Some thoughts on Interactive Whiteboards

This story highlights some of the thoughts we had while observing 2nd graders and their teacher using an interactive whiteboard while learning basic multiplication.

As said, these are observations made from one single case, thoughts we had – not scientific results. However, we want to share them in open way and hope to create some discussion regarding the Interactive Whiteboards (also known as Smartboards) and use of them.

Creative use of technology

Despite offering a more interactive and multimedia experience, the use of the interactive whiteboard was quite traditional, from a methodological point of view. The session was teacher-centered and the students’ role was quite passive — they answered questions or participated when they were required to, but they were just reproducing content they have been taught during the previous sessions.

Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Having a working lunch at Hämeenlinna

2013-02-12-384People from Aalto Arts, HIIT and TRIM headed to Hämeenlinna to discuss the state of the research, while the more senior researchers together with the company representatives had a board meeting. Here’s a brief note on what we’ve been doing through the winter.

Aalto ARTS has been designing prototypes that support new approaches to learning. Square1 and Digital Dashboard were covered in this blog too. The Square1 idea will be presented and co-developed with teachers in the ITK conference.

HIIT is developing their participation platform and has setup pilots in Hämeenlinna and at Aalto University and University of Helsinki. These pilots will allow examination of the system performance and impact, but also topics such as experience. The goal is to experiment the system design in Hämeenlinna cases.

TRIM has been focusing on literature review and examining new areas that could be attached to Opeka-tool. They are also focusing on understanding the change of practices caused by ICT and conducted interviews among teachers too.

However, what we observed was that currently we’re not doing that great in the collaboration. This needs to be fostered, as the real value comes from us – three different disciplines – working together. One of the topics that could be tight us together is the practice sharing in school communities. We discussed this from the different perspectives and found some common ground. We shall discuss these more and hopefully found nice possibilities to do kick ass science later on – and while at it, impact the society.

However, it wasn’t just talking. We setup a Mendeley group for us and agreed that we shall share articles using it. Also, we agreed that manuscripts and other work-in-progress kind of stuff will be shared and announced more widely inside the project group. And, we decided that it’s time to go out in the public more heavily. The ITK conference has researcher days with focus on the Finnish research community, so work from the LEAD will be published there, and later publication venues will be examined. And all research groups agreed to blog on a more regular basis, I for example agreed to write a blog post on agile development before the end of February. Still several days to go…

After the successful two hours, we headed to a lunch and continue the discussions there. However, it’s worth mentioning that no tax-payer money was used on the lunch 😉

Posted in Meetings | Leave a comment

Digital dashboard for visualizing learning progress and well-being

Data tracking is becoming a popular practice in very different domains ranging from sports to health, work productivity and learning, among others. The availability of personal informatics tools is allowing a growing number of users to have access to their personal data. Initiatives such as the Quantified Self open the door for self-knowledge through numbers. One of the questions that emerge from this context is how to make this data meaningful for users.

Usually, this extensive amount of data is presented in a visual way in order to make easier the detection of trends and patterns that otherwise would require a huge memory. The visualization of information can help users’ understand their habits and behavior and therefore, improve awareness and self-reflection.

Two areas in which the advances of data tracking are quite active are sports and learning.  In sports, some of current well-known products focused on body tracking are Nike+ and its fuelband, Fitbit, Philipps directlife, Adidas Mycoach, RunKeeper and Striiv. All of them offer opportunities to the users to learn about their progression and undertake new challenges.  A shared characteristic in many of these tools is that they make an intensive use of infovis in order to show the users’ performance.

Learning analytics is another field to take into consideration when understanding how to better give feedback to learners and teachers about the data that has been tracked. In this case, as Duval (2011) suggests “For learners and teachers alike, it can be extremely useful to have a visual overview of their activities and how they relate to those of their peers or other actors in the learning experience”.  Usually the sort of data that is tracked in learning analytics systems consists in the number of activities submitted by the student, the number of communications, time spent on tasks, …etc. Under this approach, qualitative aspects, such as the students’ welfare, that might have an impact on the learning performance are totally left aside.

Among others, two indicators closely related to well-being are a person’s stress and recovery levels. In this line, a recent study about “Everyday rythms and practices related to “objective” and “subjective” well-being” carried out by the National Consumer Research Centre showed that stress and recovery levels have an impact on the well-being of a person. The research highlighted that in order to determine the level of well-being, it was crucial to analyze the length and quality of the recovery moments. In this sense, how fast and how well a person recovers after a stress period was strongly influenced by that persons’ lifestyle.

Although stress and training effectiveness have been at the center of many researches during the past several decades, there has been very little research intended to integrate these two areas (Le Pine et al., 2004). In learning analytics, indicators dealing with the students’ stress levels and how they feel about are not taken into consideration when, actually, they could provide useful insight about their learning capabilities. Besides, the integration of this information in a learning environment could contribute to develop more personalized approach to learning.

Many eyes visualization software.

Despite the appearance of information visualization tools easily accessible for a broad audience, such as Many eyes, Gapminder, Timelinejs, its use in educational settings is still quite marginal. In this sense, visualizations, understood as a shared external representation, can become boundary objects (Star, 1989) that support discussion between divergent viewpoints.  From this perspective, information visualization connects with the knowledge creation framework of learning (Lipponen, Hakkarainen & Paavola, 2004) in which, according to the authors “The defining characteristic of creative collaboration is that it is focused on advancing certain shared objects, knowledge-laden or conceptual artifacts and the agents’ relationship to them.” (pp.12).

Following the knowledge creation approach, we consider that the creation a goal oriented visualization (Duval, 2011) that helps relating the students’ well-being with their learning patterns will be a useful tool that mediates and transforms the students’ knowledge building about themselves. The design of a dashboard that combines objective and subjective well-being indicators such as the students’ stress and recovery levels and their mood, with their learning performance will allow users reflect about their lifestyle and, when considered necessary, take action to improve their learning.  Digital dashboards are critical data visualization tools that do not have to necessarily rely on computer screens. In this sense, more innovative proposals about how users interact with the visual displays of information in a given space would augment the role of infovis as boundary objects that mediate knowledge building processes.

Self-reflection about learning performance.

References

Duval, E. (2011). Attention Please! Learning Analytics for Visualization and Recommendation. To appear in: Proceedings of LAK11: 1ST International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge 2011.

LePine, J.A., LePine, M.A. & Jackson C.L., (2004). Challenge and Hindrance Stress: Relationships With Exhaustion, Motivation to Learn, and Learning Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89 (5): 883–891.

Lipponen, L., Hakkarainen, K. & Paavola, S. (2004). Practices and orientations of computer-supported collaborative learning. In J. Strijbos, P. Kirschner & R. Martens (eds.). What we know about CSCL, and implementing it in higher education (pp. 31-50). Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Star, S.L. (1989). The structure of ill-structured solutions: boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. In R. Glaser & M.N. Huhns (Eds.), Distributed artificial intelligence: Volume II (pp. 27-54). London: Pinnan.

Posted in Uncategorized | 3 Comments

Square1 – A collection of single-task dedicated learning devices

Isometric drawing of the Square1 drawing device.

Square1 (sometimes also spelled “Square One”) is a collection of single-task dedicated learning devices designed for collaborative work at school. The collection consists of three devices: (1) one for writing, (2) one for drawing, and (3) one central computer device for online and offline search and assembling presentations out of the content created by students. While the writing and drawing devices are dedicated for precisely these tasks, they can also be connected to the central device for students to share content.

The writing device will include a screen, a keyboard, a scrolling wheel and a share button. There will be no files, but students will share paragraphs that may be named. The screen is infinite and individual paragraphs cannot be deleted. The device may be restored to delete all previous content. If a student would like to save their paragraphs, the writing device can be connected to the central device, move over their paragraphs and store them in the cloud.


Illustration of five connected Square1 devices.

The drawing device will include a pliable touch screen, which, similar to paper, gives in to touch. The device will afford paper like drawing capabilities such as texture tracing. Similarly to the writing device, the screen expands infinitely to all sides, orientation is facilitated through graphic navigation support, and pictures can be saved by moving them to the central device. Drawn pictures will be stored as transparent images, allowing students to wrap text around an image.

The central device will include two touch screens (one on each side), connectors for the other devices and a camera. Tangible and audiovisual feedback is particularly considered here, for example, devices are connected by magnets and sharing content to the center is accompanied by a gentle audio-visual animation. Assembly of shared content is performed on an infinite canvas. Paragraphs and images can be grouped to represent presentation collections, which may be saved to the cloud. For online research, students will have to deliberately agree on pausing their assembling tasks and turn the central device to access the browser.

Design inspiration: The Braun “Was ist Elektronik?” construction kit.

Overall, the Square1 collection moves away from personal computing, towards an understanding of shared and collaborative ownership. Simplicity and tangibility are guiding design principles of Square1. The idea for the devices was born while Teemu Leinonen explored different modes of computational interaction with children. The children frequently mentioned their enjoyment of tactile and multimodal feedback. Through further conceptualization of the comments by the children, we developed the hypothesis that school work, unlike professional work, should not be facilitated by efficiency devices, but rather promote a particular clumsiness of interaction. This also implies a consideration of certain slowness of learning carried through the principally considered affordances of the digital and computational devices. This builds on Lars Hallnäs and Johan Redstöm (2001) notion of slow technology, in which the inner workings of a tool are openly exposed,  can easily be explored, and deliberately afford reflection.

The inner workings of Square1 devices are discovered through construction. By design, the Square1 device collection is conceptualized to be assembled by students and teachers in school. Through collaborative design sessions with teachers, and various school visits, it became apparent that many modern schools have access to, or own, complex manufacturing machinery, including laser cutters, milling machines and 3-D printers. Students are trained to master the tools, and teachers report the empowerment students experience by using the machines, first, under guidance and, later, independently. Frequently, however, students are instructed to create novelty products that are discarded shortly after creation. The design of Square1 is building on the idea that access to manufacturing facilities is possible for many more schools, also due to the proliferation of Fabrication Laboratories (Fab Labs), an open hardware initiative by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Center for Bits and Atoms and Grassroots Innovation Group.

Square1 is not a functional prototype yet. The first industrial non-functional prototype of Square1 will be available in April 2013, and will be presented at the Interaktiivinen Tekniikka Koulutuksessa (ITK2013) in Hämäänlinna.

Illustrations: Anna Keune, 2012
Posted in Prototypes | Tagged , , , , , , | 3 Comments

Working together with Digital Lessons

This research project has three academic partners and bunch of companies developing their business. We have been asking is how can we combine the skills from academia and companies to increase the flow of information?

I was the first one to step down from our ivory tower and headed to work with Digital Lessons for few days. Well, I was still quite high in the clouds during that time, worked on papers, read articles and other usual academic stuff. So, I wasn’t doing any real work.

However, my expertise in software engineering and some highlights from user experience and social systems. I think the most useful exercise for everyone was the one-hour paper prototyping we did together (or, rather: they did and I mentored). We focused on the concept of participation and how to bring the elements of participation to their existing offering.

On the next day, I took the lead to actually develop the paper prototype towards a real working prototype with the help of web technologies and I’ve send bunch of code to them for future use.

My key learning from this trip is that software is integrated into everywhere. I’ve been this far working only in software-orientated organizations; but I see that certain important practices which we have already adapted, are vital for the future for any organization in this domain, and those skills must be fostered in companies, such as Digital Lessons.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

LEAD website is on

Hello, world. In this project two research groups from Aalto University and one research group from University of Tampere together with 11 companies work together to bring design thinking into learning design and to bring design expertise into developing of technical learning solutions.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment