Exploring the Intersection of Emotional Literacy and Computational Modeling Using Scratch
Author: 
Ralph VaccaAuthors Info & Claims
Pages 849 - 858
Abstract
Computational thinking learning tools such as Scratch support forms of expressive making that can aid in reflection and understanding complex scientific concepts and systems. However, little research has explored how such computational tools might support forms of emotional literacy such as developing an understanding of emotions. Through an exploratory design with 11 participants, Scratch was used to create models representing participants' emotion knowledge. The overarching research question focused on how might computational tools aid in supporting reflection on emotion knowledge. Analysis of artifacts generated through sketching and Scratch, as well as transcribed design discussions were used as points of data analysis. Drawing on theories of computational thinking and emotional literacy, we present an analysis that highlights the potential for such tools to support certain reflective practices around emotion knowledge.
References
[1]
Barker, L.A. and Adelman, H.S. 1994. Mental health and help-seeking among ethnic minority adolescents. Journal of Adolescence.
[2]
Blikstein, P. and Wilensky, U. 2009. An atom is known by the company it keeps: A constructionist learning environment for materials science using agent-based modeling. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning. 14, 2 (2009), 81--119.
[3]
Bosse, T. et al. 2010. A computational model based on Gross' emotion regulation theory. Cognitive Systems Research. 11, (2010), 211--230.
[4]
Castro, V.L. et al. 2016. EUReKA! A Conceptual Model of Emotion Understanding. Emotion Review. 8, 3 (Jul. 2016), 258--268.
[5]
Cetin, I. and Dubinsky, E. 2017. Reflective abstraction in computational thinking. 47, July (2017), 70--80.
[6]
Denham, S.A. et al. 1994. Socialization of Preschoolers' Emotion Understanding. Developmental Psychology. 30, 6 (1994), 928--936.
[7]
Ekman, P. and Cordaro, D. 2011. What is meant by calling emotions basic. Emotion Review. 3, 4 (2011), 364--370.
[8]
Feurzeig, W. and Roberts, N. 1999. Modeling and simulation in science and mathematics education.
[9]
Fogel, A. et al. 1997. Communication of smiling and laughter in mother-infant play: research on emotion from a dynamic systems perspective. New directions for child development, No. 77. The communication of emotion: Current research from diverse perspectives. Jossey-Bass. 5--24.
[10]
Fong, A. and Froehlich, J. 2013. Bear-With-Me?: An Embodied Prototype to Explore Tangible Two-Way Exchanges of Emotional Language. (2013), 1011--1016.
[11]
Garland, E.L. et al. 2010. Upward spirals of positive emotions counter downward spirals of negativity: Insights from the broaden-and-build theory and affective neuroscience on the treatment of emotion dysfunctions and deficits in psychopathology. Clinical Psychology Review. 30, 7 (2010), 849--864.
[12]
Gobert, J.D. and Pallant, A. 2004. Fostering Students' Epistemologies of Models via Authentic Model-Based Tasks. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 13, 1 (2004), 7--22.
[13]
Gotwals, A.W. and Songer, N.B. 2010. Reasoning up and down a food chain: Using an assessment framework to investigate students' middle knowledge. Science Education. 94, 2 (2010), 259--281.
[14]
Gross, J.J. 2001. Emotion Regulation in Adulthood: Timing Is Everything. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 10, 6 (2001), 214--219.
[15]
Grühn, D. et al. 2013. Time-based indicators of emotional complexity: Interrelations and correlates. Emotion. 13, 2 (2013), 226--237.
[16]
Hall, J.A. et al. 2009. Psychosocial correlates of interpersonal sensitivity: A meta-analysis. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior. 33, 3 (2009), 149--180.
[17]
Izard, C. et al. 2001. Emotion knowledge as a predictor of social behavior and academic competence in children at risk. Psychological Science. 12, 1 (2001), 18--23.
[18]
Jackson, S.L. et al. 1996. A learner-centered tool for students building models. Communications of the ACM. 39, 4 (1996), 48--49.
[19]
Joi, Y.R. et al. 2015. WearLove. Proceedings of the 2015 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play - CHI PLAY '15 (New York, New York, USA, 2015), 559--564.
[20]
Kazemifard, M. et al. 2014. An emotion understanding framework for intelligent agents based on episodic and semantic memories. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. 28, 1 (2014), 126--153.
[21]
Koerner, A. and Fitzpatrick, M.A. 2002. Nonverbal communication and marital adjustment and satisfaction: The role of decoding relationship relevant and relationship irrelevant affect. Communication Monographs. 69, 1 (2002), 33--51.
[22]
Kral, T.R.A. et al. 2018. Neural correlates of video game empathy training in adolescents: a randomized trial. npj Science of Learning. 3, 1 (2018), 13.
[23]
Labouvie-Vief, G. et al. 2010. Dynamic Integration of Emotion and Cognition: Equilibrium Regulation in Development and Aging. The Handbook of Life-Span Development. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
[24]
Lopez, V. and Hernandez, M.I. 2015. Scratch as a computational modelling tool for teaching physics. Physics Education. 50, 3 (May 2015), 310--316.
[25]
Martinez, A. et al. 2016. Emotion-bracelet: A web service for expressing emotions through an electronic interface. Sensors (Switzerland). 16, 12 (2016), 2--15.
[26]
McRae, K. et al. 2012. Unpacking cognitive reappraisal: goals, tactics, and outcomes. Emotion (Washington, D.C.). 12, 2 (Apr. 2012), 250--5.
[27]
Papert, S. 1980. Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books, Inc.
[28]
Peebles, A. et al. 2018. Questions + answers + agency: Interactive touchscreens and Children's learning from a socio-emotional TV story. Computers in Human Behavior. 85, (Aug. 2018), 339--348.
[29]
Penner, D.E. et al. 2016. From Physical Models to Biomechanics?: A Design-Based Modeling Approach Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article?: From Physical Models to Biomechanics?: A Design-Based Modeling Approach. 7, 3 (2016), 429--449.
[30]
Peppler, K. and Wohlwend, K. 2018. Theorizing the nexus of STEAM practice. Arts Education Policy Review. 119, 2 (2018), 88--99.
[31]
Piaget, J. 1985. The equilibration of cognitive structures: The central problem of intellectual development. (1985).
[32]
Pitterman, H. and Nowicki, S. 2004. A test of the ability to identify emotion in human standing and sitting postures: The diagnostic analysis of nonverbal accuracy-2 posture test (danva2-pos). Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs. 130, 2 (2004), 146--162.
[33]
Pons, F. et al. 2004. Emotion comprehension between 3 and 11 years: Developmental periods and hierarchical organization. European Journal of Developmental Psychology. 1, 2 (2004), 127--152.
[34]
Puttick, G. 2018. Building Systems from Scratch?: an Exploratory Study of Students Learning About Climate Change. (2018), 306--321.
[35]
Resnick, M. et al. 2009. Scratch: programming for all. Communications of the ACM. 52, 11 (2009), 60--67.
[36]
Riess, W. and Mischo, C. 2010. Promoting Systems Thinking through Biology Lessons. International Journal of Science Education. 32, 6 (Apr. 2010), 705--725.
[37]
Sabelli, N.H. 2006. Complexity, Technology, Science and Education. Journal of the Learning Sciences. 15, 1 (2006), 5--9.
[38]
Schon, D. 1983. From technical rationality to reflection-in-action. 1993) Boundaries of Adult Learning. (1983), 8--31.
[39]
Schon, D.A. and DeSanctis, V. 1986. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. The Journal of Continuing Higher Education. 34, 3 (1986), 29--30.
[40]
Sharp, P. 2014. Nurturing Emotional Literacy: A Practical for Teachers, Parents and those in the Caring Professions.
[41]
Sharp, P. 2000. Promoting Emotional Literacy: Emotional Literacy Improves and Increases Your Life Chances. Pastoral Care In Education. 18, September (2000), 8--10.
[42]
Sheppes, G. et al. 2014. Emotion regulation choice: A conceptual framework and supporting evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 143, 1 (2014), 163--181.
[43]
Shute, V.J. et al. 2017. Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review. 22, (2017), 142--158.
[44]
Songer, N.B. et al. 2009. How and when does complex reasoning occur? Empirically driven development of a learning progression focused on complex reasoning about biodiversity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 46, 6 (2009), 610--631.
[45]
Southam-Gerow, M.A. and Kendall, P.C. 2000. A Preliminary Study of the Emotion Understanding of Youths Referred for Treatment of Anxiety Disorders. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology. 29, 3 (Aug. 2000), 319--327.
[46]
Thompson, R.A. 1990. Socioemotional development.
[47]
Wallbaum, T. et al. 2017. Towards a Tangible Storytelling Kit for Exploring Emotions with Children Towards a Tangible Storytelling Kit for Exploring Emotions with Children. November (2017).
[48]
Wilensky, U. 2003. Statistical mechanics for secondary school: The gaslab multi-agent modeling toolkit. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning. 8, 1 (2003), 1--41.
[49]
Wilensky, U. and Reisman, K. 2006. Thinking Like a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Firefly: Learning Biology Through Constructing and Testing Computational Theories-An Embodied Modeling Approach. Cognition and Instruction. 24, 2 (Jun. 2006), 171--209.
[50]
Wilkerson-Jerde, M.H. et al. 2015. Exploring Shifts in Middle School Learners' Modeling Activity While Generating Drawings, Animations, and Computational Simulations of Molecular Diffusion. Journal of Science Education and Technology. 24, 2--3 (2015), 396--415.
[51]
Wilkerson, M. 2017. Exploring Computational Modeling Environments as Tools to Structure Classroom-Level Knowledge Building. (2017), 447--454.
Index Terms
- Exploring the Intersection of Emotional Literacy and Computational Modeling Using Scratch
Recommendations
Beyond self-reflection: introducing the concept of rumination in personal informatics
AbstractPersonal informatics tools can help users self-reflect on their experiences. When reflective thought occurs, it sometimes leads to negative thought and emotion cycles. To help explain these cycles, we draw from Psychology to introduce the concept ...
Ingenuity of scratch programming on reflective thinking towards problem solving and computational thinking
AbstractIndividuals learn to develop problem solving strategies and make connections between their mathematical ideas while programming, so they have the opportunity to improve their thinking skills. Scratch provides an environment to experience problem ...
Exploring Emotional Reappraisal and Repression through Acoustic Mood Self-Tracking
UbiComp/ISWC '21 Adjunct: Adjunct Proceedings of the 2021 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2021 ACM International Symposium on Wearable ComputersSelf-tracking technologies are a dominant tool employed in Human-computer Interaction (HCI) in the realm of mental health research. The majority of these tools serve as mechanisms for self-reflection in individuals with affective disorders and are ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
June 2019
1628 pages
ISBN:9781450358507
DOI:10.1145/3322276
- General Chairs:
- Steve Harrison,
- Shaowen Bardzell,
- Program Chairs:
- Carman Neustaedter,
- Deborah Tatar
Copyright © 2019 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 18 June 2019
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
DIS '19
Sponsor:
Acceptance Rates
DIS '19 Paper Acceptance Rate 105 of 415 submissions, 25%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,158 of 4,684 submissions, 25%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 192Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)13
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 12 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in