sign in sign up
<<
Home , Computing, Ethnocomputing, Ethnomathematics, Tribal name

Standardizing Culturally Situated Design Tools Christina Bert Keshia King Aiyana Brown Deanna Watkins

ABSTRACT In today’s , there is a lack of diversity in the profession in terms of both gender and race [11]. With the constant introduction of new tools being designed to help students gain knowledge in the areas of and , one might believe that there should be a decrease in this inequitable gap. However, the number underrepresented students (e.g., minorities, women, and people with disabilities) working professionally, earning degrees, and showing interest in the computer science are steadily decreasing, and since the basis behind computer science is mathematics, these students struggle in this area as well [11]. The problem is that there is a current disconnect between underrepresented students and these fields. Teachers are having problems relating mathematics and computer science concepts to their students on a deeper level, that relates to them to topics such as or plotting on the Cartesian coordinate system. What types of tools could be created so that these students would be intellectually challenged, but also able to the commonality between them and computer science?

1. INTRODUCTION Dr. Ron Eglash figured out a way to attract these overlooked underrepresented students to computer science and mathematics. His vision was to get them involved with the use of and . He is an American cyberneticist (the interdisciplinary study of the structure of controlling or societal behavior by rules or restrictions), university professor, and author widely known for his work in the field of ethnomathematics, aims to study the diverse relationships between math and . According to the Ethnomathematics Digital (EDL), the basic premise of ethnomathematics is that mathematical ideas are mental constructs created by individuals and groups in response to cultural activities [14]. Similarly, the study of ethnocomputing concentrates on understanding how different have come up with different ideas on the organized structures and models used to represent ( structures), ways of manipulating the organized information (), and the mechanical and linguistic realizations of these two [8]. In the past, teachers used multicultural mathematics and which ties mathematics, computing, and culture together. This form of teaching has not worked because it fails to teach specific cultural concepts [14]. For example, a multicultural mathematical problem would use Taktuk and Esteban counting coconuts which could easily be translated into Dick and Jane counting marbles [14]. Differentiations between the two theories are visible with the presence of four concepts: deep design themes (e.g., pervasive use of geometry in African design), anti-primitivist representation (showing sophisticated mathematical practices), translation (establishing relations between the culture’s conceptual framework and the mathematics embedded in related native designs), and dynamic rather than static views of culture( includes the vernacular practices of a culture’s contemporary descendents) [7]. His solution to this growing problem was the creation of Culturally Situated Design Tools (CSDTs). These tools are web–based software applications that allow students to create simulations of cultural arts, such as the Cornrow Curves

tool which combines the use of Fractal Geometry and the art of hair braiding [7]. He saw this as a way to teach math and computer skills, but also as a catalyst to contest the ideas of genetic determinism (genes alone that determine human traits and behaviors), cultural determinism (conceptions of mental illness that are culturally determined, by which it is meant that these conceptions are culturally constructed), as well as engaging students in the zone of proximal development (level that will challenge a student without causing frustration or loss of motivation) [15,19].

2. THE AVAILABLE CSDT CSDTs in general have created a new wave of learning that follows the curriculum standards of the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE), Computer Science Teachers Association (CSTA), and International Society for Technology and Education (ISTE). There are fourteen CSDTs, with tools still being created.

Table 2-1: All 14 CSDTs, related culture, and brief description of each. CSDT Culture Description African African Teach recursion loops through a in which outputs are use as inputs. Shows how a demotion can exist through a one and two dimensional object. Teaches iteration in adding levels to an object. Transformational African Uses all four geometric transformations: translations, Geometry and Iteration in rotation, reflection, and scaling. Helps students use Mangbetu Art proper scaling ratios. Teaches students how to use vectors. Hexastrip Weaving African Use sixty degree angles create a design. Students engage in skills while constructing ball. Use geometry Cornrow Curves African-American Practice the application of translation and iteration. Also teaches and design and scaling ratio to show how similar triangle differs only in size. Use logarithmic spirals on cornrow curves to explore the relations between measurement and graphing. Graffiti Grapher Youth Subculture Learn geometric concepts by creating graffiti. Uses the Cartesian coordinate system to create lines. Use algorithms to create design BreakDancer Youth Subculture Through the use of trigonometry teaches rotational and SINE function. Uses transformational geometry. Also teaches basic programming principles. Virtual Bead Loom Native American Uses the Cartesian coordinate system to create lines. Teaches transformational geometry through four-fold symmetry. Learn the principle of linear iteration. Pacific Northwest Basket Native American Uses the Cartesian coordinate system to create lines. Weaving Teaches transformational geometry through four-fold symmetry. Learn the principle of linear iteration. Navajo Rug Weaver Native American Gain creative processing concepts. Uses the Cartesian coordinate system. Teaches .

SimShoBan Native American Learn geometry principles. Use an algorithmic process to design the basket. Gain creative processing concepts. Yup’ik Star Navigation Native American Teaches navigation skills. Learn Modular math concepts. Use trigonometric function. Yup’ik Parka Pattern Native American Use transformational geometry. Cartesian coordinate system. Teaches difference between and float values. Pre- Columbian Pyramids Mesa-American Uses the Cartesian coordinate system. Students engage in engineering skills while constructing a pyramid. Learn four-fold geometry. Rhythm Wheels Latino Teaches least common multiples. Use creative concepts to create music. Learn number operations.

2.1 MOST LIKED/LEAST LIKED CSDTs The authors of this paper, who are sponsored thorough the Distributed Research Experiences for Undergraduates ((D)REU) program, evaluated each design tool individually and ranked them according to level of interest, fourteen being the most interesting and one being the least. They also evaluated them based on which was the easiest to understand, and whether they felt they could learn from the tools. They then added the individual rankings together and concluded the top five CSDTs, refer to Table 2.1-1. The Rhythm Wheels, Virtual Bead Loom, Pre-Columbian Pyramids, Pacific Northwest Basket Weaving, and Hexastrip Weaving are the top five tools that were chosen.

Table 2.1-1: CSDT rankings showing individual group member’s ranking of the CSDT tools based on interest (14 being the most interesting, 1 being the least; yellow being the most liked, grey being the least) CSDT Tool Christina Keshia Aiyana Total Average Ranking Ranking Ranking Ranking Group Ranking Rhythm Wheels 14 14 14 42 1 Virtual Bead Loom 6 12 12 30 2 Pre Columbian Pyramids 11 6 6 23 3 Pacific Northwest Basket Weaving 4 11 11 26 4 Hexastrip Weaving 12 4 9 25 5 Break dancer 13 8 3 24 6 Graffiti Grapher 10 10 4 24 7 Cornrow Curves 9 13 1 23 8 Navajo Rug Weaver 3 5 10 23 9 Mangbetu Design 2 7 13 22 10 SimShoBan 5 3 8 16 11 Yupik Parka Patterns 8 1 7 16 12 African Fractals 1 9 5 15 13 Yupik Tundra Navigation 7 2 2 11 14

2.2 STANDARDIZING CSDT TOOLS The interns matched the top CSDTs to the respective standards that they believe meet the CSTA and ISTE standards, as shown in Table 2.2-1.The Rhythm Wheels teaches least common multiple by counting rhythm beats. The concepts of this tool are supported by the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) which helps the students to learn number and operations. The students also learn to problem solve in a creative way through design and digital-age learning [5]. Students in grades six through eight need these computational skills. The Pre Columbian Pyramid’s concepts are supported by the ISTE. Students are encouraged to design and develop, promote and support creative learning [5]. They are also encouraged to express this work through a multi-cultural prospective. The Computer Science Teachers’ Association (CSTA) promotes learning algorithmic processing and problem solving skills. Through the use of the CSDTs students fit the requirements for the curriculum from grades six through eight. The Virtual Bead Loom and the Pacific Northwest Basket Weaving, which has concepts that are also encouraged by the GaDOE, promotes students to learn how to plot points on a coordinate plane [5]. The Hexastrip Weaving concepts are also supported by the GaDOE who want students to investigate transformations of functions and graph quadratic functions as transformations of the function (eg. f(x) = x2 ) [5]. In general the ISTE and CSTA both want students to learn, think, plan, and experience creative processing, which are fundamental skills that are learned through the use of CSDTs. A complete mapping of the CSTA and ISTE standards and expectations are illustrated in Appendix A,

Table 2.2-1: Top Five CSDTs and Standards showing how top ranked CSDTs tools fit into current standards [1, 13].

ISTE- Standards (General) 1. Facilitate and 2. Design and Develop 3. Model Digital-Age 4. Promote and Model 5. Engage in Inspire Student Digital-Age Learning Work and Learning Digital Citizenship and Professional Growth Learning and Experiences and Responsibility and Leadership Creativity Assessments

Rhythm Wheels Pre- Columbian Virtual Bead Loom Pacific Northwest Hexastrip Weaving Pyramids Basket Weaving

Level 1: 6-8 Level 2: 9 or 10 Level 3: 10 or 11 Level 4: 11 or 12 (recommended)

CSTA- Standards (Specific)

3. RELATED WORK Culturally Situated Design Tools are not the only computer generated teaching tool. New design tools are developing that are based on CSDTs. cMotion is a related design tool that is used to teach emotion recognition and programming logic to children using virtual . The goal of cMotion is to promote learning of emotions in a cultural environment, teach concepts to children, and improve on the current design of CSDTs. cMotion displays instructions on an interactive playable game, unlike CSDTs which show most of their information on a help screen. The developers of cMotion think that this change will make information easier to comprehend and as a result increase user interest [9]. There are other different web-based games and design tools such as wireless LAN Designer (WLAN Designer), which is a web-based software tool that enhances teaching, learning, and helps users to learn about wireless local area design. It has been developed the Auckland University of Technology that give students interactive, hands on experience in WLAN design [18]. Edu Bingo is also a web-based game that is a bingo like system for mathematics skill building. The main aim of the game is to increase the level of motivation and engagement of students during skill building [4]. Research and projects around the world have studied by using games for learning. The Electronic Games for Education in Math and Science (EGEMS) project at University of Baltimore College created several games aiming to develop mathematical skills for young children. The most prominent web-based games are Prime Climb and Phoenix Quest. Latticework Software company has developed Penny Penguin’s Math Bingo to teach children addition, subtraction, division and [4]. These gaming tools are used to teach students different subjects by using an innovative way of learning. Culturally Situated Design Tools and Gaming Tools provide valuable experiences that can support discovery and exploration while learning culture, as well as mathematics and programming concepts [2].

4. ISSUES In addition to Dr. Ron Eglash’s perspective, there are other points of view on the effectiveness of CSDTs in the classroom. African and African American design tools were discussed with middle school and high school teachers, who taught at inner-city schools consisting of mostly African American students. The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, who provides teachers with math resources and professional development opportunities [16], requested feedback on the African and African American CSDTs [7]. Teachers were thrilled about the new prospective on African Math, but they did not see the use for it in the classroom. Teachers suggested that students were more interested in the CSDTs itself rather than combining math and culture to teach mathematics and computing. The teachers believed that the tools, which focus on the use of Fractal Geometry, are ineffective in their classrooms and are on the level of a college math course. They protested that this concept did not fit into the K-12 standards. Some believe that CSDTs should be used even though teachers do not see them useful and do not think they are effective in the classroom. Teachers might think that the CSDTs are not useful because they are not trained efficiently on the CSDTs. This problem will neglect teachers from knowing how effective the CSDTs can be. Teachers need to be trained efficiently in order for them to understand the concepts of the CSDTs and to be able to teach the material correctly

to the students. Teachers also need to be trained on all fourteen CSDTs before making a decision that they are not useful. Since teachers are not computer literate, they may be discouraged about using web-based design tools. Also, since many teachers are not familiar with using web-based teaching tools, the CSDTs could have step by step instructions on how to use the tool, along with teaching material that is already provided on the website.

5. CSDT WORKSHOP Using the top five CSDTs chosen, illustrated in Table 2.2-1, the interns decided to conduct a workshop for high school students, teaching the CSDTs and their cultural background. The goal was to conclude whether the student’s opinion on mathematics and computer science changed after using the CSDTs. The workshop was held June 16-18, 2009 from the hours of three to four o’clock. Each one of the group members were appointed to a specific tool in which they would oversee for the workshop. The participants involved in this study are students in the Upward Bound program at Georgia Southern University who came from different Counties/Cities in southeast Georgia including Bulloch County and surrounding areas. These students are either from households of low-income or are first-generation college bound students entering the tenth, eleventh, or twelfth grade [17]. For the study, there were 18 students (17 African-American, 1 Caucasian, 8 Female, and 11 male) who participated in the workshop.

5.1 WORKSHOP DAYS The first day of the workshop the interns introduced themselves to the students to give them insight as to who they are as individuals and as a group. After this introduction, they presented to them the different cultures that are associated with each tool. The cultures that were associated with the tool were Mesoamerican, Alaskan, Native American, African, and Latino-Caribbean. Most of the students were previously familiar with some variation of Native American and African culture, which was concluded through a show of hands that proved that Native American and African culture were most popular. After the presentation, the interns asked the students to complete a survey, shown in Appendix B, which asked their personal opinion on interests in computer science and mathematics topics. Also, on the survey, they were able to write which two cultures they found the most interesting. After completing the survey, the interns went around the room and allowed each student to stand up and tell their name and one interesting fact about themselves. Following this, they conducted an exercise to test their communication skills. In the exercise the students were to break off into groups of five and line up in order of month they were born without talking or using their hands, thus forcing them to find other means of communication to complete the given task. This is a task that involves sorting. When the students arrived for the second day of the workshop, they were asked to complete a pre-test, illustrated in Appendix , to analyze their current knowledge of computer science and math skills before being introduced to the CSDTs. After they finished their six-question pre-test, they were divided into groups according to the culture they found most interesting on the first day of the workshop. Each group consisted of four to five students. Once the students were in their respective groups, they were given a task from their intern leader to complete using the newly introduced tool. Once they

finished the assigned task, they were asked to create their own design to complete for the remainder of the time. The first ten minutes of the final day of the workshop were allotted so that the students could finalize their projects. After the students finished their design, they presented their work individually to their peers for 25 minutes where each group member explained what they learned. In addition, they stated if the CSDT changed their apprehension about mathematics and computing, and whether it was effortless or tough for them to create a design using their assigned CSDT. While the students were presenting, volunteers from the National Society of Black Engineers (NSBE) opened the online post surveys on the computer’s web browser in order for students to complete them once the presentations were completed. For the final 25 minutes, the students completed the online survey and took a post-test.

5.2 RESULTS After having completed the workshop, the pre-/post-surveys and pre-/post-test were then assessed to see if the students were able to learn from the workshop. Based on the responses from the pre-survey, all of the Upward Bound students enjoyed using . The majority of the students believed that computers are exciting and thought learning about computers is interesting. Only 5% of the students felt that computers are boring. After analyzing the results from each question of the pre-survey, most of the students were in favor of computers and were interested in using them. Based on the post- survey, 63% of the students thought using computers in general were easier before starting the workshop, which can be an indication that they were already familiar with using computers. Because only 32% of all the students felt using computers would be easier after the workshop, it can be inferred that the workshop did not substantially cause the users to become any better than they felt they already were. Refer to Appendix E for complete results from the surveys.

Table 5.2-1: Results from responses to Pre-/Post-Survey Agree ? Disagree Enjoy using computers 100% 0% 0% Computers are exciting 74% 16% 10% Yes A Little No I Don’t know Using computers was easy before 63% 27% 5% 5% workshop Using computers would be easier 32% 37% 21% 10% after completing the workshop

The pre-test that was administered on the second day of the workshop and the post-test on the final day of the workshop concluded appalling results. The pre-/post-test was an insufficient test to administer to the students. The test was created by a Doctor from a four year university. Because of her higher level of education, she made the test too hard for high school students to complete. The test was open ended, which made it difficult to come up with the actual answers to the test. It caused confusion for the students which limited their ability to take the test effectively. There was no variation in the questions between the pre-test and the post-test and as a result, the students lacked

enthusiasm and drive to do better on the later test. In order to fix this problem, some believe one should review test previously taken by the student as a guideline for the new test, only base questions on what should be learned from the CSDT itself and also ask teachers the best of questions to specify certain types of mathematics and skills. The pre-/post-test had a total of 50 points that could be earned. There were six questions given to the students. However, when the test was graded, one question due to error was omitted. This change made the other five questions worth 10 points each. Each question was designed differently, which made coming up with a grading scale very difficult. In order to solve this problem, a grading scale was made for each individual question. Some questions had more than one solution and some questions could only be answered with a right or wrong answer. See Appendix F for grading rubric. The average score for the pre-test was a 33% and the average score for the post-test was a 28%. The workshop did not establish any proof of improvement in mathematics or computing by using the CSDTs and therefore both the pre- and post-test were inconclusive. Complete results can be found in Appendix G. After going through the process of preparing and conducting the workshop there were lessons learned which can help run a more successful workshop in the future. Some believe that the pre-test made was not the best test to use to measure the student’s level of improvement on their mathematical and computing skills. From reviewing our results, the students did not even try their best on the post-test and some students remembered the answers they used on the pre-test and duplicated them. The results of the pre-/post test would have been much better if the test was changed and if it was in a different with different questions. During a recent CSDT workshop we attended in Charleston, S.C., Tiffany Barnes, who is a leading researcher in this area, said that she thinks the most productive pre-/post-test are the ones that have multiple choice questions which allow students to complete them faster and have a more concise answer.

6. CONCLUSION In conclusion Culturally Situated Design Tools are wonderful teaching tools for all students in hopes of enhancing their mathematics and computation skills, as well as to contest the ideas of genetic determinism, cultural determinism, and engaging students in the zone of proximal development. Each design tool has its own concept in the studies of geometry, the coordinate system, algorithmic teaching, etc, which enable students to learn and familiarize themselves with mathematics and . There are fourteen design tools in all and we believe that there are five top design tools that best teach students the easiest and most comfortable way to learn. The design tools meet the ISTE standards as well as the CSTA standards which will enable students to meet there curriculum goals. Using the most effective design tool depends on the grade level of the student, what they are most interesting in, and which skills are needed for improvement. In order for a teacher or an instructor to properly teach these design tools to students, they must understand specific knowledge about the design tool as a whole. They have to plan out their teaching material, prepare task, mention background and culture, give properly administered test, and excitement from the instructor can also be useful in order to have a successful learning experience. All of these key things are very important to fulfill Dr. Eglash’s goal of Culturally Situated Design Tools.

7. REFERENCES [1] C. S. T. Association. Association for computing machinery. http://csta.acm.org, 2005. Last Accessed: June 2, 2009. [2] T. Barnes. Serious games. In IEEE Computer Society, pages 18{19, 2009. [3] K. Z. Bell-Watkins, T. Barnes, and N. Thomas. Developing computing identity as a model for prioritizing dynamic k-12 computing curricular standards. ACM Journal of Computing in Colleges, 24(3):125 { 131, January 2009. [4] M.-C. Chiang, Y.-C. Deng, H.-Z. Chang, H.-C. Liao, C.-W. Ho, and T.-W. Chan. Edubingo: A bingo-like game for mathematics skill building. In IEEE International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies in Education (WMTE), pages 93{95, 2005. [5] K. Cox. Mathematics georgia performance standards. http://www.georgiastandards.org/standars, 2006. [6] R. Eglash. Culturally situated design tools: Teaching math and computing through culture. http://www.csdt.rpi.edu/, 2003. Last Accessed: May 21, 2009. [7] R. Eglash, A. Bennett, C. O'Donnell, S. Jannings, and M. Cintorino. Culturally situated design tools: Ethnocomputing from field site to classroom. American Anthropologist, 108(2):347{362, 2009. [8] Ethnocomputing. Ethnocomputing. http://www.ethnocomputing.org, 2005. [9] S. Finkelstein L., A. Nickel, L. Harrison, E. Suma A., and T. Barnes. cmotion: A new to teach emotion recognition and programming logic to children using virtual humans. In IEEE , pages 249{250, 2009. [10]C. C. for Liberal Arts & Technology. Charter conservatory for liberal arts & technology. http://www.chartercat.org/curriculum.html#MATH, 2006. [11]J. Goode. Increasing diversity in k-12 computer science: Strategies from the field. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1352135.1352259&coll=ACM&dl= ACM&CFID=37748380&CFTOKEN=96880226, 2008. [12]M. Guzdial. Technological support for project-based learning. pages 47{59, 1998. [13]N. E. T. S. International Society for Technology in

Education. International society for technology in education, national education technology standards. http://www.iste.org/Content/NavigationMenu/NETS/ForTeachers/2008Standards/NETS_T_ Standards Final.pdf, 2008. [14]E. D. Library. Etnomathematics . http://www.ethnomath.org/index.asp, 2005. [15]J. of Medical Ethics. Journal of medical ethics. 31(9):526{530, September 2005. [16]N. C. of Teachers of Mathematics. Principles & standards for school mathematics. http://standards.nctm.org/, 2004. [17]U. B. Program. Upward bound program. http://www.ed.gov/programs/trioupbound/index.html, February 2009. [18]N. I. Sarkar. Wlan-designer: A web-based software tool to enhance teaching and learning wireless lan design. In Fourth IEEE International Conference on Advance Learning Technologies, pages 624{628, 2004. [19]M. E. Spiro. Ethos. American Anthropological Association, 29(2):218{234, June 2001.