This document discusses a heuristic evaluation of authoring tools for children to create digital games. It presents the results of evaluations conducted with students and lecturers. The evaluations found that interfaces should be simple and intuitive for children to understand. Tools that use familiar concepts from the real world were preferred. Open source tools that are engaging and fun were seen as most suitable. Usability was improved when designs were child-centered without confusing instructions. The tools were found to help children develop technical and soft skills while improving creativity and self-esteem when creating unique and educational digital games.

1. Heuristic Evaluation of Children’s
Authoring Tool for Game Making
Laili Farhana Md Ibharim¹, Maizatul Hayati Mohamad Yatim²
Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris
4th International Conference on
Education and Information
Management
1

2. Digital Games and Children
Game-based learning (GBL) provide the exposure and opportunity to
the children to show their talents and abilities in making proposed
digital games (Connolly, Stansfield & Boyle, 2009).
2

3. Children in Making Games
• Children as ‘producer’ rather than
‘consumer’ (Kafai, 2006).
Designer
Design
Partner
• Children involved directly in the
research and development process.
Informant
Tester
User
Roles for children in designing
new technologies - adaptation
Druin, 2002.
• Enhance the understanding and
readiness of children to learn (Baytak,
Land & Smith, 2011).
• Exchange of knowledge among students
and to provide students an enjoyable
learning environment (Kamisah & Nurul
Aini, 2013) .
3

4. Authoring Tool for Children
• AT for kids = Allows children to develop or design a digital game
according to the principles and guidelines in the theory of
constructivism (Maizatul Hayati, 2009).
• Good selection of authoring tools:
• Save time
• Easier for children to create something unique and meaningful.
Scratch
Gamefroot
Gamestar Mechanic
4

5. Heuristic Evaluation for Children Product
• Usability: Effectiveness, efficiency & satisfaction.
• Heuristic inspection: Evaluate usability problems of a product based
on predefined sets (Nielsen & Molich, 1990)
Consistency
Familiar way
to program
Familiar
conceptual
model
Childfriendliness
Usability
Heuristic
Inspection
Reflection
Degree of
functionality
Staying in
the flow
Usability heuristic inspection for authoring tool for children (Maizatul Hayati, 2009)
5

6. Evaluation Session
• Participant
• 9 students of Diploma Game Design and Development, UPSI
(semester 4).
• 4 lecturers of Department of Computing, UPSI.
• Instrument
• Observation guided by a set of Heuristic inspection checklist
• Procedure
• Phase 1: Students evaluation
• Phase 2: Students and lecturer evaluation
6

7. Findings
7

8. Result 1: User Acceptance
• Interface design should be
aesthetic, easy to understand,
easy to follow and simple.
• Familiar with the concept of the
environment authoring tool with
real world.
Game Salad
• Open source, portable, and has a
high level of engagement and fun.
Scratch
8

9. Result 2: Interaction Between User and
Authoring Tool
•
Child – centered design (CCD): every
navigation and features in authoring
tools have to function properly.
•
Simple icons that can be seen and
understood by children.
•
Allow children to operate freely and
no confusing instructions.
•
Provision of interactive galleries .
Gamefroot
9

10. Result 3: Creativity and Skill of Children
• May assist children in designing
something new, unique and
particularly useful digital games in
educational value.
• Children become skillful in terms
of technical skill and softskill.
Atmosphir
• Improve their self-esteem and
motivation.
Stencylworks
10

11. Conclusion
• A good selection of authoring tools is the backbone that contributes
to the success of a multimedia product.
• Children need to be exposed to the experience of developing their
own digital games to prove the creativity and skills to be a glorious
cyber generation for a better nation.
11

12. References
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Baytak, A., Land, S.M., & Smith, B.K. (2011). Children as Educational Computer Game Designers: An
Exploratory Study. TOJET, 10(4).
Connolly, T., Stansfield, M., & Boyle, L. (2009). Games-based learning advancements for multisensory human computer interfaces: Techniques and effective practices. Information Science
Reference.
Dix, A. (Ed.). (2004). Human computer interaction. Pearson Education.
Druin, A. (2002). The role of children in the design of new technology. Behaviour and information
technology, 21(1), 1-25.
Kamisah, O., & Nurul Aini, B. (2013). Teachers and Students as Game Designers: Designing Games
for Classroom Integration. In S. de Freitas, M. Ott, M. Popescu, & I. Stanescu (Eds.), New
Pedagogical Approaches in Game Enhanced Learning: Curriculum Integration (pp. 102-113).
Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-3950-8.ch006.
Maizatul Hayati, M.Y. (2009). Children, Computer and Creativity: Usability Guidelines for Designing
Game Authoring Tool for Children. PhD Dissertation, Otto-Von-Guericke University of Magdeburg,
Germany.
Nielsen, J. (2013). Nielsen Norman Group: Evidence-Based User Experience Research, Training, and
Consulting. http://www.nngroup.com.
12

13. THANK YOU
Q & A SESSION
13