Skip to content
Accessible Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by Oldenbourg Wissenschaftsverlag November 14, 2018

Begreifbare Learning Environments

A Framework of Interaction Design for Reflective Experience

Bernard Robben, Bardo Herzig, Tilman-Mathies Klar and Heidi Schelhowe
From the journal i-com


We propose a framework of Interaction Design for Reflective Experience (RED). “Begreifbare” (graspable, in the sense of tangible and comprehensible) learning environments embody a designed experience that combines abstraction and concreteness, perception and cognition, and thus emphasizes both the impact of tangible, embodied interactions and the importance of symbols and signs for reflective experience. Our framework is based on the categories of space and experience, model and reflection.

Funding statement: Our research was funded by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG).


We thank all workshop participants for their active collaboration.


[1] Edith Ackermann. 2004. Structuring Knowledge and Transforming the World. In A learning zone of one’s own: Sharing representations and flow in collaborative learning environments. Mario Tokoro, Luc Steels, et al. (eds.). IOS Press, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. 15–37.Search in Google Scholar

[2] Edith Ackermann. 1996. Perspective-Taking and object Construction. In Constructionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking, and Learning in a Digital World. Yasmin B. Kafai and Mitchel Resnick (eds.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 25–37.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Alissa N. Antle. 2007. The CTI Framework: Informing the Design of Tangible Systems for Children. In TEI’07, Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction, pp. 195–202.10.1145/1226969.1227010Search in Google Scholar

[4] Paulo Blikstein, Uri Wilensky. 2007. Bifocal modeling: a framework for combining computer modeling, robotics and real-world sensing. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (AERA 2007), Chicago, IL.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Jay D. Bolter, Diane Gromala. 2003. Windows and Mirrors. Interaction Design, Digital Art and the Myth of Transparency. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA and London, England.10.7551/mitpress/7248.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

[6] Jay D. Bolter, Richard Grusin. 2000. Remediation: Understanding New Media. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Search in Google Scholar

[7] David Buckingham. 2007. Digital Media Literacies: rethinking media education in the age of the Internet. Research in Comparative and International Education, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2007.10.2304/rcie.2007.2.1.43Search in Google Scholar

[8] Anne Burdick, Holly Willis. 2011. Digital learning, digital scholarship and design thinking. Design Studies Vol. 32 (2011), pp. 546–556.10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.005Search in Google Scholar

[9] Lucila Carvalho, Peter Goodyear, Marten de Laat (eds.). 2017. Place-Based Spaces for Networked Learning. Routledge, New York, NY and London, England.10.4324/9781315724485Search in Google Scholar

[10] John Dewey. 1925. Experience and Nature. Open Court, La Salle, IL.Search in Google Scholar

[11] John Dewey 1938. Experience and Education. Kappa Delta Pi, New York, NY.Search in Google Scholar

[12] John Dewey. 1944. Democracy and Education. Free Press, New York, NY.Search in Google Scholar

[13] Mike Eisenberg et al. Computationally-Enhanced Construction Kits for Children: Prototype and Principles. (12/20/2017).Search in Google Scholar

[14] Kristina Höök, Jonas Löwgren. 2012. Strong Concepts: Intermediate-Level Knowledge in Interaction Design Research. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, Vol. 19, No. 3, Article 23.10.1145/2362364.2362371Search in Google Scholar

[15] Yasmin B. Kafai, Mitchel Resnick. 1996. Constructionism in practice: designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world. Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.Search in Google Scholar

[16] David Kestenbaum. 2005. The Challenges of IDC: What Have We Learned from our Past? – A Conversation with Seymor Papert, Marvin Minsky, and Alan Kay. Communications of the ACM. Vol. 48, No. 1.Search in Google Scholar

[17] Henri Lefebvre. 2005. The Production of Space. Blackwell Publishing, Malden, MA, Oxford, UK, Carlton, Australia.Search in Google Scholar

[18] Bernd Mahr. 2012. On the Epistemology of Models. Explaining the Nature of Models. In Rethinking Epistemology. Günter Abel and James Conant (eds.). De Gruyter, Berlin and Boston, MA.10.1515/9783110253573.301Search in Google Scholar

[19] Bernd Mahr. 2008. Cargo. Zum Verhältnis von Bild und Modell. In Visuelle Modelle. Ingeborg Reichle, Steffen Siegel, Achim Spelten (eds.). Wilhelm Fink, München.Search in Google Scholar

[20] Bernd Mahr. 2008. Ein Modell des Modellseins – Ein Beitrag zur Aufklärung des Modellbegriffs. In Modelle. Ulrich Dirks, Eberhard Knobloch (eds.). Peter Lang, Frankfurt/Main.Search in Google Scholar

[21] Paul Marshall. 2007. Do tangible interfaces enhance learning? In TEI’07. Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Tangible and embedded interaction. DOI: in Google Scholar

[22] Seymor Papert. 1994. The Children’s Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. Basic Books, New York.Search in Google Scholar

[23] Mitchel Resnick, Brian Silverman 2005. Some reflections on designing construction kits for kids. IDC’05. Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Interaction Design and Children. (pp. 117–122).10.1145/1109540.1109556Search in Google Scholar

[24] Bernard Robben. 2012. Der Raum der begreifbarbegreifbaren Interaktion. In BegreifbarBegreifbare Interaktionen – Der allgegenwärtige Computer: Touchscreens, Wearables, Tangibles und Ubiquitous Computing. Bernard Robben, Heidi Schelhowe (eds.). Transcript Bielefeld, pp. 367–387.10.1515/transcript.9783839420058.367Search in Google Scholar

[25] Carol Rodgers. 2002. Defining Reflection: Another Look at John Dewey and Reflective thinking. Teachers College Record. Vol. 104, No. 4, June 2002, pp. 842–866.10.1111/1467-9620.00181Search in Google Scholar

[26] Gerhard Tulodziecki, Silke Grafe, Bardo Herzig. 2013. Gestaltungsorientierte Bildungsforschung und Didaktik. Klinkhardt, Bad Heilbrunn.Search in Google Scholar

[27] Gerhard Tulodziecki, Bardo Herzig, Silke Grafe. 2017. Unterricht und Allgemeine Didaktik. Klinkhardt / UTB, Bad Heilbrunn.Search in Google Scholar

[28] Jeannette M. Wing. 2006. Computational Thinking. Communications of the ACM, March 2006, Vol. 49, No. 3, pp. 33–35.10.1109/VLHCC.2011.6070404Search in Google Scholar

[29] Peter Wright, Jayne Wallace, John McCarthy. 2008. Aesthetics and experience-centered design, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human-Interaction (TOCHI), Vol. 15, Issue 4, DOI: in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2018-11-14
Published in Print: 2018-12-19

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston