skip to main content
10.1145/3294109.3302932acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesteiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

TetRotation: Utilising Multimodal Analytics and Gestural Interaction to Nurture Mental Rotation Skills

Published:17 March 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Embodied Interaction (EI) offers unique opportunities to uncover novel ways to achieve experiential learning whilst keeping students stimulated and engaged. Spatial abilities have been repeatedly demonstrated as a success predictor for educations and professions in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. However, many researchers argue that training and assessment of this pertinent reasoning skill is vastly underrepresented in the school curriculum. This paper presents TetRotation, a PhD centred on how affordances coming from Multimodal Analytics can be coupled with EI to nurture Mental Rotation (MR) skills. The overarching objectives of the project are two fold. First, the TetRotation Interaction Design study will highlight best practices identified through the assessment of efficiency, level of engagement and learning gains achieved when using gesture based EI to solve MR tasks. Next, in the TetRotation Game study, these design practices will guide the implementation of an interactive serious game purposed to support the development of MR skills. This research relies on mixed method techniques, including data collections from users' actions, like motion sensing, EEG, gaze tracking, video-recordings, click streams, interviews and surveys.

References

  1. Alejandro Andrade. 2017. Understanding Student Learning Trajectories Using Multimodal Learning Analytics within an Embodied-Interaction Learning Environment. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference. ACM, 70--79. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Alejandro Andrade, Joshua A Danish, and Adam V Maltese. 2017. A Measurement Model of Gestures in an Embodied Learning Environment: Accounting for Temporal Dependencies. Journal of Learning Analytics 4, 3 (2017), 18--46.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Jack Shen-Kuen Chang, Georgina Yeboah, Alison Doucette, Paul Clifton, Michael Nitsche, Timothy Welsh, and Ali Mazalek. 2017. TASC: Combining Virtual Reality with Tangible and Embodied Interactions to Support Spatial Cognition. In Proceedings of the 2017 Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. ACM, 1239--1251. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Isabelle D Cherney. 2008. Mom, let me play more computer games: They improve my mental rotation skills. Sex Roles 59, 11--12 (2008), 776--786.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Po-Tsung Chiu. 2017. Supporting spatial skill learning with gesture-based embodied interaction. Master's thesis. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Po-Tsung Chiu, Helen Wauck, Ziang Xiao, Yuqi Yao, and Wai-Tat Fu. 2018. Supporting Spatial Skill Learning with Gesture-Based Embodied Design. In 23rd International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces. ACM, 67--71. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Paul G Clifton, Jack Shen-Kuen Chang, Georgina Yeboah, Alison Doucette, Sanjay Chandrasekharan, Michael Nitsche, Timothy Welsh, and Ali Mazalek. 2016. Design of Embodied Interfaces for Engaging Spatial Cognition. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications 1, 1 (2016), 24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. John W Creswell and VL Plano Clark. 2011. Choosing a mixed methods design. Designing and conducting mixed methods research (2011), 53--106.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Richard De Lisi and Jennifer L Wolford. 2002. Improving children's mental rotation accuracy with computer game playing. The Journal of genetic psychology 163, 3 (2002), 272--282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Elizabeth A Linnenbrink and Paul R Pintrich. 2003. The role of self-efficacy beliefs in student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading &Writing Quarterly 19, 2 (2003), 119--137.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Laura Malinverni and Narcis Pares. 2014. Learning of Abstract Concepts Through Full-Body Interaction: A Systematic Review. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 17, 4 (2014), 100.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Nora S Newcombe. 2010. Picture This: Increasing Math and Science Learning by Improving Spatial Thinking. American Educator 34, 2 (2010), 29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Henri Palleis and Heinrich Hussmann. 2016. Indirect 2D Touch Panning: How Does It Affect Spatial Memory and Navigation Performance?. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1947--1951. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Rafael Radkowski and Christian Stritzke. 2012. Interactive hand gesture-based assembly for augmented reality applications. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Advances in Computer-Human Interactions. Citeseer, 303--308.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Melissa S Terlecki, Nora S Newcombe, and Michelle Little. 2008. Durable and generalized effects of spatial experience on mental rotation: Gender differences in growth patterns. Applied Cognitive Psychology: The Official Journal of the Society for Applied Research in Memory and Cognition 22, 7 (2008), 996--1013.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. David H Uttal, Nathaniel G Meadow, Elizabeth Tipton, Linda L Hand, Alison R Alden, Christopher Warren, and Nora S Newcombe. 2013. The Malleability of Spatial Skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological bulletin 139, 2 (2013), 352.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Jonathan Wai, David Lubinski, and Camilla P Benbow. 2009. Spatial Ability for STEM Domains: Aligning Over 50 Years of Cumulative Psychological Knowledge Solidifies its Importance. Journal of Educational Psychology 101, 4 (2009), 817.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Steffi Zander, Stefanie Wetzel, and Sven Bertel. 2016. Rotate it!--Effects of touch-based gestures on elementary school students' solving of mental rotation tasks. Computers & Education 103 (2016), 158--169. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Ting Zhang, Yu-Ting Li, and Juan P Wachs. 2017. The Effect of Embodied Interaction in Visual-Spatial Navigation. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS) 7, 1 (2017), 3. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. TetRotation: Utilising Multimodal Analytics and Gestural Interaction to Nurture Mental Rotation Skills

      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 '19: Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction
        March 2019
        785 pages
        ISBN:9781450361965
        DOI:10.1145/3294109

        Copyright © 2019 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 the author(s) 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: 17 March 2019

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article

        Acceptance Rates

        TEI '19 Paper Acceptance Rate36of110submissions,33%Overall Acceptance Rate393of1,367submissions,29%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)12
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader