PBL via ARG

This is the location I will be posting articles realted to my current project PBL via ARG (problem based learning via alternative reality games).  My articles list will be updated as I become more parsimonious with the content.

ARG

Dondlinger, M. & Warren, S. (2009). Alternate reality games as simulations.

Dondlinger, M., Warren, S., & Barab, S. (2008). A muve towards pbl writing: effects of a digital learning environment  designed to improve elementary  student writing.

Warren, S. (TBA). Game learning toll.

(2007). Brave New Game World: ‘Alternative reality’ Web games are captivating digitally savvy young people. BUSINESS WEEK -NEW YORK-, (4041), 54-58.

Hoxsey, R. (2005). 59(4), 102-103. Retrieved from Art Abstracts (H.W. Wilson) database.

Goldie, L. (2008). Copycat warning over alternative reality games. New Media Age, 1-2.

Alexander, B. (2008). Games for Education: 2008. Educause Review, 43(4), 64-65.

Williams, M. (2006). Jane McGonigal, 28. Technology Review, 109(4), 50.

Kim, J., Lee, E., Thomas, T., & Dombrowski, C. (2009). Storytelling in new media: The case of alternate reality games, 2001-2009. First Monday, 14(6), 1-24.

Moseley, A., Whitton, N., Culver, J., & Piatt, K. (2009). Motivation in Alternate Reality Gaming Environments and Implications for Education. Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning, 279-286.

O’Donovan, A., Tsvetkova, N., Stoimenova, B., Tsvetanova, S., Connolly, T., Stansfield, M., et al. (2009). The Truth About Alternate Reality Games: Args in Educational Method, Args as Educational Method. Proceedings of the European Conference on Games Based Learning, 287-293.

McCall, R., & Braun, A. (2008). Experiences of evaluating presence in augmented realities. PsychNology Journal, 6(2), 157-172.

Kroeker, K. (2010). Mainstreaming Augmented Reality. Communications of the ACM, 53(7), 19-21.

Squire, K., & Jan, M. (2007). Mad City Mystery: Developing Scientific Argumentation Skills with a Place-Based Augmented Reality Game on Handheld Computers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(1), 5-29.

Villano, M. (2008). When Worlds Collide: An Augmented Reality Check. T.H.E. Journal, 35(2), 33-34,.

Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., & Mitchell, R. (2009). Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning. Journal of Science Education & Technology, 18(1), 7-22.

de Freitas, S., Rebolledo-Mendez, G., Liarokapis, F., Magoulas, G., & Poulovassilis, A. (2010). Learning as immersive experiences: Using the four-dimensional framework for designing and evaluating immersive learning experiences in a virtual world. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(1), 69-85.

PBL

Ulden, L. & Beaumont, C. (2006). Technology and Problem-based Learning.

Tan, O. (2008). Problem-Based Learning and Creativity. Cengage Learning Asia, Singapore. Information Science Publishing, Hershey PA.

Savery, J. R., & Duffy, T. M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35, 31–38.

Blumenfeld, P.C., Soloway, E., Marx, R.W., Krajcik, J.S., Guzdial, M., & Palinscar, A.(1991). Motivating project-based learning: sustaining the doing, supporting the learning. Educational psychologist, 26 (3&4), 369-398.

Schmidt, H. (1993). Foundations of problem-based learning: some explanatory notes. Medical Education, 27, 422 – 432.

Maudsley, G. (2001). What issues are raised by evaluating problem-based undergraduate medical curricula? Making healthy connections across the literature. JOURNAL OF EVALUATION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE, 7311-324.

Savin-Baden, M. (2003). Disciplinary Differences or Modes of Curriculum Practice?: Who Promised to Deliver What in Problem-based Learning?. BIOCHEMISTRY AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY EDUCATION, 31338-343.

Kwan, T. (2008). Student-teachers’ evaluation on the use of different modes of problem-based learning in teacher education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 36(4), 323-343. doi:10.1080/13598660802375933.

Lieberman, D., & Linn, M. (1991). Learning to learn revisited: computers and the development of self-directed learning skills. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 23(3), 343-372. Retrieved from Internet and Personal Computing Abstracts database.

Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn?. Educational Psychology Review, 16(3), 235-266.

Belland, B. (2010). Portraits of middle school students constructing evidence-based arguments during problem-based learning: the impact of computer-based scaffolds. Educational Technology Research & Development, 58(3), 285-309

Chung, J., & Chow, S. (2004). Promoting student learning through a student-centred problem-based learning subject curriculum. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 41(2), 157-168.

Akınoğlu, O., & Tandoğan, R. (2007). The Effects of Problem-Based Active Learning in Science Education on Students’ Academic Achievement, Attitude and Concept Learning. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 3(1), 71-81.

Vardi, I., & Ciccarelli, M. (2008). Overcoming problems in problem-based learning: a trial of strategies in an undergraduate unit. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 45(4), 345-354.

Akçay, B. (2009). Problem-Based Learning in Science Education. Journal of Turkish Science Education (TUSED), 6(1), 26-36.

Mok, N., & Lai, P. (2003). Problem Design in Problem-based Learning: Evaluating Students’ Learning and Self-directed Learning Practice. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 40(3), 237.

Kumar, M., & Natarajan, U. (2007). A problem-based learning model: showcasing an educational paradigm shift. Curriculum Journal, 18(1), 89-102.

Parton, G., & Bailey, R. (2008). Problem-based learning: a critical rationalist perspective. London Review of Education, 6(3), 281-292.

HMELO-SILVER, C., DUNCAN, R., & CHINN, C. (2007). Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99-107.

Mai, N., & Tse-Kian, N. (2005). A multimedia-enhanced problem-based learning experience in the Malaysian classroom. Learning, Media, & Technology, 30(1), 41-53.

Barrett, T. (2010). The problem-based learning process as finding and being in flow. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 47(2), 165-174.

Wretlind, K., Rundberg, M., & Warfvinge, G. (2007). Problem Based Learning on the Net. International Journal of Learning, 13(9), 57-63.

SCHMIDT, H., LOYENS, S., VAN GOG, T., & PAAS, F. (2007). Problem-Based Learning is Compatible with Human Cognitive Architecture: Commentary on Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 91-97.

Oon Seng, T. (2004). Students’ experiences in problem-based learning: three blind mice episode or educational innovation?. Innovations in Education & Teaching International, 41(2), 169-184.

Hormel, L. (2009). Practicing Social Activism Through Problem-Based Learning. Humanity & Society, 33(3), 169-184.

Downing, K., Kwong, T., Chan, S., Lam, T., & Downing, W. (2009). Problem-based learning and the development of metacognition. Higher Education, 57(5), 609-621.

Arts, J., Gijselaers, W., & Segers, M. (2002). Cognitive effects of an authentic computer-supported, problem-based learning environment. Instructional Science, 30(6), 465-495.

Dolmans, D., De Grave, W., Wolfhagen, I., & van der Vleuten, C. (2005). Problem-based learning: future challenges for educational practice and research. Medical Education, 39(7), 732-741.

Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. (2006). Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching.

SWELLER, J., KIRSCHNER, P., & CLARK, R. (2007). Why Minimally Guided Teaching Techniques Do Not Work: A Reply to Commentaries. Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 115-121.

History

HARLAND, T. (2003). Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development and Problem-based Learning: linking a theoretical concept with practice through action research. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(2), 263.

Harland, T. (1998). Moving towards problem-based learning. Teaching in Higher Education, 3(2), 219.

Barrows, H. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, (68), 3.

Capon, N., & Kuhn, D. (2004). What’s So Good About Problem-Based Learning?. Cognition & Instruction, 22(1), 61-79.

Berejkovskaya, E., & Favorov, N. (2006). Potential negative consequences of education based on the principle of the zone of proximal development. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 44(6), 37-53.

Sokolova, T., Tarasova, I., & Korepanova, I. (2009). The Empirical Study of the Zone of Proximal Development: Operational, Technical and Motivational Components of the Action. (English). Cultural-Historical Psychology, (1), 28-35.

This is a project I just finished.  It is a six weeks challenge (assignment) for 7th grade science students.  All TEKS that are meet are listed on the website.  This challenge was inspired by the real ARG Urgent Evoke.

This type of Reality Game is hopefully where educational technology is heading.  It is more Organic in the learning process.  When creating this project I did not look at the website and computer I already had.  I found the issue to solve and the TEKS that could be learned along the way.  Then I use technology to make it happen!

So my first big light bulb moment occurred this past weekend in CECS 6510.  Dr. K has been telling us that we are learning to build a scale and then learning how to measure something with it.  Well I guess I am just really hardheaded because I just got it!

We are essentially looking for connections in our survey questions and answers that build constructs.  We are doing this by using SPSS to analysis our data.

We follow a set of processes that brings our data from random questions to a set of questions that builds a strong construct leading to our development of a scale.  This process can be long and arduous, but filled with reward.  I will now attempt to summarize the process we are using in these classes.

This process is Cybernetic in nature (meaning it never ends and is a constant loop of knowledge acquisition). Here are the Cybernetic steps I am currently working with to build my first scale:

1. Descriptive Statistics (determines if all items contain real numbers)
2. Reliability Analysis (check Cronbach’s α)
3. Factor Analysis (look for constructs)
   1. After looping 2 and 3 for a while I run with the best construct and run some other analysis.
4. ALSCAL and Hierarchical clustering (looking for more groupings or better groupings)

After repeating these steps 1,000 times I found one very strong construct with a Conrbach’s α of .92.  I turned this construct into a single domain or box  to compare with my demographic info.  This new domain is my scale. YEA!!!  I am just about to finish my second scale based off of my second construct, wish me luck . . .

Thank goodness for SPSS.  When I started CECS 6510 and CECS 6800 I was very nervous about statistics.  I mean come on, I stink at math!  When I was growing up I had dyslexia and no one knew it.  They just kept trying glasses on me and placing me in math classes that I could survive.  I missed some important steps in the learning process, but I am going to survive!

After the first 2 hours of Dr. K’s class I already understood more than I thought I would the entire time.  He did a great job of explaining in layman’s terms.

I have purchased SPSS and am playing with the data the Dr. K provided us.  So far I have remembered how to do factor analysis which is Cronbach’s α.  I am not sure of all the math involved here, but at least I can read the numbers and know that we are shooting for .8 or higher!  This however makes me crossed eyed:

Next I ran the reliability analysis, looking at the construct validity of the tool.  I still don’t understand all the math behind it, but am getting a vague idea of the analysis.  It seems that it delves into the psychological trails of the answerer.

The one I do get the math and can do is the Coens D

I welcome change and would love to find a way to fill the gap between people.  I can not wrap my brain around a way to accomplish this task? Video/audio chat does this well with only two people conversing.  Make that number 3 or more and it seems that I cannot keep up with all the conversations and thoughts.  Even if everyone is on the screen in video form, they are in their own boxes.  I think of it like trying to have a conversation in an office building with others that are in adjacent or not adjacent cubicles.  This would be confusing the natural flow of conversation would be interupted because each person could not read the conversation clues given by each member.  I am sure this feeling is what persons with social disorders feel like.  They can’t read others context clues and just say what they are thinking or feeling at any time (maybe way off)?

Found this comic funny on the surface and yet even funnier when you think about it!  Media communication is created by humans and is limited to our perspectives.  So in our quest to communicate better we have limited ourselves!  Another element that makes me laugh is the thought of if we could actually read minds, the amount of information would make us crazy!  Much like the vast amount of information of the internet being projected into our heads all at one time.  Maybe that is the problem too much info our brains cannot handle it!

This is my visual representation of my Cybernetic Distance Learning theory, I call this the Cybernetic Cognition Loop.  It contains elements from three various learning theories, some that deal with distance learning and some that do not.  The first theory is that of the learner’s cognition based on ACT-R theory of John Anderson. The second theory is that of Habermas and Warren, LTCA.  The final component is that of Cyberneticist Pask. Please let me know what you guys think about this theory.

- Mr. Baudrillard

Well today our young children will be able to really have their lives chronicled for the ages or at least until Armageddon! According to Born Digital by the time the “digital natives” enter the workforce there will be thousands of digital files about them ranging from medical files to personal posts made on social networking sites like Facebook or Myspace.  Corporations may have the ability to search these files via Google and fine out many aspects of “digital native’s” lives by only using their name.  This type of search could potentially thousands of videos, photos, and some day surveillance footage of an individuals comings and goings.  Even though Baudrillard did not intend for the above statement to apply in this manner, it is definitely something to consider for the future privacy of our students.

– “Armageddon”

ACT

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 4

Slide 5

LTCA

Slide 1

Slide 2

Brunder’s Constructivist Theory

Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 4

Slide 5

Chapter Synopsis

-Michael G. Moore & Greg Kearsley

Chapter 1: Fundamentals of Distance Education

8WWZ9RN2CDKH This chapter focuses on defining distance education, discussing “systems approach”, and fundamental changes that distance education can bring to the educational field.  Applying the “systems approach” philosophy to distance education allows one to realize that all parts of the educational process are inter-related and independent at the same time.  Meaning that if one aspect of communication is altered in the instructional design the over all learning experience could be altered.  The “systems approach” of distance education also broadens the impact of it on traditional education.  Lack of need for classroom space, parking, buildings, etc. or a need for computers, Internet capabilities, etc.

Chapter 2: The Historical Context of Distance Education

This chapter covers the history of distance education from the late nineteenth century.  According to Moore and Kearsley there are four main stages:

1. Correspondence/Independent Study (1890-present)
2. Open Universities: (1969- present)
3. Broadcasting & Teleconferencing (1960s-present)
4. Multimedia & the Web (1980s – present)

This chapter does seem to me as interesting that it only focuses on 1890 to present.  I would think that from the start of the written word distributed and distance education would have started.  Socrates feared the written word would adversely affect society.  I believe that would be a starting point for the history of distributed/distance learning?

I cannot image taking a course via radio!  I am impatient as it is with the “instant” nature of the Internet when using asynchronous communication (i.e. forum, blog, wiki, etc.). It seems that as technology has changed more people are taking advantage of distance and distributed learning.  I do not think that this is a good thing.  I personally believe that we need to interact with others individually to gain maximum benefit in learning. Text does not convey emotion well, neither does voice only.  Seeing another persons facial expressions, eye movements, and inflection bring the entire focus of their statements to light.

Chapter 3: The Scope of Distance Education

This chapter discuss the various nature of distance education including: correspondence schools, open universities, schools, colleges and universities, teleconference consortia, corporations, and even the department of defense. This chapter also presents a table of various distance applications, these tables are dated and do not necessarily help today.  Also the table does not differentiate between individual or group focused learning.

Chapter 4: Research on Effectiveness

Chapter 4 is a summary of research in distance learning with a focus on effectiveness of the technology. The summaries were then broken into four conclusions “(1) there is insufficient evidence to support the idea that classroom instruction is the optimum delivery method; (2) instruction at a distance can be as effective in bringing about learning as classroom instruction; (3) the absence of face-to-face contact is not in itself detrimental to the learning process; and (4) what makes any course good or poor is a consequence of how well it is designed, delivered, and conducted, not whether the students are face-to-face or at a distance.”  I find that the forth conclusion is the strongest point to be made. The course design is more important than any expansive technology that can be purchased.  Leading us to the idea that the content is more important than the technology.  According to Chapter 4 effective distance learning and teaching occurs with large numbers of students and good instructional design.

Chapter 5: Technologies and Media

Technology can take many different forms media, print, audio, video, radio, television, computer-based instruction, and teleconferencing.  Chapter 5 defines each of these technologies and gives educational examples of their uses.  Each medium is also looked at in terms of strengths and weaknesses.  The chapter ends with discussion points on designer’s selection of the technologies in planning courses.  This chapter is now highly outdated, and the strengths and weakness of these technologies have changed.  Print is no longer passive, audio/video is no longer expensive or as time consuming, teleconferencing is easy and cheap, and computers are no longer expensive.

Chapter 6: Course Design and Development

Chapter 6 delves into design and development of distance educational courses.  The author looks at Instructional Systems Design (ISD), Development Team, Designing the Study Guide, Preparing and Audio Conference, Planning a Satellite Teleconference, Computer Conferencing, Creating Student Involvement, Evaluation, and some General Design Principles.  I found the ISD and Development Team sections to be very interesting. It seems that the team approach to developing a course is more effective because everyone brings a set of skills to the table, but it appears to me that a single teacher following the author-editor model designs most courses. I found the study guide section to be insightful into the way our online courses are set up, smaller units that are easier to manage and the layout of the LMS’ that are used.  Finally the general design principles are a nice synopsis of items to consider when designing a course.

Chapter 7: Teaching and Tutoring

This chapter looks into the teacher perspective in an online educational setting.  Chapter 7 deduces that teachers must master the “delivery technology” that is involved for the course to be effective.  Another aspect of the teacher paradigm in online learning is the humanizing or personalizing of the class.  Teachers of online classes need to also make sure to not present the class but promote interactivity.  Finally teachers need to be trained to use these systems effectively.
Chapter 8: The Distance Education Student
Chapter 8 focuses on the relationship of student to the distance learning setting.  At the time this book was published the majority of students were adults.  I wonder if this is still true today?  This chapter also looks as the factors that determine student success in the distance learning setting.  I also wonder if these factors are true for adolescents as well as adults?  Chapter 8 encourages student feedback to determine success of a distance learning course, as well as a support system for them.  This book finds that adult learners, once they get over initial reactions, enjoy an online distance course.  Finally I wonder what learning styles do better at distance courses versus others?

Chapter 9: Administration, Management and Policy

This chapter focuses on the administrative issues that may arise in distance education with regards to policy and state regulations.  The major fuci of Chapter 9 are Planning, Staffing, Budgeting, Scheduling, Quality Assessment, and Policy.  Policy seems to take the majority of focus from an Administrator standpoint in distance learning.  I find it interesting that policy ends the chapter when in fact policy is what sets the decisions for Planning, Staffing, Budgeting, and Scheduling.  Chapter 5 touched briefly on policy with a few questions on the development of policy.  This section focuses on challenges, state regulation, and various barriers to overall adoption of distance learning.  While reading the case study of Florida I wondered what it looks like today. Here you go: http://www.distancelearn.org/mainPage.cf…

Chapter 10: The Theoretical Basis for Distance Education

This is by far the most helpful chapter for me!  Understanding a small part of the theoretical basis for DL opened my mind up to what is going on.  From Peters “industrial methods” in DL to Boyd and Apps effects of physical and transactional distance, this chapter brings it all together!  After finishing this chapter I went to Google in search of more and found this: http://tip.psychology.org/theories.html .  I really feel that the fact that Moore and Kearsly are taking a “systems view” on distance education is a DL theory in and of itself!
GREAT STUFF!

Chapter 11: International Perspectives

Chapter 11 looks at the various perspectives of countries other than USA toward online education.  China, Norway, Australia, and the Republic of South Africa are examined briefly for history and system analysis.  This chapter also offers a short case study of an Australian distance learning system, using Telematics (phone lines for voice and computer).  I found that overall analysis would have been helpful in a chart format.  Not all aspects of each country were equally examined (i.e. self-regulation, demographics, finance, etc.).  The bits of information were highly interesting and I found them to build a picture that I wanted more info on.  I am sure that the data that is presented is very outdated.  The use of distance education in developing countries is fantastic.  Bringing education to persons that would likewise have no chance at education is amazing!  I wonder if distance education has filled the gap or created a larger gap between developed and undeveloped countries?  I also am now a subscriber to ICDE reports via UNT library services. http://www.icde.org/

Chapter 12: The Transformation of Education

This chapter covers many aspects of distance education that would affect its effectiveness for all stakeholders.  The authors look at the acceptance of this type of education by many educational institutions and organizations. They also discuss how distance education might affect the structure of universities.  New technologies are also examined to see how they might influence distance education.  The authors also explore how distance education might impact teacher training. Finally Chapter 12 looks at how educational institutions might begin to compete or work together with the influx of distance education.  I truly appreciate the authors discussing the importance of life long learning being a leading influence to distance education.

These perspectives to me seemed to be grounded in reality of student and teacher interaction, not collegiate money.  Robert Zemsky and Greg von Lehmen seemed too keen for the money and students that online education can bring to colleges as Robert Zemesky stated, “Once again higher education’s electronic El Dorado beckons.”

My other “Aha” moment was the “synthesizing” rules that games are comprised of. These four rules could also outline lessons that include little or no technology. Educational speaking the four rules could apply in this phrase: “Fun lesson must have quantifiable outcomes (learning) that are gained through true to life play.”

Finally, I do appreciate the fact that video games do cost $10-20 million to produce. I believe that video game manufactures and programers/designers should “give back” some brain cells to our students (and me) by helping public education via their “withered” technologies.

Doc posted: An article from last fall about the future of SL:
http://www.pixelsandpolicy.com/pixels_and_policy/2009/10/media-doubts-sl.html

Interesting article, but even better is the response from a reader! Look down towards the bottom of the page and read the post by Dusan Writer, damn. She rips that article up. Also went to Dusan’s page and like this youtube video.

This trend seems to have also spilled over into the classroom. Districts love to have shinny new toys and tote the benefits of technology to student learning. But does the vanity begit the substance? Making the tool (technology) the focus will never improved instruction. Vanity or Substance, technology does not equal good instruction; good instruction stands alone.

Our students will always be the future, because that is the next generation to teach the future (so on and so forth). We must be vigilant in continuing our prosperity as humans. We must help progress our society from rich to poor to be better than our current state, not only monetarily, but morally. As educators we must find the path of enlightenment that will best benefit our society. Technology has opened a whole new world for educators to operate in.

We are in the age of great communication. No matter what government regime someone lives under they can find out truths and non-truths like never before. Our world has never been this connected for almost all classes of citizens. While technology changes rapidly we cannot deny that the main uses of technology are slowing down. As we explore all the ways in which technology can be stretched we will reach a limit. Updates will continue to occur and new ideas will flourish, but a core categorization of technology will remain to be in place. At the forefront will be communication, wither by video, text, or voice, communication is now a staple of technology. I believe that as technology advances we will see that devices will become more condensed and multifunctional, but that the functions will cease to change.

I want to make sure that I have done everything I can, so that my children can do everything they can, to help our society in 5 billion years prosper.

Please click to advance slides.
Download

Here is what the website says about the book:

about THE BOOK

The first generation of “Digital Natives” – children who were born into and raised in the digital world – are coming of age, and soon our world will be reshaped in their image. Our economy, our politics, our culture and even the shape of our family life will be forever transformed. But who are these Digital Natives? More

what is a DIGITAL NATIVE?

Born Digital is an initiative of the Digital Natives project, an interdisciplinary collaboration of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University and the Research Center for Information Law at the University of St. Gallen. The aim of the Digital Natives project is to understand and support young people as they grow up in a digital age. More

Cannot wait to try this in the classroom, I will post results and details after I try.  Details of how to start are listed below straight from Johnny Chung Lee website:

Low-Cost Multi-point Interactive Whiteboards Using the Wiimote

WiiPens

Low-Cost Multi-point Interactive Whiteboards Using the Wiimote

Since the Wiimote can track sources of infrared (IR) light, you can track pens that have an IR led in the tip. By pointing a wiimote at a projection screen or LCD display, you can create very low-cost interactive whiteboards or tablet displays. Since the Wiimote can track upto 4 points, up to 4 pens can be used. It also works great with rear-projected displays.

Software
The calibration and mouse cursor emulation software is available for you to download and try yourself. Note: My mouse emulation code isn’t perfect. If any of you are programmers and can get it working with Alias Sketchbook, drop me a line.
1. Connect your wiimote to your PC via Bluetooth. There are a number of tutorials online on how to do this, possibly even for you specific software/hardware configuration. The Wiimote works with many (but not all) Bluetooth drivers. You can report/read about compatibility issues at WiimoteProject.com
2. Download the Wiimote Whiteboard software to the right. Please read the “READ ME.txt” file first! Make sure your wiimote is connected via Bluetooth, and then run the “.exe” in the main folder. NOTE: Good placement of the wiimote is key to good tracking. View the README for more info.

Multitouch: The multitouch demos are custom C# DirectX programs. You may download the sample program to the right, but this is provided for developers without support or documentation. The code is built on top of this Wiimote library. Unfortunately, multi-touch capable applications are currently extremely rare. Hopefully, that will change as more developers explore its potential.

Building pens: Here is a simple schematic of the light pen. The LEDs that I use are Vishay TSAL6400s running at 100mA, but lots of other LEDs will work too. You also might be able to jump start your experimentation by retro-fitting a mini keychain light with an IR LED. I’m currently looking into manufacturing and selling IR pens, but this may take several months.

Mac/Linux Versions: Due to personal time contraints, I probably won’t be able to make a port myself. But fairly mature versions are available online. However, I haven’t tried them myself. I’ve also created a Source Forge Project – Wiimote Whiteboard, but it does not seem to be getting much love.

A visit to this project’s FAQ and Advanced Discussion post may be very englightening. You may also find the official discussion forums for my wiimote projects helpful: WiimoteProject.com

Downloads:
Windows (32-bit)
Wiimote Whiteboard* (original 12/19/07) – includes source
Wiimote Whiteboard v0.2* (updated 3/27/08) – includes source
Wiimote Whiteboard v0.3* (updated 8/20/08) – includes source

* there appear to be some issues with 64-bit machines, and BlueSoleil. Alternative Bluetooth software may work. Check the forum for more info.

Mac (Java)
You can do a quick webserach or try the version created by uweschmidt which is a fairly mature Java-based version for Mac.

Multitouch:source code

Fun software (mostly free) to try with this:
Mapping software: Microsoft Virtual Earth, Google Earth
Physics simulation software: Phun
Virtual Tourism: Photosynth
Media Browsing: CoolIris
Painting progams: Alias Sketchbook Pro
Note taking:One Note
Handwritting recognition: Windows Tablet PC Edition – works great if you have it, not a stand alone program to install.

If you are a returning member of the community please login here.