Laura Marie Leventhal, Computer Science Dale Klopfer, Psychology Guy Zimmerman, Computer Science

Empowering Student Learning in the Geologic Sciences with Three Dimensional Interactive

Animation and Low Cost Virtual Reality

Laura Marie Leventhal, Computer Science Dale Klopfer, PsychologyGuy Zimmerman, Computer ScienceCharlie Onasch, Geology

NMSU - May 2, 2008Leventhal, Klopfer, Onasch,

Zimmerman

Overview

Research in context Spatial cognition Use of 3DIA tools for

Standard task Profile task

Summary

Leventhal

What Can I Say

I am not a geoscientist or chemist Area HCI

Research focuses• Spatial cognition (perception, wayfinding)• Underrepresented groups

Our team CS, HCI, Psychology, Geology

Leventhal

Geoscience Learning and Innovative Representations

Our premise Student understanding of concepts thought

to involve processing of spatial information • Can be improved using three dimensional

animation and interactive animation tools• Especially for those students with lower spatial

ability

Tools should be useful in large or small size lab sections

Leventhal

Evidence Research

Multimedia learning Geoscience education Spatial perception HCI

Interesting results Benefits, especially to persons of low SA

• Dual presentations• Highly interactive

• Interactive control• Interactive manipulation

Leventhal

Pitfalls?

Ha ha – I am an HCI person so here it is Designing for problem (user, task)

• Tempting to build latest technology without data support

• Might be a good projects but poor task match Design of usable systems is difficult Evaluation is difficult

• Determining causality in a complex environment


Zimmerman

Spatial Cognition

Why do we care about spatial perception and spatial cognition? Much of human functioning is tied to

processing of spatial information Spatial cognition is “old” by evolutionary

standards


Zimmerman

Spatial Cognition and STEM Education

Why do we care about spatial cognition in STEM education? Many tasks require the processing of spatial

information Reported in many areas of science, including

chemistry Learners with low spatial skills may be

systematically disadvantaged People show vast individual differences

Gender does not predict these differences uniformly


Zimmerman

Spatial Cognition and Visual Computerized Presentations

Why do we care about spatial cognition in HCI? There are similar patterns of behaviors

between functioning in the real world and in computerized presentations

• Visualization• Wayfinding and navigation• Information preferences


Zimmerman

What is “Spatial Ability”

Generally refers to skill in representing, transforming, generating, and recalling symbolic, nonlinguistic information Involves multiple processes No clear agreement what the cognitive

processes are


Zimmerman

Some correlates of SA include…

Mental rotation Ability to rotate a 2D or 3D object accurately and

rapidly

Spatial Visualization the ability to manipulate visual patterns without

regard to speed of task solution

Measured via standardized psychometric tests


Zimmerman

Our Focus 3D Interactive Animations (3DIA) 3DIA =

3DMA 3DCA

3DIA??? How does 3DIA impact performance on tasks

that involve Mental rotations Visualization

Structure of research Develop/test a 3DIA tool that allows “Lows” to

improve performance on standardized test? Develop/test 3DIA tool that improves performance of

“Lows” on geologic problem solving task


Zimmerman


Zimmerman

Standard Task Involving Mental Rotation

Cube Comparison Task - CCT Task is to determine if the two cubes could be the

same Complexity of rotation can be varied Can discriminate between “lows” and “highs” relative

to mental rotation


Zimmerman

Our Research - Cube Comparison Task

Subjects can manipulate cube in 3D with tool


Zimmerman

Summary of Findings from 3DIA CCT studies HCI result of interest

The interactive rotational tool moderates ability differences and differences due to stimulus complexity in reaction time.

Similar to paper and pencil Lower spatial ability subjects do worse than

higher ability subjects Lower spatial ability subjects do differentially

better with more complex stimuli.


Zimmerman

Why Care about 3DIA CCT? Spatial skills needed in the CCT similar to those

used in other tasks Generation of a profile from a topographic map

Taught in many geoscience curriculae Earlier studies suggest that

Task differentially more difficult with increasing stimulus complexity

Task differentially more difficult for lower spatial ability subjects


Zimmerman

A topographic map


Zimmerman

The profile task: determine the elevations changes along the path

A

B

A

B

Map with profile line

Resulting profile


Zimmerman

3DIA and Profile Task

Can a 3DIA tool help?• Higher complexity problems• Low ability subjects


Zimmerman

Software for Studies

Integrated web site Section 508 certified Accesssible by NDSL Available at SERC

http://voyager.cs.bgsu.edu/topo

Demonstration of training software for studies


Zimmerman


Zimmerman

Lab Study Experimental Design IVs

Spatial ability Presence/absence of 3DIA tool 3 levels of problem complexity 1st 1/2 vs. 2nd 1/2 of trials

DVs Accuracy Reaction Time and number of slices rotated Performance with real topo maps Strategy


Zimmerman

Study 2 Accuracy ResultsAccuracy Study 2

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1 2 3

Problem Type

% Correct

Day 1 High No Rotate

Day 1 High Rotate

Day 1 Low No Rotate

Day 1 Low Rotate

Day 3 High No Rotate

Day 3 High Rotate

Day 3 Low No Rotate

Day 3 Low Rotate


Zimmerman

Study 2 Results Number of Slice Events

n of slice events, rotaters only

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

pType 1 pType 2 pType 3

Problem Type

Avg # of slice events

half 1 high rotatehalf 1 low rotatehalf 2 high rotatehalf 2 low rotate


Zimmerman

Study 2 Topo Test Results Accuracy for Naturalistic Test

Significant improvement on the second 1/2 of the test items

Significant interaction between tool availability and half of test.

• Non-rotaters were better the first 1/2 but rotaters were better the second 1/2


Zimmerman

What Does this Mean? 3DIA tool improves accuracy.

Differential for low spatial ability subjects on more difficult problems

Tool use drops in second 1/2 of task but accuracy does not

• Subjects may have learned how to do task via tool

Other findings Validated that problem complexity influences

performance Validated that spatial ability influences performance


Zimmerman

What is Next? Ran approximately 80 Geology 104 students

through task plus 3DIA tutorial Evaluating data

Building Additional component for learning about building

profiles with tablet pc Website dissemination with 3DIA tutorial and

integrated feedback 3DIA Tools for other geoscience problems

• Visualization of substrata structure


Zimmerman

Thanks to…

CERMACSThis work was supported by funding from

National Science Foundation(Award ID 0536739)

Bowling Green State UniversityFaculty Research CommitteeDepartment of Computer ScienceDepartment of PsychologyDepartment of GeologyCollege of Arts and SciencesOffice of Undergraduate Research


Zimmerman


Zimmerman

Identity Test The Identity test requires individuals to

discriminate objects of similar shapes with similar features. Consists of two 90 second blocks with 48 trials in

each block. Does not require mental manipulations of the

images.


Zimmerman

Cards Test The Cards test requires individuals to mentally

rotate an object to see if it matches another object or not. Consisted of two 180 second blocks with 80 trials in

each block. (Image below has 8 trials) Does not require identification of the object. Objects are 2D


Zimmerman

Paper Folding Test The Paper Folding test requires that an

individual both manipulate the initial object and then mentally undo the manipulation to it. Consisted of two 180 second blocks with 10 trials in

each block.


Zimmerman

Further variations of Study 2 - Geology Pilot Sp 07 1/2 of students in conventional lab experience. 1/2 of students

saw powerpoint tutorial with chimes added 1 added slide demonstrating by animation the process of

building a topo map from a 3D surface (by filling or by painting) completed profile matching task from Study 2 all rotaters x participants

All students completed Topo Test on paper and pencil


Zimmerman

Further variations of Study 2 - Geology Pilot Su 07 (1) 1/2 of students in conventional lab experience 1/2 of students

saw web-based version of tutorial with no sound 1 added slide demonstrating by animation the process of building a

topo map from a 3D surface (by painting) 1 added slide with 3DIA painting demonstration 2 added slides showing the relationship between a 3D surface and a

topographic map by increasing levels of detail in the topographic map completed profile matching task from Study 2; all rotaters 9 participants


Zimmerman

Further variations of Study 2 - Geology Pilot Su 07 (2) All students completed an extended Topo Test on paper

and pencil Extended Topo test included profile matching task and topo -

3D surface matching trials Given in a pre/post test format. Short overview of topographic

maps provided for pre test Pre test given before web-based tutorial

All students completed a background questionnaire


Zimmerman

Summer Geology 104 Pilot

No measure of SA All rotaters Tutorial with 3DIA, increasing detail topo

to 3D surface presentation Pretest before profile task Pilot test of background questionnaire


Zimmerman

Summer Geo Pilot Results (1)

Acc Significant effect of pType

RT Significant effect of half, pType

n of Slice Events almost significant effect of half, significant

effect of pType


Zimmerman

Summer Geo Results (2)

TopoTest tool use group slightly better but result is not

significant Have not yet looked at correlations of

DVs with background data Conclude

Pattern of results similar to Study 2


Zimmerman

Compare Summer to Study 2ACC Summer vs Study 2

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2


Problem Type

% Correct

half 1 summerhalf 1 Study 2half 2 summerhalf 2 Study 2 RT Summer vs Study 2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


Problem Type

RT (seconds)

half 1 summerhalf 1 Study 2half 2 summerhalf 2 Study 2n of Slice Events Summer vs Study 2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8


Problem Type

n of Slice Events

half 1 summerhalf 1 Study 2half 2 summerhalf 2 Study 2


Zimmerman

Compare Study 2 to Summer Geo Main Effects Acc

pType experiment (Study 2

vs. Summer Geo)

Main Effects RT half, pType

Main Effects, n of slce half, pType

Interactions Acc half x pType x expType

Interactions RT half x expType half x pType half x pType x expType

Interactions n of slice half x expType


Zimmerman

Interpret Summer Geo vs. Study 2 Accuracy of Summer higher, differential

improvement by problem type RT of Summer faster, all faster second half,

differential drop by problem type Summer used tool much more in first half than

Study 2 and much less than Study 2 in second 1/2

Influence of SA not known


Zimmerman

Role of New Tutorial In general Summer Geo students did better on the task

and more effectively used the tool, especially in the second 1/2 of the trials

This is given that there were some low SAs in the Summer Geo Pilot group we think

Conclude that even with the layout problems in the tutorial materials and some timing glitches, the changes and additions to the tutorial make it more effective

Documents

Laura Marie Leventhal, Computer Science Dale Klopfer, Psychology Guy Zimmerman, Computer Science