Designing tangible programming languages for classroom use
Abstract
This paper describes a new technique for implementing educational programming languages using tangible interface technology. It emphasizes the use of inexpensive and durable parts with no embedded electronics or power supplies. Students create programs in offline settings—on their desks or on the floor—and use a portable scanning station to compile their code. We argue that languages created with this approach offer an appealing and practical alternative to text-based and visual languages for classroom use. In this paper we discuss the motivations for our project and describe the design and implementation of two tangible programming languages. We also describe an initial case study with children and outline future research goals. Author Keywords Tangible UIs, education, children, programming languages
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Educators hold an irreplaceable role in programming education.
“Our decision to engage with professional educators instead of children and parents was driven by the understanding that educators still hold an irreplaceable role in programming education [22].”
From ChatScratch: An AI-Augmented System Toward Autonomous Visual Programming Learning for Children Aged 6-12 (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
Current Scratch educational practices are mainly tailored for classroom environments, guided by professional educators, and a structured curriculum.
“Additionally, current Scratch educational practices are mainly tailored for classroom environments, guided by professional educators, and a structured curriculum [22].”
From ChatScratch: An AI-Augmented System Toward Autonomous Visual Programming Learning for Children Aged 6-12 (2024) · cites this paper as [22]
Cites
Karel the Robot: A Gentle Introduction to the Art of Programming
Pattis, R. E., Roberts, J., & Stehlik, M. (1994) · Cumulative Index of Computer Aided Architectural Design · Cited by 352 · see citing works
From turtles to Tangible Programming Bricks: explorations in physical language design
McNerney, T. S. (2004) · Personal and Ubiquitous Computing · doi:10.1007/s00779-004-0295-6 · Cited by 274 · see citing works
Maloney, J. H., Burd, L., Kafai, Y. B., et al. (2011) · Cited by 229 · see citing works
TRIP: A Low-Cost Vision-Based Location System for Ubiquitous Computing
López–de–Ipiña, D., Mendonça, P. R. S., Hopper, A., & Hopper, A. (2002) · Personal and Ubiquitous Computing · doi:10.1007/s007790200020 · Cited by 206 · see citing works
Interaction-level support for collaborative learning
Suzuki, H., & Kato, H. (1995) · doi:10.3115/222020.222828 · Cited by 166 · see citing works
AutoHAN: an architecture for programming the home
Blackwell, A. F., & Hague, R. (2002) · IEEE Symposia on Human-Centric Computing Languages and Environments · doi:10.1109/hcc.2001.995253 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
Tangible programming elements for young children
Wyeth, P. A., & Purchase, H. C. (2002) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/506443.506591 · Cited by 83 · see citing works
What is the next generation of human-computer interaction?
Jacob, R. J. K. (2006) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/1125451.1125768 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Self-citationKarel the Robot: A Gentle Introduction to the Art of Programming, 2nd Edition
Pattis, R. E. (1994) · John Wiley & Sons, Inc. eBooks · Cited by 40 · see citing works
A physical interface for system dynamics simulation
Zuckerman, O., & Resnick, M. (2003) · CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA) · doi:10.1145/765891.766005 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chen, L., Xiao, S., Chen, Y., Song, Y., Wu, R., & Sun, L. (2024) · Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/3613904.3642229 · Cited by 60 · see citing works
Computing Education Research Today
Fincher, S. A., Tenenberg, J., Dorn, B., Hundhausen, C., McCartney, R., & Murphy, L. (2019) · The Cambridge Handbook of Computing Education Research · doi:10.1017/9781108654555.003 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
- Authors
- Horn, M. S., & Jacob, R. J. K.
- Affiliations
- Tufts University (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2007-02-15
- Pages
- 159-162
- OpenAlex
- W2077211141
- Cited by
- 217
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 4.21
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction (TEI) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Cambridge
- University of Queensland
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Teaching and Learning Programming
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Robotics and Engineering
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Interactive and Immersive Displays
- Keywords
- tangible user interfaces, educational programming languages, classroom programming, children, low-cost hardware, offline programming, programming language design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
