Designing for the Internet of Things

(Nandana) #1

  1. LEarninG and tHinkinG witH tHinGs (^) | 133
    As with nearly all of Maria Montessori’s manipulative materials, these
    objects are treated like toys, for children to get off the shelf and play
    with, satisfying our first principle, playful interactions. Because chil-
    dren are encouraged to discover these items for themselves, and pursue
    uninterrupted play (learning) time with the object, we can say it satis-
    fies the second principle: self-directed learning. Attempting to place a
    cylinder into the wrong hole triggers the learning by either not fitting
    into the hole (too big), or standing too tall and not filling the space; stu-
    dents are able to quickly recognize this fact and move cylinders around
    until a fitting slot is found, allowing for self-correction, our third prin-
    ciple. As you play with wooden cylinders, using your hands, we can
    safely say this satisfies our fourth principle: tangibility. As far as intel-
    ligence, this is the only missing piece.
    With this kind of orientation in mind, I’d like to share a personal proj-
    ect I’m working on (along with a friend much more versed in the tech-
    nical aspects).
    Case Study: An appcessory for early math concepts
    When my kids were younger, I played a math game that never ceased
    to amuse them (or me, at least). The “game,” if you can call it that, con-
    sisted of grabbing a handful of Teddy Grahams snack crackers (usually
    off of their plate) and counting them out, one by one. I’d then do sim-
    ple grouping exercises, moving crackers between two piles or count-
    ing by placing them into pairs. The real fun kicked in when we’d play
    subtraction. “You have seven Teddy Grahams. If Daddy eats one Teddy
    Graham, how many do you have left?” I think I enjoyed this more than
    my kids did (to be fair, I’d also make a few additional Teddy Grahams
    appear out of nowhere, to teach addition). All in all, this was a great way
    to explore early math concepts such as counting, grouping, subtraction,
    and addition.
    So, how does this game stack up on the design principles? The learn-
    ing is playful (if not downright mischievous). And the Teddy Grahams
    are tangible. On these two attributes my game is successful. However,
    the game doesn’t fare so well on the remaining principles: although my
    presence is not a bad thing, this doesn’t encourage self-directed learn-
    ing, and the correction comes entirely from me and is not discovered.
    As for the intelligence, it’s dependent on my presence.

Free download pdf