Around the table: Are multiple-touch surfaces better than single-touch for children's collaborative interactions?

Amanda Harris*, Jochen Rick, Victoria Bonnett, Nicola Yuill, Rowanne Fleck, Paul Marshall, Yvonne Rogers

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference Contribution (Conference Proceeding)

160 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper presents a classroom study that investigated the potential of using touch tabletop technology to support children's collaborative learning interactions. Children aged 7- 10 worked in groups of three on a collaborative planning task in which they designed a seating plan for their classroom. In the single-touch condition, the tabletop surface allowed only one child to interact with the digital content at a time. In the multiple-touch condition, the children could interact with the digital content simultaneously. Results showed that touch condition did not affect the frequency or equity of interactions, but did influence the nature of children's discussion. In the multiple-touch condition, children talked more about the task; in the singletouch condition, they talked more about turn taking. We also report age and gender differences.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationComputer Supported Collaborative Learning Practices, CSCL 2009 Conference Proceedings - 9th International Conference
Pages335-344
Number of pages10
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2009
Event9th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2009, CSCL 2009 - Rhodes, Greece
Duration: 8 Jun 200913 Jun 2009

Conference

Conference9th International Conference on Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning 2009, CSCL 2009
Country/TerritoryGreece
CityRhodes
Period8/06/0913/06/09

Research Groups and Themes

  • Bristol Interaction Group

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Around the table: Are multiple-touch surfaces better than single-touch for children's collaborative interactions?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this