APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
Mobile Game-Based Science Learning Jaime Sánchez, Alvaro Salinas and Mauricio Sáenz Department of Computer Science University of Chile Blanco Encalada 2120, Santiago, CHILE {jsanchez, msaenz}@dcc.uchile.cl,
[email protected] ABSTRACT
This study describes and analyzes the design, development, application and evaluation of a new pedagogical methodology based on interactive games for mobile devices (PDAs). The methodology is oriented to developing problem-solving skills in science classes for 8th graders, by including pre-classroom activities with the teacher, classroom activities, and a central activity using an interactive game for a mobile device. The core problem they had to solve through the game consisted in preserving and evolving different biological species from the animal kingdom, in an unknown and varying environment, by modifying some key factors for evolution of the species. The study was implemented in two main stages: a guided visit to a zoo observing animals directly, and a simulation game that takes place in the school during four weeks. Results show highly motivated learners with a fast adoption of mobile devices, fully engaged in a learning task without external control. Keywords Mobile learning, problem solving, strategy game, science learning 1. INTRODUCTION
Since the 90’s, but more intensively in the last few years, diverse research projects using mobile devices in the school have been developed. Results are promising, but the real value of these devices is still far from being achieved. Technology has meaning when making specific and distinctive contributions to improve education. This is especially important when there are technologies (like computers) available in the same contexts where the PDA is embedded. PDAs have been described as low cost devices, with data storage and processing capacities, mobile, ready-to-use, and so they can be easily integrated to other devices, such as desktop computers (Salinas & Sánchez, 2006). The growing impact of these devices, the increasing functions, data storage and processing capacities, opens new opportunities for integrating them in the school context. Several studies emphasize the contribution and limitations of using mobile devices in education (Williams et al., 2005). One of the most active lines of research analyzes the conditions and methodologies of PDAs in order to make a positive contribution to education and classroom learning (Savill-Smith & Kent, 2003). ICTs do not have much to contribute to education by themselves. The people, models, methodologies and strategies are those that determine changes, innovation and impact on learning. Also, no task or specific activity influence learning in a deep and final way, rather, it is the learning culture (with or without ICTs) that can impact it considerably (Sánchez, 2001). Salinas & Sánchez (2006, p. 257) argue that “the most important issue to explore constitutes the idea that the distinctive contribution of the PDAs is their portability and lightness of use. This offers a possibility of making the boundaries of the school, so jealously guarded by traditional education, more and more permeable to the environment. Learning and relevant knowledge it is not only limited to the space and time spent inside the classroom. PDAs can extend the school work to other contexts, as well as this is able of making knowledge transfer to contexts where that knowledge can be made significant”. Mobility of PDAs, Salinas y Sánchez continue, provides a more natural learning for learners, because it can “give back the body” to them. In traditional education children are seating for long hours on their chairs, and they can not talk without the authorization of the teacher. PDAs allow learning everywhere, when walking, in the street, in the bus. Computer classrooms of Chilean schools usually consist of laboratory spaces, apart from the regular classrooms. The use of PDAs does not require transferring users from their daily learning context to locate them in another place where computers are placed, becoming more ubiquitous for learning purposes. A critical in issue to explore is using PDAs to help learners in the decision making process in situ, to assist them providing essential processing information. Perhaps unexplored uses of PDAs, considering the capacity of mobile information processing, are related to assist unexpected problem solving, sudden situations and needs that may happen in everyday life, but requiring immediate data assistance, information and communication, here and now. This study explores the distinctive contribution of PDAs, under the hypothesis that their value rely on integrating them to a methodology that enhances mobility, technology integration into curriculum, problem-solving, and interactive games.
18
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
Mobility In 1991, Marc Weiser outlined the 21st century computer proposing that computer development should orient to ubiquitous computing. Weiser says that ubiquitous computing is a transparent tool for users. Thus they can concentrate on the task and not on the artifacts used. At the same time, tools have to be integrated into the context of use. Embodied virtuality “refers to the process of drawing computers out of their electronic shells” (Weiser, 1991, p. 68) to integrate them inside of natural contexts of use. Ubiquitous computing implies a diversity of devices with different characteristics (such as size). They are oriented to different tasks but work coordinately. “The real power of the concept comes not from any of these devices –it emerges from the interaction of all of them” (Weiser, 1991, p.72). He thinks that ubiquitous computing is oriented to an opposite direction of virtual reality. It does not imply to immerse users in a context generated by the computer, but rather an immersion of the computer in the user’s everyday life context. This idea from Weiser can be central to the development of user-centered applications. When designing and developing technology applications, ubiquitous computing integrates new dimensions that are fundamental to understand technology. Weiser’s perspective integrates the complex context of users and multiple dimensions involved in the process of new technology adoption. Diverse authors have explored the same perspective. Mattern, for example, defines ubiquitous computing as “the omnipresence of tiny, wirelessly interconnected computers that are embedded almost invisibly into just about any kind of everyday object” (Mattern, 2001, p. 1). A current trend in ubiquitous computing is to have access “anything, anytime, anywhere” to Internet. Current literature has begun to study behaviors of people who daily carry work or entertainment material (Chipcase & Persson, 2005) as a way of improving the design of mobile devices like PDAs and cell phones uses (Haddon, 2001). Therefore, the design of mobile devices from observing daily behaviors of end-users using them begins to create a real a new understanding in the construction of user-centered scenarios (Holtzblatt 2004, 2005; Kangas & Kinnunen, 2005). PDAs are devices that reasonably convey ubiquitous computing features. As Savill-Smith & Kent indicate, they are part of a new technology generation highlighted by mobility and connectivity; handheld computers are at the forefront of a new wave in the evolution of technology that involves very small computers and wireless connectivity delivering ‘anyone, any time, anywhere learning (Savill-Smith & Kent, 2003). Several authors have posed the question about the pedagogical potential of mobile devices (Brown, 2001; Csete et al., 2004; Facer et al., 2004; James et al., 2003; Pownell & Bailey, 2000, 2001; Williams et al., 2005; Wills, 2001). However, research in this field is recent and more full-field research studies on the impact of wireless communication networks are required (Tatar et al., 2003). Some experiences have shown that PDAs “are most often used as tools to aid in research, alternatives to paper-based tasks, group collaboration activities, and much more” (Curtis, et. al., 2002). A research experience using PDAs in collaborative learning has been developed by profiting from mobility features of the device, making learning a more natural process, and also promoting negotiation concepts in the classroom (Cortez et al., 2005). We have developed a game for PocketPC devices under Microsoft Windows Mobile 5.0 operating system. These devices are utilized by each learner for gaming both in and out of the classroom. Learners can fulfill certain stages of the game outside the school context, play outside the classroom, and off-classroom schedule. ICT integration into science curriculum Our methodology aims to facilitate the integration of mobile technology into the classroom. We have integrated specific curriculum content, designing activities for in and out of the classroom, involving teachers from the beginning of the project. ICT integration into curriculum is critical when using technology in education. However, it is far from being integrated in the practices of teachers, even in those more familiarized with technology. The process of incorporating ICTs in Chilean education began massively more than 10 years ago, through the Enlaces Network. This is the national program to integrate teachers and learners into the knowledge society. Numbers from the Enlaces Network on infrastructure, connectivity and teacher qualification are promising. Nevertheless, this just implies the first level of a higher process of ICTs integration into curriculum (Enlaces, 2005). Researchers have focused on understanding what ICT integration into curriculum is about (Dockstader, 1999; Swan et al., 2002), how to do it (Vázquez, 1997; Gross, 2000), and its consequences (Merrill et al., 1996). ICT integration consists in "making ICT entirely part of the curriculum as a part of a system, integrating them to educational principles and didactic for the learning process" (Sánchez, 2003, p.53). ICT must be integrated to relevant and legitimate educational knowledge, practices, and available resources in the school context. According to Sánchez, “when integrating ICTs we emphasize learning and how ICTs can assist, without losing sight that the focus is on learning and not ICTs” (Sánchez, 2003, p.52). There have been fewer advances in ICT integration into curriculum in Chilean schools, representing a barrier in reaching the main objectives of Enlaces (Sánchez, 2001).
19
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
Studies about ICT integration into curriculum have focused mainly on personal computers. The use of mobile devices, as PDAs, poses a new challenge in a scenario where learning is determined by processes such as ubiquity, mobility, collaboration, accessibility, and invisibility. Problem solving skills One of the main contributions of ICTs to education is the assistance to the development of high order cognitive skills, such as problem solving, communication skills, and information management. Polya describes heuristics such as methodology to solve problems, considering four key steps: Understanding the problem, designing a strategy, putting the strategy into practice, and checking the solution (Polya, 1965). Other authors highlight other dimensions of problem solving, but they in general aim to the same purpose. O’Neil (1999) defined problem-solving as consisting of three facets: content understanding, problem-solving strategies, and selfregulation. A good problem solver: (a) understands well the content (content knowledge), (b) has specific intellectual skills (problem-solving strategies), and (c) is able to plan the use resources and skills, and monitors her own progress toward the end goal of solving the problem (self-regulation) (O’Neil et al., 2004). Choi identified 6 steps in order to solve a problem: define the problem, identify solutions, define goals and establish approaches in order to evaluate alternatives, choose a course of action, establish criteria in order to evaluate when a course of action is successful, and determine when the results accomplish the conditions to solve the problem (Choi et al., 2000). When solving a problem, some aspects in the mind are activated in a metacognitive level. For this reason it is important learners to learn strategies about how to arrive to the metacognitive level and then solve the problem thoroughly. Developing interactive games One of the most common student practices when using ICT is to play computer games. However, the potential of the games in education has not been exploited yet. Games and education appear like separated spaces, even though they produce a high commitment and motivation in learners (Klopfer & Yoon, 2005). Diverse authors have analyzed the impact of the games on education. To some of them, games can promote higher order learning, such as increased meaningful dialogues among learners (McDonald & Hannafin, 2003). Other studies describe the effects of games on social skills (Pellegrini et al., 2004). Authors synthesize the effects of games on education to enhance learning through visualization, experimentation, and creativity of play (Amory et al., 1999; Betz, 1995), and often include problems that develop critical thinking defined by Huntington (1984) as the analysis and evaluation of information in order to determine logical steps that lead to concrete conclusions. Visualization, a key cognitive strategy, plays an important role in discovery and problem solving (Rieber, 1995). In this study, we designed a game that integrates simulation and strategy game modes. The game consists of maintaining and developing four biology classes (fish, amphibians, reptiles, and birds) with three species each one, manipulating key factors for preserving, developing, and evolving each species in a changing and unknown environment. The purpose of the game is to maintain in the long-run a balance of species in the environment by arriving to good levels of population and biodiversity. This research work describes and analyzes some results of the Biology Learning with Mobile Technology (ABTm, from the Spanish abbreviation) project. The goal of the project is to design, develop, apply, and evaluate a new pedagogical methodology based on interactive games for mobile devices (PDA). The software is oriented to developing problemsolving skills in science classes for 8th graders. The pedagogical methodology includes pre-classroom teacher activities, classroom activities, and a central activity using an interactive game for mobile devices. The project was developed in two main stages: A guided visit to a zoo, which works as a quiz game, and a simulation game that takes place in the school during four weeks. Learners participated in the game in teams. The core problem that they had to solve through the game consisted in preserving and evolving different species from the animal kingdom in an unknown and varying environment, by modifying some key factors for the evolution of species. In the first stage, learners analyzed species directly, identifying some variables affecting the adaptation of each species to the environment. In the second stage (simulation and strategy game), learners controlled and managed the development and preservation of species by altering some variables. 2. DESIGN
The study consisted of two main stages. In the first stage, learners visit a zoo and carry out a guided visit embedded in a PDA. This guided visit has a quiz format. The second stage is more extensive and implies learners to develop a group of biology species in an environment by manipulating key variables. At the ZOO
20
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
BuinZoo is a quiz game embedded in a PDA representing a real zoo placed in the central region of Chile. Learners use this application when visiting the zoo providing a guided visit by representing different places of the zoo and the position of cages. The software asks questions and conveys information to assist learners in their answers. Information is contained in a zoo map with zones and cages that have to be visited and a section of resources, containing text and images about the observed animals available for children usage. The interaction with the quiz is simple. They are 3 interfaces: questions, map, and resources. The information contained in the map and resources section is modified according to the question. The map provides information that helps learners to locate the cages available for visit. The resources section provides information that learners could not obtain in the direct observation of animals (details about their physiology, processes of change, information of the original habitat, etc.) (See Figure 1).
Figure 1. Interfaces of the BuinZoo PDA Application The quiz is based on the idea that each learner should answer 11 questions; each one gives 100 points if the learner answers correctly in the first try. To avoid random answers or without enough analysis, the software cut off 20 points for each wrong answer. In a group of four learners, each learner has different questions (content and sequence). When concluding the visit to the zoo, learners analyze and discuss in group the main conclusions obtained during the visit, exposing them to the teachers and classmates. The evolution game The game is designed in such a way that each group of four learners should maintain and develop three species of 4 classes (fish, amphibians, reptiles and birds), manipulating key variables for the preservation and development of each species in a changing and unknown environment. The purpose of the game is to attain a balanced environment. The complexity of the problem is growing. The groups of learners start with a small number of individuals of a species considering a series of well-known variables but with unknown effects (feeding, mobility, reproduction). The evolution of the species can happen in some preset directions. Each class has a basic species that could evolve in other species of the same class. Thus, for instance, he basic unit of the fish is the lamprey, that could evolve in swordfish or shark. This basic unit could also evolve, under certain conditions, in a species of different class. The triton, basic unit of amphibians, could evolve to frog, salamander, or to the basic unit of reptile. The process continues until the evolution in the four classes of animals is completed (see Figure 2).
21
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
Figure 2. The Evolution of
Species
In order to colonize diverse environment, learners should discover the logic of the evolution behind the game. This includes factors and conditions under which a species can develop and colonize new spaces. The environment permits the development of a species up to a limit. When a species reaches to a limit, the population cannot increase (the food is insufficient, the individuals diminish). The option left to the individuals of such species is to explore new environments with different characteristics than those of the original environment. This change of environment demands to the species to evolve in order to adapt to the new environment. Colonizing those new spaces with a certain number of individuals may lead to a qualitative change to a new species. Game description Part of the game consists of a single-player interaction. Each player utilizes a PocketPC device and has to achieve the highest biological development of an assigned species, within a week of interaction. The following week, the learner exchanges species with a partner of his or her team that has developed another species over the last week. The learner receives the species in the evolution level and development stage that was left by the partner. The actions that players can carry out in the different ecological environments are the following (see Figure 3):
Selecting. They could select one or several groups of the species of the player.
Attacking. The player could decide to attack other species which are commanded by the software. He or she could attack in order to feed their units, or to dominate new territories. The species managed by the PDA possess intelligence in such a way that under a certain range, they could decide to attack the player.
Reproducing. There are nests for the species where they can be reproduced. The player could choose if new creatures are added to previous groups or to create new groups of interaction.
Feeding. The user has to feed the individuals, otherwise they will die. There are specific foods for the species. It is possible to feed the species by attacking other species.
Evolving. There are some zones inside the map in which the user should maintain, during a certain time, the basic species to be able to evolve them.
Beside to the actions controlled by the user, there are other actions controlled by the game:
Predation. They are predators that correspond to the same species with which the user could play. These are patrolling and have ranges of vision to identify their prey. If it is necessary, predators can call others in order to be effective in their hunt. When the predator attacks, the units of the user also attack and feed.
Mortality. All the species have associates rates of mortality.
22
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
Figure 3. Actions into the game Interaction with the game can be performed through three main interfaces: Main, menu, and game. Main means users enter the species they want to play with (fish, amphibian, reptile, bird). Once a species is selected, the player enters to the corresponding environment in the game interface. This interface is divided in two parts: top and bottom. The top part corresponds to the map of the environment and associated elements. The bottom part provides information about elements and current events, and supplies a mini-map to facilitate the navigation, some buttons to enter to the menu, tags for evolution zones, and play/pause buttons. The menu interface offer possibilities to return, record or leave the game (see Figure 4).
Figure 4. Game Interface 3. METHODOLOGY
Five schools participated in the project. Some of them considered a single class and others two or three classes. In total, there were 8 classes, with 323 learners and 5 teachers participating in the project. All schools were located in the city of Santiago and they were intentionally selected. We were interested in working with schools placed in poor communities with different results in the national science test to control the effect of "school results" in our research. In Chile, the results of this test are strongly correlated with the social and economical level of learners. For this reason, selected schools having a score over the average, at the same time, have a social and economical level slightly higher to those have lower score. The development of the ABTm project was supported by usability evaluations to identify the relationship between the users and the game. This initial testing allows obtaining a product adapted to end-users. Usability was evaluated by using heuristic evaluation and cognitive walkthrough. The project also included the evaluation of process and final results. We are interested in evaluating the relationship between the pedagogical methodology and the learning of science, the development of problem solving skills, the teaching practices and the learner’s activities in the classroom. We carried out direct observation of learning activities included in the methodology, and we planned to implement in depth interviews and surveys to teachers and learners, and also apply a problem solving test to the students.
23
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
Usability Testing
Heuristic evaluation Participants This testing was carried out with two experts in interfaces and usability ages between 20 and 25 years old, assisted by a member of the software development team. Instrument Heuristic evaluation was based on systematic inspections of the interface. We used heuristic evaluation questionnaires built from Schneiderman golden rules (Schneiderman, 2004) and Nielsen usability heuristics (Nielsen, 1994). The resulting test consists in 12 heuristics, embracing a total of 25 items. These items are statements on which experts have to indicate their appreciation in a 5 points scale from strongly agree to strongly disagree. The heuristics are: (I) Visibility of system status, (II) Match between the system and the real world, (III) User control and freedom, (IV) Consistency and standards, (V) Error prevention, (VI) Recognition rather than recall, (VII) Flexibility and efficiency of use, (VIII) Aesthetic and minimalist design, (IX) Help users to recognize, diagnose, and recover from errors, (X) Help and documentation, (XI) Content design, and (XII) Velocity and media. Procedure The evaluation was carried out by each expert during a session of 30 minutes by using a first prototype. During the session the software is shown to the experts. Then, they explore the software freely for 30 minutes. After this, they answered the Heuristic Evaluation questionnaire. Cognitive walkthrough
This usability evaluation consisted in some experts assuming the role of the end-user, developing tasks with an early prototype of the game. They played as if the software was finished and solved tasks in the role of a typical user. Each step carried out by the expert was monitored, looking for those situations in which the interface blocked and prevented him to finish their task or to follow procedures unnecessarily complex. This information allowed us to identify critical aspects to improve in the interface. Participants The test was carried out by the same two experts in interfaces and usability that participated in the heuristic test. Instrument A series of common tasks in the game was selected, also relevant to developers. A set of questions was created that was answered after carrying out each task (successful or unsuccessful) (see tables 2 and 3). Tasks T1
Enter the application
T2
Select an owned shoal
T3
Attack an enemy shoal
T4
Put eggs in a nest
T5
Create a new shoal
T6
Increase the number of fishes in a shoal
T7
Evolve lampreys
Table 2. Tasks fulfilled by expert users Questions P1
Did you complete the task?
P2
Did you have any problems fulfilling the task?
P3
It was simple or complicated to fulfill the task? Why?
P4
If you did not fulfill the task, where in the action sequence did you fail? How?
P5
Finally, what suggestions can you make to improve the success in completing the mentioned task?
Table 3. Associated questions to the tasks
24
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
Procedure The evaluation was carried out in a session of 45 minutes with each expert. During the first 30 minutes the experts carried out some tasks with the software and during the following 15 minutes they answered questions related to the activity. In the first part of the test, experts received a list of activities to complete and the sequence of steps to complete each task. Tasks list:
Enter to the application: o
Fill in “user” fields
o
Click on "enter"
Select an owned shoal: o
Click on an owned shoal (green bar)
Attack an enemy shoal: o
Select an owned shoal
o
Click on an enemy shoal (red bar)
Put eggs in a nest: o
Select an owned shoal
o
Click on a nest located in the zone corresponding to the selected type of fish (this information can be found in the information bar)
Create a new shoal o
Put eggs in a nest
o
Unselect everything (making a drag& drop movement over an empty space in the environment)
o
Click on the nest when the eggs are mature (a bar over the nest indicates it)
Increase the number of fishes in a shoal o
Put eggs in a nest
o
Select an owned shoal
o
Click in the nest when the eggs are mature (a bar on the nest indicates it)
Evolve lampreys o
Select owned lampreys
o
Click on in a zone corresponding to another type of fish (this information can be found in information bar)
o
Wait the required time for evolution (a bar under the fish indicates it)
This evaluation was implemented by using a complete yet preliminary software prototype. In-Field Observation
In field observation is a qualitative research technique. In this research we implemented a non-participant observation: one researcher joined the learners during their work and observed some of them during their journey at the zoo. During observation, the researcher took some field notes. In each session, we carefully observed the interaction between learners and their PDA. We were particularly interested in analyzing how and when learners were interacting between them; whether they established moments for meaning negotiation of the information required to carry out the task; how and why they used the PDA; and how they used different information sources available during the game. We registered the events by using video, photography and audio. Considering that learners visited the different places in the zoo individually or in couples, it was unfeasible to observe all of them. Procedure
Zoo visits were organized one class at a time. Classes were guided by one or two teachers. At the activity site, two or three members of the project provide them information about the project goals, visits that they should make, PDA operation and care, and about behavior norms during the visit. After that, we provide a PDA to each learner.
25
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
During the visit, learners had to solve a problem in groups, observe animals, get available information in the panels of each cage, analyze available information in the PDA, and interact with teachers and employees of the zoo. The problem to solve was to identify and describe the evolutionary adaptations of animals observed during the visit. Each group organized on their own to solve the problem. Learners had 45 minutes to carry out this task. Upon concluding the visit, the groups met to discuss the conclusions based on observations made by each member. This activity was designed in such way that each member has a piece of information in order to solve the whole problem. They needed to share information to arrive to conclusions. After this, each group in a plenary meeting shared conclusions and opinions about the experience with the rest of the class. This information was extremely useful for the research team because it allowed to understand how much and how learners worked, and to receive opinions about the PDA and the methodology used. 4. RESULTS Usability test
Experts highly accepted the software. On the average, the game obtained an appreciation score of 3.6 out of 5 (see figure 5). From the 11 heuristics evaluated by the experts, 8 obtained scores situated in the average or above the average score. Only 3 heuristics were located below the average score. The heuristics that presented the lowest score in the evaluation were error prevention, recognition, diagnosis and recovery from errors and help and documentation during the game. Results above the average were: match between the system and the real world, user control and freedom, recognition rather than recall, aesthetics and minimalist design, and velocity and media. One of the most important reasons that explain the low score obtained in the three heuristics mentioned is the early implementation of this test during software design and development cycle. However, the highest scores obtained correspond to the heuristics that are considered a standard for videogames (and that learners are used to). For instance, during software development, efforts have been made to improve game performance to ensure load rates that keep the attention of learners in the game. Graphic design efforts have also been made so that learners can interact with a graphical interface that resembles those from commercial videogames.
Figure 5. Heuristic Evaluation
The results of these testing allowed correcting bugs and improving the interface design of the application, such as colors, icons and characters. In cognitive walkthrough, experts could complete all the tasks without relevant difficulties. In the case of the first task a special situation took place: a password was requested in order to enter to the game, but the field was not available. The first expert proceeded to denote the lack of this field when answering the questions, while the second expert considered the question not applicable and did not answer it. The experts detected some bugs that were later eliminated; they suggested improving the feedback provided by each action, and correcting some errors. At that time the feedback provided by the game was very complex, and in certain actions even did not exist. In field observation: Learners behavior
26
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
At this moment the project has culminated the visit to the zoo. During the visit to the zoo we mainly carried out observation of learners’ practices when using the game. In the beginning of the visit a member of the research team presented them general instructions about the objectives of the activity, the methodology used, and general information about the use of the PDA, considering that many learners had never manipulated a PocketPC.
Figure 6. Learners discussing about information provided by the PDA In general, we appreciated that learners had an enormous facility to use the PDA. The general instructions presented in the beginning of the activity were easily understood. When learners had a problem, they could ask for help to members of the research team, their peers, or can explore and quickly solve it (see Figure 6). We believe that the facility of use is the result of the design of the game interface and the familiarity learners had with digital technology devices. Many of them have computers at home and all of them have access to computers and Internet in the school. Cellular phones are very accessible among youngster and they are familiar with quiz activities from contest through cellular organized for commercial companies. All of this permitted learners to concentrate in non frequent task and operation problems.
Figure 7. Learners interacting with the PDA and with the information of panels in the zoo During the visit in the zoo, learners worked individually or in pairs. Frequently, they made comments to their peers about the performance in the game, the results obtained and some observations (see Figure 6). In many cases we observed that learners cooperated to each other by providing information about where to find certain animals or to solve doubts about questions in the quiz. This collaboration took place even between learners from different groups that were contending to each other to win the game. In several cases we observed learners in front of a cage, talking about the information gathered and analyzing alternatives of possible answers. As a participant learner said: "the questions that I did not know well, I asked who could help me". The game did not intend collaboration between learners during the visit to the cages. Collaboration was thought for the end of the activity, when learners had to discuss the conclusions. But collaboration emerged spontaneously in the practice of the learners. In order to answer the questions presented by the PDA, learners had different sources of information: the direct observation of animals, the explanatory panels in front of each cage, the information provided by the game in the section "resources," and the teachers and employees of the zoo. Learners analyzed different sources of information available.
27
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
According to their reports at the end of the activity, the information more useful was provided by the PDA, then the panels in each cage, and finally the direct observation of the animals (see Figure 7). An issue that surprised us was the commitment and behaviors of learners during the task. Before starting the visit the research team discussed about how to face with some learners that could misbehave in the zoo and thus putting on risk the PDA, the results of the project, and future visits to the zoo. For this reason, we ask for some adults to join learners during the visit. Some of them were located in key zones to have a certain control over most parts of the zoo, while others were moving from one place to another. All these precautions were useless. We were surprised because all learners faced it with enormous enthusiasm and seriousness the tasks, making the adult control unnecessary. We did not observe any learners infringing the rules. All classes had a similar behavior, in spite of the fact that the schools involved in the study have important differences in their learning results in science and in the social and economical background of learners. This could be explained because the methodology used caused enough attention and commitment with the assigned task. Upon concluding the experience, learners highly appreciated to be involved in an activity outside the current learning context supported by attractive technology such as the PDAs. They mentioned that the activity was "interesting" and "amusing". Some pointed that the PDA was somehow delicate imposing restrictions such as running from a place to another. Finally, teachers valued the possibilities of having direct contact with animals and the interesting learning experience supported by mobile technology. 5.
DISCUSSION
An important characteristic of our focal point in the ABTm project was that we were not centered on technology, but rather in its integration into curriculum. This implied an effort from the beginning of the project to integrate pedagogical elements to the design of games. This task was not trivial because forced to work together the software development and the pedagogical design teams. They had different ways of thinking and priorities. In order to solve this issue, we have always to attempt to pursue the objective of the project, that is, to develop a methodology for learning by playing games with mobile technology. We have planned to evaluate the process of software design and the application of the methodology with the learners in different times. These evaluations have been fundamental in order to adjust the intermediate products of the project and to understand some key factors to explain final results. In our perspective, the visit to the zoo showed that a playful learning activity can commit learners to the task, without external control. Motivation arose spontaneously during learning. The factors that could explain the commitment of learners to the task was the fact of being involved in learning experiences outside the current context, and the use of a mobile technology with a pedagogical methodology. In this experience teachers and the research team have only prepared conditions for learning, but the whole process have been developed by learners with the assistance of the PDA. We also observed that during the visit emergent behaviors appeared. Many game contexts tend to generate competitive behaviors between players. In our game design, learners had to compete between groups to obtain higher scores and they could choose to work alone or in group during the visit to the zoo. However, in our experience competition was supplemented by spontaneous collaboration between learners of different groups. Collaboration and competition are not always incompatible concepts. If we could put games in a continuum whose poles are collaboration and competition, our game is located in the middle because in different moments both elements mix in themselves. Learners took decisions and got along in the use of technology because they felt comfortable with digital technologies. Even if they did not know a specific device, they could transfer knowledge and experience obtained in the use of other technologies. In the case of PDAs, they transferred knowledge from their experience with computers and cellular phones. The process of adopting new technologies in education has a little curve of learning while there is more similarity with other available technologies in the everyday life of learners. 6. FUTURE WORK
ABTm project is currently being applied in five Chilean schools. In this work we have presented some preliminary results and discussion of usability evaluation and observation of learners´ practices in the initial phase of the game. In the near future, other methodologies for data gathering will be used to analyze further learning variables involved in the project. In next months learners will interact fully with the evolution game. In addition, we continue evaluating the experience and analyzing results in science learning and problem solving skills. This will be critical for the goals of our project. In any case, we started with two important factors in our favor: the capacity of the learners to use a mobile technology and the motivation and commitment with the learning task. We envision proposing alternatives ways of learning with mobile technologies.
28
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This project has been partially funded by the Microsoft Alliance for Education Program. REFERENCES
Amory, A., Naicker, K., Vincent, J., Adams, C. (1999). The Use of Computer Games as an Educational Tool: Identification of Appropriate Game Types and Game Elements. British Journal of Educational Technology, v30 n4 p311-21, Oct 1999 Betz, J. A. (1995). Computer games: Increases learning in an interactive multidisciplinary environment. Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 24 195–205. Cited by Amory, A. Naicker, K., Vincent, J. Adams, C. (1999). The Use of Computer Games as an Educational Tool: Identification of Appropriate Game Types and Game Elements. British Journal of Educational Technology, v30 n4 p311-21 Oct 1999 Brown, M. (2001). Handhelds in the classroom. Education World. URL http://www.educationworld.com/a_tech/tech083.shtml, Accessed 17 March 2006. Chipchase, J., Persson, P. (2005). What, how and why people carry what they do. Proceedings of the Designing for User Experience Conference, DUX05, URL: http://www.dux2005.org, Accessed 17 March 2006. Choi, J., Cristopher, D., Hsu, P., Kim, H., McGriff, S. (2000). A problem solving assessment instrument. College of education, The Pennsylvania State University, PA. Cortez, C., Nussbaum, M., López, X., Rodríguez, P., Santelices, R., Rosasw, R., Marianovz, V. (2005). Teachers’ support with ad-hoc collaborative Networks. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 21, pp. 171–180 Csete, J., Wong, Y., Vogel, D. (2004). Mobile devices in and out the classroom. In Cantoni, L. & McLoughlin (Eds.). Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2004 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, pp. 4729-4736. Curtis, M., Luchini, K., Bobrowsky, W., Quintana, C., Soloway, E. (2002). Handheld use in K-12. A descriptive account. Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE’02) Dockstader, J. (1999). Teachers of the 21scentury know the what, why, and how of technology integration. T.H.E. Journal, pp. 73-74., January. Enlaces (2005). Estadísticas nacionales Enlaces 2005. Santiago de Chile: Ministerio de Educación. Facer, K., Joiner, R., Stanton, D., Reid, J., Hull, R., Kirk, D. (2004). Savannah: mobile gaming and learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 20, pp. 399-409, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Gross, B. (2000). El ordenador invisible, hacia la apropiación del ordenador en la enseñanza. Barcelona: Ed. Gedisa. Haddon, L. (2001). Domestication and Mobile Telephony. Paper presented at the conference Machines that Become Us Rutgers University, New Jersey, US, 18th-19th April 2001. URL: Http://members.aol.com/leshaddon/Domestication.html, Accessed 17 March 2006. Holtzblatt, K. (2004). Designing mobile applications with customer data: techniques that work for mobile platforms. URL: www.incent.com/community/design_corner/04_0526.html. Holtzblatt, K. (2005). Designing for the mobile device: Experiences, challenges, and methods. Communications of the ACM 48, 7 (July 2005), pp. 33-35. Accessed March 17, 2006. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/23/b8/e4.pdf, Huntington, F. (1984). Thinking is an adventure InCider October 33–36. Cited in Amory, A. Naicker, K., Vincent, J. Adams, C. (1999). The Use of Computer Games as an Educational Tool: Identification of Appropriate Game Types and Game Elements. British Journal of Educational Technology, v30 n4 p311-21 Oct 1999 James, J., Beaton, B., Csete, J., Vodel, D. (2003). Mobile educational games. In D. Lassner, C. McNaught (Eds.) Proceedings of ED-MEDIA 2003 World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications, pp. 801-802. Kangas, E., Kinnunen, T. (2005). Applying user/centered design to mobile application development. Communications of the ACM 48, 7 (July 2005), pp. 55-59. Klopfer, E. and Yoon, S. (2005). Developing Games and Simulations for Today and Tomorrow’s Tech Savvy Youth TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, May/Jun2005, Vol. 49 Issue 3, pp. 33-41 Mattern, F. (2001). The vision and technical foundations of ubiquitous computing. UPGRADE vol II, N° 5, (October 2001) pp. 1-4. McDonald, K, K., Hannafin, R.D. (2003). Using web-based computer games to meet the demands of today's high stakes testing: A mixed method inquiry. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(4], pp. 459-472. Merrill, P., Hammons, K., Vincent, B., Reynolds, P., Cristiansen, L., Tolman, M. (1996) (Third Edition). Computers in Education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability engineering. New York: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers; 1st edition, p. 362 O’Neil, H., Chuang, S., Chung, G. (2004). Issues in the Computer-Based Assessment of Collaborative Problem Solving. CSE Report 620. Center for the Study of Evaluation National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. University of California, Los Angeles. O’Neil, H. F. (1999). Perspectives on computer-based performance problem solving. Computers in Human Behavior, 15, pp. 225-268. Cited by O’Neil, H. Chuang, S. and Chung, G. (2004). Issues in the Computer-Based Assessment of
29
APRU DLI 2006
1A-4
Collaborative Problem Solving. CSE Report 620. Center for the Study of Evaluation National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing. University of California, Los Angeles. Pellegrini, A., Blatchford, P., Kato, K., Baines, E. (2004). A Short-term Longitudinal Study of Children's Playground Games in Primary School: Implications for Adjustment to School and Social Adjustment in the USA and the UK. Social Development; Feb2004, Vol. 13 Issue 1, pp. 107 – 123. Polya, G. (1965). “Cómo plantear y resolver problemas”. México: Trillas Pownell, D., Bailey, G. (2000). Handheld computing for educational leaders: A tool for organizing or empowerment. Leading & Learning with technology, May, pp. 1-8. Pownell, D., Bailey, G. (2001). Getting a handle on handhelds.Electronicschool.com URL: www.electronicschool/2001/06/0601handhelds.html Rieber, L. P. (1995). A historical review of visualisation in human cognition Educational Technology, Research and Development 43 45–56. Cited by Amory, A. Naicker, K., Vincent, J. Adams, C. (1999). The Use of Computer Games as an Educational Tool: Identification of Appropriate Game Types and Game Elements. British Journal of Educational Technology, v30 n4 p311-21 Oct 1999 Salinas, A., Sánchez, J. (2005). Uso de PDAs en el Entorno Escolar. En Sánchez, J. (editor). Nuevas Ideas en Informática Educativa, pp. 32-40. Santiago de Chile: Lom Ediciones S.A. Salinas, A., Sánchez, J. (2006). PDAs and Ubiquitous Computing in the School. Human Centered Technology Workshop 2006. Pori, Finland, June 11-13, 2006, pp. 249-258 Sánchez, J. (2001). Aprendizaje visible, tecnología invisible. Dolmen, Santiago de Chile. Sánchez, J. (2003). Integración curricular de TICs. Conceptos y modelos. Revista Enfoques Educacionales, Vol. 5, N° 1, pp. 51-65 Savill-Smith, C., Kent, P. (2003). The use of palmtop computers for learning. A review of the literature. Learning and skills development agency, UK. Shneiderman, B., Plaisant, C. (2004). Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction. New York: Addison Wesley, pp. 652 Swan, K., Holmes, A., Vargas, J. (2002). Situated Professional Development and Technology Integration: The Capital Area Technology and Inquiry in Education (CATIE) Mentoring Program. JI. Of Technology and Teacher Education 10 (2), pp. 169 – 190. Tatar, D., Roschelle, J., Vahey, P., Penuel, W. R. (2003). Handhelds Go To School: Lessons Learned. IEEE Computer, 36(9), pp. 30-37. Vásquez, G., Martínez, M. (1997). Límites y posibilidades actuales de las nuevas tecnologías. En Barroso, M. (comp.). Tecnología y formación permanente (pp. 53-1 08). La laguna: Universidad de La Laguna. Weiser, M. (1991). The Computer for the 21st Century. Scientific America, vol. 265, n° 9, september 1991 pp. 66-75. Williams, M., Jones, O., Fleuriot, C., Wood, L. (2005). Children and emerging wireless technologies: Investigating the potential for spatial practice. Proceedings of ACM CHI, April 2-7 2005, Portland, Oregon, USA, ACM Press, pp. 819-828. Wills, S. (2001). Wireless, mobile & handheld: Where are our teachers and students going with their computers? The power of 3. EDUCAUSE in Australia 2001: The power of 3., http://www.gu.edu.au/conference/educause2001/conten2a.html Accessed December 10, 2003.
30
