ABSTRACT
The possibility of leveraging technology to support children's learning in the real world is both appealing and technically challenging. We have been exploring factors in tangible games that may contribute to both learning and enjoyment with an eye toward technological feasibility and scalability. Previous research found that young children learned early physics principles better when interactively predicting and observing experimental comparisons on a physical earthquake table than when seeing a video of the same. Immersing children in the real world with computer vision-based feedback appears to evoke embodied cognition that enhances learning. In the current experiment, we replicated this intriguing result of the mere difference between observing the real world versus a flat-screen. Further, we explored whether a simple and scalable addition of physical control (such as shaking a tablet) would yield an increase in learning and enjoyment. Our 2x2 experiment found no evidence that adding simple forms of hands-on control enhances learning, while demonstrating a large impact of physical observation. A general implication for educational game design is that affording physical observation in the real world accompanied by interactive feedback may be more important than affording simple hands-on control on a tablet.
- Antle, A. N. Research opportunities: Embodied child? computer interaction. International Journal of ChildComputer Interaction 1, 1 (2013), 30--36.Google Scholar
- Antle, A. N., Droumeva, M., & Ha, D. Hands on what?: comparing children's mouse based and tangiblebased interaction. In Proc. IDC 2009, ACM Press (2009), 80--88. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Back, M, Cohen, J, Gold, R, Harrison, S and Minneman,S, Listen Reader: an electronically augmented paper-based book. In Proc. CHI 2001, ACM Press (2001), 23--29. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bakker, S., van den Hoven, E., & Antle, A. N. MoSo tangibles: evaluating embodied learning. In Proc.of Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction 2011, ACM Press (2011), 85--92. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bruner, J. Toward a Theory of Instruction. Vol. 59. Harvard University Press (1966).Google Scholar
- Carini, R. M., George D. K., and Stephen P. Klein. Student engagement and student learning: Testing the linkages*. Research in Higher Education 47.1 (2006), 1--32Google ScholarCross Ref
- DeLoache, J. S., et al. "Do babies learn from baby media?." Psychological Science (2010).Google Scholar
- Englekamp, J. & Zimmer, H. D. Memory for action events: A new field of research. Psychological Research 51.4 (1989), 153--157.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Glenberg, Arthur M. What memory is for: Creating meaning in the service of action. Behavioral and brain sciences 20,01 (1997), 41--50.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hayne, H., Herbert, J. & Simcock, G. Imitation from television by 24- and 30-month-olds. Developmental Science, 6, 3 (2003), 254--261.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Henning, P. (1998). Everyday Cognition and Situated Learning. In Jonassen, D. (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology. (2004), 829--861.Google Scholar
- Kahn, P. H., Severson, R. L., & Ruckert, J. H. The human relation with nature and technological nature. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 1 (2009), 37--42.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Klahr, D., Triona, L. M., and Williams, C. Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical versus virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 44.1 (2007), 183--203.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Martin, T., & Schwartz, D. L. Physically distributed learning: Adapting and reinterpreting physical environments in the development of the fraction concept. Cognitive Science, 29 (2005), 587--625.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Montessori, M. Montessori method. Random House Digital, Inc., (1964).Google Scholar
- Olympiou, G., and Zacharias C. Z. Blending physical and virtual manipulatives: An effort to improve students' conceptual understanding through science laboratory experimentation. Science Education 96, 1 (2012), 21--47.Google ScholarCross Ref
- O'Malley, C., Stanton-Fraser, D.: Literature review in learning with tangible technologies, Nesta FutureLab Series, report 12 (2004).Google Scholar
- Pouw, W. T., Van Gog, T., & Paas, F. An embedded and embodied cognition review of instructional manipulatives. Educational Psychology Review, 26, 1 (2014),, 51--72.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Quinn, H. et al., A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas, The National Academies Press (2012)Google Scholar
- Raffle, Hayes Solos, Amanda J. Parkes, and Hiroshi Ishii. Topobo: a constructive assembly system with kinetic memory. In Proc CHI 2004, ACM Press (2004), 647--654. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Resnick, M., et al. Digital manipulatives: new toys to think with. In Proc. CHI 1998, ACM Press (1998), 281--287. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rieser, J.J., Garing, A.E. and Young M.F. Imagery, action and young children's spatial orientation-it's not being there that counts, it's what one has in mind. Child Development, 65, 5 (1994), 1262--1278.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rizzolatti, G., Craighero, L. The mirror-neuron system, Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27 (2004) 169--192.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Rogers, Y., et al. A conceptual framework for mixed reality environments: designing novel learning activities for young children. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 11, 6 (2002), 677--686. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ryokai, R. and Cassell, J. (1999). StoryMat: a play space for collaborative storytelling. In Proc. CHI 1999, ACM Press (1999), 272--273 Google ScholarDigital Library
- Schneider, B., Jermann, P., Zufferey, G., & Dillenbourg, P. Benefits of a Tangible Interface for Collaborative Learning and Interaction. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 4 (2011), 222--232. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shelley, T., Lyons, L., Zellner, M., & Minor, E. Evaluating the embodiment benefits of a paper-based tui for educational simulations. Ext. Abstracts CHI 2011, ACM Press (2011), 1375--1380. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ullmer, B. and Ishii, H. Emerging frameworks for tangible user interfaces. IBM Syst. J. (2000) 915--931. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yannier, N., Basdogan, C., Tasiran, S., Sen, O. L., Using Haptics to Convey Cause and Effect Relations in Climate Visualization, IEEE Transactions on Haptics, 1, 2 (2009), 130--141. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yannier, N., Hudson. E. S, Wiese, E., Koedinger, K., Adding Physicality to an Interactive Game Improves Learning and Enjoyment: Evidence from EarthShake, Under ReviewGoogle Scholar
- Yannier, N., Koedinger, K. R. and Hudson, S. E. Tangible Collaborative Learning with a Mixed-Reality Game: EarthShake. Artificial Intelligence in Education. Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2013), 131--140.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Walker, E., & Burleson, W. Using Need Validation to Design an Intelligent Tangible Learning Environment, Ext. Abstracts CHI 2012, ACM Press (2012), 2123--2128. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Learning from Mixed-Reality Games: Is Shaking a Tablet as Effective as Physical Observation?
Recommendations
Mixed reality games
CSCW '12: Proceedings of the ACM 2012 conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work CompanionCollaborative technologies increasingly permeate our everyday lives. Mixed reality games use these technologies to entertain, motivate, educate, and inspire. We understand mixed reality games as goal-directed, structured play experiences that are not ...
Adding Physical Objects to an Interactive Game Improves Learning and Enjoyment: Evidence from EarthShake
Can experimenting with three-dimensional (3D) physical objects in mixed-reality environments produce better learning and enjoyment than flat-screen two-dimensional (2D) interaction? We explored this question with EarthShake: a mixed-reality game ...
Designing tangible video games: lessons learned from the sifteo cubes
CHI '14: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsIn this paper, we present a collaborative game designed for Sifteo Cubes, a new tangible interface for multiplayer games. We discuss how this game exploits the platform's interface to transfer some of the game mechanics into the non-digital world, and ...
Comments