More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Toward a taxonomy of design genres: fostering mathematical insight via perception-based and action-based experiences

Author:

Dor AbrahamsonAuthors Info & Claims

IDC '13: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children

Pages 218 - 227

https://doi.org/10.1145/2485760.2485761

Published: 24 June 2013 Publication History

Abstract

In a retrospective analysis of my own pedagogical design projects over the past twenty years, I articulate and compare what I discern therein as two distinct activity genres for grounding mathematical concepts. One genre, "perception-based design," builds on learners' early mental capacity to draw logical inferences from perceptual judgment of intensive quantities in source phenomena, such as displays of color densities. The other genre, "action-based design," builds on learners' perceptuomotor capacity to develop new kinesthetic routines for strategic embodied interaction, such as moving the hands at different speeds to keep a screen green. Both capacities are effective evolutionary means of engaging the world, and both bear pedagogical potential as epistemic resources by which to build meaning for mathematical models of, and solution processes for situated problems. Empirical studies that investigated designs built in these genres suggest a two-step activity format by which instructors can guide learners to reinvent conceptual cores. In a primary problem, learners apply or develop non-symbolic perceptuomotor schemas to engage the task effectively. In a secondary problem, learners devise means of appropriating newly interpolated mathematical forms as enactive, semiotic, or epistemic means of enhancing, explaining, and evaluating their primary response. Whereas my analysis distills activities into two separate genres for rhetorical clarity, ultimately embodied interaction may interleave and synthesize the genres' elements.

References

[1]

Abrahamson, D. (2002). When "the same" is the same as different differences: Aliya reconciles her perceptual judgment of proportional equivalence with her additive computation skills. In D. Mewborn, P. Sztajn, E. White, H. Wiegel, R. Bryant & K. Nooney (Eds.), PME-NA 24 (Vol. 4, pp. 1658--1661). Columbus, OH: Eric.

[2]

Abrahamson, D. (2007). Both rhyme and reason: toward design that goes beyond what meets the eye. In T. Lamberg & L. Wiest (Eds.), PME-NA 29 (pp. 287--295). Stateline (Lake Tahoe), NV: University of Nevada, Reno.

[3]

Abrahamson, D. (2009a). Embodied design: constructing means for constructing meaning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 70(1), 27--47.

[4]

Abrahamson, D. (2009b). Orchestrating semiotic leaps from tacit to cultural quantitative reasoning---the case of anticipating experimental outcomes of a quasi-binomial random generator. Cognition and Instruction, 27(3), 175--224.

[5]

Abrahamson, D. (2012a). Discovery reconceived: product before process. For the Learning of Mathematics, 32(1), 8--15.

[6]

Abrahamson, D. (2012b). Rethinking intensive quantities via guided mediated abduction. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(4), 626--649.

[7]

Abrahamson, D. (2012c). Seeing chance: perceptual reasoning as an epistemic resource for grounding compound event spaces. In R. Biehler & D. Pratt (Eds.), Probability in reasoning about data and risk {Special issue}. ZDM: The international Journal on Mathematics Education, 44(7), 869--881.

[8]

Abrahamson, D., & Cigan, C. (2003). A design for ratio and proportion. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 8(9), 493--501.

[9]

Abrahamson, D., Lee, R. G., Negrete, A. G., & Gutiéérrez, J. F. (submitted). Coordinating visualizations of polysemous action: values added for grounding proportion. In F. Rivera, H. Steinbring, & A. Arcavi (Eds.), Visualization as an epistemological learning tool {Special issue}. ZDM: The international Journal on Mathematics Education.

[10]

Abrahamson, D., & Lindgren, R. (in press). Embodiment and embodied design. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd Edition). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

[11]

Abrahamson, D., & Trninic, D. (2011). Toward an embodied-interaction design framework for mathematical concepts. In P. Blikstein & P. Marshall (Eds.), IDC 2011 (Vol. "Full papers", pp. 1--10). Ann Arbor, MI: IDC.

Digital Library

[12]

Abrahamson, D., Trninic, D., Gutiérrez, J. F., Huth, J., & Lee, R. G. (2011). Hooks and shifts: a dialectical study of mediated discovery. Technology, Knowledge, and Learning, 16(1), 55--85.

[13]

Abrahamson, D., & Wilensky, U. (2007). Learning axes and bridging tools in a technology-based design for statistics. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 12(1), 23--55.

[14]

Antle, A. N., Wise, A. F., & Nielsen, K. (2011). Towards utopia: designing tangibles for learning. In P. Blikstein & P. Marshall (Eds.), IDC 2011 (Vol. Full Papers, pp. 11--20). Ann Arbor, MI: IDC.

Digital Library

[15]

Arieti, S. (1976). Creativity: the magic synthesis. New York: Basic Books.

[16]

Arnon, I., Nesher, P., & Nirenburg, R. (2001). Where do fractions encounter their equivalents? Can this encounter take place in elementary-school? International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 6(2), 167--214.

[17]

Artigue, M. (2002). Learning mathematics in a CAS environment: The genesis of a reflection about instrumentation and the dialectics between technical and conceptual work. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 7(3), 245--274.

[18]

Artigue, M., Cerulli, M., Haspekian, M., & Maracci, M. (2009). Connecting and integrating theoretical frames: the TELMA contribution. In M. Artigue (Ed.), Connecting approaches to technology enhanced learning in mathematics: the TELMA experience {Special issue}. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 14, 217--240.

[19]

Bamberger, J. (1999). Action knowledge and symbolic knowledge: The computer as mediator. In D. Schön, B. Sanyal & W. Mitchell (Eds.), High technology and low Income communities (pp. 235--262). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[20]

Bamberger, J., & diSessa, A. A. (2003). Music as embodied mathematics: a study of a mutually informing affinity. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 8(2), 123--160.

[21]

Barsalou, L. W. (2010). Grounded cognition: past, present, and future. Topics in Cognitive Science, 2(4), 716--724.

[22]

Bartolini Bussi, M. G., & Mariotti, M. A. (2008). Semiotic mediation in the mathematics classroom: artefacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective. In L. D. English, M. G. Bartolini Bussi, G. A. Jones, R. Lesh & D. Tirosh (Eds.), Handbook of international research in mathematics education (2^nd revised edition) (pp. 720--749). Mahwah, NG: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[23]

Batanero, C., Navarro-Pelayo, V., & Godino, J. D. (1997). Effect of implicity combinatorial model on combinatorial reasoning in secondary school pupils. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 32, 181--199.

[24]

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind: a revolutionary approach to man's understanding of himself. New York: Ballantine Books.

[25]

Bautista, A., & Roth, W.-M. (2012). The incarnate rhythm of geometrical knowing. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 31(1), 91--104.

[26]

Becvar Weddle, L. A., & Hollan, J. D. (2010). Scaffolding embodied practices in professional education. Mind, Culture & Activity, 17(2), 119--148.

[27]

Behr, M. J., Harel, G., Post, T., & Lesh, R. (1993). Rational number, ratio, and proportion. In D. A. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 296--333). NYC: Macmillan.

[28]

Bereiter, C. (1985). Towards the solution of the learning paradox. Review of Educational Research, 55(2), 210--226.

[29]

Borovcnik, M., & Bentz, H.-J. (1991). Empirical research in understanding probability. In R. Kapadia & M. Borovcnik (Eds.), Chance encounters: Probability in education (pp. 73--105). Dordrecht, Holland: Kluwer.

[30]

Botzer, G., & Yerushalmy, M. (2008). Embodied semiotic activities and their role in the construction of mathematical meaning of motion graphs. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 13(2), 111--134.

[31]

Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University.

[32]

Carey, S. (2011). Précis of The Origin of Concepts. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 34(3), 113--124.

[33]

Cole, M., & Wertsch, J. V. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions of Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39(5), 250--256.

[34]

Collins, A. (1992). Towards a design science of education. In E. Scanlon & T. O'shea (Eds.), New directions in educational technology (pp. 15--22). Berlin: Springer.

[35]

Confrey, J., & Scarano, G. H. (1995). Splitting reexamined: results from a three-year longitudinal study of children in Grades Three to Five. In D. T. Owens, M. K. Reed & G. M. Millsaps (Eds.), PME-NA 17 (Vol. 1, pp. 421--426). Columbus, OH: Eric.

[36]

Dillenbourg, P., & Evans, M. (2012). Interactive tabletops in education. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 6(4), 491--514.

[37]

diSessa, A. A. (2000). Changing minds: Computers, learning and literacy. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

Digital Library

[38]

diSessa, A. A. (2008). A note from the editor. Cognition and Instruction, 26(4), 427--429.

[39]

diSessa, A. A., & Cobb, P. (2004). Ontological innovation and the role of theory in design experiments. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 77--103.

[40]

Dourish, P. (2001). Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. Cambridge, MA: M. I. T. Press.

Digital Library

[41]

Dubinsky, E., & McDonald, M. A. (2001). APOS: a constructivist theory of learning in undergraduate mathematics education research. In D. Holton (Ed.), The teaching and learning of mathematics at university level: an ICMI study (pp. 273--280). Dordrechet: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

[42]

Figueiredo, N., van Galen, F., & Gravemeijer, K. (2009). The actor's and observer's point of view: A geometry applet as an example. Educational Designer, 1(3), Retrieved January 8, 2013, from: http://www.educationaldesigner.org/ed/volume2011/issue2013/article2010.

[43]

Forman, G. (1988). Making intuitive knowledge explicit through future technology. In G. Forman & P. B. Pufall (Eds.), Constructivism in the computer age. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[44]

Gelman, R. (1998). Domain specificity in cognitive development: universals and nonuniversals. In M. Sabourin, F. Craik & M. Robert (Eds.), Advances in psychological science: Vol. 2. Biological and cognitive aspects (pp. 50--63). Hove, England: Psychology Press.

[45]

Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335--346.

Digital Library

[46]

Howison, M., Trninic, D., Reinholz, D., & Abrahamson, D. (2011). The Mathematical Imagery Trainer: from embodied interaction to conceptual learning. In G. Fitzpatrick, C. Gutwin, B. Begole, W. A. Kellogg & D. Tan (Eds.), CHI 2011, Vancouver, May 7--12, 2011 (Vol. "Full Papers", pp. 1989--1998). New York: ACM Press.

Digital Library

[47]

Jones, I., Inglis, M., Gilmore, C., & Dowens, M. (2012). Substitution and sameness: two components of a relational conception of the equals sign. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113, 166--176.

[48]

Kahneman, D. (2003). A perspective on judgement and choice. American Psychologist, 58(9), 697--720.

[49]

Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.). (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[50]

Kali, Y., Levin-Peled, R., Ronen-Fuhrmann, T., & Hans, M. (2009). The Design Principles Database: A multipurpose tool for the educational technology community. Design Principles & Practices: An International Journal, 3(1), 55--65.

[51]

Kaput, J., & West, M. M. (1994). Missing-value proportional reasoning problems: factors affecting informal reasoning patterns. In G. Harel & J. Confrey (Eds.), The development of multiplicative reasoning in the learning of mathematics (pp. 237--287). Albany, NY: SUNY.

[52]

Kelly, A. E. (2004). Design research in education: Yes, but is it methodological? Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 115--128.

[53]

Kinsella, E. A. (2007). Embodied reflection and the epistemology of reflective practice. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41(3), 395--409.

[54]

Klemmer, S. R., Hartmann, B., & Takayama, L. (2006). How bodies matter: five themes for interaction design DIS (pp. 140--149): ACM.

Digital Library

[55]

Lakoff, G., & Núúñez, R. E. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: how the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. New York: Basic Books.

[56]

Lamon, S. J. (2007). Rational numbers and proportional reasoning: toward a theoretical framework for research. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 629--667). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

[57]

Mariotti, M. A. (2009). Artifacts and signs after a Vygotskian perspective: the role of the teacher. ZDM: The international Journal on Mathematics Education, 41, 427--440.

[58]

Markman, A. B., & Gentner, D. (1993). Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 431--467.

[59]

McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: The New American Library.

[60]

Moreno-Armella, L., Hegedus, S., & Kaput, J. (2008). From static to dynamic mathematics: historical and representational perspectives. In S. Hegedus & R. Lesh (Eds.), Democratizing access to mathematics through technology: issues of design, theory and implementation---in memory of Jim Kaput's Work {Special issue}. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 68(2), 99--111.

[61]

Nathan, M. J. (2012). Rethinking formalisms in formal education. Educational Psychologist, 47(2), 125--148.

[62]

Nemirovsky, R. (2011). Episodic feelings and transfer of learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 308--337.

[63]

Nemirovsky, R., & Borba, M. C. (2004). PME Special Issue: Bodily activity and imagination in mathematics learning. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 57, 303--321.

[64]

Nemirovsky, R., Tierney, C., & Wright, T. (1998). Body motion and graphing. Cognition and Instruction, 16(2), 119--172.

[65]

Newman, D., Griffin, P., & Cole, M. (1989). The construction zone: working for cognitive change in school. New York: Cambridge University Press.

[66]

Norton, A. (2009). Re-solving the learning paradox: epistemological and ontological questions for radical constructivism. For the Learning of Mathematics, 29(2), 2--7.

[67]

Núñez, R. E., Edwards, L. D., & Matos, J. F. (1999). Embodied cognition as grounding for situatedness and context in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39, 45--65.

[68]

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. NY: Basic Books.

Digital Library

[69]

Papert, S. (1996). An exploration in the space of mathematics educations. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 1(1), 95--123.

[70]

Peirce, C. S. (1931--1958). Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. C. Hartshorne & P. Weiss (Eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

[71]

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child (H. Weaver, Trans.). NY: Basic Books (Original work published 1966).

[72]

Pirie, S. E. B., & Kieren, T. E. (1994). Growth in mathematical understanding: How can we characterize it and how can we represent it? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 26, 165--190.

[73]

Pratt, D., & Noss, R. (2010). Designing for mathematical abstraction. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 15(2), 81--97.

[74]

Prawat, R. S. (1999). Dewey, Peirce, and the learning paradox. American Educational Research Journal, 36, 47--76.

[75]

Prediger, S. (2008). Do you want me to do it with probability or with my normal thinking? Horizontal and vertical views on the formation of stochastic conceptions. International Electronic Journal of Mathematics Education, 3(3), 126--154.

[76]

Radford, L. (2006). Elements of a cultural theory of objectification. In semiotics, culture and mathematical Thinking {Special issue}, REDIMAT, 103--129.

[77]

Reed, E. S., & Bril, B. (1996). The primacy of action in development. In M. L. Latash & M. T. Turvey (Eds.), Dexterity and its development (pp. 431--451). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

[78]

Reinholz, D., Trninic, D., Howison, M., & Abrahamson, D. (2010). It's not easy being green: embodied artifacts and the guided emergence of mathematical meaning. In P. Brosnan, D. Erchick & L. Flevares (Eds.), PME-NA 32 (Vol. VI, Ch. 18: Technology, pp. 1488--1496). Columbus, OH: PME-NA.

[79]

Roth, W.-M. (2010). Incarnation: radicalizing the embodiment of mathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics, 30(2), 8--17.

[80]

Rubel, L. (2009). Student thinking about effects of sample size: An in and out of school perspective. In S. L. Swars, D. W. Stinson & S. Lemons-Smith (Eds.), PME-NA 31 (Vol. 5, pp. 636--643). Atlanta, GA: Georgia State U.

[81]

Ruthven, K., Laborde, C., Leach, J., & Tiberghien, A. (2009). Design tools in didactical research: instrumenting the epistemological and cognitive aspects of the design of teaching sequences. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 329--342.

[82]

Sarama, J., & Clements, D. H. (2009). "Concrete" computer manipulatives in mathematics education. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 145--150.

[83]

Sawyer, R. K. (2007). Group genius: the creative power of collaboration. New York: Perseus Books Group.

[84]

Saxe, G. B. (2004). Practices of quantification from a sociocultural perspective. In K. A. Demetriou & A. Raftopoulos (Eds.), Developmental change: theories, models, and measurement (pp. 241--263). NY: Cambridge University Press.

[85]

Saxe, G. B., & Esmonde, I. (2005). Studying cognition in flux: A historical treatment of "fu" in the shifting structure of Oksapmin mathematics. Mind, Culture, & Activity, 12(3&4), 171--225.

[86]

Schön, D. A. (1981). Intuitive thinking? A metaphor underlying some ideas of educational reform (Working Paper 8). Unpublished manuscript, Division for Study and Research, M. I. T.

[87]

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

[88]

Schön, D. A. (1992). Designing as reflective conversation with the materials of a design situation. Research in Engineering Design, 3, 131--147.

[89]

Sfard, A. (2007). When the rules of discourse change, but nobody tells you - making sense of mathematics learning from a commognitive standpoint. Journal of Learning Sciences, 16(4), 567--615.

[90]

Shank, G. (1998). The extraordinary ordinary powers of abductive reasoning. Theory & Psychology, 8(6), 841--860

[91]

Smith, J. P., diSessa, A. A., & Roschelle, J. (1993). Misconceptions reconceived: a constructivist analysis of knowledge in transition. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(2), 115--163.

[92]

Stavy, R., & Tirosh, D. (1996). Intuitive rules in science and mathematics: The case of "more of A - more of B". International Journal of Science Education, 18(6), 653--668.

[93]

Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[94]

Thompson, P. W. (in press). In the absence of meaning... In K. Leatham (Ed.), Vital directions for mathematics education research. New York: Springer.

[95]

Trninic, D., & Abrahamson, D. (2012). Embodied artifacts and conceptual performances. In J. v. Aalst, K. Thompson, M. J. Jacobson & P. Reimann (Eds.), ICLS 2012 (Vol. 1: Full papers, pp. 283--290). Sydney: University of Sydney/ISLS.

[96]

Vagle, M. D. (2010). Re--framing Schön's call for a phenomenology of practice: a post-intentional approach. Reflective Practice, 11(3), 393-407.

[97]

von Glasersfeld, E. (1992). Aspects of radical constructivism and its educational recommendations (Working Group #4). ICME 7, Quebec.

[98]

White, T. (2008). Debugging an artifact, instrumenting a bug: Dialectics of instrumentation and design in technology-rich learning environments. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 13(1), 1--26.

[99]

Wilensky, U. (1997). What is normal anyway?: Therapy for epistemological anxiety. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 33(2), 171--202.

[100]

Wilensky, U., & Papert, S. (2010). Restructurations: reformulations of knowledge disciplines through new representational forms. In J. Clayson & I. Kallas (Eds.), Constructionism 2010: Paris.

[101]

Winograd, T., & Flores, R. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition: A new foundation for design. New York: Addison Wesley.

Digital Library

[102]

Xu, F., & Garcia, V. (2008). Intuitive statistics by 8-month-old infants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(13), 5012--5015.

Cited By

Torgersson OBaykal GEriksson E(2024)Learning from Learning - Design-Based Research Practices in Child-Computer InteractionProceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3628516.3655754(338-354)Online publication date: 17-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3628516.3655754
Alberto RShvarts ADrijvers PBakker A(2022)Action-based embodied design for mathematics learningInternational Journal of Child-Computer Interaction10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.10041932:COnline publication date: 1-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100419
Bullock ERoxburgh AMoyer‐Packenham PBektas EWebster JBullock K(2020)Connecting the dots: Understanding the interrelated impacts of type, quality and children's awareness of design features and the mathematics content learning goals in digital math games and related learning outcomesJournal of Computer Assisted Learning10.1111/jcal.1250837:2(557-586)Online publication date: 13-Dec-2020
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12508
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Toward a taxonomy of design genres: fostering mathematical insight via perception-based and action-based experiences
1. Human-centered computing
  1. Human computer interaction (HCI)
    1. Interaction devices
      1. Touch screens
  2. Interaction design
    1. Interaction design process and methods
      1. User centered design

Recommendations

The mathematical imagery trainer: from embodied interaction to conceptual learning
CHI '11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

We introduce an embodied-interaction instructional design, the Mathematical Imagery Trainer (MIT), for helping young students develop grounded understanding of proportional equivalence (e.g., 2/3 = 4/6). Taking advantage of the low-cost availability of ...
Toward an embodied-interaction design framework for mathematical concepts
IDC '11: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children

Recent, empirically supported theories of cognition indicate that human reasoning, including mathematical problem solving, is based in tacit spatial-temporal simulated action. Implications of these findings for the philosophy and design of instruction ...
The choreography of conceptual development in computer supported instructional environments
IDC '12: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children

A key affordance of computational learning environments is that they can be designed to instantiate specific rules and causal relationships between user inputs and perceptual output. In this sense, designers can attempt to engineer specific trajectories ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

IDC '13: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children

June 2013

687 pages

ISBN:9781450319188

DOI:10.1145/2485760

Co-chair:
Juan Pablo Hourcade
University of Iowa
,
Conference Chairs:
Nitin Sawhney
The New School
,
Emily Reardon
Sesame Workshop

Copyright © 2013 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

The New School: The New School
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Sesame Workshop: Sesame Workshop

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 24 June 2013

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

IDC '13

Sponsor:

The New School
ACM
Sesame Workshop

IDC '13: Interaction Design and Children 2013

June 24 - 27, 2013

New York, New York, USA

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 172 of 578 submissions, 30%

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

4
Total Citations
View Citations
243
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)16
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

Reflects downloads up to 11 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Torgersson OBaykal GEriksson E(2024)Learning from Learning - Design-Based Research Practices in Child-Computer InteractionProceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Interaction Design and Children Conference10.1145/3628516.3655754(338-354)Online publication date: 17-Jun-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3628516.3655754
Alberto RShvarts ADrijvers PBakker A(2022)Action-based embodied design for mathematics learningInternational Journal of Child-Computer Interaction10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.10041932:COnline publication date: 1-Jun-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100419
Bullock ERoxburgh AMoyer‐Packenham PBektas EWebster JBullock K(2020)Connecting the dots: Understanding the interrelated impacts of type, quality and children's awareness of design features and the mathematics content learning goals in digital math games and related learning outcomesJournal of Computer Assisted Learning10.1111/jcal.1250837:2(557-586)Online publication date: 13-Dec-2020
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12508
Dubovi ILevy SDagan E(2017)Situated Simulation-Based Learning Environment to Improve Proportional Reasoning in Nursing StudentsInternational Journal of Science and Mathematics Education10.1007/s10763-017-9842-216:8(1521-1539)Online publication date: 8-Aug-2017
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9842-2

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents