Embedded figures in stories (EFiS): A method to observe preschoolers' interactions with spatial manipulatives

Abstract Technologies that aim to support preschool children’s learning are emerging rapidly in the industry. However, the developmental needs and abilities of children under 4 years old have been insufficiently taken into account in the early stages of technology design. This paper addresses this gap in the child–computer interaction field by exploring how children between the ages of 2 and 4 years old interact with spatial manipulatives that facilitate their early spatial learning. To this end, we developed Embedded Figures in Stories (EFiS) method to elicit age specific knowledge about preschoolers’ spatial skills (i.e., mental rotation) and inform child-tangible interaction (CTI) design. To develop EFiS method, we modified intervention techniques for early spatial learning found in cognitive developmental studies and incorporated these into design methods used in CTI. In this paper, we first present an argument for why CTI design with and for preschoolers is important for early spatial learning. Second, we describe our method and how we applied it in a case study. Then, we discuss the potential opportunities and limitations of using the EFiS method, along with design guidelines for future use of the method. This study mainly contributes to design methods to extract age specific knowledge about very young children’s spatial thinking skills, which lay a basis for further STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics) achievements.

[1]  Eva Eriksson,et al.  The Role Definition Matrix: Creating a Shared Understanding of Children's Participation in the Design Process , 2016, IDC.

[2]  Denton J. Snider,et al.  The Psychology of Froebel's Play-Gifts , 2010 .

[3]  J. Huttenlocher,et al.  Early puzzle play: a predictor of preschoolers' spatial transformation skill. , 2012, Developmental psychology.

[4]  Juan Pablo Hourcade,et al.  Child-Computer Interaction SIG: New Challenges and Opportunities , 2016, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[5]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Ambient wood: designing new forms of digital augmentation for learning outdoors , 2004, IDC '04.

[6]  Juanita V. Copley,et al.  The Development of Spatial Skills Through Interventions Involving Block Building Activities , 2008 .

[7]  H. A. Witkin A Manual for the embedded figures tests , 1971 .

[8]  Kelly Dickerson,et al.  They can interact, but can they learn? Toddlers' transfer learning from touchscreens and television. , 2015, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[9]  Paul Marshall,et al.  Do tangible interfaces enhance learning? , 2007, TEI.

[10]  Alissa Nicole Antle,et al.  Knowledge gaps in hands-on tangible interaction research , 2012, ICMI '12.

[11]  Martin Ludvigsen,et al.  Mission from Mars: a method for exploring user requirements for children in a narrative space , 2005, IDC '05.

[12]  David H. Uttal,et al.  Exploring and Enhancing Spatial Thinking , 2013 .

[13]  Bongshin Lee,et al.  Co-Designing with Preschoolers Using Fictional Inquiry and Comicboarding , 2017, CHI.

[14]  Asim Evren Yantaç,et al.  A review on complementary natures of tangible user interfaces (TUIs) and early spatial learning , 2018, Int. J. Child Comput. Interact..

[15]  N. Newcombe,et al.  Block Talk: Spatial Language During Block Play , 2011 .

[16]  Wolmet Barendregt,et al.  Exploring the potential of the drawing intervention method for design and evaluation by young children , 2013, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[17]  Yvonne Rogers,et al.  Kids as informants: telling us what we didn't know or confirming what we knew already? , 1998 .

[18]  Stacy B. Ehrlich,et al.  The importance of gesture in children's spatial reasoning. , 2006, Developmental psychology.

[19]  Allison Druin,et al.  How Young Can Our Technology Design Partners Be , 2002 .

[20]  Eva Cerezo,et al.  NIKVision: Developing a Tangible Application for and with Children , 2013, J. Univers. Comput. Sci..

[21]  Allison Druin,et al.  Mixing ideas: a new technique for working with young children as design partners , 2004, IDC '04.

[22]  Jorge Maya,et al.  DESIGN FOR INFANTS IS NOT DESIGN FOR CHILDREN: ON THE QUEST OF TOOLS TO MODEL A METHOD TO DESIGN FOR INFANTS , 2015 .

[23]  Janet C. Read,et al.  Bluebells: a design method for child-centred product development , 2006, NordiCHI '06.

[24]  Roberta Michnick Golinkoff,et al.  Finding the missing piece: Blocks, puzzles, and shapes fuel school readiness , 2014, Trends in Neuroscience and Education.

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

[26]  Joost Elffers,et al.  Tangram: The Ancient Chinese Shapes Game , 1977 .

[27]  Alissa Nicole Antle,et al.  The CTI framework: informing the design of tangible systems for children , 2007, TEI.

[28]  Olivia N. Saracho,et al.  Validation of Two Cognitive Measures to Assess Field-Dependence/Independence , 1986, Perceptual and motor skills.