Scaling up a Tangible User Interface for Education

[1]  Lara M. Triona,et al.  Point and Click or Grab and Heft: Comparing the Influence of Physical and Virtual Instructional Materials on Elementary School Students' Ability to Design Experiments , 2003 .

[2]  S. Ainsworth.  DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. , 2006 .

[3]  Patrick Jermann,et al.  A Study of Spatial Reasoning Skills in Carpenters’ Training , 2011 .

[4]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Bricks: laying the foundations for graspable user interfaces , 1995, CHI '95.

[5]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Paper Interfaces for Learning Geometry , 2012, EC-TEL.

[6]  I. Sigel.  Developmental trends in the abstraction ability of children. , 1953, Child development.

[7]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Tangible bits: towards seamless interfaces between people, bits and atoms , 1997, CHI.

[8]  Jiajie Zhang,et al.  Representations in Distributed Cognitive Tasks , 1994, Cogn. Sci..

[9]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  The Benefits and Limitations of Distributing a Tangible Interface in a Classroom , 2013, CSCL.

[10]  Michael S. Horn,et al.  Tangible programming and informal science learning: making TUIs work for museums , 2008, IDC.

[11]  Leah Buechley,et al.  The LilyPad Arduino: using computational textiles to investigate engagement, aesthetics, and diversity in computer science education , 2008, CHI.

[12]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[13]  Jeffrey Huang,et al.  Ubicomp to the masses: a large-scale study of two tangible interfaces for download , 2010, UbiComp.

[14]  Paul Marshall,et al.  Editorial: the evolving field of tangible interaction for children: the challenge of empirical validation , 2012, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[15]  Steve Benford,et al.  The role of physical representations in solving number problems: A comparison of young children's use of physical and virtual materials , 2010, Comput. Educ..

[16]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  The tangible user interface and its evolution , 2008, CACM.

[17]  Patrick Jermann,et al.  Tangible interfaces: when physical-virtual coupling may be detrimental to learning , 2012, BCS HCI.

[18]  Shaaron Ainsworth,et al.  The functions of multiple representations , 1999, Comput. Educ..

[19]  Lara M. Triona,et al.  Hands on What? The Relative Effectiveness of Physical versus Virtual Materials in an Engineering Design Project by Middle School Children , 2007 .

[20]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  Digital manipulatives: new toys to think with , 1998, CHI.

[21]  Patrick Jermann,et al.  TinkerSheets: using paper forms to control and visualize tangible simulations , 2009, TEI.

[22]  Sara Price,et al.  A representation approach to conceptualizing tangible learning environments , 2008, TEI.

[23]  William Buxton,et al.  An empirical evaluation of graspable user interfaces: towards specialized, space-multiplexed input , 1997, CHI.

[24]  Pierre Dillenbourg,et al.  Tangible vs. virtual representations: when tangibles benefit the training of spatial skills , 2012, NordiCHI.

[25]  Linda Jarvin,et al.  When Theories Don't Add Up: Disentangling he Manipulatives Debate , 2007 .

[26]  Patrick Jermann,et al.  Task Performance vs. Learning Outcomes: A Study of a Tangible User Interface in the Classroom , 2010, EC-TEL.

[27]  Sara Price,et al.  The effect of representation location on interaction in a tangible learning environment , 2009, TEI.

[28]  Paul A. Beardsley,et al.  Tangible interaction + graphical interpretation: a new approach to 3D modeling , 2000, SIGGRAPH.

[29]  Hiroshi Ishii,et al.  Token+constraint systems for tangible interaction with digital information , 2005, TCHI.