Introduction to Unit and - people.bath.ac.ukInteracting with Technology Introduction to Unit and Lecture 1: Children, Schools and . Technology use. Dr. Danaë Stanton Fraser

Interacting with Technology

Introduction to Unit and Lecture 1: Children, Schools and

Technology use

Dr. Danaë Stanton Fraser

Interacting with Technology 2010

Goals of this Unit• The course will explore the effects of emerging

technology paradigms on a range of psychology research areas including: spatial, educational and methodological issues.

• After completing the unit you should:– Understand debates centred around methodology in the

area of evaluating new technology. – Be familiar with current debates and their implications for

the continuing development of theory and methodology. – Be able to present a critical perspective on the issues. – Be up-to-date with the state of the art in industrial and

academic research projects in this area.


Unit structure1st part of course lectures

Topics include :• Children and technology • Space cognition• Evaluating ‘in the wild’• Case studies

2nd part of course presentations by students30 minutes presentation, followed by questions and

general discussion


References and slides

• References will appear at the end of the lecture slides. For your presentations you will be expected to have read widely.

Slides available online at:

http://staff.bath.ac.uk/pssds/IWT.html


Assessment

2 assessed courseworks:

• Presentation (20%)

• Report (80%)


Presentations

• There are a choice of topics related to the course:

• Discuss the merits and drawbacks of technology design partnerships? • Is the use of ‘new technology’ beneficial to children’s education?• Is it better to evaluate in the lab or ‘in the wild’? Discuss.

• Presentations will take place in the final three lectures


Report

• Individually written• The essay can address the same question as the oral

presentation • 2000-2500 words• Refer to other presentations where possible.• Deadline:12 noon Tuesday 18th May 2010


Ubiquitous Technology• Third wave of computing

– 1940s to 1970s Many people one computer– 1980s to 1990s One person one computer– 2000 onwards One person many computers–

• Three psychology themes for interaction effects of ‘ubicomp’– Education: children and technology – Spatial cognition: from virtual to real– Methodology: evaluating ‘in the wild’

Children, schools and technology


Introduction

• Traditional technologies in subservient role to Psychology– Methods of recording and storing data

• e.g. desktop computers used to time reactions– Domains of data gathering

• e.g. digital video recording enables repeatable analysis of behaviour– Methods of conducting experiments

• software provides reproducible experiences during experiments– Access to people

• Larger numbers of participants possible in on-line surveys or questionnaires


Evaluating in the Wild

• New technologies also provide an interesting domain for study– New possibilities for collaboration and changing

methods of communication (e.g. telephone, email, SMS, videoconferencing, …)

– The Shared Desktop– Sensors and Context– Mobile Systems


Working with schools (1)

• Education– Working with schools versus testing in schools

• The practicalities: consent, ethics, relationship with user group, OFSTED, SATS

• Designing within the physical, social and organisational constraints of a real classroom

• Children as partners versus informants

• Design methods


Working with schools (2)

• How to gain access to schools• Ethics approval – school policies• Consent forms to parents

– Through school– Include use of video recordings (research

papers now often go on the web)– Teacher’s approval


Designing with or for?

• Different ways of designing and working with user groups

– Design partners – Informants– “Subjects”/Participants

• See Druin et al., 1999


Participatory design

• Involve users as members of the design team from the start

• Methods of communication– brain (and body) storming– pen and paper interface walkthroughs– paper/cardboard mockups– early prototypes

• emerged from Scandinavia


Designing with Children

• Children and teachers involved in the design process.

• Work intensively with teachers and children in school to design and develop technologies to be integrated into the classroom?

• Interdisciplinary team? Those developing the technology should also go to the school!


Designing with Children

• Integrating with the National Curriculum?

• The physical nature of the classroom means that children are continually divided into small groups

• Iterative design sometimes slower development of technology but a more ‘integrated’ and ‘usable’ product.


Traditionally

• Computer in the corner of the classroom• Computer lessons not linked to domain• Individual use of machine, or• Possibility for input < number of children per device• Children and teachers not actively involved in the

design of the technology being used


New Technologies: The Shared Desktop

• Working in pairs and groups can have advantageous effects on learning and development (Rogoff, 1990; Wood and O’Malley, 1996)

• Role of the computer unique in the way that it can structure collaborative activity (Littleton, 1999)

• Traditionally computer hardware and software designed with one user in mind


• KidStory project - Developing collaborative storytelling technologies for children aged 5-7

• Learning in class is a social activity - focus on group work

• Designing within the physical, social and organisational constraints of a real classroom


Collaborative Desktop

Single Display Groupware - allows two co-located users to interact with a system simultaneously

Example: KidPad – a 2D drawing package with zooming

www.kidpad.org

Studies carried out to examine the effect of multiple mice on childrens collaborative behaviour

Applications: storytelling, digital libraries


Collaborative Desktop:KidPad


An evaluation study: Collaborative behaviour around the

computer

• An exploratory study to examine the effect of multiple mice on children’s dialogue and interaction


• Single Display Groupware - allows to co-located users to interact with a system simultaneously

• Inkpen et al (1995, 1997, 1999) found significant learning improvements - higher levels of activity and less off task behaviour

• Abnett et al (2001) gender effects.


Method

• Participants - 24 children from an infant school in Nottingham. Aged 6-7 years.

• Apparatus - KidPad a shared 2D drawing tool with a zooming interface (Druin et al, 1997).

• Task - Creative task carried out by pairs of children using one or two mice.


• Procedure

Recreate a poem in KidPadChildren encouraged to work together20 minutesVideo capture of the computer screen and the children

were mixed An analysis of the process of collaboration


Results

Use of two mice:

Greater degree of engagement in task

more total time spent on creation

symmetry of mouse use


Asymmetry with one mouse

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Pair 3

Pair 5

Pair 7

Pair 9

Pair 11

Pair 13


Symmetry with 2 mice

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Pair 2

Pair 4

Pair 6

Pair 8

Pair 10

Pair 12


Examination of behaviour in depth

• Coding scheme developed to capture types of talk, physical interaction and their relationship with the on screen product

• Qualitative analysis

• The development of the car in the poem analysed for each pair (5minutes)


Characteristics and Behavioural styles observed

Interaction with 2 mice

Common themesVerbalisation of actionLittle reciprocity or elaboration of ideasActive division of tasks - working in parallelStill cases of dominant behaviour by one partner


Video


Interaction with one mouse

More of a mix of behavioursGood collaboration - long discussion of ideas,

reciprocity followed by input of joint ideas, conflict followed by compromise

Conflict not resolved, high degree of negativity about others work

Domination by one partner


References (1)Abnett, C., Stanton, D., Neale, H and O’Malley (2001) The effect of multiple input devices on collaboration and

gender issues. In the Proceedings of European Perspectives on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (EuroCSCL) 2001, March 22-24, Maastricht, the Netherlands. P.29-36.

Druin, A., Stewart, J., Proft, D., Bederson, B., Hollan, J. (1997). KidPad: A design collaboration between children, technologists, and educators. Proceedings of CHI’97, Atlanta, GA.

Druin, A. (2002). The Role of Children in the Design of New Technology. Behaviour and Information Technology, 21(1) 1-25.

Inkpen, K., Booth, K.S., Klawe, M., and Upitis, R. (1995). Playing Together Beats Playing Apart, Especially for Girls. Proceedings of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL) '95. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 177-181.

Inkpen, K. M., Booth, K. S., Klawe, M., & McGrenere, J. (1997). The Effect of Turn-Taking Protocols on Children's Learning in Mouse-Driven Collaborative Environments. In Proceedings of Graphics Interface (GI 97) Canadian Information Processing Society, pp. 138-145.

Inkpen, K.M., Ho-Ching, W., Kuederle, O., Scott, S.D. & Shoemaker, G.B.D. (1999) ‘This is fun! We’re all best friends and we’re all playing’: Supporting children’s synchronous collaboration. In Proceedings of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL99) (eds. C.M. Hoadley & J. Roschelle) pp. 252–259. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.


References (2)Littleton, K. (1999). Productivity through interaction: An overview. In K. Littleton and P. Light (Eds.) Learning with Computers:

Analysing productive interaction. Routledge. London p.179-194.

Rogers, Y, Price, S., Randell, C, Stanton Fraser, D., Weal M. and Fitzpatrick, G. (2005). Ubi-learning: Integrating Indoor and Outdoor Learning Experiences. Communications of the ACM. January 2005/Vol. 48, No. 1

Rogoff, B., Apprenticeship in Thinking: Cognitive Development in Social Context. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.

Stanton, D., Neale, H. and Bayon, V. (2002) Interfaces to support children's co-present collaboration: multiple mice and tangible technologies. Computer Support for Collaborative Learning. (CSCL) 2002. ACM Press. Boulder, Colorado, USA. January 7th-11th.p.342-352

Stanton, D. and Neale, H. (2003). Collaborative Behaviour around a computer: the effect of multiple mice on children’s talk and interaction. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning (JCAL), Blackwell, Vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 229-239.

Wood, D., & O'Malley, C., Collaborative learning between peers: An overview. Educational Psychology in Practice, 11(4), 4-9, 1996

Documents

Introduction to Unit and - people.bath.ac.ukInteracting with Technology Introduction to Unit and Lecture 1: Children, Schools and . Technology use. Dr. Danaë Stanton Fraser