An integrated way of using a tangible user interface in a classroom
An integrated way of using a tangible user interface in a classroom
复制标题
DOI：
10.1007/s11412-015-9213-3
复制
发表时间：
2015-06-01
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Dillenbourg, Pierre
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Cuendet, Sebastien;Dehler-Zufferey, Jessica;Dillenbourg, Pierre
尽管CSCL进行了多年的研究，但计算机在今天的课堂上仍然很少使用。其中一个原因是设计师忽视了课堂环境的约束。在这篇文章中，我们从一开始就为课堂使用设计了一个CSCL环境。该系统名为TapaCarp，基于有形用户界面（TUI），旨在帮助培训木匠学徒。之前的一项研究（Cuendet and Dillenbourg 2013）表明，TapaCarp的有形性质有助于将其融入课堂环境，但这并不能保证有意义的学习活动。在这篇文章中，我们描述了导致我们为双重木工学徒的特殊背景设计新的学习课堂活动的过程。该活动的一个创新之处在于TapaCarp仅用于其中的一小部分。这与主流的CSCL方法形成对比，后者假定系统必须从活动的开始到结束使用。这个新活动被用于一个课堂研究，每个班有3个木匠学徒，每个班两天。尽管有很多步骤，但这个活动被证明是有用的，并培养了许多与工作场所的联系，这是它的主要目的之一。老师和学生都很积极，对活动的参与度很高。学习增益的结果是混合的：从第一天到第二天，学生的表现有所改善，但与对照组相比，用测试前/测试后机制测量的学习增益没有显示出任何显著差异。
Despite many years of research in CSCL, computers are still scarcely used in classrooms today. One reason for this is that the constraints of the classroom environment are neglected by designers. In this contribution, we present a CSCL environment designed for a classroom usage from the start. The system, called TapaCarp, is based on a tangible user interface (TUI) and was designed to help train carpenter apprentices. A previous study (Cuendet and Dillenbourg 2013) showed that the tangible nature of TapaCarp helped integrate it in the classroom environment, but that this did not guarantee a meaningful learning activity. In this article, we describe the process that led us to design a new learning classroom activity for the particular context of dual carpentry apprenticeships. One innovative aspect of the activity is that TapaCarp is used only for a small part of it. This contrasts with the mainstream CSCL approach that assumes that the system must be used from beginning to end of the activity. This new activity was used in a classroom study with 3 classes of carpenter apprentices over two days for each class. Despite its many steps, the activity proved usable and fostered many connections to the workplace, which was one of its main purposes. The teacher and the students were positive and showed high engagement in the activity. The learning gain results were mixed: the performance of the students improved from day 1 to day 2, but the learning gain measured with a pre-test/post-test mechanism did not show any significant difference compared to that of a control group.