You are here:

Using Multimodal Learning Analytics to Identify Patterns of Interactions in a Body-Based Mathematics Activity
article

, University of Vermont, United States ; , Florida International University, United States ; , University of Vermont, United States

Journal of Interactive Learning Research Volume 27, Number 4, ISSN 1093-023X Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC

Full Text

Abstract

Elementary students’ difficulties with angles in geometry are well documented, but we know little about how they conceptualize angles while solving problems and how their thinking changes over time. In this study, we examined 26 third and fourth grade students completing a body-based angle task supported by the Kinect for Windows. We used fine-grained, multimodal data detailing students’ actions and language to identify three common patterns of interactions during the task: the explore, dynamic, and static clusters. We found that students with higher learning gains spent significantly more time in the dynamic cluster than students with low learning gains. Implications for mathematics teaching and research using body-based tasks are discussed.

Citation

Smith, C., King, B. & Gonzalez, D. (2016). Using Multimodal Learning Analytics to Identify Patterns of Interactions in a Body-Based Mathematics Activity. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 27(4), 355-379. Waynesville, NC: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved January 23, 2021 from .

© 2016 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Burger, W., & Shaughnessy, J. (1986). Characterizing the van hiele levels of development in geometry. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 17(1), 31-48.
  2. Clements, D. (2003). Teaching and learning geometry. In J. Kilpatrick, W.G. Martin& D. Schifter (eds.), A research companion to principles and standards for school mathematics (pp. 151–178). Reston, Va: national Council
  3. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
  4. Piaget, J. (1968). Genetic epistemology (E. Duckworth, trans.). New York: Columbia University Press.
  5. Sarle, W. (1983). Cubic clustering criterion (tech. Rep. No. A-108). Cary, nC: SaS instistute.
  6. Scally, S. (1990). The impact of experience in a logo learning environment on adolescents’ understanding of angle: a van hiele-based clinical assessment (Doctoral dissertation). Emory University.
  7. Seitz, J. (2000). The bodily basis of thought. New Ideas in Psychology, 18, 2350. Siegler, R., & Crowley, K. (1991). The microgenetic method: a direct means for studying cognitive development. American Psychologist, 46, 606-620.
  8. Xu, X., & Ke, F. (2014). From psychomotor to ‘motorpsycho’: learning through gestures with body sensory technologies. Educational Technology Research Development, 62, 711-741.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Related Collections