawley, WA, USA
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
© Springer International Publishing AG 2018
D. Sampson et al. (eds.), Digital Technologies: Sustainable Innovations for
Improving Teaching and Learning, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73417-0_15
260 K. J. Murcia et al.
Nanotechnology is a transdisciplinary STEM field that marries nanoscience,
engineering, mathematics and technology, in order to understand and manipulate
matter at the nanoscale. To put this in perspective, a nanometre (nm) is one billionth
of a metre (m). When matter is restructured at the nanoscale, fascinating new
properties can emerge. Nanotechnology seeks to take advantage of these new
p roperties for human uses. Arguably, it is current science research and its human
uses and implications that motivate and excite students to engage with STEM disci-
plines. Today’s students are the future workforce for the field of nanotechnology
and their training and education determines the future of cutting edge technologies.
Specific references to the emerging field of nanotechnology are now included in the
Science as a Human Endeavour strand of the Australian Curriculum for Science,
specifically in the sub-strand Use and Influence of Science. The interdisciplinary
nature of nanotechnology requires teaching and learning experiences that provide
opportunities for integrating knowledge from all the disciplines of STEM.
In this chapter, we argue that the power of video game technologies for teaching
and learning reflects twenty-first century opportunity for engaging digitally aware
students with STEM fields such as nanotechnology. Online games can provide
entire worlds designed to help learners adopt roles and engage with storylines previ-
ously inaccessible to them. Transformational learning is a perspective shifting expe-
rience [3]. Transformational game “play” involves taking on the role of a protagonist
who employ conceptual understandings to transform a problem-based fictional con-
text [4]. The youth engaged with the game can become scientists and nanotechnolo-
gists who critically engage with significant science content, mathematics and
inquiry skills needed to transform a virtual world.
NanoCity, an online virtual reality transformational computer game, was
designed to meet educational objectives of the Australian Science Curriculum and
to engage and immerse the player as a “scientist” in a world where they experienced
STEM in action. The game development and research was conducted as a collabora-
tion between the Centre for Transformational Games at Edith Cowan University,
Perth Western Australia and the Australian Department of Industry, Innovation,
Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary. This chapter describes the design
of this custom-designed transformational virtual reality game and then evaluates its
impact on secondary students’ understanding and opinions of nanotechnology and
of their dispositions to consider nanotechnology as a future career.
15.2 Literature Support for the Design of the Game
Although the area of research into transformational computer-based games is
relatively new, it builds on wider concepts, such as situated learning and serious
gaming, with much longer research track records. Many of the key ideas come from
knowledge in situated learning and cognition, play and the broader concern with
transforming scientific knowledge, values and beliefs. Therefore, while the follow-
ing review of the literature begins with transformational computer-based games, it
then builds on literature from these contributing areas.
15 NanoCity: An Immersive Game to Transform Student Perceptions of Science 261
15.2.1 Transformational Computer-Based Games
Playing games has probably always been a significant human endeavour. Clearly,
the main aims of playing games are social and/or personal satisfaction; their
e ngagement with our minds ensures that we also learn from the experience, although
exactly what we learn may not always be clear. As a result, games have been devised
or modified by educators to intentionally connect with curriculum content or
outcomes [5]. Since the early 1980s, an increasing proportion of game playing in
developed countries such as Australia has become computer-based, whether on
dedicated platforms such as created by Nintendo, on personal computers, on mobile
devices and/or over the Internet. With the increasing availability of computer devices
in schools, it is reasonable that teachers should consider the use of computer games
to support learning, to some extent leveraging the engagement of many children
with these games but providing a greater range of learning activities to address
curriculum requirements.
The intentional connection between curriculum content and game playing is per-
haps the basis of what has come to be known as serious gaming. The beginning of
this terminology is generally attributed to the Serious Games Initiative in 2002;
however, the ideas behind the terminology developed well before this [5, 6]. The
terms computer-based educational games, transformational games, or instructional
games are used to describe using computers to support games that had been
designed, or repurposed, to engage students in learning some content within the
school curriculum. de Freitas [7] provides a useful definition for educational games,
“applications using the characteristics of video and computer games to create
engaging and immersive learning experiences for delivering specified learning
goals, outcomes and experiences.” The constructivist theory of transformational
play has provided an excellent framework for the design of educational games as
explained by Barab et al. [8] for their Quest Atlantis multiplayer virtual world game.
Enough is now known of how to create engaging and immersive learning experiences
connected to curriculum outcomes to guide the purposeful design of educational
games [9]. Yet, more empirical evidence is needed on the effectiveness of
incorporating game elements in learning environments [10].
Computer game technologies are arguably powerful tools for teaching and learning
with evidence pointing to the potential to support “a range of perceptual, cognitive,
behavioural, affective and motivational impacts and outcomes” with respect to learn-
ing ([11], p. 661). A transformational game is an experience in which education, not
entertainment, is the primary goal. Barab, Gresalfi and Ingram-Goble [4] explain that
transformational play involves the player taking on a role to allow content to be used
to change the context. These games have “three interconnected e lements of person,
content, and context” ([12], p. 241). The person and context are bound through being
a “protagonist in the storyline”, the content is bound to the person through being an
agent of change set within a dilemma, and the content is bound to the context through
allowing the context to change as a result of the p erson’s actions. The virtual world of
a transformational game becomes the social environment within which learning
262 K. J. Murcia et al.
occurs as an outcome of the complex interaction of persons and digital resources.
Narratively, rich virtual worlds can be designed to help learners adopt roles and
engage in scenarios previously inaccessible to them. Authentic scenarios or p roblems,
concepts and inquiry processes are embedded in the virtual world and woven through
the narrative. Engaging individuals with learning science in game-based societal
situations means concepts and skills are connected to the context and remain a
p owerful tool for decision-making and problem solving in the world [13].
15.2.2 S ituated Learning in Transformational Games
Barab et al. [8] define a transformational game in terms of the position of the person,
the content and the context within which the former are immersed. They explain
that transformational play occurs when the player is able to take on a role in which
their actions or choices change the context to allow them to relate a knowledge base
(or mental model) to a problem. They relate this to situated learning theory with
learning emanating from activity within a context relevant to the content. This con-
tent orientation and immersive nature support the attainment of learning outcomes
while the affordances of the digital technologies employed support the fidelity of
the representation of the context, transfer and management of learning.
Situated learning or cognition is based on the understanding that conceptual
knowledge is “situated” in activity, context and culture [14]. Thus, learning result-
ing from acting within real or realistic situations or contexts, set within a commu-
nity and culture, is far more effective than trying to learn “abstract, self-contained
entities” (p. 33). Situated learning is often discussed in terms of the authentic activi-
ties that are the “ordinary practices of the culture” (p. 34) for the knowledge domain
conducted by practitioners. That is, the learner is immersed within a contextual situ-
ation relevant to the domain of knowledge to conduct activities using knowledge as
tools. Transformational games may provide virtual situations within which the
learner is immersed and acts using knowledge tools [8]. In our NanoCity game, this
translates to activities done as a scientist within a real world context within which
nanotechnology concepts would be encountered.
Barab and Dede [15] claim that games, particularly immersive games, are
increasingly being used in science to support learning by situating the learning
within authentic inquiry-based activity. These games are “narratively driven, expe-
rientially immersive, and multi-media rich” (p. 1). As a result, research in the area
is concerned with investigating the impact on learning, the underlying theory of
game-based learning, and the design and implementation in the field. As a virtual
reality game, NanoCity aimed to provide a compelling narrative around science
inquiry and use high quality multimedia elements to enhance the experience of
immersion within this narrative. What Barab et al. [12] would refer to as “affording
a type of narrative transactivity” (p. 235). This transactivity situates a person through
roles in an ideological dilemma-based story that gives them agency through deci-
sions that have consequences and attached accountability.
15 NanoCity: An Immersive Game to Transform Student Perceptions of Science 263
Furthermore, Barab et al. [16] argued that students were better able to transfer
their learning to another task due to the transformational experience of their
immersive game where students were active within the context rather than the
typical “passive receiver” (p. 316). The user became a scientist rather than a science
student and thus they used and valued science content. They explain that this is due
to the complex framing of the content and context allowing the user to own the
content rather than being owned by the teacher or the instructional materials.
15.3 The Design of NanoCity
The key to designing transformational computer-based games is to engage the
student in a way that will foreground what is to be learned. All games aim to engage
the player to the extent that they are motivated to keep playing; however, e ducational
games add the need to engage with the content and transformational games add the
need for the player’s way of thinking or acting to be changed through the process.
Barab et al. [12] explain that such games are designed to engage students at three
levels: with the narratives and social dilemmas; with the consequences of their
choices; and through their roles of “author, performer, and audience” (p. 261). The
player is an author in acting and making decisions within the situation, a performer
in experiencing the consequences, then part of the audience in reflecting on the
outcomes, and this then loops back to being in the author role to act on the basis of
this feedback. A study by Futurelab [17] found that the features of a computer game
seen to be of most importance to students were: rules; role; reward; social aspects;
challenge; creativity; and fantasy/narrative (p. 6). For the teachers, the important
features were: active learning, transfer, goal, social aspects, relevance interest, rules
and safety. To some extent, this mirrors the need for engagement through person and
context for the students and content and context for the teachers.
NanoCity is set in a city that has reached an all-time low in terms of living
standards. The city has been quarantined from the rest of the country, and the city
leaders have been given the ultimatum: sort out your problems, or the quarantine
will become permanent. The player has been brought in by the Future Protection
Initiative to lead research into nanotechnology. The player will be given the choice
of working directly in two nanotechnology research projects (mini-games) and will
also be responsible for deciding how research funding (points achieved in
m ini-games) is allotted to other, more general nanotechnology research areas. The
general research areas are categorised as medical, security, infrastructure and
environmental. The players’ performance in their specific research project will
determine how much funding is received. The allotment of research funding deter-
mines the overall health of the city, and the final fate of the city is determined by the
city health once the player has completed all available research projects.
The NanoCity game was developed using the Unity3D game engine. The main
reason for the choice was that Unity3D supports a variety of platforms to deliver the
game. This is important for games to be used in schools where a variety of hardware
264 K. J. Murcia et al.
and software can be expected. So to keep the game adequately platform agnostic,
browser-based distribution from server-based hosting was used. As a result, school
students were able to access the game using a web browser, with the Unity plugin. The
game was developed over a period of a year and involved two teams of developers that
included tertiary students, staff and contractors. It is not the purpose of this chapter to
discuss the technical construction of the game; rather firstly the design features are
presented and then the results of implementing the game with school students.
15.3.1 Gameflow and Game Elements
The prototype of NanoCity had two main components or activity sections after some
introductory screens and activities. These were accessed through a “Map” and connected
through an “Office”. A representation of the flow of the game is given in Fig. 15.1.
The player is given the opportunity to personalize their character in an attempt to
counteract the stereotype that scientists are predominantly male, elderly and wear
laboratory coats. Both a male and a female character are supplied; the models had
to appear to be in their early twenties; and the models’ clothing had to appear mod-
ern. The player is asked to choose a character name, which they are addressed
Fig. 15.1 The gameflow for NanoCity
15 NanoCity: An Immersive Game to Transform Student Perceptions of Science 265
throughout the game’s dialogue, giving the player a sense of immersion and agency
within the game. In addition, this allowed the game’s progress to be saved and
rejoined at a later time. The remainder of the introduction was designed to give the
player an opportunity to interact with the game through conversations with other
characters where they are able to select from two or more of responses to questions
in the game. Each response was written to convey a different tone, such as polite-
ness or sarcasm. By allowing this selection, the player was given a greater sense of
agency, letting them form the personality of the character.
15.3.2 Personal Digital Assistant (PDA)
During the gameplay of NanoCity, the player was provided with a supplementary
set of screens that supplied information about nanotechnology and other aspects of
the game environment. This information was presented within the game as an older
style PDA (Personal Digital Assistant) resembling a tablet whose features and their
purposes are now explained.
15.3.2.1 Information Log
An information log, containing keywords and definitions for nanotechnology con-
cepts, was included to help provide the player with a vocabulary for discussing
nanotechnology. The game was designed so that new terms are added to the infor-
mation log as the player encounters new nanotechnology concepts throughout the
gameplay. This allowed the player to review the list of terms, increasing the likeli-
hood of the player retaining these definitions.
15.3.2.2 Objectives
During initial play testing, it was found that students were quite often unsure as to
how to proceed in the game. To help with this, an objectives list was added to the
PDA. The purpose of the objectives list was to display clear objectives for the player
to follow and to tick them off when they are completed. Further play testing indi-
cated that the inclusion of this feature resulted in much more focussed gameplay.
15.3.2.3 B iography Log
In order to give a sense of being a realistic world with actual residents, a biography
log that contained a description and picture of each character that the player meets
was included. This allowed the player greater immersion into the game.
266 K. J. Murcia et al.
15.3.2.4 Map
Similar to the biography log, a map was included to enhance immersion in the
game and to give the player a sense of place. Through the map screen, the player
was required to move to a transportation point and then select a location to which
to travel.
15.3.2.5 C ity Status
A central theme was that scientific applications have real-world consequences. To
demonstrate this, the city status functionality was added. Through the PDA, the
player was required to allocate research funds to four different aspects of the well-
being of the city. The amount of funds received by the player was determined by
their performance in the research mini-games. The allocation of funds, in turn,
determined how the non-player characters in the plaza respond to the player during
conversations. From these relationships between game play and resource allocation,
the player could infer how a society could be affected if different aspects of that
society were nurtured or neglected.
15.3.3 The Plaza
The plaza was designed as the focal point that the player returned to after complet-
ing a research mission or resuming a saved game. On the initial visit, a tutorial was
implemented to teach the games’ controls to the player. As the game progresses, the
tutorial screen was displayed whenever new gameplay concepts requiring new
player actions are introduced. The plaza was populated with non-player characters
(NPCs) that the player could interact with for the following purposes:
• To assist the player in discovering their goals throughout the game
• To provide the player with feedback about different aspects of the city (e.g. med-
ical, security, infrastructure, or environmental) in relation to the funding choices
the player makes in the city status screen
• To allow the player to gauge the current mood of the city and understand how
advances in nanotechnology affect the real world
To encourage discussion between students after gameplay, the dialogue game
mechanics was also designed to ensure that all possible variations in dialogue
couldn’t be accessed in a single play-through. In addition, visual cues regarding the
success of the player’s resource allocation, such as lighting and the colour of the
sky, was made visible in the plaza. Milestones also depicted by events such as fire-
works appearing on the successful completion of all the mini-games, in order to
heighten immersion in the game and give the player a sense of their progress.
15 NanoCity: An Immersive Game to Transform Student Perceptions of Science 267
15.3.4 Nanotechnology Research Missions
To provide the player with specific examples of nanotechnology applications, nano-
technology research missions, or mini-games, were provided as gameplay elements.
These games all followed a similar format in order to ensure that players easily
understood the gameplay and to allow rapid development of new research modules
should the opportunity for game expansion become available.
1. Meet the characters
Each mini-game was launched from a new location that reflected the area
being researched. For example, the cancer treatment missions were launched
from a hospital, and the water filtration missions were launched from an indus-
trial water treatment complex. This helped to give a sense of place, grounding the
abstract concepts and reminding the player that this research took place in the
real world. Also, upon entering the research location, the player was required to
meet and talk with NPCs to provide a dialogue concerning current attitudes
towards the use of nanotechnology in the relevant field of research.
2. Receive a description of the research background and objectives
Before the player began a research mini-game, an NPC provided instructions
for how to play and complete the game. This instruction also allowed the intro-
duction of nanotechnology-related terms and concepts that were then added to
the information log.
3 . Play the research mini-game
The mini-games were designed to implicitly introduce nanotechnology con-
cepts, such as scale and particle interaction, in addition to raising awareness of
nanotechnology interactions. Each mini-game had a threshold score that the
player must pass to continue the game. If they did not meet this threshold, they
must repeat the mini-game. This enforced repetition was introduced to ensure
students read and comprehend the gameplay instructions.
4. Answer quiz questions
To ensure players retained some knowledge of the mini-game, they answered
questions from an NPC after completing a mini-game. These questions were
presented as multiple-choice, and they allowed the player the opportunity to pro-
cess the new information they had received from the mini-game and the prior
dialogue. If the player answered a question incorrectly, the NPC provided them
with the correct answer.
5 . Return to the plaza
After completing the questionnaire, the player was required to return to the
plaza and invest the funds they received, based on their combined performance
in the mini-game and the quiz. This requirement to keep returning to the plaza
was intentionally included to ensure the players had the opportunity for ongoing
dialogue with the plaza NPCs, allowing them to gauge the effects their research
was having on the city.
268 K. J. Murcia et al.
Four research missions were developed for each research area, all built on the
previous mission. This design allowed for a layered approach to introducing nano-
technology concepts, as well as providing an ongoing narrative between missions in
an attempt to hold the player’s attention between play sessions.
15.4 Evaluation of Implementation of NanoCity
A study was conducted to evaluate the implementation of NanoCity and determine
the impact of a game play experience on secondary school students’ understanding
of nanotechnology and their opinions of the technology as a human endeavour. The
specific research questions guiding the implementation of the game were:
• What impact did playing NanoCity have on students’ understanding and opinions
of nanotechnology?
• What impact did playing NanoCity have on students’ disposition to consider a
career as a nanoscientist?
A secondary aim was to observe the students’ level of immersion and engagement
with the experience and to obtain feedback on the game’s design.
There were 87 lower secondary students (ages 12–13 years), 40 males and 47
females, participating in the play testing, from three metropolitan Western Australian
independent schools: one co-educational and two single-gender schools. The schools
were selected because they had expressed interest in nanotechnology education
initiatives. A focus group of 5 students randomly selected from each class were inter-
viewed after the game play to obtain feedback on the game concept and its impact on
their understanding of nanotechnology and interest level in being a future non-scien-
tist. A semi-structured interview was also conducted with the three participating
teachers to obtain their perspective on the students’ level of engagement during the
play testing. Play testing of the game, on average, required 1 h of class time.
15.4.1 S urvey of Students
The aim of the student questionnaires (see Appendix 15.1) administered pre- and
post-gameplay was to determine the impact of the game play experience on stu-
dents’ understanding of nanotechnology and their opinions of the technology as a
human endeavour. The pre-gameplay survey was facilitated by the teacher during a
normal science lesson. There had been no previous discussion or explicit teaching
on nanotechnology with these students in these classes. The questionnaire contained
three types of questions. Firstly, there were three open-response questions:
• Write what you know about nanotechnology?
• Describe examples of nanotechnology used in everyday life.
• What sort of jobs or tasks do you think a nanoscientist would do when they are
working?
15 NanoCity: An Immersive Game to Transform Student Perceptions of Science 269
Secondly, students were asked to mark an “X” somewhere along a given line to
show how interested they were in a career as a Nanoscientist. This line represented
a linear scale; 0 = no way, 1 = maybe, 10 = definitely.
Finally, there were 14 items each in the form of a 5-point Likert response from
strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). These items were combined to create an
“Attitudes” scale adapted from the Norwegian Relevance of Science Education
Project (ROSE) questionnaire subscale titled “My opinions about science and tech-
nology” ([18], April; [19]). In the current study, the focus of the items was placed
on nanotechnology by substituting the words science and technology. An unsure
option was included (3) to capture ambivalent attitudes. The higher the total score
(sum of all items), the more positive the opinion of nanotechnology.
15.4.2 P ost-gameplay Interviews and Focus Group Discussions
Semi-structured focus group discussions following gameplay testing of NanoCity
were conducted on-site with students from each participating school. Three focus
groups consisting of 5 students, nominated by their classroom teacher, were inter-
viewed. These 30 min interviews were used to elicit further information about the
players’ experiences of the game, their understanding of the science addressed by
the game and their suggestions for design enhancements, especially in relation to
the game’s characters, virtual worlds, dilemmas and story lines.
As well as watching their students’ engagement with the game, the participating
classroom teachers were also invited to play NanoCity. Following the play testing regime,
these teachers were interviewed to seek their perspectives on student engagement, learn-
ing outcomes and principles that should be adopted to design effective education game
environments and supporting teaching and learning packages. The result of which was
the development of a NanoCity teaching and learning package to support the integration
of NanoCity in the classroom. The discussion of this is beyond the scope of this paper.
15.5 Results from Analysis of Data
The results are discussed in terms of observations of the intervention, analysis of the
student surveys data and interviews with selected participants.
15.5.1 Observations of the Intervention
Without exception, all students were highly engaged in playing NanoCity, as
v erified by both the researchers running the gameplay testing, and the participating
classroom teachers. Gender did not appear to affect the level of engagement as male
and female students were equally immersed in the learning experience.
270 K. J. Murcia et al.
The teacher from the coeducational school commented:
“Didn’t hear a peep from them for at least an hour so they were engrossed in it…they were
definitely engaged and definitely their attention was fixed on it. They didn’t break away
from their attention for at least an hour or until they’d sort of finished the game.”
The teacher from the boys school commented:
“They were very engaged. If they’re not engaged they’ll be talking to each other or bashing
each other’s keyboards or something, so they were well and truly engaged. We had to stop
them at the end because we were running out of time. They were definitely hooked in and
playing.”
The teacher from the girls school commented:
“I thought they were really engaged. It was really quiet, they were all playing the game…
they were really engaged and didn’t want to finish, and several of them I know went home
and played it again.” This teacher later commented, “If I’d given them a 20 page booklet to
go home and read on nanotechnology they would have said, I’m too busy; I’ve got all this
homework, or I’ve got a test tomorrow; I won’t have time. But it was interesting just off
their own backs the number that went home and played it again.”
15.5.2 S tudent Surveys
Students were surveyed before and after the intervention using paper-based
questionnaires.
15.5.2.1 Analysis of Closed-Response Items
Initially, basic descriptive statistics were generated for the 14 items for both sur-
veys. Then effect sizes were calculated to compare the means for each item between
the two surveys. There were effect sizes above 0.5 SD for four items: Nanotechnology
will help cure diseases, e.g. cancer; Nanotechnology is important for society;
Nanotechnology makes our lives healthier, easier and more comfortable; and
Nanotechnology will help eradicate poverty and famine in the world. It is perhaps
not surprising that the greatest effect size was recorded for the item about curing
cancer, as this was part of the main content of the game.
The Nanotechnology Attitude scale was constructed using all 14 items leading to
Cronbach’s Alpha reliability coefficients of 0.63 (Pre-intervention) and 0.79 (Post-
intervention). If Item 10 was removed, then these coefficients improved to 0.66 and
0.79, respectively, and thus all the items were maintained. However, Factor Analysis
showed that Items 10, 11 and 12 contributed little to the scale. All three tend to be
ideological judgements, and Item 11 was a combination of “statement” and “opin-
ion”. Descriptive statistics are summarised in Table 15.1 for the scale scores for
both surveys. The Nanotechnology Attitude scale had an increase in mean from 44.2
to 48.2 with only one student being excluded due to missing data. This gave an
15 NanoCity: An Immersive Game to Transform Student Perceptions of Science 271
Table 15.1 A summary of descriptive statistics and effect size for the Nanotechnology Attitude
scale
Questionnaire document Scale mean SD N (F, M) Effect size
Pre 44.2 10.8 87 (47, 40)
Post 48.2 12.0 86 (47, 39) 0.37
Table 15.2 A summary of descriptive statistics and effect size for the Nanotechnology Interest
scale and gaming hours
N Min Max Mean SD Effect size
Nanoscientist interest (pre) 67 0 8 2.79 1.98
Nanoscientist interest (post) 82 0 9 4.22 2.13 0.72
Gaming hours (pre) 68 0 3 0.93 0.97
effect size of only 0.37. However, a t-test showed significant difference between the
means (t = 2.5, p < 0.05). A comparison between the means for the two genders
showed no significant difference for either survey.
There were three other closed-response items: the Nanoscientist interest scale on
each survey (11 score points) and the time playing computer games on the
pre-intervention survey (<1, 1 to 5, 6 to 10, or >10 h/week: coded 0 to 3). Descriptive
statistics are summarised in Table 15.2 for the three sets of scores. The Nanoscientist
Interest scale showed a significant increase in mean from pre to post (t = 5.3,
p < 0.0001) with an effect size of 0.72. There was only a significant difference in
means for the two genders for the pre-intervention questionnaire although there
were 20 students who did not complete the open-ended questions in this
q uestionnaire, 18 were males. The gaming hours per week had a mean of 0.93 that
was close to the “1 to 5” hours per week option. About 40% of the valid responses
indicated less than 1 h a week and 38% indicate “1 to 5” hours per week. There was
a significant difference between the mean for the females and males (t = 4.8,
p < 001) with an effect size of 0.82 in favour of the males. That boys would indicate
more time playing computer games is perhaps not surprising.
15.5.2.2 A nalysis of Open-Response Items
The pre-intervention questionnaire included six open-ended questions about nano-
technology and computer gaming, and the post-intervention questionnaire included
four open-ended questions about the students’ experience of playing the NanoCity
game and a common question about the tasks and jobs nanoscientists do. The
responses to these questions were coded around common themes for each.
Responses to the three questions in the pre-intervention survey about their
knowledge about nanotechnology indicated very limited knowledge. When asked to
write what they knew about nanotechnology, 33 referred to small size, 23 that it was
to do with technology and 19 did not know anything. When asked for an example of
nanotechnology, 26 could not provide one and only 8 referred to use in medicine.
272 K. J. Murcia et al.
Asked what jobs and tasks nanoscientist do, 19 did not know with another 11
referred to producing or making things. In the post-intervention survey, only 2 indi-
cated that they did not know and 52 referred to research and development in science,
16 finding cures and 14 conducting medical procedures. These responses were con-
sistent with the content of the NanoCity game and clearly indicated that the students
had gained knowledge from the experience.
Responses in the pre-intervention survey about their playing of computer games
indicated a range of behaviours. In total 29 indicated playing games on mobile devices,
28 on dedicated games consoles and 11 online. About 51% indicated playing games at
school and 52% agreed that it could help their learning. In total, 43 students indicated
that games helped them learn because they were more interesting and fun, 20 believed
that games motivated them and 18 that they helped understanding and memory.
Responses in the post-intervention survey about their experience of the game
were generally positive. Overall, 71% indicated that they enjoyed playing the game
with only 4% not. While 34 thought some aspects were educational and added to
their understanding, and 45 referred to learning about how nanotechnology can be
used to cure diseases; however, 11 found it too repetitive. While this result is not
surprising given the content of the game it was significant that 38 indicated that they
now felt that they had a better idea of how nanotechnology could be applied to liv-
ing and 19 could now define the concept. Only three students indicated not learning
anything. When asked to describe an example of nanotechnology related to the
game, not surprisingly 43 referred to observing and interacting with small particles
and 37 referred to treatment for cancer.
15.5.3 I nterviews with Participants
There were a number of relevant themes that emerged from an analysis of the data
from the interviews.
15.5.3.1 A ppreciation for Learning in the Virtual World
Students recognised and appreciated the nature of immersive virtual reality learning
when comparing it to their more traditional classroom learning experiences. For
example, a student from the co-educational school commented:
“I like the way they kind of give the information, it’s not bombarding you with crazy infor-
mation that you don’t understand. It’s easy to understand and you can apply it and use it in
your game and learn as you go along while you’re playing.”
Students from the girls school further explained:
“I don’t like having loads of facts thrown at me otherwise I just get confused. Yeah, it just
goes in one ear and out the other. I don’t want to listen about this, this is so boring, I don’t
really care.”
15 NanoCity: An Immersive Game to Transform Student Perceptions of Science 273
Students from the boys school stated:
“It was really virtual, with people’s opinions changed depending on what you did. It’s really
effective way to run nanotechnology, with games and everything. Yeah, it was pretty good.
I feel like I could control the play, what was said, like with the options and conversations
you choose.”
15.5.3.2 S cience as a Human Endeavour
The gameplay experience enabled students to see that science was a part of everyday
life and was conducted by real people. Students from the girls school commented:
“Now it (NanoCity) makes life and sciences come together because you’re the scientist
now; instead of being just someone, with science telling you what to do. The scientist that
was our character needed things explained to them as well, so it kind of made you under-
stand that they need stuff explained as well. They’re just (pause) don’t know everything.
Science is about finding out something and trying to make a difference.”
15.5.3.3 L earning Nanotechnology Concepts
Students believed they had learnt nanotechnology concepts and some applications
as an outcome of playing NanoCity.
Students from the co-educational school participating in the focus group interview
commented:
“I didn’t know anything about nanotechnology, now I know a lot more about it just from
that little bit. In the questions after the simulations, I did know a lot of the answers. I learnt
that a nanometre is a billionth of a metre, and I also just learnt sorts of way nanotechnology
is actually used and what it can actually do.”
“Yeah and it was good that at the end you had the questions to answer. It backed up and you
had to re-think about it, so it stuck in your mind a bit more.”
A student from the girls school stated:
“I didn’t know anything about nanotechnology before but I learnt a lot. It’s really interesting
and good what they’re doing with it.”
15.5.3.4 I ncreasing Interest
It was evident that students’ interest in nanotechnology had been heightened by the
gameplay experience. For example, students from the co-educational school
explained:
“I’m more interested in nanotechnology than before; before I just thought it was like a
bunch of small robots.”
“The first time we did the questionnaire, it said how interested are you? And I was, like, no
way, I’m not interested, it sounds kind of boring, but now I think it’s cool.”
274 K. J. Murcia et al.
“I kind of thought it was interesting. I knew sort of the good things it could become but it’s
a lot more interesting now that we put them into practice.”
A student from the girls school explained how her family became interested in
n anotechnology as a result of her playing NanoCity at home. She explained:
“I played it at home and then showed my brother…so I kind of explained it. My mum and
dad didn’t really know what nanotechnology was.”
Students also commented being more prepared to learn about nanotechnology in the
future. For example, from the co-educational school students, stated:
“If we were talking about it in science then I’d pay a bit more attention, because I know a
bit of background now.”
“I think the game is kind of a taster sort of thing as to what nanotechnology really is and
then you can go into a nano-scientist and research a lot more about nanotechnology and see
what you can do with it. So it broadened the horizons of what you can do with these
nanotechnologies.”
15.6 Conclusion
The design of NanoCity included an intentional connection between STEM curricu-
lum content and game playing in order to engage digitally aware students with nan-
otechnology. Game play testing and surveys demonstrated the significant impact of
this custom-designed transformational video game, on secondary students’ under-
standing and opinions of nanotechnology. Without exception, all students were
highly engaged when playing NanoCity.
Gameplay evoked a statistically significant increase in positivity to nanotechnol-
ogy as measured by the attitude scale. A comparison between the means for the two
genders showed no significant difference, despite boys indicating more time playing
computer games than the girls. Student responses to open survey questions clearly
indicated that the students had gained knowledge from the experience; specifically,
they had a better idea of how nanotechnology could be applied in society and could
define the concept.
Importantly, the Nanoscientist Interest scale showed a significant increase in
mean from pre to post gameplay. The students were more likely to consider a future
career as a nanoscientist as a result of playing NanoCity. This would suggest that
serious gaming could assist in re-engaging students with STEM fields and could
make a valuable contribution to preparing a skilled and dynamic future workforce.
Acknowledgments The NanoCity research and development project was supported with funding
from the Australian Department of Industry, Innovation and Science.
15 NanoCity: An Immersive Game to Transform Student Perceptions of Science 275
Appendix 15.1: Questionnaire Likert Scale
My Opinions about Nanotechnology:
Please circle one number to show your opinion on each item in the table below.
Item Strongly Disagree 2 Unsure 3 Agree 4 Strongly
disagree 1 2 3 4 agree 5
1. Nanotechnology is important 1 2 3 4 5
for society 1 2 3 4 5
1 5
2. Nanotechnology will help cure 2 3 4
diseases, e.g. cancer 1 5
2 3 4
3. Thanks to nanotechnology 1 2 3 4 5
there will be greater 1 5
opportunities for future 2 3 4
generations 1 5
2 3 4
4. Nanotechnology makes our 1 2 3 4 5
lives healthier, easier and 1 5
more comfortable 2 3 4
1 5
5. Nanotechnologies will make 2 3 4
work more interesting 1 5
2 3 4
6. The benefits of nanotechnology 1 2 3 4 5
are greater than the harmful 1 2 3 4 5
effects it could have 1 5
7. Nanotechnology will help
eradicate poverty and famine
in the world
8. Nanotechnology is the cause of
some environmental problems
9. A country needs
nanotechnology to become
developed
10. Nanotechnology benefits
mainly the developed
countries
11. Scientists follow the scientific
method which leads them to
correct answers
12. We should trust what
scientists say
13. Scientists are neutral and
objective
14. Scientific theories develop
and change all the time
276 K. J. Murcia et al.
References
1. PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC). (2015). A Smart Move: Future-proofing Australia’s
w orkforce by growing skills in STEM. Canberra: PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC). Retrieved
from http://www.pwc.com.au/pdf/a-smart-move-pwc-stem-report-april-2015.pdf.
2. Office of the Chief Scientist. (2014). Science, technology, engineering and mathematics:
Australia’s future. Canberra: Australian Government.
3. Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: Critical perspectives on a theory in progress.
San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
4. Barab, S. A., Gresalfi, M. S., & Ingram-Goble, A. (2010). Transformational play: Using games
to position person, content, and context. Educational Researcher, 39(7), 525–536.
5. Guillén-Nieto, V., & Aleson-Carbonell, M. (2012). Serious games and learning effectiveness:
The case of It’s a deal! Computers & Education, 58, 435–448.
6. Panoutsopoulos, H., Sampson, D., & Mikropoulos, A. (2014). Digital games as tools for
designing and implementing innovative pedagogical approaches: A review of literature. In
M. Gosper & D. Ifenthaler (Eds.), Models for the 21st century. Using learning technologies in
higher education (pp. 279–293). New York: Springer. Chapter 14.
7. de Freitas, S. (2006). Learning in immersive worlds. A review of game-based learning.
Prepared for the JISC e-learning programme. Retrieved 6/5/2012, from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/
media/documents/programmes/elearninginnovation/gamingreport_v3.pdf.
8. Barab, S., Pettyjohn, P., Gresalfi, M., Volk, C., & Solomou, M. (2012). Game-based curricu-
lum and transformational play: Designing to meaningfully positioning person, content, and
context. Computers & Education, 58, 518–533.
9. Wouters, P., van der Spek, E. D., & van Oostendorp, H. (2011). Measuring learning in seri-
ous games: A case study with structural assessment. Educational Technology Research and
Development, 59, 741–763.
1 0. Dicheva, D., Dichev, C., Agre, G., & Angelova, G. (2015). Gamification in education: A sys-
tematic mapping study. Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 75–88.
1 1. Connolly, T. M., Boyle, E. A., MacArthur, E., Hainey, T., & Boyle, J. M. (2012). A systematic
literature review of empirical evidence on computer games and serious games. Computers &
Education, 59, 661–686.
12. Barab, S. A., Dodge, T., Ingram-Goble, A., Pettyjohn, P., Peppler, K., Volk, C., et al. (2010).
Pedagogical dramas and transformational play: Narratively rich games for learning. Mind,
Culture, and Activity, 17, 235–264.
1 3. Svingby, G., & Nilsson, E. M. (2011). Research review: Empirical studies on computer game
play in science education. In P. Felicia (Ed.), Handbook of research on improving learning and
motivation through educational games: Multidisciplinary approaches (pp. 1–28). Hershey,
PA: IGI Global.
14. Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning.
Educational Researcher, 18(1), 32–42.
15. Barab, S., & Dede, C. (2007). Games and immersive participatory simulations for science educa-
tion: An emerging type of curricula. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 1–3.
1 6. Barab, S. A., Scott, B., Siyahhan, S., Goldstone, R., Ingram-Goble, A., Zuiker, S. J., et al.
(2009). Transformational play as a curricular scaffold: Using videogames to support science
education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 18, 305–320.
1 7. Kirkland, K., Ulicsak, M., & Harlington, M. (2010). Games-based learning experiences:
Testing the principles with teachers and students. London, UK: Futurelab. Retrieved May 9,
2012, from http://futurelab.org.uk/projects/games-and-learning.
18. Sjoberg, S. (2004, April). Science education: The voice of the learners. Paper presented at the
conference on Increasing Human Resources for Science and Technology, Brussels, Belgium.
Retrieved from http://roseproject.no/network/countries/norway/eng/nor-sjoberg-eu2004.pdf.
1 9. Sjøberg, S., & Schreiner, C. (2004). Rose: The relevance of science education. Retrieved
December 7, 2013, from http://roseproject.no/key-documents/key-docs/master-rose-q.doc.
Chapter 16
Digital Smart Citizenship Competence
Development with a Cyber-Physical Learning
Approach Supported by Internet of Things
Technologies
Yacine Atif, Stylianos Sergis, and Demetrios Sampson
Abstract The concept of Smart Cities is an emerging social and technology inno-
vation, attracting large public and private investments at a global scale, arguing for
the effective exploitation of digital technologies to drive quality of living and sus-
tainable growth. However, these investments mainly focus in smart technical infra-
structure, and they have yet to be systematically complemented with efforts to
prepare the human capital of future smart cities in terms of core competences
anticipated for exploiting their potential. In this context, this chapter introduces
“cyber-physical learning” as a generic overarching model to cultivate Digital
Smart Citizenship competence. The proposed approach exploits the potential of
Internet of Things technologies to create authentic blended and augmented learn-
ing experiences. Proof-of-concept case studies of the proposed cyber-physical
learning approach, to develop smart household energy management competences,
are presented and discussed as a field of application. Finally, the findings of a sur-
vey with university students for eliciting their attitudes to engage with cyber-phys-
ical learning environments for enhancing their digital smart citizenship
competences are reported.
Y. Atif (*) 277
Department of Information Technology, School of Informatics,
University of Skövde, Skövde, Sweden
e-mail: [email protected]
S. Sergis
Department of Digital Systems, University of Piraeus, Piraeus, Greece
D. Sampson
Department of Digital Systems, University of Piraeus, Piraeus, Greece
School of Education, Curtin University, Bentley, WA, Australia
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]
© Springer International Publishing AG 2018
D. Sampson et al. (eds.), Digital Technologies: Sustainable Innovations for
Improving Teaching and Learning, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73417-0_16
278 Y. Atif et al.
16.1 I ntroduction
Increasingly, cities are planning the transition into becoming “smart cities,” where
effective use of digital technologies plays an important role into engaging more
actively with citizens and be more reflective to their needs [1]. Subsequently, smart
cities are emerging as a global need induced by the challenge that more than 54% of
the global population now resides within cities, with an estimation that this ratio will
further increase to 66% by 2050 [2]. With these prospects, city leaders and administra-
tors face complex challenges to adopt and promote new social and technical innova-
tions for improving citizens’ quality of living as well as pursuing sustainable growth.
The effectiveness of such innovations rely on the active engagement of citizens and
their capacity to gradually develop appropriate smart citizenship competences [3].
Thus, smart cities plans can benefit from incorporating educational initiatives to
ascertain such digital smart citizenship competences. Broadly stated, these compe-
tences go beyond conventional digital literacy, leveraging the affordances of smart
technologies for empowering smart citizenship [4]. Such educational programs are
expected to facilitate learning experiences embedded within daily routine interactions
with smart environments at home, the workplace, or in public spaces [5].
Internet of Things (IoT) is one of these technologies that are expected to incite
citizenship attitude changes across a range of Smart City functions, being one of the
pillar digital technologies that Smart Cities are built on [6–8]. As a result, IoT learn-
ing environments are currently investigating in the context of Smart City learning.
In this context, this chapter discusses the emerging concept of Smart Citizenship
and the need for educational initiatives for developing Digital Smart Citizenship
competences and proposes a cyber-physical learning environment for supporting
digital smart citizenship education. The remaining sections of this chapter are orga-
nized as follows. First, we discuss the concepts of smart cities and digital smart citi-
zenship competences and we present existing approaches for smart citizenship
learning. Then, we introduce our proposed Cyber-Physical Learning (CPL) con-
cept. Subsequently, we describe a system architecture as well as a learning-path
construction algorithm to support the integration of CPL into routine practices with
blended learning opportunities. Then, we illustrate the proposed CPL approach in
the context of smart grid that interfaces with smart-home connected appliances, and
finally, we discuss directions for future work.
16.2 Background
16.2.1 Smart Cities
Even though a unifying definition of smart cities has yet to be formulated [9], they
can be broadly described as those cities that make “use of information and commu-
nication technology to sense, analyze and integrate key information of core systems
16 Digital Smart Citizenship Competence Development with a Cyber-Physical… 279
in running cities” (IBM as cited in [9]). More specifically, smart cities use a wide
range of digital technologies [10], to improve their functions across a set of com-
monly acknowledged dimensions [11]:
• Smart Economy, which refers to ensuring financial competitiveness through
innovation, productivity, and flexibility of the workforce and the market.
• Smart People, which focuses on improving the learning dispositions and com-
petences of the human capital.
• Smart Living, which aims to improve the social and cultural cohesion of the
city, as well as enhance the quality of services provided to citizens, e.g., housing,
health, and education.
• Smart Mobility, which focuses on accessible infrastructures for transportation
and communication.
• Smart Governance, which refers at ensuring that citizens participate in the
city’s management.
• Smart Environment, which aims at achieving efficient, effective, and sustain-
able use of natural and environmental resources.
As aforementioned, smart cities are currently receiving a significant level of
attention globally, and vast investments are being allocated on researching and
implementing supporting initiatives [12]. However, these large public and private
investments on smart cities’ infrastructure to holistically blend it into the social
fabric should also focus on individual actors to educate the human capital [13, 14].
In the next section, we discuss different learning approaches that have been exploited
to cultivate such Smart Citizenship competences for future citizens of smart cities.
16.2.2 D igital Smart Citizenship Learning
Preparing future citizens and workforce of smart cities with appropriate compe-
tences is paramount for driving innovation and sustainability across the different
dimensions of such city functions [15]. The required Digital Smart Citizenship
competences can comprise diverse skillsets including digital literacy, communica-
tion, and collaboration with the Smart City fabric, creative problem solving, as well
as inquiry skills for collecting, processing, and evaluating information and data
(e.g., [12, 16, 17]).
In order to build future smart citizens’ competence profiles, research and practice
have been focusing on different learning approaches [18]. For example, Seitamaa-
Hakkarainen et al. [19] adopted a collaborative approach involving problem-solving
and design-thinking techniques. In this context, learners are engaged in a longitudi-
nal hands-on project for designing a block of apartments for the city of Helsinki,
taking into account environmental considerations and aiming to cultivate their com-
petences for smart environment [20]. They adopted a mixed learning approach,
involving inquiry-, and game-based learning. The focus of their work was to engage
280 Y. Atif et al.
learners in structured activities to develop their competences on data processing,
visualization, and sense-making for energy resource usage in smart city context.
Another body of work has focused on exploiting the potential of mobile tech-
nologies for cultivating Smart Citizenship competence. This line of work adopts the
standpoint that smart citizenship competence development should involve blended-
learning experiences, supported by mobile technologies. For example, Rehm et al.
[21] investigated such a blended-learning approach, capitalizing on ubiquitous
mobile technologies, in order to enrich the formal education process (based on cur-
ricula structure) with informal learning experiences outside the school.
The key competences that this work focused on were subject domain specific,
defined by STEM curricula. In a similar vein, Ulrich and Nedelcu [22] investigated
further mobile technologies for engaging students in a range of blended activities
within an overarching project for urban planning and environmental awareness.
Learners utilized different types of mobile technologies for engaging in data collec-
tion, analysis, presentation, and modeling tasks, in order to collaboratively build a
planning and environmental blueprint of their city. The use of mobile technologies
in the context of “blended” learning approaches was also investigated by [23]. The
standpoint of this work was that such technologies can be effectively used within an
“incidental learning” framework (relevant to “ubiquitous informal learning”) to
support the development of students’ competences on language use, social cohe-
sion, and cultural inclusion.
Finally, a more recent strand of work has begun to investigate the potential of
massive online learning environments. For example, Hudson et al. [24] exploited
the potential of Massive Open Online Courses to create a distributed learning envi-
ronment and community. Capitalizing on this community, they engaged participants
in collaborative activities of co-defining challenges related to smart city functioning
and proposing solutions to overcome them. The target competences for this work
were collaborative problem-solving as well as awareness of smart cities and their
challenges.
All the aforementioned examples for existing approaches for cultivating digital
smart citizenship competences share the characteristic that they are largely linked to
a structured curriculum, often also contained within a restricting physical setting
(e.g., a classroom). In this way, they do not fully engage the future citizens in
authentic learning experiences that would immerse them in real-life scenarios of
ubiquitous use of ICT, such as those envisaged in the context of smart cities.
Therefore, a different strand of approaches in smart citizenship competence
development have placed attention on the development of innovative and more
ubiquitous environments for learning. A future education has been envisioned in
[25], which emphasizes the idea of “smart citizens.” IBM’s Smarter Education [26]
program builds on the same principles, but is more oriented towards using emerging
technologies (such as IoT) for real-time data collection and use in the educational
continuum. This trend is aligned with IBM’s global vision that future education is
driven by ubiquitous platforms, which monitor learners’ interactions with smart
physical and digital objects. In a similar vein, Microsoft is investigating how gov-
ernmental and civil organizations can collaborate with local smart city initiatives to
16 Digital Smart Citizenship Competence Development with a Cyber-Physical… 281
build competences of “smart citizens” [27]. Such competences include technical
data skills facilitated by computational urbanism such as “smart homes” and partici-
pation in “civic coding” on behalf of the city. Microsoft CityNext initiative on edu-
cation connects “cloud, big data, mobile and social” technology trends to the smart
city and to education [28]. A similar approach is adopted by different research and
innovation projects globally, such as the “Smart People for Smart Cities!” [29],
which aims to bridge academic curricula with autonomous informal hands-on activ-
ities for cultivating smart-city data literacy competences.
Other commercial digital technologies companies, such as Cisco and Intel, have
also launched projects promoting their smart city products, either collaborating with
smart city development projects (such as Songdo in South Korea, PlanIT Valley in
Portugal, and Masdar in Abu Dhabi) or simply for “upgrading” existing infrastruc-
ture [30] (such as Stockholm, Helsinki, Amsterdam, Seattle, and Singapore). To
achieve these urbanization developments, an efficient cooperation between inhabit-
ants, industry, and technology players is expected, prompting shifts in learning pro-
cesses which evolved outside traditional classrooms towards data-intensive
approaches. These processes are transforming tangible interfaces into learning envi-
ronments that can foster real-time feedback on how they should be effectively used
and also deliver personalized educational experiences [31].
In this context, the main standpoint of this chapter is that conventional educa-
tional approaches may not be appropriate for developing Digital Smart Citizenship
competences. Our proposed approach is explicitly built on situated-learning para-
digms that utilize emerging smart technologies (e.g., IoT technologies) to learn with
and from smart cities’ technical fabric. Thus, this chapter describes the concept of
cyber-physical learning, as a strand of situated learning that comprises actors from
physical smart-city elements arranged as a social Web of things, where IoT tech-
nologies form the backbone platform [32].
16.2.3 T he Concept of Cyber-Physical Learning (CPL)
Cyber-physical learning (CPL) adopts a situated-learning approach [33] enhanced
with smart technologies. In particular, it capitalizes on the analysis of the interac-
tions of individual and/or groups of learners-citizens with smart physical and digital
objects, to identify gaps between the current level and the anticipated level of cer-
tain digital smart citizen competences and recommend smart-environment-aware
learning activities towards closing this gap in a consistent manner.
For a given learner digital smart competence state S, we say that CPL occurs
when a physical stimulus event Ei maximizes the probability that a learner moves its
competence state to S′. Hence, CPL is enabled by physical events paired with
competence-influence likelihood. Formally, this relationship is driven by the fol-
lowing equation:
arg max P (S → S ′|Ei ) (16.1)
i
282 Y. Atif et al.
In addition, the probability that the learner adopts the competence state S′ under
stimulus Ei is strictly greater than the probability that S changes its state indepen-
dently, namely:
P (S → S′|Ei ) > P (S → S′) (16.2)
The above dual formulation of Eqs. (16.1) and (16.2) simultaneously aims at
identifying new physical stimuli with the capacity to move the current digital smart
citizenship state to a higher level. In this cyber-physical learning environment, con-
nected devices consist of internet-enabled sensors attached to physical objects and
linked to web applications that collect and curate data. The success of this physical
and virtual convergence depends on learners’ engagement within the cyber-physical
environment through appropriate learning strategies. CPL utilizes appropriate hard-
ware, interfaces, and applications to visualize physical phenomena, in given situa-
tions and for specific domains.
For example, in the energy sustainability context, household energy data could
be seamlessly collected to reflect real-time self-assessment of energy manage-
ment, and linkup with power retailers’ programs and incentives to balance energy
load, as illustrated in Fig. 16.1. Much is being anticipated about the smart grid,
including consumers’ engagement into excess energy redistribution, as an alterna-
tive for power retailers to buy shortages from energy suppliers or to build new
power distribution infrastructures, in a scheme known as Demand-Response used
to schedule load in a way that optimizes the available capacity. However, these
adjustments in energy distribution require consumers’ education and engagement
to build this level of smart digital citizenship across a new educational continuum.
Using IoT technologies, power data is unleashed from physical home appliances
and converted into learning analytics that instill this new education process driven
by power retailers’ energy programs. Uneducated consumers reduce their engage-
ment expectation and subsequently delay sustainability shifts as, for example,
evidenced by a pilot study in UK done throughout 2014–2015 [34]. This study
investigated three clusters of households, which shared similar characteristics in
terms of energy profile. However, one of these clusters reported three times the
consumption of the other clusters. Further analysis revealed that this additional
energy consumption was related to irregular washing machine usage. IoT-induced
energy data could have identified these patterns to educate consumers on appro-
priate use of energy in cooperation with power retailers. Although it is not current
practice for the retailers to concern about incorporating “smart educational” fea-
tures in their devices, however, we can claim that in the future smart technologies
will be further exploited as part of a cyber-physical ecosystem at home, in the
workplace, and in public spaces, which facilitates the development of digital
smart citizenship competences.
The following section outlines a generic CPL supporting system architecture.
16 Digital Smart Citizenship Competence Development with a Cyber-Physical… 283
Fig. 16.1 User engagement in smart grid
16.3 C yber-Physical Learning System Architecture
In Smart City contexts, there is a proliferation of embedded IoT devices with
sensing capabilities that capture large amounts of data across different functions
of prospective smart cities. The analysis of these data can provide useful insights
on citizenship profiles and trends. For example, existing devices such as power
284 Y. Atif et al.
sensors have built-in features to capture real-time consumption data streams that
could be turned into energy behavioral patterns and profiles. Sensors accumulate
measurements of environmental variables automatically and periodically, and
actuators may set some desired usage modes automatically as well, through
embedded software or remote web applications. Hence, these devices (smart
physical objects) incorporate wireless connectivity modules allowing both collo-
cated devices and citizens (via their smartphones) to seamlessly interact with each
other. In our CPL framework, these synergies are controlled by a model library
that incrementally drives CPL continuum towards attaining the next level in the
digital smart citizenship competences.
Each instance of CPL model library is associated to one or more scenarios that
simulate the model instance and contrast against current status of digital smart citi-
zenship competences. A learning session is then engaged to close the gap. CPL
continuum resumes until citizen-learners achieve the desired level of competence.
Each actor participates in CPL continuum as a member of a social network-like
structure using a unique IoT-provided identifier to get the ability to transmit data
within that network [35]. Future Smart City functions are poised to weave human
actors into communities that integrate autonomous and proactive objects. Examples
of this perception started to emerge already in smart transportation with connected
and autonomous cars, as well as numerous energy-aware smart appliances that
report and adjust their power usage.
16.3.1 S mart-Object Virtualization
New generation IP-enabled objects are propelling IoT applications across a wide
spectrum of application domains to realize Smart City functions. Embedded
6LoWPAN Wireless sensors and actuators with IPv6 perceive surrounding environ-
ment and bring physical processes to Internet via two-way communications. A
smart object extends a physical object with four embedded or augmented capabili-
ties, namely, unique identification, processing, storage, and communication.
Figure 16.2 shows this virtualization composed of sensor/actuator modules, CPU
module, battery module, and communication module (radio). CPU provides limited
storage and processing capabilities. This module runs the device interface and con-
trols components as well as lightweight RESTful web services to interact with web
applications. REST emerged as a prominent architectural framework for IoT, allow-
ing messages exchanged by interconnected devices to flow directly over HTTP pro-
tocol. This standard approach web-enables devices with an interface that includes
analogue to digital transformers as well as data-encoding capability to render physi-
cal signals into data that can be accessed online/offline via CRUD (create, read,
update, and delete) Web service operations invoked over HTTP via REST. Time-
stamped data is stored in a lightweight SQLite database system. The web service
layer defines complex interval-based data-access operations, control activities,
event-trigger mechanisms, and QoS parameters. Physical devices are thus packaged
16 Digital Smart Citizenship Competence Development with a Cyber-Physical… 285
Fig. 16.2 Smart-object
virtualization
into services and abstracted by short (RESTful) URLs. These devices may be con-
nected directly or indirectly to IoT platform via a gateway bridge. In the latter case,
sensors and actuators communicate locally using short-range wireless protocols
such as Zigbee, Bluetooth, z-wave, etc., but use the gateway to reach Web applica-
tions. In any case though, REST web service design model provides a high-level
abstraction level to interact with physical nodes.
16.3.2 CPL Community
Figure 16.3 shows a software representation of a community structure where data is
exchanged across RESTful web services in JSON format. CPL community is built
to divide citizen-members into learning-model-driven aggregation of physical
objectives and their users. CPL interactions are triggered by model-defined rules,
which define actor interactions in the community as illustrated in Fig. 16.4.
The model library could be provided by resource manufacturers, service provid-
ers or other third-party stakeholders (e.g., a new strand of education providers). Our
community approach aims at stimulating and influencing citizens to learn new smart
citizenship competences, by progressively reflecting on the community compe-
tences as demonstrated through interactions with the smart physical objects. Sensing
devices monitor physical environments and involve citizens in social network-like
collaborations to drive them activities dictated by scenarios that are associated with
each learning model.
Each citizen-member of CPL community is described by its updatable and
extendable profile. Usage of the profiles makes it possible to personalize learning.
CPL members’ profiles are configured by learning models’ rules dynamically.
Table 16.1 provides an overview of smart-object and learner profiles within CPL
286 Y. Atif et al.
Fig. 16.3 CPL community
Fig. 16.4 CPL interactions
16 Digital Smart Citizenship Competence Development with a Cyber-Physical… 287
Table 16.1 CPL community members
Category Smart-object profile Learner profile Description
Context Description Category
Measurement Current competence
Consequence Perceived phenomenon information Current status Target competence
Data source pattern Target status CPL environments
Parameter reconfiguration Learning path
community. Events occurring from CPL members trigger competence-status gap
analysis. Progressive learning is engaged to incite competence status change based
on information related to antecedents and consequences stored in each CPL mem-
ber profile.
16.3.3 Progressive Learning
Behaviorists such as B. F. Skinner state that complex behavior is learned gradually
through the modification of simpler behaviors [36]. We define a learning path LP as
a route, across an ordered set of CPL environments Envi.
{ }
LP = Env1,,, Env2 ,,,…,,,Envp (16.3)
Each CPL environment Envi is composed of a CPL community represented by
the set of data sources DSi generated by the actors of the community, within a
model-based learning structure, as well as a set of scenarios Sj and a targeted com-
petency Cj.
Envi = DSj (16.4)
1≤ j ≤ p
Digital smart citizenship competence building proceeds progressively across
CPL environments with increasing data set sources. CPL models contributing to
digital smart citizenship involve interconnected smart objects within a progressively
scaled CPL community where resulting dynamics are dictated by learning scenarios
to assert a prescribed competency. A learning model Mi is defined as a function of a
given CPL environment Envi that is mapped to a targeted competence Cj through
learning scenarios Sij.
( )
Mi : Envi ,C j → Sij (16.5)
A model is bound to a CPL environment. In this context, model-based learning
prevents the information flow to outpace the capacity of learners in absorbing the
next digital smart citizenship competence within a given CPL environment. Hence,
learning models start with basic data sources and proceed to more complex ones
288 Y. Atif et al.
Algorithm 16.1 Progressive 1: Given data source DSi, for i = l..n
Learning Path 2: Given Model library Mk, for k = l..p
3: Env0 = ∅
4: for j = 1 to m do
5: Envj = Envj−1 ∪ DSj
6: Mj ← RetrieveModel (Envj)
7: Sj ← RetrieveScenarios (Mj)
8: for each s ∈ Sj do
9: Learn (s)
10: end for
11: Cj ←RetrieveCompetence (Mj)
12: Assert (Cj)
13: end for
along a curriculum-like structure, termed as “progressive learning path.” Algorithm
16.1 shows a process that leads to inductive learning of concepts from examples
illustrated by data flows distributed over time.
As data is collected, a visualization step comes next in the form of a graphical
presentation to provide a qualitative understanding of the competence development
process in a natural and direct way [37]. However, CPL employs multidimensional
data , which requires a visualization approach that represents each data feature
within a given CPL environment Envi, such as = ( 1, 2, … , ). This visual
form needs to be acceptable for a human being to develop persuasive insights from
streamed data [38]. Effective graphical representations of the data help citizens and
city authorities to detect and explore the expected citizenship competences, as well
as discovering the unexpected ones that root out learning deficiencies.
The learning process moves along three phases: readiness, prediction, and
engagement. Smart-city readiness phase involves processes that define smart-city
awareness dimensions and creating means to measure and analyze related data
streams. We introduce a novel disposition scale to measure competence attainment
within CPL environments and develop a diagnostic and a visualization tool to track
citizens’ maturation across CPL workflows. Our proposed model identifies five cat-
egories of competences that influence digital smart citizenship. They form the joint
set of attitudes and generic skills that dispose individuals to engage effectively with
smart-city functions. In this essence, we define digital smart citizenship compe-
tences as a scheme of attitudes, assumptions, and skills that engenders practiced
behaviors and influences the ability to adapt and respond to changing urban situa-
tions and environments. Further, we combined lifelong learning and Big Five [39]
frameworks to model these disposition as a 6-dimensional construct that comprises:
Openness to challenge (OC), Critical Thinking (CT), Resilience (R), Learning
Relationships (LR), Responsibility for Learning (RL), and Creativity (C).
Figure 16.5 shows the six dimensions of smart-city competence dispositions in a
spider chart to describe the tendencies, mind state, and preparations of each indi-
16 Digital Smart Citizenship Competence Development with a Cyber-Physical… 289
R CT R CT R CT
Mean 0 2 4 6 8 10 OC LR 0 2 4 6 8 10 OC
LR 0 2 4 6 8 10 OC LR
RL C RL C RL C
R CT R CT R CT
LR 0 2 4 6 8 10 OC LR 0 2 4 6 8 10 OC LR 0 2 4 6 8 10 OC
RL C RL C RL C
CT: Critical Thinking OC: Opennes to Challenges C: Creativity
RL: Responsibility for Learning LR: Learning Relationships R: Resilience
Fig. 16.5 Spider view of multidimensional competence-disposition metrics of digital smart
citizenship
Table 16.2 Smart Citizenship Competence-disposition scores
Dimension High scores are Low scores are
Openness to
challenge (OC) Intellectual, creative, curious, open to Skeptical, conventional,
Critical thinking new ideas and experiences practical
(CT)
Investigative, attentive reader/listeners, Inpatient with complexity,
Resilience (R) inquisitive, analytical, experimenting, confused, impression-based
evidence-based decision makers decision makers, impulsive
Learning
relationships (LR) Determined, assertive, energetic, social, Passive, inconsistent, droopy
Responsibility for competitive, achievement oriented
learning (RL)
Creativity (C) Cooperative, expressive, agreeably, Quiet, uncooperative, distant,
social oriented introvert
Dependable, autonomous, motivated, Dependent, unreliable, carless,
organized, dedicate, punctual feeble
Intellectual, imaginative, adventuresome, Mechanical, unoriginal,
curious, and original spontaneous
vidual towards smart-city practices. The diagram shown in Fig. 16.5 uses CPL
dummy data to illustrate competence-disposition levels.
A brief definition of each competence-disposition dimension is discussed in
Table 16.2, which summarizes the individual characteristics corresponding to high
and low scores along each dimension (as illustrated in Fig. 16.5). There can be
gradual variations between these extreme scores reflecting disposition levels in
competence assessment, along the proposed progressive learning-path algorithm.
Next, we elaborate further on these dispositions.
290 Y. Atif et al.
• Openness to Challenge (OC) refers to the degree to which an individual is intel-
lectual, creative, curious, and open to new ideas and experiences. Individuals
with high openness degree thrive in situations that require flexibility and learning
new skills, which make them highly adaptable to change. They also tend to seek
feedback on their performances and to build new relationships.
• Critical Thinking (CT) refers to the degree to which an individual is investiga-
tive, attentive reader/listener, inquisitive, analytical, and an evidence-based deci-
sion maker. Critical thinkers strive for understanding, keep curiosity alive,
remain patient with complexity, and are ready to invest time to overcome confu-
sion. They tend to develop their own ideas about any topic; however, they show
interest in other people ideas even if they disagree on the principle, in order to
practice fair-mindedness and avoid extreme views.
• Resilience (R) refers to the degree to which an individual is conscientious, deter-
mined, assertive, and achievement-oriented. Individuals with high resilience
degree have good social skills and thrive in social contexts. They also show high
levels of drive and energy that make them able to progress under conditions of
uncertainty, deal with the unexpected, and solve problems as they arise.
• Learning Relationships (LR) refers to the degree to which an individual is coop-
erative, expressive, agreeable, and social oriented. Individuals with high LR
degree tend to establish social networks and use them effectively to collect infor-
mation and seek feedback. They enjoy learning with and from others.
• Responsibility for Learning (RL) refers to the degree to which an individual is
dependable, autonomous, motivated, organized, and punctual. Responsible
learners tend to take part on deciding what will be learned and how. They are able
to identify their strengths and weaknesses, develop strategies for learning, man-
age time and available resources, monitor their progress, and make changes
when existing learning strategies are not working or when they are challenged.
They always try to test their new learning approaches in real-life applications.
• Creativity (C) refers to the degree to which an individual is intellectual, imagi-
native, adventuresome, curious, and original. Creative individuals tend to
regard problems and controversial issues as exciting challenges. They accept
new ideas, focus on details, and ask questions rather than only accepting what
they are told. They also tend to take risks and try new things regardless of rules
and regulations.
Smart citizenship competence-dispositions data can also be aggregated across
groups of citizens in order to provide city authorities or mentorship service provid-
ers with a view of the collective profile on all or specific competence dispositions as
illustrated in Fig. 16.6. As an illustration only using some dummy data, Fig. 16.6
indicates that almost 35–45% of citizens score good (yellow) on all dimensions,
while almost 30% of citizens score poorly on all dimensions but resilience that
comes with least poor percentage (17%). Most importantly, the illustrated figure
indicates that a same percentage of citizens (25%) score high (green) on all
dimensions, and those citizens could be the seed of influence campaign to propagate
further digital smart citizenship disposition while interacting with other citizens.
16 Digital Smart Citizenship Competence Development with a Cyber-Physical… 291
Responsibility for Learning Learning Relationships Resilience
Good 37% Excellent 26% Excellent 24% Excellent 24%
Good 43% Poor 17%
Good 59%
Poor 37% Poor 33%
Critical Thinking Openness to Challenge Creativity
Excellent 26% Excellent 22% Excellent 26%
Good 45% Good 45%
Good 47%
Poor 27% Poor 33% Poor 29%
Fig. 16.6 Dashboard view of digital smart citizenship competence dispositions, showing aggre-
gated scores across citizens
The following section presents a case study for discussing a preliminary evalua-
tion of the aforementioned CPL model for developing digital smart citizenship
competences.
16.4 C ase Study and Preliminary Evaluation
This case study focuses on energy consumers, who form an integral part of the
upcoming smart grid within foreseeable smart cities, as they engage in utilizing new
information and adopting new behaviors to better balance energy supply and
demand. However, the success of this evolution relies on the transformation of pas-
sive end users into actively engaged digital smart citizens. We propose to gauge our
proposed CPL approach into driving this transformation by integrating Internet of
Things technologies and resulting data analytics into household practices. This inte-
gration enables energy suppliers to understand and affect their customers’ behavior
in order to embrace an active role into smart grid operations. In an attempt to assist
power distributors understand and intervene into consumers’ perception of the
planned smart grid, this case study investigates the deployment of data-intensive
customer segmentation across a set of incremental levels of digital smart compe-
tences. Utilities could gain customer intimacy through influencing sustainable
behaviors via incentive rewards such as energy tariff models for raising their digital
smart competence levels.
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
Home
Explore
Demetrios Sampson,Dirk Ifenthaler,J. Michael Spector,Pedro Isaías (eds.) - Digital Technologies_ Sustainable Innovations for Improving Teaching and Learning-Springer International Publishing (201
View in Fullscreen
Demetrios Sampson,Dirk Ifenthaler,J. Michael Spector,Pedro Isaías (eds.) - Digital Technologies_ Sustainable Innovations for Improving Teaching and Learning-Springer International Publishing (201
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search