Expressive pen-based interfaces for math education

Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Conference, CSCL

Volumn 8, Issue PART 2, 2007, Pages 569-578

  Oviatt, Sharon ^a   Arthur, Alex ^b   Brock, Yaro ^c   Cohen, Julia ^d  

^a Incaa Designs ^*  (United States)

^b Adapx Inc   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^d DARTMOUTH COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATION THEORY; MAMMALS;

COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY; COMMUNICATION PATTERN; COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT; GEOMETRY PROBLEMS; HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS; MATH PROBLEM SOLVING; PEN-BASED INTERFACES; PEN-TABLET INTERFACE;

STUDENTS;

EID: 84861042068     PISSN: 15734552     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.3115/1599600.1599708     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (24)

1. Aleven, V., & Koedinger, K. R. (2000). Limitations of student control: Do students know when they need help? In Proceedings of ITS 2000. 292-303.
2. Alibali, M., Kita, S., & Young, A. (2000). Gesture and the process of speech production: We think, therefore we gesture. Language and Cognitive Processing, 15, 593-613.
3. Anoto Technology. (2006). Retrieved Feb. 23, 2007: http://www.anoto.com
4. Baddeley, A. (1986). Working Memory. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Cohen, P. R., & McGee, D. R. (2004). Tangible multimodal interfaces for safety critical applications. Special Issue on Multimodal Interaction, Communications of the ACM, 47(1), 41-46.
6. Goldin-Meadow, S., Nusbaum, H., Kelly, S. J., & Wagner, S. (2001). Explaining math: Gesturing lightens the load. Psychological Science, 12(6), 516-522.
7. Kalyuga, S. (2006). Rapid cognitive assessment of learners' knowledge structures. Learning and Instruction, 16, 1-11.
8. Kalyuga, S., Ayres, P., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2003). The expertise reversal effect. Educational Psychologist, 36(1), 23-31.
9. Leapfrog. (2006). Retrieved Nov. 8, 2006: http://www.leapfrog.com
10. Liao, C., Guimbretiere, F., & Hinckley, K. (2005). PapierCraft: A system of interactive paper. In Proceedings of UIST'05, Seattle, WA. ACM Press: 241-244.
11. Mayer, R. E., & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(2), 312-320.
12. Mousavi, S. Y., Low, R., & Sweller, J. (1995). Reducing cognitive load by mixing auditory and visual presentation modes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 319-334.
13. Oviatt, S. L. (1997). Multimodal interactive maps: Designing for human performance. Human Computer Interaction, 12(1-2), 93-129.
14. Oviatt, S. L. (2006). Human-centered design meets cognitive load theory: Designing interfaces that help people think. In Proceedings of ACM Multimedia '06, special session on "Human-Centered Multimedia Systems". Santa Barbara, CA. ACM Press: 871-880.
15. Oviatt, S. L., Arthur, A. M., & Cohen, J. (2006). Quiet interfaces that help students think. In Proceedings of UIST '06, Montreaux, Switzerland. ACM: 191-200.
16. Oviatt, S. L., Coulston, R., & Lunsford, R. (2004). When do we interact multimodally? Cognitive load and multi-modal communication patterns. In Proceedings of ICMI'04, Penn State University, PA. ACM: 129-136.
17. Paas, F., Tuovinen, J., Tabbers, H., & Van Gerven, P. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63-71.
18. Pea, R. D., & Maldonado, H. (2006). WILD for learning: Interacting through new computing devices anytime, anywhere. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge University Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 427-443). New York: Cambridge University Press.
19. Rauscher, F., Krauss, R., & Chen, Y. (1996). Gesture, speech and lexical access: The role of lexical movements in speech production. Psychological Science, 7, 226-231.
20. Salden, R. J. C. M., Paas, F., Broers, N. J., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2004). Mental effort and performance as determinants for the dynamic selection of learning tasks in air traffic control training. Instructional Science, 32, 153-172.
21. Salden, R. J. C. M., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2006). A comparison of approaches to learning task selection in the training of complex skills. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 321-333.
22. Tindall-Ford, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (1997). When two sensory modes are better than one. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 3(3), 257-287.
23. van Merriënboer, J., & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-177.
24. Winne, P. H., & Perry, N. E. (2000). Measuring self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 531-566). Orlando, Florida: Academic Press.