[GEOMANIAC] Learning has reached a whole new level. Researchers have criticized the current form of learning because of the fact that it does not offer a level of interaction that makes education more engaging and collaborative. This has spurred further research that could find new ways of improving the learning experience from an early age. This report aims at providing a snapshot of what could be done to create an educational environment that makes use of gamification and Tangible User Interfaces to deliver an intuitive, challenging, collaborative and more importantly educative learning environment for children from the age of 8 to 10.Furthermore, it will provide the basis for future works in designing educational games based on TUI by evaluating the current system and changes that can be done to improve it. Also, insights of what methods of evaluation for such systems to be used will be explained. 2012/13 Novel Interaction CMT3321 GROUP B: GEOMANIACSLECTURER : DR PRISCILLA RAMSAMY Bugembe Dennis M00424054
Transcript
[geomaniac]
Learning has reached a whole new level. Researchers have criticized the current form of learning
because of the fact that it does not offer a level of interaction that makes education more engaging
and collaborative. This has spurred further research that could find new ways of improving the
learning experience from an early age. This report aims at providing a snapshot of what could be done
to create an educational environment that makes use of gamification and Tangible User Interfaces to
deliver an intuitive, challenging, collaborative and more importantly educative learning environment
for children from the age of 8 to 10.Furthermore, it will provide the basis for future works in designing
educational games based on TUI by evaluating the current system and changes that can be done to
improve it. Also, insights of what methods of evaluation for such systems to be used will be explained.
2012/13
Novel Interaction CMT3321 GROUP B:
GEOMANIACSLECTURER: DR PRISCILLA
RAMSAMY
Bugembe Dennis M00424054
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................3GAMING CONCEPT (IDEA) OVERVIEW.........................................................................3GAMING CONCEPT IN DETAIL WITH JUSTIFICATION....................................................4GAME PLAY................................................................................................................. 6
GAME FEATURES......................................................................................................10EVALUATION..........................................................................................................11
Technology has been the driving force of many fields in the world. Its ability to simplify processes and help in creating efficiencies in places where it was not possible before is now more evident than ever. In the design world, technology has grown rapidly from the early Command Line Interfaces to the widely acclaimed Graphical User Interfaces to recent and novel ones more specifically Tangible User Interfaces.
Tangible User Interface (TUI) as Defined by Ulmer and Ishii (2001, pp.2) is an interface that makes use of physical objects to represent digital information by coupling the physical objects with the digital information they manipulate. The scope of this report is to elaborate and make clear how the use of Tangible User Interfaces in designing learning systems for children.
In the context of this report and its scope of designing educational systems for children, it is imperative to understand the clear differences between Tangible User Interfaces and Graphical User Interfaces. The main difference between these two is how they are applied to manipulate the digital information. While Graphical User Interfaces mainly make use of peripherals such as mice, keyboards and cameras to manipulate digital information, Tangible User Interfaces involves making use of direct coupling of physical objects with the digital information they represent to offer a deeper level of manipulation (Cheng, et al., 2011)
This report aims to inform the reader on how Tangible User Interfaces can be successfully used in designing an educational game for children which is engaging, educational, fun, intuitive and also collaborative. Contents of the report include the design concept of the educational game, how the above criteria were included in building the game, the evaluation methods used to evaluate the game and more importantly the application of Tangible User Interface technologies to make the game a reality.
3 | P a g e
GAMING CONCEPT (IDEA) OVERVIEW
The idea is for a kid 8-10 years old to learn geography by taking a trip to Africa. The starting point of the journey is Mauritius and the player will be required to select and digitally travel to one of three regions on the continent which include and are limited toNorthern Africa, Central Africa and Southern Africa. These contain a number of countries. As soon as the animated manikin arrives in the selected region, the player’s knowledge about it will be tested. The testing format will include a question and answer (Q&A) approach which will focus on natural aspects of geography. The player will be required to answer seven questions that will be got from any of wildlife, weather and geographical features of the area. This will be limited by time and score count, if four of the questions are answered correctly in not less than 5 minutes, the player progresses to the next level otherwise they have three more attempts before the game ends. On advancing to the next level, the player will then be tested on their knowledge of the countries positions in the selected region. This testing format is of the puzzle variety in which the countries will be disorganised and the player required to reorganise them in a certain time frame (7 minutes).A score count will be kept for every country place correctly and at the end the total will guarantee whether the player progresses to the final level or makes another attempt.
The final level will incorporate both elements from the first and second levels with a reduced time frame for action execution.
The gaming environment will have a two player mode which will be collaborative as well as competitive. The two players will compete in the different levels to see who comes out with the best score but will have to accumulate a collective score above 70% of the total attainable mark to progress to the next level.
GAMING CONCEPT IN DETAIL WITH JUSTIFICATION
Looking at the required criteria for the gaming environment, it should be educative, fun, challenging, engaging with a sense of purpose and use tangible user interface
4 | P a g e
object (TUIO). The idea is to develop the gaming environment using tangible objects on a tangible user interface. According to Nova (2007) a Tangible User Interface is a user interface in which a person interacts with digital information through the physical environment. Ullmer and Ishii (2001) described the physical objects as’ spatially manipulable’ physical objects, which in this case are the manikin that will be represented digital as a flight from Mauritius to Africa or cut-out objects that will represent the countries that will be rearranged, and digital objects as the graphics and audio a combination of which, yield interactive systems that are computationally mediated. These are found to be helpful during human interface interactions because they offer more control for the user considering the fact that the tangible object is used to control the digital information displayed on the system. The role of technology as far as enhancing children’s learning process was found to be of paramount importance especially because it helps them develop cognitively through augmented play activities. Healy (1998) and Antle (2007) maintain that research reveals that ability to touch, feel, manipulate and build sensory awareness of the relationships in the world was crucial to children’s cognitive development. The four main features that are targeted in the use of TUI in the game design are face-to-face collaboration, digital feedback, physical manipulation of objects and integration of input and output space. These coupled with the fact that a research on an adventure game designed for kids showed that interaction with tangibles encouraged engagement, excitement and collaboration a combination which makes learning a playful and pleasurable experience for children.
The idea of using table tops for this gaming environment although mandatory, it is important to understand how helpful it is in designing an effective and collaborative gaming environment. Since table tops are usually wide areas as in the case of egomaniacs, they are considered to encourage collaborative and equitable problem solving in both the quiz and puzzle as well as allow the children participating in the game a chance to contribute equally. This would be an interactive way to overcome challenges which would make the environment more pleasing to interact with and furthermore enables players to execute tasks in the game using both hands in a 3-dimensional space and using tactile objects especially the pieces of the puzzle an
5 | P a g e
experience and quality which research has showed table tops add to the gaming experience.
The interface of the game was designed with geographical features of the area of interest, Africa, and the specific region from which the questions will be asked. Special emphasis was put on Norman’s design principles in designing and selecting locations for the repetitive elements of the game. The logo is placed in the top right corner of all the game screens, and perhaps the most important element for the children playing in the gaming environment, the menu, is placed in the bottom left corner of the environment and includes the play, exit and help buttons which are easily accessible in a sense that the players do not require much thought to access them.
Another key element in the game concept which is used side by side with markers by the second player is Google maps or similar. This encourages the two players to collaborate in attempting both levels of the game especially in the question and answer section where the players are required to know country-specific geographical features. This collaborative element adds to the players’ enjoyment when playing the game according to Xie (2008).
GAME PLAY
Requirements- Processing version (1.2.1) or later- ReacTIVision- Camera 3mpx or more (Mounted on a Tripod stand)- Two Laptops <1 to run the game and another for the Google Map>- Projector- Power Source- 21 inch LCD monitor or table top-Internet connection-Fudicial markers attach to tangible object.
6 | P a g e
Game playThe set-up is as shown in the image below and once everything is in place as required the game can start.
7 | P a g e
The game starts by displaying two images of the company logo, Geomaniacs, and the company slogan “the true essence of edutainment” which are accompanied by background music of African drums
For the player to start the game, they show the play marker mounted on a triangular play object in the environment and they are prompted to select a region whose questions they would like to attempt. Using a cube with a dynamic marker, the player can then choose one of three zones as well as get a chance to look at the instructions of the game. As soon as the zone screen loads, the player can start to attempt questions by showing the marker o the correct country or feature in the environment as the other player looks for the answers on the Google maps and the timer keeps track of how long they take to carry out this activity. The score is dependent on the time taken by the players, the more time taken the less the score at the end. With the drums still playing in the back ground, the players have feedback from the game for every question they attempt. A correct answer draws cheers as well as a written statement that indicates that the answer is write and conversely a wrong answer draws a buzzer from the game and a statement in the answer box to indicate that the answer given is wrong. During the course of this level the players have a chance to select only two of the menu items in the left hand corner of the game screen, to exit the game or get help on that level of the game.
The final score is dynamically computed and displayed on a colourful screen with maps of several countries. Depending on the score attained by the players, they will progress to the next level or try the current level again until the required score is attained. This is restricted to only three attempts. A total score of more than 70% of the maximum attainable score will allow the players to attempt the next level.
Level two is a TUI jigsaw puzzle made from a map of Africa split into 6 pieces. The players have to organise the pieces together to form the map of Africa in the shortest period of time with the help of the Google map. Currently, the second is the final level of this prototype and any further improvements will be listed more clearly in the future works.
The state diagram below shows the different states in the game and how they are change and which user generated events trigger state changes in the game.8 | P a g e
Splash Screen
Play marker
Select Zone
Zone marker
Answer markers Quiz (7)
Score < 70%
Score > 70%
TUI jigsaw puzzle dismantle
Organise
Time t > 2 min
Time t < 2 min
Exit
9 | P a g e
State 0
State 1
State 2Q & A
State 3
State 4
Score
State 2a
State 3a
State 5 State 0
GAME FEATURES
Some of the key features incorporated in the game to add to its value include:-
A timer whose overall purpose is to basically govern the length of the game not just the entire game but the individual levels and at a finer level each attempt. The timer is important as well because it helps in computing the final score for a player at the end of the level therefore according to Norman’s design principles concerning consistency, it was placed in the same position for every part of the game where it was required so the players can be conscious of their time use. It is in the top right corner just below the logo.
Score board too was added because of the sense of purpose and objective it gives the players. The score is part of what motivates the players to do well in the environment because without the right score players will not be able to progress through the levels. With time being a motivation in this scenario, research by Verhaegh et al. (2007) revealed a relationship between motivation, challenge and fun. Motivation which is intrinsic was found to be widely accepted from an educational perspective because it leads to long term motivation which would be an added advantage for the children who interact with the ‘geomaniac’ gaming environment.
The audio feedback in the game also has a motivational element to it because the players get the answer right and they are applauded the get a sense of achievement and it keeps them motivated and encouraged to progress in the environment, on the contrary, the sound for a failure can have both a demotivational and motivational effect on the children in a sense that some of them could be spurred on to try and get the correct answer where as others will be discouraged.
For smooth graphic transition during the game, another processing library known as G4p.
10 | P a g e
EVALUATION
The evaluation of the gaming environment mainly focused on four important aspects and these were usability of the game, user experience and effectiveness.
The user interface was the primary focus in testing usability of the game. A few of our colleagues interacted with the environment and tried to carry out typical tasks like moving from the splash screen to the first level to find out how effective the use of markers and TUIO was in carrying out the task as well as when the game commenced were the players or users interacting with it to do things they were meant do with the system.Observations were made and summarised in an informal usability specification document by asking the users to think aloud as they interacted with the environment and on other occasions basically observing the users interact with the game in a more natural setting with no external influence. Other qualities of the environment that were evaluated included aesthetic appeal, how motivating and engaging the game is and whether the experience of interacting in the environment was enjoyable.
During the design of the prototype as well an expert opinion was sought from time to time considering use of kids for evaluation was prohibited. Cognitive walk through was used to try and point out a few thing we as designers could have taken for granted especially considering the age difference between the designers and the target users. Some of the things pointed out required an urgent game in the system whereas others needed slight changes as opposed to what the experts suggested. For example use of dynamic markers in the environment was an expert opinion which helped reduce the number of markers required to interact with the environment hence greatly improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the ‘geomaniac’ environment. On the contrary, the play button which was triangular was intended to be the exit button as well depending on its orientation in the environment, which according to expert opinion was confusing and not intuitive enough but we realised that changing the colour to something people can relate
11 | P a g e
with easily totally changed the perspective of what the marker could do in the environment. Having a green shade on the play and red on the exit work quite well.
The applying knowledge of typical users to identify usability problems which is basically heuristics is one of the other methods that was used to evaluate the gaming environment. This was done mainly to find out from an expert point of view what kind of users would encounter while interacting with the environment and how they could be minimised by altering the design.
Finally the formative evaluation of the complete prototype was done and revealed certain aspects of the game that were lacking which will be included in the future works on the environment.
FINDINGS
During the evaluation the team found that the font colour used originally in the design, yellow, was not visible enough for the players so they struggled to see the questions, the timer and all dynamically generated text which gave for an unpleasable experience for the users. The font colour was changed to black to improve visibility according to Norman’s design principles which improved the aesthetics of the design as well as made it easier to read the font.
The dynamic markers, as mentioned earlier, made the gaming environment more effective because they reduced the number of markers required to interact with the game so as the players answered questions and organised the jigsaw puzzle, they did not have to think about the processes as with time they came naturally.
Even if the idea of having Google maps or similar encouraged collaboration between the players, during evaluation it was established that incorporating it into the environment would make the environment less cumbersome and allow one player to attempt the game alone as well two players with consummate ease.
In the design of the zones, it would have probably been better if the backgrounds were more colourful since the game is designed for kids. It was a challenge trying to strike the right balance between having a colourful background and still maintain
12 | P a g e
the educational and fun aspects. Perhaps the only place it came together to good effect was the scoreboard screen.
Players interacting with the goemaniac gaming environment also preferred to keep track of their score as they attempted the quiz rather than have it displayed at the end of the quiz. It helps them vary the effort in answering the questions as well as saving them the burden of keeping score themselves.
FUTURE IMPROVEMENTS
After the summative evaluation, certain changes were implemented in the environment where as the others that could be implemented were summarised as future improvements. These include
The use of the fisical library to give the environment a boundary beyond which the players are not allowed to interact with the game. This will be especially for the puzzle where the players have to organise countries and they will not be allowed to go outside the demarcated area.
There was also need for an increase in the play area from a size of 1280 * 720 pixels to an area big enough to allow player interact with each other and with the game without getting in each other’s way which according to Xie (2008) is one of the potential drawbacks when using interactive table tops.
The current prototype was found to be lacking in terms of recovery from errors which greatly affects its usability which in turn affects user experience because during evaluation players got frustrated by the inability to recover from errors. This will be implemented by adding pause and undo options to the menu but still maintain the same dynamic marker so that the number of markers required for interaction in the environment is kept at a minimum. This ensures that players especially the children require their short term rather than long term memory to interact with the environment.
13 | P a g e
Even though the idea of the Google maps was welcome because of it benefits in terms of interaction between the players and the collaboration, it was evident that the players would have preferred for the map or similar to be a part of the environment rather than a separate entity that appears on a totally different screen. Perhaps having the questions popping up on the Google maps or designing a similar set up and have the questions pop up from there would make for a more complete and immersive environment.
An improvement in the technology used to develop the gaming environment would also help improve the gaming environment by improving the range of options available in terms of functions.
CONCLUSION
Geomaniac is a gaming environment built on the fundamentals of education in their pure form backed by the Mauritian curriculum for the age group stipulated earlier (8-10 years) incorporated with educational, fun and other aspects that interactive table tops have been revealed to add to any form of computing environment. Even though the idea continued to evolve from the original idea to the current prototype because of constraints in the technology used as well as time to so extent, an improvement in the team’s knowledge of the current technology would have given room for a better prototype at this stage. Never the less geomaniac is an exciting way for kids to learn geography and the environment is all inclusive because even adults can interact with it and still find it interesting and challenging as well.
Reference list1. Xie, Z. (2008) Comparing Children’s Enjoyment and Engagement Using
Physical, Graphical and Tangible User Interfaces. Partial fulfilment of master of science degree , Spring (2008)
14 | P a g e
2. Ishii, H. and Ullmer, B (2001) Emerging Frameworks for Tangible User Interfaces. Human-Computer Interaction in the New Millennium, (January), pp. 579 – 601.
3. Preece et al. (2009) Interaction Design – Beyond Human Computing. 3rd ed. Chapter 12.
4. Verhaegh, J. et al. (2007) Optimal challenge in educational electronics. In the proceedings of the first international conference on tangible and Embedded Interaction, ACM Press (2007), pp. 187-190.
5. Antle, A. (2007) The CTI framework: informing the design of tangible systems for children. In Proceedings of the 1st international Conference on Tangible and Embedded interaction, ACM Press, pp.195-202.
6. Healy, J. (1998) Failure to Connect: How Computers Affect Our Children’s Minds – for Better or Worse Simon & Schuster, New York.
Bibliography1. Martens, J-B. and Aliakseyeu, D. (2001) Visual Interaction Platform. Physical
Paper as User Interface for Architectural Design Tool, Netherlands.
2. Hornecker, E. A Framework for Design of Tangible Interaction for Collaborative Use. Proc. Of Danish HCI Research Symposion, pp.51 -67.
3. Prensky, M. (2001) The Digital Game-Based Learning Revolution. McGraw-Hill.
4. Underkoffler, J. and Hiroshi, I. (1999) Urp: A Luminous-Tangible Workbench for Urban Planning and Design. Tangible Media Group, Cambridge.
