Thoughts on Effective Learning Procedure for Tangible Learning Environment Based on Embodied Design

  • Hideaki KuzuokaEmail author
  • Ryo Kimura
  • Yuki Tashiro
  • Yoshihiko Kubota
  • Hideyuki Suzuki
  • Hiroshi Kato
  • Naomi Yamashita
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10272)


Based on an observational study of astronomy education using a tangible globe system, this paper aims to elicit implications for effective learning procedure for tangible learning environments. By analyzing the experiment based on “embodied design” concept, we found that, when appropriate instruction is not provided, intuitive operability of tangible user interface at times rather disturbs learners’ thinking opportunities. We also found that by properly limiting the information to show learners, the system can make learners be more conscious of the meaning of manipulating tangible objects and result in better understanding of the learning content.


Tangible User Interface Correct Answer Rate Astronomy Education Preservice Elementary School Teacher Body Rotation Angle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Abrahamson, D., Lindgren, R.: Embodiment and embodied design. In: Sawyer, R.K. (ed.) The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences, 2nd edn, pp. 258–376. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Atwood, R.K., Atwood, V.A.: Effects of instruction on preservice elementary teachers’ conceptions of the causes of night and day and the seasons. J. Sci. Teach. Educ. 8(1), 1–13 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Collins, A., Joseph, D., Bielaczyc, K.: Design research: theoretical and methodological issues. J. Learn. Sci. 13(1), 15–42 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    The Design-Based Research Collective: Design-based research: an emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educ. Res. 32(1), 5–8 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gokhale, A.: Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. J. Technol. Educ. 7(1), 22–30 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kuzuoka, H., Yamashita, N., Kato, H., Suzuki, H., Kubota, Y.: Tnagible earth: tangible learning environment for astronomy education. In: Proceedings of HAI 2014, pp. 23–27 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moher, T., Hussain, S., Halter, T., Kilb, D.: RoomQuake: embedding dynamic phenomena within the physical space of an elementary school classroom. In: Proceedings of CHI 2005, pp. 1655–1668 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Morita, Y., Setozaki, N.: Practical evaluation of tangible learning system: lunar phase class case study. In: Proceedings of SITE 2012, pp. 3718–3722 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Price, S.: A representation approach to conceptualizing tangible learning environments. In: Proceedings of TEI 2008, pp. 151–157 (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schneider, B., Jermann, P., Zufferey, G., Dillenbourg, P.: Benefits of a tangible interface for collaborative learning and interaction. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 4(3), 222–232 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shelton, B., Hedley, N.: Using augmented reality for teaching earth-sun relationships to undergraduate geography students. In: Proceedings of ART 2002, 8 p. (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Suzuki, H., Kato, H.: Interaction-level support for collaborative learning: AlgoBlock-an open programming language. In: Proceedings of CSCL 1995, pp. 349–355 (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yamashita, J., Kuzuoka, H., Fujimon, C., Hirose, M.: Tangible avatar and tangible earth: a novel interface for astronomy education. In: CHI 2007 Extended Abstract, pp. 2777–2782 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vosniadou, S., Skopeliti, I., Ikospentaki, K.: Modes of knowing and ways of reasoning in elementary astronomy. Cogn. Dev. 19(2), 203–222 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Young, T., Farnsworth, B., Grabe, C., Guy, M.: Exploring new technology tools to enhance astronomy teaching & learning in grades 3 classrooms: year one implementation. In: Annual Meeting of the Association for Science Teacher Education, pp. 4556–4567 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zakaria, E.: Promoting cooperative learning in science and mathematics education: a Malaysian perspective. Eurasia J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ. 3(1), 35–39 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zuckerman, O., Arida, S., Resnick, M.: Extending tangible interfaces for education: digital montessori inspired manipulatives. In: Proceedings of CHI 2005, pp. 859–868 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hideaki Kuzuoka
    • 1
    Email author
  • Ryo Kimura
    • 1
  • Yuki Tashiro
    • 1
  • Yoshihiko Kubota
    • 2
  • Hideyuki Suzuki
    • 3
  • Hiroshi Kato
    • 4
  • Naomi Yamashita
    • 5
  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Information and SystemsUniversity of TsukubaTsukubaJapan
  2. 2.Graduate School of EducationUtsunomiya UniversityUtsunomiyaJapan
  3. 3.The College of HumanitiesIbaraki UniversityMitoJapan
  4. 4.Faculty of Liberal ArtsThe Open University of JapanMihama-kuJapan
  5. 5.Innovative Communication LaboratoryNTT Communication Science LaboratoriesKeihanna Science CityJapan

Personalised recommendations