EFECTO DE DIFERENTES PORTAINJERTOS SOBRE LAS RESERVAS EN RAÍCES

Previous studies have demonstrated how location-based activities, using handheld computers with GPS, can deliver engaging mobile learning activities. Environmental Detectives (Squire and Klopfer, 2007), Savannah (Facer et al., 2004), and Frequency 1550 (Huizenga et al., 2009) are exemplary projects that have all shown that mobile game-based learning activities have the power to engage learners and enable innovative learning activities using physical spaces as learning environments.

However, a lack of comparative evaluations means it is difficult for us to determine the exact source of this engagement, and how the use of mobile learning provides specific benefits beyond traditional interactive learning activities.

Dede and Dunleavy (2007), who describe the use of handhelds to deliver an interactive learning activity that requires learners to explore a physical space and gather information, state that it is unclear where the engagement comes from in these learning activities Ð is it the location-based activity, the use of the physical environment, or just the novelty factor of being outdoors with a PDA? In a recent review of the field, Frohberg et al. (2009) have also highlighted the need for comparative studies to help explore the issues pertaining specifically to mobile and location-based learning.

Crucially, some aspects of these outdoor mobile learning activities might actually hinder learners in their performance of the underlying learning activity. Again, without studies comparing outdoor, mobile learning with more traditional activities indoors, it is difficult if not impossible to state what these factors might be. Some previous studies, such as Savannah (Facer et al., 2004), have identified pragmatic issues and specific aspects of the learning activity used in their study that were detrimental to the performance of the activity as a whole (see Section 2.4.6.1), but these findings cannot easily be generalised.

To design the next generation of mobile learning activities that exploit location-based, handheld technologies, we need to build a clearer picture of what it is in these activities that learners find appealing, so that we can better exploit it. We must also include in this picture some indicators of what aspects of these tasks, as currently implemented, can detract from the learning activity. This latter point has so far gone relatively unaddressed in the field (Dede et al., 2005; Frohberg et al., 2009); the novelty of these technologies means that researchers and practitioners alike are prone to a high degree of enthusiasm with regard to their use so evaluation tends to be biased towards searching out the positives rather the negatives.

5.1.2 Aims

This study aims to compare an outdoor, location-based learning activity, enabled using mobile devices, with an indoor learning activity using the same technological support. By using this direct comparative design, we aim to identify those aspects of being outdoors with mobile, location-based technologies that can actively engage and support learners, and those aspects that actually hinder the learning process.

Additionally, Study 1 is intended as a first exploratory use of the PaSAT system to determine its suitability for deploying location-based learning games and to assess whether this type of system can deliver tangible benefits for learners. Findings from this study were fed into the development of the PaSAT toolkit to help refine the technical, pedagogical and ludic aspects of its functionality.

Since this was an exploratory study, there are no specific experimental or research hypotheses, however we developed several expectations during the course of reviewing previous work that helped to focus our attention during task observation and analysis. Our intention was not to determine whether the outdoor mobile learning activity was superior or inferior to the indoor version, since we did not optimise the activity for either environment. Instead, we focused on identifying issues that either helped or hindered in both cases. Before designing activities intended to support learners in a field condition, it was essential to gain first-hand experience of the problems faced by learners and teachers alike. Reports in the literature tend to focus on the positive aspects brought about by location-based learning, and we wished to see directly what problems could arise as well as what benefits.

We expected the outdoor condition to engage because we were giving them the PDA, but with the indoor condition allowing us to identify the aspects that came only from the presence of the technology itself we aimed to identify factors that arose from the

combination of handheld computer, location-based activity, and direct coupling with the physical environment.

However, we are more concerned with what problems may arise as a result of learners using the PDAs outside, away from the classroom, so that we can determine how to support situated enquiry learning. Problems that were expected to arise from outdoor use include:

1. Moving around outside takes more time: exploring a space and map through physical movement will take longer than performing the same task using a point-and-click interface (as in the control condition). It is expected that learners will take longer to complete even simple tasks using the PaSAT system outdoors.

2. Distractions: there are far more potential distractions outdoors, both in terms of physical artefacts and also the activity of other learners. It is expected that, at times, learners using PaSAT outside may be more distracted and be less focused on the task.

3. Dissonance between physical world and informatic space: the layering of a virtual informatic space on top of a physical space is the central premise behind PaSAT, however, this layering could lead to problems if there is too much of a mismatch between what learners see on the screen and what they see in the physical world.

To evaluate the impact of the device and the environment on the learning process, compared to the indoor version, our evaluation was structured around several core questions:

Do any observed benefits arise from the additional, situated functionality provided by the system, or are they due to the novelty and engaging nature of the task itself?

It is important to ask whether any observed benefits of interactive educational technology can be attributed to the actual functionality of the system or whether they arise simply from the novelty of the technology itself and hence increased engagement from the learners. This issue has been raised for participatory simulations, most recently by Dede & Dunleavy (2007). This study attempts to begin to answer this question by using an experimental design that controls for the use of movement-based interactions. The novelty factor of being outside will be removed for the control condition, indicating whether or not this is a major factor in the engaging power of the system. If the novelty factor remains for the control condition this will suggest that the use of the technology itself is novel enough to lead to increased engagement. The only way to control for that would be to run longitudinal studies where learners were given long term access to this kind of technology, thus eliminating the novelty factor. Such longitudinal studies will be possible with future versions of PaSAT.

Does the use of PaSAT to learn about flooding lead to a richer learning process than the indoor condition?

Rogers et al. (2002) found that the coupling of a familiar action with an unfamiliar digital response was effective in getting children to talk about and reflect upon their experience. It is expected that children using PaSAT outside will talk more about what they are doing and display more reflective activity than those in the control condition, because of the coupling of movement with information display and trail making. The act of movement is coupled with content display and trail making in the outdoor condition; in the indoor version the initial act is always a click on the screen, to which any computer-based response will be familiar.

We can relate this reaction to an unfamiliar response to KolbÕs cycle of engagement and reflection (Kolb and Fry, 1975), whereby a learner who is actively engaged in concrete experience is then cued to reflect on that experience, form a conceptualisation of what they have seen, and then to engage again in active experimentation. Considering this in the context of movement-based learning activities, an obvious question is how to support the learner in this cycle and how to cue reflection in appropriate circumstances. One of the major advantages of using mobile technology such as PDAs to facilitate learning activities is that the PDA can be used to prompt and guide the learner in a context-sensitive way, directing them to engage and reflect at suitable times. This kind of support could be built-in to later versions of PaSAT, so this present study aims to identify where this kind of support could be given, and how it might be provided.

Do the design of the task and the available functions lend themselves to a gameplay style of activity? What aspects can be exploited and improved to make the most of studentsÕ tendency to ÔplayÕ the activity?

Games have been shown to be effective motivating activities for learning, and interactive activities that incorporate one or more of the core elements of gameplay as identified by Malone (Malone, 1980) are likely to give rise to a fun, game-like experience.

Malone has identified fantasy, curiosity, and challenge as the key elements for a compelling gaming experience. The use of physical movement and interaction with a physical space is expected to lead to the activity seeming more game-like, with a clearer sense of the goal (challenge) and also a stronger notion of the fantasy aspect of being engaged in a role-playing activity. Curiosity is also expected to be greater in the outside environment than using a screen-based system, because of the coupling of familiar actions with unfamiliar results (cf. Rogers et al., 2002; Rogers and Price,

2004). It is expected that motivation and engagement will be increased by virtue of the outside condition being more game-like than the indoor version: learners take on roles and have tasks to perform in collaboration with other learners. Increased motivation and engagement are expected to lead to observable changes in learning outcome and process.

However, what is not clear is how the different elements of gameplay map on to studentsÕ behaviours when engaged in an outdoor learning experience. Many previous projects have cited Ôgame-likeÕ activities without actually making use of the full range of popular gaming mechanisms (for example Environmental Detectives Ð see discussion in Chapter 2, Section 2.4.6.3). By observing the studentsÕ activities with the PDAs both indoors and out, we will be able to determine which aspects of the learning activities are supported by game elements, and in what way. In particular, we are interested in what aspects of the system capture the studentsÕ interests, and any behaviours they exhibit that indicate they are engaged in the task as a fun activity.

Where do breakdowns occur in the use of the system and what gives rise to them?

A range of problems with the system is expected, both technical and practical in nature. These were recorded by the observers and in video logs and with the intention being to use these observations to improve the design of PaSAT and to inform the design of subsequent mobile learning activities to be used in this thesis.

Where do breakthroughs (unexpected successes) occur in the use of the system and what gives rise to them?

It was expected that there will be a number of Ôeureka momentsÕ when learners discover that they are able to perform particular functions using the system that lead to specific instances of engagement or understanding.