Is Embodied Interaction Beneficial When Learning Programming?

  • Pablo Romero
  • Benedict du Boulay
  • Judy Robertson
  • Judith Good
  • Katherine Howland
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5622)


Embodied interaction has been claimed to offer important advantages for learning programming. However frequently claims have been based on intuitions and work in the area has focused largely around system-building rather than on evaluation and reflection around those claims. Taking into account research in the area as well as in areas such as tangibles, psychology of programming and the learning and teaching of programming, this paper identifies a set of important factors to take into account when analysing the potential of learning environments for programming employing embodied interaction. These factors are formulated as a set of questions that could be asked either when designing or analysing this type of learning environments.


Programming Environment Learn Program Image Schema Programming Concept Initial Framework 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dourish, P.: Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. MIT Press, London (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blackwell, A.: What is programming? In: Kuljis, J., Baldwin, L., Scoble, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 14th annual workshop of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group, pp. 204–218 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    du Boulay, B.: Some difficulties of learning to program. In: Soloway, E., Spohrer, J. (eds.) Studying the Novice Programmer, pp. 283–299. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1989)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rist, R.S.: Plans in programming: definition, demonstration and development. In: Soloway, E., Iyengar, S. (eds.) Empirical Studies of Programmers, first workshop, pp. 28–47. Ablex Publishing, Norwood, New Jersey (1986)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gilmore, D.J., Green, T.R.G.: Programming plans and programming expertise. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 40A, 423–442 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gilmore, D.J.: Expert programming knowledge: a strategic approach. In: Hoc, J., Green, T.R.G., Samurcay, R., Gilmore, D.J. (eds.) Psychology of Programming, pp. 223–234. Academic Press, London (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hornecker, E., Buur, J.: Getting a grip on tangible interaction: a framework on physical space and social interaction. In: CHI 2006: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in computing systems, pp. 437–446. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Price, S.: A representation approach to conceptualizing tangible learning environments. In: TEI 2008: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction, pp. 151–158. ACM Press, New York (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Purchase, H.: Defining multimedia. IEEE MultiMedia 5, 8–15 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ainsworth, S.: Deft: A conceptual framework for considering learning with multiple representations. Learning and Instruction 16, 183–198 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hurtienne, J., Israel, J.H.: Image schemas and their metaphorical extensions: intuitive patterns for tangible interaction. In: TEI 2007: Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction, pp. 127–134. ACM Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson, M.: The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    McDowell, C., Werner, L., Bullock, H., Fernald, J.: The impact of pair-programming on student performance, perception and persistence. In: Clarke, L., Dillon, L., Tichy, W. (eds.) Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 602–607. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Roth, W.M., Lawless, D.: Scientific investigations, metaphorical gestures, and the emergence of abstract scientific concepts. Learning and Instruction 12, 285–304 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Papert, S.: Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, New York (1980)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lindley, S.E., Couteur, J.L., Berthouze, N.L.: Stirring up experience through movement in game play: effects on engagement and social behaviour. In: CHI 2008: Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 511–514. ACM Press, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Resnick, M., Martin, F., Sargent, R., Silverman, B.: Programmable bricks: toys to think with. IBM Systems Journal 35, 443–452 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    McNerney, T.S.: From turtles to tangible programming bricks: explorations in physical language design. Personal Ubiquitous Computing 8, 326–337 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Boogaarts, M., Daudelin, J.A., Davis, B.L., Kelly, J., Levy, D., Morris, L., Rhodes, F., Rhodes, R., Scholz, M.P., Smith, C.R., Torok, R.: The lego mindstorms nxt idea book: design, invent, and build. Ubiquity 8, 2 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Horn, M.S., Jacob, R.J.K.: Tangible programming in the classroom with tern. In: CHI 2007: extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 1965–1970. ACM Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wyeth, P., Purchase, H.C.: Tangible programming elements for young children. In: CHI 2002: extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, pp. 774–775. ACM Press, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kelleher, C., Pausch, R.: Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments and languages for novice programmers. ACM Computing Surveys 37, 83–137 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Montemayor, J., Druin, A., Chipman, G., Farber, A., Guha, M.L.: Tools for children to create physical interactive storyrooms. Comput. Entertain. 2, 12–12 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Romero, P., Good, J., Robertson, J., du Boulay, B., Reid, H., Howland, K.: Embodied interaction in authoring environments. In: Ramduny-Ellis, D., Hare, J., Gill, S., Dix, A. (eds.) Proceedings of the second Workshop on Physicality, pp. 43–46. UWIC Press, Lancaster (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pablo Romero
    • 1
  • Benedict du Boulay
    • 1
  • Judy Robertson
    • 2
  • Judith Good
    • 1
  • Katherine Howland
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsUniversity of SussexBrightonUK
  2. 2.Department of Mathematical and Computer SciencesHeriot-Watt UniversityEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations