Human-Computer Interaction

INTERACT 2015: Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2015 pp 531-548 | Cite as

Evaluating Digital Tabletop Collaborative Writing in the Classroom

  • Philip Heslop
  • Anne Preston
  • Ahmed Kharrufa
  • Madeline Balaam
  • David Leat
  • Patrick Olivier
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9297)

Abstract

We present an evaluation of an “in the wild” classroom deployment of Co-located Collaborative Writing (CCW), an application for digital tabletops. CCW was adapted to the classroom setting across 8 SMART tables. Here, we describe the outcomes of the 6 week deployment with students aged 13–14, focussing on how CCW operated as a tool for learning within a classroom environment. We analyse video data and interaction logs to provide a group specific analysis in the classroom context. Using the group as the unit of analysis allows detailed tracking of the group’s development over time as part of scheme of work planned by a teacher for the classroom. Through successful integration of multiple tabletops into the classroom, we show how the design of CCW supports students in learning how to collaboratively plan a piece of persuasive writing, and allows teachers to monitor progress and process of students. The study shows how the nature and quality of collaborative interactions changed over time, with decision points bringing students together to collaborate, and how the role of CCW matured from a scaffolding mechanism for planning, to a tool for implementing planning. The study also showed how the teacher’s relationship with CCW changed, due to the designed visibility of groups’ activities, and how lesson plans became more integrated utilizing the flexibility of the technology. These are key aspects that can enhance the adoption of such technologies by both students and teachers in the classroom.

Keywords

Digital tabletops Collaborative learning Multi-touch 

References

  1. 1.
    Barron, B.: When smart groups fail. J. Learn. Sci. 12(3), 307–359 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bartu, H.: Decisions and decision making in the Istanbul exploratory practice experience. Lang. Teach. Res. 7(2), 181–200 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Berninger, V., et al.: Assessment of planning, translating, and revising in junior high writers. J. Sch. Psychol. 34(1), 23–52 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coyle, A.: Discourse analysis. In: Breakwell, G.M., Hammond, S., Fife-Schaw, C. (eds.) Research Methods in Psychology. Sage, London (1995)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Creswell, J., Clark, V.P.: Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dillenbourg, P.: Distributing cognition over brains and machines. In: Vosniadou, S., De Corte, E., Glaser, B., Mandl, H. (eds.) International Perspectives on the Psychological Technology-Based Learning Environments, pp. 165–184. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dillenbourg, P., Evans, M.: Interactive tabletops in education. Int. J. Comput. Collab. Learn. 6(4), 491–514 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heslop, P., et al.: Learning extended writing: designing for children’s collaboration. In: Proceedings of 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp. 36–45 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hollan, J., et al.: Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Trans. Comput. Interact. 7(2), 174–196 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kharrufa, A., et al.: Digital mysteries: designing for learning at the tabletop. In: ACM International Conference Interaction Tabletops Surfaces, pp. 197–206 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kharrufa, A., et al.: Extending tabletop application design to the classroom. In: Proceedings 2013 ACM International Conference Interaction Tabletops Surfaces - ITS 2013, pp. 115–124 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kharrufa, A., et al.: Learning through reflection at the tabletop: a case study with digital mysteries. In: World Conference Education Multimedia, Hypermedia Telecommunication, pp. 665–674 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kharrufa, A., et al.: Tables in the wild: lessons learned from a large-scale multi-tabletop deployment. In: CHI (2013)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kharrufa, A.S., Olivier, P.: Exploring the requirements of tabletop interfaces for education. Int. J. Learn. Technol. 5(1), 42 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kirkpatrick, L.C., Klein, P.D.: Planning text structure as a way to improve students’ writing from sources in the compare–contrast genre. Learn. Instr. 19(4), 309–321 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kirsh, D.: The intelligent use of space. Artif. Intell. 73(1), 31–68 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    De La Paz, S., Graham, S.: Explicitly teaching strategies, skills, and knowledge: writing instruction in middle school classrooms. J. Educ. Psychol. 94(4), 687–698 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lewis, M., Wray, D.: Writing Frames. Reading and Language Information Centre, University of Reading, Reading (1996)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Markee, N.: Conversation Analysis. Routledge, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Martinez-Maldonado, R. et al.: Orchestrating a multi-tabletop classroom: from activity design to enactment and reflection. In: Proceedings of 2012 ACM International Conference on Interaction Tabletops Surfaces ITS, pp. 119–128 (2012)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mercier, E.M., Higgins, S.E.: Collaborative learning with multi-touch technology: developing adaptive expertise. Learn. Instr. 25, 13–23 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Norman, D.A.: Things that Make Us Smart. Perseus Books, Boston (1993)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Piaget, J.: The Language and Thought of the Child. Routledge, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rick, J., et al.: Beyond one-size-fits-all: how interactive tabletops support collaborative learning. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp. 109–117. ACM (2011)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rick, J., Rogers, Y.: From DigiQuilt to DigiTile: adapting educational technology to a multi-touch table. In: TABLETOP, pp. 79–86. IEEE, Los Alamitos (2008)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rogers, Y.: HCI Theory: classical, modern and contemporary. Synth. Lect. Hum.-Centered Inform. 5(2), 1–129 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rogers, Y., Ellis, J.: Distributed cognition: an alternative framework for analysing and explaining collaborative working. J. Inf. Technol. 9(2), 119–128 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Roschelle, J., Teasley, S.: The construction of shared knowledge in collaborative problem solving. In: O’Malley, C. (ed.) Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. NATO ASI Series, vol. 128, pp. 69–97. Springer, Heidelberg (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schneider, B., et al.: Phylo-Genie: engaging students in collaborative ‘tree-thinking’ through tabletop techniques. In: CHI 2012, pp. 3071–3080 (2012)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Scollon, R., Levine, P.: Multimodal discourse analysis as the confluence of discourse and technology. In: Scollon, R., Levine, P. (eds.) Discourse Technology Multimodal discourse Analysts, pp. 1–6. Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Searle, J.R.: Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sinclair, J.M., Coulthard, M.: Towards an Analysis of Discourse: The English Used by Teachers and Pupils. Oxford University Press, London (1975)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vygotsky, L.S.: Mind in Society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1978)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Wood, D., et al.: The role of tutoring in problem solving. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 17(2), 89–100 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Wood, D., Wood, H.: Vygotsky, tutoring and learning. Oxf. Rev. Educ. 22(1), 5–16 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Von Zadow, U., et al.: SimMed: combining simulation and interactive tabletops for medical education. In: CHI 2013, pp. 1469–1478 (2013)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zhang, J., Patel, V.L.: Distributed cognition, representation, and affordance. Pragmat. Cogn. 14(2), 333–341 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Philip Heslop
    • 1
  • Anne Preston
    • 1
  • Ahmed Kharrufa
    • 1
  • Madeline Balaam
    • 1
  • David Leat
    • 1
  • Patrick Olivier
    • 1
  1. 1.Newcastle UniversityNewcastle upon TyneUK

Personalised recommendations