Supporting cooperative learning in the classroom: Exploiting large multi-touch displays
•
0 likes•510 views
Presentation at DULP 2011, Athens, Georgia, USA
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (18)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (16)
Similar to Supporting cooperative learning in the classroom: Exploiting large multi-touch displays
Similar to Supporting cooperative learning in the classroom: Exploiting large multi-touch displays (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Supporting cooperative learning in the classroom: Exploiting large multi-touch displays
- 1. DISCo,University of Milano Bicocca Supporting cooperative learning in the classroom Exploiting large multi-touch displays Alessandra Agostini, Elisa Di Biase
- 2. Table of Content Context, Motivation, and Objectives The Pervasive Classroom Towards a Pervasive Classroom IWB as cornerstone An Application for IWB: the FairyTale Box Designing for Cooperative Learning A Preliminary Experiment Conclusions and Open Issues DULP 2011 2
- 3. Context and Motivation In the actual school system: Teaching is a mere transmission of knowledge from teachers to students Little active participation of students in the educational process No personalization and adaptation of learning activities … DULP 2011 3
- 4. Classrooms are taken out from current technology-pervaded world while digital natives are used to digital interactive instruments Context and Motivation DULP 2011 4
- 5. Objective and Approach Stimulating students’ engagement and participation in the educational process by means of technology-enhanced tools Designing a pervasive classroom with technology permeating learning activities: To increase engagement, interaction and participation of students during the lessons To stimulate cooperative learning and knowledge creation DULP 2011 5
- 6. Objective and Approach Stimulating students’ engagement and participation in the educational process by means of technology-enhanced tools Stimulating a cooperative learning approach to education by designing a pervasive classroom Technology permeating learning activities: To increase engagement, interaction and participation of students during the lessons To stimulate cooperative group activities in creating/sharing knowledge DULP 2011 6
- 7. DULP 2011 7 The Pervasive Classroom The most profound technologies are those that disappear. They weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it. Mark Weiser (1952-1999) Xerox Parc, 1988
- 8. The Pervasive Classroom Technology embedded in everyday tools and disappearing within walls, desks, pens, books, … Some gadgets follow students outside the school allowing anytime-everywhere learning A unifying context-aware platform providing adaptability and personalization DULP 2011 8
- 9. Space Integration Services Main components of the framework SIS DULP 2011 9 Space Thematic context Applications Sensor managers Presentation handling Client component Sensor
- 10. DULP 2011 10 Towards a Pervasive Classroom Interactive WhiteBoards as cornerstone of pervasive classroom
- 11. Benefits of Interactive WhiteBoard Pupil’s learning is reinforced by the physical and tactile interaction Multimediality stimulates an engaging and funny way of learning Knowledge sharing across the whole class is supported Moreover, adopting IWB with multi-touch technology DULP 2011 11
- 12. Benefits of multi-touch IWB Multiple-user interaction and group working More natural gesturing and manipulation using both hands It should stimulate/facilitate: Collaboration on the same task A more equal participation in learning activities Knowledge building involving the whole class A co-learning approach involving teachers and the whole class DULP 2011 12
- 13. An Application for IWB: The FairyTale Box The FairyTale Box application is suitable for primary schools’ literacy lessons 7-10 year-old pupils can create stories Cooperative storytelling can “increase the level of engagement of less motivated children without affecting the involvement of the more active ones”[4] Next screendumps and photos came from the simplified prototype used in the last experiment (May 2011) DULP 2011 13
- 14. Characters Selections Pupils choose the characters, locations, etc. by moving the images on the Who, Where, When, What areas DULP 2011 14
- 15. Characters Selections Pupils moving images with the finger or the magic wand DULP 2011 15
- 16. Writing Phase By default, writing is organized in Preface, Development, and Conclusion; pupils write text with a finger or a pen. DULP 2011 16
- 17. Writing Phase By default, writing is organized in Preface, Development, and Conclusion; pupils write text with a finger or a pen. DULP 2011 17
- 18. Writing Phase By default, writing is organized in Preface, Development, and Conclusion; pupils write text with a finger or a pen. DULP 2011 18
- 19. Writing Phase 19 Pupils writing text with finger or pen
- 20. Extra-Activities to Relax Jigsaw puzzle DULP 2011 20
- 21. Extra-Activities to Relax Deepening the prehistory theme DULP 2011 21
- 22. Designing for Cooperative Learning Applications for IWB are designed for a PC with a huge monitor Teachers and students should have an ample freedom of interaction for allowing creative, unanticipated use Flow of activities must not be rigid Students’ interaction should not be limited by roles Teachers should rarely interact with IWB, acting as a mediatoras well as a facilitatorof pupils’ cooperation DULP 2011 22
- 24. Applications should not automatically correct pupils’ mistakes; the whole class must act as a reviewer
- 25. Applications must provide adaptation to the actual context of learning and personalization for the individual learnerDULP 2011 23
- 26. DULP 2011 24 A Preliminary Experiment 3=rd A 3=rd B
- 27. The Setting Pupils area The position of the instruments DULP 2011 25
- 28. The Setting Pupils area The position of the instruments DULP 2011 26
- 30. When: May 2011
- 31. Pupils: 40; 2 classes (19+21); 8-9 years old
- 32. Teachers: 2 (+1 in meetings); literacy (math.)
- 33. Duration: 3 two-hours lessons for each class
- 34. Topic:prehistory (humans & dinosaurs cohabit)
- 35. Some data on the method:
- 36. 4 main meetings with teachers (3 pre & 1 post)
- 37. 2 questionnaire for teachers (pre & post)
- 38. 1 questionnaire for children (post-experiment)
- 39. Data collection: 2 webcam, 1 camcorder, screen trackingDULP 2011 27
- 41. IWB installed for teachers (too high for kids)
- 42. HW of IWB quite unsuitable for writing with finger/pen: 90°-touch needed
- 43. Downsizing of the prototype due to single-touch IWB
- 44. The analyses of qualitative data, in collaboration with teachers, is still runningDULP 2011 28
- 45. The degree of participation and cooperation has been high (more than without the IWB?) Pupils really loved using the IWB and asked to use it in all subjects Teachers are quite satisfied of the experience; in particular, with respect to their worries: Lesson has been easy to manage and run Students well-behaved during the lesson A student with difficulties in writing (possible dyslexia) wrote better than usual (both on IWB and on his exercise book) Some Summerized Outcomes DULP 2011 29
- 46. Conclusions and Open Issues New tools and new ways of teaching are needed to motivate digital-native students Early outcomes are positive but the experiment, focussed on IWB, has too many limitations It is of paramount importance to experiment a whole pervasive classroom in real settings but it is an utopia (in Italy?) DULP 2011 30
- 47. Lucidi in piu’ 31
- 48. Some Summerized Outcomes Teachers are quite satisfied of the experience; in particular, with respect to their worries: Lesson has been easy to manage and run Students well-behaved during the lesson The degree of participation and cooperation has been high (more than without the IWB?) A student with difficulties in writing (possible dyslexia) wrote better than usual (both on IWB and on his exercise book) Pupils really loved using the IWB and asked to use it in all subjects DULP 2011 32
- 49. It would have been nice to learn more about the group of pupils using the fairytale box in the text itself -- and more about the approach in general in the conclusion. All in all, the described work is interesting. But honestly, I wondere where the advantage of using computer technology is -- as far as I know, scenarios like these can be found in classrooms (admittedly only sometimes) based on pencil and paper. Thus, it would be nice to learn more about your ideas regarding the technological aspects ;) N.
- 50. The Pervasive Classroom The spatial model of a scholastic building DULP 2011 34
- 51. Designing for Cooperative Learning Applications for IWB are designed for a PC with a huge monitor Teachers and students should have an ample freedom of interaction for allowing creative, unanticipated use IWB applications should allow an ample freedom of interaction allowing creative, unanticipated use The flow of activities must not be predefined or rigid DULP 2011 35
Editor's Notes
- The actual school system suffers from various deficits. Teaching is mainly a mere transmission of knowledge from teachers to students …… with little active participation of students in the educational process. Learning programs and activities are designed with a “one-size-fits-all” approach without any appropriate personalization towards individual learners, or an adaptation to the actual context.
- … Classrooms are taken out from current technology-pervaded world while digital natives are used to digital interactive instruments
- We claim that the focal point that can reverse the actual situation of the school system can beStimulating students’ engagement and participation in the educational process by means of technology-enhanced tools.Our work aims at designing a pervasive classroom allowing (stimulating) cooperative and participative learning of students during the lessons.Technology permeating learning activities:In order to increase the level of engagement,interaction and participation of students during the lessons To stimulate cooperative work and knowledge creation
- We claim that the focal point that can reverse the actual situation of the school system can be stimulating students’ engagement and participation in the educational process by means of technology-enhanced tools.Our work aims at designing a pervasive classroom allowing cooperative and participative learning of students during the lessons.Technology permeating learning activities:Increasing the level of engagement, interaction and participation of students during the lessons Supporting and stimulating cooperative group activities to build and share group knowledge
- Let me specify that our ideas are completly in line with Weiser’vision of Ubi. Computing and calm technology:In particular that - the most profound technologies are those that disappear …
- Technology embedded in everyday tools and disappearing within walls, desks, pens, books, …[Technology embedded in everyday tools and diffused in the environment:](Technology which is not personal but shared; technology that encalms and informs) [Again as in Weiser’s vision: the size and number of these tools will be quite diverse, so, we plan to have few interactive tables and large-screens (e.g., augmenting teachers’ desktops and blackboards); various tablet and portable computers; and a multitude of technology-enhanced gadgets (e.g., bracelets, pens).] Some gadgets follow the students outside the school allowing a learning process available ‘anytime, everywhere’. All these artifacts are part of a context-aware platform which is able to provide appropriate adaptability and personalization to the users. IIn particular, we adopt a framework called SIS (Space Integration Services) [3], which supports the exchange of contextual information among client-components, using a publish-subscribe mechanism.
- Componenti client ed elementi costitutivi del modello spazialeIn particular, we adopt a framework which is called Space Integration Services, which supports the exchange of contextual information among client-components, using a publish-subscribe mechanism.
- At present we are moving the first steps towards a pervasive classroomWe started designing applications suited for large interactive screens, or Interactive WhiteBoards (IWBs)We choose IWBs on purpose/we start from IWBs for some interesting/valuable features/characteristics.
- [We started designing applications suited for large interactive screens, or Interactive WhiteBoards (IWBs)We choose IWBs on purpose/ we start from IWBs for some interesting/valuable features/characteristics.] It is well known that pupil’s learning is reinforced by the physical and tactile interaction with the IWB. The multimediality of IWBs stimulate a more engaging and funny way of learning[, that can be quite effective for children]IWB allows/supports [a beneficial] knowledge sharing across the whole classMoreover, by adopting IWB with multi-touch technology we gain other features which are quite interesting for supporting cooperative learning
- [These devices seem to facilitate a co-learning approach, where teacher and pupils work together, inducing a more independent and self-directed learning]First of all, multi-touch technology allows multi-user interaction and therefore it supports group of students working together using the IWBSecond, multi-touch technology supports a more natural gesturing and manipulation using both handsMoreover, we claim that IWB with multi-touch can better support aCollaboration on the same taskA more equal participation in learning activitiesKnowledge building involving the whole classPractically, IWB with multi-touch should be ideal for supporting a cooperative-learning approach involving teachers and the whole class[— students’ engagement in learning activities and collaboration in building knowledge could be stimulated. Our application is developed on MultiTouch Cells [9]. ]
- -The FairyTale Box application is suitable for literacy lessons in primary schools’- during which 7-10 year-old pupils can create storiesCooperative storytelling can “increase the level of engagement of less motivated children without affecting the involvement of the more active ones” [4]. - Next screendumps and photos came from the simplified prototype used in the last experiment (May 2011)
- The creation of the tale starts with pupils choosing the characters of the story, the locations, the actions and so on by moving images on these four areas: the Who, Where, When, What areas.[The sets are empty at the beginning and surrounded by images with single-word labels]Of course, organizing the story around these 4 sets support/allow practicing on logical and grammatical structures[the four rounded areas of the screen): Who the main characters are, Where the tale takes place, When it happens, and What the characters are going to do.][Pupils fill sets little by little with images—representing nouns and verbs—to build the fairytale.]
- In these photos you can see some kids moving images by using a single finger or a stick, which we denominated magic wand [Pupils sets little by little with images—representing nouns and verbs—to build the fairytale. ]
- By default, the writing is organized in three phases (Preface, Development, and Conclusion) which can be revised as necessary. Organizing the writing in various steps should facilitates a smooth turn-taking of students in using the IWB [the FairyTale box facilitates a smooth turn-taking in using the IWB by splitting the writing activities into different phases, that can be easily assigned to different groups of pupils. ]
- The FairyTale Box supports some extra-activities, for instance, playing puzzle with the characters of the tale.
- Or to deepen some related topic by using the net
- There are already many educational applications for IWBs, However, we think that the majority of these apps do not exploit well the IWB features; these applications seem designed for ‘a PC with a huge monitor’ and they only exploit multimediality-In designing our application/We have collected some design issues which are largely neglected Teachers and students should have an ample freedom of interaction for allowing creative, unanticipated use [7]. The flow of the activities must not be RIGID (predefined) so that the lesson could freely adapt to the actual requirements [switching from one activity to another one is simple and the learning process flows without boundaries, holding students’ attention.] [Even if our proposed lesson offers a structured process (i.e., a division in phases) students are left free to choose]The students’ interaction with the screen and its objects should not be bound by roles: all students should have the same access rights; the application must not impose different rights and behaviors to pupils. This choice allows children to help each other as well as to exchange their responsibilities. Teachers should rarely interact with the technology, acting as a mediator between the technology and the class as well as a facilitator of pupils’ cooperation [Our approach is in contrast with the teacher-centric one proposed in [2] for using multi-touch surfaces in classrooms.]
- [The organization of the activities should facilitate the rotation of the children using the IWB, allowing as many students as possible to use the interactive board (e.g., decomposing the learning process in steps or phases)]Applications should not automatically correct pupils’ mistakes. The automatic correction could be useful in those applications devoted to support individual activities; on the contrary, in those applications aiming to support participative learning, it is preferable that the whole class can act as a reviewer.[the IWB should not be considered as an isolated tool placed in the classroom. It has to be a brick in the wall of the classroom of the future, where portable technology-enhanced devices and large multi-touch displays hold new opportunities for experiential learning through both the dialogic interaction between students (minds-with) and the simultaneous physical interaction with the screen (hands-on).]Finally, IWB applications must provide adaptation to the actual context (for instance the other tools in the classroom) of learning and personalization for the individual learner.
- We are starting the experimental phase in collaboration with an Italian primary school. Together with the literacy teachers, we have chosen a prehistoric set for the tale. This topic seems appropriate both for its links with the historical lessons and for the kids’ predilection for dinosaurs and the like. La fiaba era gia’ stata fatta come progetto x 4 mesi (con anche libretto, ecc.) ma ha generato molto interesseNon sappiamo pero’ in the long-term quanto lo strumento nuovo possa produrre certe emozioni
- We are starting the experimental phase in collaboration with an Italian primary school. Together with the literacy teachers, we have chosen a prehistoric set for the tale. This topic seems appropriate both for its links with the historical lessons and for the kids’ predilection for dinosaurs and the like. La fiaba era gia’ stata fatta come progetto x 4 mesi (con anche libretto, ecc.) ma ha generato molto interesseNon sappiamo pero’ in the long-term quanto lo strumento nuovo possa produrre certe emozioni
- In this paper, we described our complete view of the classroom of the future even if the actual version of the FairyTale Box is quite limited. We claim that, to match digital natives’ needs, new tools and new ways of teaching should be designed to stimulate students’ cooperation and their active participation to the lessons.
- Grazie alla tecnologia:DislessicoMaggior coinvolgimento e partecipazione dal posto
- [By adopting the SIS frameworkModello spaziale dell'edificio scolasticoWe use RFID technology for recognizing students in front of the board or in the classroom; sensors and cameras, already available in our experimental classroom, will be adopted for recognizing persons in the next future.
- There are already many educational applications for IWBs, However, we think that the majority of these apps do not exploit well the IWB features; these applications seem designed for ‘a PC with a huge monitor’ and they only exploit multimedialityIn designing our application/We have collected some design issues which are largely neglected Teachers and students should have an ample freedom of interaction for allowing creative, unanticipated use [7]. The flow of the activities must not be predefined. In this way, the development of the lesson could freely adapt to the actual requirements; switching from one activity to another one is simple and the learning process flows without boundaries, holding students’ attention. Even if our proposed lesson offers a structured process (i.e., a division in phases), students are left free to choose, to build and to share with their mates the work done, “according to constructivist modalities implying collaborative-cooperative behaviours” [5]. The possible students’ interaction with the screen and its objects should not be bound by their roles: all students should have the same access rights. In case the accomplishment of a task asks for establishing roles, these must be defined only from a strategic point of view, not to impose different rights and behaviors to pupils. This choice allows children to help each other as well as to exchange their responsibilities. Teachers should rarely interact with the technology, acting as a mediator between the technology and the class as well as a facilitator of pupils’ cooperation. Our approach is in contrast with the teacher-centric one proposed in [2] for using multi-touch surfaces in classrooms. The organization of the activities of the lesson should allow as many students as possible to use the interactive board and should be organized to accommodate the rotation of the children actively using the device (e.g., decomposing the learning process in steps or phases). Applications should not automatically correct pupils’ mistakes. The automatic correction could be useful in those applications devoted to support individual activities; on the contrary, in those applications aiming to support participative learning processes, it is preferable that the whole class can act as a reviewer.