Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Kinecting Physics: Conceptualization of Motion Through Visualization and Embodiment

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to share our findings in using the Kinect technology to facilitate the understanding of basic kinematics with middle school science classrooms. This study marks the first three iterations of this design-based research that examines the pedagogical potential of using the Kinect technology. To this end, we explored the impact of using the Kinect in conjunction with an SDK Physical Virtual Graphing program on students’ understanding of displacement, velocity and acceleration compared to students who conducted more traditional inquiry of the same concepts. Results of this study show that, while there may be some affordances to be gained from integrating this technology, there is a need for a scaffolded approach that helps students to understand the “messiness” of the data collected. Further, meta-cognitive activities, such as reflective opportunities, should be integrated into the inquiry experiences in order to scaffold student learning and reinforce concepts being presented. While the Kinect did work to generate large-scale visualization and embodied interactions that served as a mechanism for student understanding, this study also suggests that a complementary approach that includes both the use of hands-on inquiry and the use of the Kinect sensor, with each activity informing the other, could be a powerful technique for supporting students’ learning of kinematics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Pseudonyms are used for school, teachers and students.

References

  • Abrahamson D, Lindgren R (2015) Embodiment and embodied design. In: Sawyer K (ed) The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams DD, Shrum JW (1990) The effects of microcomputer-based laboratory exercises on the acquisition of line graph construction and interpretation skills by high school biology students. J Res Sci Teach 27(8):777–787. doi:10.1002/tea.3660270807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annetta L (2008) Video games in education: why they should be used and how are they being used. Theory Into Pract 47(3):229–239. doi:10.1080/00405840802153940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bamberger J, diSessa AA (2003) Music as embodied mathematics: a study of mutually informing affinity. Int J Comput Math Learn 8(2):123–160. doi:10.1023/b:ijco.0000003872.84260.96

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barak M (2007) Transition from traditional to ICT-enhanced learning environments in undergraduate chemistry courses. Comput Educ 48(1):30–43. doi:10.1016/J.Compedu.2004.11.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barsalou LW (1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behav Brain Sci 22(4):577–609. doi:10.1017/s0140525x99002149 discussion 610–560

    Google Scholar 

  • Belcher J (2003) From the mind’s eye to 3D animation: teaching electromagnetism with learning technology. Retrieved 1 Aug 2008 from http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cl1/ilt/solution/bel-chej2.htm

  • Bereiter C, Scardamalia M (2010) Can children really create knowledge? Can J Learn Technol/La revue canadienne de l’apprentissage et del la technologie 36(1):1–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Bielaczyc K (2006) Designing social infrastructure: critical issues in creating learning environments with technology. J Learn Sci 15(3):301–329. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls1503_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown A (1992) From design experiments: theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of Learning Sciences 2(2):141–178. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0202_2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown DE, Hammer D (2008) Conceptual change in physics1. International handbook of research on conceptual change. p 127

  • Brungardt JB, Zollman D (1995) Influence of interactive videodisc instruction using simultaneous-time analysis on kinematics graphing skills of high school physics students. J Res Sci Teach 32(8):855–869. doi:10.1002/tea.3660320808

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang J (2011) Kinect Math. http://apps.kinecteducation.com/catalog/4868.html

  • Clark J, Newman J (1997) The managerial state. Sage, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark D, Nelson B, Sengupta P, D’Angelo C (2009) Rethinking science learning through digital games and simulations: Genres, examples and evidence. Paper presented at the learning science: computer games, simulations, and education workshop. http://www7.nationalacadamies.org/bose/Clark_Gaming_CommissionedPaper.pdf

  • Computing Research Association (2006) Cyber-infrastructure for education and learning for the future: a vision and research agenda

  • Cooper S, Perez LC, Rainey D (2010) K-12 computational learning. Commun ACM 53(11):27–29. doi:10.1145/1839676.1839686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbin J, Strauss A (2008) Basics of qualitative research: technique and procedures for developing grounded theory, 3rd edn. Sage Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Dede C, Salzman M, Loftin RB, Sprague D (1999) Multisensory immersion as a modeling environment for learning complex scientific concepts. In: Feurzeig W, Roberts N (eds) Modeling and simulations in science and mathematics education. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey J (1958) Experience and Nature. Dover, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa A (2000) Changing minds. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • diSessa AA (2006) A history of conceptual change research: threads and fault lines. Cambridge University Press

  • diSessa AA (2008) Can students re-invent fundamental scientific principles? evaluating the promise of new-media literacies. Children’s learning in a digital world. pp 218–248

  • Dourish P (2001) Where the action is. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Dyskra DI Jr, Sweet DR (2009) Conceptual development about motion and force in elementary and middle school students. Am J Phys 77(5):468–476. doi:10.1119/1.3090824

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisele JE (1982) Instruction computing: computers and cognitive learning. Educ Technol 22:33–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg M, Pares N (2015) Tangible and full-body interfaces in learning. In: Sawyer K (ed) Second handbook of the learning sciences, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 229–357

    Google Scholar 

  • Elby A (2000) What students learning of representations tells us about constructivism. J Math Behav 19:481–502. doi:10.1016/s0732-3123(01)00054-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkelstein ND, Adams WK, Keller CJ, Kohl PB, Perkins KK, Podolefsky NS, LeMaster R (2005) When learning about the real world is better done virtually: a study of substituting computer simulations for laboratory equipment. Physical Review Special Topics-Physics Education Research 1(1):010103. doi:10.1103/Physrevstper.1.010103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gee JP (2003) What videogames have to teach us about learning and literacy. Palgrave Macmillan, New York

  • Gee JP (2008) Learning and Games. In: Salen K (ed) The ecology of games: connecting youth, games and learning. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 21–40

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldin-Meadow S (2003) Hearing gesture. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordin DN, Pea RD (1995) Prospects for scientific visualization as an educational technology. J Learn Sci 4(3):249–279. doi:10.1207/s15327809jls0403_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graef JL (1983) The computer connection. Sci Teacher 50:42–47

    Google Scholar 

  • Halloun IA, Hestenes D (1985) The initial knowledge state of college physics students. Am J Phys 53(11):1043–1055. doi:10.1119/1.14030

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegarty M, Kozhevnikov M (1999) Spatial abilities, working memory and mechanical reasoning. In: Gero J, Tversky B (eds) visual and spatial reasoning in design. Key Centre of Design and Cognition, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegarty M, Sims VK (1994) Individual differences in mental animation during mechanical reasoning. Mem Cognit 22(4):411–430. doi:10.3758/bf03200867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaak MI, Just MA (1995) Constrains on the processing of rolling motion: the curtate cycloid illusion. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 21(6):1391–1408. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.21.6.1391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaendler C, Wiedmann M, Rummel N, Spada H (2014) Teacher competencies for the implementation of collaborative learning in the classroom: a framework and research review. Educ Psychol Rev. doi:10.1007/s10648-014-9288-9

    Google Scholar 

  • Ketelhut DJ, Dede C, Clarke J, Nelson B (2006) A multi-user virtual environment for building higher order inquiry skills in science. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association, San Francisco, CA

  • King A (1997) ASK to THINK–TEL WHY: a model of transactive peer tutoring for scaffolding higher level complex learning. Educ Psychol 32(4):221–235. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3204_3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozhevnikov M, Thornton R (2006) Real-time data display, spatial visualization ability, and learning force and motion concepts. J Sci Educ Technol 15:113–134. doi:10.1007/s10956-006-0361-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozhevnikov M, Motes MA, Hegarty M (2007) Spatial visualization in physics problem solving. Cognit Sci 31(4):549–579. doi:10.1080/15326900701399897

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laws P (1997) Millikan Lecture 1996: promoting active learning based on physics education research in introductory courses. Am J Phys 65:14–21. doi:10.1119/1.18496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layman JW, Krajcik JS (1992) The microcomputer and practical work in science laboratories. Innov Sci Technol Educ 4:171

    Google Scholar 

  • Leinhardt G, Zaslavsky O, Stein MK (1990) Functions, graphs, and graphing: tasks, learning, and teaching. Rev Educ Res 60(1):1–64. doi:10.3102/00346543060001001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lincoln Y, Guba E (1985) Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications Inc, Newbury Park

    Google Scholar 

  • Lindgren R, Schwartz D (2009) Spatial learning and computer simulations in science. Int J Sci Educ 31(3):419–438. doi:10.1080/09500690802595813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindwall O, Ivarsson J (2004) What makes the subject matter matter? Contrasting probeware with graphs and tracks. Research Article. Department of Communication Studies. Linköping University, Sweden. http://probesight.concord.org/whatAreThey/LindwallI-2004-what.pdf

  • Linn M, Eylon B (2006) Science education: integrating views of learning and instruction. In: Winne P (ed) Handbook of educational psychology, 2nd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Linn MC, Layman JW, Nachmias R (1987) Cognitive consequences of micro-computer-based laboratories: graphing skills development. Contemp Educ Psychol 12(3):244–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masson MEJ, Bub DN, Lalonde CE (2011) Video-game training and naive reasoning about object motion. Appl Cognit Psychol 25(1):166–173. doi:10.1002/Acp.1658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayo M (2009) Video games: a route to large scale STEM education? Science 323:79

  • McCloskey M (1983) Naive theories of motion. In: Gentner D, Stevens A (eds) Mental models. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  • Mcdermott LC, Rosenquist ML, Vanzee EH (1987) Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: examples from kinematics. Am J Phys 55(6):503–513. doi:10.1119/1.15104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McKenny S, Reeves TC (2012) Conducting educational design research. Routledge, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Megowan C (2007) Framing discourse for optimal learning in science and mathematics, Ph.D. Dissertation, Arizona State University

  • Metcalf S, Tinker RF (2004) Probeware and handhelds in elementary and middle school science. J Sci Educ Technol 13(1):43–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milar KS (2005) Beaking the silence: Helen Bradford Thompson Woolley. In: The life cycle of psychological ideas, Springer, US, pp. 301–328

  • Mohanty SD, Cantu S (2011) Teaching introductory undergraduate physics using commercial video games. Phys Educ 46:570. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/46/5/009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moher T, Wiley J, Jaeger A, Silva BL, Novellis F, Kilb D (2010) Spatial and temporal embedding for science inquiry: An empirical study of student learning. Paper presented at the international conference of the learning sciences, Chicago

  • Nemirovsky R (1994) On ways of symbolizing: the case of Laura and the velocity sign. J Math Behav 13(4):389–422. doi:10.1016/0732-3123(94)90002-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nemirovsky R (2002) On guessing the essential thing. In: Gravemeijer K, Lehrer R, Verschaffel L (eds) Symbolizing, modeling, and tool use in mathematics education. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 233–255

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Nemirovsky R, Tierney C, Wright T (1998) Body motion and graphing. Cognit Instr 16(2):119–172. doi:10.1207/s1532690xci1602_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NRC (2011) Simulations and games in the classroom. National Acadamies Press, Washington D.C.

    Google Scholar 

  • NSF Task Force on Cyberlearning (2008) Fostering learning in the networked world: learning opportunity and challenge, a 21st century agenda for the National Science Foundation. National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA

    Google Scholar 

  • Ochs W (1990) The importance of phase space dimension in the intermittency analysis of multihadron production. Phys Lett 247(1):101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papert S (1980) Mindstorms. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Piaget J (1968) Genetic Epistemology (E. Duckworth Ed.), Columbia University Press, New York

  • Polanyi M (1958) Towards a post-critical philosophy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Price S, Rogers Y (2004) Let’s get physical: the learning benefits of interacting in digitally augmented physical spaces. Comput Educ 43(1–2):137–151. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2003.12.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers Y, Scaife M, Gabrielli S, Harris E, Smith H (2002) A conceptual framework for mixed reality environments: designing novel learning activities for young children. Presence: Teleop Virt 11(6):677–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russell DW, Lucas KB, McRobbie CJ (2004) Role of the micro-computer-based laboratory display in supporting the construction of new understandings in thermal physics. J Res Sci Teach 41(2):165–185. doi:10.1002/tea.10129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia M (2002) Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In: Smith B (ed) Liberal education in a knowledge society. Open Court, Chicago, IL, pp 67–98

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia M, Bereiter C, Lamon M (1994) The CSILE project: trying to bring the classroom into world 3. In: McGilley K (ed) Classroom lessons: integrating cognitive theory and classroom practices. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Scardamalia M, Bereiter C (1991) Higher levels of agency for children in knowledge building: a challenge for the design of new knowledge media. J Learn Sci 1:37–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenfeld A (2006) What doesn’t work: the challenge and failure of the what works clearinghouse to conduct meaningful reviews of mathematics curricula. Educ Res 35(2):13–21. doi:10.3102/0013189x035002013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinkuhler C, Duncan S (2008) Scientific habits of mind. J Sci Educ Technol 17:530–543

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Struck W, Yerrick R (2010) The effect of data acquisition-probeware and digital video analysis on accurate graphical representation of kinetics in a high school physics class. J Sci Educ Technol 19(2):199–211. doi:10.1007/s10956-009-9194-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton RK, Sokoloff DR (1990) Learning motion concepts using real-time microcomputer-based laboratory tools. Am J Phys 58(9):858–867

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tinker R (2000) A history of probeware. http://makingsens.stanford.edu/pubs/AHistoryHighlighted.pdf. Accessed 14 Jul 2015

  • Torentino L, Birchfield D, Megowan-Romanowicz C, Johnson-Glenber MC, Kelliher A, Marinez C (2009) Teaching and learning in the mixed-reality science classroom. J Sci Educ Technol 18:501–517. doi:10.1007/s10956-009-9166-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky LS (1962) Thought and language. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky LS (1978) Mind in society, 14th edn. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Yair Y, Mintz R, Litvak S (2001) 3D virtual reality in science education: an implication for astronomy teaching. J Comput Math Sci Teach 20(3):293–305

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker AA, Tinker R, Staudt C, Mansfield A, Metcalf S (2008) Learning science in grades 3–8 using probeware and computers: findings from the TEEMSS II project. J Sci Educ Technol 17(1):42–48. doi:10.1007/s10956-007-9086-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Education, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Peabody Hall 307A, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-3500, USA

    Janice L. Anderson

  2. Samford University, 800 Lakeshore Drive, Birmingham, AL, 35229, USA

    Steven D. Wall

Authors
  1. Janice L. Anderson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven D. Wall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Janice L. Anderson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Anderson, J.L., Wall, S.D. Kinecting Physics: Conceptualization of Motion Through Visualization and Embodiment. J Sci Educ Technol 25, 161–173 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9582-4

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9582-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation