Background
This paper compares the effects of two classroom-based technology-enhanced teaching interventions, conducted in two schools in sixth (age 11–12) grade. In one school, the intervention involves the use of a class set of 3D Printing Pens, and in another school the use of dynamic geometry environments, for inquiry-based learning of the relations among the number of vertices, edges, and faces of prisms and pyramids. An instrument was designed as guided by the van Hiele model of geometric thinking and administered to the two groups in the form of pretests, posttests, and delayed posttests to assess students’ prior knowledge before the intervention started, the learning outcomes obtained immediately after intervention, and the retention of knowledge after the interventions had been completed for a sustained period of time. The purpose of this study is to explore differences in geometry learning outcomes in two technology-enhanced environments, one that involves dynamic, visual representations of geometry and another that involves embodied actions of constructing physical 3D solids.

Results
The results show that students using dynamic geometry improved at a higher rate than those using 3D Pens. On the other hand, students with the aid of 3D Pens demonstrated better retention of the properties of 3D solids than their dynamic geometry counterparts. Namely, the posttest results show that the dynamic geometry environment (DGE) group generally outperformed the 3D Pen group across categories. The observed outperformance by the DGE group on “advanced” implies that the DGE technology had a stronger effect on higher levels of geometric learning. However, the results from the ANCOVA suggest that the retention effect was more significant with 3D Pens.

Conclusions
This study has established evidence that the DGE instructions produced strong but relatively temporary geometry learning outcomes, while 3D Pen instructions can help solidify that knowledge. The results of this study further shed light on the effect of visual and sensory-motor experiences on school mathematics learning and corroborate previous work showing that the effects of gesture are particularly good at promoting long-lasting learning.



中文翻译：

---

在两种技术增强的环境中探索小学生几何学习成果的差异：动态几何和3D打印

背景
本文比较了在两个六年级（11至12岁）学校中实施的两种基于课堂的技术增强型教学干预的效果。在一所学校中，该干预涉及使用一类3D打印笔，而在另一所学校中，则使用动态几何环境，以基于查询的方式学习顶点数量，棱边和棱镜面之间的关系。金字塔。在van Hiele几何思维模型的指导下设计了一种仪器，并以预测，后测和延迟后测的形式对两组进行管理，以评估学生在干预开始之前的先验知识，干预后立即获得的学习成果，并在持续一段时间内完成干预后保留知识。

结果
结果表明，使用动态几何的学生比使用3D笔的学生进步更快。另一方面，借助3D笔的学生证明了3D实体的属性比其动态几何对应物更好的保留。即，后测结果表明，动态几何环境（DGE）组在各个类别中的性能通常优于3D Pen组。DGE小组观察到的在“高级”上的优异表现表明，DGE技术对更高水平的几何学习有更强的影响。但是，ANCOVA的结果表明，使用3D笔时，保留效果更为显着。

结论
这项研究已经建立了证据，表明DGE指令产生了强大但相对暂时的几何学习结果，而3D Pen指令可以帮助巩固该知识。这项研究的结果进一步阐明了视觉和感觉运动体验对学校数学学习的影响，并证实了以前的工作，表明手势的作用特别有利于促进持久学习。