A Case Study in Gamification for a Cybersecurity Education Program: A Game for Cryptography

Albert Wong; Dylan Huitema

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

A Case Study in Gamification for a Cybersecurity Education Program: A Game for Cryptography

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a spy-themed cryptography game, built on progress, feedback, and a codex, will raise student engagement with cryptography concepts through a feature-by-feature mapping to gamification research.

desk verdict A design proposal for a cryptography game with a solid literature review and clear design description, but the abstract overstates it as a real-world case study and the engagement claim is unsupported. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.06706 v1 pith:W6QKAJ2T submitted 2025-02-10 cs.CR

Dylan Huitema , Albert Wong This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CR

keywords gamificationcybersecurityeducationcryptographystudentengagementgame-basedlearningCaesarcipherimmediatefeedbackteachingtool

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that a purpose-built cryptography game can raise student engagement and give educators an accessible tool for teaching cybersecurity. Framed as a real-world case study, the game casts the student as a spy who decrypts intercepted messages, starting with a Caesar cipher and progressing through substitution and transposition ciphers, block and stream ciphers, public-key systems, and hash functions. The paper's central claim is that because the game's features—level progression, immediate supportive feedback, an in-game codex, and narrative—match gamification mechanisms that published research links to motivation and retention, using the game will result in higher engagement with cryptography concepts. That conclusion is presented as a design argument from a feature-by-feature mapping, not from a pilot study, user study, or measured learning outcome.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the spy-game learning loop: each level gives the student a coded message to decrypt, offers in-game advice that adapts to attempts and time, updates a codex of cryptographic concepts, and unlocks the next level. The codex is the persistent reference that students are encouraged to consult when later puzzles require deciding which learned concept applies; later levels demand coding and understanding of keys, initialization vectors, and XOR operations. The paper's engagement claim rests on mapping this loop to known gamification mechanisms, chiefly progression and immediate feedback.

What would settle it

A controlled classroom comparison would settle the claim: one group learns cryptography with the game, a matched group with a conventional lecture-and-exercise format, and both are measured for engagement (attendance, time-on-task, voluntary practice) and learning (quiz and problem-set scores). If the game group shows no advantage on either, the paper's central claim fails. A shorter check specific to the game's mechanism: log whether students who use the codex and respond to in-game hints show higher mastery than those who ignore them; the feedback mechanism predicts they should.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's contribution is a concrete, transferable design that converts a standard undergraduate cryptography syllabus into a game loop: intercept a message, attempt a decryption, receive immediate character feedback, update the codex, and advance. The authors assert that this loop turns the binary feedback of traditional programming exercises into a supportive, rewarding experience and that the progress mechanism, by itself, can significantly affect motivation. They conclude that using the game will produce higher student engagement with cryptography concepts, and that similar gamified tools could make cybersecurity education more inviting and effective if widely adopted.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that engagement and retention benefits found in other gamified settings—leaderboards, role-playing progress, virtual reality—transfer unchanged to this particular cryptography game, a transfer the paper supports only by feature-by-feature mapping and not by any pilot, user study, or measured learning outcome.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the central claim is correct, a finished version of the game would give non-specialist instructors a ready-to-use way to teach Caesar ciphers, block and stream ciphers, Diffie-Hellman, and hash functions.
If the central claim is correct, the game's controlled feedback environment would convert cryptography programming exercises from binary success-and-failure into a supportive, iterative process that rewards progress.
If the central claim is correct, the same design pattern—narrative, progression, and a codex—could be extended to other cybersecurity topics beyond cryptography, potentially improving retention and interest in the field.
If the central claim is correct, the game could lower the barrier for K-12 teachers who lack specialist cybersecurity training by embedding explanations and hints directly in the activity.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

Beyond the paper: the design argument implies a directly testable hypothesis—students who play the game will show higher engagement and concept recall than a matched group given conventional lectures and exercises—which the paper itself does not test.
Beyond the paper: the cited leaderboard research suggests that adding competitive scoring, which the proposed game currently lacks, could change motivation in either direction depending on the students, so the current design's omission of leaderboards may itself be a deliberate and testable choice.
Beyond the paper: instrumenting the game to log attempts, hint use, and codex lookups would produce direct engagement measures and could identify which levels stall learning, turning the design into an empirical study.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

Quick take: this is a design proposal dressed up as a case study. The game itself is described clearly, and the literature review is solid enough for a practitioner audience, but the paper has no data, no artifact, and the central claim of improved engagement is asserted, not shown.

What's actually here: the authors walk through the design of a cryptography game (spy theme, Caesar cipher intro, codex, levels covering classical crypto through hash functions). The topic list is well-chosen and matches standard undergraduate courses. The design discussion in Section III-A is concrete and reads like something an instructor could actually build. They also honestly note in Section IV that the goal was to develop concepts, not deliver a finished product. That admission partly undercuts the abstract's 'real-world case study' framing.

The problems are in the framing and the inference. The abstract calls it a real-world case study; Section I calls it a 'ready-to-use educational tool'; Section IV says it's not finished. More importantly, Section III-C ends with 'Based on the above, using the game will result in a higher level of student engagement' - but 'the above' is just a mapping from gamification literature to game features. No engagement is measured, no product is tested, no comparison is made. That's a hypothesis phrased as a result. The stress-test note is right on this point.

That said, the flaws are about overclaiming, not about incoherence. The design logic is reasonable, and the literature review cites relevant work including a similar Diffie-Hellman game, so the novelty is modest. If you're teaching or building gamified cybersecurity exercises, this could be a useful starting point.

Recommendation: I would not send this to a research-oriented peer review in its current form. It's a design concept, not a study. If a venue specifically wants practice-oriented education papers, it could be rescued with major revisions: soften the claims, change the title to a design proposal, and ideally include a small pilot or at least a link to a playable prototype.

Bring it to reading group only if someone is thinking about building a similar game; otherwise it's a 15-minute skim.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a design concept for a cryptography education game, reviews recent literature on cybersecurity education and gamification, and maps the game's features to gamification principles. It claims that using the game will result in higher student engagement with cryptography concepts, but it reports no pilot test, user study, or engagement measurement. Section IV explicitly states that the purpose is to develop the concepts of a game rather than to deliver a finished product, which conflicts with the abstract's claim that the paper presents a real-world case study of a gamified cryptography teaching tool.

Significance. If the game were implemented and evaluated, the design could serve as a useful example of gamification for cryptography education. The paper's literature review, the alignment of topics with common undergraduate cryptography courses, and the explicit acknowledgment in Section IV that this is a concept rather than a finished product are strengths. However, the central claim that the game will improve student engagement is not supported by the evidence presented, and the abstract and introduction overstate the state of the work relative to Section IV. The contribution as currently framed is therefore more limited than claimed.

major comments (3)

[Section III-C] The sentence "Based on the above, using the game will result in a higher level of student engagement with cryptography concepts" is a causal claim about an artifact for which no empirical evidence is presented. The preceding argument maps features such as progression, immediate feedback, and story to effects reported in other gamification contexts, but the paper reports no pilot test, user study, engagement metric, or comparison baseline. Because the abstract and introduction present the paper as a real-world case study, this unsupported inference is load-bearing. The sentence should be reframed as a design hypothesis, or supported by at least a small evaluation.
[Abstract and Section I vs. Section IV] The abstract describes "a real-world case study of a gamified cryptography teaching tool" and Section I calls the game "a ready-to-use educational tool," but Section IV explicitly states that the purpose is "to develop the concepts of a game" and "rather than to deliver a fully finished product to be used immediately." These statements are mutually inconsistent and overstate the current state of the artifact. The framing should be aligned with the actual contribution, which is a design concept with a literature-based rationale.
[Section III-C] The transfer argument from prior gamification research is not sufficient to support the central claim. The cited works on leaderboards [3], freemium RPG retention [14], and VR/AR technologies [13] evaluate settings with different content, mechanics, and production quality, and the manuscript does not explain why their effects should transfer unchanged to this specific cryptography game. The term "engagement" is also never operationalized, so there is no criterion by which the central claim could be tested. The paper should specify a measurable definition of engagement and, if the claim is retained, provide at least preliminary data.

minor comments (5)

[Abstract] There are grammatical errors, such as "has increased" with a plural subject and "have continue in failing," which should be corrected.
[Section I] The word "prgram" in "cybersecurity prgram" is a typo for "program."
[Section III-B] "Post-Quantam" should be "Post-Quantum."
[References] Reference [17] contains a stray Turkish word "Bas¸lık" in the journal title field, and reference [25] spells the university as "Standford" instead of "Stanford."
[Figures] The figures are placed as standalone items with captions but are not referenced in the text; consider adding in-text references such as "(see Figure 3)" to help the reader connect the description to the screenshots.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation; the unsupported engagement claim is an external-validity problem, not a circularity.

full rationale

The paper contains no equations, fitted parameters, or derived quantities. Its central claim in Section III-C that the game 'will result in a higher level of student engagement with cryptography concepts' is an inference from a feature-by-feature mapping to prior gamification literature; that inference may be under-evidenced (no pilot or user study is reported), but it does not reduce by construction to its inputs. The only self-citation is Ferrari et al. [4] (co-authored by A. Wong), used as background literature on challenges in cybersecurity education; the game's design and the engagement argument do not depend on it, so it is not load-bearing. No circular step can be quoted or exhibited, so no circularity is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No fitted parameters or invented entities appear in the paper. The claims rest on untested transfer assumptions about educational effectiveness and on the representativeness of a small set of reviewed courses and textbooks.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption Gamification effects reported in other settings transfer to this specific cryptography game.
Section III-C maps the game's features to gamification concepts from references [14], [8], and [13] and assumes the same effects apply without testing them in this game.
domain assumption The reviewed courses and textbooks, references [20] through [25], are representative of undergraduate cryptography curricula.
Section III-B uses this review to decide which topics to include. If the selection is unrepresentative, the game's coverage claim weakens.
domain assumption A spy narrative and a codex that collects concepts will keep students engaged.
No user testing is reported. The design choice is asserted as motivating in Sections III-A and III-C without evidence from students or instructors.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Case Study in Gamification for a Cybersecurity Education Program: A Game for Cryptography." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/W6QKAJ2T

@misc{pith2026250206706,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Case Study in Gamification for a Cybersecurity Education Program: A Game for Cryptography},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/W6QKAJ2T}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.06706}
}

read the original abstract

Advances in technology, a growing pool of sensitive data, and heightened global tensions has increased the demand for skilled cybersecurity professionals. Despite the recent increase in attention given to cybersecurity education, traditional approaches have continue in failing to keep pace with the rapidly evolving cyber threat landscape. Challenges such as a shortage of qualified educators and resource-intensive practical training exacerbate these issues. Gamification offers an innovative approach to provide practical hands-on experiences, and equip educators with up-to-date and accessible teaching tools that are targeted to industry-specific concepts. The paper begins with a review of the literature on existing challenges in cybersecurity education and gamification methods already employed in the field, before presenting a real-world case study of a gamified cryptography teaching tool. The paper discusses the design, development process, and intended use cases for this tool. This research highlights and provides an example of how integrating gamification into curricula can address key educational gaps, ensuring a more robust and effective pipeline of cybersecurity talent for the future.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.06706 by the authors.

**Figure 3.** First shift attempt. Upon completing this level, the students are greeted with a success message and their character’s thoughts on how the information gained affects the game’s larger story [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Successful decryption. The final screen, before moving on, is designed to encourage the student to interact with the codex. The codex is a collection of all the concepts the student has been introduced to throughout the game. As the game progresses, the mechanisms needed to solve the puzzles increase. Students are meant to use the codex as a tool to help uncover which of the concepts they have learned is applicable … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Advice from character on how to solve caesar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Codex update. The above serves as a simple look at the game’s core gameplay loop, even though it is the first and easiest [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

EduSOC: Lightweight Security Operations Center Simulator for Cybersecurity Education
cs.CR 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

LITE-SOC is a lightweight web-based platform that simulates Security Operations Center alert streams and provides separate student and instructor interfaces for guided classroom exercises on triage and decision-making.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 24 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[3]

To gamify or not? on leaderboard effects, student engagement and learning outcomes in a cybersecurity intervention,

M. Malone, Y . Wang, K. James, M. Anderegg, J. Werner, and F. Monrose, “To gamify or not? on leaderboard effects, student engagement and learning outcomes in a cybersecurity intervention,” in Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education , ser. SIGCSE ’21. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 11...

work page arXiv 2021
[14]

Improved retention analysis in freemium role-playing games by jointly modelling players’ motivation, progression and churn,

B. Karmakar, P. Liu, and G. Mukherjee, “Improved retention analysis in freemium role-playing games by jointly modelling players’ motivation, progression and churn,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) , vol. 185, no. 1, pp. 102–133, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://research.ebsco.com/ linkprocessor/plink?id=c3b49f5...

work page 2022
[13]

Leveraging vr/ar/mr/xr technologies to improve cybersecurity education, training, and operations,

P. Wagner and D. Alharthi, “Leveraging vr/ar/mr/xr technologies to improve cybersecurity education, training, and operations,” Journal of Cybersecurity Education, Research and Practice , vol. 2024, no. 1, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw. edu/jcerp/vol2024/iss1/7

work page 2024
[1]

Knowledge, skills, and abilities for specialized curricula in cyber defense: Results from interviews with cyber professionals,

M. E. Armstrong, K. S. Jones, A. S. Namin, and D. C. Newton, “Knowledge, skills, and abilities for specialized curricula in cyber defense: Results from interviews with cyber professionals,” ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) , vol. 20, no. 4,

work page
[2]

2017 Global Information Security Workforce Study: Benchmarking Workforce Capacity and Response to Cyber Risk,

Center for Cyber Safety and Education, (ISC)², Booz Allen Hamilton, Alta Associates, and Frost & Sullivan, “2017 Global Information Security Workforce Study: Benchmarking Workforce Capacity and Response to Cyber Risk,” 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.iamcybersafe.org/research

work page 2017
[4]

Cybersecurity education within a computing science program - a literature review,

E. P. Ferrari, A. Wong, and Y . Khmelevsky, “Cybersecurity education within a computing science program - a literature review,” in Proceedings of the 26th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education, ser. WCCCE ’24. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3660650.3660666

work page arXiv 2024
[5]

A cyber attack simulation for teaching cybersecurity,

C. Scherb, L. Heitz, F. Grimberg, H. Grieder, and M. Maurer, “A cyber attack simulation for teaching cybersecurity,” in Society 5.0 Integrating Digital World and Real World to Resolve Challenges in Business and Society , 06 2023

work page 2023
[6]

Incorporating psychology into cyber security educa- tion: a pedagogical approach,

J. Taylor-Jackson, J. McAlaney, J. Foster, A. Bello, A. Maurushat, and J. Dale, “Incorporating psychology into cyber security educa- tion: a pedagogical approach,” in Financial cryptography and data security. Springer, Springer Nature, 2020, pp. 207–217

work page 2020

Show all 27 references

[7]

A framework for infusing cybersecurity programs with real-world artificial intelligence edu- cation,

J. DeBello, E. Troja, and L. Truong, “A framework for infusing cybersecurity programs with real-world artificial intelligence edu- cation,” in 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 05 2023, pp. 1–5

2023
[8]

Analyzing augmented reality (ar) and virtual reality (vr) recent development in education,

A. M. Al-Ansi, M. Jaboob, A. Garad, and A. Al-Ansi, “Analyzing augmented reality (ar) and virtual reality (vr) recent development in education,” Social Sciences and Humanities Open , vol. 8, no. 1, p. 100532, 2023. [Online]. Available: https: //www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...

2023
[9]

Exploring Cybersecurity Education at the K-12 Level,

W. Chen, Y . He, X. Tian, and W. He, “Exploring Cybersecurity Education at the K-12 Level,” in Proceedings of SITE Interactive Conference, E. Langran and D. Rutledge, Eds. Online, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), 2021, pp. 108–11...

2021
[10]

A sys- tematic review of k-12 cybersecurity education around the world,

A. Ibrahim, M. McKee, L. F. Sikos, and N. F. Johnson, “A sys- tematic review of k-12 cybersecurity education around the world,” IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 59 726–59 738, 2024

2024
[11]

Integrating ai-based and conventional cybersecurity measures into online higher education settings: Challenges, opportunities, and prospects,

M. M. A. Parambil, J. Rustamov, S. G. Ahmed, Z. Rustamov, A. I. Awad, N. Zaki, and F. Alnajjar, “Integrating ai-based and conventional cybersecurity measures into online higher education settings: Challenges, opportunities, and prospects,” Computers and Education: Artificial I...

2024
[12]

Cybermentor: Ai powered learning tool platform to address diverse student needs in cybersecurity education,

T. Wang, N. Zhou, and Z. Chen, “Cybermentor: Ai powered learning tool platform to address diverse student needs in cybersecurity education,” arXiv, vol. 2501.09709, January 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.09709

2025 arXiv
[15]

Leveraging gamification and game-based learning in cybersecurity education: Engaging and inspiring non-cyber students,

L. Williams, E. Anthi, Y . Cherdantseva, and A. Javed, “Leveraging gamification and game-based learning in cybersecurity education: Engaging and inspiring non-cyber students,” Journal of The Colloquium for Information Systems Security Education , vol. 11, no. 1, 2024. [Online]...

2024
[16]

Virtual reality and gamification in education: a systematic review,

G. Lampropoulos and Kinshuk, “Virtual reality and gamification in education: a systematic review,” Educational Technology Research and Development , vol. 72, no. 3, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink? id=1258c6db-2175-3aac-b1d0-a298cde0d521

2024
[17]

Implementation of gamification principles into higher education,

D. Pa ˇlov´a and M. Veja ˇcka, “Implementation of gamification principles into higher education,” Bas ¸lık, vol. volume-11-2022, no. volume-11-issue-2-april-2022, pp. 763–779, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.11.2.763

2022 doi
[18]

Unlocking student engagement and achievement: The impact of leaderboard gamification in online formative assessment for engineering education,

H. Cigdem, M. Ozturk, Y . Karabacak, S. G ¨urkan, M. H. Aldemir, and N. Atik, “Unlocking student engagement and achievement: The impact of leaderboard gamification in online formative assessment for engineering education,” Education and Information Technologies, vol. 29, pp. 2...

2024 doi
[19]

Gamification of graduate medical education in an emergency medicine residency program,

S. Gue, J. Ray, and L. Ganti, “Gamification of graduate medical education in an emergency medicine residency program,” International Journal of Emergency Medicine , August 2022. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12245-022-00445-1

2022 doi
[20]

Math231 - introduction to cryptography,

O. College, “Math231 - introduction to cryptography,” Course description, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.okanagan.bc.ca

2025
[21]

Online cryptography course,

D. Boneh, “Online cryptography course,” Online course,
[22]

Cas cs 538: Fundamentals of cryptography,

L. Reyzin, “Cas cs 538: Fundamentals of cryptography,” Course syllabus, 2021, spring 2021. [Online]. Available: https: //www.cs.bu.edu/∼reyzin/teaching/s21cs538/syllabus.pdf

2021
[23]

Csci 556: Introduction to cryptography,

M.-D. Huang, “Csci 556: Introduction to cryptography,” Course syllabus, 2021, fall 2021. [Online]. Available: https://web-app.usc.edu/soc/syllabus/20213/30196.pdf#: ∼:text=an%20introductory%20course%20to%20modern% 20cryptography.%20The%20topics,proof%2C%20public-key% 20cryptog...

2021
[24]

Katz and Y

J. Katz and Y . Lindell, Introduction to Modern Cryptography, Second Edition , ser. Chapman & Hall/CRC Cryptography and Network Security Series. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group, 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.crcpress. com/Introduction-to-Modern-...

2015
[25]

Boneh and V

D. Boneh and V . Shoup, A Graduate Course in Applied Cryptog- raphy. Standford University, 2023, latest version, January 2023. [Online]. Available: https://crypto.stanford.edu/ ∼dabo/cryptobook/

2023
[2020]

Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3421254

[Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3421254

doi
[2021]

Available: https://crypto.stanford.edu/ ∼dabo/ courses/OnlineCrypto/

[Online]. Available: https://crypto.stanford.edu/ ∼dabo/ courses/OnlineCrypto/

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [3]

To gamify or not? on leaderboard effects, student engagement and learning outcomes in a cybersecurity intervention,

M. Malone, Y . Wang, K. James, M. Anderegg, J. Werner, and F. Monrose, “To gamify or not? on leaderboard effects, student engagement and learning outcomes in a cybersecurity intervention,” in Proceedings of the 52nd ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education , ser. SIGCSE ’21. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2021, p. 11...

work page arXiv 2021

[2] [14]

Improved retention analysis in freemium role-playing games by jointly modelling players’ motivation, progression and churn,

B. Karmakar, P. Liu, and G. Mukherjee, “Improved retention analysis in freemium role-playing games by jointly modelling players’ motivation, progression and churn,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) , vol. 185, no. 1, pp. 102–133, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://research.ebsco.com/ linkprocessor/plink?id=c3b49f5...

work page 2022

[3] [13]

Leveraging vr/ar/mr/xr technologies to improve cybersecurity education, training, and operations,

P. Wagner and D. Alharthi, “Leveraging vr/ar/mr/xr technologies to improve cybersecurity education, training, and operations,” Journal of Cybersecurity Education, Research and Practice , vol. 2024, no. 1, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw. edu/jcerp/vol2024/iss1/7

work page 2024

[4] [1]

Knowledge, skills, and abilities for specialized curricula in cyber defense: Results from interviews with cyber professionals,

M. E. Armstrong, K. S. Jones, A. S. Namin, and D. C. Newton, “Knowledge, skills, and abilities for specialized curricula in cyber defense: Results from interviews with cyber professionals,” ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE) , vol. 20, no. 4,

work page

[5] [2]

2017 Global Information Security Workforce Study: Benchmarking Workforce Capacity and Response to Cyber Risk,

Center for Cyber Safety and Education, (ISC)², Booz Allen Hamilton, Alta Associates, and Frost & Sullivan, “2017 Global Information Security Workforce Study: Benchmarking Workforce Capacity and Response to Cyber Risk,” 2017. [Online]. Available: https://www.iamcybersafe.org/research

work page 2017

[6] [4]

Cybersecurity education within a computing science program - a literature review,

E. P. Ferrari, A. Wong, and Y . Khmelevsky, “Cybersecurity education within a computing science program - a literature review,” in Proceedings of the 26th Western Canadian Conference on Computing Education, ser. WCCCE ’24. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3660650.3660666

work page arXiv 2024

[7] [5]

A cyber attack simulation for teaching cybersecurity,

C. Scherb, L. Heitz, F. Grimberg, H. Grieder, and M. Maurer, “A cyber attack simulation for teaching cybersecurity,” in Society 5.0 Integrating Digital World and Real World to Resolve Challenges in Business and Society , 06 2023

work page 2023

[8] [6]

Incorporating psychology into cyber security educa- tion: a pedagogical approach,

J. Taylor-Jackson, J. McAlaney, J. Foster, A. Bello, A. Maurushat, and J. Dale, “Incorporating psychology into cyber security educa- tion: a pedagogical approach,” in Financial cryptography and data security. Springer, Springer Nature, 2020, pp. 207–217

work page 2020