Edutainment: a case study of interactive cd-rom playsets

ABSTRACT

With recent growth of the childrens software sector, companies are pushing to create innovative software packages for home and school. Edutainmentsoftware intended to educate children through the use of entertainmentis one of the quickest growing sectors in the children's software field. This exploratory study investigated how children interacted with two new games that combine hands-on computer input devices with software: the Easy Bake Oven PlaySet" and the Tonka Workshop" PlaySet. Children were observed in order to study their behavior patterns and preferences concerning the new toys. Data collected describes participants preferences, ergonomics difficulties, and software understanding. This initial research suggested that: (1) childrens gender was uncorrelated with their interaction or preferences; (2) childrens age was correlated with their ability to use and understand the software and playset; and (3) knowledge learned while using one playset transferred to the second playset. These results open the door for further research into gender issues, ergonomics, metaphor understanding, learnability, and the ability of young children to use and understand the physical and virtual worlds of the playsets.

REFERENCES

• 1: ALTO, P. 1998. Entertain preschoolers with innovative technology: HP offers creative home technology tips for parents. Online: http://www.hp.com/preschool/aug98/03aug98f.htm.
• 2: BEATO, G. 1997. Computer games for girls is no longer an oxymoron. Wired 5.04 (April 1997). Online: http://www.wired.com/wired/5.04/es_girlgames.html.
• 3: BUCKLEITNER, W. 1999. The state of children's software evaluation--Yesterday, today and in the 21st century. Information Technology in Childhood Education, 211-220.
• 4: Children's Software Revue Evaluation Form. 2000. Children's software revue. Online: www.childrenssoftware.com.
• 5: Allison Druin, Age matters, ACM SIGCHI Bulletin - a supplement to interactions, 2002, September-October 2002 [doi>10.1145/568190.568196]
• 6: DRUIN, A. AND FAST, K. 2002. The child as learner, critic, inventor, and technology design partner: An analysis of three years of Swedish student journals. Int. J. Technol. and Design Education 12, 3 (2002), 189-213.
• 7: Libby Hanna , Kirsten Risden , Kirsten Alexander, Guidelines for usability testing with children, interactions, v.4 n.5, p.9-14, Sept./Oct. 1997 [doi>10.1145/264044.264045]
• 8: Libby Hanna , Kirsten Risden , Mary Czerwinski , Kristin J. Alexander, The role of usability research in designing children's computer products, The design of children's technology, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, 1998
• 9: LARKIN, S. 2002. Usability, Jr. -- How to run a successful usability test with children. STC Usability SIG Newsl. 8, 3 (Jan. 2002).
• 10: LEWIS, J. R. 1994. Sample sizes for usability studies: Additional considerations. Human Factors, 36(2), 368- 378.
• 11: MARTIN, P. AND BATESON, P. 1993. Measuring Behaviour: An Introductory Guide. 2nd ed. Cambridge: University Press.
• 12: MAULSBY, C. 1997. Going to sea and other adventures in learning: A kindergarten perspective on play. Online: http://www.cfc-efc.ca/docs/cccf/00000984.htm.
• 13: National Association for the Education of Young Children. 1996. Toys: Tools for learning. Online: http://www.thelaboroflove.com/forum/childcare/toys.html.
• 14: NIELSEN, J. 2000. Why you only need to test with 5 users. In Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox (March 19, 2000).
• 15: NIELSEN, J. 2002. Kids' corner: Website usability for children. In Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox (April 14, 2002).
• 16: Donald A. Norman, The invisible computer, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998
• 17: PIAGET, J. 1961. Extracts from Piaget's theory. In Manual of Child Psychology. P.H. Mussen, ed.. Wiley, London, 1970. 703-732.
• 18: Jenny Preece , Yvonne Rogers , Helen Sharp , David Benyon , Simon Holland , Tom Carey, Human-Computer Interaction, Addison-Wesley Longman Ltd., Essex, UK, 1994
• 19: Robert A. Virzi, Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: how many subjects is enough?, Human Factors, v.34 n.4, p.457-468, Aug. 1992
• 20: WEIL, E. 1997. The girl-game jinx. Salon. Online: http://archive.salon.com/21st/feature/1997/12/cov_10feature.html.
• 21: WILLIAMSON, M. AND KOLOMYJEC, B. 1996. Deconstructing play: Theory and practice. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Symposium on Small Computers in the Arts (Philadelphia, PA, Nov. 1-2, 1996).
• 22: WILSON, D., RAUCH, T., AND PAIGE, J. 1992. Generating metaphors for graphical user interfaces. Online: www.firelily.com/opinions/metaphor.html.
• 23: WOOD, D., BRUNER, J., AND ROSS, G. 1976. The role of tutoring in problem solving. J. Child Psychology and Psychiatry 17 (1976), 89-100.
• 24: YOUNG, R. 1997. Females and computer games. Quandary Computer Game Reviews. Online: http://www.quandaryland.com/1997/femgames.htm.