Newer
Older
Translating kindergarteners’ creative expressions into engineering specifications to design paper boats. (*rework title)
3. Literature Review
4. Equipment and Methodology
5. Results and Discussion
6. Conclusions
7. References and Citations
In the educational engineering sphere today, there are limited and expensive introductory kits for children in primary school (K-3) that focus on concepts like basic design, engineering, and programming. We are working to create a system that is suitable for 5 year olds to design robotic paper boats. From beginning to end, the system will include: a graphical user interface, a robot compiler and a printer. Components needed for this system to be complete include: a collection of designs, a set of parameters that designs can change, and the collection of interactions with the user. My goal is to create a graphical user interface suitable for 5 year olds to change parameters of a boat. This involves creating a widget that is "best" to change parameters based on the user's efficiency and creativity when using it with a specific end goal. We are conducting qualitative research by which we collect data during meetings with the user based on the questions we are attempting to answer. After the initial participant observational meetings, one widget will better allow for efficiency and creativity. That widget will be implemented into the graphical user interface that is created in the future, along with other expansions to the system.
There are a vast amount of educational engineering kits for students in high school and college, these kits expose students to basic design, engineering, and programming concepts. But when the age group is students in primary school, specifically kindergarten, the options are limited and expensive. How can we expose young children to engineering skills with easily accessible systems, while making sure these systems realistically coincide with different areas of their development? My group is working to create an end-to-end system where 5 year olds can design their own robotic paper boat. The child would be able to create the initial design on a graphical user interface(GUI), run it through a robot compiler (RoCo), and print it out. The print would include different colored and styled lines to reference where to fold, how to fold, where to cut, etc. After configuring the paper boat, there would be electrical, mechanical, and software components already made for an easy installation.
When we run RoCo, a web app illustrates a specific set of initial designs that can be customized. A boat design is clicked on and leads the user to a different layout that includes the name of the boat design, its parameters, downloadable formats, material choice, a 3D model (simulation), a 2D schematic, as well as a Make! button that initiates the robot compiler.
| Figure 1 | Figure 2 |
| ------------------------------------------------------------ | :----------------------------------------------------------: |
| BoatBase RoCo Design | Canoe RoCo Design |
|  |  |
From the figures above, it can be seen that this layout and interface may be daunting for someone seeing this for the first time, let alone a 5 year old. To "design" a boat, one must change the numerical values of the parameters. The 3D simulation and 2D schematic will then update accordingly with the change(s). While someone with some experience in computer aided design may see this as intuitive and take the time to explore through changing the parameters.
This introduces introduces the problem we are facing when the paper boat design system is not suitable for 5 year olds. While the numerical input widget works for those of us in and out of LEMUR, we need to create an entire new GUI for this audience.
The distinguishing factor, the number input widget, needs to be swapped out entirely. We are testing out the integration of a slider and dial widget. Depending on how the user interacts with these widgets, the possibility of creating an entirely new widget for this GUI arises.
To test the capability of the user and the interaction with modifying the paper boat with their hands and with a widget, we will be running experiments by meeting with the user. We will be looking to answer the specific questions below.
- If a student wants to change the parameters of the boat, do they want a slider or a dial? What will make it easier for them?
- If a students wants to change the linear dimension of the boat, is a slider or dial better? (In terms of efficiency, creativity)
## 3. Literature Review
– A discussion of findings from other researchers
– Critical apparaisal of other’s theories
• You should compare and assess other’s results.
– Provides external context for your project
– Justifies your project
(*put this literature review) spent the past nine weeks doing research on children's technology design principles. When a software or tech designer wants to make an application or tool for children, they change arbitary things that we believe will make the application/tool more usable to children. But in reality there are actual design principles software and tech designers should be aware of that will allow children to express their creativity and explore their imagination (change). I went throught literature review on children's technology, their input, and specific design principles. After I created an experimental procedure to best observe and interview children when drawing a boat, using computer and table apps and games, and drawing a boat on a computer and tablet application. This was done to best understand and move on to designing a GUI for children to use when designing a foldable paper boat.
– Discusses the reasons for choosing your methods and procedures
Contents
– Rationale for methodological apprach
– Hypotheses
– Description of study area
– Demographic details of study population
– How the population was selected
– Description of types of data and sources
– Descrption of methods and procedures for obtaining data
– Description of methods and procedures of data analysis
Hyptheses: Based on literature review, I believe the slider widget will be more efficient while the dial widget will allow for more creativity with the user.
Slider: Range of two point (quantities)
Dial: Never ending (limitless quantity)
For this experiment we will need a computer, the RoCO repository, a slider widget, and a dial widget. The data that will be collected includes: participant observation, interviews, and surveys. The data will be analyzed using descriptive statistics, narrative analysis, and hermeneutic analysis.
The usability of the widgets will be judged on the scale of efficienty and creativity. Efficiency will be judged by usability based on getting a task done in the quickest manner. While creativity will be judged on uniqueness to other designs, and can take a longer time (possibility of more time spent in completing task). The questions and obervations we are looking for during the meetings include: time from when task it orated to time when task is completed, commentary or questions from user when completing tasks, changes made to boat, overall design.
Q1: If the user wants to change the parameters of the boat, ...
what would they change?
how would they change it?
(Looking at thought process and user interaction with paper, object, system?
Q2: If the user wants to change the parameters of the boat, do they want a slider or a dial?
What is easier for them?
(Looking at user capability of understanding and completing task, thought process and interaction with widget)
Q3: If the user wants to change the linear dimension of the boat, is a slider or dial better? (in terms of efficiency and creativty)
(Looking for thought process 1) when being *efficient*(amount of time (fast) and changes(completing task), and 2) when being *creative* (time (slow) and changes(uniqueness))
Goal: We want to observe the parameters of the paper boat the user would change.
Question: If the user was asked to build a paper boat and modify it, would they be able to complete the task? And if they were, what changes would they make? What did that interaction, between the user and the widget, look like?
We will provide the student with an A4 (8.5x11 in) paper with the task to create a paper boat using folds. We will then repeat the process but this time with the task to manually change one or more of the paper boat's parameters.
Paper Boat Parameters: base length, base height, sail width, sail height (can these change, if yes how and what changes need to be made?)
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
******
Q1.
1) Build a paper boat
2) Change a paper boat
Q2.
1) Put a picture of a boat on screen
Slider: Make the boat longer
Dial: Make the boat longer
2) Put a picture of a boat on screen
Slider: Make the boat taller
Dial: Make the boat taller
Q3.
Efficiency: less time spent using widget, less number of changes and deviation from original paper boat
Creativity: more time spent using widget, more number of changes and deviation from original paper boat
1) Make a GUI with slider widgets and test for efficiency and creativity
2) Make a GUI with dial widgets and test it for efficiency and creativity
##### Meeting 2: Modifying a robot boat using widgets (slider and dial) (testing for user capability and understanding of task)
Goal: We need to implement/utilize a widget that changes the geometry of the boat. If there is no widget, we will then resort to creating a widget.
Measurement: (completing task, time to complete task)
Question: If the user wants to change the parameters of the boat, do they want a slider or a dial? What will make it easier for them?
We will provide the user with an interface that contains a widget (ie. slider) . They will be given the following tasks: Double the *parameter* (ie. length) of the boat, Make the boat twice as *parameter* (ie. long). The user will do something, while we observe them on a screen that shows the boat along with a *widget* (ie. slider).
##### Meeting 3: Modifying a robot boat using widgets (slider and dial) (testing for efficiency and creativity widgets allow)
Question: If the user wants to change the linear dimension of the boat, is a slider or dial better? (In terms of efficiency, creativity)
We will provide the user with an interface that contains a *widget* (ie. slider). The will be given the following task: ________________________. The user will do something with the parameters of the boat using the *widget*. (Here we will be grading the widget based on efficiency and creativity, depending on time and design (changes).)
### Meeting 1:
### Meeting 2:
### Meeting 3:
In the future we intend to expand the range of customization of the paper boat. (library)
Using the information and data collected from the experiment meetings, we can begin the process of implementing a widget onto the paper boat GUI. We will need to test whether the widget allows the 5 year olds to design their own paper boat. (Creating a GUI with implemented widgets)
https://www.diffen.com/difference/Laptop_vs_Tablet_computer
http://www.mathematische-basteleien.de/paper_ship.htm (methods)
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
• What is the research problem and why is it important?
There are a vast amount of educational engineering kits for students in high school and college, these kits expose students to basic design, engineering, and programming concepts. But when the age group is students in primary school, the options are limited and expensive. How can we expose young children to engineering skills with an inexpensive kits, while making sure they are suitable for those in primary school? (***change kits, because they are not really packages kits sold to users)
A majority of students are initially exposed to STEM during their time in high school, and college. There are large amount of kits, ranging in price and complexity. These kits introduce students to basic design, engineering, and programming concepts. But we would like to pose the question, what if we could expose students to these concepts earlier?
Our goal to introduce STEM to children at an earlier age brought us to a robotic foldable boat. At its core, only a sheet of paper, a widely available resources, is required to create a functional paper boat. With added electrical, mechanical, and software components, it is transformed into a robotic foldable boat.
Our work consists of creating systems and tools for children, as young as five years old, to begin dabbling with engineering. Requirements for this project to be a success are: low cost, accessible supplies, usable for all ages, and limitless design ideas.
• What did you do and why?
• What did you find?
We found that one widget was better than the other.
• What do your findings mean?
(Refined abstract)
We are working to create a graphical user interface (gui) suitable for 5 year olds that will allow them to modify robotic boats as they desire.
To enable this, we must first create a widget that is better to use when changing parameters of the boat, as well as the linear dimensions of the boat, by finding a suitable widget that will allow them to change parameters of the boat as to our specification. After we can determine the widget that is better for 5 year olds to use, or create it if it doesn not yet exist. Second we must observe how they use the widgets to to change the parameters of the boat to their desire. The widgets will be graded on efficiecy and creativity. And lastly we will need to implement the widget into a giu that will result in the final system for 5 year old s to design their own robot boat.
Finally to create an optimized boat with a minimum speed that move the boat through the water.
(*** dont think I need this, or if I do rephrase it, figure out where it belongs (below)) OR MORE!
We use a Robot Compiler with an available interface, but the interface requires some familiarity of computer aided design. For this study, we will collect qualitative data from a 5 year old through: participant observation, interviews, and surveys. With sessions, we will try to carefully extract information from the user to detemine the "best" widget. The "best" widget will be determined by the widget that would allow for the largest amount of creative expression during the design and modification of a paper boat. Future work will include the design, creation, and testing of a graphical user interface for 5 year olds to design their own foldable robotic boat.
GUI -> RoCo -> Paper Boat
5 -> Creative Expressions = Engineering Specifications -> GUI
Our goal to introduce STEM to children at an earlier age brought us to a robotic foldable boat. At its core, only a sheet of paper, a widely available resources, is required to create a functional paper boat. With added electrical, mechanical, and software components, it is transformed into a robotic foldable boat.
Our work consists of creating systems and tools for children, as young as five years old, to begin dabbling with engineering. Requirements for this project to be a success are: low cost, accessible supplies, usable for all ages, and limitless design ideas.
Project Goal: Create a Graphical User Interface suitable for 5 year olds that lets them change the *parameters* (ie. length) of a paper boat they they desire.
Sub Project Goal: create or utilize a widget suitable for 5 year olds that will enable paramters to be changes on GUI
Software System (Final System)
- Components
- collection of designs
- set of parameters that designs can change
- collection of interactions w/ student (enables above)
Specific Questions:
If a student wants to change the parameters of the boat, do they want a slider or a dial? What will make it easier for them?
If a students wants to change the linear dimension of the boat, is a slider or dial better? (In terms of efficiency, creativity)
Goal: We need to implement/utilize a widget that changes the geometry of the boat. If there is no widget, then we will resort to creating a widget that changes the geometry of the boat.
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
Children and Adults have different uses and expectations of computers (desktop and/or laptop) and tablets. Adults generally user tablets for content-consumption and computers for content creation. But tablets are easier to use among children for content-consumption and content-creation because mice and keyboards are not as intuitive. (https://www.diffen.com/difference/Laptop_vs_Tablet_computer, deisgn principles)
#### Materials
Paper, A computer running Roco/ interface, a slider widget, a dial widget
Collected Data: Participant observation, Interviews, Surveys (one or the other, interview might be better, survey if used for a larger group and small amount of time)
Analyzing Data: Descriptive Stats, Narrative Analysis, Hermeneutic Analysis
Scale ——— Efficiency vs. Creativity
Creativity will be based on uniqueness to other users designs, could take longer time.
Characteristics of Creativity: possibility of more time spent completing task,
Efficiency, usability will be based on getting the task done in the quickest manner.
Characteristics of Efficiency: less time spent completing task,
Questions and wanted observations for each meeting:
-Time from when task is orated to when task is completed
-commentary or questions from user when completing tasks
-changes made to boat
-overall design