You are here:

Overt Physicality with Virtual Manipulatives PROCEEDINGS

, University of Hawaii at Manoa, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Kona, Hawaii, United States Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA


This study examines the impact of two different input devices (Wiimote vs. touchscreen) on young students’ understanding of multiplication as experienced in a virtual manipulatives environment. For this study, twenty-one (n = 21) second grade students played used a game-like virtual manipulative environment to learn about multiplication. The results show that after three rounds of interacting with the virtual manipulatives, all students had significantly increased test scores for multiplication facts. However, the group experiencing more overt physicality while manipulating the on-screen manipulatives showed significantly higher gains when comparing their pre-test and post-test scores, compared to a group experiencing less overt physicality. Implications for researchers and designers are discussed, along with suggestions for future research.


Paek, S. (2015). Overt Physicality with Virtual Manipulatives. In Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 884-890). Kona, Hawaii, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved November 14, 2018 from .

View References & Citations Map


  1. Baroody, A.J. (2006). Mastering the Basic Number Combinations. Teaching Children Mathematics, 23.
  2. Bruner, J.S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
  3. Char, C.A. (1989). Computer graphics feltboards: New software Approaches for young children's mathematical exploration. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
  4. Clements, D.H. (1989). Computers in elementary mathematics education. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  5. Clements, D.H., & McMillen, S. (1996). Rethinking "Concrete" manipulatives. Teaching Children Mathematics, 2, 270-279.
  6. Clements, D.H., Crown, W.D., & Kantowski, M.G. (1991). Primary graphing and probability workshop. In F.C. Scott (Ed.): Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman & Co.
  7. Durmus, S., & Karakirik, E. (2006). Virtual manipulatives in mathematics education: A theoretical framework. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 5(1).
  8. Froebel, F. (1904). Pedagogics of the kindergarten (J. Davis, Trans.). New York, NY: D. Appleton & Company
  9. Montessori, M. (1965). Montessori's own handbook. New York, NY: Schocken books, Inc.
  10. Moyer, P.S., Bolyard, J.J., & Spikell, M.A. (2002). What are virtual manipulatives? Teaching Children Mathematics, 8(6), 372-377.
  11. Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology (E. Duckworth, Trans.). New York: Columbia University Press.
  12. Reimer, K., & Moyer, P.S. (2005). Third-Graders Learn About Fractions Using Virtual Manipulatives: A Classroom Study. The Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 24(1), 5-25.
  13. Resnick, M. (1998). Technologies for Lifelong Kindergarten. Educational Technology Research& Development, 46(4), 43-55.
  14. Suh, J., & Moyer, P.S. (2007). Developing students' representational fluency using virtual and physical algebra balances. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 26(2), 155-173.
  15. Suh, J., Moyer, P.S., & Heo, H.-J. (2005). Examining technology uses in the classroom: Developing fraction sense using virtual manipulative concept tutorials. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 3(4), 1-21.
  16. Zuckerman, O., Arida, S., & Resnick, M. (2005). Extending tangible interfaces for education: digital montessoriinspired manipulatives. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems. Doi:

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact