I like the idea, especially for students with accessibility requirements, using adaptive technologies, and for ESL students - but for many students, so used to the wiggly lines of errors, I do worry about the desire to add bumper rails to literacy. All in moderation, but I can see uses here in my context, thanks for finding.

Ewan, glad to see your back (even though you didn't really go). I think part of the problem is that teachers by and learn learn to use one taxonomy - Blooms. When training and entering the workforce, they are novices for a very short time, relative to the amount of time they spend as experts. The next issue for me is that pedagogy is dominated by teachers. Cybergogy - which uses more game like archetypes is dominated by students. To understand how these work in games or even virtual worlds requires teachers to become novices. Not just users, but accept that to get the most out of technology, you have to be evidence based and scientific in your understanding of how games operate. They use a clear taxonomy; but unfortunately, the curriculum is usually designed for the cognitive apprentice, and not the epic enquirer. Thanks for the GBL Tweets and links, hope to catch ya soon.