Content uploaded by Alexander Pfeiffer
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Alexander Pfeiffer on Jan 09, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
A Study of the E ects of Facility and Service Provision on
Physical Activity among Students and Sta at MCAST
Evaluating the E cacy of Di erent Manures in the Cultivation
The Case for Lead Internal Veri cation:
Housing A ordability – A Local Perspective
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in Gaming
Nick Muniz, Kishan Patel, Alexander Pfei er, Aksel Taylan, André Thomas,
Vol. 3, Issue 2, 2019
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
MCAST Journal of
Applied Research & Practice
Vol. 3, Issue 2, 2019
Description
The aim of the MCAST Journal of Applied Research & Practice is to serve as a
platform for showcasing vocational and applied research that is carried out
either by researchers and professionals working within MCAST, or with its
collaborative partners. The nature of the research and innovative practice
that is published is varied in nature to reect the various aspects of vocational
specialization that MCAST is focused upon. It is aimed at researchers, academics and
practitioners.
Editorial Board
Alex Rizzo
Christian Camilleri
Jevon Vella
Doreen Micallef
Edwin Zammit
Robert Wielgat
Rose Falzon
Acknowledgments for the Contribution of this Edition
University of Applied Sciences, Tarnów, Poland
Craneld University, United Kingdom
Danube-University Krems, Austria
Texas A&M University, United States of America
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States of America
University of Malta, Malta
Copyright
Articles: © Respective Authors
Journal Edition: © MCAST
Journal Logo Design: © Michaela Fleri Soler
Contact Details
Research & Innovation Centre, MCAST
Colleges’ Administration Wing
Students’ House, 1st Floor, Main Campus, Corradino Hill, Paola PLA9032, Malta
Tel: +356 23987180; Email: research.innovation@mcast.edu.mt
Printed by
Tik Communications., Handaq, Qormi
ISSN: 2523-0433
Published by:
The Malta College of Arts, Science and Technology
Remaining the Vocational Professional: A Grounded Theory Study
of IVET Teachers’ Continuing Professional Development
Rachel Curmi.................................................................................................................04
Mathematical Modelling of Heat Transfer Physics In Sea and Air
Deployed PV systems
Stephen Sammut, Patrick Attard...................................................................................24
A Study of the Eects of Facility and Service Provision on Physical
Activity among Students and Sta at MCAST
Renzo Kerr Cumbo, Matthew Muscat Inglott, Dorianne Caruana Bonnici .....................38
Evaluating the Ecacy of Dierent Manures in the Cultivation
of Aubergine and Green Pepper – A Case Study of the
Maltese Islands
Kimberly Terribile, Malcolm Borg, Daniel Grech, Liberato Camilleri, Ruben Sakrabani
.....................................................................................................................................61
The Impact of the Hairdressing Profession on Practising
Hairdressers: A Gozitan Perspective
Amanda Bonnici …………………………………..…………………………………...………................76
Achieving Sustainable Development Goals: the Role of the
Accountancy Profession in Malta
Dorianne Tabone Saliba……….......................................................................................90
The Case for Lead Internal Verication: An Intrinsic Element of
MCAST Quality Assurance Practices
Jacqueline Micallef Grimaud ......................................................................................117
Housing Aordability – A Local Perspective
Joan Ann Farrugia Galea..............................................................................................130
Autism Spectrum Disorder. How do Maltese Care Services Respond?
Damian Spiteri, Jessica Borg………..............................................................................160
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies
in Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test
Results
Michael Black, Lloyd Donelan, Trevor Higgins, Nikolaus Koenig, Brenton Lenzen,
Nick Muniz, Kishan Patel, Alexander Pfeier, Aksel Taylan, André Thomas,
Thomas Wernbacher..................................................................................................172
1
CONTENTS
172 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain
Technologies in Gaming Environments to Secure
Learning Outcomes and Test Results
Michael Black*1, Lloyd Donelan*1, Trevor Higgins*1, Nikolaus Koenig*2, Brenton Lenzen*1,
Nick Muniz*1, Kishan Patel*1, Alexander Pfeier*3, Aksel Taylan*1, André Thomas*1, Thomas
Wernbacher*2
*1: Texas A&M University (TAMU); LIVE lab (Learning Interactive Visualization Experience lab),
Department of Visualization, College of Architecture
*2: Danube-University Krems (DUK); Center for applied game studies, Department for Arts and
Cultural Studies
*3: Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT); The Education Arcade, MIT Comparative Media
Studies/Writing
All authors contributed equally to this article, either by research (Koenig, N.; Pfeiffer,
A; Thomas, A., Wernbacher, T.) or State-of-the-Art development of the Game Prototype
Gallery Defender, which is one of the very rst approaches of integrating Blockchain
Technology for assessment and learning-outcome related data within a serious game
(Black, M.; Donelan, L.; Higgins, T.; Lenzen, B.; Muniz, N.; Patel, K.; Taylan, A.). The names
of the contributors are therefore listed in alphabetical order. This book chapter is based
on the project “Blockchain technologies and their impact on game-based Education
and Learning Assessment” funded by a Max Kade NY Foundation grant, awarded by the
Austrian Academy of Sciences to Alexander Pfeiffer. The project-Website is including a
link to the game Gallery Defender and related material and surveys: https://alexpfeiffer.
mit.edu Contact: Alexander Pfeiffer (MIT): alex_pf@mit.edu | André Thomas (TAMU):
manink@arch.tamu.edu | Nikolaus König (DUK): Nikolaus.Koenig@donau-uni.ac.at
Abstract: This study, pursues the following three goals, namely the introduction and
discussion regarding Blockchain technologies in education in general and serious games
in particular; a denition and proposal of a category system for digital games with
the aim not only to teach but also to assess; and a description of the serious game
Gallery Defender, one of the very rst games which maps grades/certicates for the
player/learner as well as further information for the teacher on Blockchain. This game is
currently in the middle of an iterative design process and the authors describe the used
Blockchain approach of the rst iteration of the game to inspire further developments in
this direction, especially for the Maltese audience, as Malta is perceived as the leading EU
country in the eld of Blockchain regulation.
Keywords: Education, Game-based Assessment, Game-based Learning, Blockchain
Introduction
For many decades, computerized media have continued to change our world through
their main characteristics of interactivity, digitalization, and virtualization (Kraemer 1998):
being interactive, they have allowed us to engage with complex social, political, and
economic processes in a meaningful way; being digital, they have made a wide range of
properties, actions, and processes measurable and comparable and being virtual; they
173
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
have opened up alternatives to the restrictions of the material world, creating spaces in
which properties, actions, and processes can be produced and reproduced at will and in
which the limitation of resources does not apply.
This third characteristic of virtuality becomes vividly apparent in the seemingly limitless
possibilities of computer-game worlds. When players of a computer game have fullled
the requirements to be awarded a specic kind of resource, this resource can instantly
be ‘produced’ by the game system, without risking depletion of supplies. The volume of
resources can be increased at any time if more players enter the game (Pfeiffer 2018).
In a similar manner, space is not limited in a virtual world: regardless of whether one
player or a million players enter a room within a game, each one of them can have one’s
own version (a so-called instance) of the room available, without the increasing number
of rooms taking up increasing space. And, as these game spaces are virtual, they can be
accessed from anywhere in the material world, making it possible for players from all
over the world to ‘meet’ and interact within the same virtual space.
All these features of virtuality have contributed greatly to the success of digital learning
environments (and particularly game-based or gamied learning environments). In these
virtual spaces, learners can receive instant feedback for their learning efforts, regardless
of whether their teacher is currently engaged with another student, or even the place
where the learner is located. They can immediately access the resources which best
support their individual learning progress, without having to wait for another student to
nish using them. Virtual classrooms will never be crowded, and learners can enter the
learning environment from any place in the world, if they have access to the Internet.
However, while virtual environments leave behind certain limitations of the material
world, this can create problems of a different kind. Such problems are especially prevalent
when the uniqueness of items or matters of ownership are of importance, the possibility
to reproduce items, actions, or processes innitely and without any loss of quality can
have unwanted effects like data piracy, copyright infringements, identity theft, and other
kinds of online fraud (Rüdiger and Pfeiffer 2015).
In the educational sector, similar problems arise as soon as value is placed on the
assessment of learning performance and the grading of learning achievements. Even
when the assessment of learning success is not deemed important, the individual
experience of achievement, and therefore the learner’s motivation, depends on the
trustworthiness of learning achievements; it might not seem worthwhile to make an
effort if the same effect can be achieved more easily by cheating or if the idea prevails
that others are awarded a good grade without the same effort. The need to create trust,
reliability, and, in some cases, a sense of achievement has therefore made it necessary
to re-introduce certain limitations articially to serve as safeguards against fraudulent
behaviour. Most importantly, these safeguards limit by whom and under what conditions
data can be changed. Just as a person cannot simply edit the amount of money on his
banking account, and not just anybody can make a transfer from his account, certain
data stored in virtual learning environments cannot be changed at will. Learning
achievements will be tied to his learning efforts which are again tied to his personal,
password-protected account; and grades can only be changed either by the system or
by a teacher, whose account will again be password protected to prevent unauthorized
persons from tampering with the grades.
But even these safeguards are only as safe as the systems that provide them and, if these
systems are controlled by one centralized authority, they are far from manipulation-
proof. While these measures can in many cases prevent manipulations within the system,
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
174 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
it will still be possible to manipulate the system itself. Even if the learner trusts teachers
to grade learning efforts fairly, the data can still be manipulated by the system’s creators
and administrators or by people ‘hacking’ into the system and changing data without
permission.
A recent answer to these challenges presents itself in the form of Blockchain-based
technologies. As decentralized systems, Blockchains should offer by design little
opportunity for tampering attempts, and especially in the case of suciently established,
public, and permission-less Blockchain systems, manipulation becomes virtually
impossible.
When information is stored on the Blockchain, it cannot be altered retroactively (Atzei
2018). In addition to giving users full control over how their data is used and providing
unambiguous information about the provenance of this data, it is this immutability that
makes Blockchain systems the perfect technology to secure critical information like
personal data and nances, but also learning achievements and educational credentials.
Once learning achievements and credentials are stored in a Blockchain-based system,
neither teachers nor learners, and not even system administrators or the designers of the
system can change entries, remove success criteria, or add additional milestones. And as
this system is de-centralized, there is nobody who can be approached and ‘convinced’ to
change data entries retroactively.
Game-based learning
Far beyond their obvious success as entertainment media, digital games have
increasingly gained attention as a facilitator of learning processes and education. The
potential benets of digital game-based learning (GBL) applications and strategies have
been explored thoroughly (Gee 2007; Klopfer et al. 2009; Annetta 2010; Bers 2010; Squire
2011; Klopfer et al. 2018; Thomas 2018; Thompson et al., 2019) as have their limitations
(Wagner 2009; Linderoth 2010; Wernbacher 2013). However, Zusho (2014) proposes to
extend the impact of game-based learning in terms of motivation and transfer aspects to
models other than ow (Csíkszentmihályi 1990) and/or self-determination theory (Ryan
2000), because new approaches are needed to actually prove the impact of game-based
learning.
Various initiatives are promoting educational gaming as a suitable tool to face the
educational challenges of the digital age such as Quest2Learn, which transforms a whole
school into a game environment (Salen 2011), and ‘Learning with Computer Games’, a
curated collection of didactically useful games (Pivec and Pivec 2012). The Centre for
Applied Game Studies at Danube-University in Krems researched the applications
of gamication, games, and serious games at schools for nearly a decade, leading to
the creation of the online resource www.toolkit-gbl.com (Koenig 2014) and the project
‘Create Digital Games for Education (CDG4E)’, a tool for creating decision-based games.
Both projects were funded by the European Union. The LIVE Lab (Learning interactive
visualization experience) is a research facility at Texas A&M University College Station
that has developed interactive learning experiences since 2014 and works closely
with publishers and policy-makers in the educational sector. The MIT Scheller Teacher
Education Program and The Education Arcade focus on creating playful and powerful
learning experiences using the affordances of new educational technologies. All of these
approaches show that the pedagogical value of digital games is becoming increasingly
acknowledged within the educational community and beyond and that the application of
this potential in educational practice is a declared goal.
175
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
According to Prensky (2001, 2012), today’s students are ‘digital natives’, people who have
lived with access to computers and digital media since early childhood. Dingli and Seychell
(2015) go one step further and call the generation that already grew up with tablet-PCs
and Smartphones ‘the new digital natives’ or ‘generation glass’, as growing up with those
devices differs from the ‘Computer & Mouse generation’, due to the gesture control only
using the ngertips.The impact of digital games on cognitive, motivational, behavioural,
social, and affective outcomes has been examined in various studies (Green and Bavelier
2007; Gee 2007; Rosser 2007; Tüzün et al. 2009, Dingli et al. 2013; Camilleri et al. 2017,
Dingli and Montaldo 2019).In addition to these individual but important studies, there is
also a limited number of meta-analyses on the impact of serious games and gamication
in education. A study by Wouters et al. (2013) summarizes the effects of studies on
more than 12.000 participants and states that serious games are a superior alternative
to conventional educational practices. Signicant positive effects on motivation, skill
acquisition, and retention were reported in most of the studies (p<.05; d=.29-.45). A
literature review by Hamari et al. (2014) showed that gamication has positive effects on
psychological variables like motivation or enjoyment and behavioural outcomes, like user
participation or learning outcomes.
Classification of game-based approaches to assessment in
the context of education
In addition to the concern of enabling effective learning experiences, the assessment of
learning processes through gamied and game-based means has also become a trend
in recent years (Bezzina 2015; DiCerbo 2015; Kato and de Klerk 2017; Nikolaou 2019).
This can be achieved by either playing games or gamied approaches only with the sole
purpose of simulating and/or assessing or by using the same game/gamied approach
that was used for educating through a playful experience before the assessment.
Irrespective of the structure, game-based and gamied approaches (Deterding 2011;
Pfeiffer 2018) to learning assessment can take various forms:
First, game-based approaches to learning assessment can either rely on the gamication
of conventional testing situations or on the creation of actual testing game environments.
Second, game-based assessment approaches can either serve the sole purpose of
testing, or they can be part of a broader game-based learning approach in which game-
based tools are used for enabling as well as evaluating learning experiences. And nally,
the difference between game-based learning and game-based assessment can either
be explicit or done in a way that is hardly noticeable by learners.The authors therefore
suggest the following classication of game-based approaches to assessment in the
context of education:
Gamied Learning Assessment (GLA)
Gamied assessment concepts rely on existing psychometric science, including
gamication characteristics, such as points and challenges. They should be implemented
well thought-out and are most of the time cheaper to develop than serious games as
assessment tools, as they are only a second layer on the existing real-world environment.
Just as in any ‘regular’ E-learning assessments, it is crucial that such assessment tools can
ensure that the user taking the test is who he pretends to be and that the result (if not the
test itself) is not prone to manipulations, especially those which are (a) easy to conduct
and/or (b) hard to detect.
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
176 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
Game-Based Assessment (GBA)
Game-Based Assessments consist of testing environments that take the form of an actual
game, Apart from being also based on psychological methodology, the main challenge
here is to create a game that stays true to the curriculum by incorporating the testable
skills and knowledge in a meaningful way, while at the same time being designed in a
way that is also entertaining, engaging and accessible. In addition to gamied learning
assessments, developers and educational designers have to avoid glitches within the
game environment, as these glitches might distort the testing results.
Combined Game-Based Learning and Assessment (GBL&A)
Due to the success of game-based learning, it makes sense to design game-based
assessment and game-based learning tools as complementary to each other. In
combined Game-Based Learning and Assessment environments, a learning experience
might take place in one level of a game, while another level serves as a testing stage for
the evaluation of learning progress. While the demands regarding safeguards against
identity fraud, cheating, and result-distorting glitches are the same as in regular game-
based assessment, an additional challenge lies in the fact that the assessment segments
must not only reect the curriculum but must also be synchronized with the learning
segments.
Integrated Game-Based Learning/Assessment (GBL/A)
The most promising, but also the most challenging, form of game-based assessment
is the actual integration of learning assessments as interlaced parts of game-based
learning experiences. Contrary to Game-Based Learning & Assessment, there is no
noticeable switch between learning and testing, as the system tracks and maps learning
progress as it happens, and learners do not have to step out of their learning experiences
for the purpose of testing. While all forms of game-based assessment call for measures
that ensure security and establish trust, GBL/A approaches are especially demanding
not only regarding data volumes, but also regarding the criteria under which a constant
assessment of even the smallest actions and decisions can occur. Integrated Game-Based
Learning/Assessment raises the questions of where the game stops and where the exam
begins, and whether this form should only be used for self-directed learning, without any
effect on a school, university, or company-related examination of performance.
However, in all these cases the examiners as well as the examinees should have faith
regarding the validity of the test outcome and fairness of the testing tool. Furthermore,
it should be impossible to manipulate the results, e.g. altering the txt, .csv or .json le
storing the data (which may include personal identiers, time and date, results, steps
to results, etc.). In this sense, non-Blockchain-based approaches can hardly ensure the
required level of trust and immutability. This raises the question whether Blockchain-
based approaches are better suited to do so, and if they are, in which ways?
Currently, most digital learning environments and assessment tools safeguard their
data using safety systems (e.g. password protection) that are not Blockchain-based but
controlled by a centralized authority. While these centralized systems provide a certain
level of security against unauthorized access from outside the system, the possibility
of manipulation from within the system cannot be dismissed. Users with high enough
access rights (teachers, administrators, system managers) can still add, change, or delete
177
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
entries. This becomes an even greater problem when learning achievements are to be
reected in fair and transparent credit systems and especially when these educational
credits are to be valid across different institutions or even countries, or if the assessment
outcome is an important factor in the admissions for a college or university. As a result,
there could be cases in which the administrative staff is bribed to change the learning
results to the positive (referring to the Felicity Huffman case). These and other reasons
speak for the use of Blockchain technologies in the education sector.
Discussing Blockchain technologies in the educational sector
Immutability to changes made retroactively make Blockchain systems the perfect
technology to secure learning achievements and educational credentials. Keeping
data trustworthy, secure, and manipulation-proof has become an increasing issue in
education due to the rise of digital learning environments which often combine learning
experiences, testing procedures, and educational credential management. Due to
their ability to store data in a de-centralized, transparent, and manipulation-proof way,
Blockchain-based technologies can provide solutions to this problem. However, it is
necessary to rst gain a sound overview of the different ways in which these technologies
can be used in the educational sector and to assess the expected merits and drawbacks
of these respective strategies.
In the early 1980s, Lamport et al. (1980, 1982) described the Byzantine generals’ problem
and outlined possible solutions in their papers ‘Reaching Agreement in the Presence
of Faults’ and ‘The Byzantine Generals Problem’.The name refers to the attack on
Constantinople in 1453, during which the city had to be attacked simultaneously from
several sides due to its strong fortications. The generals who were to coordinate the
attack communicated with each other by messenger, as they could not be in the same
place at the same time. However, some of these generals were prone to send false and
contradictory messages to other generals on purpose, as they wanted to gain a personal
advantage by discrediting their fellow combatants in the eyes of the sultan. In effect,
while there was a constant ow of messages in all directions, the receivers could never be
sure whether they could trust the message and the person who had it delivered to them.
Just like the Byzantine generals more than 500 years ago, today’s digital society, too,
is struggling with severe trust issues. We have to trust the retailer when shopping as
private individuals on craigslist.org, eBay, sellinmalta.com, willhaben.at or even from
large corporations such as Amazon. Apart from the transfer of monetary-values, we need
to build trust in e-mails and other electronic correspondence – e.g. via Internet forums
– or the belief that the sender is in fact who it is supposed to be. And when it comes to
game-based-assessment in classroom, the teacher also needs to trust that, for example
the set of information that is delivered from the game engin/gamied e-learning system
has not been altered. This is where Blockchain technology comes in:
‘From a social perspective, Blockchain technology oers signicant possibilities beyond those
currently available. In particular, moving records to the Blockchain can allow for:
1. Self-sovereignty, i.e. for users to identify themselves while at the same time maintaining
control over the storage and management of their personal data;
2. Trust, i.e. for a technical infrastructure that gives people enough condence in its
operations to carry through with transactions such as payments or the issue of certicates;
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
178 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
3. Transparency & provenance, i.e. for users to conduct transactions in knowledge that
each party has the capacity to enter into that transaction;
4. Immutability, i.e. for records to be written and stored permanently, without the possibility
of modication;
5. Disintermediation, i.e. the removal of the need for a central controlling authority to
manage transactions or keep records;
6. Collaboration, i.e. the ability of parties to transact directly with each other without the
need for mediating third parties.’ (Grech and Camilleri 2017)
These features of Blockchain as technology also have great value for the eld of
education. Especially in combination with digital identity management, Blockchain
technology unfolds its full power. Even if Blockcerts (an open standard for Blockchain
credentials, developed by the MIT Media Lab) is intended to be a technical standard
to work across any Blockchain (currently working on Bitcoin and Ethereum), when MIT
Media Lab developed Blockcerts, they decided on building it upon the Bitcoin Blockchain
for the following reason:
‘The easy answer is that, when we started out, Ethereum was a mere whi of an idea (no pun
intended). The other part of the answer is that Bitcoin has been the most tested and reliable
Blockchain to date; in addition, the relatively robust self-interest of miners, and the nancial
investment made into Bitcoin (and Bitcoin-related companies) make it likely that it will be
around for a good while longer. Our solution is not locked to one particular Blockchain – it
would be easy to also start publishing our credentials to other Blockchains, but for most of
what we want to do, the functionality of the Bitcoin Blockchain continues to be sucient.
That is not to say that we are not curious about the potential of smart contracts, and we are
discussing the potential of Ethereum-based side-chains to reduce transaction cost and expand
functionality.’ (Juliana Nazaré on Medium.com)
The afore-mentioned blog posting was made in June 2016. Three years later, the
Blockchain ‘Ethereum’ had a market cap of 20 billion USD (9 September 2019), which
is nearly double the market cap of all Blockchain systems, including Bitcoin, had when
Juliana Nazaré from the MIT Media Lab wrote her article. Apart from Ethereum, many
different Blockchain systems have entered the market. Some of them (Ardor, Etc, Eos,
Nem, Nxt, Tron, or Waves, just to mention a small selection) allow to create Tokens/
Assets and Cryptocurrencies upon them (like the ERC20 Tokens on Ethereum). All these
new systems and applications built on them lead to a number of new problems:
(I) In the near future, there might be a number of different educational credit systems
similar to blockcerts built upon a large variety of different Blockchain systems, and
different institutions (universities, colleges, schools, …) might also use different credit
systems. A possible solution to this problem would be an independent mediator who
can collect and validate the credentials issued on the various systems. Such a mediating
system could serve as a ‘collection point’, compiling and validating the results of the
various credential systems and connecting them to the users digital ID (e.g. the ‘A-Trust
ID Card’ issued by the Austrian government), or (within the EU) other digital identity
procedures within the EIDAS (Electronic IDentication, Authentication and Trust Services)
regulation), making it possible for users to access their own data and share it as proof of
achievement (e.g. as a link in their CV).
Another reason why such an independent mediating system might be useful or even
necessary is the possible dependency on the provider of a Blockchain-based application.
This is mainly due to these credential systems not being based on open-source, public,
179
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
permission-less Blockchains, but on centralized, controlled Blockchains, owned by
private companies, who intend to sell their systems to governments and universities (for
instance, Sony corporation has recently developed such a system, based on a patent
the company holds, and is currently marketing it to schools and universities). While this
company might successfully sell its system to an educational institution and might even
provide an excellent service in handling this institution’s processes regarding test results,
credentials, admissions, etc., it is still possible that, for whatever reasons, the company
decides to shut down its centralized permissioned Blockchain at a later point. Without
an independent mediating system, the data would almost certainly be lost, defeating
the purpose of using a Blockchain-system altogether. If, on the other hand, the data
was compiled at a universal ‘collection point’, together with the data from all the other
credential systems, a veried copy of the results would still exist on a public permission-
less Blockchain and could be stored on this (de-centralized) Blockchain potentially
forever. Such a system would provide the security of a decentralized Blockchain even for
centralized Blockchain applications, enabling anyone to run a full node at low costs that
acts as a public ledger and ensuring that the Blockchain and its entries will exist unless
everyone in the world including yourself is shutting down the node.
(II) Other potentially challenging issues (technologically as well as nancially) are the
number of transactions that can be handled within a certain period, the transaction costs,
and who is responsible in payment terms (because on a public Blockchain transactions
usually cost a certain amount of money, commonly paid in the native token of the specic
Blockchain).
A university using blockcerts might only have to issue the learning credentials twice a
year to each student. In this case, the number of transactions is still easily manageable,
and the transaction fees (amounting to two times the number of students, multiplied
by the fees payable to the network), will be in the affordable range. While Blockchain
technologies even for basic E-Learning and E-Assessment applications already lead to a
much higher number of transactions, since not only the nal grades would be entered in
the Blockchain but also the results from each single test and maybe even the answers to
specic questions.
The greatest number of transactions, however, occur when game-based assessments
(and especially Integrated Game-Based Learning/Assessment solutions) make use
of Blockchain-systems. In this case, any single-step learners take might be stored, in
addition to milestones they reach and badges that signify a specic competence gained,
even before all this data leads to a test result which, again, is reected in a nal grade.
This enormous number of transactions is necessary to reach the goal of immutable
and continuous learning environments and the possibility of learning credentials that
do not only show the results at the end of the semester, but also record all steps in-
between that lead to the nal grades. Due to this enormous number of transactions,
game-based learning assessment calls for especially robust Blockchain systems and,
as these transactions will need to be nearly instant as well as cost-effective, strategies
that enable more ecient transaction management (utilizing, for instance, mechanics
like bundling, pruning, proof-of-existence-secure timestamps using merkle-trees) will be
in high demand. Future research projects in this direction are of utmost importance.
In all mentioned cases it should also be possible to make Blockchain-enabled learning
and assessment environments without the player/learner having to hold tokens of the
Blockchain-system used by himself and the system has to offer an interface which can
easily be used by third parties (e.g. educational software providers) while still being
immutable at the same time.
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
180 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
A Blockchain-based system must therefore be extremely robust in order to handle the
enormous number of transactions that occur using game-based assessments (and
especially GBL/A) approach. Any system that is strong enough to handle this volume
of transactions will easily handle more simple demands like E-Learning assessments or
storing the nal grading results at the end of each semester. Hence, focusing on Blockchain
solutions for GBL/A as a long-term goal makes sense, as this will ensure that its ndings
will also be applicable for less demanding applications, making them highly relevant not
only for the educational sector as a whole, but also for Blockchain-developers who are
interested in stable and sustainable strategies Blockchain-applications.
(III) Yet another issue that differs, but cannot be dealt separately from technological
problems, is the human factor, or more specically, the question what role humans play
in the process of creating, storing, and managing data on the Blockchain. While safe-
keeping data on a Blockchain is primarily a technical process, the data itself (at least
some of the educational data, like grades) is often produced by human agents.
Regarding the human factor, the following issues must at least be kept in mind when
developing future Blockchain-in-education scenarios:
– Humans as a source of error. Especially in the educational sector, even the most
sophisticated digital environments will not make human interaction obsolete, as learning
and education are inherently social processes. This also means that any application that
involves learning and assessment must deal with problems caused by human error.
Some of these problems can effectively be countered or excluded by Blockchain-based
technologies. Especially in the case of retroactive manipulation of data, non-Blockchain
systems are prone to manipulation, as even the most advanced safeguards cannot
prohibit users with high enough access rights to manipulate existing data entries (this
may be a mere annoyance when a well-meaning teacher edits a favourite student’s
attendance times, but it can quickly become a large-scale problem when the recognition
of diplomas is tampered with on an institutional level). As data stored on the Blockchain
cannot be altered retroactively, the problem of tampering with existing data could easily
be ruled out.
However, even when a Blockchain-system secures the storage and management of data,
there are still humans involved in the process. Especially when Blockchain is used only for
the nal storage of grades, there is still plenty of room for error. When a professor takes an
exam, tells his assistant to note the grade, which is then dropped off at a secretary’s desk,
who emails the grade to the Blockcert-department for secure entry in the Blockchain, this
process offers many opportunities for human error, ranging from unfair grading by the
professor, to the assistant mixing up US and European grading scales, to the secretary
mistyping when copying the grade, to the Blockcert-clerk assigning the grade to the
wrong student.
This problem can be reduced when a whole (basic, gamied combined, or even integrated
game-based) E-learning and Assessment system is based on the Blockchain, as this allows
the immediate storage of test results and ensures that grades are calculated based on
a grading xed key and in real time. While the initial creation of the test (including how
answers and actions are evaluated, and the determination of the grading key) is still
subject to human error, it is the system that provides transparent testing conditions for
every student, saves the (intermediate and nal) results immediately and securely, and
safeguards this data from retroactive manipulation.
– Dealing with faulty entries: While Blockchain-based systems can ensure the immutability
of data, this also creates problems when it turns out that this data has been created based
181
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
on faulty premises. The more obvious reason for faulty data entries has already been
described on the example of systems which only use Blockchain technologies to store
nal grades, as there is a great number of reasons that can lead to a wrong grade being
entered in the Blockchain. Even when a sophisticated E-learning and assessment system
ensures that grades are always correctly calculated in accordance with the grading key,
mistakes in determining the grading key or in setting the correct and incorrect answers
in a test cannot be ruled out.
If it turns out that the wrong grades have been saved, or if the learner has improved
his grade on a new attempt of the test (or if it has stayed the same or even worse, but
denitely with a new timestamp), they still cannot be changed. Instead, additional entries
must be made that contain not only the correct grade but also the information that the
previous grade has been entered incorrectly into the system, because corrections cannot
made as edits, but only as additions to existing entries. In this sense, Blockchain-based
systems might require a radical re-thinking of educational credentials, as these systems
no longer highlight the learner’s successes but instead serve as a comprehensive learning
biography, in which successes, stagnation, and failures are equally reected.
In order to further investigate the previously discussed approaches, the authors decided
to go for an applied approach and develop a serious game (named Gallery Defender)
including an assessment mode that uses Blockchain technology to store and transfer
the grading and other information related. The approach is described in detail below,
starting with the Blockchain system selected for the serious game.
The Ardor Blockchain
After intensive research, the authors chose the Blockchain system Ardor. The Blockchain
implementation takes place in the testnet of Ardor, on the Ignis childchain. The decision
for this Blockchain system was taken based upon the following thoughts:
1. Ardor is based on a Proof of Stake (PoS) Consensus Algorithm which is considered
extremely environmentally friendly. The (testnet) node the LIVE Lab of Texas A&M
University uses is based on a Raspberry Pi3 B+, with even the possibility to use the
strong Texan sun to power the computer nearly independently from conventional
power sources.
2. As the tokens storing grades should be pure-utility tokens, the player/learner is
unable to send the token peer2peer to someone else (without the issuing institution
approving the transfer rst). The asset management on the Ignis childchain and the
possibility to enable phasing meets the functional criteria of the game prototype.
Phasing is a feature that allows certain phasing-safe transactions to be created
with conditional deferred execution based on the result of a vote, on a list of linked
transactions or on the revelation of a secret; or simply with unconditional deferred
execution.
3. The possibility to set up ‘Bundling-Accounts’ means that accounts can pay transaction
fees for the player/learner. There is therefore no need at all that all player/learner
or other users have to purchase cryptocurrencies, in this case the ‘Ignis token’.
This seems to be a key feature to build Blockchain-based systems beyond the
cryptocurrency and Blockchain community.
4. While sending a token, the designers of the system can decide if the information
attached to the token is stored forever or only for a certain amount of time. This
enables the possibility that the grading results and points are stored forever at the
user account (and the issuing institution can of course retrieve the information
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
182 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
from there), while the information on the token sent to the teacher is considered as
‘prunable data’, meaning that the information is only stored for a predened time,
e.g. 90 days by default.
5. The Ignis asset exchange on the Ardor platform already supports most of the ERC20
and ERC 721 operations out of the box without the need to issue a smart contract.
That means that using the Ignis childchain is not closing doors to other widely used
Blockchain-systems, but opening them.
6. With the possibility of the asset-control functions, KYC (know your customer) or
in this case KYL (know your learner), KYT (know your teacher) and KYI (know your
institution) can be implemented in future versions of the Gallery-Defender prototype.
This aspect is of utmost importance regarding fraud-prevention and recognition of
the results beyond the issuing institution. The idea behind this is that the school
veries the Ardor Blockchain Address of teachers and students, a process that can
obviously be conducted on Blockchain, again possibly using the Ardor Blockchain.
Porting from the testnet to the mainnet, the time the game is ready to be published,
is easily possible. Following is an overview of different Blockchain systems which were
considered for this project:
Figure 1: Blockchain comparison table
183
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
Gallery Defender
The game Gallery Defender helps to understand the requirements for art history of the
K-12 Curriculum Framework:
The learning goal, which equals the game goal (following Wagner 2008), is dened as
‘All students=all players will understand, analyse, and describe artstyles in their historical,
social, and cultural contexts.’ The serious game likes to introduce and later assess the
following art concepts to the player/learner, categorized by art movements:
• Cubism
• Surrealism
• Impressionism
• High Renaissance
• Realism
The player/learner slips into the role of a gallery owner. Using his profound knowledge of
art history he must defend the pictures of the gallery against a master thief.
Figure 2 : Game Screen Gallery Defender
The game is a turn-based card game, split into multiple levels. Within each level, the
player/learner has a deck of cards with images of historical paintings on them. A small
subset of the deck is dealt into his hand at the start of each turn. Each card in hand
corresponds to an action, which is denoted by a small icon; such actions include ‘racecar,’
‘headphones,’ ‘helmet’, and ‘building.’ These actions were chosen from existing icon
assets that the authors already owned; the icons themselves are not related to learning
outcomes.
The player/learner faces off against a simple AI who declares an action at the start of each
turn. There is exactly one painting in hand that corresponds to the AI’s declared action
at any time, which must be correctly matched to the art movement that it belongs to by
dragging the card into one of several labelled buckets near the bottom of the screen.
After successfully matching some number of artworks (varies by level), the player/learner
can move on to the next level. Incorrectly matching too many artworks to art movements
will result in failure of the level. Not all levels contain the same number or types of art
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
184 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
movements. Additionally, certain levels may allow the player/learner to click on various
buttons to gain more information about artworks, art movements, and their previous
moves. The Simulation and Assessment Levels are based on the highest diculty settings
possible.
Gallery Defender’s combined game-based learning and
assessment approach
Following their own classication, the authors are following the Combined Game-Based
Learning and Assessment (GBL&A) approach. For this serious game, which is functioning
as an early prototype regarding the impact of Blockchain technologies for the future
development of serious games, a clear distinction between learning and assessment had
to be made. Gallery Defender consists of three different levels the player/learner can
choose from: playing/learning/exploring; simulation/self-test/practice, and assessment/
evaluation/testing. The thoughts behind this split are the following:
1. Learning/exploring while playing gives the user all information needed to learn and
apply new concepts self-reliantly.
2. Simulation/self-test gives the user the opportunity to self-test in an assessment-
like situation, but without storing the results in a manner that would allow third-
party access, eliminating performance-related consequences for the user while
still providing detailed feedback related to right/wrong actions and helping the
user nd the right resources to improve. Teacher guidance of the player/learner is
recommended in this stage. Information from this stage should not be stored on
Blockchain.
3. The assessment/evaluation approach changes the game into an assessment-tool.
This change must be communicated clearly to the user, as it changes the typical-
role of a gamied or game-based approach for learning into the same level of
consequence as a classic test would do. This information is stored on Blockchain.
However, as an assessment has an impact on the user’s life outside of the game due
to the grading/evaluation component (and therefore removes, to a large extent, the
‘playfulness’ of the serious game), following Caillois (1961) this disqualies it from
being called a game per se, since a game should not affect the life of the player
outside of the game.Gallery Defender follows this clear structure starting at the main
menu screen:
Figure 3 : Tutorial, practice, simulation and assessment (Screenhot Gallery Defender)
185
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
The table below shows the difference between the three options in detail. An important
aspect is when and how Blockchain technology is useful enough to be considered:
Figure 4 : Learning, simulation, assessment
Implementation and use cases of Blockchain technologies
within the serious game Gallery Defender
As mentioned earlier. Blockchain-based systems might require a radical re-thinking of
educational credentials, as these systems no longer highlight the learner’s successes
but serve as a comprehensive learning biography, in which successes, stagnation, and
failures are equally reected.
While Blockchain does not play a role for the ‘Learning’ and ‘Simulation’ part of the game
Gallery Defender, Blockchain Technology has a core function for the ‘Assessment’ section.
Gallery Defender utilizes Blockchain technology in three different ways.
1. A player/learner receives a digital token at the end of the assessment which contains
the grade, the points, and the time the assessment was nished as a message.
This token and the attached message are stored forever and unchangeably on the
Blockchain in the player’s/learner’s Ardor Blockchain Wallet (which is a unique public
Blockchain address, with a unique private key per user). The certicate is encrypted
and can only be decrypted, for privacy purposes, by the sender and the original
recipient. However, using a shared key should (in future versions of the game) enable
the player/learner to share the results with third parties, such as their future boss,
his family, or another school/university.
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
186 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
2. A player/learner with particularly good results receives an additional token with which
the authors of the paper want to show gamication principles on Blockchain. This
token can be exchanged for digital rewards, e.g. a game poster. In future versions,
the whole ecosystem for rewards can be built on Blockchain.
3. Teachers can receive a token with further information about the respective test
result. After a (denable) time, the message is deleted, and only the proof that
the token has been sent remains (and thus an assessment has been carried out).
For the rst iteration of the prototype the teacher token is sent to a pre-dened
Ardor address used to showcase the function. For the nal version of the game the
teacher’s address can be pre-dened by the teacher when setting up the player/
learner accounts for the class at the administrative dashboard which has not yet
been developed.
The tokens used in the game Gallery Defender are dened as utility tokens. It is of utmost
importance that the tokens cannot be traded/sent outside of the learning/assessment
environment. This is, on one hand, obviously needed, so that the certicates cannot be
changed between accounts, besides the very rare cases when the issuing-entities allows
this exchange; on the other hand, it is important so that, within ‘a typical government
regulatory framework’, it can be 100 per cent ensured that the tokens are not perceived
as securities or cryptocurrencies.
As described above, the authors use the functionality of phasing. A token called ‘veduc’,
standing for ‘virtual education conrmation’, with the token asset ID (the unique
identication number on the Blockchain) 8383233259086863643, is held by the account
(ARDOR-365M-XM4Z-RZ48-23XNQ – Ardor Testnet) issuing the certicates. The token
itself is a ‘Singleton Token’, meaning that there is only one unique token in existence.
It is also dened that the token can only be hold by the dedicated issuer’s account. This
token is needed to enable ‘phasing by voting’ which means that, whenever a certicate of
completion to the player/learner is being sent, the transaction needs to be veried by the
main account. This prevents the possibility that tokens can be sent peer2peer without
the permission of the issuing account, as mentioned above. The token used for the
certicates of completion is called veduut, which stands for ‘virtual education user token’,
with the asset ID 13489968754320443895 on the Ardor Testnet Blockchain. 10,000,000
tokens have been created, meaning that this number of certicates can be issued by the
game. However, the developers have the option to reissue a new set of tokens, should
more than 10,000,000 assessments be done using Gallery Defender.
To enable this process automatically, the authors, as developers of the game, have to
run at least one Ardor Full Node (in the form of a Raspberry PI3) that acts as a ‘contract
runner’ for the smart contract. On the Ardor network, in contrast to other Blockchain
systems like Ethereum, not every node runs and veries every smart contract. The
authors suggest that every project needs to run a couple of nodes (at different places)
to ensure a 100 per cent uptime. In the future, schools, universities, and developers of
software used for assessment can set up a stable system that reruns and veries those
Blockchain transactions used for assessment purposes.
The third token in the ecosystem of Gallery Defender is named vedutt (virtual education
teacher token), with the asset id 11478600775360421069 on the Ardor Testnet Blockchain.
This token contains information useful for the teacher, relating to an assessment taken.
The information in the message of the token is also encrypted for privacy purposes. The
difference for this token, however, is that the message for the teacher is only stored
for a predened timeframe (counted in blocks created on the Blockchain). After this
187
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
time period, the information is no longer stored on the Blockchain; only the proof of
the transfer itself is left on Blockchain. The authors use a function called ‘pruning’ to
demonstrate that, although on Blockchain, you can distinguish between information
that needs to be stored forever and information stored only for a limited amount of
time on the Blockchain. In both cases there is no possibility that the information can be
manipulated or altered retroactively.
The fourth and nal token in the Gallery Defender Blockchain ecosystem is called vedugt
(virtual education gift token) with the asset id 15596172380431790053 on the Ardor
Testnet Blockchain. This token tests how gamication can be implemented as additional
layer and reward system. A player/learner who passes the assessment with an ‘A’ or ‘B’
grade receives a vedugt token which can be redeemed, in the case of Gallery Defender,
for a digital gift. In this case the token can be sent to a dedicated Ardor Blockchain
account. The player/learner needs to include his e-mail address in the transaction to
receive the gift.
Critics could argue at this point that a token has now been included which has a certain
monetary value (depending on the possible value of the prize) and therefore the token is
not just a simple utility token. The authors counter this argument with the fact that the
token can only be sent to a predened address and cannot be sent peer2peer between
other Ardor addresses. A possible payment, for example between the publishers of a
game and the institution awarding the prizes, can still occur in FIAT currency to t into
a possible ‘typical regulatory framework’. However, a smart contract can trigger this
payment and thus maximize trust between the partners of an ecosystem. To give an
example: At the end of the period a prize can be redeemed; the institution sending the
prizes to the player sends the received tokens to the publisher’s Ardor address which
then triggers an automatic payment from one bank account to another.
At this point, the concept of transaction fees must be described and who pays for them.
Who must have Cryptocurrencies of the used Blockchain system, in order to operate
the ecosystem? Transaction fees are fees that have to be paid to the network to verify
the transactions and include them into the next block of the Blockchain. In the case of
Gallery Defender, the main account of the game has to hold a particular amount of Ignis,
the cryptocurrency of the childchain that our tokens were created with. Each transaction
that occurs after a player/learner has completed an assessment triggers the sending
of a token, which holds further information, from the main account to the account of
the player/learner. Consequently, this triggers a transaction fee to the network. For this
simple transaction the account needs to hold cryptocurrencies but the authors would not
need to run their own node to conduct such a transaction.
This changes in the case of the gamication approach because here the users send the
token from their account to another address. Since it is extremely important that the
users themselves have no costs and do not need any further technical knowledge, apart
from the simple creation of an Ardor address for themselves, the bundling accounts
approach comes into play here. This means that on the node, run by the authors, a
‘bundling account’ is in place. All transactions that take place within the Gallery Defender
ecosystem to the Ardor network are being paid for by the game-creators. The authors
believe that Blockchain-based applications, at least in the near future, can only work if
the users do not handle Blockchain processes themselves, and therefore must purchase
cryptocurrencies and store them on their Ardor address.
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
188 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
Figure 5: Graphic interface of an Ardor Node, showing timestamp, type of transaction, fees
paid, account, approval model, block height. and number of conrmations from a transaction
Conclusion and Outlook
Although storing learning credentials on Blockchain, or at least the possibility to verify an
original document using a 1-way hash, is already being conducted (e.g. blockcerts), the
topic of Blockchain-based credential management, its broad usage, and its understanding
from politicians and other policy-makers is still at a very early stage. Real-life use cases
can be counted on a single hand. Integrating Blockchain technologies into e-learning
applications or even into serious games is therefore comparable to a new-born child.
In order to generate progress over the next few years, holistic processes must be
mapped, created, and researched, and the results shared between the parties involved.
It is important to look beyond one’s own immediate interests and to consider this topic
from many different points of view. In summary, the authors would like to point out
following aspects as necessary to consider regarding the usage of Blockchain technology
to store learning credentials, especially for serious games:
• A Know Your Customer (KYC) approach needs to be established. Knowing all parties
participating in the Ecosystem is most important to prevent fraudulent behaviour
and enable an instant verication of credentials, not only as proof of origin of a
document but also of the actual private information, like grades, which are stored on
Blockchain directly.
• This KYC approach should involve government-issued digital IDs, wherever possible.
• Encryption on the one hand, but also the possibility of sharing the information, for a
certain amount of time, with trusted third parties needs to be established.
• The institutions issuing credentials, the companies creating learning environments,
and of utmost importance the users/learners need to run a full node themselves and
therefore have a copy of the Blockchain including their very own credentials always
in their own hands.
• A consortium of involved parties should cooperate to rerun each other’s smart
contracts, if one uses a Blockchain system like Ardor that does not run all Smart
189
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
Contracts on all nodes. This will ensure uptime and security, while keeping the
Blockchain system fast and scalable. Regarding the Ardor Network, a Child Chain
operated by a consortium of schools and universities, could be a possibility to get
issuing, storage, and acceptance of educational credits to a new level.
• Payment and regulation of transaction fees necessitate a clearly dened solution for
assigning responsibilities to involved parties.
• Blockchain-based credential solutions should follow an open-source approach.
• Not all information needs to be stored on Blockchain or, at least, not all information
(attached messages to transactions) needs to be on Blockchain forever. Designers
need to be trained the best way possible to identify and create a feasible solution.
• Think green. Opt-in for solutions that are safe but environmentally friendly. Especially
for use cases like this, that do not store monetary records.
On https://alexpfeiffer.mit.edu readers can nd the link to the game, to surveys related
to the topic, and progress of the studies. Please do not hesitate and contact the authors
to start a discussion and collaboration.
Words of gratitude
The authors like to kindly thank Deputy Principal of Research and Innovation Dr Alexander
Rizzo, Deputy Director for Research and Innovation Mr Edwin Zammit, and Project
and Research Engineer Ing. Christian Camillieri for the kind invitation to participate in
the December 2019 edition of the MCAST Journal. The authors also like to thank Scot
Osterweil (creative director of The Education Arcade; MIT) and Prof. Eric Klopfer (Head of
the Department of Comparative Media Studies and Writing) for their ongoing support.
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
190 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
References
Annetta, L.A., Cook, M.P., and Schultz, M. 2007. ‘Video games and universal design: A vehicle for
problem-based learning’, Journal of Instructional Science and Technology, 10 (1), 1–12.
Atzei N., Bartoletti M., Lande S., Zunino R. 2018. ‘A Formal Model of Bitcoin Transactions’,
in S. Meiklejohn, K. Sako (eds.). ‘Financial Cryptography and Data Security. FC 2018’,
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 10957, pp. 551–60 (Berlin, Heidelberg).
Bers, M.U. 2010. ‘Let the games begin. Civic playing in high-tech consoles’, Review of
General Psychology, 14, 147–53.
Caillois, R. 1961. Man, play, and games (New York).
Camilleri, V., Dingli, A., and Montebello, M. 2017. ‘Games and Citizen Engagement:
Towards Democracy 3.0.’, in Welt der Spiele 360° (Krems).
Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1990. Flow. The psychology of optimal experience (NewYork).
Deterding, S. 2011. ‘From Game Design Elements to Gamefulness: Dening “Gamication”’,
Peer-reviewed presentation, MindTrek 11 (Tampere, Finland).
Dingli, A. and Montaldo, L.C. 2019. Aspects of an Articial Intelligence Assisted Learning
(AIAL) System. Embracing Digital Learners in an Age of Global Educational Change and Rapid
Technological Advancements, IGI Global.
Dingli, A. and Seychell, D. 2015. The New Digital Natives: Cutting the Cord (Berlin, Heidelberg).
Dingli, A., Bonello, C., and Farrugia, C. 2013. ‘Games in the classroom’, in ICERI 2013, The 6th
International Conference on Education, Research and Innovation (Seville).
Gee, J. 2007. What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy, 2nd edn.
(London).
Green, C.S. and Bavelier, D. 2007. ‘Action-video-game experience alters the spatial
resolution of vision’, Psychological Science, 18 (1), 88–94.
Grech, A. and Camilleri, A. 2017. Blockchain in Education (Luxemburg).
Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., and Sarsa, H. 2014. ‘Does Gamication Work? A Literature Review of
Empirical Studies on Gamication’, in Proceedings of the 47th Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences (Hawaii).
Kato, Pamela & Klerk, S. (2017). ‘Serious Games for Assessment: Welcome to the Jungle’,
Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 18, 1–6.
Klopfer, E., Osterweil, S., and Salen, K. 2009. Moving learning games forward (Massachusetts).
Klopfer, E., Haas, J., Osterweil, S., and Rosenheck, L. 2018. Resonant Games, Design
Principles for Learning Games that Connect Hearts, Minds, and the Everyday (Boston).
Kraemer, S. 1998. Medien – Computer – Realität: Wirklichkeitsvorstellung und Neue Medien
(Frankfurt/M.).
191
VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
Koenig, N., Pfeiffer, A., and Wernbacher, T. 2014. ‘Gaming Media and their Application in
Educational Practice – An Interactive Toolkit for Teachers’, Proceedings of the 6th Conference
on Game-based Learning (ECGBL)(Berlin).
Lamport, L., Shostak, R., and Marshal, P. 1982. ‘The Byzantine Generals Problem’, SRI
International.
Linderoth, J. 2010. ‘Why gamers don’t learn more. An ecological approach to games as
learning environments’, Proceedings of DiGRA Nordic: Experiencing Games: Games, Play, and
Players (Stockholm).
Nikolaou, I., Georgiou, K., & Kotsasarlidou, V. 2019. Exploring the Relationship of a
Gamied Assessment with Performance. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 22, E6.
doi:10.1017/sjp.2019.5
Pfeiffer, A. 2018. ‘Approaching a ludic society’, Unpublished dissertation,
Wirtschaftsuniversität Wien.
Pivec, M. and Pivec, P. 2012. Lernen mit Computerspielen: Ein Handbuch für Pädagoginnen/
Pädagogen (Vienna).
Prensky, M. 2001. ‘Digital natives, digital immigrants – Part 1’, Whitepaper, (https://
www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20
Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf)
Prensky, M. 2012. From digital natives to digital wisdom: hopeful essays for 21st century
learning, 1st edn. (London).
Rosser, J., Lynch, P., Caddihy, L., Gentile D., Klonsky, J., and Merrell, R. 2007. ‘The impact
of video games on training surgeons in the 21st century’, Archives of Surgery, 142, 181–6.
Rüdiger T.G. and Pfeiffer. A. 2015. Game! Crime?, (Frankfurt/M).
Ryan, R.M. 2000. ‘Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation,
social development, and well-being’, American Psychologist, 55, 68–78.
Salen, K. 2011. Quest to Learn: Developing the School for Digital Kids (Cambridge, Mass.).
Squire, K. 2011. Video Games and Learning: Teaching and Participatory Culture in the Digital
Age. Technology, Education—Connections (The TEC series) (New York).
Thompson, M., Zhang, L., Seyam, M., Fan, J., Wang, A., Roy, D., Perry, J., and Klopfer, E.
2019. ‘Designing for Group Flow’; in Collaborative Cross-Platform Learning Experiences.
Accepted at Connected Learning Summit (CLS) UC Irvine, Irvine CA, 4–6 October 2019.
Tüzün, H., Yilmaz-Soylu, M., Karaku, T., Inal, Y., and Kizilkaya, G. 2009. ‘The effects of
computer games on primary school students’ achievement and motivation in geography
learning’, Computers & Education, 52 (1), 68–77.
Wagner, M. 2008. ‘Serious Games: Spielerische Lernumgebungen und deren Design in
Online-Lernen – Handbuch für Wissenschaft und Praxis’, Oldenburg Wissenschaftsverlag
(Oldenburg) 297–306.
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in
Gaming Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
192 VOL. 3, ISSUE 2, 2019
Wagner, M. 2009. ‘Serious Games: Spielerische Lernumgebungen und deren Design.
Didaktische Szenarien des Digitalen Game Based Learning’, Research report, Danube
University (Krems).
Wernbacher, T. and Wagner, M. 2013. Iterative Didactic Design of Serious Games.
Proceedings of the Foundations of Digital Games Conference (FDG).
Wouters P. ; Van Nimwegen, C., Van Oostendorf, H., Van der Spek, E. D. 2013. ‘A Meta
Analysis of the Cognitive and Motivational Effects of Serious Games’, Journal of Education
Psychology, 105(2), 249–65.
Zusho, A., Anthony, J.S., Hashimoto, N., and Robertson, G. 2014. ‘Do video games provide
motivation to learn?’, in F.C. Blumberg (ed.), Learning by Playing: Video Gaming in Education,
69–86 (New York).
Ardor Learning Hub: https://ardordocs.jelurida.com/Getting_started
Ardor Lightweight Smart Contracts description: https://ardordocs.jelurida.com/Getting_
started
Blockcerts Guide: https://www.blockcerts.org/guide/
Ardor Testnet Wallet (here you can get your Ardor Testnet address and use the network
without the need to install your won node): https://testardor.jelurida.com/index.html
Ardor.world website helps to fund your Testnet Wallet with Ignis (not needed to use
Gallery Defender as a user), but a helpful resource for developers: https://www.ardor.
world/en/faucet_ignis/
Ardor.world website helps to fund your Testnet Wallet with ARDOR (not needed to use
Gallery Defender as a user), but a helpful resource for developers: https://www.ardor.
world/en/faucet_ardor/
DiCerbo: https://www.pearsoned.com/current-state-of-game-based-assessment/Felicity
Hufmann case on CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/13/felicity-huffman-sentenced-
in-college-admissions-cheating-case.html Jelurida Website, download a Ardor Node and
set it up for testnet, learn more about
Ardor: https://wwwA.jelurida.com/ardor/downloads
Juliana Nazaré and MIT Media Lab articles on Blockcerts: https://medium.com/mit-
media-lab/what-we-learned-from-designing-an-academic-certificates-system-on-the-
Blockchain-34ba5874f196
https://medium.com/mit-media-lab/blockcerts-an-open-infrastructure-for-academic
credentials-on-the-Blockchain-899a6b880b2f
K12 Curriculum Art Styles: https://www.k12.com/high-school-course-list/ne-art-elective-
art010.html Thomas: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/games-every-classroom-andre-th
omas?articleId=6473556622848323584#comments-6473556622848323584&trk=public_
prole_post
Remaining the Vocational Professional: A Grounded Theory
Study of IVET Teachers’ Continuing Professional Development
Rachel Curmi
Mathematical Modelling of Heat Transfer Physics
In Sea and Air Deployed PV Systems
Stephen Sammut, Patrick Attard
A Study of the Eff ects of Facility and Service Provision on
Physical Activity among Students and Staff at MCAST
Renzo Kerr Cumbo, Matthew Muscat Inglott, Dorianne Caruana Bonnici
Evaluating the Effi cacy of Diff erent Manures in the Cultivation
of Aubergine and Green Pepper – A Case Study of the Maltese Islands
Kimberly Terribile, Malcolm Borg, Daniel Grech, Liberato Camilleri, Ruben Sakrabani
The Impact of the Hairdressing Profession on
Practising Hairdressers: A Gozitan Perspective
Amanda Bonnici
Achieving Sustainable Development Goals:
the Role of the Accountancy Profession in Malta
Dorianne Tabone Saliba
The Case for Lead Internal Verifi cation:
An Intrinsic Element of MCAST Quality Assurance Practices
Jacqueline Micallef Grimaud
Housing Aff ordability – A Local Perspective
Joan Ann Farrugia Galea
Autism Spectrum Disorder. How do Maltese Care Services Respond?
Damian Spiteri, Jessica Borg
From Learning to Assessment. Utilizing Blockchain Technologies in Gaming
Environments to Secure Learning Outcomes and Test Results
Michael Black, Lloyd Donelan, Trevor Higgins, Nikolaus Koenig, Brenton Lenzen,
Nick Muniz, Kishan Patel, Alexander Pfeiff er, Aksel Taylan, André Thomas,
Thomas Wernbacher
ISSN: 2523-0433
MCAST JOURNAL OF APPLIED RESEARCH & PRACTICE
