skip to main content
10.1145/3024969.3024988acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Public Access

Experience and Ownership with a Tangible Computational Music Installation for Informal Learning

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 March 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

In this paper we present a preliminary design and initial assessment of a computational musical tabletop exhibit for children and teenagers at the Museum of Design Atlanta (MODA). We explore how participatory workshops can promote hands-on learning of computational concepts through making music. We also use a hands-on approach to assess informal learning based on maker interviews. Maker interviews serve to subjectively capture impromptu reflections of the visitors' achievements from casual interactions with the exhibit. Findings from our workshops and preliminary assessment indicate that experiencing and taking ownership of tangible programming on a musical tabletop is related to: ownership of failure, ownership through collaboration, ownership of the design, and ownership of code. Overall, this work suggests how to better support ownership of computational concepts in tangible programming, which can inform how to design self-learning experiences at the museum, and future trajectories between the museum and the school or home.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

teifp0196-file3.mp4

mp4

24.5 MB

References

  1. Samuel Aaron and Alan F. Blackwell. 2013. From Sonic Pi to Overtone: Creative Musical Experiences with Domain-Specific and Functional Languages. In Proceedings of the First ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on Functional Art, Music, Modeling & Design (FARM '13). 35--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Sue Allen. 2004. Designs for Learning: Studying Science Museum Exhibits that Do More than Entertain. Science Education 88, Suppl. 1 (2004), S17--S33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Alissa N. Antle. 2015. Scratching the Surface: Opportunities and Challenges from Designing Interactive Tabletops for Learning. In Learning Technologies and the Body: Integration and Implementation, Victor R. Lee (Ed.). Routledge (Taylor & Francis), 55--73.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Alissa N. Antle, Jillian L. Warren, Aaron May, Min Fan, and Alyssa F. Wise. 2014. Emergent Dialogue: Eliciting Values During Children's Collaboration with a Tabletop Game for Change. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '14). 37--46. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Jeanne Bamberger. 1979. Logo Music Projects: Experiments in Musical Perception and Design. MA Institute of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Ayah Bdeir. 2009. Electronics as Material: littleBits. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI '09). 397--400. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Tina Blaine and Tim Perkis. 2000. The Jam-O-Drum Interactive Music System: A Study in Interaction Design. In Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS '00). 165--173. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Anders Bruun, Kenneth Eberhardt Jensen, Dianna Hjorth Kristensen, and Jesper Kjeldskov. 2016. Escaping the Trough: Towards Real-World Impact of Tabletop Research. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction (2016), 1--17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Sarah D'Angelo, D. Harmon Pollock, and Michael Horn. 2015. Fishing with Friends: Using Tabletop Games to Raise Environmental Awareness in Aquariums. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '15). 29--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. John Dewey. 1938/1997. Experience and Education. Kappa Delta Pi.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Beverlie Dietze and Diane Kashin. 2012. Playing and Learning in Early Childhood Education. Pearson Canada.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Pierre Dillenbourg and Michael Evans. 2011. Interactive Tabletops in Education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 6, 4 (2011), 491--514.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Elizabeth Dobson and Karen Littleton. 2016. Digital Technologies and the Mediation of Undergraduate Students' Collaborative Music Compositional Practices. Learning, Media and Technology 41, 2 (2016), 330--350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Carolyn Edwards, Lella Gandini, and George Forman (Eds.). 1993. The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia Approach to Early Childhood Education. ERIC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Ylva Fernaeus and Jakob Tholander. 2006. Finding Design Qualities in a Tangible Programming Space. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '06). 447--456. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Jason Freeman, Brian Magerko, Tom McKlin, Mike Reilly, Justin Permar, Cameron Summers, and Eric Fruchter. 2014. Engaging Underrepresented Groups in High School Introductory Computing through Computational Remixing with EarSketch. In Proceedings of the 45th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '14). 85--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Friedrich Fröbel. 1885. The Education of Man. A. Lovell & Company, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Daniel Gallardo, Carles Fernández Julià, and Sergi Jordà. 2008. TurTan: A Tangible Programming Language for Creative Exploration. In 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human-Computer Systems (TABLETOP 2008). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 89--92.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Mark Guzdial. 2003. A Media Computation Course for Non-Majors. In ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, Vol. 35. 104--108. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Amanda Harris, Jochen Rick, Victoria Bonnett, Nicola Yuill, Rowanne Fleck, Paul Marshall, and Yvonne Rogers. 2009. Around the Table: Are Multiple-Touch Surfaces Better than Single-Touch for Children's Collaborative Interactions?. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL '09). 335--344. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Michael S. Horn, Brenda C. Phillips, Evelyn Margaret Evans, Florian Block, Judy Diamond, and Chia Shen. 2016. Visualizing Biological Data in Museums: Visitor Learning With an Interactive Tree of Life Exhibit. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 53, 6 (2016), 895--918.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Michael S. Horn, Erin Treacy Solovey, and Robert J.K. Jacob. 2008. Tangible Programming and Informal Science Learning: Making TUIs Work for Museums. In Proceedings of the 7th international Conference on Interaction Design and Children (IDC '08). 194--201. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Eva Hornecker. 2008. "I don't Understand it Either, but it is Cool" -- Visitor Interactions with a Multi-Touch Table in a Museum. In 3rd IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human-Computer Systems (TABLETOP 2008). 113--120.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. 2Toshio Iwai. 1999. Composition on the Table. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques (SIGGRAPH '99). 10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Carey Jewitt, Anna Xambó, and Sara Price. 2016. Exploring Methodological Innovation in the Social Sciences: The Body in Digital Environments and the Arts. International Journal of Social Research Methodology (2016), 1--16.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. 2Sergi Jordà. 2008. On Stage: The Reactable and Other Musical Tangibles Go Real. International Journal of Arts and Technology 1, 3/4 (2008), 268--287.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Martin Kaltenbrunner and Ross Bencina. 2007. reacTIVision: A Computer-Vision Framework for Table-Based Tangible Interaction. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI '07). 69--74. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. John Larmer, John Mergendoller, and Suzie Boss. 2015. Setting the Standard for Project Based Learning. ASCD.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. John Maeda. 2013. STEM + Art = STEAM. The STEAM Journal 1, 1 (2013), 34.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Anand Mahadevan, Jason Freeman, and Brian Magerko. 2016. An Interactive, Graphical Coding Environment for EarSketch Online using Blockly and Web Audio API. In Proceedings of the 2nd Web Audio Conference (WAC '16).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Bill Manaris and Andrew R. Brown. 2015. Making Music with Computers: Creative Programming in Python. CRC Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Ali Mazalek, Claudia Winegarden, Tristan Al-Haddad, Susan J. Robinson, and Chih-Sung Wu. 2009. Architales: Physical/Digital Co-design of an Interactive Story Table. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (TEI '09). 241--248. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Adam L. Meyers, Marilyn C. Cole, Evan Korth, and Sam Pluta. 2009. Musicomputation: Teaching Computer Science to Teenage Musicians. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition (CC '09). 29--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Sugata Mitra and Vivek Rana. 2001. Children and the Internet: Experiments with Minimally Invasive Education in India. British Journal of Educational Technology 32, 2 (2001), 221--232.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Maria Montessori. 1912. The Montessori Method. Frederick A. Stokes, NY.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Reese Muntean, Kate Hennessy, Alyssa F. Wise, Susan Rowley, Jordan Wilson, Brendan Matkin, Rachael Eckersley, Perry Tan, and Ron Wakkary. 2015. Belongings: A Tangible Interface for Intangible Cultural Heritage. In Proceedings of the Electronic Visualisation and the Arts (EVA 2015). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Claire O'Malley and Danae Stanton Fraser. 2004. Literature Review in Learning with Tangible Technologies.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Seymour Papert. 1980. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, NY. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Hayes Solos Raffie, Amanda J. Parkes, and Hiroshi Ishii. 2004. Topobo: A Constructive Assembly System with Kinetic Memory. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '04). 647--654. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Casey Reas and Ben Fry. 2007. Processing: A Programming Handbook for Visual Designers and Artists. MIT Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Peter Reason and Hilary Bradbury-Huang. 2015. The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. SAGE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Yvonne Rogers. 2011. Interaction Design Gone Wild: Striving for Wild Theory. Interactions 18, 4 (2011), 58--62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. Gerard Roma and Perfecto Herrera. 2010. Graph Grammar Representation for Collaborative Sample-Based Music Creation. In Proceedings of the 5th Audio Mostly Conference: A Conference on Interaction with Sound (AM '10). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Alex Ruthmann, Jesse M. Heines, Gena R. Greher, Paul Laidler, and Charles Saulters II. 2010. Teaching Computational Thinking Through Musical Live Coding in Scratch. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE '10). 351--355. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Douglas Schuler and Aki Namioka. 1993. Participatory Design: Principles and Practices. CRC Press. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Daniel Short. 2012. Teaching Scientific Concepts using a Virtual World--Minecraft. Teaching Science 58, 3 (2012), 55--58.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Bret Victor. 2012. Learnable Programming. http://worrydream.com/LearnableProgramming/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Alyssa F. Wise, Alissa N. Antle, Jillian Warren, Aaron May, Min Fan, and Anna Macaranas. 2015. What Kind of World Do You Want to Live In? Positive Interdependence and Collaborative Processes in the Tangible Tabletop Land-Use Planning Game Youtopia. In Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL '15). ISLS Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Chih-Sung Wu and Ali Mazalek. 2008. Tangible Tracking Table: An Interactive Tabletop Display. In IEEE Workshop on Tabletops and Interactive Surfaces (ITS '06), Vol. 8. 1--3.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Anna Xambó, Eva Hornecker, Paul Marshall, Sergi Jordà, Chris Dobbyn, and Robin Laney. 2016. Exploring Social Interaction With a Tangible Music Interface. Interacting with Computers (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Oren Zuckerman, Saeed Arida, and Mitchel Resnick. 2005. Extending Tangible Interfaces for Education: Digital Montessori-Inspired Manipulatives. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '05). 859--868. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Experience and Ownership with a Tangible Computational Music Installation for Informal Learning

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            TEI '17: Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction
            March 2017
            806 pages
            ISBN:9781450346764
            DOI:10.1145/3024969

            Copyright © 2017 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 20 March 2017

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            TEI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate41of151submissions,27%Overall Acceptance Rate393of1,367submissions,29%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader