Master Thesis 2011: 'Alles Maal'

Alles maalt
FMP by Eveline Brink 2011
Draft report
Final Master Project M2.2 Alles maalt Help children with multiplications
Student
Eveline Brink (S041262) e.brink@student.tue.nl www.evelinebrink.nl
Coaches
dr.ing. Marco Rozendaal Designing Quality in Interaction dr.ir. Tilde Bekker User-Centred Engineering Theme: Playful Interactions Department of Industrial Design Eindhoven University of Technology the Netherlands August 2011
Abstract
This report documents and explains the process and results of my Final Master Project at the department of Industrial Design at the Eindhoven University of Technology. The goal of the project was to design a soluction to help children with their multiplication problems. Through research (literature, experts and observations) I noticed opportunities to help children, aged eight to nine, who are behind with learning the multiplication table. To achieve my goal I had to create a good learning situation: motivate the child, guide the child (on the correct level) and give direct feedback. To provide this I used TagTiles (this is a product from my client Serious Toys BV). This platform is able to identify objects and their position, and gives direct response by audio and light. During three iterations I explored pos-
sible didactics, materials, theories, instructions, and TagTiles together with experts (teachers and children).I have teach four children each week for four months. I also involved PARWO (expert on adaptive education) as my partner. They introduced new theories and gave feedback on my iterations. Eventually all findings were combined and the concept and the final design was evaluated by testing it in the field. The final design is an application (the game Alles maalt) on TagTiles which asks the child to act out physical tasks, construct and solve the appropriate multiplication for each situation. The application makes sure the child gets a multiplication that fits with their progress, by assessing the child during play. The child gets direct feedback on their actions, to optimize the learning situation. When the child struggles TagTiles
gives appropriate hints to make sure the child gets a feeling of success. In conclusion the child improves their multiplication skills by playing the game on TagTiles: it keeps the child motivated and takes little steps forward. The final design should be tested and evaluated in the field, but unfortunately there was no time left to do so. The final design should be tested first to check my assumptions and the interaction. When the design is improved a longitudinal study is necessary to prove the game Alles maalt is instructive. By this project my identity as a designer has been changed. I started as a hard working and enthusiastic student, who wanted to complete a perfect project, but I ended much better. I achieved a good project which is not perfect, but I also realized that I need to change my attitude (my goals were too high).
Preface
co-design sessions
I am a user-centred designer; I dont only work for but also with users. This is clearly visible when you look at my design approach. During each iteration I involved the users in their natural setting to get inspired, create empathy and test, discuss and evaluate ideas or suggestions. My focus is always on how the user experiences my design, how rich the interaction is and how to improve the interaction and their experience. To achieve this, I start early with building prototypes, testing concepts and exploring possibilities. This inspires me to make the right choices. I have a special interest in working with children. It is challenging to get into their world and help them communicating what they experience. Find out what could be improved or is not succesful.
I am triggered to help them with their development. Their development which prepares them for the real world and which determines how they will be in the future. I have always had a special interest in math, working with numbers, finding solutions and understand the logic behind it. I like to teach math to others, to help them understand more about logic thinking. As a child I needed extra tutoring in language due to my dyslexia. I know how it feels to be behind, compared to others. To get extra tutoring in something you dont like, something you want to avoid, and fill in boring sheets again and again.
user-test scenario
user-test textile with children
Preface
After reflecting on my own development and my interests I came to the conclusion that I want to help children with their math problems. This would be the start of my Final Master Project (FMP). The FMP is the main activity during the final (M2.2) semester of the Master program. It should reflect the skills and identity I have developed over the years and allows me to develop these even further.
Conclusions
a delay I was not stuck with the project. But my delay was caused by CANS (also known as RSI). During the fourth month of the project my body made clear I was working too hard and sitting too long behind the computer. Since then I have had physical pains in neck, shoulders and back, mostly caused by stress. This was a big learning moment, I learned to deal with it, how to prevent it and I changed my attitude. Because my body was damaged it will take me a while to recover completely. By taking little steps forward and adjusting my project goals. I managed to continue my project. Which resulted into a project which is not complete finished yet, but due to the circumstances enough to complete my master program.
This document reports my FMP starting point, process, reasoning and end results. First it explains the background of my project; my goals and my literature. Then I will discuss my proposal, including important decisions regarding to my intention of this project. Next, I will describe my approach; get in touch with my target group and the creation of the prototypes. In the last chapter the final design will be described and eventually everything will be evaluated. Hopefully everything is clear, when something is not clear or you have questions please feel free to contact me: e.brink@student.tue.nl. Enjoy reading, Eveline Brink
Report structure
Before I go into the concrete project material, I first want to illustrate the context of my project. It took me one and a half years, instead of a half year to complete this project. The project was going well, and unlike others who have
Project context
Contents
Framing
1. Introduction
1.1 Orientation 1.2 Design opportunities 1.3 Approach 12 12 14
Exploring
4. Iteration I
4.1 The field 4.2 Explore material 4.3 Field conclusions 46 48 50
Final Design
7. Final design
7.1 Alles maalt 7.2 Design hardware 7.3 Design software 7.4 Validate 76 83 92 100
2. Theoretical foundations
2.1 Context 2.2 Learning 2.3 Didactics 2.4 Multiplication 2.5 Motivation 2.6 Business
16 18 20 22 27 32 36 40 41
5. Iteration II
5.1 Explore TagTiles 5.2 Analysis and conclusions 5.3 Focus group 5.4 Overall scenario
52 54 56 58 60 62 65 73
8. Evaluation
8.1 Reflection results 8.2 Discussion 8.3 Reflection process 8.4 My identity
102 104 106 110
6. Iteration III
3. Opportunity
3.1 Client 3.2 Partner 3.3 Design guidelines
6.1 Set-up user-test 6.2 User-testing 6.3 Explore details 6.4 Conclusions
Acknowledgements References Appendices
114 116 123
What is the project about? What do I want to achieve? Who are involved?
framing
1. Introduction 2. Theoretical foundations 3. Conclusions
1. Introduction
After reflecting on my own development and my interests, I came to the conclusion that I want to help children which have trouble with learning math. This is the start of my FMP and should be transformed into a more detailed problem statement/design opportunity.
To complete my FMP in the given time it is very important to define the scope my project as much as possible. First I explored opportunities which fit with my FMP goal to help children with their math. I found out that there is a growing concern and a public debate about the quality of math of the primary education in the Netherlands [appendix A]. Investigations showed [KNAW 2009] that the childrens mathematical proficiency needs improvement. Worldwide the Netherlands scores high, but eac year it gets worse. It is expected that this will cost the government six billion euro each year [Steeg 2011]. To improve the quality of math you have to start with improving the basic knowledge. Therefore children from four to ten need to work on basic math, to realize complex
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
1.1 Orientation
math later on. When having issues with the basic math this means big issues later on. Experts [appendix B] indicate that multiplication is a stumbling block, and is of high importance to realize complex math problems later on. A lot of children are behind or never realize the memorization of the multiplication (more details in 2.4). People are trying to improve the quality of math, but the lack of time, money and knowledge in the field does not do any good. New technologies give opportunities to improve didactics: give teachers extra support, information about the child (progress) and motivate the child. But old didactics are used on the new technologies, this could be done better, which is a missed opportunity.
After orientating this field I could conclude that helping children with their multiplication problems is a good start for my project: use the opportunity of new technologies and new knowledge about didactics.
In February 2010 I presented my project proposal [appendix C]: design a product that helps children with automatization of the multiplication table. To realize this I want to use new didactics on new technologies. It should give the child prolonged experience of success and the child becomes more confident (figure 1). Current solutions are old-fashioned and not optimal for the available technology. A new solution could be new didactics by using new technology possibilities.
1.2 Design opportunities
12
FMP Eveline Brink Augustus 2011
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
Experts indicated they miss something like this; there is a clear market for a tool. People try to create such a tool, but often lack knowledge of technology (possibilities) or lack expertise in didactics. I could be the one who links those two.
I concluded that there is a clear problem: too many children have not automatized the multiplication facts at the end of class five, although it is essential as foundation for arithmetic operations.
figure 1: visual from project proposal; help children who have trouble with learning the multiplication facts (who experience the circle of failure) by providing an interactive, tangible tool that gives direct feedback. The end result should be a happy child with knowledge about the multiplication (who experience the circle of success).
13
1. Introduction
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
To realize this it is very important to investigate the complete area: context (the children, school, teacher, etc.), learning, didactics, multiplications, motivation, used materials, and the new technologies.
The design vision that I want to implement requires a couple iterations with involvement of each iteration close expert (children, teachers and researchers). I started with a theoretical and field study to analyze the current situation. Then, get insights about didactics and other context related issues. Finally create empathy with the child and teacher to understand the situation. I wanted to keep involving people from the field during the complete de-
1.3 Approach
sign process. By this, I make sure that not only the product works, but also fits with the users latent needs. This wil let the user experience scenarios to improve the concept and protocol. This will help to make choices towards the right direction. Combine this with scientific research to validate my decisions. Not only keep involving the users but also other experts. Ask for their feedback on my decisions, because I am aware of the fact that it is not realistic to become an expert like them in such a short period of time. They have years of experience in this field and have different backgrounds. It is also very important to keep an eye on the progress of the project during the first few weeks. Because I know I am motivated to make sure each detail is thoroughly investigated. This will result in slowing down the process and
eventually end with a half project. Make sure I make decisions on time and keep focusing on the big picture and relevant details. Eventually I want to realize a scenario demonstrated with a (partly) working prototype which illustrates how the product should look like and work. This scenario should be validated by scientific research, experts and user-testing. The scenario will not be worked out into details, but will be a start to create such a product for real.
14
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
I could conclude that my problem statement is: to help children with their multiplication problems by designing a tool with the use of new technologies. Motivate the children by creating a rich and meaningful experiences. I will realize this by close user involvement during the complete process, exploring concepts in the field and validating my choices by the use of research, experts and the field. But first I will summarize my theoretical findings. pictures of previous projects representing my approach in a project (row on the left: MoZo; user-testing with children, row on the right: SleepSupportSystem, user-test by letting the user experience different scenarios, materials, etc.)
Conclusions
15
2. Theoretical framework
For this project information about learning, didactics and multiplication are necessary. But it also required information about motivation, because there is no learning when there is no motivation. I will start with summarizing findings about the context and end with the business aspects.
When talking about learning the multiplication table, we are talking about children aged seven to nine (in the Netherlands group four and five). The goal is to have memorized all multiplication facts at the end of group five. But a lot of children (aged eight to nine) are behind and need extra help; this help is currently not optimal.
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
2.1 Context
Characteristic for this age (middlechildhood), it that children attend school and learn large amounts of information. Their overall development includes their physical, cognitive, social and emotional growth. They begin to manage their own behaviour and start to find their place in the world, they develop self-esteem.
Children begin to note their internal qualities and realize that they are good at some things, and not good at others. More details will be discussed in chapter 4.1. The context of use will be at school, probably in the classroom. In the Netherlands 1,5 million children go to pri-
Watterson 1987, page 57
16
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
pictures of computer corners in classrooms (left: Bijenkorf group 5, right: Beppino Sarto RK group seven) mary schools [CBS 20-12-2010], and sit in their classroom with an average of 24 children. But because of cuts of the government they will grow to 26 [Besturenraad 2011], which means higher working load for the teachers and less attention for each child, probably resulting in lower quality. In the room itself each child has his/ her own table and against the wall extra materials are stored. Teachers use their chalkboard or smartboard (Dutch: digibord) in front of the class to give instructions. Often in the back of the classroom there is a computer corner, probably my project would be used in that corner. pictures of classrooms at primary schools (top: Beppino Sarto group seven,left: Bijenkorf group 5) Based on this, I will design for children from the age eight to nine. More information about how they learn (2.2), didactics (2.3), multiplication (2.4), and how to motivate (2.5) them, you can read in the following sub-chapters.
17
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Learning is very complex. Like BrandtWilliams [1997, page 9] says: As human beings, learners are inherently complex. They bring divergent sets of values, experiences, abilities, and motivations to the learning process. Many theories try to explain learning, some of them are: Behaviourism (conditioning) [Pavlov 1927, Atkinson 1983], Cognitive theory [Newell 1972], Mental functions [Vygotsky 1978], Metacognitive [Brown 1980], and Constructivism [Paris 1989]. I will not go into the details of those theories, instead I will describe some conclusions which are relevant for my project. First what is learning? Learning may occur consciously (informal) or without conscious awareness (formal). The educational system should use a combination of them.
2.2 Learning
Learning can be acquiring (recording), processing (constructing), practicing (gain knowledge), or a combination of those [Boekaerts 1995]. Next; when are we learning? Humans learn continuously, each experience is a learning activity. Some are only stored in the short memory, but in this context we are focusing on the long-term memory. What do we learn? Benjamin Bloom [1956] has suggested three domains of learning: cognitive, psychomotor and affective. When learning math at school we mostly focus on the cognitive domain (involves knowledge and the development of intellectual skills). How do we learn? Anderson illustrated the process of learning [figure 2] as a pyramid [Forehand 2010].
Not everyone is learning in the same way; there are different learning types. Visual learn type (read and consider), auditory learn type (listen), motorial learn type (learn by doing), and communicative learn type (discuss and exchange). Also keep in mind that each child is unique. It is not realistic to make the perfect tool for each child. By mak-
figure 2: pyramid from Anderson based on the taxonomy pyramid from Bloom. The learning process starts at the bottom with the lower order thinking skills. [source: http://en.wikipedia.org]
18
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
We learned how to talk and walk, not by being taught how to talk, or taught how to walk, but by interacting with the world... whereas at about the age of six, we were told to stop learning that way and that all learning from then on would happen through teaching.
[Negroponte 2006] ing it flexible and adaptive, I want to help as many children as possible. How to improve our learning? Learning can be easier with motivation (read more in 2.5). Improve learning by making it fun, children learn as a result of play. Several theorists say that play is the first form of learning. When children play they experiment with the world, learn the rules, and learn to interact. Vygotsky [1933] agrees that play is central for childrens development (they make meaning of their environment through play). Learning can also be improved by using more senses during the learning process. There is a theory [Treichler 1967] saying that by just listening, people remember 20% of what they learned, by just seeing 30%, by seeing and hearing 50%, by combining seeing, hearing, and talking about it 70%. Eventually by seeing, hearing, talking and acting out 90% of what they learned is remembered. But critics say those numbers are fraudulent and shouldnt be taken too literally [Thalheimer 2006]. But I think I can use the theory as an inspiration for my project because it gives an idea how important multiple senses stimulation is for learning (stimulate this by rich interaction). To improve the learning of children, teachers should: 1. Determine a clear goal, motivate to reach ad guide towards that goal. 2. Give the child confidence that it is able to reach that goal (have positive expectations, keep their interest and intrinsic motivation). 3. Scaffold the child by making sure it is working on the right level (make sure the child likes the challenge, by avoiding too much threats and keeping control). 4. Assess the child to know its progress toward the goal (so the previous point could be realized). When learning, the child needs the domain specific knowledge, skills, and cognitive strategies. But also equally important are metacognitive knowledge (insights about your own learning) [Boekaerts 1995]. For the age six to nine, children have a lack of this cognitive knowledge [Flavel 1971], so young children need extra guidance, in order to be successful in learning. In conclusion, I could say that when I am designing I should reckon with several aspects: support the cognitive learning for long-term memory by motivating the child and stimulating multiple senses. Communicate a clear goal, and give the child confidence about achieving this goal, by assessing the child and work on the right level. Therefore I will design a flexible and adaptive tool which helps the children to learn the multiplication table. But because each child is unique, the effectiveness of the tool will be user dependent.
19
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
self-confidence is a result of good performance, not the cause [Thomaes 2007]

2.3 Didactics
The problem is that schools are mainly focussed on the end results (performance oriented) and not on the effort and process. This results in avoiding and problems with criticism. Whereas learn oriented results in willingness to learn, dont see learning as a threat but as a challenge [Nicholls 1987 and Ames 1988]. When having trouble with a calculation, a child needs support. Never give the answer immediately, but guide the child towards the answer. The way towards the goal is more important than the actual goal. So make sure the child understands the answer and is able to get the answer by itself next time. This instead of asking the child to remember the correct answer. Children that have issues with a topic have continuously negative experiences: this results in avoiding the subject. This means even more issues (negative spiral). The trick is to let them experience positive results (correct answer finded on their own) by instructing the right level of calculation. This will give them more confidence. Success is partly a self-fulfilling prophecy. The results of low expectations are more harmful comparing to high expectations. High expectations results in higher results (Pygmalion-effect) [Jungbluth 1996]. Teachers believe they always need to give students with special needs a helping hand. But this results that these students dont get the opportunity to learn to think and reflect on their own [Luit 2009]. When a child knows it has a disability (dyslexia or dyscalculia), the result will be that the child will act like it. This results in lower performances. Therefor it is very important to have high (realistic) expectations. Working on the right level is crucial. The level of a calculation is depending
To make an instructive tool, understanding didactics is necessary. Not only read (scientific) papers and talk to experts, but also get feedback from them on the current situation and explore how didactics are realized in the field (chapter 4.1). Education materials and teachers should support the learning process (chapter 2.2). Teaching should change the behaviour of the child [Boekaerts 1995]. First demonstrate new skills and motivate the child. Next create the perfect surrounding to acquire. Finally give enough time and space to consolidate (maintaining behavior). Without motivation there is no learning. When a child wants to learn something, it is willing to put energy in it. Make sure the child understands the urge of learning those facts (more in chapter 2.5).
20
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
Watterson 1987, page 28 on the process of the child. Take little steps forward and when having trouble take a step back. This asks for an adaptive system which assesses the child and translates this into a certain calculation on a certain level that should be asked to the child. To know which action is correct a child should get feedback on their actions. When getting the feedback later, there is a change the child saved a wrong answer in their head. So direct feedback on actions is crucial when learning. But when giving feedback dont focus on lack of skills, but instead on giving hints how to improve their action; so dont give product orientated comments (You have two mistakes). Go for process orientated comments, with acceptance and compassion (wat heb jij ontzettend goed je best gedaan!) [Eerkens 2011]. As I said in chapter 2.2; each experience is a learning activity. High impact experiences characterize themselves by high stimulation of multiple sensors but also by meaningful context. So learning does not only depends on the medium, but also how active and meaningful the learning experience is. Recent research shows also that moving your body improves the learning results [Houwen 2011]. So in conclusion I understand the didactics and know how to optimize this: Give the child more confidence, assess the child, work on the right level, support the learning process (guide), give direct feedback, motivate the child, have high (realistic) expectation, make the experience active and meaningful. Beside this, also focus on the effort and process, not on the end results. In the next subchapter I will continue my didactic research but on a more specific level: multiplying.
21
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
To narrow the project I chose to focus only on learning the multiplication table. Experts and teachers pointed out that this is a big issue in the math
2.4 Multiplication
didactics. This knowledge is part of the basic knowledge of math. It is crucial to automatize this to be successfull in more complex math problems. When learning the multiplication, you
start with concrete material to understand the meaning of multiplying (repeatedly sum up). If done correctly, the concrete examples used are meaningful material from a childs perception. This is really important, because every individual is inclined to reason on the basis of meaningful information (more than on the basis of formal and fixed rules of reasoning) [Girotti 2004, p.122]. Children start with the easy calculations (2x 5x 10x). In between children add 1x and 0x. At this stage the child creates insights which are of high importance when going to the next level. Make sure this is sufficient before entering the next level. These insights are the foundation of knowing the multiplication table, this is often misunderstood in the field (the attention of most teachers is focusing on the formal level) [Luit 2009]. To illustrate this Frans Moerlands used the iceberg metaphor [figure 2].
figure 2: The iceberg metaphor from Frans Moerlands, illustrating how important the investment in activities and insights are to reach a formal level of mathematics (the top of the iceberg) source: Boswinkel 2003, theory Moerlands 2009.
22
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
The concrete material can be represented in different ways (all three of them are important, no one should be left out). Line model: Have material put behind each other in a line [figure 3], to make it more easy reorder in length of ten. The advantage: to counting easy, the disadvantage: no
clear overview with big amounts and very attractive to keep counting. Surface/square model: Have material ordered like a rectangle, count amount of blocks [figure 4]. Advantage: still able to count (easy to take a step back), clear representation, often used in real life. Disadvantage: still able to count (not going forward).
Box mode Have objects which can be filled with material and put in each object the same amount [figure 5]. Advantage: able to hide whats inside the box: little step towards formal notation, not able to count anymore. Useful to act out the neighbor strategy. Disadvantage: it does not provide a clear structured overview.
Figure 3: an ex-ample of a line model [Dawson 2003] Figure 4: an example of a surface model [Brodie 2005] Figure 5: an example of a box model [Greaves 2008]
23
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
By little steps the level of difficulty is ascending,: first introduce 3x,4x, 6x and 9x and eventually learn 7x and 8x [figure 6]. But meanwhile the materials used should change from concrete material towards formal notation [figure 7, next page]. How this process will look like and what the learning speed will bei, is different for each child. So again an adaptive tool who assess the child is needed. But make sure to make small steps forward (towards formal notation), when having trouble take a step back. It is very important to make sure the child keeps understanding the insights. Eventually, when the child understands the calculation on the formal level, the next level is the automatizing. At this stage the child is able to find the answer for a calculation by knowing which strategy to use and is able to give the correct
figure 6: visual showing all possible multiplication answers up to 10 x 10. The colours show how difficult children find them when learning. It is remarkable that when knowing just the easy multiplications, you already know 70 % of the complete multiplication table to ten. And just 10 % of the calculations are very hard to learn.
24
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
answer in approximately 10 seconds; no material and context are needed. The final goal is to memorize the calculation, which means that the child knows the answer, no calculation is needed. To make sure to keep on this stage, repeating is needed. The problem in the field is that schools and teachers are rushing towards the end goal: memorizing. A lot of children just repeat the calculation aloud without knowing the meaning (called drill and preactice [Kroesbergen 2003]. They miss the foundation. So later on, when they forget one fact, they are not able to find the answer. figure 7: learning traject for multiplication table inspired on Frans Moerlands theory. You start learning the multiplication at the easy level (like 2x4) with the use of concrete (physical) material to understand the meaning of the calculation. Slowly the calculation becomes harder but also the context changes towards a more formal notation. How this process looks like depends on the child, each child is learning on their own way and speed. Children who are behind with the multiplication table and keep practicing on the formal level will not only have floating capacity [Luit 2009], but this results also in a lot of failure (confidence is shrinking, multiplication gets stupid, get
25
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
more behind). Experts told me that the problem is that the teachers and math book publishers miss the didactic knowledge, time and materials to do so. To find the correct answer for each multiplication, different kinds of strategies could be used. The most important and used one is the neighbor strategy: add or minus one multiplicand [figure 8]. There are a lot of strategies, but the children who have trouble with multiplication are advised not to use too many different strategies. They get confused, so keep it simple [Luit 1999]. The best way is to let the children discover a strategy by themselves, by this they will understand the background of a strategy and when to use it in practise. When observing the child during multiplication you can analyze not only the level of the child but also what kind of
7x6=?
mistakes the child makes. A lot of children create their own strategy which is often incorrect or cumbersome. It is of high importance to correct the child. By keeping an eye on what kind of mistakes the child makes. Some common mistakes are known [figure 8]. In conclusion when learning the table of multiplications it is very important to start concrete with easy multiplications, and slowly go towards more formal calculations and more difficult ones. Make little steps forward, when having trouble go back. Guide the child by hints (using strategies or counting). For my project I chose to focus on the multiplication table to ten, to scope my project even further.
neighbor from 6 is 5: 7x6=7x5+7 7 x 5 = 35 35 + 7 = 42 so 7 x 6 = 42 often made mistake: 7 x 6 = 7 x 5 - 7 = 28 or 35 + 7 = 40 - 2 = 38

figure 8: example neighbor strategy and example mistakes children make during this strategy.
26
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
When learning, motivation is a key component (concluded in chapter 2.3). To answer the question how to motivate a child, it is important to know what motivation is and how to stimulate this. When children are not motivated, they are not prepared to invest time and energy to acquire new skills.
2.5 Motivation
Motivation means that an individual comes in a certain state, when one or more motives (influenced by circumstances) are updated [Boekaerts 1995]. You have performance, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Performance motivation triggers to pursue success and avoid failure. This
relates to choices and perseverance from an individual. And those are based on their expectations, which are partly created by previous experiences. A task can be intrinsically motivating; just doing it is its own reward (e.g. because it is fun). Or a task can be extrinsically motivated; if I do it I will get re-
Watterson 1987, page 25
27
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
warded (e.g. with money, the absence of punishment). Extrinsic motivation arises when the reward is not connected to the task/activity but external. It is a fact that people have a natural need to feel efficient and competent, called competence motivation [White 1959]. The feeling of progress causes positive emotions. Another influence comes from the fact whether the action is obligated or freely chosen [DeCharms 1968]. In conclusion there should be motives to learn the multiplication table, create the right circumstances and make sure children have good expectations. In the second part are some relevant theories from Malone, Maslow, Cskszentmihlyi, Vygotski, Keller and Fontijn which inspire my project.
Malone [1981] presents a theoretical framework for intrinsic motivation in the context of designing computer games for instruction. Malone argues that intrinsic motivation is created by three qualities: challenge, fantasy, and curiosity. Challenge depends upon activities that involve uncertain outcomes due to variable levels, hidden information or randomness. Fantasy should depend upon skills required for the instruction. Curiosity can be aroused when learners believe their knowledge structures are incomplete or inconsistent. According to Malone, intrinsic motivating activities provide learners (with a broad range of challenge, concrete feedback, and clear-cut criteria) good performances. Maslow [1943] presented a theory of human motivation, focusing on humans natural curiosity. He translate his
theory into a pyramid [figure 9]. This is used to understand peoples their motives for action. I can use this for my project. A child at a Dutch school has met the physiological needs and I hope the child lives in a safe environment and is healthy. The child should have family and friends to get a feeling of belonging and acceptance. Then comes the most important layer for this project: es-
figure 9: Maslows hierarchy of needs, translated into a pyramid wit the more basic needs at the bottom [source: http://en.wikipedia.org]
28
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
teem. The child desires to be accepted and valued by others. It should engage themselves to gain recognition and get the feeling of self-valued. When learning the multiplication, the child is intrinsically motivated to master the multiplication table to get status, recognition and self-confidence, independence and freedom.
Cskszentmihlyi [1990] created a theory about optimal experience. He says that people are most happy when they are in the state of Flow. In this state they are concentrated and nothing else seems to matter (optimal state of intrinsic motivation). To achieve this state balance must be found between the challenge of the task and the skills of the performer (if it is too easy or too difficult, flow connect occur) [figure 10]. This proves that when a child is learning the multiplications, it should work on the right level. Vygotski [1978] created a theory which was probably the inspiration for Cskszentmihlyi: the Zone of proximal development (ZPD) [figure 11]. This term is used to illustrate the range of tasks that a child can complete independently. And the task completed with the help of others. It captures the childs cognitive skills. This shows that the support figure 11: visual of Vygotskis Zone of proximal development theory [source: http://en.wikipedia.org] provided to the child should change over time. So the child should not only work on the right level, but the support should be on the right level as well. This asks for an adaptive system.
figure 10: visual of Csikszentmihalyis Flow theory [source: http:// en.wikipedia.org]
29
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Based on the same facts Lazeron (2010) concludes that cribbing (spieken) is a very important part of a learning process, so it should be used more often. Keller (1983) presents an instructional design model for motivation that is based upon a number of other theories. His model suggests a design strategy that includes four components of motivation: arousing interest, creating relevance, developing an expectation of success, and producing satisfaction through intrinsic/extrinsic rewards. Like mentioned before we know that intrinsic rewards works, but there is a discussion about the consequences of extrinsic rewards. Kohn [1993] arguments that every reward is killing intrinsic motivation. This is demonstrated with an experiment with twenty children on the Oprah Winfrey show [Coens 2000]. The children were asked to evaluate new puzzles, ten children were re-
warded (dollars), the other ten didnt get a reward. After the evaluation the children were left alone with the puzzles, all ten children who had not been rewarded went back playing with the puzzles, only one child who had been rewarded was doing the same. So the reward has killed the intrinsic motivation to play with the puzzles. Another theory is from Fontijn [2007]; Functional Fun. He describes how fun can be used to maximize the learning potential of smart toys using tangible interfaces. To achieve this at least one of the three core sources should be realized: accomplishment, discovery and bonding (if you have all you have a more powerful motivation). Getting a sense of accomplishment is influenced by goals (clear cut criteria) which can be met and influenced by the progress towards those goals. A balance between challenge and control is important (flow).
Motivation is that which gets a behavior started and keeps it going.

Svinicki 2000 The next source, discovery, comes from gaining knowledge which is stimulated by curiosity. And the last source, bonding, is linked with recognition, being part of a group (like the third layer of Maslows pyramid). There is one last thing which influences a child motivation; feedback. Dont react enthusiastic after each achievement [Kohn 2001]. As mentioned in chapter 2.3 the feedback should be process oriented comments and not product oriented comments. But Kohn also suggests three options:
30
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
1. say nothing 2. say what you saw (let the child know you noticed, the child will be proud on what (s)he did, example: Boy, you made a lot of calculations today!) 3. talk less, ask more (Which calculation was the hardest to solve? this will feed his/her interest in multiplication) When giving feedback it is important to reckon with the effects of doing so. Make sure the feedback is helping the child to feel a sense of control over his/ her life, help the child to become excited about what he/she is doing in its own right. And dont give feedback which results in letting the child constantly look to us for approval or turning the activity into something (s)he just wants to get through in order to receive a pat on the head.
So a lot of important elements related to motivation are mentioned in this chapter. In conclusion I should reckon with: - balance between difficulty and ability (create a challenge) - accomplishment (satisfaction, clear cut criteria, overview achievements) - discovery (curiosity, arousing interest, exploring) - bonding (recognition, self-valued, expect success, cooperation, competition) - control (autonomy, independent) - appealing (fantasy, create relevance, meaningful) - dont give extrinsic rewards - give direct correct and concrete feedback In general; when learning the multiplications it is about repeating the same over and over. Variation is key to prevent it becomes boring.
31
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
For this project it is also important to look from a business perspective. I explored and evaluated the market of didactic materials with regard to multiplication and interactive learning materials [figure 13]. This varies between books, board games, simple plastic or wood objects, and computer programs. Most of them are used at school and are used
2.6 Business
individually. When assessing [example; figure 12] I can conclude that those materials focus a lot on the formal notation, in general they lack in giving insights and are not adaptive. All the materials use old didactics, although new technologies offer much more possibilities. Most materials dont give insights but keep repeating boring
formal notation calculations. They dont fit into the requirements to be a good instructive tool. They should assess the child and should provide calculations that are on the right level of difficulty. This is a big opportunity for my project. The market misses a good assessment tool, which reflects on the level of the child and adapts its scenario on this. And it should not cost the teacher extra effort nor time.
figure 12: didactic materials assessed, horizontal axes describes a couple of criteria for my design and the vertical axes shows seven product which I assess and the last question mark is how my project schould be
32
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
figure 13: didactic materials used to learn the multiplications
33
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
You would expect that such an assessment tool is already developed for use on a computer. But as far as I know there is no such program on the market yet. Right now companies started with developing such a program. This is a bit late, but I am glad they realize this. But games on the computer are not a perfect tool to learn the multiplication table. The interaction is not optimal, physical material in the real world is an added value when a child needs to understand a multiplication [OMally 2004, page 3].
To realize physical materials and the advantages of new technologies, I can use tangible interaction. With tangible interfaces people can interact with digital information through the physical environment. This provide a lot of benefits to the educational world [OMalley 2004]. There are several new products on the market realizing this,
like the Sifteo [figure 14], the I-Blocks [figure 15] and the SmartUs [figure 16]. But they miss thoughtful didactics. Therefore my focus is to create a new market (Design-driven innovations) [Verganti 2009].
figure 14: Sifteo; The alternative game system for truly hands-on play [www.sifteo.com]
figure 15: SmartUs concept; traditional play elements combined with technologies, learn and play in one [JSW 2007]
figure 16: I-Blocks; intelligent blocks that children use to learn spelling. [www.Heutink.nl]
34
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
According to teachers and experts, the focus of this project should be children who are behind with learning the multiplication. The result of my project should be an extra tool in the classroom that helps children to get back on track with their math skills. The tool should be independent from a publisher, so every school which is interested can buy this tool. Eventually the tool will not be the only tool that is used for learning multiplications, but it should be used next to other tools. On the next page you can read a summary of this chapter; the theoretical framework. In the next chapter I will use these to set up requirements.
Conclusions
I will design an extra tool for children (aged eight to nine) who are behind with learning the multiplication table. Support their learning by having an adaptive system who assess and guide the child on the right level. Not only on the difficulty level but also on concrete-formal representation (which support the learning process). Make sure the child understands the insights of each multiplication, so eventually the child automatized all calculations of the multiplication table up to ten.
Motivate the child by giving them confidence by letting them experience positive results (feeling of accomplishment), by challenging the child, give a feeling of control and by letting them discover. Make it more instructive by giving direct feedback to the child and having and active and meaningful learning experience by stimulating multiple senses (tangible interaction). Use new technologies to realize this, support the teacher by saving her time and effort. And finally keep in mind each child is unique.
35
3. Opportunity
By combining all the knowledge and the whishes from client (Serious Toys) and partner (PARWO), I created my design guidelines for this project.
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
To realize my project in the given time, I chose to involve a client in my project. Two companies were interested and eventually I chose Serious Toys from Den Bosch to become my client. Because I could use their platform, TagTiles and their expertise to realize my project quicker. Serious Toys is a spin out of Royal Philips Electronics (since 2008). One PhD student (Janneke Verhaegh) from our faculty of Industrial Design TU/e was involved in the pre-development of TagTiles. Serious Toys focuses on merging fun and personal development. They make learning aids that adapt to the abilities and needs of each individual child. It allows children to reach their full potential in a pleasant way, without pressure. This vision fits perfectly with my project vision so far.
3.1 Client
Their first product is TagTiles (TikTegel in Dutch). This is a game computer in a form of a tablet, without keyboard, mouse and play area. Children play with the board by placing play pieces on them. It is very easy to use, because the pieces you use to control the computer, form an integral part of the game that is played. This makes the task easy to understand and a lot of fun.
It is a flexible and intrinsically motivating learning aid with which the child works independently. While the child completes game tasks, TagTiles assesses the capabilities of the child. The board adapts interactively to those capabilities by tuning the difficulty level of the game tasks and providing help where needed. [quoted from the site: www. SeriousToys.com].
figure 17: TagTiles the innovative learning aid from Serious Toys (den Bosch)
36
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
[1] Play area: underneath this surface RFID (Radio frequency identification) technology makes it possible to identify and locate each tagged object which is put on this surface. [2] Tagged objects: these objects will be recognized by the surface because these wooden blocks have an unique tag underneath or inside them. [3] Log in: each child can have their own unique card, to log in they place the card here and now TagTiles knows who is playing the game. [4] Audio output [5] USB connector [6] SD-card [7] power supply
3 2
1 7
figure 18: side view of TagTiles
figure 19: top view of TagTiles
37
3. Opportunity
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
It a platform that recognizes each object (with an unique tag) and its location by using new localization technologies. This makes it possible to interact with TagTiles by simply manipulating physical objects on the surface. Already over one hundred games are created for TagTiles to help children from different ages with learning space insights, reading, math, safety, etc. Each game (example figure 20) exists out of software (which is programmed in the dedicated language ESPranto), physical objects and a foil. This foil lays on the play area of TagTiles. It is a visual printed on a transparent plastic that blocks or transfers the light from TagTiles LED array underneath the play area. TagTiles offers me the opportunity to focus my project and to quickly test a potential concept. The tangible interaction is an added value to my project.
figure 20: Example of one game for on TagTiles: Keer op Keer; ref. 012101. Game to learn the multiplications. Age 6-8, players: 1-4 and price: 129,00. Developed by ThiemeMeulenhoff. On the left: the complete game existing out of the foils, instructions and packaging.
38
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
Serious Toys is involved in this project as a client, but also as an expert. My contact person Willem Fontijn was able to give me feedback during my process and helped me with finding knowledge on the field of motivating the child. They helped me not only by sharing knowledge, but I also borrowed TagTiles to do some tests with (chapter 5). The interaction of TagTiles fits with my intention of using tangible interactions. With TagTiles children can explore and manipulate physical objects. By tagging
the objects, each object will be recognized by the console. This provides me freedom when designing, objects can be
whatever I want them to be. But there are some limitations, the objects will not be recognized when they lay on top of each other and they will only be recognized when laying on the play area. This is something to reckon with while designing. In conclusion, Serious Toys B.V. will be my client for my project. I will design an application for on their product: TagTiles (in Dutch: de TikTegel). They provide me knowledge and materials (like TagTiles). To align this, we agreed I do an internship at Serious Toys.
figure 21: logo from Serious Toys B.V.
39
3. Opportunity
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Another company was interested in my project and asked to be involved during my entire project. Which is good for my project, because they have a lot of knowledge and an innovative vision which fits to my project. Together with Serious Toys we agreed to include them as an official partner. My partner are the companies from the project PARWO (PAssend RekenWiskunde Onderwijs, translated: Adequate Mathematics) which is an organisation created by collaboration between educative design agency Edumat and SSOT in 2005. SSOT (Stichting Speciaal Onderwijs Tilburg) exists out of schools for special education. Edumat is an educational design agency initiative by and based on the theory of Frans Moerlands.
3.2 Partner
figure 22: logo from PARWO Frans Moerlands previously worked at the Freudenthal Institute in the Netherlands. He created an underlying philosophy how and what children should learn during mathematical education. I referred to his knowledge and vision in chapter 2.4 (iceberg). He points out that new didactics are needed for the new technologies. The new technologies create new possibilities, but publishers dont use those possibilities but just copy-paste the old didactics on the new devices. This is a missed opportunity. More information can be found on their sites: parwo.yurls.net, www.edumat.nl and www.ssot.nu. PARWO helped me during my project by giving feedback on my project. But more important, by sharing their expertise of didactics and learning materials aiming on supporting lessons for (special) elementary education.
40
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
After an inventory of the world around math issues, I saw an opportunity to design a tool to help children with multiplication problems. I collected all mentioned aspects of the previous chapters [figure 23]. I translate this mapping into a clear structured visual which represents all the important aspects regarding my project [figure 24, next page]. To make my project more concrete and realistic to realize in the giving time, I need to scope my project further. So I chose to figure 23: impression of a mapping of all mentioned aspects of the previous chapters. The aspects are linked to each other when they influence each other. By this I get an overview of what is important for my project and where I should focus on.
3.3 Design guidelines
41
3. Opportunity
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
focus on just a couple aspects: adaptive, insight and direct feedback. This results into a project which does not include multiple players (social). Although this would be an added value, to realize this would cost me too much time. Because when having multiplayers assessing each child will be very complex. It would be nice to add this social aspect again when the project is realized.
figure 24: visual representing all key components of the project (all mentioned in the previous chapters). In the middle of the wheel you see the two main aspects of my project: the child and the tool (TagTiles). Around the center all important aspects are illustrated. In the outer circle the aspects are specified.
42
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
The circle on the left inspired me to create the design guidelines for this project (on the right). This will be my starting point of my first iteration, described in the next chapter. In the following chapters I will describe the design process and the results of each iteration.
1.
Design a tool (physical aid device) to help children (aged eight to nine) with their multiplication (until table of 10) problems (unable to automatize the multiplications after reasonable amount of instructions and practice). The tool should be an application for TagTiles from Serious Toys (client). Design a system that adapts on the childs level of multiplication skills. Let them experience success, this way they become more confident about themselves. Design a system that adapts on the childs level of formulation. Make sure the child creates a strong foundation of multiplication insights. Make a tool which is instructive, by motivating the child (make it fun) and give direct feedback. Focus on individual use only (easier to design for and able to keep track on one childs progress). Create a tool which helps the teacher to observe the childrens progress and which doesnt cost extra time and effort.
2. 3.
4. 5. 6. 7.
43
How to combine all the findings into a validated design? How will the scenario look like?
exploring
4. Iteration 1 5. Iteration 2 6. Iteration 3
4. Iteration 1
My design process exists of four iterations, in each iteration I do/perceive, ideate/integrate, validate, analyse and update my vision. During my first iteration I explored the field and materials which already exist and linked it with my theoretical framework. This gave me inspiration for my project.
My way of designing is to involve the user in each iteration in my design process. The user is an expert of their own experience and it is very relevant to know what kind of experience to design. This gives insights in understanding how users translate their surroundings and interactions into an experience. This kind of information should not be learned from a book, but discovered in the field: understand the context which I am designing for and look for opportunities. I realised this by visiting schools, observing and interacting with the children.
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
4.1 The field
I observed the children in their natural habitat, look at the world through their eyes. When attending a math class I was shocked about the huge gap between literature (chapter 2) and practice. I saw enough points of improvement, but for the time being I stayed focussed on my project. Notable is the willingness of children to learn new things, they want to learn. They are curious, like to understand things and are proud on what they have learned. But they miss direct feedback and are often confused (when the teach-
er is going to fast or they miss relevant knowledge for that topic). Children help each other, but often that is not enough. It is difficult for just one teacher to see it all and to help all the 25/30 children at the same time. To learn more about those children I taught four children each weak individually at school and one at home. By this I was able to test an idea (based on literature, expert or my own opinion). I made a prototype [figure 25 on page 50] and put it to the test. I did not only focus on the end goal: how to learn the multiplication, but also other aspects like: motivation, materials, interactions, learning (how quick), concrete/formal material, boring/frustration, skills, instructions/feedback, uniqueness, etc. I will discuss the outcomes in the next subchapters.
the best way to learn about them is to spend time with them
[Markopoulos 2008]
46
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
I tried to analyze the level of the child on multiplications. By asking the child to put each multiplication in one of the three cups: easy, normal or difficult. This informs me which multiplications are known by the child and which multiplication need extra attention. A nice side effect of this game was to see how the children notice their own progress. They grow up with the thought that they are bad with multiplications. But when seeing the cup easy completely filled, they realized that they already knew a lot of multiplications. In fact 70% of the multiplications is already covered when they know the 0x, 1x, 2x, 5x and 10x. When knowing also 3x and 4x they know already 87%. Their feeling of failure is caused by just a little amount of really difficult calculations. It is important to let the child know how many multiplication they already know.
47
4. Iteration 1
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
When teaching the children multiplication I evaluated a lot of existing basic materials which are used for ages. I will discuss the four most important materials: boring sheets, wooden puzzle, golden blocks and an old computer.
4.2 Explore material
Standard sheets
Wooden puzzle
hey look! I completed the table of six by myself!

[a child during teaching, playing with the wooden puzzle]
Plain white paper with calculations seems to be also motivating when the child has success. This material is used all the time at school, and should not be ignored. It is very clear material without any distraction. But it is important that this material is used at the right moment with the right calculations, to make sure the child experience success. Make sure to let the child notice their progress.
Wooden pieces with all the multiplication on them (on front the calculation, on back the answer). They are triggered to complete the whole puzzle, it motivates to see how many calculations they already know and structure their progress. It is an open-ended game, create their own rules/goals. Variations: row by row (neighbor strategy) or random. I could use some interesting aspects from this: let the child create and show progress.
48
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
Math-table blocks
Old Computer
This is just a selection. The first representing the traditional way, second the old fashion way, third a modern tangible way and the last an old interactive way (no tangibles). I also observed the child playing multiplication games on the computer [AmbraSoft 2000]. They were motivated and their direct feedback was good. But the interaction was poor. I still missed the insights and it wasnt instructive for a child who only choose to practice the table 1x and 2x, because he already knew them and wanted to score some points. All these findings inspired me for my project and I summarized them in the next subchapter.
Simple small wooden blocks, individual or clustered together. This creates the possibility to quickly create surfaces which represents multiplications. This visualizes the meaning of a multiplication and easily shows the neighbor strategy. When adding the context gold or money it gets an interesting dimension for them. The children like to order them and create surfaces which help with their multiplication insights.
When I was young I really liked to learn from this computer. With little lights on the side and sound it was exiting to link answer with question on the sheet. I made my own games [appendix D] and noticed it is very motivating to play with this. The game is very structured, a bit adaptable and most important direct feedback. But it misses creating deeper understanding why something is wrong. Trial and error was often used to find the answer.
49
4. Iteration 1
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
From the first iteration I learned how the world of multiplication looks like in practice. I was shocked about the gap between the research world and the classroom. The quality of math education could be easily improved by bringing research findings into practice. The cause of this gap is discussed and a lot of people blame the PABO (educating teachers), the math book publishers and the fact that teaching math at a primary schools has become a less important topic [KNAW 2009]. Instead that it should be one of the most important
4.3 Field conclusions
topics. Like recently published [Steeg 2011] this will costs the Dutch government 6 billion euro each year. But back to my findings. I concluded that this is even a bigger opportunity then I was hoping for. Everyone is convinced of how it could be better by using the new technologies, but no one is able to realize this (lack of technology or didactic knowledge). Now I am up to date about the situation and I noticed some big opportunities and know with what kind of pitfalls I have to reckon with while I am in designing.
It would be interesting to have new didactics with new technology and not old didactics on the new technology
[Frans Moerlands]
figure 25: pictures of low fidelity prototypes which I used during teaching the children.
50
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
Conclusions from field
[1] Almost everything could be fun when it is new and not played too often. So the games should change and have different kinds of layers to keep it fun for prolonged use. [2] The children like to enrich their experience by using their imagination, add a context like gold or money. [3] The children like to be active with their hands, it becomes more fun and tangible material makes the calculation also more alive. This will help them with creating deeper understanding of the meaning from the multiplication. [4] The children are eager to learn, understand new stuff and proud when they achieved something. [5] I noticed a lot of confusion during class and playing games. When creating a game make sure it has a clear structure and gives the child the opportunity to ask for extra explanation. [6] Also show their progress, this also motivates them too see how many multiplications are learned.
51
5. Iteration 2
During the second iteration I explored TagTiles in the field and combined this with my previous findings. This resulted into an overall scenario.
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
As mentioned in chapter 3.1, I will use the platform, TagTiles, to realize my concept. To do so I introduced TagTiles to the children by letting them explore the general games and some under construction multiplication games. Their first reactions were very positive. They were really excited, privileged to be the first child at school who plays with such a high-tech board. They are very concentrated when playing the games.
5.1 Explore TagTiles
The interaction becomes clear by trying out, they take a block and notice the reaction on the play area. But it takes a long time before they really understand the interaction. The advantage of this interaction is how it triggers social play. They often shared the interaction and created their own extra rules. It took a while before they understood the games. They needed extra instructions to understand the meaning of the game and the interaction.
The children often complained about TagTiles, that it was wrong. The child was convinced of her answer and was disappointed when TagTiles didnt seems to react. It is important that in these kinds of situations TagTiles gives feedback, for example: rethink your answer. Like all games, to keep the child engaged with the game make sure it does not get boring. Variation in tasks, context, feedback and adding advanced levels should be considered. This can be achieved by adding small features such as time pressure. Overall the children were very enthusiastic, liked to play with TagTiles for quite some time. After a while the interaction was clear and fun. It is really important to make the instructions as clear as possible and give feedback often enough to make sure the child understands what is happening.
I want this game, I am going to use all my savings to buy this!

[a child during teaching, when using TagTiles for the first time]
52
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
pictures of children playing with TagTiles; standard games, but also multiplication games which were at that point still under construction. Now these games are on the market (see an example in chapter 3.1, figure 20 on page 38).
53
5. Iteration 2
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
By observing the children and testing scenarios on TagTiles I became inspired how to use TagTiles for my project. Here are some conclusions why and how I could use TagTiles. From a business perspective it is wise to design a game on an already existing platform. This makes the game itself less expensive and schools who already invested in TagTiles are extra triggered to buy this game. When looking at the technical aspects it is also smart to use TagTiles. The interaction from TagTiles is ideal when creating a tangible concept. The electronics works, new technologies are optimized to work more precise (which is a must when designing for such an interaction).
5.2 Analysis and conclusions
The design features of TagTiles are also useful for my project. The object has the right size, fits on the childs table, easy to transport and still enough space for exploration. Sound and light feedback are perfect, because this fits with the tangible input and children with weak reading skills have no issues. The most important aspect is the fact that TagTiles gives direct feedback on tangible activities and can record the actions of the children. But of course there are also negative points about the use of TagTiles for my project. First of all, you can only play the game when you have bought an expensive platform. Second are the limitations of interaction. Stacking object on TagTiles is difficult to recognize. Because the RFID recognition is on a 2D-area.
And last of all publishers will put the game on the market. This means that the game is not independent. By this a lot of schools will not choose this game because of their chosen publisher. But using TagTiles for my project influences my process positively. It gives me the opportunity to create a working (advanced) prototype to start testing with the children. It also helps to focus my project further which means the project will be more concrete. But it also means a lot of project choices are already made, because of the (limited) possibilities of TagTiles. Observing the children gave me inspiration to sketch some possible interaction object for on TagTiles regarding learning the multiplication [figure 26].
54
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
figure 26: sketches of possible interaction object for the project to use on TagTiles, representing multiplications
55
5. Iteration 2
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
During this iteration I did not only look at what children think of TagTiles, but also what the opinion of teachers is about TagTiles and about my project plans. To find this out I organised a focus group with teachers. To achieve this I cooperated with a PABO student; Ester Lathouwers. She was doing her graduation project about games during math lessons. We agreed to work together for a while, she helped me contacting teachers (at her school Beppino Sarto, Eindhoven) and I helped her by sharing my literature research. On the 14th of April in 2010 we gathered four teachers who teach group five to seven. We introduced ourselves, TagTiles, TagTiles games and my project. They discussed, gave their opinion and even brainstormed about possible solutions.
5.3 Focus group
This resulted in a clear view of everyones opinion and a lot of practical tips how to realize details. They were very critical and it was nice to see the influence of difference ages of the teachers. Young teachers were more open minded for new technologies and old teachers hesitated more (as described by Mirande 2006). This teacher didnt saw the added value of TagTiles in comparing with the computer. They agree that learning the multiplication table can be improved a lot. Children who have issues with the multiplication tables dont get the correct material, they ask the child to just repeat the formal notation calculations. After a while teachers give up and give the child the multiplication table card (figure 27). In general they were very enthusiastic about TagTiles, but didnt like the price. They could think of a lot of extra appli-
cations, like: parsing sentences, learning fractures, percentages, decimal system, section table, but also for history, geography, coordinations and music lessons. The teachers suggested to improve TagTiles by making the scenario quicker, light brighter, skip big introductions, have a clear voice (dont use childish voice for this age), add limit on how often asking help, add game elements
56
figure 27: an example of a multiplication table card, includes all calculations
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
(such as: next level, game over), and make sure TagTiles doesnt make sounds which become annoying after a while. They agreed that it is very important to communicate clearly to teachers what the learning goal of the game is. They advice me to make sure I chose an interesting contexts for the age eightnine: diamonds, money, bling-bling, fancy cars or famous persons. I also presented my project at the PABO (Pedagogische academie voor het basisonderwijs, translated: Educational Academy for primary schools) during an information day at the Fontys. A miniconference on May 27th 2010 called: Verfrissend perspectief voor onderwijsontwikkeling (translated: refreshing perspective for educational development). The goal of this conference was to exchange practical examples of educational development on the field of cul-
ture, ICT and/or science and technique. I presented together with Esther Lathouwers. Important people attended this presentation (including head of PABO and teachers of the PABO). They were interested in TagTiles, but also in my project. They agreed with my conclusions and were very positive about my plans. The gave me advice on how to continue my project and agreed that this is a promising project.
Conclusions focus group
They were enthusiastic about TagTiles and agreed with my conclusions. There only problem are the costs. But near the costs they can image using my application to help their children with learning the multiplication. The teachers agreed with the fact that learning tools for multiplications can be improved. The current situation is sad. Too many children are behind and are depending on their multiplication table card. The teachers gave a lot of practical information and advised me to choose an interesting context.
57
5. Iteration 2
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Eventually I summarized all conclusions so far into an overall scenario [figure 28]. This scenario orders the main activities which are important to realize an instructive game when using TagTiles. To achieve this I focussed on the main issues: - keep the child motivated - assess the level of the child - adapt level of calculation to child - guide the child - give direct feedback - communicate progress to teacher Reasoning why each stage should be motivating for the child is included in this visual. Details about the scenario are left out because I want to investigate them further in the next iteration. This scenario makes sure the child understands the foundation of multiplication (start with concrete material) and
5.4 Overall scenario
that the child finds the right answers by her/himself (get a better feeling about themselves). This is crucial when learning and remembering the multiplication table for the rest of their lives. This scenario makes sure the child will be motivated to continue to play this game (feeling of control, discovery, accomplishment and challenge) and also by variation of the context. It is an adaptive system which assess the child during play, this is an ideal situation for learning. And finally this scenario makes sure the teacher doesnt need to invest extra time, but will be up to date about the childs progress. In the next iteration the scenario should be validated and investigate the details of the scenario (context, material, feedback, etc.).
Notes overall scenario
Start: TagTiles and a child with multiplication issues. A. Get multiplication (audio and visual) and ask the child to construct this calculation. B. Support the child with giving the right answer. C. When answer is correct, give feedback. D. Use data (time, errors, support, actions) to reflect on level of the child. Translate this into their overall progress (and communicate this with the teacher). Eventually back to A, another calculation at a certain level (depending on progress). When having trouble at B, even after enough support, take a step back (go directly towards D).
58
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
A.
D.
B.
figure 28: overall scenario, combined previous findings into a scenario, details will be added later on
C.
59
6. Iteration 3
After creating an overall scenario, details must be investigated and tested in the field. Make choices about how the final concept should look like and link back with previous findings.
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
During this iteration I created a couple of scenarios and tested them in the field. In subchapter 6.2 I will describe and evaluate each scenario, but first I will explain the context of the user-test. I tested the different scenarios with the different materials by the use of a Wizard of Oz prototype [figure 29]. This means that I created my own fake TagTiles (a plastic mould with underneath a laptop) which looks like it was working (when acting, it gave the correct responds with light). But by the use of an external keyboard, I was controlling the fake TagTiles in real time. Using this Wizard of Oz prototype has several advantages. It makes the prototype very flexible without any bugs. I was able to anticipate on the situation. Details and possible exceptions didnt have to be worked out before the test,
6.1 Setup user-test
but could be filled in during testing. Such a prototype is much quicker and easier to program. And finally I didnt have to borrow an expensive TagTiles for a long period of time. Of course this prototype influences how the children experienced the game. This doesnt show how the child will act exactly when it will play the same game with a real TagTiles. But this prototype will give me a clue and inspires me how it could look like. With this prototype I tested initially the overall scenario from chapter 5.4. I looked how motivated the children were, how clear everything was and what is the best way to instruct the child. So during tutoring I placed the prototype in front of the child. I asked to construct a certain calculation with the materials (see chapter 6.3) on the
yellow surface. Then I asked them to lay down the first number; size of one item. For example with the pizzas; how many mushrooms, lay down nine. This number should be laid down on a little blue surface, which I created with my keyboard. When correct I made this surface green, when incorrect I made it red and asked to look again. The same for the next number (times set is repeated) and for the answer. Then the play area is cleaned and start over with another calculation. I also looked at input possibilities, not only what kind of material to use to construct the calculation, but how to input the formal calculation notation and the answer. Another important aspect is to look how to guide the child, not only through the process, but also how to help the child when it is stuck: What kind of hints are possible, in which order and when to give such a hint.
60
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
child
plastic empty prototype
material
laptop
keyboard
: input
figure 29: Wizard of Oz prototype used during user-testing. Left: picture of the prototype setup. Top: program I wrote in Processing 1.2.1 to make sure I could control the play area by using my keyboard. And in the middle: visual how the software should look like on the play area. me
61
6. Iteration 3
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
The Wizard of Oz prototype was used to test the overall scenario and four detailed scenarios. I will illustrate those three detailed scenarios in this subchapter by describing and evaluating each one of them. The outcome of these user-tests will be used in chapter 6.3, where I will discuss each detail.
6.2 User-testing
Snakes
Simple wooden blocks connected to each other by the use of an elastic. The child can construct a surface by ordering the snakes. Then ask the right calculation and answer. This represents the surface model (subchapter 2.3), within an interesting context for the child. By acting physical they get a better feeling about what an calculation means. The snakes make it also easier to act out a strategy.
They were very enthusiastic about the snakes, they liked to order, reorder and build things with the snake. Some children added a complete story to the snakes. It is a clear representation, with the option to act out a strategy. When using the snakes, make sure they create the snakes out of loose blocks, otherwise you will need to many snakes.
62
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
Pizza boxes
Used empty CD boxes to represent pizza boxes. Create one foam pizza to stimulate their imagination. The pizza has four tomatoes, nine mushrooms and existed out of six slices. This is used to represent the box model. You have on each pizza nine mushrooms and a pile of eight pizzas, how much mushrooms are there in total?
They loved the context and liked to build big piles with the empty CD boxes. It wasnt a problem at all that just one box contains a pizza. They used their imagination to think all the boxes were filled. It is a good representation of the boxes model, sometimes it was difficult to count a huge pile of empty CD boxes because they are a bit transparent.
63
6. Iteration 3
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Flowers
Cubes
Almost similar with the pizza boxes, instead of a pizza the empty CD boxes were filled with little colourful fake flowers. Girls like this context very much. In one box were six pink, seven purple and nine red flowers. This resulted into multiplications. This representation was a little less representing the reality, because why would someone put flowers in a flat box?
After practicing the scenario with the snakes and boxes I translated this concrete material in a more formal representation. Instead of a pizza box with six tomatoes, a simple cube was representing this. The child was still motivated because of the intrinsic motivation to achieve a higher level in multiplication and noticing their progress.
64
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
When testing different scenarios in the previous subchapter I used simple materials. This made me realize that those children dont need fancy designed materials to get motivated. In this context it is more important to have a design which is practical, cheap and most important of all: clear. When looking at the scenario, there are four things which need to be designed [figure 30]: material that represents all possible multiplications (to ten), input material (the numbers and asking for help), foil (surface on TagTiles) and the output (sound and light on TagTiles). Each thing mentioned above will be explored more into detail. Together they will be the final design which will be presented in chapter seven. figure 30: four things which need to be designed; material that represents all possible multiplications (orange), input material (purple), foil (green) and the output (red).
6.3 Explore details
65
6. Iteration 3
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Represent multiplication material This material should represent all possible multiplications to ten. To make the game as instructive as possible, it is important to have material which represents the line-model, surface-model and the box-model. But also material which represents in a more formal way is necessary (like the cubes on page 64). The representation of the line and surface model can be combined by using something like the snakes [figure
31], by laying the snakes behind each other (line-model) or next to each other (square-model). To realize this as cheap as possible and to make sure children do not spend too much of their time constructing the snakes, there should be different sizes [figure 32]. The representation of the box model is much more complicated. The pizzas where a big success, but unfortunately
it is not (yet) possible for TagTiles to recognize objects on each other. So it should be boxes who are laid down on TagTiles, next to each other [figure 33]. It should also not have a clear surface by itself. Because children can get confused when a box looks too much like the surface model.
figure 31: snakes used to represent the multiplication 3 3 by using the lineand the square-model.
figure 32: preconstructed snakes, one of five blocks, one of two blocks and three of one blocks. You can not take these apart.
figure 33: a TagTiles with boxes on the play area. On the left a concrete representation and on the right a more formal representation.
66
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
The solutions are little bags from cloth which can be filled with things [figure 34]. To motivate the children an interesting context will be connected: money/ gold. So the box model will be represented by little bags which can be filled with gold pieces. The bags should be semi-transparent, which makes it possible to show the contents (how many pieces of gold) by putting the light on underneath the bags when laying on TagTiles [figure 35]. By this a small transformation from concrete towards a more formal representation is possible.
To realize a representation of the complete multiplication table to ten with the bags, you need ten bags and just ten pieces to put in the bag (just one bag will be filled). Again childrens imagination will be used, to pretend all the bags are filled with the same amount. As shown in the pizza concept they dont have trouble with this.
Input material To make sure children understand each multiplication and know the correct answer it is very important to check the multiplication including the answer. To achieve this children need to build the calculation on TagTiles in the correct notation: infix notation (most common notation). Each multiplication exists out of five components [figure 36].
1.
figure 35: illustrating how the light of TagTiles can assist with the box-model representation. On the left a bag with no light on the play area. Inside the bag are three pieces, but you cant see them. This helps to go to a formal notation. But when the child has trouble TagTiles can put the light on (illustrated on the right). Now you can see the content (take a step back to a more concrete representation.
3.
5.
24=8
2. 4.
figure 36: infix notation 1. first factor: multiplicand (size of the set) 2. multiplication sign () 3. second factor: multiplier (times set is repeated) 4. equal sign (=) 5. product (answer of the calculation).
figure 34: illustration of little bags, that can be filled with things, to represent the box-model.
67
6. Iteration 3
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
It is of high importance to let the child construct the calculation themselves. This way, learning the correct notation is stimulated and practiced. The best way would be to let the child write the multiplication down (on paper/touch play area). But in this context it is hard to realize this, because that kind of recognition hardware is too expensive. Another used solution is pushing the corresponding number (keyboard). When looking at the interaction this is a bad way of learning the notation, because children are forced to type direct in the right order. For example 45, children are used to write first the five and then the four, when typing they type, without knowing, 54. So no writing and no typing, which results in tangible interaction, constructing the calculation by connecting com-
ponents. This fits perfectly with TagTiles and is still didactically responsible. During the user-test I used paper cards which I borrowed from PARWO. Those cards are cheap, simple and very clear. By folding them they stand up. I used the ten units and nine dozens. It is very instructive to have separate units and dozens cards (to learn the difference). When talking only about the multiplicand, multiplier and product (the numbers) it is not enough to have just one five, when you need to lay down: 55=25. You would think three would be enough, but this will result in a lot of question marks when a child wants to lays down 55=55, even though this is a wrong calculation the child should be able to put this down. If so the Tagtile is aware of the childs mistake. To give the child some space, four piec-
es of each number should be available (three units and one dozen). The zero dont need a dozen, but need five units 10 10 = .. (some children could answer 1000). Also the ones are an exception, three units, three dozens and one hundred. So five zeros, seven ones and four pieces of each number between two to nine. This means (5+7+48) 44 pieces with numbers on them (32 units, eleven dozens and one hundred). This big amount of pieces also influence the design of one piece. It should be easily stored (otherwise it will cost too much space) and as cheap as possible. During the user-tests it was a bit chaotic, all the numbers standing around TagTiles. It took often a while before
68
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
the child found the correct number. This could be a problem because TagTiles thinks the child is thinking too long about a calculation. So it is very important the child can quickly lay down the correct number as soon as the child knows it. In conclusion the 44 number pieces should be clear, cheap, easy to find, easy to grasp, easy to place, easy to put back and easy to store, without taking too much space. In addition there should be a clear multiplication sign and equal sign. Some sketching [figure 37] resulted into four concepts: simple loose pieces laying, loose pieces standing, dice and stations which each include the nine numbers. It would be nice to try them out in the field.
possible positions of numbers including the position of the tag
figure 37: sketches how the input material can look like. The child will use this to construct the (in)correct calculation on TagTiles.
69
6. Iteration 3
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Foil Each game used on TagTiles consists of input material, output and a foil that lays on the play area of TagTiles. This foil creates a context, which supports the scenario and makes the game more attractive. This foil is a visual printed on a transparent plastic that blocks or transfers the light of TagTiles play area. For my game the foil should help to structure the interaction. It should be clear for the child were to lay down the multiplication representation and the calculation in formal notation. So there are just two surface which need to be designed. When thinking logically it is more practical to put the calculation in front of the representation. Because the child lays down the representation first and this could block the view on the calculation. It is practical to make the representation
area ten by ten squares (to realize the surface model). The play area has twelve by twelve squares. So this means that just a row of two squares are left for the calculation. This makes it a bit cramped, so the field will exclude the calculation ten multiply ten for the surface model. So on the
front a field of three by twelve squares are left for the calculation [figure 38]. Often the field used for the representation for a multiplication will be much smaller. The calculation can be put a bit higher. This should be possible, so TagTiles should be loose about the exact location of the calculation as long as it is standing in the right order. Or maybe the foil is not a flat surface but a construction, where the child can scroll between the numbers as shown in figure 39.
figure 38: sketch of how the foil could look like. Two areas: back, lay down the multiplication representation material (ten by nine squares) and the front, lay down the calculation by using the numbers (twelve by 2,5 squares).
figure 39: sketches how the foil could look like, when not using the loose number pieces, but stations connected to the foil.
70
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
Output To prevent confusing and frustration the output should be tested over and over, to make sure children understand the scenario and what is expected from them. The output exists out of light and sound. The light can be designed in each colour in squares from 20 x 20 mm on the play area. By making the material which is put on the play area a bit transparent, the objects can change colour. The light should indicate were to lay down the representation. Like mentioned at the previous page the representation surface is ten by nine squares big. TagTiles can show surface representations by using the light. This could be used for example when a child has trouble laying down a surface model.
But the light can also assist with the box-model representation as shown in figure 35 on page 67. By lightning the bag from beneath, it shows how many gold pieces are inside the bag (to take a step back to concrete). The light can also support the child when constructing the calculation. By indicating if the correct number is put on the correct place [figure 40]. The sound output should be further investigated. It will exists out of a voice telling instructions, giving help, giving feedback and sounds indicating correct actions. It is very important to give clear instructions and have variations in feedback. As mentioned in 2.3 the feedback should not be focussed on the lack of skills but on giving hints how to improve. Dont give product oriented comments, but process oriented comments (you have done your best!). figure 40: illustrating how the light can contribute to get direct feedback on the constructed calculation. When asking to lay down a certain number, indicate this by flashing a couple of squares blue. When the correct number is positioned on the right place, give it a yellow colour. But when it is incorrect make it blue (not flashing. Make sure children don not use trail and error, if child is just guessing, stop with indicating by colour, but give hints. When the complete multiplication is correct, they all change in green.
71
6. Iteration 3
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
figure 41: scenario so far
72
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
During iteration three I made a lot of progress by testing and investigating the details of the overall scenario. Overall the children understood the scenario, but some extra time is needed to be sure the details work. So far the scenario [figure 41] will be act out by using first the snakes (surfacemodel) and gradually the bags are used. Each time a multiplication is constructed with the material and then the correct calculation should be constructed on TagTiles. The level of difficulty and how concrete the material will be, depends on the progress of the child. To realize this, a well thought through algorithm should be designed and validated, to realize an adaptive system. To keep the game interesting it is important to have variations in multipli-
6.4 Conclusions
cations, contexts, feedback and show progress of the child. To achieve this an extra foil could be used with all the multiplications on it. When laying it on TagTiles, TagTiles will indicate, by using light, which calculations are making progress or already known by the child. It should also look nice, not too fancy. I noticed this has no extra value later on. It would be nice to give the school the possibility to expand the game by adding extra versions of the game. The details which are explained in this chapter should be connected to each other. An overall context would make the game more interesting and coherent. The final design will be illustrated in the next chapter.
73
What is the final result from my FMP? What are the reactions on my FMP? How does this FMP changed me who I am as a designer?
final design
7. Final Design 8. Evaluation
7. Final Design
By combining all findings and solutions, from previous iterations, a final design can be presented. Not only how it should be, but also why it should work. First I will demonstrate the overall game, later I explain the details of the hard- and software.
7.1 Alles maalt
chose (or recommended by the teacher) to play the game Alles maalt. In the back of the classroom, in the computer corner, TagTiles is stored. The child gets TagTiles, including the Alle maalt attributes, and lays it down on his/her table. Plugs the power in and puts on the headphone. Then (s)he will play the game for approximately ten minutes. When finished another child can play the same game, another game or the child stores the TagTile. It would be nice to play this game a couple of times each week. Whenever the teacher needs an update, the teacher can connect the TagTile with the computer. By using the Alles maalt program (included with the game), the teacher can check the progress of each child. It gives an overview, but also (when necessary) detailed ad-
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
The final design is an application on the TagTile, the game named: Alles maalt. To explain clearly how this game will work and look like, I will first demonstrate the scenario. In the following subchapters I will go more into detail; how the hardware looks like (chapter 7.2), how the software should work (chapter 7.3) and why this design should work (chapter 7.4). Before I illustrate what the final scenario looks like, I will first refresh your memory in what kind of context this design should be used.
vice how to help a child with a certain representation or calculation. By using internet the data can be uploaded. An expert can look at it (when teacher wants) or researchers can use the data.
Alles maalt should be used by children in group five, age eight-nine, who have trouble with learning the multplication table. At the end of a daily math lesson children are free to choose a math related activity. Then the child can
Context
But what happens when the child turns on the TagTile? To start the game Alles maalt, the child should first lay down the foil of that game on TagTiles. By a tag in the foil TagTiles knows to start the game Alles maalt. Then it will start with the introduction, followed by the actual game and closed by a reflection [figure 42]. 1. The introduction When TagTiles knows the child wants to play Allles maalt, it shows a fancy illustration and plays a recognizable tune. By this the child gets feedback from TagTiles that the foil is placed correct.
Scenario
76
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
figure 42: flow chart how the scenario of the game Alles maalt looks like. Start at the top left with the introduction, after the actual the game ends on the bottom right with a reflection on the progress of the child.
77
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Meanwhile the game is loading and asks the child to place their name tag on the top left of the play area. When the tag is placed correctly, the tag is recognized, TagTiles welcomes the child by saying: Welcom Susan, lets play Alles maalt!. When no name tag is placed, to TagTiles will start the trial scenario, to give an impression how this game should work. But for now we assume that Susan is logged in. Then there are two options: 1. Susan is playing it for the first time or 2. Susan has played it before. In the first case TagTiles will give a short, clear, interactive introduction. To make sure Susan understands where to lay down the numbers and the representation material. This will be realized by showing light and asking to put the material on this place. When done correct, the first task can start.
When Susan has played the game before, TagTiles refresh Susans memory. By repeating what she did last time (Do you remember last time? ...). This is realized by a short, clear, interactive summary of what kind of material Susan used on what kind of level. When done correct, the first task can start. 2. Actual game This is the main part of the game. Starts after a short introduction and finishes when the reflection is started. In this middle part a simple scenario is executed: construct a representation of a given calculation and then lay down the correct corresponding calculation. Then construct a new representation and lay down the new calculation, and so on. In the beginning of the task TagTiles asks (for example) to lay down two snakes, of each four blocks, in a certain place (indicated by flashing blue light).
When done correctly, the light turns yellow (direct feedback). When having trouble, the task is repeated and explained in more detail (Get the snake cubes out of the box, connect them by...).
1.
3.
5.
2.
4.
figure 43: overview of play area, with indication where to lay down everything, 1: the multiplicand, 2: the multiplication sign, 3: the multiplier, 4: the equal sign and 5: the area for the answer.
78
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
When the material lays in place, TagTiles asks to construct the corresponding multiplication. In the beginning this is done piece by piece. Start with asking to lay down the multiplicand (size of one snake), by saying: How many blocks does one snake have?. At the same time the place where to lay down the multiplicand [figure 43] is flashing blue. When laying down the correct number (4) the light turns into yellow, when it is wrong the reaction depends on the progress of the child. The light will stay blue, but quits with flashing. TagTiles asks if the child is certain about this answer. More hints will be given (depending on the progress) and eventually TagTiles starts to count aloud (supporting by the light) and eventaully asks How many blocks did we count?. Then asks the child to take that number and place it on the play area.
When the correct multiplicand is laying on the correct position TagTiles will ask: How many snakes are laying on me?. Now the blue light will flash at the multiplier place, when correct number (2) is placed the light turns yellow. But when the wrong answer is placed the same story as for the multiplicand counts. At this stage the child has placed the multiplicand (4) and the multiplier (2) on the correct place. When it is the first task, the child has to place the multiplication sign and the equal sign on the correct place. This is stimulated by asking to create the corresponding multiplication. When the child has trouble, explain in detail where to lay down each sign, indicated by light. Then the correct calculation is laying in place. It is time to place the correct answer behind it. Again blue light will flash and when the correct asnwer (8) lays, it
will turn yellow. But when the wrong answer is placed, or it takes too long, hints will help the child finding the answer. The child can asks for the hints sooner by using the question mark. The amounts of hints, and what kind of hints, depends on the progress of the child. But TagTiles will never give the correct answer! The child has to find it by themself. When the correct answer lays in place, all the light change from yellow to green. This indicates the calculation is finished. Now TagTiles will ask the child to write this calculation on a clean piece of paper. And then all the numbers and the snakes should be stored, to start with the next task. Those tasks will be done in sequence. So get instructions, lay down representation material and construct the correct calculation. Different materials will be used (snakes, bags, cubes or maybe
79
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
also dices). This depends on the progress of the child, more details in chapter 7.2 and 7.3. After five minutes of executing those tasks, TagTiles asks if the child wants to continue. When Susan wants to quit, she places the question mark up side down in the middle of the play area. When she wants to continue she does not do anything, or when she is in a hurry, she places the question mark on a certain place. After a total of ten minutes play time, TagTiles asks again, if she wants to quit and after 15 minutes the TagTile ends the game by itself. What happens next will be explained on the next page. When executing the tasks, TagTiles is using a complex algorithm. This algorithm assesses the childs multiplication skills and makes sure the child gets the correct calculation (on the right level of difficulty and material). To realize that I
created three levels of difficulty and four levels of material. They both will be explained in chapter 7.3. 3. Reflection When the child indicates (s)he wants to quit the game (or has played for 15 minutes), it is time to wrap up. Before shutting down the game, it is time for reflection. A special (smaller) sheet should be laid down on top of the other foil [figure 44]. On this foil all multiplication are printed. When the child lays it on the the correct place, the lights will indicate which calculation were played today (guided by a voice). After concluding that the child has done a lot, TagTiles will show all the calculations the child knows (so include previous results). The colour of the light indicates how well Susan knows each calculation (orange means well and birght yellow means very well). A voice
figure 44: top: the second foil, a smaller sheet with all multiplications. Bottom: when laying the foil on the play area TagTiles shows the progress of the child by using lights.
80
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
tells that Susan knows already a lot of calculations. The visual gives the child a clear overview and gets more confident, feels proud. Even though she did not make any progress today, she can be proud, because she solved a lot of calculations today. Eventually TagTiles thanks the child for playing and asks if she wants to play again soon. The introduction, the actual game and the reflection together, form the complete game. This process is explained global on the last pages. But the Alles maalt game is much more. I will explain some aspects further: guidance (feedback and hints), variation and expansions.
direct feedback and motivating. But the correct guidance is also very important. First of all the instructions should be clear (easy to follow), appropriate and no too boring (concise). But guidance is much more then instructing, it should give feedback and hints to. It is very important to get direct feedback on each action. The feedback can be just a sound, voice, light or a combination of them. The sound and voice feedback become quickly monotonous, so light feedback is prefered. Voice feedback should be more rare, for example when the correct calculation is solved really quick (for that child). Sounds can be used to indicate that another task is completed. Hints are also communicated by sound, voice, light or a combination of them. This is a complex process, because the type of hint depends on the progress
of the child. In the beginning hints are given more quickly, but later on TagTiles should be more reserved with giving hints. Hints will automatically start when a child did not act for a long time. But by laying down the question mark on the play area, the child can ask for a hint sooner. When the child is advanced, asking for hints is limited. For example for every five minutes the child can just use three question marks. By this the child will be more cautious and is stimulated to think more by themselves. When a child asks for a hint TagTiles can give different hints. The first hint is small, some kind of reminder. The next one (when the first was not enough) is more into detail and the last one is counting together. The amount of hints used for each calculation will be saved and used for assessing the progress of the child (more details in chapter 7.3).
To make sure the game is instructive, it should be adaptive, tangible, giving
Guidance
81
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
To keep the child motivated, the game should not get boring after a while. This is provided by offering the child a challenge. But when learning the multiplication table, it means the child needs to repeat each calculation again and again. To make this a bit more pleasent, variation at different stages should be offered. Variation can be created by adding and changing an exiting context to the material (for example, the two snakes get a baby, now you have three). But you can also variate with the calculations (do not repeat the stupid 8x8 calculation, but vary with easy calculations in between). You can also variate by adding new rules. For example; only lay down the answer, add time pressure or draw surface (with two blocks) instead of laying down the snakes.
Variation
The best way to create variations is to give some control to the child. Let them choose which calculation they want to lay down. Or decide which calculation to do next by throwing two dice. Those last variations do not match with the whole algorithm of making the calculation on the right level. But when a child made a lot of progression, this control does not damage the algorithm. All those variations can be added to the game. But be careful with selecting the moments of those variations and make sure the child does not get confused. Because it is very important that the child understands the overall structure.
on the market after a school buys this game. By this more variation is offered, and children who played the game for a while get some refreshment. Expansions for the game could be extra material; new kinds of surface or box material, new kind of foil or maybe different numbers. But also adding advanced levels (have smaller numbers), were you work with calculations up to 20. But also the guidance can be expanded, or even updated by using internet. Download new feedback lines or sounds can refresh the whole game. Now I described the game scenario, in the next chapters I will describe the hardware into detail.
The Alles maalt game described in this chapter is the basic game to start with. It would be a smart bussiness value to make sure expansions are available
Expansions
82
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
The game Alles maalt should be instructive and attractive, by the realisation of two major aspects. The first is the adeptiveness (explained in chapter 7.3), and the second major aspect is the Tangible interaction. By the tangible interaction the game is instructive, because it motivates the child, creates deeper understanding and gives direct feedback. It is motivating because children like to be active (building and ordering objects), by this they have a sense of control. The tangible objects create deeper understanding of multiplying. The child build examples of multiplication representations, those are meaningful constructions. So it provides insights about what multiplication is and it stimulates the children to find strategies by themselves. But it also helps the child with re-
7.2 Design hardware
membering their new insights, by stimulating multiple senses (seeing, hearing, touching and doing). But the game will be instructive mostly because of its direct feedback. Not only feedback about the actions of the child are notices by TagTiles. But also feedback on the constructed calculation, is the answer right? By knowing this immediatly, it prevents that the child stores the wrong answer as being probably right. The game Alles maalt contains the following hardware components; TagTiles, the foil, the input numbers, and multiplication representation material. I will describe them in the following sections.
the hardware, it is a platform (320x298 mm) with a play area (240x240 mm) [appendix E]. The play area is the interactive field (the input), each tagged object placed on the play area will be recognized. The output is 144 LEDs of the play area (12 by 12) and sound (speakers or headset). How they will act is explained in chapter 7.3. But first I will describe the foil, the numbers and the tagged objects used on TagTiles when playing the game.
To realize this tangible instructive game, the existing product, TagTiles is used (chapter 3.1). When looking at
TagTiles
To start the game, the child places the foil (with one tag) of the game Alles maalt on TagTiles. This foil is a visual printed on a transparant plastic (blocks or transfers the light of the play area). On the foil there are two areas: on top the field to lay down the multiplication representation material and at the bottom the field to lay down the numbers. On the edge the title is printed.
Foil
83
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
When looking at the use of colour, it is important to make sure it does not look childlish. It should be cool and modern, so I choose refreshing and hard colours. The corresponding colours are figure 45); black, light and dark gray (metallic look), light and dark blue (colour of TagTiles). These colours are clear, and stands for alert, exact, progression, and intellectual [Kobayashi 1998]. I will add contrast by using the colours of the LEDS and the gold and bling material. By having a relative dark design the LEDs will be easier to see. I try to avoid the colour red, although it is a powerful colour, the association with failure, wrong is too big. I will come back to the colours when describing the complete setup. There are two options for the design. Just a plain design (no distraction, figure 45) or a design which support a story
figure 45: design of foil (laying on TagTiles) plain design, bottom: the chosen colours for the foil design.
figure 46: design of foil (laying on TagTiles) which support a story; investigate the cave together with a spider (question mark) and explore snakes and gold to finally find the treasure.
84
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
(extra motivation, figure 46). I am not sure which one is better, it would be nice to test both in the field. But unfortuneatly I do not have time over, so this should be researched later on. The top area of the foil (for the representation material) is transparant, 90 LEDS (10 by 9) will be active in this field (200 x 180 mm) to support the construction of the representation. The bottom area is used to lay down the calculation. To minimize the costs and the space for storing the numbers I chose to use flat numbers. But to make them easier to read from the childs perspective, I use the foil to lay them in an angle [figure 47]. This also prevents another problem; when child is asked to clean the calculation it is stimulated to put the numbers back one by one, instead of sweeping them of TagTiles.
Two bars are attached to the foil to realize the angle of the numbers. By making those bars transparant (perspex) light, colours indicating the correctness of the numbers, will be easier to recognize.
figure 47: side view of the design of the foil. Two bars attached to the foil make sure the numbers which are put on TagTiles are easily to read and easy to grasp.
85
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
To lay down the correct calculation on the foil (on the board) tagged objects with numbers on it are needed. The yshould be easy to store (so be flat), easy to grasp (add grip), easy to place (on the bars) and easy to put back (in a box). This box makes it possible to find the numbers easier. Eventually I created a flat design [figure 48]. Also transparant (perspex, opal acrylic, cost per game four euro) so it is easy to tell if the number is correct or not. The sign (equal and multiplication) are the same, but a bit smaller to make sure they stay on their place (they do not need to be placed over and over, they can lay down during the whole game). All the 44 numbers and the two signs are stored in a box. That box lays in front of TagTiles. I leave out the option of having tens and ones, but maybe in an exfigure 48: design of one number object (technical drawing, scale 1:1, unit mm)
Input numbers
86
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
pansion version this could be realised. Because it has an added value (alot of those children still have trouble with the correct position of the numbers). The 44 pieces of numbers need 44 tags. This could be an expensive joke. There is a cheap solution [figure 49]. It works, which means children can input the numbers they like. But the interaction is bad. When creating the right number it takes a lot of time and children of this age find it very confusing. Eventually the constructed calculation will look a bit odd. Not very attractive, but much cheaper. I will keep this solution in mind when the costs become too high.
figure 49: back up option for inserting the numbers much cheaper, but this interaction is really bad.
87
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
By now I have described the foil and the numbers. Next I will discuss the hardware used on TagTiles as representation material. As described in chapter 6.3 there will be three different materials; the snakes, the bags and the cubes. Snakes To represent the line- and surfacemodel I use the snakes. The child can build a snake by connecting cubes with Velcro. There are one hundred cubes, each cube (17 x 15 x 20 mm) is made out of transparant perspex (per game seven euro). The cubes are sanded (get rid of the sharp corners), by this the snakes become the colour of the light underneath them. To cut the costs and to minimalize the constructing time, there will be cubes connected to each other [figure 50].
Representation material
figure 50: top: drawings of the snakes from different views. Right: pictures of the snakes laying on TagTiles. Bottom: snakes in predefined sizes (five, two and three times one).
88
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
Bags To represent the box-model I use the bags. One of the ten bags can be filled with golden pieces. The rest of the bags could be fake to save some time and costs. The bags (70 x 90 mm) shoud look like the left sketch in figure 51, but to minimize the costs, the right will do. The material could be off-white cotton (a bit transparant). By laying the bag on the play area, the LEDs make the contents visible. Make sure the golden pieces block the light. There should be ten golden pieces to realize all multiplication representations.
Each bag and golden objects should be tagged. The golden pieces should be recognized by TagTiles. For that reason the pieces have to lay flat in the bag (not on top of each other). To stimulate this the pieces should have a shape like this [figure 52]. The pieces itself do not need much detail. The imaginition of a child will be enough to get the children excited. The gold pieces (15x 15 mm) can be made out of wood and painted yellow.
figure 51: inspiration how a bag should look like (source: creacarmen.webklik. nl), right: sketch of a simple model of a bag to realize the bags.
figure 52: the golden pieces which are used to fill the bags.
89
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Cubes To create a representation which is more formal, but still a bit concrete, cubes can be used. Ten cubes will be needed for the basic version of Alles maalt. The cube can be very simple, it would be nice to make it also transparant. But make sure there is a clear different between these cubes and the cubes from the snakes. Each cube should be tagged and has a surface of 20 x 20 mm [figure 53]. The hight should be less then 20 mm, because it should be clear what the top side is. When it is made of perspex 15 mm would be clever (standard size). Now I described all representation material. But to make sure the materials are easy to access and to store, more hardware is needed. I will explain this when describing the final setup.
the question mark. When opening the box the numbers should be put in front of TagTiles [figure 54]. I chose for an interesting context, which fits with the game, a treasury. How this box is realized depends on a lot of factors which I did not investigated yet. It would be nice to make it out of wood. When the story is added to the scenario (foil in figure 45), the question mark will be replaced by a sweet spider, called: Spinnie. Spinnie and the child together will investigate a cave, find snakes, bags with gold and try to solve the whole treasure map (the second foil). All hardware of the game Alles maalt is explained. To get more information you can look at the technical drawings [appendix F]
figure 53: the cubes, each cube represention a certain amount.
When playing the game all materials should be easy to find. When storing the game, it should be as compact as possible. The solution is a box, containing the numbers and signs, the snakes, the bags, all gold pieces, the cubes and
Setup during play
90
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
figure 54: get an imprssion how the setup during play and the box could look like. On top the scenario how the the numbers are installed. On the left the materials which are used to represent a multiplication on the TagTiles play area and on the right a sketch how the material will look next to TagTiles.
91
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
To make everything work properly, software is needed. Each object is tagged with a RFID tag, by using new localization technologies, TagTiles is able to recognize the identity and location of each tag (object). This is the input of TagTiles. But to generate the correct output, sound and light, software is created for processing. This software is programmed in the language ESPranto SDK, on a computer with linux and put on a SD-card. The SD-card is put in TagTiles and TagTiles use this software to act. So the software contains the complete scenario, each detail of the scenario is programmed. The software for the game Alles maalt should execute the scenario described in chapter 7.1. The software describe how the audio (voice instructions and sounds) and light (144 LEDS) will act.
7.3 Design software
But the software is also the brain behind the program. It should reason which scenario to follow (influenced by the actions of the child). So an algorithm is needed, by this an adaptive system can be realized. This is very important, because adaptiveness is one of the two major aspects of the game Alles maalt. By making the game adaptive, it will be more instructive and attractive (prevent that the child gets bored).
Before explaining the complex algorithm, I will first describe how the output is realized. At the beginning of a task, a voice gives an instruction to the child. Then TagTiles waits for the responds (lay an object on the play area) of the child. Depending on the responds (correct or incorrect) TagTiles gives different outputs.
Link input-output
For example, the child gets the instruction to lay down two snakes of four blocks on the play area. After giving this instruction the child should build two snakes of four and lay them down on TagTiles. When doing so, TagTiles localizes eight tags (with the identity snake) on the play area (positioned next to eachother, creating a rectangle from two by four). TagTiles compares these positions and identities with the positions and identities of what is programmed. When they match TagTiles instruct the corresponding LEDs to become yellow. By this the child gets feedback, that the snakes are in the correct place. But when the child does not lay down what should be layed down, the reaction of TagTiles should be different. The reaction depends on what is going wrong. When the child does not act at all, the instructions will be repeated, with the
92
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
added instruction: When you dont understand this instruction, please place the question mark on the play area. When the child lays down the wrong objects, TagTiles says: Those are no snakes, you have got the bags, please take them of me and get the snake cubes. When the child is laying down the wrong amount, TagTiles will ask to recount one length of one snake. And so on and so forth. Almost the same happends when TagTiles gives the instructions to lay down the calculation (and show blue flashing light on the location). When the correct object is placed on the correct location (TagTiles compares input with programmed rules), TagTiles instructs six LEDs (underneath the number) to become yellow. The child knows now (s)he placed the correct number on the correct place.
When the wrong number is placed, the LEDs should not become yellow, but stays blue and quits flashing. TagTiles starts the sound sample: Are you sure about this number?. When the number is removed, the blue light starts flashing again. Depending on the progress of the child (explained in the comming sections), TagTiles does not give immediatly feedback on each number which is layed down (to prevent trail and error). When the child should understand the calculation and the answer, TagTiles waits with giving feedback. When the child is sure about the complete calculation the child places an object on the play area. Then TagTiles shows the child if the calculation is correct. The question mark is also an input, TagTiles should act when this object is
placed on the play area. The reaction depends on the situation. When the question mark is placed after an instruction to lay down representation material, the instruction will be repeated and explained into detailed. When the question mark is placed when the child should lay down a number TagTiles will give a hint. What kind of hint depends on the situation, this is explained on page 98.
But for the game Alles maalt more software should be designed, as mentioned before; the algorithm. This algorithm makes sure TagTiles assesses the child during play, to realize an instructive game. By assessing the child TagTiles makes sure the child is working on the right level (keep in the flow), and prevent the child from getting frustrated or bored.
Algorithm
93
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
It is very imporant that those complex aspects are not visible for the child. The child should think it is playing a simple and clear game, which is coincidental instructing the right level of calculation at the right moment. By this the child is not distracted by complex goals and rules. But how to realize such an algorithm? To achieve this clear goals should be formulated. What kind of aspects influence this algorithm. Then a structure should be created, showing all the aspects and connections between those aspects. And eventually the rules should be formulated and translated into the ESPranto SDK language. Then programm the software (combine all rules into one file) and put it on a SD-card. Meanwhile test everything with a TagTiles, to make sure those parts are working. Finally the Alles maalt game will be realized. But of course it is not realistic to build a working prototype in the given time for this
project. For now I will explain the goals and how the structure of the algorithm will look like.
The childs multiplication skills need to be assessed on two dimension: which calculation is solved right and on which level (concrete - formal) is this calculation solved. This needs to be assessed because the order of multiplications matter. Before instructing a difficult calculation, an easy calculation should be solved first. And before solving a calculation on the formal level, the calculation should be solved on the concrete level. This is to make sure the insights are there, the child understands the meaning of the calculation. Therefor the correct calculation should be instructed on the right time. A calculation is solved right, when the notation is correct and the answer is
Algorithm goals
correct. But when used too many hints the calculation will be repeated later on, on the same level. And when the childs skills are more advanced, the correct notation will not be enough. The time required to solve the calculation should be not more then a couple seconds (so the time will be measure to). But there are more goals, not only the calculation should be traced and instructed on the right time, but the feedback (hints and responds on mistakes) is also linked with the progress of the child on the concrete - formal level. Those goals should be realized by the use of the algorithm. To achieve a practical and ordered algorithm a structure should be created.
94
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
First I will structure the two dimensions (which calculation and which level) separately. When learning the multiplication table up to ten, you need to know eventually 121 calculations (that is including the table of 0). In chapter 2.4 I showed a visual [figure 6] which divided all the mutliplications into three different difficulty levels. 70% of those multiplication are easy to learn, 20% is not easy and not hard and the last 10% is hard to learn. This distinction will be used for the structure [figure 55]. Every multiplication has changed into a code (35 is the code foe 3x5) and all the multiplication are ordered. This order is most likely the order how a child learns the multiplication order. No child will learn it in this particular order (precisly), because each child is unique. But it gives a clue how a progress could look like.
Algorithm structure calculations
figure 55: All the multiplications ordered. TagTiles use this structure to decide which calculation is next. This will happen in the following order: 1. instruct green calculation random (from the top) 2. instruct green calculation random (from the bottom) 3. instruct orange calculation random (from the top) 4. instruct orange calculation random (from the bottom) 5. instruct red calculation random (from the top) 6. instruct red calculation random (from the bottom)
95
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
Figure 55 describes a order, which is realized when the child answers them all right the first time. But when the child has trouble with a calculation, this order stops and the next calculation will be one step back [figure 56]. After the child had trouble with two calculations, the child will return to one. To make sure the child passess all the 121 calculations, the child returns to one, also when eight calulcation has been solved well in one sequence. Which calculation is used from a section is choosed randomly. Calculations will not be repeated for a while when they are answered right. But when the child had problem with a certain calculation (lets say, 48), this calculation will be repeated after getting in the forth section for the second time (so at least three different calculations will be in between).
The above described model makes sure the child gets a variation of calculations, gets calculations which are not exrtemely difficult for them and repeated the difficulty calculation after a while.
each level different materials will be used. The snakes and bags are used at the concrete model level. The cubes are used at the semi-concrete level and throwing dices can be used on the formal level (but can also be done without). When the child has reached the formal level it starts with automatizing the calculation (solve multiplication in 1o seconds). When this is achieved, there is an extra level to achieve: memorizing (knows answer immediately, described in chapter 2.4). In order to achieve the memorizing level, it is very important to have a good foundation (iceberg). To realize this, the child should construct each multiplication on almost each level (concrete model, semi-concrete and memorize). Those levels should be structured and linked to each other. To realize this each
There is also another dimension: each calculation can be solved on different levels. Those levels are inspired on the iceberg from Frans Moerlands [figure 2]. The child should start with mathematical world orientation, but this should be realized by looking around in their world, collecting examples of multiplications. Realizing this by using TagTiles is possible (lay down pictures on TagTiles with tags), the game Alles maalt starts with one level above: model material, all the way to the top: formal notation. Each calculation should be solved at three levels: concrete model level, semiconcrete model level, formal level. For
Algorithm structure levels
96
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
figure 56: rules that determines which order of all multiplications is used in the algorithm. Start at level one and eventually all the multiplication should pass by.
97
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
level gets a character and rules. A = memorizing (correct < 5 sec.) B = automatizing (correct < 12 sec.) C = semi-concrete model (correct, use cubes for representation) D = concrete model (correct, use snakes or bags for representation) The upgrading and downgrading between those levels depends on the actions of the child. Obviously the multiplication gets a level higher when the child did everything correct and will return to previous level when the child couldnt find the right answer. But it is much more complicated then that. Because the up- and downgrading is also influenced by other aspects. Like the amount of hints used, how well did it go last time, how quick is this multiplication progressing and how long did it take to solve the multiplication. How figure 57: structure for each mutliplication, each multiplication starts at level D and eventually should achieve level A.
98
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
they influence the progress is illustrated in figure 57. As you can see, the child does not have to answer the multiplication four times, in order to reach level A for that multiplication. When the child gives the correct answer very quick in level C (within 12 seconds) the multiplication get a super upgrade, goes from C to A. By this the algorithm prevents that the child gets bored. And I added an extra level below level D. This level is used when the child has a lot of trouble with solving this multiplication in level D. In level E the meaning of multiplication is demonstrated (repeatedly add) by using concrete material. Very slowly the child is guided how to solve the multiplication (count together).
In order to create a working algorithm, the above explained structures should be combined. This is visualized in appendix G. It is important to control the overall process, to make sure the child is not confused. One way of realizing this, is by making sure the child is not hopping between different levels each time it starts a new multiplication. Because when the child needs to use for each time different materials, it becomes too complex. So the algorithm should try to work on the same level for a couple of multiplications, before changing to the next level. In conclusion the algorithm must ensure that each multiplication has passed and that every multiplication goes from D to A. The process towards memorizing all the multiplications, can be different for each child. Not only the speed, but also how they achieved their goal
Algorithm
can be different for each kid. As long as the end result stays the same, the game is succesful. The end result could be to memorize all the multiplications, but for some children it is enough to automatize them or only solved them with the help of concrete models. The most important goal is to let the child experience some successes in solving multiplications.
99
7. Final design
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
The whole scenario and its details are explained in the previous subchapters. This concept should be validated to find out if it works. To achieve this, a usertest should be realized. This is achieved by creating a full working prototype and let the children use it for a while. In order to realize scienitfic proof of concept, a longitudinal study is needed. Because learning the multiplication table is a long process (talking about a one or two years). Three groups of children should be analyzed. The first group should learn the multiplication table how it is teached at the old fashion schools (use of books and non technical tangible tools). The second group of children should learn the multiplication table on a more modern school (that uses also the books and tangible tools, but also the new tech-
7.4 Validating
nologies such as computers and digiboards). And the last group schould be children who learn the multiplication table the same way, but with the Alles maalt games as an extra tool. After a while, data should be collected. Not only about how many multiplications are known by the child, but also the attitude towards learning the multiplication table. The children will be asked if they like to learn the multiplication table and also their opinion about their own multiplication skills. Do they think they are bad in multiplications, or do they think they are making a lot of progress? It would be nice to realize such a usertest in the project, but due to time issues, this is not realistic. Especially because a longitudinal study is necessary.
Another way to validate the design is by asking feedback from experts. Their experiences from the field would be usefull to find out if it would work in practice. Experts in combination with a small user-test with just a few children could give an idea if the game could really work. But my priorities for my graduation were the report and presentation, due to illness there was no time left to test the final design in the field. Therefore I can validate the final design only by reflecting on the design with the use of previous tests. Why would this game be instructive? First of all by having an adaptive system. The child gets the appropriate multiplications to ensure the child becomes not bored or frustrated and to make sure the crucial foundation is present.
100
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
The second major aspect is the tangible interaction. By manipulating physical objects, multiple senses are stimulated and the child gets a deeper understanding of what a multiplication means. The tangible interaction also gives direct feedback, this is very important to prevent learning the wrong facts. Both mentioned aspects make sure that the game is instructive, but also makes sure the child keeps motivated. The following questions need to be answered. Why would this game be a success? What is the added value in comparing to other products on the market? What would be the selling features? First of all it is design-driven innovation, untill now there is no such product on the market. The product is for a new market, a niche market. Mostly because a lot of companies are incompetent to
realize such a product (do not have the didactic and the technology knowledge). Experts indicated that there is a niche market for products with the following features: an adaptive instructive tool by using tangible interaction with direct feedback. There are instructive tools with direct feedback, but those computer programs miss the advantages of tangible objects. There are instructive tools with tangible objects, such as wooden puzzles, but they often lack in giving direct feedback. And recently companies are developing adaptive tools with direct feedback, but those programs are realized on the computer, so they miss the advantages of tangible objects. So this new gamecombines all the good aspects from old materials and new computer programs.
101
8. Evaluation
Eventually I reflect on the complete project, not only the results and proces, but also reflect on the influences it has on me as a designer.
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
At the end of chapter three, seven design guidelines were formulated. Those guidelines were inspired on my theoritical framework and my project intensions. I compare these guidelines with the end results, did I achieve them? In the red boxes on the right you can read why each design guideline is achieved. But does this mean that the Alles maalt game is perfect? Not completely (as every design is), while designing I had to make choices which made the game less instructive then hoped for. The most important point of improvement whould be to add the bottom layer of Frans Moerlands Iceberg into the design (chapter 2.4, figure 2). I could not achieve this, because it would make the game too big, and too complex. Another point of improvement would be the possibility to put material upon
8.1 Reflect on results
1.
Design a tool (physical aid device) to help children (aged eight to nine) with their multiplication (until table of 10) problems (unable to automatize the multiplications after reasonable amount of instructions and practice). As far as I have tested, children (aged eight to nine) are helped with learining the multiplication table when playing the game Alles maalt (an physical aid device). Because it is used as an extra tool in the classroom, it is possible that only children with multiplcation problems play the game. The tool should be an application for TagTiles from Serious Toys (client). The Alles maalt game is designed to be played on TagTiles, by this the game Alles maalt will be less expensive, becauset it uses existing technology. Design a system that adapts on the childs level of multiplication skills. Let them experience successes, so they become more confident about themselves. By using the algorithm the game Alles maalt is adaptive. Therefore children experieces successes. By reflecting on the childs progress (with second foil) the child gets an overview of their progress. If all goes well, the child will become more confident about itselve. Design a system that adapts on the childs level of formulation. Make sure the child creates a strong foundation of multiplication insights. By starting each multiplication on a concrete model level, the child gets more insights about the multiplication foundations. By taking little steps forward (only when the multiplication was right) the game makes sure that the foundation is present, before going to the next level.
2.
3.
4.
102
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
5.
Make a tool which is instructive, by motivating the child (make it fun) and give direct feedback. Alles maalt is instructive because it is adaptive and has tangible interaction with direct feedback. The child will be intrinsicly motivated by letting the child control, discover, feel accomplisment and have a good balance between challenge and skills (by making it adaptive). But also making it attractive because it is tangible. Focus on individual use only (easier to design for and able to keep track on one childs progress). The game Alles maalt is designed for single use only, in the beginning the child logs in, by this TagTiles knows who is playing and can record all her/his actions. Create a tool which helps the teacher to observe the childrens progress and which doesnt cost extra time and effort. By connecting TagTiles with the computer the teacher can read out the statistics of each child. This should be done without any effort. When the child is playing the game Alles maalt teachers intervention is not needed. writing the software this could results into a lot of bugs (errors). This will cost a lot of time. It would be wise to start with a simple algorithm which later on could be expanded to make Alles maalt more advanced. Im sure that during future testing, a lot of improvements can be made.
6.
7.
When looking at the results more general I could say that this project is quite successful. The final design has a clear added value in comparing with existing products on the market. During the 25 user interventions it became clear that the children were very enthousiastic about my ideas. Experts from the field always responded very positive on my concept. Teachers agreed with my conclusions and like my concept solutions. My project results such as this report and prototype are of lower quality then I was hopling for. But due to my illness I should be happy with this result.
eachother. But because of the limitations from TagTiles, it was not possible to realize the recognition of the materials. One last point of improvement would be to simplify the algorithm. Right now the algorithm is quite complex, when
103
8. Evaluation
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
The question now is: whats next? As mentioned before there is a clear market for this concept, experts indicate that something like this is really needed in the classroom. So it would be regrettable to finish project and put it away.
8.2 Discussion
It would be nice to continue this project, to make it ready for the market. To realize this a couple of things need to be done. First of all, the materials used on TagTiles should be optimalized. The
design of the materials should be optimised, to make sure that TagTiles is reckonizing everything. As mentioned before a longitudinal study should be realized. This is needed to test how the game Alles maalt will
104
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
be used by children. Therefore many questions can be answered: Is this tool more instructive in comparing with other products? How can the design be improved? How can the interaction be optimized? How can the algorithm be realized? Is a story relevant or not? The user group should be of sufficient size, because each child is unique. It is not realistic to expect that the game Alles maalt will be the best tool for every child with multiplication problems. But it would be nice realise a tool which will help as many children as possible. The game Alles maalt could also be an inspiration concept, which makes designers of didactic materials aware of this market. Aware of the possibilities of the new technologies (tangible interaction) and aware of the importance of an adaptive system. The game can also be an inspiration to create similar games,
but then with different goals. Such as learning division sums, learning percentages or for younger children learning other basic math aspects. Designing a game for division sums or multipling has a lot of simularities. It is easy to change the game Alles maalt into ga game for learning division sums. The same material could be used, but the question will be asked in the opposit direction: you have 5 bags, with a total amount of 45 pieces gold, those pieces are equally divided, how many pieces are in each bag? In conclusion I could say that this project is a big inspiration for the field and has great potential when developed further. There is a clear market for this concept, but that does not mean it will be easy to have success on this market. A well thought out marketing plan is need-
ed. During this project, the business aspect was outside the scope. I mainly focussed on the users and the interaction. So hopefully this concept will be continued, and it will help a lot of children who are in need of such a tool. Because I noticed how important this game can be for the development of a child.
105
8. Evaluation
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
When looking back at the process of this project, you can see how I have changed over time. In total I have worked on this project for two years; a half year of preparation, eventually just six months of hard work and one year delay (because of CANS). When I started the project I was very enthusiastic. Maybe too enthusiastic; I worked very hard, wanted to explore every aspect into detail and was only satisfied with perfection. This resulted in a strong foundation of my project (a lot of literature, many users involved and experts contacted). Choices were only made when I was sure about the answer, and preferable validated by two other sources. A positive aspect of this project was that I was having fun during the whole project. The subject was very interesting and I was inspired to work on the pro-
8.3 Reflect on process
ject the entire time. I was never stuck, I always knew what to do next and even after two years of multiplications, I still love them. Therefor I could say that the subject I choose two years ago was well chosen and that this is very important. I loved the challenge to work with the children, this age group was new for me. While creating empathy I was inspired to help them with their development. It was a challenge to get honest feedback on my ideas. Because when a child is younger they do not feel they need to be nice to the person who designed it, they are completely honest. At the age eight to nine they start to think about what people want to hear, they think they are being polite when they say something that a person would like to hear, instead of telling the truth. Therefor I needed to look at non-verbal signs of the children; are they easily distracted, are they excit-
ed, would they like to play it again next time? Concluded, I could say that I like to work with them, creating empathy was not very hard, I started to think as a child very quick. When looking at the reason of my CANS, it was clear that i have spended to many hours behind my computer. At that moment I thought I did not have a choice, to achieve as much as possible in the given time I spend every free minute behind my computer. Weekends and long days were filled with project activities, to prevent pressure on the end of my project. I sticked to a good planning, but when the report deadline suddenly shifted to two months earlier, I thought the only solution would be to start typing the report all day long. Together with my perfectionism and the time pressure, this resulted in the ideal situation to get CANS.
106
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
107
8. Evaluation
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
My body warned me that I had gone too far. It was time to stand still and reflect on my actions. So I took a step back, evaluated the situation and concluded that I had a choice, and that I made the wrong choice. I am just a human, with limitations. I realized that perfection does not exist, or everything is already perfect. Because when you want to achieve something to be perfect, you will never be finished. You will never be satisfied with the result, because it can always be done better somehow. I realized that my attitude towards work needs to be changed and learn how to relax my body. I contacted experts and they helped me realize that even when I think I am relaxed, my whole body is still very tense. My muscles had been over used for a long period of time, which results in muscles who are shorter. To lenghten my muscles again, resting for
just one month was not enough. It took me a year of exercises, reflection and resting to understand how to deal with it and to know what would be the best way to finish my project. A lot of people supported me, and together we agreed that finishing my project by reporting and presenting what I did so far was the best thing to do. By slowly ending this project (working on my computer each day just for two hours) I realized how hard it is to let my old habit go. I know I need to change my attitude towards perfection, but to achieve that in reality is much harder. I was used to achieve everything what I wanted, and now I have to be satisfied with less. This obviously feels less satisfied, but I know it is the best way to eventually get the most out of it.
By taking a break, I took a step back, I became aware of the disadvantage of my approach. I was expecting too much from myself and this resulted into a lot of (non-relevant) work and too much information (which makes decision making sometimes harder). I realized that I do not have to be one hundred percent sure about every design decision. Of course it is important to make the right decisions, to prevent bigger issues later on. But making wrong decisions and admit them later, is not a waste of time. Every experience is a learning moment. And eventually it will save time by making decisions quicker. It also made me realize that involving four users each week from the beginning of the project was a good start, but also very tiresome (I recorded more than one hundred hours of video). I should be more effective when involving
108
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
the users. Only involve the users when empathy is needed (after two weeks I already achieved that) or when I have a clear goal for the involvement (such as testing a theory, an idea, or asking feedback). User involvement in the beginning of a project is still very important, but try to prevent user-tests which are not relevant, but still time and energy consuming. During my project I was very organized, after each activity ((such as meetings, reading books, teaching children, and after analysing products) I wrote down a summary. This is a good habit, but I should keep an eye on how detailed this is, because again I was too much of a perfectionist. After starting such a summary I could not resist to make sure nothing was missing. I should continue making those summaries, but make sure it becomes a useful summary (therefor: do not make it too long).
When looking at the iterations they were a good foundation for the final design. But I miss some exploration of more extreme ideas, the ideas which I used were not extremely out of the box. This was not realized during this project, because after my break I had just one priority: finish my master. By this I only focussed on reporting and presenting. I chose to work out the most obvious ideas, to make sure I had an idea to present. When typing the report I developed the concept further, so that is why it looks like I reported a well thought final design. But personally I miss a broad exploration of innovative solutions. I do not say this project has failed, but my personal goals are not completely achieved, which is caused by my high expectations of myself.
I only missed one thing in this project; investigate the actual interaction. I like to optimize the interaction by letting the user experience the interaction for a couple of times. But due to my CANS there was no time left to investigate this further. The interaction which I designed in this project is not put to the test and I expect that it can be improved a lot. In general, I conclude that my design process was a big learning moment. It started how I was used to design and ended completely different then I was used to design. But still it is a good project with all the necessary aspects (user, technology, design and a bit of business), but some aspects were carried out into detail and others were less elaborated. Even though I still feel pain in my body, I think I improved myself.
109
8. Evaluation
5x9 7x8
6x1
3x2
In the preface I explained who I was as a designer at the beginning of my project. During this project a lot happened, I got more experience with designing, but also learned more about who I am and who I want to be. My vision on designing decided my approach for this project, I focussed a lot on the user: observed and involved them and let them experience my concepts by quickly build prototypes. I made sure every choice was validated by involving experts, literature and by doing user-tests. But how did this project change my identity? To answer this question I will first demonstrate how other people describe me when giving feedback to me. They see me as a professional (especially in organizing and planning), hard working, and creative student with quite a passion for design. I am a very moti-
8.4 My identity
vated student, I like what I am doing and I do everything very thorough (perfectionism). My strong points are: work closely with the users, create empathy, be enthusiastic (have intrinsic motivation), quickly create prototypes, use visualization skills, use experts, relies strongly on intuition, envisage where to go, see various connections and able to establish priorities and approach. Some of those qualities create my pitfall, working too hard and focus too much on each detail. The challenge for this project was to find out how many research is relevant, execute the activities in less details. My corresponding allergy would be that I would make choices without a good validation. Due to my CANS experience I reflected more on my attitude during this project in comparing with previous projects. Being very thorough in everything I did
took its toll, and I was forced to be less precise and to take a step back. It is very hard to be satisfied with less, but by understanding that less is also enough to reach the same, it became (after a while) easier to let the perfectionism go. I do not worry about each detail anymore, and when I notice I do, I tell myself to quiet worrying and drop it. But my identity is more than just my attitude, it is also how I do things and how I achieve things. I spread my wings and went into the field, came out of my comfort zone to see and feel the state of art. I do not only think about the most obvious places, but also try to look to the reality from different perspectives. For example in this project I did not only contacted schools and teachers, but also other stakeholders (researchers (with different expertise), special education schools, companies who develop
110
3x10
8x6
7x2
4x4
111
8. Evaluation
didactic materials, organisations which advice schools and even mothers who have children with math issues). I do not only observe the field, but also use their expertise to get feedback on my design decisions. In order to use my experts as efficient as possible, I use my design skills for optimal communication. Make drawings, prototypes or even let them experience my concept (this stage is not achieved in this project for experts others then the children). To (quickly) make prototypes, knowledge about the state of the art of technology is necessary. Over the years I learned to use different technologies (from basic electronics, to programming, to wireless communication with XBees), which helps me to have an overview which technology is appropriate for which situation.
In order to communicate what I want by using drawings and prototypes, I developed knowledge about how people experience different designs. I developed my design skills to know how to create certain designs for different purposes. Not only to make it attractive, but also to make it clear, keep it simple and still interesting. Design the correct interface, to create the interaction which is needed to achieve a certain goal. How this is experienced should be tested with different people, because they are experts of their own experiences, values and wishes. Testing a designed interaction is another design challenge, I want to help the users with giving feedback on what to experience. I have executed different ways to achieve this, co-designing, cultural probes and acting out a scenario. During my final master project I tried something new to achieve this; involve the children each week. This was
very tiresome, but this gave me the opportunity to validate little concepts and a couple of theories. Next time I would use the user involvement less frequent and more effective. Now I discussed my user, technology and design skills, but during this project I also involved business aspects. By involving the client I learned a lot about the company itself and how to look at the market of didactic materials. Several experts explained their view on this market, this helped me to realize the influence of the business aspects on my design. Eventually I chose to take those business aspects into account while designing. But I did not investigate them further, because I chose to focus more on the user. Personally i took those business aspect more serious than before, next time I will collect the business aspects earlier in the design process (not
too early, because this can influence my creativity). My ambition is to help children with their development, I like to work with them and help them with communicating what they experience. I like to try out different interaction methodes and look at the reactions of the children. I feel happy when I help people, and even more happy when I design for children. They are more pure, are not damaged by the society yet; they still use their imagination, are more creative and just do what they feel like doing.
Conclusions
My identity is to design together with the users (by using my technological and design skills), but I changed my vision on how to put this into practice. More does not mean better, sometimes less is more. My work could be still of very good quality, even though I do not try to achieve a perfect design. I should not involve the user too often and i should not focus too much on the small details. Furthermore, i should make decisions earlier, even though a decision is not validated a couple of times and i should trust more on my instincts.
In the last two years a lot of people helped me with realizing this project, namely the children I involved, several experts, my coaches, but also family and friends who helped me out. Many thanks to the following people: Willem Fontijn for his time and supportive coaching and for giving me the opportunity to work at his company Serious Toys. Frans Moerlands and Dirk van der Straaten for their time and for sharing their (innovative) expertise with me. They gave me useful and critical feedback on my concepts. My coaches Marco Rozendaal, Tilde Bekker and Oscar Tomico Plasencia for their support and guidance during my project. They advised me and made sure that I was reckoning with all the important aspects of designing.
Acknowledgement
Jan Rouvroye for his feedback on my report and advice how to finish my project. And other experts from the TU/e for their help and sharing their time and expertise: Rene Ahn, Saskia Bakker, Chet Bangaru, Harm van Essen, Jelle van Dijk, Esther Gielen, Bart Hengeveld, Ren de Torbal and Diana Vinke. All the experts and researchers of the field of didactics who responded to my mail and shared their experiences and opinion with me; Marije Bakker (CPS), Marjoke Bakker (PhD Freudental Instituut), Ria Brandt (CPS), Joop Daemen (teacher Fontys Tilburg), Anne Mieke Dekkers (Balans zuid-oost Brabant), Hanneke Graaf (remedial teacher at Joost Meulers Talent ontwikkeling BV), Wim Joosten (Stempelfabriek & Jegro), Hans van Luit (Professor dyscalculia, Utrecht university), Janneke Romeijnders (teacher PABO Fontys Eindhoven), Raymond de Ruijter (Jumbo), Ber Suilen (Rolec),
Belinda Terlouw (Freudenthal Instituut), Janneke Verhaegh (Philips research) and Jeroen de Weerd (Biggle Toys BV). The schools and teachers for their time: JenaPlan Basisschool De Bijenkorf (director: Lenny Voets and the teachers: Annelies, Daisy and Trees), basisschool Tweelingen (director: Rian Vums), Beppino Sarto school and SBO de Petraschool (director Kim de Vos). The four children from the Bijenkorf who I teached for a couple of months and their parents for giving permission to record all my lessons. The students from the PABO, Fontys Eindhoven: Jos Van Bergenhenegouwen and Ester Lathouwers. It was nice to work together and to help each other with our graduation projects. I want to thank Ester also for arranging the focus group at her school and the presenta-
tion at the Fontys. My colleagues at Serious Toys in den Bosch for having fun, feeling welcome and their helping hand: Bert Bogaerts, Frank van Gils, Tjeerd IJtsma, Joost Meijles, Patrick Schevers, Sander Smit, Wijnand van Tol and Wies van Wieringen and. My family and friends for supporting me, giving me feedback on my report and helping with building my prototype: Bart Brink, Michiel Brink, Monique Brink, Dirk Gooren, Zanne de Visser and Thomas de Wolf. Especially I want to thank my partner Dirk van Ginneke for his time and help throughout the whole project and of course my parents for their support. Finally I want to thank you (the reader) for your patience while reading my report, because I know that my writing skills are not one of my stronger points.
AmbraSotf (2000). Tom en Tamira - CD-rom: TafelTrainer. Science World, Hema B.V. Noordhoff Uitgevers, Houten, NL. Ames, C. and Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom. Students learning strategies and motivation perocesses. Journal of Educatiional Research, 80 (3), 260-268. Atkinson, R.L., Atkinson, R.C., and Hilgard, R.E. (1983). Introduction to psychology. Harcourt, Brace & Jovanovich, San Diego, USA. Besturenraad (2011). Onderzoek Besturenraad: Gemiddeld twee extra leerlingen per klas. 8 februari 2011 - 13:21. http://www. besturenraad.nl/content/onderzoek-besturenraad-gemiddeld-twee-extra-leerlingen-klas. retrieved March 2011. Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. David McKay Co Inc, New York, USA. Bloom, B. S. and Krathwohl, D.R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the classification of educational goals. In Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. Longmans, New York: McKay Bloom, Benjamin S. (1980). All our children learning: A primer for parents, teachers, and other educators. McGraw-Hill, New York, USA. Boekaerts, M. and Simons, P.R. (1995). Leren en instructive, Psychologie van de leerling en het leerproces. Van Gorcum, Assen, the Netherlands. Boswinkel, N., Moerlands, F.J. (2003). Het topjes van de Ijsberg [The top of the iceberg]. In: K. Groenewegen (Ed.), Nationale Rekendagen 2002; Een praktische terugblik (pp. 103-114), Utrecht: Freudenthal Instituut.
References
Brandt-Williams, A., Celoza, A., Cristiano, M., Effland, R., Medeiros, P. and Pflanz, C. (1997). Learning@maricopa.edu. Glendale Community College, Glendale, USA. Brodie, A. (2005). Practise Times Tables, for ages 9-11. A&C Black Publishers Limited, London, UK. Brown, A.L. (1980). Metacognitive development and reading. In Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, USA. Coens, T., Jenkins, M. and Block, P. (2000). Abolishing performance appraisals: why they backfire and what to do instead. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc. San Francisco, USA. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Harper and Row, New York USA. Dawson, R. (2003). At Home With Times Tables, Age 5-7. Oxford University press, UK. DeCharms, R. (1968). Personal causation. Academic Press, New York, USA. Eerkens, M. and Paassen, van, D. (2011). Tips van een tijgermoeder: kinderen mag je best een beetje drillen. Intermediair 2303-2011, Amsterdam, NL. http://www.intermediair.nl/artikel/werk-en-leven/232867/tips-van-een-tijgermoeder-kinderen-magje-best-een-beetje-drillen.html, retrieved in June 2011. Flavell, J. H. (1977). First discussants comments: What is memory development the development of? Human development, 14, 421-435. Fontijn, W.F.J. and Hoonhout, H.C.M. (2007). Functional Fun with Tangible User Interfaces. First IEEE International Workshop on Digital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning, DIGITEL 07, Jhongli City, Taiwan, pp. 119-123.
Forehand, M. (2005). Blooms taxonomy: Original and revised. In Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. Georgia, USA. http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/ retrieved in July. Greaves, S. and Greaves, H. (2008). Times Tables practice, age 7-11. Easy learning. Harper Collins Publishers, London, UK. Houwen, S. (2011). Unpublished: Het effect van bewegen tijdens de les op de schoolprestaties. Centrum voor Bewegingswetenschappen van het Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen. JSW (2007). In beeld: Het nieuwe spelen. JSW, jaargang 92, November 2007, Floor de Jager, Amersfoort, NL. Jungbluth, Paul (1996). Onderwijs en sociaal-economische herkomst. Samsom H.D.T jeenk Willink, Alphen a/d Rijn, NL??? KNAW (2009). Reken onderwijs op de basisschool, analyse en sleutels tot verbetering, advies. Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Amsterdam. Kobayashi, S. (1998). Colorist, A practical handbook for personal and professional use. Kodansha international, Tokyo, Japan. Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by Rewards, the Trouble with Gold Stars, Incentive Plans, As, Praise, and Other Bribes. Houghton Mifflin, Boston, USA. Kohn, A. (2001). Five Reasons to Stop Saying Good Job!. http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/gj.htm retrieved July 2011. Kroesbergen, E. H., Van Luit, J.E.H. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special eduacational needs: A metaanalysis. Remedial & Special Education, 24, 97-114.
References
Lazeron, N and Dinteren, van R. (2010). Brain@work, wetenschap en toepassing van breinkennis. Springer Uitgeverij BV, Houten, NL. Luit, van, E. H., Nelissen, J. M. C. and Peltenburg, M. C. (2009). Learning Mathematics by Interaction in Young Students with Special Educational Needs. Published in Early Education, Nova Science Publishers. Inc. New York, USA. Luit, van, J. E. H. and Naglieri, J. A. (1999). Effectiveness of the MASTER Program for Teaching Special Children Multiplication and Division. Journal of learning disabilities, volume 32, number 2, March/April 1999, pages 98-107. Malone, T. W. and Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun. Aptitude, learning, and instruction: Vol. 3. Cognitive and affective process analysis, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 223--253. Markopoulos, P. Read, J. MacFarlance, S. and Hysniemi, J. (2008). Evaluating childrens interactive products: principles and practices for interaction designers. Amsterdam: Morgan Kaufmann. Maslow, A.H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review 50(4):370-96. New York, USA. Mirande, M. (2006). De onstuitbare opkomst van de leermachine, Over de precaire verhouding tussen technologie en onderwijs in de periode 1925-2005. Koninklijke Van Gorcum BV, Assen, the Netherlands. Moerlands, F. and Straaten, van der, H. (2009). Passend rekenwiskundeonderwijs voor alle leerlingen. Projectbureau Kwaliteit, PO raad, Utrecht, NL. Negroponte, N. (2006). Nicholas Negroponte on One Laptop per Child. February 2006. Timeslot 02:03 - 02:31 minutes on www. TED.com. retrieved November 2009.
Newell, A. and Simon, H.A. (1972). Human problem solving. Prentice-Hall, Englewoods-Cliffs, USA. Nicholls, J. G. (1987). Motivational orientations: Individual and classroom differences. Paper presented at the Secondary Workshop on Achievement and Task Motivation, Ringberg Castle, Tegnersee. OMalley, C. and Stanton-Fraser, D. (2004). Literature review in learning with tangible technologies. Nesta FutureLab Series, report 12. Paris, S.G. and Byrne, J.P. (1989). The constructivist approach to self-regulation and learning in the classroom. In Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theory, research and practice (pp. 169-200). Springer, New York, USA. Pavlov, I. P. (1927). Conditioned Reflexes: An Investigation of the Physiological Activity of the Cerebral Cortex. Oxford Univesity Press, London, UK. Scinicki, M. (2000). ALD 320: Cognition, Human Learning and Motivation. Texas University, Texas, USA. http://www.utexas.edu/ courses/svinicki/ald320/ retrieved in July 2011. Steeg, van der, M., Vermeer, N. and Lanser, D. (2011). Niveauonderwijs daalt, Vooral beste leerlingen blijven achter. Centraal Planbureau, Den Haag, NL. Thalheimer, W. (2006). People remember 10%, 20%...Oh Really? 01-05-2006 http://www.willatworklearning.com/2006/05/ people_remember.html, retrieved July 2011. Treichler, D. G. (1967). Are you missing the boat in training aids? Film and Audio-Visual Communication.
References
Van Luit, J.E.H., Nelissen, J.M.C. and Peltenburg, M.C. (2009). Learning Mathematics by interaction in young students with special educational needs. Chapter 9 in Early education, Mottely, J.B. and Randall, A.R. Nova Science Publishers. Inc. Verganti, R. (2009). Design Driven Innovation: Changing the Rules of Competition by Radically Innovating What Things Mean. Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, Cambridge, USA. Vygotski, L. S. (1967). Play and its role in the Mental development of the Child. Volume 5, Number 3, Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, New York, USA. Vygotsky, L. (1933). Play and its role in the Mental Development of the Child. Translated by Catherine Mulholland in Voprosy psikhologii, 1966, No. 6; Online Version: Psychology and Marxism Internet Archive (marxists.org) 2002, Moscow, Russia. Vygotsky, L.S. , Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S. and Souberman, E. (1978). Mind in Society, the development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, UK. Vygotsky, L.S. , Cole, M., John-Steiner, V., Scribner, S. And Souberman, E.(1978). Mind in Society, the developmentof higer psychological processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, UK. Watterson, B. (1987). Calvin and Hobbes. Andrews McMeel Publishing, Kansas City, Missouri, USA. White, R.W. (1959). Motivation reconsidered: The concept of competence. Psychological Review, Vol 66(5), Sep 1959, 297-333, USA.
appendices
A media math NL B list of experts C FMP proposal D games made E technical drawing TagTiles F technical drawing materials G algorithm
appendix A: public debate in the media about quality of math (NL)
appendix B: list of experts used for this project Appendix B: Experts

Name ReneAhn MarjokeBakker Function dr.Ir.Universitair Docent Ph.D.student Company TU/e,DI FreudentalInstituut PABOfontysEindhoven FontysLerarenopleiding Tilburg SeriousToysBV JoostMeulersTalent ontwikkelingBV TU/e,DQI(then) Edumat(PARWOproject) JegroB.V.(then) PABOfontysEindhoven UtrechtUniversity PABOFontysEindhoven TU/e,DQI(then) SSOT(PARWOproject) FreudenthalInstituut PhilipsResearch,Connected ConsumerSolutions Relevantexpertise DesignandArchitecureof IntelligentSystems effectsofmathematicscomputer game Automatizemultiplications Teachingmathematics MotivationandtheTagTiles Teachingchildrenwithmath problems Interactivetoysandplayful learning Meeting 08042011 03112009 13012010 12112009 Weekly meetings 04012010 12112009 Several meetings Several (unofficial) Several meetings 03112009 13012010 Several meetings Several meetings 03112009 January 2010
JosVan student Bergenhenegouwen JoopDeamen Teachertrainer(physics andmathematics) WillemFontijn FounderandManaging Director HannekeGraaf remedialteacher BartHengeveld FransMoerlands WimJoosten EsterLathouwers HansvanLuit Janneke Romeijnders MarcoRozendaal Dirkvander Straaten BelindaTerlouw JannekeVerhaegh Ph.D.student(then) Leadingmember Managingdirector student Professordyscalculia Teachertrainer Dr.ing. MSc. Teachertrainer Ph.D.student
Educationalmaterialsandserious games Gameinterventionsduringmath lessons Dyscalculiaandmathdifficulties teaching Engagement Teachingandinnovativemath theories teaching doingresearchwiththeTagTiles
developinginnovativemath educationforprimaryschools
Directors from the following schools: - Jenaplan Basischool de Bijenkorf (Lenny Voets) - Basischool Tweelingen (director: Rian Vums) - SBO de Petraschool (director Kim de Vos) And the teachers from the JenaplanBasischool de Bijenkorf: Annalies, Daisy and Trees.
appendix C: project proposal
FMP proposal Alles maalt Eveline Brink (s041262) Oscar Tomico Plasencia Discovery and Learning December the 17th 2009
Vision
I am a user-centred designer; to create successful products I do not only work for but also with the user. My slogan is: design is creating new experiences. I want to give a product more value through rich (tangible) interactions, fit it to the user and the context and make it meaningful to the user. To achieve this I involve the user many times and make sure the design is a balance between function, form and interaction. To achieve a well balanced design I have a hands-on approach: - quickly create working prototypes (and test them) - explore and experiment (myself and (with) the users) - keep reflecting on decisions (involve extern experts) I am visually oriented; I prefer to communicate by visuals instead of words. For me an experience is highly influenced by vision. In my design I focus a lot on the visual appearances, make sure they feel right and make sure it is clear, focussed, pleasant and functional. To achieve this experimenting and feedback are very important, but also understanding peoples perception and know the rules. I am interested in working with young users. It is a true challenge to get useful feedback from them, understand their perception of the environment and communicate on the same level with them (I previously researched longitudinal use of an open-ended game MoZo (picture 1). I like to design for them, help them with their development in a playful way (prevent problems in their future) and I like their world (I have no problem to enter their world). To communicate with them it is useful to use visuals.
Picture 1: longitudinal test of the open-ended game: MoZo, object which make sound when they move.
Design opportunity
I also like math, work with numbers, structure things, solve problems and also help others understand math and physics. During teaching I always used the theory active learning. I experienced the efficiency of this theory by myself during my language problems because of my Dyslectic. Active learning means for me that you learn faster when you have a more rich experience, the related experience stimulates multiple senses actively and has a high impact on you. People learn by making mistakes (learn how not to do it) and by having positive experiences (learn one way of doing it right). Besides understanding the experience, it is relevant to remember the previous experience (learning moment), and by making this experience more rich it is easier to remember. In the Netherlands there is a growing concern and a public debate [Volkskrant 2009] about the quality of Math of the primary education. The KNAW researched [KNAW 2009] the conditions and concluded that the childrens mathematical proficiency needs improvement. In the coming semester I will start my Final Master Project (FMP) with the goal (figure 1) to help children with their math problems through active learning. This is also inspired by my own experiences when I was a child (remedial teaching for languages was a nightmare).
Figure 1: visual where my project is located
Help with automatizing multiplication table at school (age of 8-9 years). Help the child with developing, by realizing visually interactive products through close user-involvements. Help learning by active learning and make sure the child goes from circle of failure to circle of success.
my project
Project
I propose to design a product that helps children with automatizing the multiplication table. Automatization means that children understand a multiplication sum and know how to solve the sum correctly, but dont know the answer directly (that could be the next level called memorization) [Van Luit]. Automatizing is a problem in the Dutch education and the reason why children dont keep up. Most teachers underestimate the importance of automatizing and the math methods mention the importance but dont provide the time and material for it [Deamen]. I chose a clear defined context on purpose: automatizing of the multiplication table. The multiplication is the foundation to understand and solve the math which follows [Deamen]. I will not create a new method, but my tool should be used as something extra next to the used method, so it should be method independent [Van Luit]. The design will be a tool that support the child like a scaffold, which will enhance the calculation powers. This results in giving the child prolonged experience of success and become more confident [Van Dijk]. In short the tool should be: - Instructive (active learning, measure progress) - Physical (tangible, visual and provide structure) - Interactive (direct feedback, embodied and fun) - Motivate (playful, interactive, diverse activities) - Independent (no intervention of teacher needed) My design challenge is to motivate the child and make it instructive. I want to make use of their will to explore and their curiosity. The tool should help the child from going out of the circle of failure into the circle of success and eventually become quicker, makes fewer mistakes and eventually be able to calculate all by him-/herself. The tool should know the level and reasoning of the child, by making the tinkering process visible/tangible, and use this to steer the child, provide the right level (of abstractness and difficulty sum) and give feedback. For now I choose the school context, it should be clear for the child that he/she is learning multiplication tables at that moment. My goal is to create a new way of playful learning which may be used in other education areas or will be used as inspiration to create more interactive learning devices.
Current maths tools are physical or computer programmes. The physical tools, like robes, cards, dices etc., are successful because the child has an overview, can create structures and is stimulated to be active. The disadvantages are that the child misses guidance (teacher is needed) and feedback about the correctness of his/her actions. On the other hand they use computer programmes, like little internet games [rekenweb.nl]. The computer is a motivator, gives direct feedback and one computer offers a lot of different tools. The disadvantages are that the child misses the overview (positioning) and the interaction is nothing more than clicking or typing. My conclusion is that my tool should be physical, but also interactive (this is linked with active learning). Related projects are the Tagtiles (picture 2), Max (picture 3) and i-Blocks (picture 4).
Picture 2: Tagtiles, a tangible electronic board game for educational purposes from Royal Philips Electronics.
Picture 3: Max, learncards with self-control
Picture 4: i-Blocks, innovative educational tool which makes language tangible and practice fun.
Key aspects to consider

Learning: Acting is important for learning: Learning and acting are interestingly indistinct, learning being a continuous, life-long process resulting from acting in situations. [Brown 1989]. Explorations (making mistakes) are a must; discovery by yourself is the best way to learn [Terlauw, Deamen and Van Luit 1999]. The problem is that education says: mistakes are the worst thing you can ever make [Robinson 2006]. Learning is context dependent [Brown 1989, Van Luit 1999] and supported by mental images [..]. So it should be instructive to let the child act in the right context and help to use mental images to recollect the knowledge. You can give structured instructions (explain how to solve tasks and let them practice) or guided instructions (work together, children demonstrate and there are a lot of discussions) [Kroesbergen 2002]. To let the child discover it by himself/herself guided instructions are preferred, you should not provide solutions but lead the discussion about suggested strategies.[Van Luit 1999] We didnt learn to talk and walk, not by being taught how to talk, or taught how to walk, but by interaction with the world... whereas at about the age of six, we were told to stop learning that way and that all learning from then on would happen through [Negroponte 2007] teaching.
learning traject for multiplication table

Teaching maths When teaching maths you start simple and slow (concrete) and step-by-step introduce strategies, start automizing (practice) and become quick (abstract), illustrated in figure 2. To walk through this process you use little iterations interaction, construction and reflection [Van Luit 2009]. To automatize successfully you should practice and repeat maths (on the right level) each day for 5/10 minutes [Deamen and Van Luit]. This means that the tool should be flexible, have space to experiment (try and check procedures) and give insights (aha-erlebnissen) [Moerlands 1994]. Direct feedback is very important [Deamen], when the answer is correct: compliment the child, but when the child is wrong: let the child know the sum was too difficult, so let the child feel it is not his/her fault. In case the sum is wrong, make sure the child notices this visu-
Figure 2: when learning maths you start easy and concrete and through iterations go to difficult and absract
bad performance
negative expectations about future performance
better performance
positive expectations befief in own capacity
circle of failure
goal
circle of succes
more practice, concentrate more on the subject matter more self-convidence more pleasure in doing
ally. Go back to concrete material to let the child do it right and eventually go back to the abstract level. When possible administrate and analyze the mistakes and progress, this is also useful for the teacher [Deamen]. Most important are the emotions of the child, the child should be motivated and get more confidence [Deamen]. For children with low achieved maths skills this would be the first problem to encounter. At the moment the child has trouble with maths the child experience a circle of failure (figure 3). By having no success, the child get less motivated to work with maths and get more behind, which cause more bad performances. Important is to stop the circle of failure and change it in a circle of success (figure 3) [Desoete 2008]. Very important is to have patience, build certainties and have time to careful get more self-confidence [Moerlands 1994].
less practice, less focus on the subject matter
fear of failure, avoid subject
Figure 3: circle of failure and circle of succes
Motivate child To motivate the children I could think about the categories from Malone [1987] which are: challenge, curiosity, control, fantasy, cooperation, competition and recognition. I could focus on one or more of them to get and keep the childs attention. Important is to offer challenge and give feeling of control [Hengeveld] and keep them balanced [Verhaegh 2007]. An important motivator would be the interaction, like Verhaegh [2007] mentioned after evaluating the Tagtiles (picture 2, page 6): they [children] liked the game because it is different from the ones that they are familiar with, as it differs from screen based computer games and it is more interactive than traditional board games. To motivate the child it is very important that the child itself becomes a central part of the activity, rather
than just watching something evolve like in computer games. [Price 2003]. The tool should be driven by the learner [Negroponte 2007]. It helps when physical artefacts and physical actions (natural and intuitive [Marshall 2007]) are combined. To achieve these physical actions embodiment is also interesting to consider. Another motivator would be playful learning, make it fun to use. According to Price [2003]: playful learning should entail, is one where interaction with informational artefacts involves fun and where the boundaries between play and learning are blurred. Fun is important in learning: Fun and enjoyment are well known to be effective in childrens development [Clements, 1995], both supporting and deepening learning [Resnick, 1999] as well as facilitating engagement and motivation. [Price 2003].
Children will be more empowered through play. Play helps the brain to develop the contextual memory [Brown 2008] which is important for my context. When developing a playful learning device, I should encompass [Price 2003]: (i) fun, (ii) exploration through interaction (discovery), (iii) engagement (increasing attention to the activity, concentration and promotes useful learning [Stoney 1999]), (iv) reflection, (v) imagination, creativity and thinking (different levels of abstraction) and collaboration.
Learning maths is a matter of doing it a lot of times, so it helps when it is fun. [Bakker] make it fun to motivate the child. [Van Luit]
10
Interaction The values of tangible electronics for learning has been discussed [Marshall 2007 and OMally 2004] and described as: they can be used for shared play and learning, they are assumed to be more motivating than traditional learning materials and it is claimed that they support explorative behaviour... they may be very useful in helping children to solve complex abstract problems [Verhaegh 2009] like in my context. To accomplish a rich interaction (new) technologies will be used, this technologies should be distinguish or invisible, so that the technology itself is not the primary focus for exploration, but rather the interaction with the tangible and their effects [Price 2003]. Through a couple of explorations and validations the right appearance, actions (sensors and actuators) and tangibility should be created.
11
process
I want to realize this project by going through a couple iterations (3 to 5), each iteration containing user involvement, building prototypes and reflection (use feedback from experts), for more details look at my planning (appendix C). The first iteration will be exploring boundaries and creating empathy by just start building and experiencing how children experience their math. In the second iteration I want to use the results from the first to generate a co-design session [Sanders 2003] or a cooperative inquiry [Guha 2005], generate different concept directions and reflect on this. In the third session I will use the outcome of the user-sessions to explore the directions and use the concepts as input for little user-tests with children. Use the outcomes for inspiration to define design directions and eventually (maybe by more iterations) create a final tool which is evaluated, fine tuned and validated on the end. To validate my decisions and results I ask feedback from experts (the children (math and without math problems), parents, teachers, researchers and stakeholders) and I will test everything with the help of (low-fidelity) working prototypes and close user involvement. To conclude if the child(ren) are making more progress with the multiplication table I will compare their CITOtoets results from January with July with their classmates. To realize the feedback from all the different experts I will use a blog on the internet. This blog makes it possible for everyone to follow my progress and also helps me with recording my own process and creating my report.
12
Feasibility and risks

1. Client; I try to get a client involved in my project. 2. Collect users; it is crucial I find children to work with. 3. Collaborative or individual; to learn math [Price 2003, Stanton 2002 a,b] and do user-tests [Sturm] collaborative use is very important, but individual exercise are also important [Van Luit 1999] and design for an individual would be less complex. 4. Each child is unique; the process of learning math is very personal [Brown 1989, Van Luit]. I should reckon with the personal differences of the children. 5. How much freedom will the tool provide; it is positive to have rich action possibilities (more space for exploration, open-endedness [Bekker 2008]), but it is also scary and confusing to have too much freedom [Rozendaal].
13
References
Bekker, M. M., Sturm, J., Wesselink, R., Groenendaal, B. and Eggen, B. (2008). Interactive Play Objects and the Effects of Open-Ended Play on Social Interaction and Fun. Proceedings of ACE08. Brown, J.S., Collins, A. and Duguid, P. (1989). Situated Cognition and the Culture of Learning. Educational Researcher, Vol. 18, No. 1. (Jan. - Feb., 1989), pp. 32-42. Brown, S. (2008). Stuart Brown says play is more than fun. www.TED.com. Clements, D. (1995). Playing with computers, playing with ideas. Educational Psychology Review 7 (2), 203 207. Desoete, A. and Braams, T. (2008). Rondom het kind, Kinderen met dyscalculie. Boom Amsterdam. Guha, M.L., Druin, A., Chipman, G., Fails, J.A., Simms, S., and Farber, A. (2005). Working with Young Children as Technology Design Partners. In Communications of the ACM, Vol. 48, No. 1, pp. 39-42. KNAW (2009). Reken onderwijs op de basisschool, analyse en sleutels tot verbetering, advies. Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Amsterdam. Kroesbergen, E. H. and Van Luit, J.E.H. (2002). Teaching multiplication to low maths performers: Guided versus structured instruction. Instructional Science, 30, 361378. Malone, T. W. and Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun. Aptitude, learning, and instruction: Vol. 3. Cognitive and affective process analysis, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 223--253. Marshall, P. (2007). Do tangible interfaces enhance learning? Chapter 4 - learning through physical interaction TEI07, 15-17 Feb 2007, Baton Rouge, LA, USA. Moerlands, F. (1994). Leercurve, leertijd en vaardigheid. www.Edumat.nl. Negroponte, N. (2007). Nicholas Negroponte on One Laptop per Child. www.TED.com. OMalley, C. and Stanton-Fraser, D. (2004). Literature review in learning with tangible technologies. Nesta FutureLab Series, report 12. Price, S., Rogersa, Y., Scaifea, M., Stantonb, D.and Neale, H.(2003). Using tangibles to promote novel forms of playful learning. Elsevier Science B.V.Interacting with Computers 15 (2003) 169185.
14
Reijn, G. (2009). Rekenen op pabo al jarenlang beneden peil. de Volkskrant, 4 November 2009. Resnick, M., Bruckman, A. and Martin, F. (1999). Constructional Design: Creating New Construction Kits for Kids. Morgan Kauffman, USA, The Design of Childrens Technology. Robinson, K. (2006). Ken Robinson says schools kill creativity. www.TED.com. Sanders, B.-N. and Stappers, P.J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. In CoDesign,Taylor & Francis, March 2008.
Stanton, D., Bayon, B., Abnett, C., Cobb, S. and OMalley, C. (2002b). The effect of tangible interfaces on childrens collaborative behaviour. Proceedings of Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI 2002), ACM Press. Stanton, D., Neale, H. and Bayon, V. (2002a). Interfaces to support childrens co-present collaboration: multiple mice and tangible technologies. Computer Support for Collaborative Learning (CSCL), ACM Press, Boulder,Colorado, USA, January 7th11th. Van Luit, J.E.H. and Naglieri, J.A. (1999). Effectiveness of the MASTER program for teaching special children multiplication and division. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 32, 98-107.
Van Luit, J.E.H., Nelissem, J.M.C. and Peltenburg, M.C. (2009). Learning Mathematics by interaction in young students with special educational needs. Nova Science Publishers. Inc. Verhaegh, J. and Fontijn, W.J.F (2009). Integral skill development with the TagTiles console. SeriousToys.nl. Verhaegh, J., Hoonhout, H.C.M. and Fontijn, W.J.F (2007). Effective use of fun with a tangible interaction console. In Proc. of the 4th International Symposium on Pervasive Gaming Applications PerGames 2007, Shaker-Verlag, Aachen, 177-178.
15
Resources pictures
Picture 1: research project: MoZo, photographer: Eveline Brink Picture 2: a. Concept Tagtiles. Source: www.serioustoys.com b. Tagtiles. Source: Verhaegh 2009 Picture 3: Max. Source: www.k2-verlag.de Picture 4: i-Blocks. www.jegro.com/i-blocks Figure 3: Circle of failure and succes. Source: Desoete 2008 The rest of the pictures and figures: Illustrator: Eveline Brink Photographer: Eveline Brink.
Appendices
A. List of Experts: People I contacted for my project, with their function, company, relevant expertise and date of meeting. B. Planning: My proposed planning according to the reflective transformative design process. On the left the weeks and in the next comlumn what kind of activities. The underlined activities are deliverables. The dots represent the activities and show when and where they take place in the reflective transformatice design process.
16
List of experts
17
planning
Val
project week
ti ida
ng
g Doin g vin i Perce
Ide Inte ating grat ing
ysis anal
vis
ion
iteraction 1
1. create empathy, experience their math moodboard 2. experience and tools 3. improve vision of project, list of demands
1.
February
project week
2.
February
project week
iteraction 2
1. create co-design sessions: plan and materials 2. co-design sessions: 3. analyse results codesign sessions 4. improve vision of project, list of demands
3.
February
1 2 2 3
blog up to date?
project week
4.
March
project week
iteraction 3
draw conclusions 2. create 3 concepts 3. create prototypes 4. test/feedback on 3 scenarios 5. analyze feedback, draw conclusions 6. improve vision, list of demands
5.
March
1 2 3 4
blog up to date?
project week
6.
March
project week
iteraction 4
2. explore decisions 3. validate decisions
7. INTRIM
7. INTRIM
April
project week
2. explore decisions 3. validate decisions test/expert feedback 4. draw experts feedback on drawings 6. prepare prototype 7. update vision and
1 3 4 5 6
8.
April
project week
9.
April
7
iteraction 5
prototype user-test 3. perceive user-test, collect data 4. analyse data with experts how to improve tool 7. create report blog up to date?
project week
10.
May
project week
11.
May
3 4
3 5 4 6
project week
12.
May
7
green light
1. generate last improvements 3. collect feedback: user-test / experts
project week
13.
June
2 3
project week
4 5
ida Val tin g
14.
June
g Doin g n ceivi Per
Ide Inte ating grat ing
ysis anal
vis
ion
appendix D: new games created for the old computer from Jumbo
appendix E: technical drawing of TagTiles
appendix G: algorithm
Final Master Project Report: Alles maalt
2011 Eveline Brink

Master Thesis 2011: 'Alles Maal'

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Master Thesis 2011: 'Alles Maal'

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Alles maalt

FMP by Eveline Brink 2011

Eveline Brink (S041262) e.brink@student.tue.nl www.evelinebrink.nl

user-test textile with children

102 104 106 110

3.1 Client 3.2 Partner 3.3 Design guidelines

Acknowledgements References Appendices

114 116 123

1.2 Design opportunities

Watterson 1987, page 57

self-confidence is a result of good performance, not the cause [Thomaes 2007]

neighbor from 6 is 5: 7x6=7x5+7 7 x 5 = 35 35 + 7 = 42 so 7 x 6 = 42 often made mistake: 7 x 6 = 7 x 5 - 7 = 28 or 35 + 7 = 40 - 2 = 38

Watterson 1987, page 25

figure 10: visual of Csikszentmihalyis Flow theory [source: http:// en.wikipedia.org]

Motivation is that which gets a behavior started and keeps it going.

figure 13: didactic materials used to learn the multiplications

figure 18: side view of TagTiles

figure 19: top view of TagTiles

figure 21: logo from Serious Toys B.V.

3.3 Design guidelines

4.1 The field

4.2 Explore material

hey look! I completed the table of six by myself!

4.3 Field conclusions

Conclusions from field

5.1 Explore TagTiles

I want this game, I am going to use all my savings to buy this!

5.2 Analysis and conclusions

5.3 Focus group

figure 27: an example of a multiplication table card, includes all calculations

Conclusions focus group

5.4 Overall scenario

Notes overall scenario

6.1 Setup user-test

plastic empty prototype

6.3 Explore details

possible positions of numbers including the position of the tag

figure 41: scenario so far

To make sure the game is instructive, it should be adaptive, tangible, giving

7.2 Design hardware

figure 53: the cubes, each cube represention a certain amount.

Setup during play

7.3 Design software

Algorithm structure calculations

Algorithm structure levels

8.1 Reflect on results

8.3 Reflect on process

appendix A: public debate in the media about quality of math (NL)

appendix B: list of experts used for this project Appendix B: Experts

appendix C: project proposal

appendix C: project proposal

appendix C: project proposal

Picture 3: Max, learncards with self-control

appendix C: project proposal

Key aspects to consider

learning traject for multiplication table

appendix C: project proposal

negative expectations about future performance

positive expectations befief in own capacity

less practice, less focus on the subject matter

fear of failure, avoid subject

Figure 3: circle of failure and circle of succes