1 / 14

Physical vs Digital

Physical vs Digital. Tangible Interfaces. “ Tangible interfaces give physical form to digital information, employing physical artefacts both as representations and controls for computational media.” Ullmer & Ishii, 2001, MIT Media lab, Tangible Media group.

eliot
Download Presentation

Physical vs Digital

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Physical vs Digital

  2. Tangible Interfaces “Tangible interfaces give physical form to digital information, employing physical artefacts both as representations and controls for computational media.” Ullmer& Ishii, 2001, MIT Media lab, Tangible Media group “The basic premise is that the affordances of the physical handles are inherently richer than what virtual handles afford through conventional direct manipulation techniques. These physical affordances, [..] include facilitating two handed interactions, spatial caching, and parallel position and orientation control” Fitmaurice et al.,1995

  3. Logo blocks Resnick, M., Silverman, B. S., Begel, A., Martin, F., Welch, K., Logo Blocks, http://fredm.www.media.mit.edu/people/fredm/projects/cricket/logo-blocks/1998 Begel, A., LogoBlocks: A Graphical Programming Language for Interacting with the World, S.B. Thesis, MIT Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, http://abegel.www.media.mit.edu/people/abegel/begelaup.pdf

  4. Programming bricks McNerney, 2000

  5. TICLE: Tangible Interfaces for Collaborative Learning Environments L.L. Scarlatos (2002). An Application of Tangible Interfaces in Collaborative Learning Environments, SIGGRAPH 2002 Conference Abstracts and Applications, 125-126.

  6. Tangibles for
 Learning
 project Price, S., Sheridan, J.G. and Pontual-Falcão, T. Action and representation in tangible systems: implications for design of learning interactions. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Tangible, Embedded and Embodied Interaction, Cambridge, USA. http://www.lkl.ac.uk/research/tangibles/publications.html

  7. Tern Programming language

  8. Experimental comparisons TUI vs GUI Active collaboration Apprehendability Engagement Number of programs created by visitors per session Length of programs created Complexity of programs create Michael S. Horn, R. Jordan Crouser, and Marina U. Bers. 2012. Tangible interaction and learning: the case for a hybrid approach. Personal Ubiquitous Comput. 16, 4 (April 2012), 379-389. DOI=10.1007/s00779-011-0404-2 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00779-011-0404-2 http://ase.tufts.edu/devtech/publications/10.1007_s00779-011-0404-2.pdf

  9. TANGIBLE JIGSAW PUZZLES – COMPARING TUI – PUI -GUI Antle, A.N. Exploring how children use their hands to think: An embodied interactional analysis, Behaviour and Information Technology, (2012). Xie et al (2008) Are Tangibles more Fun, TEI, Feb 18-20 2008, Bonn, Germany http://sr-hercules05.iat.sfu.ca/TangibleSpatialGames/Paper/p191-xie.pdf

  10. “Epistemic actions are those actions used to change the world in order to simplify the problem-solving task. the action changes the world in some way that makes the task easier to solve. “ “Pragmatic actions are those actions whose primary function is to bring the individual closer to his or her physical goal (e.g. winning the game, solving the puzzle).” “Tangible interaction provides unique opportunities to support the development of thinking skills in areas where physical interaction is beneficial and can be augmented with digital feedback that facilitates social interaction and skills development”

  11. SmartStep http://www.cs.sunysb.edu/~tony/research/SmartStep/SmartStep.html

  12. FINGU Barendregt, W., Lindström, B., Rietz-Leppänen, E. Holgersson, I., Ottosson, T. (2012) Development and Evaluation of Fingu: A Mathematics iPad Game Using Multi-touch Interaction. Proceedings of IDC, 12-15 June, Bremen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_K7zN3ACnc

  13. Tangibles for Mathematics • allow collaborative use; • provide scaffolding; • increase user engagement; • are accessible by children with different kinds of disabilities; • Should be independent of personal computers; • Should be viable in the physical space of classrooms; • Should be aligned with school curriculum; • Should be fairly inexpensive

More Related