Wearable Learning: Multiplayer Embodied Games for Math

ABSTRACT

We present a new technology-based paradigm to support embodied mathematics educational games, using wearable devices in the form of SmartPhones and SmartWatches for math learning, for full classes of students in formal in-school education settings. The Wearable Learning Games Engine is web based infrastructure that enables students to carry one mobile device per child, as they embark on math team-based activities that require physical engagement with the environment. These Wearable Tutors serve as guides and assistants while students manipulate, measure, estimate, discern, discard and find mathematical objects that satisfy specified constraints. Multi-player math games that use this infrastructure have yielded both cognitive and affective benefits. Beyond math game play, the Wearable Games Engine Authoring Tool enables students to create games themselves for other students to play; in this process, students engage in computational thinking and learn about finite-state machines. We present the infrastructure, games, and results for a series of experiments on both game play and game creation.

References

1. Abrahamson, D. (2009). Embodied design: constructing means for constructing meaning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(1), 27--47.
2. Abrahamson, D., Howison, M. (2010) Embodied artifacts: coordinated action as an object-to-think-with. Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA), Denver, CO.
3. Abrahamson, D., Sánchez-García, R. (2016). Learning is moving in new ways: The ecological dynamics of mathematics education. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(2), 203--239.
4. Alibali, M.W., & Nathan, M.J. (2012). Embodiment in Mathematics Teaching and Learning: Evidence From Survey Question (min=1; max=4) Mean (SD) MODE How much did you know about state machines BEFORE you started? (1=Nothing; 4=A lot) 1.65 (0.91) (Nothing) How much do you feel you know about state machines NOW? (1=Nothing; 4=A lot) 2.94 (0.81) (Do know) After looking at Estimate It, how difficult was it to determine its underlying state based design? (1=Easy; 4=Hard) 1.71 (0.78) (Easy) How difficult was it to adapt your game to a state based design? (1=Easy; 4=Hard) 1.74 (0.82) (Easy) How difficult was it for you to design a math game given the set of constraints during day 1? (1=Easy; 4=Hard) 1.84 (0.73) (Sort of Easy) How similar was the game you designed to Estimate It, by the end of the FIRST day you created the math game? (1=Not Similar; 4=Very Similar) 1.35 (0.71) (Not Similar) How similar was the math game you designed to Estimate It, by the end of TODAY, after redesigning the game -- (1=Not Very Similar; 4=Very Similar) 1.94 (0.73) (A bit similar) Table 4. Means, Standard deviations and Modes of High School Students' Survey Responses about Creating Mathematics Games as Finite State-Machines Learners' and Teachers' Gestures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 247--286.
5. Antle, A. N., Corness, G., & Droumeva, M. (2009). What the body knows: Exploring the benefits of embodied metaphors in hybrid physical digital environments. Interacting with Computers, 21(1), 6675.
6. Arroyo, I, Schapira, A., Woolf, B.P. (2001). Authoring and sharing word problems with AWE . Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. IOS Press.
7. Arroyo, I., Woolf, B. P., Burelson, W., Muldner, K., Rai, D., & Tai, M. (2014). A multimedia adaptive tutoring system for mathematics that addresses cognition, metacognition and affect. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24(4), 387--426.
8. Arroyo, I., Zualkernan, I.A., & Woolf , B.P. (2011). Hoodies and Barrels: Using a Hide-and-seek Ubiquitous Game to Teach Mathematics. 11th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), Athens, Georgia.
9. Bamberger, J., & Disessa, A. (2003). Music as embodied mathematics: A study of a mutually informing affinity. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 8(2), 123--160.
10. Barab, S. A., & Plucker, J. A. (2002). Smart people or smart contexts? Cognition, ability, and talent development in an age of situated approaches to knowing and learning. Educational psychologist, 37(3), 165--182.
11. Barab, S., Thomas, M., Dodge, T., Carteaux, R., & Tuzun, H. (2005). Making learning fun: Quest Atlantis, a game without guns. Educational technology research and development, 53(1), 86--107
12. Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction (Vol. 59). Harvard University Press.
13. Casano, J., Tee, H., Agapito, J.L., Arroyo, I., Rodrigo, M.T (2016) Migration and Evaluation of a Framework for Developing Embodied Cognition Learning Games. The 15th ACM SIGGRAPH International Conference on Virtual-Reality Continuum and its Applications in Industry (VRCAI 2016).
14. Cayton-Hodges, G. A., Feng, G., & Pan, X. (2015). Tablet-based math assessment: what can we learn from math apps?. Educational Technology & Society, 18(2), 3--20.
15. Chiu, C., & Liu, M. (2014). An innovative teaching model research affect the elder smart watch usage efficacy. Gerontechnology, 13(2).
16. Clegg, T., Norooz, L., Kang, S., Byrne, V., Katzen, M., Velez, R., Plane, A., Oguamanam, V., Outing, T., Yip, J., Bonsignore, E., Froehlich, J. (2017) Live Physiological Sensing and Visualization Ecosystems: An Activity Theory Analysis. Computer Human Interaction Conference (CHI 2017).
17. Devlin, K. (2011). Mathematics education for a new era: Video games as a medium for learning. CRC Press.
18. Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: The foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
19. Drake, J., Cain, R., & Lee, V. R. (2017). From wearing to wondering: Treating wearable activity trackers as tools for inquiry. In I. Levin & D. Tsybulsky (Eds.), Optimizing STEM Education With Advanced ICTs and Simulations. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
20. Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Computers in Entertainment (CIE), 1(1), 20--20.
21. Grotto, Lozano, Muldner, Burleson, Walker (2016). Lessons Learned from In-School Use of rTAG: A Robo-Tangible Learning Environment. CHI 2016, San Jose, CA.
22. Howison, M., Trninic, D., Reinholz, D., Abrahamson, D., (2011) The mathematical imagery trainer: from embodied interaction to conceptual learning, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, pp. 1989--1998 , New York, NY.
23. Johnson, K., Pavleas, J., & Chang, J. (2013). Kinecting to mathematics through embodied interactions. Computer, 46(10), 101--104.
24. Kafai, Y. B., & Kafai, Y. B. (1995). Minds in play: Computer game design as a context for children's learning. Routledge.
25. Ke, F. (2008) . A case study of computer gaming for math: Engaged learning from gameplay?
26. Lave, J., Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Micciollo, M. (2017) Physical Games for Learning II. Major Qualifying Project. Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
28. Nardi, B. A. (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
29. Nemirovsky, R., Tierney, C., & Wright, T. (1998). Body motion and graphing. Cognition and Instruction,16(2), 119--172.
30. Ottmar, E., Landy, D., & Goldstone, R. L. (2012). Teaching the perceptual structure of algebraic expressions: Preliminary findings from the pushing symbols intervention. In Miyake, N., Peebles, D, & Cooper, R.P. (Eds). Proceedings of the Thirty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Sapporo, Japan (pp. 2156--2161). Pasadena, CA: Cognitive Science Society.
31. Ottmar, E., Landy, D., Weitnauer, E., & Goldstone, R. (2015) Graspable mathematics: Using perceptual learning technology to discover algebraic notation. In M. Meletiou-Mavrotheris, K. Mavrou, & E. Paparistodemou (Eds.), Integrating Touch-Enabled and Mobile Devices into Contemporary Mathematics Education (pp. 24--48). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
32. Reinholz, D., Trninic, D., Howison, M., & Abrahamson, D. (2010). It's not easy being green: embodied artifacts and the guided emergence of mathematical meaning. In Proceedings of the 32nd annual meeting of the North-American chapter of the international group for the psychology of mathematics education (PME-NA 32) (Vol. 6, pp. 1488--1496). Columbus, OH: PME-NA.
33. Rountree, W. L. (2015). Redesigning Traditional Children's Games to Teach Number Sense and Reinforce Measurement Estimation Skills Using Wearable Technology. Masters Thesis in Interactive Media and Game Development. Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
34. Silva, M. J., Ferreira, E., Andrade, V., Nunes, O., & da Luz Carvalho, M. (2015, November). Embodied education: Senses, emotions, and technology. In Computers in Education (SIIE), 2015 International Symposium on (pp. 32--37). IEEE.
35. Silver (1994) On Mathematical Problem Posing. For the Learning Mathematics. FLM Publishing Association.
36. Slavin, R. E. (1980). Cooperative learning. Review of Educational Research, 50(2), 315--342.
37. Tsai, H.; Sing, K. (2012) Mobile Applications and Museum Visitation. Computer. 45 (4), pp. 95--98.
38. Whitton, N. (2009). Learning and teaching with computer games in higher education. Game-based Learning Advancements for Multi-Sensory Human Computer Interfaces: Techniques and Effective Practices. Thomas Connally, Mark Stansfield and Liz Boyle Eds. Information Science Reference, Hershey New York.
39. Wing, J.M., Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 2006. 49(3): 33--35.
40. Wu, T., Dameff, C., & Tully, J. (2014). Integrating Google Glass into simulation-based training: experiences and future directions. Journal of Biomedical Graphics and Computing, 4(2).

Index Terms

• Mathematics of computing

  • Mathematical software

• Software and its engineering