Bu kaydın yasal hükümlere uygun olmadığını düşünüyorsanız lütfen sayfa sonundaki Hata Bildir bağlantısını takip ederek bildirimde bulununuz. Kayıtlar ilgili üniversite yöneticileri tarafından eklenmektedir. Nadiren de olsa kayıtlarla ilgili hatalar oluşabilmektedir. MİTOS internet üzerindeki herhangi bir ödev sitesi değildir!

Smart Toy Based Learning

Oluşturulma Tarihi:

Niteleme Bilgileri

Tür: Makale

Yayınlanma Durumu: Yayınlanmış

Dosya Biçimi: Dosya Yok

Dil: İngilizce

Konu(lar): TEKNOLOJİ,

Yazar(lar): Kara, Nuri (Yazar), Cagiltay, Kursat (Yazar), Aydın, Cansu Çiğdem (Yazar),

Emeği Geçen(ler):


Yayın Adı: Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology Yayınlandığı Sayfalar: 703-711


Dosya:
Dosya Yok

Anahtar Kelimeler

Toy, Smart toy, Cognitive tool, 


Özet

This chapter examines the general characteristics of and related recent research on smart toys. Smart toys can be defined as new forms of toys featuring both tangible objects and electronic components that facilitate two-way child–smart toy interactions to carry out purposeful tasks. In this chapter, smart toy based learning projects are discussed and the characteristics of smart toys as cognitive tools to facilitate learning are analyzed. This chapter also covers the relationship between smart toys and children’s developmental stages—with a particular focus on motivation—in order to understand smart toys’ potential effects on children.



İçindekiler



Açıklamalar



Haklar



Notlar



KaynakçaGoogle Scholar*Price, S., & Rogers, Y. (2004). Let‘s get physical: The learning benefits of interacting in digitally augmented physical spaces. Computers in Education, 43(1–2), 137–151.*Plowman, L., & Stephen, C. (2003). A ‘benign addition’? Research on ICT and pre-school children. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPiper, B., & Ishii, H. (2002). PegBlocks: A learning aid for the elementary classroom. In L. Terveen & D. Wixon (Eds.), CHI ‘02 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 686–687). Minneapolis, MN: ACM Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarPiaget, J. (1964). Development and learning. In R. E. Ripple & V. N. Rockcastle (Eds.), Piaget rediscovered: Report of the conference on cognitive studies and curriculum development (pp. 7–20). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar*Piaget, J. (1962). The stages of the intellectual development of the child. In A. Slater & D. Muir (Eds.), The Blackwell reader in developmental psychology (pp. 35–42). Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPetersson, E., & Brooks, A. (2006). Virtual and physical toys: Open-ended features for non-formal learning. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 9(2), 196–199.Google ScholarPeretti, P. O., & Sydney, T. M. (1984). Parental toy choice stereotyping and its effects on child toy preference and sex-role typing. Social Behavior and Personality, 12(2), 213–216.McVee, M. B., Dunsmore, K., & Gavelek, J. R. (2005). Schema theory revisited. Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 531–566.CrossRefGoogle ScholarMerrill, D., Kalanithi, J., & Maes, P. (2007). Siftables: Towards sensor network user interfaces. In Proceedings of First International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (pp. 75–78).CrossRefGoogle ScholarMauch, E. (2001). Using technological innovation to improve the problem-solving skills of middle school students: Educators’ experiences with the LEGO Mindstorms robotic invention system. The Clearing House, 74(4), 211–213.Google Scholar*Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude learning and instruction: Volume 3: Cognitive and affective process analyses (pp. 223–253). Retrieved from http://ocw.metu.edu.tr/mod/resource/view.php?id=1311*Luckin, R., Connolly, D., Plowman, L., & Airey, S. (2003). Children’s interactions with interactive toy technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(2), 165–176.CrossRefGoogle ScholarCrossRefGoogle ScholarLiu, M., & Bera, S. (2005). An analysis of cognitive tool use patterns in a hypermedia learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 5–21.Google ScholarLevin, D. E., & Rosenquest, B. (2001). The increasing role of ­electronic toys in the lives of infants and toddlers: Should we be concerned? Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 2(2), 242–247.Lampe, M., & Hinske, S., (2007). Integrating interactive learning experiences into augmented toy environments. Proceedings of Pervasive Learning Workshop at Pervasive 2007 (pp. 1–9). Toronto, Canada.Kudrowitz, B., & Wallace, D. (2009). The play pyramid: A play classification and ideation tool for toy design. Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/2.00b/www/2009/lecture2/PlayPyramid.pdf.CrossRefGoogle ScholarKim, B., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Reframing research on learning with technology: In search of the meaning of cognitive tools. Instructional Science, 35, 207–256.Google Scholar*Kara, N., Aydin, C. C., & Cagiltay, K. (2012a). Design and development of a smart storytelling toy. Interactive Learning Environments. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2011.649767.*Kara, N., Aydin, C. C., & Cagiltay, K. (2012b). User study of a new smart toy for children’s storytelling. Interactive Learning Environments. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2012.682587.Google ScholarJoolingen, W. V. (1999). Cognitive tools for discovery learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 385–397.*Jonassen, D. H. (1992). What are cognitive tools? In P. D. Kommers, D. H. Jonassen, & J. T. Mayes (Eds.), Cognitive tools for learning (pp. 1–6). New York: Springer Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarHunter, S., Kalanithi, J., & Merrill, D. (2010). Make a riddle and telestory: Designing children’s applications for the Siftables platform. In Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 206–209). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google ScholarHinske, S., Lampe, M., Yuill, N., Price, S., & Langheinrich, M. (2010). Let the play set come alive: Supporting playful learning through the digital augmentation of a traditional toy environment. Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Workshop on Pervasive Learning (PerEL) at PerCom 2010 (pp. 280–285). Mannheim, Germany.CrossRefGoogle ScholarHannafin, M. J., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 115–140). London: Erlbaum.Glos, J., & Cassell, J. (1997). Rosebud: Technological toys for storytelling. In S. Pemberton (Ed.), Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 359–360). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google ScholarFrei, P., Su, V., Mikhak, B., & Ishii, H. (2000). curlybot: Designing a new class of computational toys. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 129–136). New York: ACM Press. doi: 10.1145/332040.332416.Google ScholarFontijn, W., & Mendels, P. (2005, May 8–13). StoryToy: The interactive storytelling toy. In H. Gellersen, R. Want, & A. Schmidt (Eds.), Third International Conference, PERVASIVE 2005. Munich, Germany. Proceedings series: Lecture notes in computer science, 3468, 37–42.Butterworth, G., & Harris, M. (1994). Principles of developmental psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar*Cassell, J., & Ryokai, K. (2001). Making space for voice: Technologies to support children’s fantasy and storytelling. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 5(3), 169–190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarBoucher, S., & Amery, J. (2009). Play and development. In A. Justin (Ed.), Children’s palliative care in Africa (pp. 37–77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Axline, V. M. (1974). Play therapy. New York, NY: Ballantine.Google ScholarAlimisis, D., Moro, M., Arlegui, J., Pina, A., Frangu, S., & Papanikolaou, K. (2007). Robotics & constructivism in education: The TERECoP project. In I. Kalas (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th EuroLogo conference (pp. 1–11).Google Scholar*Resnick, M. (1998). Technologies for lifelong kindergarten. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(4), 43–55.Google Scholar*Roussou, M. (2004). Learning by doing and learning through play: An exploration of inter-activity in virtual environments for children. ACM Journal on Computers in Entertainment, 2(1), 1–23.Google ScholarRyokai, K., & Cassell, J. (1999). Computer support for children’s collaborative fantasy play and storytelling. In Proceedings of the 1999 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning (p. 63). International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google ScholarThe NPD Group Inc. (2011). World toy sales in 2010 were .3 billion, an increase of nearly 5 percent over 2009 [Press release]. Retrieved from https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/pressreleases/pr_110702Toy Industry Association, Inc. (2007). Consumer perceptions of ­electronic toys. New York, NY: Author.Google ScholarVaucelle, C., & Jehan, T. (2002). Dolltalk: a computational toy to enhance children’s creativity. In CHI ’02 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 776–777). New York, NY: ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar


Atıf Yapanlar

Gözat Sayfasına Dön

 

Sosyal Medya ve Araçlar

İstatistikler

  • Kayıt
    • Bu ay: 29
    • Toplam: 2240
  • Online
    • Ziyaretçi: 61
    • Üye: 0
    • Toplam: 60

Detaylı İstatistikler