ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Do tangible interfaces enhance learning?
Full text PdfPdf (338 KB)
Source Tangible and embedded interaction archive
Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction table of contents
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
SESSION: Learning through physical interaction table of contents
Pages: 163 - 170  
Year of Publication: 2007
ISBN:978-1-59593-619-6
Author
Paul Marshall  Open University, Milton Keynes, UK
Sponsor
CCT : LSU Center for Computation and Technology
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 21,   Downloads (12 Months): 490,   Citation Count: 3
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
Save this Article to a Binder    Display Formats: BibTex  EndNote ACM Ref   
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1226969.1227004
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Conceptual work on tangible interfaces has focused primarily on the production of descriptive frameworks. While this work has been successful in mapping out a space of technical possibilities and providing a terminology to ground discussion, it provides little guidance on the cognitive or social effects of using one type of interface or another. In this paper we look at the area of learning with tangible interfaces, suggesting that more empirically grounded research is needed to guide development. We provide an analytic framework of six perspectives, which describes latent trends and assumptions that might be used to motivate and guide this work, and makes links with existing research in cognitive science and education.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Ackermann, E. Perspective-taking and object construction: two keys to learning. in Kafai, Y. and Resnick, M. eds. Constructionism in practice: designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, 1996, 25--35.
 
2
Ainsworth, S. DeFT: a conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction, 16 (3). 183--198.
 
3
Ananny, M., Supporting Children's Collaborative Authoring: Practicing Written Literacy While Composing Oral Texts. In Proc. of CSCL 2002, 595--596.
 
4
Barsalou, L. W., Niedenthal, P. M., Barbey, A. and Ruppert, J. A. Social embodiment. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 43. 43--92.
 
5
Barsalou, L. W. and Wiemer-Hastings, K. Situating abstract concepts. in Pecher, D. and Zwaan, R. eds. Grounding Cognition: The Role of Perception and Action in Memory, Language, and Thought, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2005.
 
6
Bassok, M. and Holyoak, K. J. Interdomain transfer between isomorphic topics in algebra and physics. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 15 (1). 153--166.
 
7
Blackwell, A. F., Cognitive dimensions of tangible programming techniques. In Proc. of PPIG 2003, 391--405.
 
8
 
9
 
10
Chi, M. Why is self explaining an effective domain general learning activity? in Glaser, R. ed. Advances in Instructional Psychology, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997.
 
11
Clements, D. H. 'Concrete' manipulatives, concrete ideas. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1 (1). 45--60.
12
13
 
14
de Jong, T. and van Joolingen, W. R. Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research, 68 (2). 179--201.
 
15
16
17
 
18
Fernaeus, Y. and Tholander, J., "Looking at the computer but doing it on land": children's interactions in a tangible programming space. In Proc. of HCI 2005, 3--18.
 
19
 
20
 
21
Gillet, A., Sanner, M., Stoffler, D. and Olson, A. Tangible interfaces for structural molecular biology. Structure, 13. 483--491.
 
22
Goldstone, R. L. and Son, J. Y. The transfer of scientific principles using concrete and idealized simulations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14 (1). 69--110.
 
23
24
 
25
isee systems. STELLA: Systems thinking for Education and Research, isee systems, Inc., Lebanon, NH, USA, 2006.
26
 
27
Jackson, S., Stratford, S., Krajcik, J. and Soloway, E., Model-It: A case study of learner-centered software for supporting model building. In Proc. of WCTASC.
28
 
29
Kahn, K. ToonTalk#8482; -- an animated programming environment for children. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 7. 197--217.
 
30
Klahr, D., Triona, L. M. and Williams, C. Hands on what? The relative effectiveness of physical vs. virtual materials in an engineering design project by middle school children. Journal of Research in Science Teaching (in press).
31
 
32
Koleva, B., Benford, S., Ng, K. H. and Rodden, T., A Framework for Tangible User Interfaces. In Proceedings of PI03 workshop at Mobile HCI '03.
 
33
Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. Basic Books, New York, 1999.
34
 
35
Mellar, H. and Bliss, J. Introduction: modelling and education. in Mellar, H., Bliss, J., Boohan, R., Ogborn, J. and Tompsett, C. eds. Learning with artificial worlds: computer-based modelling in the curriculum, The Falmer Press, London, 1994, 1--7.
 
36
Montessori, M. The Montessori method: scientific pedagogy as applied to child education in the "children's houses". R. Bentley, Cambridge, Mass, 1912.
 
37
O'Hara, K. P. and Payne, S. J. The effects of operator implementation cost on planfulness of problem solving and learning. Cognitive Psychology, 35 (1). 34--70.
 
38
 
39
Price, S., Rogers, Y., Scaife, M., Stanton, D. and Neale, H. Using 'tangibles' to promote novel forms of playful learning. Interacting with Computers, 15 (2). 169--185.
40
 
41
 
42
 
43
44
45
46
 
47
Stanton, D. and Neale, H. R. The effects of multiple mice on children's talk and interaction. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19. 229--238.
 
48
 
49
 
50
 
51
Triona, L. M., Klahr, D. and Williams, C. Point and click or build by hand: comparing the effects of physical vs. virtual materials on middle school students' ability to optimize an engineering design In Proc. of CogSci2005.
 
52
 
53
 
54
 
55
Uttal, D. H., Scudder, K. V. and DeLoache, J. S. Manipulatives as symbols: a new perspective on the use of concrete objects to teach mathematics. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 18. 37--54.
56