Xintian Tu
ABSTRACT
In this paper, we built on the Learning through Embodied Activity Framework (LEAF) and designed the GEM-STEP mixed reality environment to support young children's science modeling practice through different play activities. The participants in this study are 16 first and second-grade students who participated in activities within the GEM-STEP environment to explore the mechanism of pollination. We applied interaction analysis to classroom videos to explore how the design of mediators within the MR environment supports students’ collective play and orients students toward science modeling practices. We found that the design of the MR environment provides a pivot for students to engage in science modeling practice, and the two roles that students played with the technology offered them different perspectives to explore and examine their model of pollination. We hope this study provides guidance on how to design for young children's science modeling practice with extended reality in a more playful way.
- Dor Abrahamson and Robb Lindgren. 2014. Embodiment and embodied design.Google Scholar
- Forest Agostinelli, Mihir Mavalankar, Vedant Khandelwal, Hengtao Tang, Dezhi Wu, Barnett Berry, Biplav Srivastava, Amit Sheth, and Matthew Irvin. 2021. Designing Children's New Learning Partner: Collaborative Artificial Intelligence for Learning to Solve the Rubik's Cube. In Interaction Design and Children (IDC ’21), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 610–614. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3459990.3465175Google ScholarDigital Library
- Martha W Alibali and Mitchell J Nathan. 2012. Embodiment in mathematics teaching and learning: Evidence from learners’ and teachers’ gestures. J. Learn. Sci. 21, 2 (2012), 247–286.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Alissa N. Antle, Greg Corness, and Milena Droumeva. 2009. What the body knows: Exploring the benefits of embodied metaphors in hybrid physical digital environments. Interact. Comput. 21, 1–2 (January 2009), 66–75. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intcom.2008.10.005Google ScholarDigital Library
- Doris Bergen. 1988. Play as a medium for learning and development: A handbook of theory and practice. Heinemann Portsmouth, NH.Google Scholar
- Doris Bergen. 2009. Play as the Learning Medium for Future Scientists, Mathematicians, and Engineers. Am. J. Play 1, 4 (2009), 413–428.Google Scholar
- M. Cathrene Connery, Vera John-Steiner, and Ana Marjanovic-Shane. 2010. Vygotsky and creativity: A cultural-historical approach to play, meaning making, and the arts. Peter Lang.Google Scholar
- Margaret H. Cooney. 2004. Is play important? Guatemalan kindergartners’ classroom experiences and their parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of learning through play. J. Res. Child. Educ. 18, 4 (2004), 261–277.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joshua A Danish, Gabriella Anton, Nitasha Mathayas, Tessaly Jen, Morgan Vickery, Sarah Lee, Xintian Tu, Lana Cosic, Mengxi Zhou, and Efrat Ayalon. 2023. Designing for Shifting Learning Activities. J. Appl. Instr. Des. https://dx.doi.org/10.51869/114/jdabcGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Joshua A. Danish and Noel Enyedy. 2007. Negotiated representational mediators: How young children decide what to include in their science representations. Sci. Educ. 91, 1 (2007), 1–35. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20166Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joshua A. Danish, Noel Enyedy, Asmalina Saleh, and Megan Humburg. 2020. Learning in embodied activity framework: a sociocultural framework for embodied cognition. Int. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. 15, 1 (March 2020), 49–87. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-020-09317-3Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joshua A. Danish, Noel Enyedy, Asmalina Saleh, Christine Lee, and Alejandro Andrade. 2015. Science through technology enhanced play: Designing to support reflection through play and embodiment. . International Society of the Learning Sciences, Inc.[ISLS].Google Scholar
- Joshua Danish, Asmalina Saleh, Alejandro Andrade, and Branden Bryan. 2017. Observing complex systems thinking in the zone of proximal development. Instr. Sci. 45, 1 (2017), 5–24.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bria Davis, Xintian Tu, Chris Georgen, Joshua A. Danish, and Noel Enyedy. 2019. The impact of different play activity designs on students’ embodied learning. Inf. Learn. Sci. (2019).Google Scholar
- David DeLiema, Noel Enyedy, and Joshua A. Danish. 2019. Roles, Rules, and Keys: How Different Play Configurations Shape Collaborative Science Inquiry. J. Learn. Sci. (2019), 1–43.Google Scholar
- Noel Enyedy, Joshua A. Danish, Girlie Delacruz, and Melissa Kumar. 2012. Learning physics through play in an augmented reality environment. Int. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. 7, 3 (2012), 347–378.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David Hestenes. 1992. Modeling games in the Newtonian world. Am. J. Phys. 60, 8 (1992), 732–748.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kuo-Ting Huang, Christopher Ball, Jessica Francis, Rabindra Ratan, Josephine Boumis, and Joseph Fordham. 2019. Augmented versus virtual reality in education: An exploratory study examining science knowledge retention when using augmented reality/virtual reality mobile applications. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 22, 2 (2019), 105–110.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Megan Alyse Humburg. USING A FRAMEWORK OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT TO CHARACTERIZE THE IMPACT OF EMBODIMENT ON YOUNG SCIENCE LEARNERS.Google Scholar
- Mina C. Johnson-Glenberg, David A. Birchfield, Lisa Tolentino, and Tatyana Koziupa. 2014. Collaborative embodied learning in mixed reality motion-capture environments: Two science studies. J. Educ. Psychol. 106, 1 (2014), 86.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mina C. Johnson‐Glenberg, David Birchfield, and Sibel Usyal. 2009. SMALLab: Virtual geology studies using embodied learning with motion, sound, and graphics. Educ. Media Int. 46, 4 (2009), 267–280.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mina C. Johnson-Glenberg, Tatyana Koziupa, David Birchfield, and Kyle Li. 2011. Games for learning in embodied mixed-reality environments: Principles and results. ETC Press, 129–137.Google Scholar
- Mina C. Johnson-Glenberg, Colleen Megowan-Romanowicz, David A. Birchfield, and Caroline Savio-Ramos. 2016. Effects of embodied learning and digital platform on the retention of physics content: Centripetal force. Front. Psychol. 7, (2016), 1819.Google Scholar
- Brigitte Jordan and Austin Henderson. 1995. Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. J. Learn. Sci. 4, 1 (1995), 39–103.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Danielle Keifert, Christine Lee, Noel Enyedy, Maggie Dahn, Lindsay Lindberg, and Joshua Danish. 2020. Tracing bodies through liminal blends in a mixed reality learning environment. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 42, 18 (December 2020), 3093–3115. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2020.1851423Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lisa Kenyon, Christina Schwarz, Barbara Hug, and Hamin Baek. 2008. Incorporating modeling into elementary students’ scientific practices.Google Scholar
- Magdalena Kersting, Jesper Haglund, and Rolf Steier. 2021. A Growing Body of Knowledge: On Four Different Senses of Embodiment in Science Education. Sci. Educ. 30, 5 (October 2021), 1183–1210. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00232-zGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Richard Lehrer. 2009. Designing to develop disciplinary dispositions: Modeling natural systems. Am. Psychol. 64, 8 (2009), 759.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard Lehrer and Leona Schauble. 2004. Modeling natural variation through distribution. Am. Educ. Res. J. 41, 3 (2004), 635–679.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robb Lindgren and Mina Johnson-Glenberg. 2013. Emboldened by embodiment: Six precepts for research on embodied learning and mixed reality. Educ. Res. 42, 8 (2013), 445–452.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robb Lindgren, Robert C Wallon, David E Brown, Nitasha Mathayas, and Nathan Kimball. 2016. “Show Me” What You Mean: Learning and Design Implications of Eliciting Gesture in Student Explanations. (2016), 4.Google Scholar
- Loucas T. Louca and Zacharia C. Zacharia. 2008. The use of computer‐based programming environments as computer modelling tools in early science education: The cases of textual and graphical program languages. Int. J. Sci. Educ. 30, 3 (2008), 287–323.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Loucas T. Louca and Zacharias C. Zacharia. 2012. Modeling-based learning in science education: cognitive, metacognitive, social, material and epistemological contributions. Educ. Rev. 64, 4 (2012), 471–492.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Loucas T. Louca and Zacharias C. Zacharia. 2015. Examining learning through modeling in K-6 science education. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 24, 2–3 (2015), 192–215.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Loucas T. Louca, Zacharias C. Zacharia, and Constantinos P. Constantinou. 2011. In Quest of productive modeling‐based learning discourse in elementary school science. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 48, 8 (2011), 919–951.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michelle Lui, Kit-Ying Angela Chong, Martha Mullally, and Rhonda McEwen. 2021. Model-Based Reasoning with Immersive VR Simulations: Patterns of Use Grounded in Time and 3D Space. International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
- Michelle Lui and James D Slotta. 2014. Immersive simulations for smart classrooms: exploring evolutionary concepts in secondary science. Technol. Pedagogy Educ. 23, 1 (2014), 57–80.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nitasha Mathayas, David E. Brown, Robert C. Wallon, and Robb Lindgren. 2019. Representational gesturing as an epistemic tool for the development of mechanistic explanatory models. Sci. Educ. 103, 4 (July 2019), 1047–1079. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21516Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tom Moher. 2006. Embedded phenomena: supporting science learning with classroom-sized distributed simulations. 691–700.Google Scholar
- Tom Moher, Syeda Hussain, Tim Halter, and Debi Kilb. 2005. RoomQuake: embedding dynamic phenomena within the physical space of an elementary school classroom. 1665–1668.Google Scholar
- National Research Council. 2012. A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. National Academies Press.Google Scholar
- National Research Council. 2013. Next generation science standards: For states, by states. (2013).Google Scholar
- J. Piaget. 1952. Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. W. W. Norton & Co, Inc., New York, NY, US.Google Scholar
- James Purnama, Daniel Andrew, and Maulahikmah Galinium. 2014. Geometry learning tool for elementary school using augmented reality. IEEE, 145–148.Google Scholar
- Christina V. Schwarz, Jason Meyer, and Ajay Sharma. 2007. Technology, Pedagogy, and Epistemology: Opportunities and Challenges of Using Computer Modeling and Simulation Tools in Elementary Science Methods. J. Sci. Teach. Educ. 18, 2 (April 2007), 243–269. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-007-9039-6Google ScholarCross Ref
- Christina V. Schwarz, Brian J. Reiser, Elizabeth A. Davis, Lisa Kenyon, Andres Achér, David Fortus, Yael Shwartz, Barbara Hug, and Joe Krajcik. 2009. Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. J. Res. Sci. Teach. Off. J. Natl. Assoc. Res. Sci. Teach. 46, 6 (2009), 632–654.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Xintian Tu, Joshua Danish, Chris Georgen, Megan Humburg, Bria Davis, and Noel Enyedy. 2019. Examining how scientific modeling emerges through collective embodied play. (2019).Google Scholar
- Xintian Tu, Chris Georgen, Joshua Danish, and Noel Enyedy. 2020. Extended embodiment: Physical and conceptual tools in a mixed-reality learning environment as supports for young learners’ exploration of science concepts. (2020).Google Scholar
- Lev S. Vygotsky. 1967. Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Sov. Psychol. 5, 3 (1967), 6–18.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lev S. Vygotsky. 1978. Mind in society: The development of higher mental process.Google Scholar
- Barbara Y. White and John R. Frederiksen. 1998. Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cogn. Instr. 16, 1 (1998), 3–118.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Uri Wilensky and W. Stroup. 1999. Learning through Participatory Simulations: Network-based Design for Systems Learning in Classrooms. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Susan A. Yoon, Karen Elinich, Joyce Wang, Christopher Steinmeier, and Sean Tucker. 2012. Using augmented reality and knowledge-building scaffolds to improve learning in a science museum. Int. J. Comput.-Support. Collab. Learn. 7, 4 (2012), 519–541. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-012-9156-xGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Joan Youngquist and Jann Pataray-Ching. 2004. Revisiting “play”: Analyzing and articulating acts of inquiry. Early Child. Educ. J. 31, 3 (2004), 171–178Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Designing a Technology-enhanced Play Environment for Young Children's Science Modeling Practice
Recommendations
Sensitivity to parental play beliefs and mediation in young children's hybrid play activities
IDC '15: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and ChildrenSupporting young children's play in the digital world is a challenging endeavor. Little is known, however, about the parental beliefs and mediation practices regarding children's facilitated play in hybrid (mixed digital/physical) environments and how ...
Designing software for young children: theoretically grounded guidelines
IDC '04: Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Interaction design and children: building a communityThis poster describes a research project aiming to formulate a set of guidelines for designing software for children aged five to six. The primary research method is a comprehensive literature study that will cover two research disciplines, namely ...
Designing technology for young children: what we can learn from theories of cognitive development
SAICSIT '08: Proceedings of the 2008 annual research conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT research in developing countries: riding the wave of technologyThe majority of guidelines and principles for design of technology are aimed at products for adults. The limited guidelines available for design of young children's technology do not focus sufficiently on age-related requirements or they offer high-...
Comments