Developing Smart Learning Environments

Using Gamification Techniques and Video

Game Technologies

Ioannis Deliyannis and Polyxeni Kaimara

Abstract  The development of Smart Learning Environments is a complex software

engineering process combined with pedagogical principles. Smart pedagogy
requirements have advanced beyond the delivery of interactive-adaptive content,
which in the past was delivered through single-media systems and applications, to
complex multisensory experiences. Contemporary systems are designed to offer
customized media-rich interactive scenarios often implemented over various media,
featuring technologies that include augmented reality, virtual reality, and holo-
grams. This chapter proposes the combination of gamification with game technolo-
gies in order to produce smart learning environments. Within that scenario one may
employ the developmental flexibility of game engines in order to achieve high-level
content delivery offered by video game environments. This approach offers
advanced capabilities to content experts and their targeted audiences. However
problems are introduced as the development process is complex and content experts
often do not possess programming experience or application development knowl-
edge. This chapter presents how common problems may be resolved via the devel-
opment of media-rich smart learning environments with the use of proprietary
multimedia development environments that do not require advanced programming
experience.

Keywords  Augmented reality · Cross-media educational content · Digital

game-based learning · Gamification · Mixed-reality applications · Virtual reality

I. Deliyannis (*) · P. Kaimara

Department of Audio & Visual Arts, Ionian University, Corfu, Greece
e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 285

L. Daniela (ed.), Didactics of Smart Pedagogy,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01551-0_15
286 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

1  Introduction

The evolution of Smart Learning Environments (SLEs), particularly those who

employ state-of-the-art technological innovations, is affected greatly by the devel-
opments in gaming technology (Hitchens & Tulloch, 2018; Visvizi, Lytras, &
Daniela, 2018). The term “smart” implies learning efficiency, adaptation, and per-
sonalization (Gros, 2016). This is not uncommon for the wider domain of learning
approaches that often employ state-of-the-art tools and applications (Pavlidis &
Markantonatou, 2018) particularly when those are employed within multisensory
multimedia-enabled learning environments, combining cross-media content.
Clearly smart education relies on the implementation of smart technologies. Devices
and software are inseparably linked, as one supports the other. However, today the
process of design and realization of smart learning environments is not fully stan-
dardized (Hoel & Mason, 2018), a fact that introduces developmental problems.
The limited availability of characteristic examples when combined with the lack of
openness in their design is both limiting factors that do not aid into the evolution of
the domain. As a result we can only examine case studies that happen to be the “first
to market” (Hoel & Mason, 2018).
The development of SLEs relies heavily on the technological competence and
programming knowledge of content experts (Tuomi, Multisilta, Saarikoski, &
Suominen, 2018), who in order to design systems that offer the required and engag-
ing media-rich user experiences have to assess first the availability of technology,
envisage a realistic design, and then communicate their ideas with developers who
will ultimately construct the SLE. Within the software engineering domain, this pro-
cess is not uncommon (Nardelli, 2010; Trifonova, Ahmed, & Jaccheri, 2009;
Trifonova, Jaccheri, & Bergaust, 2008). Similar problems are faced in other domains
such as interactive digital art (Nardelli, 2010), where technologically illiterate con-
tent experts (artists) often rely on developers to realize their end systems. This lack
of technological competence often results in the development of systems featuring
reduced functionality, a factor that reduces the intended content presentation experi-
ence (Deliyannis, 2007). In the past we have successfully presented novel design and
development techniques within various application areas such as archaeology
(Deliyannis & Papadopoulou, 2017) and the area of interactive new media artwork,
enabling artists to create interactive-adaptive artwork able to capture, evaluate, and
react meaningfully to dynamic multisensory user input (Deliyannis, 2016). The
designer of smart learning environments has to overcome similar obstacles to those
faced by interactive artists (Deliyannis & Honorato, 2016) where developmental
models and frameworks are currently being developed (Deliyannis, 2012; Deliyannis,
Giannakoulopoulos, & Varlamis, 2011; Deliyannis, Karydis, & Anagnostou, 2011;
Deliyannis & Papaioannou, 2014); thus nothing is standardized in both software
engineering, user interaction design, user experience, standards of interactivity,
cross-media support, sensing, programming platforms, and media types.
This chapter discusses the development process of such systems, allowing the
design of cross-media end-user experiences that encapsulate all the above charac-
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 287

teristics: cross-media delivery, interactive narratives, aesthetics, adaptability, and

evaluation of various sensing technologies at a high level without the need of com-
plex programming. We focus particularly at the sensing capabilities of modern por-
table platforms such as mobile phones and tablets, which with the use of modern
game engines enable the realization of a number of case studies which support the
delivery on various media from a single base system, in the area of sensing, and the
application of sensing technologies within smart learning environments (Deliyannis,
2013). The development process is discussed in detail from the perspectives of both
content experts and developers, in an attempt to bridge the gap that often results in
the development of systems with reduced functionality and capabilities. It is imper-
ative to furnish the future technology-enhanced learning systems with the appropri-
ate tools and methods that enable the development of media-rich, highly responsive,
and customized user experiences designed to offer the end user a rewarding, inter-
esting, and captivating learning process.

2  U
 nderstanding Smart Learning Environments
Through the Evolution Content, Software, Hardware,
and Users

The development of SLEs is a process that may be described from different perspec-
tives. Some choose to examine the evolution of SLEs by focusing on the availability
of hardware/software and their use on content development (Riyukta, Connie, &
Anne, 2018), while others look into interaction design and user experience in their
attempt to reveal the human aspects of the process and its evolution over time
(Mavroudi, Giannakos, & Krogstie, 2018). In this chapter, we take into account
both those perspectives in our quest to identify the design characteristics that are
important for the development of SLEs. Identifying the key factors involved in this
process and analyzing how they influence the end system describe the approach fol-
lowed in this work. For methodological purposes and for better understanding of
how smart learning technologies function, we first discuss the role of users, content,
and learning and subsequently discuss how software and hardware influence the
field. Indicatively, we refer to the most well-known and most frequently used hard-
ware and software that have entered the classrooms as, due to the rapid evolution of
technology, new and innovative devices are constantly emerging.

2.1  Users, Content, and Learning

The basic role of an SLE is to accommodate the learning needs of its users and
provide the learning tools for the educators. However, today with the wide avail-
ability of the information society technologies and content, education itself has
288 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

adapted. Formal education, which was integrated in the educational system, for both
minors and adult learners, can take place into or outside the classroom. Teaching
within this reality poses challenges that can clearly be supported by state-of-the-art
SLEs, particularly when the learning scenario is modeled in the form of an interac-
tive game. This process involves the introduction of gamification design for the
classroom (Hitchens & Tulloch, 2018), where content is organized in a modular
basis and in the form of either serious games (Becker, 2007; Blumberg, Debby,
Almonte, & Hasimoto, 2013; Jarvin, 2015) or more generalized edutainment sce-
narios (Deliyannis, Giannakoulopoulos, & Oikonomidou, 2013; Deliyannis,
Giannakoulopoulos, et al., 2011; Jarvin, 2015).
Learning can also be achieved in a nonformal manner, i.e., learning can be the prod-
uct of a process that takes place at any time and in any place, for example, in museums
and in environments that associate with tourist activity. Hacking groups may also be
considered a nonformal educational environment, while anyone may be considered a
potential student. Under the new circumstances, a new pedagogical approach rises,
which is called worldschooling. The term is credited to Gerzon (2007) who is a traveler
and writer and defined it as “… when the whole world is your school, instead of school
being your whole world”. The worldschooling is the positive version of unschooling
(Holt & Holt, 2004), i.e., the condition in where anyone can access to learning resources
freely and outside of the school context and can apply to anyone even those are beyond
school age. Such learning resources are the world that surrounds us, both natural and
man-made: home, family, friends, strangers of all backgrounds, libraries, parks, sports,
forests, schools, towns, and the World Wide Web.
SLEs seem to possess the ability to support this new pedagogical approach
(worldschooling). Findings indicate that regardless of demographic characteristics
and personal interests, worldschooling promotes development at three areas: social
and personal development and experiential academics (Ferraro, 2016). As personal
development is related to the cultivation of everyday life skills, and of lifelong
learning, and knowledge is constructed through out-of-class experiences, trips can
be educational because they broaden the mind as people learn and interpret experi-
ences (Stone & Petrick, 2013). In addition, several times, the traveler, a minor or an
adult, travels without intending to learn anything and does not even plan visits to
museums or archaeological sites, for example, but he chooses to travel to rest and to
walk freely. Nevertheless, through this nondirected tour, he can learn many interest-
ing things about the place he has visited. So, by coming into contact with new envi-
ronments, he learns without first seeking it. This process is called incidental learning.
The “learner” learns incidentally, as an informal learning through an activity quite
unrelated to the educational process and thus not directly perceived by the learner
himself but also by others (Marsick, Watkins, Scully-Russ, & Nicolaides, 2017).
The opportunity of travel to promote skills, knowledge, and wisdom relies on
Aristotle’s approach when referring to techne, episteme, and phronesis, respectively,
and is considered to be a theoretical framework for learning and travel (Falk,
Ballantyne, Packer, & Benckendorff, 2012). SLEs can also aid into this direction,
via appropriate content organization and intelligent avatars that direct the process
and provide a customized learning path within the wide availability of sources.
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 289

Cutting-edge technologies such as SLEs can support and reinforce the random or
incidental learning and transform it into deliberate learning. This can be done easily
and effortlessly, as most people always carry small portable devices such as mobile
phones and tablets, especially the latest technology that supports “smart” technolo-
gies. And while they have their mobile phones to communicate and/or take pictures,
they are very likely to find points of interest with QR Codes in their tour or
AR-enabled sites. Mobile apps based on virtual and augmented reality allow visi-
tors to access either a QR Code marker or an AR-enabled exhibit to discover addi-
tional information (Deliyannis & Papadopoulou, 2017; Deliyannis & Papaioannou,
2016, 2017). There is also the possibility for visitors to add their own information
and their own content and from simple visitors to transform themselves into product
designers as expert content, a process that activates the principles of learning by
design. Thus, symptomatic learning is transformed into deliberate. Learning by
design is not simply an exercise in applying the new digital media to learning but is
an attempt to create social relations of learning and collaborative relations of peda-
gogical design (Kolodner, Hmelo, & Narayanan, 1996; Kolodner, Crismond, Gray,
Holbrook, & Puntambekar, 1998; Kalantzis, & Cope, 2010).
The uses of digital cultural products, which are basically constructed with inter-
active 3D models, are autonomous and offer interactive experience, creating new
conditions for cultural tourism. This interaction takes on elements of game experi-
ence (Poulimenou, Kaimara & Deliyannis, 2017). Such digital cultural products is
the virtual guide for physical visitors which will be able to learn by exploring,
guided by virtual agents (Lepouras & Vassilakis, 2004) and virtual tours, aimed at
remote visitors  – the Internet users (De Carolis, Gena, Kuflik, & Lanir, 2018).
According to Alexis (2017), 3D holograms and telepresence devices promise to
eliminate geographical distance enabling travelers to be virtually present in any
location at any time. An interactive system with virtual tours does not just offer visi-
tors – physical or remote – a dynamic tour experience but the opportunity to get to
know the presence of a robot that is programmed for guided tours (Gobee &
Durairajah, 2015).

2.2  Software

Software provides the ability to control the delivery of content using single or mul-
tiple media. Technology is “smart” if and when it is effective, efficient, innovative,
engaging, and flexible (Spector, 2014), and to our view, software is the key for this
process. Software is employed to control all kinds of learning systems, learning
tools, online resources, educational games which using social networking, learning
analytics, visualization, virtual reality, etc. (Zhu, Yu, & Riezebos, 2016). In the lit-
erature, modern technologies that bring together those features, virtual, augmented,
and mixed reality and holograms, are often distinguished. However this is not
always the case, as our systems often evolve to include some or all of them, design-
ing cross-media experiences. The use of these technologies in classrooms adds new
290 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

possibilities for tracking learners’ activity and offers them more immediate feed-
back about their learning performance.
From the time of Jaron Lanier (Lanier & Biocca, 1992) who first referred to vir-
tual reality in 1986 to MIT researchers who are talking about virtual environments,
many technological tools have been developed. From simple games and devices that
support them to complex applications requiring specialized equipment, the possi-
bilities of virtual reality serve many areas of human life (arts, museum tours, enter-
tainment, flight simulators, military, medical, with disabilities, etc.). The virtual
reality (VR) technology can be defined as a high-tech human-computer interface
that includes real-world simulation and interactions through multiple sensory chan-
nels. VR is the sum of hardware and software, which enables the visualization and
interaction with data and is a situation created in the mind that can hold human
attention in a way similar to that of the natural environment (Fokides & Tsolakidis,
2008). Virtual environments are mostly audiovisual and are usually presented with
the use of special stereoscopic displays, spectacles, and speakers, without excluding
conventional computer screens or portable devices (Deliyannis, 2006). The integra-
tion of VR in school is associated with an understanding of design and use of com-
posite multimodal digital material, which combines motion and static images with
text and sound that emphasizes spatial experience (Serafini, 2013). The characteris-
tics of VR, also known as 3i, are immersion, that is, the extent to which the user of
the virtual reality application feels that they are in the virtual world and not in the
real; interaction, that is, the computer’s ability to respond to the user’s wishes and
the speed of that response, which to the user is arguably the most important part;
and intensity, which refers to the volume of information and to the variety of com-
munication channels (visual, haptic, audio) (Deliyannis, 2007; Heim, 1995).
Alternatively, literature refers to the third “I” as imagination, which relates to the
users’ ability to perceive nonexistent things and their willingness to believe they are
in a virtual environment, even when knowing they are in another environment phys-
ically (Rebelo, Noriega, Duarte, & Soares, 2012). The technological tools, which
affect user’s body through all senses and movement, as well as a simultaneous con-
trol of the environment, enable various forms of interaction, involving users sensori-
ally, cognitively, and emotionally within a hybrid space (Poslad, 2009; Zhou, Duh,
& Billinghurst, 2008).
Augmented reality (AR) is an interactive technology that allows the reproduction
of computer-generated imaging information and includes detailed information
about locations, events, or activities from the real world by combining sound, pic-
ture, video, and animation (Kidd & Crompton, 2016). AR, as an emerging interac-
tive technology, allows the fusion of virtual and real objects and gives the opportunity
to apply mobile technologies in collaborative learning (Ke & Hsu, 2015). AR tech-
nology and its supporting devices have the ability to recognize items, spaces, and
conditions and subsequently present information. The technology offers interaction
capabilities and virtual-physical experiences through a flexible environment. It is
especially suitable for teaching unsafe, complex, or abstract concepts and for pre-
senting objects that students can’t see. It also improves understanding, problem-­
solving, creative thinking, and motivation (Reisoğlu, Topu, Yılmaz, Yılmaz, &
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 291

Göktaş, 2017; Yilmaz & Goktas, 2017). According to Billinghurst (2002), AR tech-

nology has matured to such an extent that it can be applied in various areas, educa-
tion being one to which this technology can be especially valuable. Unlike VR, AR
interfaces allow users to see the real world at the same time as virtual images that
are associated with real sites and objects. The educational experience offered by AR
is supported by the smooth interaction between real and virtual environments.
Virtual and augmented reality systems can form combined higher-order systems
using software-based content linking, interchange, and adaptation. In addition, the
use of adaptable avatars designed to facilitate learning and improve collaboration
through mixed reality (MR) is clearly emerging. Several researchers have explored
the collaboration between MR spaces, as a system in which an expert user in VR
shares viewpoint and gesture cues with an AR user in order to help him complete a
real world task. Recent work in telepresence has “demonstrated realistic full-body
reconstructions of distant persons, placed in a local environment, and viewed
through AR” (Piumsomboon et al., 2018). In the same research, it is stated that “in
such mixed systems, the integration of a remote user is often represented by a
graphical persona, or avatar, which creates an illusion to both the user and the col-
laborator of being present in the environment and co-present with their partner”.
The future work in this area targets the improvement of empathy in remote coop-
eration through the recognition of facial expressions in the avatar (Lara-Cabrera &
Camacho, 2018). The application of such systems to education seems to have the
effect of teaching recognition and expressing feelings to students, particularly stu-
dents  with special educational needs and/or disabilities (da Cunha, Neiva, & da
Silva, 2018), where we often find a lack of realistic recognition of nonverbal com-
munication and thus develop inappropriate social skills and attitudes.

2.3  Hardware

Laptops and tablets providing students with new tools for learning followed the use
of desktop computers in the classroom. Today, personalized communication devices
used by the majority of the population such as mobile phones and phablets form an
ecosystem that can support the use of technological learning tools. Those devices
are actively being employed today for multiple uses: they can be used as an aug-
mented reality device enabling users to explore their spaces and link real-life infor-
mation to virtual links or information overlays. Our research work on learning
systems actively employs user-sourced hardware to implement games based on
everyday objects sourced from real life (a restaurant paper matte and plastic letters
from the game Scrabble ™). Following the gamification analysis, content design
and development of the augmented reality-based learning environment resulted in
the development of a multimedia-enabled game that was actively used as a tool for
teaching local history (Kaimara, Deliyannis, Oikonomou, & Aggelakos, 2018;
Kaimara, Kokkinomilioti, et al., 2018).
292 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

The same hardware is also used to facilitate the deployment of virtual reality
applications that feature stereoscopic-immersive audiovisual content. We currently
explore the capabilities of Google Cardboard SDK for the development of interac-
tive VR and 360° educational video content. The content is delivered in noninterac-
tive format through YouTube that supports VR and 360° video delivery, while
interactivity is facilitated via Unity game engine. Details about the development of
those case studies will be provided below.
Ultimately, mobile phones and tablets can also drive the development of holo-
graphic information systems which may also feature interactivity through the
device. Under this scenario, content represented in video or interactive format is
displayed on screen and then reflected within the holographic surfaces, presenting
the information to the user.
Researchers have already identified that “smart” devices, which are small, por-
table, and affordable (e.g., smartphones and tablets), support and engage learners
anytime, and anywhere, and improve learning, in many times in playful context
(Gros, 2016; Zhu et al., 2016). When such technologies are utilized in the class-
room, many questions arise, and researchers investigate how learning can be
improved within all educational levels: primary, secondary education, university,
and military schools. Take for example Carter, Greenberg, and Walker (2017) who
found through their research that students had lower performance when using lap-
tops. This negative effect observed when laptops and tablets are permitted without
restriction. They clarify that they cannot relate their results to the effect of laptops
into classrooms in which portable devices are deliberately used in teaching, as it can
enhance the ability of students to maintain the material. Negative results are mainly
attributed to the distraction and use of the Internet. Student engagement with the
laptop and without control of the content resulted being distracted, starting to com-
municate via messaging, having fun, and pretending to be working on something
related to the lesson (Jeong, Shin, & Park, 2015). On the other hand, assuming
control over the use of in-classroom technologies allows students and teachers to
access information via high-speed Internet, and the capability to link their systems
to interactive whiteboards makes the lesson more flexible and highly interactive.
Clearly, careful use of laptops can enrich the learning process, giving the opportu-
nity for peer and teacher interaction, while increasing engagement and learning
(Zhu et al., 2016).
Since mobile devices are light, portable, and intuitive to use as they provide a
touch screen, they are preferred over the use of laptops or desktop computers (Van
Thienen, Sajjadi, & De Troyer, 2015). Devices, such as tablets and smartphones,
enable users to have unparalleled access to communication and information, facili-
tating what has been termed “anytime, anywhere learning” or seamless learning,
due to their increased affordability and functionality, their small size, and portability
(Clarke & Svanaes, 2014; Fokides, 2018). Tablets also represent a space for enter-
tainment and a space of freedom and escapism from the “world of adults” (Dias
et al., 2016). Nowadays, most children are familiar with digital tools and applica-
tions, and many of them use them within their mobile devices every day. Mobile
digital tools can support both individual and social constructions of knowledge
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 293

simultaneously in virtually any context. Students need to be given more control over
their own learning. Teaching students inside and outside the classroom with the
same devices they use in their everyday life is engaging and motivating and pro-
motes personalized learning, collaboration, and learning among peers (van’t Hooft,
2008; Kaimara, Deliyannis, Oikonomou, Papadopoulou, & Fokides 2018). In a
classroom environment, students cooperate best if they focus and collaborate in a
common workplace. This is a difficult task to implement at a desktop-based lecture.
Students working on separate computers do not easily interact despite the fact that
they sit next to each other. On the converse with the use of mobile devices, new
opportunities for a highly interesting interactive learning experience are emerging
(Billinghurst, 2002). An experience like that enhances collaborative learning, since
students can sit together and see each other. Moreover, when students work together,
the space between them is used for nonverbal communication, such as glances and
gestures. This results in a conversational behavior that is more similar to physical
face-to-face cooperation than display-based cooperation (Billinghurst & Duenser,
2012). A remarkable contribution of mobile devices is also mentioned in their use in
the field of education of people with special educational needs and especially of
students in the autism spectrum. New possibilities have emerged with touch screen
technologies bringing new opportunities to users to facilitate the handling and to
enhance self-communication through and message composition (Billinghurst &
Duenser, 2012; Gonçalves et al., 2014). To extend the capabilities of SLEs further,
one may choose to employ virtual environments for the development of collabora-
tion. The technology is ready for deployment, and researchers may be interested to
employ systems such as Mini-Me supporting mixed reality collaboration
(Piumsomboon et al., 2018).
Activities with robotics for the promotion of learning have been employed
worldwide for a rather long period of time (Benitti, 2012). Robots used as nonhu-
man agents can improve positive attitude to the learning process in general, can
reduce risks of early school leaving (Daniela & Strods, 2018), and can improve
collaboration skills with peer and teachers, problem-solving skills, learning motiva-
tion, and students’ willingness to improve their academic achievement and knowl-
edge. Robot-student interactions shouldn’t be strictly controlled. Teachers should
allow students to experiment with robots (Chang, Lee, Po-Yao, Chin-Yeh, & Gwo-­
Dong, 2010), and they should provide assistance only when students cannot over-
come learning problems themselves. Telepresence robots have the potential to
expand access to primary school education and enhance the learning experience and
cognitive and social outcomes for students absent from the classroom (Cha, Greczek,
Song, & Matarić, 2017). There is evidence in support of peer-robot behavioral per-
sonalization having a positive influence on learning when embedded in a learning
environment for an extended period of time (Baxter, Ashurst, Read, Kennedy, &
Belpaeme, 2017). Robotics provides an effective way for children to learn, impacts
on children’s social skills, helps them to develop teamwork skills, and encourages
them to use their imagination, creativity, and innovation in design. It may motivate
children to write more easily, as they document their designs and experiments
294 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

(Johnson, 2003). Researches also have shown robots do a great job of engaging
students on the autism spectrum (Feil-Seifer & Mataric, 2008).
To enable users, including students, to control devices, such as robots, various
innovative Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) controllers have emerged (Savosin,
Prakoonwit, Tian, Liang, & Pan, 2017), allowing advanced sensing scenarios to be
realized. Leap Motion is one of the controllers, a hands movement sensor designed
to sense and immerse the user’s hands in a virtual environment. It can be placed on
a flat surface in front of the user. This technology resulted from the need to manipu-
late objects of the virtual environment, which due to the use of masks was impos-
sible to handle. The Leap Motion Controller represents a revolutionary input device
for gesture-based human-computer interaction (Guna, Jakus, Pogačnik, Tomažič, &
Sodnik, 2014).
However, what we consider today novel is already outdated as the hardware sec-
tor moves toward the nano-level, making hardware invisible and self-sufficient.
Sensing technologies pave the future in many interdisciplinary fields (Deliyannis,
2016), and we expect that our devices will soon be able to collectively evaluate user
data, actions, and behavior, a process that will be orchestrated using artificial intel-
ligence (Arnaldi, Guitton, & Moreau, 2018; Cena, Rapp, Likavec, & Marcengo,
2018; North & Kumta, 2018). On the view of those developments, the openness of
SLE standards and the availability to include new technologies will define the tech-
nological capabilities of such systems and influence their use and adoption by the
users.

3  Game Development Environments and Gamification

If we approach SLEs from the software engineering perspective, they can be classi-
fied as information systems, i.e., a system that combines hardware, software, con-
tent, and users. Since users are an integral part of the system, it is informative to
examine their roles within this structure. We identify different categories of users
each with a distinct role within such a typical system: Content Experts, System
Developers, and End Users. Typically in such an organization, content experts pro-
vide the knowledge and the learning methods, and system developers capture those
functional requirements and subsequently implement the content and a functional
system, which is then used by the end users. This process has proved to be problem-
atic for many reasons. Often, the lack of communication or awareness of the require-
ments and capabilities between the developing parties results in systems, which are
dysfunctional and limiting, thus become unusable. This is a typical software engi-
neering deficiency that needs to be resolved using a different approach.
Recent developments in the area of video game production allow us to merge the
gap between content experts and developers, as new prototyping methods require
less specialization in terms of content production. In addition, rapid prototyping
techniques and visual authoring environments allow early previews of the function-
ality and the aesthetics of the end system, permitting changes to be implemented
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 295

before the actual system is built. This process is highly supported within game
engines such as Unity and Unreal3D, which are both used to build cross-platform
games for a wide variety of systems. The unification of multimedia content, such as
video, 2D and 3D models and graphics, particles, lighting and dynamic effects,
audio processing, 360° panoramas and videos, scripting, coding, and libraries that
extend their functionality, enables developers to move beyond specifications and
create early system prototypes that the content experts can test and modify. In addi-
tion, specific new specializations such as user experience and interaction designers
following state-of-the-art technological trends permit the development of environ-
ments with full end-user functionality and professional look and feel.
Gamification is an integral part of every game, and it does not necessarily require
the use of technology, as it may be applied to everyday objects using gamified sce-
narios. For example, getting students to clean up a beach full of garbage can be
realized through a gamified scenario in the following manner: students are separated
in teams, and they are provided with equipment (bags for separation and collection
of items and protective equipment such as gloves, boots, etc.). Then the hidden
treasure scenario is introduced where all garbage is treasure, and they have to col-
lect the treasure in order to prove that they are the most worthy team to rule the
kingdom. So they have to collect as much treasure as possible and then they can rule
the place forever. This process may be also implemented using only technology,
through a computer game, where, for example, gamers can learn virtually how to
sort garbage or, in mixed-reality mode, where students holding AR-enabled tablets
will be able to collect common rubbish and identify their properties and how long
they take to dissolve in nature.
The use of applications to implement gamified scenarios does not have to be
complex. For example, programming an AR system to identify items is a process
that does not require programming. However, when one requires higher-level inter-
action, say when two objects are collected, the system to be able to congratulate the
student, this can either be achieved without programming via the creation of a third
item which combines the other two or via programming. This is the case employed
within the second case study described below.

3.1  Sensing for Smart Learning Environments

In the past, the main way a user could communicate with a device was with the use
of standard input-output devices: keyboard, screen, and mouse. More specific input
devices were introduced for specific purposes including track pads for laptop com-
puters, touch screens, interactive pen displays and tablets, different types of mouse,
keyboards, gaming controllers, laser keyboards, and voice- and camera-based ges-
ture recognition. Today the number of communication components contained within
a relatively standard smartphone or laptop is phenomenal and includes gyroscope,
high-definition cameras, accelerometer, laser projector, gesture recognition, aug-
mented and virtual reality projection modes, Amphiotik 3D Audio, and many more.
296 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

4  Developing Case Studies Through New Media

The first case study is a typical cross-media implementation where access to the
material is provided in a multimodal manner (Kaimara, P., Deliyannis, I.,
Oikonomou, A. & Aggelakos K. 2018). The material presented here focuses on
inclusive education. In a pilot project, the goal was to demonstrate to teachers a
material, which, according to literature (indicatively FitzGerald et al., 2013; Hwang,
Hong, Chuang, & Kiu, 2017; Kerawalla, Luckin, Seljeflot, & Woolard, 2006;
Mikropoulos, 2006; Wu, Lee, Chang, & Liang, 2013; Yuen, Yaoyuneyong, &
Johnson, 2011), could be an alternative way for teaching, to show how augmented
reality can help students with special educational needs (SEN) due to a disability,
and, at the same time, to promote the possibilities that AR offers to bridge the gap
between SEN and students of typical development. By aiming on the book cover of
the Greek language textbook (Fig.  1) used at school for first grade students, the
heroes of the book emerge as an interactive overlay enabling students to click on
their phone screen and watch the displayed story unfold.
Similarly, the same method is used for the second instance. When the student
aims the phone toward the letter “A,” video animations projecting audio information
about the pronunciation of the letter /ˈa/ is heard through the phone speakers. At the
same time, an animation is displayed demonstrating how the letter α is written (fine
mobility of writing; Fig. 2), while an animation of a cow, which in Greek is called
/a.ʝɛ.ˈla.ða/ and is used to demonstrate the use of the letter α, slides in the frame
shouting /ˈa/ (Figs. 3 and 4).
Ultimately, the name Anna written as Άννα in Greek is both written via anima-
tion and pronounced. The development of this case study is simple, and it uses an

Fig. 1  The student can aim the AR-enabled phone either toward the laptop screen that contains the
trigger or the actual textbook to enable content delivery
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 297

Fig. 2  Demonstrating the way that the Greek letter α can be written

Fig. 3  Demonstrating how the Greek letter α sounds

easy augmented reality environment for its implementation. Our interaction require-
ments were basic, and the students could only interact with the characters of the
book that were used as avatars in order to explain how the presentation works.
The second case study was designed and developed as a complementary tool
designed to allow teachers and students with special learning difficulties, such as
dyslexia, to approach the subject in an alternate, multisensory, and playful way
(Kaimara, Kokkinomilioti, et al., 2018). The gaming experience that is being devel-
oped is an interactive gamified process that, in its traditional form, has been proven
298 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

Fig. 4  Forming and reading the name Άννα (in english: Anna)

to support both individual and collaborative learning. The theoretical study is

framed by the design and development of an interactive exploration system to gather
data from participants so that through this action they can get to know historical
facts and discover new elements with interactive game play. Action is implemented
using augmented reality. Students with special learning difficulties are called upon
to critically explore historical content and then to place a series of elements that act
as a trigger on a “historical map.” Each element triggers additional historical infor-
mation, and when all elements are placed in the right order, aspects of historical
name emerge, which until now was unknown to them, enabling them access to fur-
ther historical content that complements the story.
The presentation follows gamification featuring specific rules. Students of the
third grade of Greek Secondary School are divided into six teams (about four stu-
dents in each team), and they are randomly assigned an equal number of plastic
letters which are linked to specific video-based historical content clues (Fig.  5).
They have to assign those letters to specific locations on the map, after watching
each video content item triggered by each letter. Placing the letters in the correct
positions results in the formation of the name of “Kapodistrias,” who was the first
governor of Greece to the newly established Greek state after 1821. Then, by
­scanning this new item (Fig. 6), a video is displayed about the life of this historical
figure that completes the story and congratulates the historical investigators.
The system features printed cards featuring a summary of the video content for
each letter, each featuring short historical paragraphs, short sentences, a content
summary, and well-structured text with headings, highlighting important terms in
bold notation; Scrabble™ game letters and augmented reality enabled audiovisual
content for enhancement and animation of the game, video, audio/text narratives,
Map, and clear navigation guidelines (rules) described using video instructions at
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 299

Fig. 5  Cards referring to historical content

Fig. 6  The “Map” that contains predefined locations for letter placement. Here letters from the
surrounding points have been merged to the center, and it is used as a new trigger for content

the beginning of the game. In that respect, we have seen how individual triggers can
be combined in higher-level order triggers, enabling the development of more com-
plex gaming scenarios. The same technique may be employed with other physical
items such as pictures, toys, etc., provided that they feature sufficient contrast that
allows recognition by the AR system.
300 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

The third case study utilizes the fairy-tale paradigm (Kaimara, Renessi,
Papadoloulos, Deliyannis, & Dimitra, 2017). In Greek educational system and in
the school framework, the project “Love of Reading” was promoted through the
collaboration of the Ministry of Education and the National Book Centre and was
approved by the Pedagogical Institute. The fairy tales, modern and traditional, have
been proved to be a very helpful factor for love of reading, especially for kids in
primary school, as children of this age have lots of fantasy and love fairy tales,
myths, and fantasy stories (Christodoulou-Gliaou, 2007). Fairy tales appear to aid
the desire of students for joyful reading, with the active support of both multimodal-
ity and the activities of creative writing. The purpose of fairy tale presented here
which is entitled “Fantasy creates history” is to introduce folklore as well as the
life’s values of previous years to the children of the first three grades of primarily
school. The main aim is to transfer knowledge concerning traditional professions
that are either dying out or no longer exist. Within this example the new generation
is presented with information for which they are not able to create images and use
their imagination. Technology has the ability to link the past to the present and make
the revival of past activities possible in the classroom. By using digital storytelling,
animation, and augmented and virtual reality information inclusion (Fig.  7), the
characters of the fairy tale become alive and transition from the mythical to the real
world, and in a playful way they recapture the past. The final goal is for the children
to create their own fairy tale. Thus, they get motivated to seek information and visu-
alize their thoughts, with the support of writing, gaming experience, and
dramatization.
A learning scenario is typically regarded as the description of a learning process
that is characterized by a focused module, specific educational goals, principles, and

Fig. 7  Integration of the digital dialogues into a digital VR game supporting Oculus, Gear VR,
Unity, Cardboard, Android, and iOS systems
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 301

Fig. 8  The “talking” book

in action using AR

practices. A learning scenario is implemented, in traditional systems, through sev-

eral educational activities. The suggested scenario implemented here adopts the
general principles of the Cross-thematic Curriculum Framework and the analytical
curriculums. It deploys traditional learning methods such as reading the book and
incorporates Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) into the class-
room. The process is constructive for students who first listen to the fairy tale in the
classroom, and then they were asked to record their voice impersonating various
character dialogues and integrate them within a VR digital game and ultimately use
AR to discover new information through the talking book (Fig. 8).
The final stage of the learning scenario included the dramatization of the story,
which was reproduced as a theatrical play (Fig. 9) based on the text of the “talking”
book.

5  Conclusions

We have discussed how smart learning environments may be realized through the
combination of gamification and mixed-media applications involving augmented
reality and virtual reality media. The importance of this approach is that it is
302 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

Fig. 9  The “talking” book in action as a theatrical play

technology-­agnostic, meaning that it can be adaptively applied to scenarios ranging

from total absence of technology to cases where the whole experience is fully vir-
tual and fully immersive. This is particularly useful for the evolution of smart learn-
ing environments as they prove to provide a solid theoretical basis for scalable
learning experiences both in terms of content and technology. Thus, Smart Pedagogy
is very much based on the theoretical framework Technological, Pedagogical, and
Content Knowledge (TPACK), which refers to the dynamic association of the three
categories of knowledge: (a) content, (b) pedagogy, and (c) technology. The future
of the domain is to develop complex gamification systems that do not require pro-
gramming skills, allowing content experts to use them with ease and confidence.

References

Alexis, P. (2017). R-tourism: Introducing the potential impact of robotics and service automation
in tourism. Ovidius University Annals, Series Economic Sciences, 17(1), 211–216.
Arnaldi, B., Guitton, P., & Moreau, G. (2018). Virtual reality and augmented reality: Myths and
realities. Hoboken, NJ/London: John Wiley & Sons.
Baxter, P., Ashurst, E., Read, R., Kennedy, J., & Belpaeme, T. (2017). Robot education peers in
a situated primary school study: Personalization promotes child learning. PLoS One, 12(5),
e0178126.
Becker, K. (2007). Teaching teachers about serious games. Paper presented at the World Conference
on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2007, Vancouver, Canada.
http://www.editlib.org/p/25705
Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic
review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978–988.
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 303

Billinghurst, M. (2002). Augmented Reality in Education, New Horizons for Learning. Retrieved
July 25, 2018, from https://goo.gl/YdoKmT
Billinghurst, M., & Duenser, A. (2012). Augmented reality in the classroom. Computer, 45(7),
56–63.
Blumberg, C., Debby, E., Almonte, J.  S. A., & Hasimoto, N. (2013). Serious games: What are
they? What do they do? Why should we play them? In K. E. Dill (Ed.), The Oxford handbook
of media psychology. New York: OUP.
Carter, S. P., Greenberg, K., & Walker, M. S. (2017). The impact of computer usage on academic per-
formance: Evidence from a randomized trial at the United States Military Academy. Economics
of Education Review, 56, 118–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.12.005
Cena, F., Rapp, A., Likavec, S., & Marcengo, A. (2018). Envisioning the future of personalization
through personal informatics: A user study. International Journal of Mobile Human Computer
Interaction (IJMHCI), 10(1), 52–66.
Cha, E., Greczek, J., Song, A., & Matarić, M. J. (2017). My classroom robot: Exploring telepres-
ence for K-12 education in a virtual environment. Paper presented at the Robot and Human
Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on.
Chang, C.-W., Lee, J.-H., Po-Yao, C., Chin-Yeh, W., & Gwo-Dong, C. (2010). Exploring the possi-
bility of using humanoid robots as instructional tools for teaching a second language in primary
school. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(2), 13.
Christodoulou-Gliaou, N. (2007) Philanagnosía,  paidiká éntipa kai dimiouryikótita ton paid-
ión. Paidagoyikó Institoúto. [Love of Reading, children's publications and creativity of chil-
dren. Pedagogical Institute]. Retrieved, May 22, 2018 from http://www.pischools.gr/download/
publications/epitheorisi/teyxos12/xristodoulou.pdf
Clarke, B., & Svanaes, S. (2014). An updated literature review on the use of tablets in education.
Tablets for Schools. London: Family Kids & Youth.
da Cunha, R. D., Neiva, F. W., & da Silva, R. L. S. (2018). Virtual reality as a support tool for the
treatment of people with intellectual and multiple disabilities: A systematic literature review.
Revista de Informática Teórica e Aplicada, 25(1), 67–81.
Daniela, L., Strods, R. (2018) Robot as agent in reducing risks of early school leaving. In L. Daniela
(Ed.), Innovations, technologies and research in education (pp  140–158). Newcastle upon
Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ISBN (10): 1-5275-0622-3.
De Carolis, B. N., Gena, C., Kuflik, T., & Lanir, J. (2018). Special issue on advanced interfaces for
cultural heritage. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.02.007
Deliyannis, I. (2006). I Kinonía tis Plirophorías kai o Rólos ton Diadrastikón Poliméson.
[Information Society and the role of Interactive Multimedia]. Athens: Fagotto Books. 
Deliyannis, I. (2007). Diadrastiká polimésa kai psiphiakí tekhnoloyía stis tékhnes [Interactive
Multimedia and Digital Technology in the Arts], (Vol. 2). Athens: Fagotto Books.
Deliyannis, I. (2012). From interactive to experimental multimedia. In I.  Deliyannis (Ed.),
Interactive multimedia (pp. 3–12). Rijeka, Croatia: Intech.
Deliyannis, I. (2013). Sensor recycling and reuse. International Journal of Sensor and Related
Networks, 1(1), 8–19.
Deliyannis, I. (2016). Interactive multimedia installation art development using recycled input
and sensing devices. International Journal of Arts and Technology, 9(2), 108–125. https://doi.
org/10.1504/IJART.2016.077235
Deliyannis, I., Giannakoulopoulos, A., & Oikonomidou, R. (2013). Engineering and design issues
in urban-oriented edutainment systems. Paper presented at the Hybrid City II: Subtle rEvolu-
tions, Athens, Greece.
Deliyannis, I., Giannakoulopoulos, A., & Varlamis, I. (2011). Utilising an educational framework
for the development of edutainment scenarios. Paper presented at the 5th European Conference
on Games Based Learning ECGBL 2011.
Deliyannis, I., & Honorato, D. (2016). Developing augmented reality applications using branded
authoring environments. In D. Ioannis, K. Petros, & B. Christina (Eds.), Experimental multi-
media systems for interactivity and strategic innovation (pp. 73–101). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
304 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

Deliyannis, I., Karydis, I., & Anagnostou, K. (2011). Enabling social software-based musical con-
tent for computer games and virtual worlds. Paper presented at the 4th International Conference
on Internet Technologies and Applications (ITA2011), Wrexham, North Wales, UK.
Deliyannis, I., & Papadopoulou, E. (2017). Creating innovative cultural heritage experiences using
adaptive game-based augmented-reality and web technologies. American Journal of Arts and
Design, 1(1), 8–14.
Deliyannis, I., & Papaioannou, G. (2014). Augmented reality for archaeological environments
on mobile devices: A novel open framework. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry,
14(4), 1–10.
Deliyannis, I., & Papaioannou, G. (2016). Augmented reality edutainment systems for open-space
archaeological environments: The case of the old fortress, Corfu, Greece. In I.  Deliyannis,
P. Kostagiolas, & C. Banou (Eds.), Experimental multimedia systems for interactivity and stra-
tegic innovation (pp. 307–323). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Deliyannis, I., & Papaioannou, G. (2017). Combining interaction design and gaming technologies
for the development of interactive archaeological content presentation systems. International
Journal of Advancements in Technology, 8(1), 1–5.
Dias, P., Brito, R., Ribbens, W., Daniela, L., Rubene, Z., Dreier, M., et  al. (2016). The role of
parents in the engagement of young children with digital technologies: Exploring tensions
between rights of access and protection, from ‘Gatekeepers’ to ‘Scaffolders’. Global Studies
of Childhood, 6(4), 414–427.
Falk, J. H., Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Benckendorff, P. (2012). Travel and learning: A neglected
tourism research area. Annals of Tourism Research, 39(2), 908–927. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
annals.2011.11.016
Feil-Seifer, D., & Mataric, M. (2008). Robot-assisted therapy for children with autism spec-
trum disorders. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on
Interaction Design and Children.
Ferraro, A. (2016). Evaluation of a temporary, immersive learning community based on world-
schooling. Journal of Unschooling and Alternative Learning, 10(20), 16-27. Retrieved, May
20, 2018 from https://goo.gl/PQX69L
FitzGerald, E., Ferguson, R., Adams, A., Gaved, M., Mor, Y., & Thomas, R. (2013). Augmented
reality and mobile learning: The state of the art. International Journal of Mobile and Blended
Learning, 5(4), 43–58.
Fokides, E. (2018). Teaching basic programming concepts to young primary school students
using tablets: Results of a pilot project. International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning
(IJMBL), 10(1), 34–47.
Fokides, E., & Tsolakidis, C. (2008). Virtual reality in education: A theoretical approach for
road safety training to students. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 11(2).
Retrieved, May 22, 2018 from http://www.eurodl.org/materials/contrib/2008/Fokides_
Tsolakidis.pdf
Gerzon, E. (2007). Worldschooling. Retrieved April 1, 2018, from: http://eligerzon.com/world-
schooling.php
Gobee, S., & Durairajah, V. (2015). Autonomous tour guide robot using embedded system control.
Procedia Computer Science, 76, 126–133.
Gonçalves, A., Souza, M., Silva, R., Silva, D., Bueno, P., & Balthazar, G. (2014). Desenvolvimento
de Jogos Educacionais na Área de Matemática em Escola de Ensino Fundamental. Paper pre-
sented at the XIX Congresso Internacional de Informática Educativa.
Gros, B. (2016). The dialogue between emerging pedagogies and emerging technologies the future
of ubiquitous learning. Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
Guna, J., Jakus, G., Pogačnik, M., Tomažič, S., & Sodnik, J. (2014). An analysis of the precision
and reliability of the leap motion sensor and its suitability for static and dynamic tracking.
Sensors, 14(2), 3702–3720.
Heim, M. (1995). The design of virtual reality. Body & Society, 1(3–4), 65–77.
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 305

Hitchens, M., & Tulloch, R. (2018). A gamification design for the classroom. Interactive Technology
and Smart Education Vol. 15 Issue: 1, pp.28-45, https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-05-2017-0028 
Hoel, T., & Mason, J. (2018). Standards for smart education – Towards a development framework.
Smart Learning Environments, 5(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0052-3
Holt, J., & Holt, J. C. (2004). Instead of education: Ways to help people do things better. Boulder,
CO: Sentient Publications.
Hwang, M.  Y., Hong, J.  C., Chuang, C.  Y., & Kiu, M.  C. (2017, October). Designing shaking
G-sensor in mobile devices for students with special needs. In ECGBL 2017 11th European
Conference on Game-Based Learning (p. 278). Academic Conferences and Publishing Limited.
Jarvin, L. (2015). Edutainment, games, and the future of education in a digital world. New
Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2015(147), 33–40.
Jeong, S., Shin, W. S., & Park, I. (2015). Students’ use of notebook computers in the college class-
room: Benefits and pitfalls. Educational Technology International, 16(1), 31–57.
Johnson, J. (2003). Children, robotics, and education. Artificial Life and Robotics, 7(1–2), 16–21.
Kaimara, P., Deliyannis, I., Oikonomou, A. & Aggelakos K. (2018). Diadrastiká polimésa kai
psiphiaká paikhnídia sto plevró tis sinekpaídefsis. Sto Paidí kai Plirophoría: Anazitísis kai
Prosengísis Istorías, Dikaíou-Deontoloyías, Politismoú, sel. 310-322, Epistimonikí epimé-
lia: María Kanellopoúlou-Mpóti. Ekdósis Oselótos. ISBN 978-960-564-609-7. [Interactive
multimedia and digital games by the side of inclusive education. In M., Kanellopoulou-Boti
(Eds) Child and Information: Searches on History, Regulation, Culture, pp. 310-322, Ocelotos
Publications. ISBN 978-960-564-609-7]. 
Kaimara, P., Deliyannis, I., Oikonomou, A., Papadopoulou, A. & Fokides E. (2018). Smart
Education: Psiphiaká paikhnídia os kínitro yia máthisi. [Smart Education: Digital games as
learning motivation]. Paper presented at 2nd International Experiential Conference on Applied
Teaching "Teaching Trends and Challenges in Contemporary Learning Environments" April
27-29, 2018, Drama-Greece (Proceedings in press) 
Kaimara, P.  Kokkinomilioti, E., Sdrolia, M., Deliyannis, I., Oikonomou, A. & Aggelakos, K.
(2018). Anaptíssontas éna diadrastikó poliaisthitiriakó sístima epafximénis pragmatikótitas kai
paikhnidikó senário yia tin parousíasi istorikoú periekhoménou se paidiá me idikés mathisiakés
diskolíes. Sto Paidí kai Plirophoría: Anazitísis kai Prosengísis Istorías, Dikaíou-Deontoloyías,
Politismoú, sel. 484-497, Epistimonikí epimélia: María Kanellopoúlou-Mpóti. Ekdósis
Oselótos. ISBN 978-960-564-609-7. [Developing an interactive multisensory platform of aug-
mented reality and game scenario for the presentation of historical content on children with spe-
cial learning difficulties. In M., Kanellopoulou-Boti (Eds) Child and Information: Searches on
History, Regulation, Culture, pp. 484-497, Ocelotos Publications. ISBN 978-960-564-609-7]. 
Kaimara, P., Renessi, E., Papadoloulos, S., Deliyannis, I., & Dimitra, A. (2017). Fairytale meets the
ICT’s: Vitalizing professions of the past. Paper presented at the Creative Writing Conference,
Ionian University, Corfu, Greece (Proceedings in press available in English).
Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2010). Introduction: Learning by design. E-Learning and Digital
Media, 7, 198. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2010.7.3.198
Ke, F., & Hsu, Y.-C. (2015). Mobile augmented-reality artifact creation as a component of mobile
computer-supported collaborative learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 26, 33–41.
Kerawalla, L., Luckin, R., Seljeflot, S., & Woolard, A. (2006). “Making it real”: Exploring the
potential of augmented reality for teaching primary school science. Virtual Reality, 10(3–4),
163–174.
Kidd, S. H., & Crompton, H. (2016). Augmented learning with augmented reality. In Mobile learn-
ing design (pp. 97–108). Singapore: Springer.
Kolodner, J.  L., Crismond, D., Gray, J., Holbrook, J., & Puntambekar, S. (1998). Learning by
design from theory to practice. In Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning
Sciences (Vol. 98, pp. 16–22).
Kolodner, J. L., Hmelo, C. E., & Narayanan, N. H. (1996). Problem-based learning meets case-­
based reasoning. In Proceedings of the 1996 International Conference on Learning Sciences
(pp. 188–195). International Society of the Learning Sciences.
306 I. Deliyannis and P. Kaimara

Lanier, J., & Biocca, F. (1992). An insider’s view of the future of virtual reality. Journal of
Communication, 42(4), 150–172.
Lara-Cabrera, R., & Camacho, D. (2018). A taxonomy and state of the art revision on affective
games. Future Generation Computer Systems.
Lepouras, G., & Vassilakis, C. (2004). Virtual museums for all: Employing game technology for
edutainment. Virtual Reality, 8(2), 96–106.
Marsick, V. J., Watkins, K. E., Scully-Russ, E., & Nicolaides, A. (2017). Rethinking informal and
incidental learning in terms of complexity and the social context. Journal of Adult Learning,
Knowledge and Innovation, 1(1), 27–34.
Mavroudi, A., Giannakos, M., & Krogstie, J.  (2018). Supporting adaptive learning pathways
through the use of learning analytics: Developments, challenges and future opportunities.
Interactive Learning Environments, 26(2), 206–220. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.
1292531
Mikropoulos, T. A. (2006). The computer as a cognitive tool. Title in Greek: Ο υπολογιστής ως
γνωστικό εργαλείο Αθήνα: Ελληνικά Γράμματα.
Nardelli, E. (2010). A classification framework for interactive digital artworks. Paper presented at
the International ICST Conference on User Centric Media, Palma, Mallorca.
North, K., & Kumta, G. (2018). Information and communication technologies supporting the
digital transformation of knowledge work knowledge management (pp.  243–271). Cham,
Switzerland: Springer.
Pavlidis, G. P., & Markantonatou, S. (2018). Playful education and innovative gamified learning
approaches handbook of research on educational design and cloud computing in modern class-
room settings (pp. 321–341). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Pedagogical Institute. http://www.minedu.gov.gr/rss/7594-08-09-10-i-filanagnosia-sta-800-olo-
imera-dimotika-sxoleia
Piumsomboon, T., Lee, G. A., Hart, J. D., Ens, B., Lindeman, R. W., Thomas, B. H., et al. (2018).
Mini-me: An adaptive avatar for mixed reality remote collaboration. Paper presented at the
Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal,
QC. Retrieved April 1, 2018, from:
Poslad, S. (2009). Ubiquitous computing: Basics and vision. Chichester: Wiley Online Library.
Poulimenou, S.M., Kaimara, P., & Deliyannis, I (2017). Anádixi tis istorikís kai politistikís
klironomías méso diadrastikón diadromón Aphíyisis kai Epafximéni Pragmatikótitas.
[Highlighting the historical and cultural heritage through interactive narrative routes and
augmented reality (pp  619-627)]. In Proceedings of the 2nd Pan-Hellenic Conference on
Digitization of Cultural Heritage, Volos, Greece, 1st to 3rd of December 2017. Retrieved April
1, 2018 from: http://euromed2017.eu/wp-content/themes/euromed/conference/documents/
EUROMED_2017_%CE%A0%CF%81%CE%B1%CE%BA%CF%84%CE%B9%CE%BA%
CE%AC_%CE%A3%CF%85%CE%BD%CE%B5%CE%B4%CF%81%CE%AF%CE%BF
%CF%85_Final-2v00.pdf
Rebelo, F., Noriega, P., Duarte, E., & Soares, M. (2012). Using virtual reality to assess user experi-
ence. Human Factors, 54(6), 964–982.
Reisoğlu, I., Topu, B., Yılmaz, R., Yılmaz, T. K., & Göktaş, Y. (2017). 3D virtual learning environ-
ments in education: A meta-review. Asia Pacific Education Review, 18(1), 81–100.
Riyukta, R., Connie, A., & Anne, N. (2018). Are academics ready for smart learning? British
Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 182–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12532
Savosin, D., Prakoonwit, S., Tian, F., Liang, J., & Pan, Z. (2017). Representation of intractable
objects and action sequences in VR using hand gesture recognition. Paper presented at the
International Conference on Technologies for E-Learning and Digital Entertainment.
Serafini, F. (2013). Reading the visual: An introduction to teaching multimodal literacy. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Spector, J. M. (2014). Conceptualizing the emerging field of smart learning environments. Smart
Learning Environments, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0002-7
Developing Smart Learning Environments Using Gamification Techniques and Video… 307

Stone, M. J., & Petrick, J. F. (2013). The educational benefits of travel experiences: A literature
review. Journal of Travel Research, 52(6), 731–744.
The National Book Centre of Greece (EKEBI). Available: http://www.edulll.gr/wp-content/
uploads/2010/11/TROP_PROSKLHSH_98.pdf, http://www.philanagnosia.gr/index.php
Trifonova, A., Ahmed, S.  U., & Jaccheri, L. (2009). SArt: Towards innovation at the intersec-
tion of software engineering and art. In C.  Barry, M.  Lang, W.  Wojtkowski, K.  Conboy, &
G. Wojtkowski (Eds.), Information systems development (pp. 809–827). Boston, MA: Springer
US.
Trifonova, A., Jaccheri, L., & Bergaust, K. (2008). Software engineering issues in interactive
installation art. International Journal of Arts and Technology, 1(1), 43–65.
Tuomi, P., Multisilta, J., Saarikoski, P., & Suominen, J. (2018). Coding skills as a success factor for
a society. Education and Information Technologies, 23(1), 419–434.
van’t Hooft, M. (2008). Personal, mobile, connected: The future of learning. In International hand-
book of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 873–881). Boston,
MA: Springer.
Van Thienen, D., Sajjadi, P., & De Troyer, O. (2015). Smart study: Pen and paper-based e-learning
smart education and smart e-learning (pp. 93–103). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.
Visvizi, A., Lytras, M. D., & Daniela, L. (2018). (Re) defining smart education: Towards dynamic
education and information systems for innovation networks enhancing knowledge discovery
and innovation in the digital era (pp. 1–12). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Wu, H. K., Lee, S. W. Y., Chang, H. Y., & Liang, J. C. (2013). Current status, opportunities and
challenges of augmented reality in education. Computers & Education, 62, 41–49.
Yilmaz, R. M., & Goktas, Y. (2017). Using augmented reality technology in storytelling activities:
Examining elementary students’ narrative skill and creativity. Virtual Reality, 21(2), 75–89.
Yuen, S. C. Y., Yaoyuneyong, G., & Johnson, E. (2011). Augmented reality: An overview and five
directions for AR in education. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange
(JETDE), 4(1), 11.
Zhou, F., Duh, H. B.-L., & Billinghurst, M. (2008). Trends in augmented reality tracking, interac-
tion and display: A review of ten years of ISMAR. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the
7th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality.
Zhu, Z.-T., Yu, M.-H., & Riezebos, P. (2016). A research framework of smart education. Smart
Learning Environments, 3(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0026-2