Toolkits and Making – Stuart Nicholson

Human Computer Interaction (HCI) as a strand of computing emerged within the 1980’s and has since been consistently adapting to different trends of research. It has expanded from desktop office applications (WIMP) to include the likes of games, learning and education, commerce, health and medical applications, emergency planning and response as well as systems to support collaboration, infrastructure creation and community. The area of tangible computing differs from HCI in that it focuses predominantly on using physical objects, surfaces and spaces for representing more abstract information such as ideas, qualities and feelings. One way in which tangible computing exemplifies itself is with a graspable user interface – physical objects being used as an interface for a computer system which performs a certain task. An example of tangible computing includes “Things” such as the Digital Photo Browser which associates real RFID tagged objects with photos and offers a series of tools for ordering and authoring. However, a contrasting area of HCI named UbiComp is working towards a much different vision (Weisner) which attempts to decrease the amount of visible technology around us in society. Weisner’s idea of calm computing is in direct contrast to the fundamentals of tangible user interfaces as it demands “focus and attention”.

Our group for Toolkits and Making consists of Dan R, Zeinab, Janis and I. With this in mind there was ample chance to discuss potential papers prior to the session. Janis had established an impressive collection of 24 potentially relevant pieces of literature and was kind enough to point out a number of papers which focused on toolkits within an educational context; something of which she knew I had an interest in. With this, I conducted further reading into the toolkits that were mentioned in a summary article titled “Hybrid rafting: towards an integrated practice of crafting with physical and digital components” and began to investigate how toolkits fit into education. Subsequent papers were found through the ACM digital library by searching for them by their toolkit name (e.g. Plushbot). The three papers I have chosen are:

1. Interaction Design as a Bricolage Practice (2015) Availabel via: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=2677199.2680594

Chosen because: Inspires students to think of novel ways in which they can use inaccurate technology. This enables them to think outside the normal parameters of what can be done and start to think about problem solving to an extent.

2. Plushbot: An Application for the Design of Programmable, Interactive Stuffed Toys. (2011) Available via: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1935701.1935753

Chosen because: A very unique idea that makes use of stuffed toys that would be particularly engaging for primary school children. The Arduino Lilly pad technology used is also cheap and easy to use along with the associated software for drawing diagrams.

3. TagTiles: Optimal Challenge in Educational Electronics (2007) Available via: http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=1226969.1227008

Chosen because: An early example of a tangible user interface being implemented on a simple plasma screen technology that promoted control and learning with high levels of enthusiasm throughout – in a way this can be seen as a benchmark for future education based tangible interfaces.