Students’ Attitudes and Competences in Modeling Using 3D Cartoon Toy Design Maker

Abstract

With the rapid development of education and information technology, there has been an increasing focus on maker education, which emphasizes cultivating students’ creative thinking and problem-solving ability. This paper presents our efforts to create a 3D cartoon toy design curriculum system that offers a playful and collaborative way to engage students with creation-based learning. It consists of a 3D modeling software and a series of 3D cartoon toy design courses. The former was developed according to students’ cognitive characteristics and hands-on operation habits, and the toy design courses include activities such as hand-painting, computer modeling, pattern design, handcraft, and creative display. This 3D cartoon toy design course was preliminarily implemented in one kindergarten and two primary schools in Hangzhou, an eastern city in mainland China. A learning assessment of participating students was conducted upon completion of the course. Results show that (1) the initial attitudes of junior students towards learning 3D cartoon toy design were mainly influenced by their interests, whereas senior students paid more attention to turning their ideas into reality with the help of technical tools. (2) All students were highly successful at mastering foundational modeling concepts, but the junior students were less successful at mastering abstract modeling concepts. (3) The course was most successful in developing students’ collaborative ability and content creation. (4) Additionally, teachers were successful at promoting a collaborative and communicative environment. Findings are discussed.

1. Introduction and Objectives

Nowadays, students are growing up with digital devices and innovative technologies that influence their way of learning as well as their daily lives [1,2,3]. A surging number of educators have been advocating the importance of maker education that incorporates information technologies [4,5]. In a traditional classroom, it is common for the teacher to talk and the student to listen [6]. However, maker education argues that a constructionist learning approach, where students learn by doing instead of by listening, is advantageous because it leads to more motivated students and a deeper understanding of the subject at hand [5,7,8]. Maker education transforms classroom activities from teacher-centered and didactic presentations to more interactive learner-centered, instruction emphasis transforms from fact memorization to the skills of problem solving and analysis, progress is evaluated by quality rather than quantity of output and criterion-referenced, and computers are used less for drill and practice activities and more for communication [9]. At the same time, maker education plays an important role in improving social and environmental sustainability [10].

Based on the concept of maker education, we developed a curriculum system of 3D cartoon toy design (Appendix A) and applied it in the practice courses of kindergartens and primary schools. On the basis of self-developed 3D design software, the course combines painting and handcraft to teach students how to design and make cartoon toys. The main contents of the course include designing and drawing cartoon images (hand-painting), using modeling software to build toy models in 3D space (computer modeling), using pattern design software to unfold 3D toy models into 2D patterns (pattern design), cutting pieces according to 2D patterns, hand-sewing and decorating cartoon toys (handcraft), and finally performing with cartoon toys (creative display). In this course, 3D modeling is a process from 2D to 3D, pattern designing is a process from 3D to 2D, and pattern design to sewing the toy is a process from 2D to 3D again. The two rounds of transformation from 2D to 3D and 3D to 2D deepen students’ understanding of the relationship between 2D and 3D (Figure 1).

The purpose of this study is to demonstrate how cartoon toy design and computer software can be used in the classroom and what students can learn with these tools. The goal of the 3D cartoon toy design course is not only to instill technical knowledge, but also to promote an interesting and cooperative learning environment. This paper applies the Positive Technological Development (PTD) evaluation framework proposed by Bers [11] to measure students’ positive and interactive behaviors in the course. Specifically, this study raises the following research questions:

(1)

What are the initial attitudes of students of different ages towards learning 3D design?

(2)

What modeling concepts do students master after the 3D cartoon toy design course?

(3)

How involved are students in different aspects of Bers’ PTD evaluation framework in the 3D cartoon toy design course?

(4)

What experience do teachers gain?

2. Related Work

2.1. Maker Education for Students

Although students are growing up in an increasingly digital environment, existing school curricula do not always focus on exploring the digital world until later elementary years. Only a few countries and regions have established clear policies and frameworks for introducing technology to early education [12,13,14,15]. Maker education is comprehensive quality education based on the integration of information technology and education, which aims to provide students with a suitable environment, resources, and opportunities for creation. Especially with the help of technical resources, the creative process can be integrated into the learning process so as to realize creation-based learning [5], cultivate a collaborative spirit, and develop problem-solving and innovation skills. This is also in line with the training requirements for innovative talents in the sustainable development process [16].

Most maker education courses focus on teaching and operation skills training of basic knowledge such as electronics, mechanics, mathematics, and computers, or complex skills training such as 3D modeling, manufacturing, circuit assembly, and programming [17,18,19]. Although these courses require students to solve problems using a variety of knowledge, they often focus on a certain technology or skills, but are less focused on comprehensive quality [20]. This study aims to use technology, social interaction, and interactive activities to help students construct their own understanding and enhance their comprehensive learning ability.

2.2. Sketch-Based Modeling

In recent decades, 3D design technology has been extensively studied in both academia and industry. With the software, users can design very complex and realistic 3D models. However, the existing software has mainly been developed for professional designers and the operations are too complicated and demanding for students. At present, there are very few modeling tools for students, such as Tinker, 123D Design, etc. This software simplifies the operations, but essentially follows the same workflow as professional software, so the design thinking still cannot be expressed quickly and effectively.

In product design, sketching is an important tool for design thinking and communication, and is usually the first step in creation [21]. Sketch-based modeling simplifies the traditional modeling approach, making it easier for students to build 3D models and providing them with an interesting and hands-on 3D model design tool. In our method, we realize an efficient and intuitive sketch-based modeling method by making use of the information extracted from the image. We use automatic alignment and deformation to replace the artificial selection to take more advantage of the input images, which makes it easier for students to produce personalized models (Appendix A).

3. Methods

In order to explore the full picture of the experience of the 3D cartoon toy design course, this study used a mixed-method research design that included data collected from a sample of students and their teachers [22]. The quantitative data collection mainly included students’ scores from an attitude survey, from 3D modeling knowledge evaluation and behavior observation frequency, whereas the qualitative data mainly included teacher interviews and daily records. The process of qualitative data collection included teachers’ opinions, feedback, and experiences, which could not be captured through solely quantitative measures. Considering that there were many unstable factors in the data collection from the sample population of students [23], the data collection method was more specific and simplified, and information was mainly obtained through one-to-one question-and-answer between researchers and students and classroom behavior observation.

3.1. Participants

We implemented this 3D toy design course in one kindergarten and two primary schools in Hangzhou, an eastern city in mainland China. A total of 93 students participated in this research (

Table 1. Sample information.

	School	Grade	Sample Size	Age
1	Kindergarten X	K-3	19	6–7
2	Primary school Y	First grade	18	7–8
3	Primary school Y	Second grade	20	8–9
4	Primary school Z	Third grade	19	9–10
5	Primary school Z	Fourth grade	17	11–12

). The participating students aged from 6 to 12 years old, with an average age of 8.7 years. These students came from public and private schools. All the students consented to participate in this study. Five teachers from these schools also participated as collaborators in the research. In addition, we undertook informal interviews with co-teachers and assistant teachers whenever possible, seeking to gain valuable feedback that would help us to gain a fuller understanding of the course experience.

3.2. Instruments

3.2.1. Students’ Attitude Survey

To build rapport, before the course, the teachers asked about the students’ hobbies, what they like and do not like at school, etc.—a measure that we found was effective at putting the participants at ease. Next, each participant was provided with a short explanation of the course and asked to fill out a structured questionnaire to gauge their initial attitudes towards learning 3D design. The questionnaire was proposed on the basis of Pupils’ Attitudes Towards Technology (PATT) [24,25,26], which was the mainstream instrument for ascertaining students’ attitudes. It included six dimensions (i.e., Interesting course content, Group cooperation, Turning ideas into reality, Operating computers, Acquiring knowledge, Challenging content) with 18 items, and a five-point Likert scale (Strongly agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, and Strongly disagree) was used to assess their level of agreement with the statements in the questionnaire.

3.2.2. 3D Modeling Knowledge Task

The research group developed the “3D modeling knowledge” task to assess students’ individual mastery of the 3D modeling software in terms of five functional modules: view, geometry, deformation, symmetry, and combinations. Students sat down with researchers one on one and were asked to help the researcher identify the way of modeling. For example, the researcher asked, “Which tool should I use if I want to model a top hat?” with the correct answer being the swing tool (Figure 2). After each question, students would indicate the function they thought was correct and their answers were recorded. Students received a point for correctly identifying one functional module, yielding scores ranging from 0 to 5 (0 means that no function module was correctly identified, and 5 means that all function modules were correctly identified).

3.2.3. Comprehensive Competency Assessments

The comprehensive ability assessment was proposed on the basis of the Positive Technological Development (PTD) framework [11,27,28]. The goal of the 3D cartoon toy design course is not only to instill technical knowledge, but also to promote an interesting and cooperative learning environment. Therefore, we applied the PTD evaluation framework to measure students’ positive and interactive behaviors and the evaluation index of such behaviors in the course.

The PTD-based assessment focuses on six positive behaviors (Six Cs): communication, collaboration, community building, content creation, creativity, and choices of conduct (i.e., positive behavioral choices). A checklist (Appendix B) assisted researchers in observing and recording the occurring frequency of behaviors related to the six Cs.

For each of the six Cs, researchers looked for specific behaviors and marked the frequency with which this behavior was observed during the 3D cartoon toy design course using a 1–5 scale (1 = Never, 2 = Occasionally, 3 = Sometimes, 4 = Often, 5 = Always). For example, for communication, researchers marked the frequency with which they observed behaviors such as students exchanging ideas with each other and students seeking help from and asking questions of one another. This assessment was performed by a trained researcher at the end of each lesson in the 3D cartoon toy design course. Raw scores were averaged into a mean score for each of the six Cs for each lesson. The scores for all lessons were then averaged to a mean composite score for each of the six Cs at the end of the course.

3.2.4. Teacher Interviews and Daily Records

After each 3D cartoon toy design lesson, the teachers were requested to complete a structured daily record to motivate them, reflecting on the success and challenges during the daytime lesson and describing the ways they adapted and personalized the course to meet their students’ needs.

The teachers were also interviewed briefly by a researcher at the end of the class. The interviews were open-ended, with the purpose being to listen to the teachers’ views and insights on the 3D cartoon toy design course and determine whether they needed any additional supports for the remainder of the research. Obtaining the practice and feedback on the 3D cartoon toy design course by means of teacher records and interviews was a direct way to learn the user’s attitudes towards the course and could help understand the feasibility and potential problems in the course.

3.3. Procedure

The “design–make–display” flow was implemented as an 8-week extracurricular course in kindergarten and primary schools. Lessons were taught by research assistants and volunteer teachers from those schools (Figure 3). Volunteer teachers needed to have an art or information technology background, and they needed to participate in a one-day training on using the 3D modeling software. During this training, the teachers were also introduced to the 3D cartoon toy design curriculum and all assessment measures and activities they would need to implement through presentations and practical examples. There was one lesson per week. The teaching hour depended on the ages of the students, as younger students could only concentrate for a shorter period. In general, one lesson lasted approximately 1 to 2 h. The contents were adjusted according to the characteristics of the students. For younger students, the teachers explained and practiced modeling knowledge through relatively simple 3D models. The teachers increased the complexity of explaining and practicing the models along with the increasing ages of the students. The cartoon toys designed and made by the students were as shown in Figure 4.

3.4. Date Analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Principal analysis procedures included the calculation of descriptive and frequency statistics of the data. Cronbach’s homogeneity coefficient alpha (α) was employed to determine the reliability and internal consistency of the attitude measurement section of the instrument. The Cronbach α-value was acceptable (α > 0.7) and reliable. The Kruskal–Wallis H test was used to determine whether there were significant differences in the 3D Modeling Knowledge Task and Comprehensive Competency Assessment performance based on the students’ grades. The results show that no significant differences were found based on the students’ grade, indicating that all students were able to master the 3D modeling concepts similarly regardless of the grade they were in. The content analysis method was used to analysis the daily records and teacher interviews to corroborate the findings of the descriptive analysis [29]. The researchers first examined the data, revealed the pattern of codes, and then named the codes.

4. Results

The 3D modeling knowledge test and comprehensive competency assessment were calculated and compared between the five grades. On average, the students in this study successfully mastered the 3D modeling knowledge after completing this course, and their personal comprehensive competency was greatly improved. Typically, their performance increased by grade level, but not for each task.

4.1. Students’ Attitude

By investigating the students’ motivation to attend the course, the questionnaire results showed that the interesting attribute was the biggest reason attracting students to the 3D cartoon toy design course. After cross-analysis of the data, it was found that lower-grade students had relatively higher demand for experiential learning [30] such as interesting course content and group cooperation. With the increase in students’ grade, their demand for skills such as turning ideas into reality and operating computers and for knowledge such as interesting and more challenging content rose, as shown in Figure 5.

4.2. 3D Modeling Knowledge

The students took a 3D modeling knowledge test after completing the course. Students received scores ranging from 0 to 5 based on whether they could correctly answer each of the five questions on the assessment. The overall mean scores from the 3D modeling knowledge test were very high for all grades, indicating that students had a good understanding of the function modules of the 3D modeling software. At the same time, the mean scores of students of different grades showed certain differences. It showed an increasing trend with an increase in age. As shown in Figure 6, kindergarten students had a good grasp of the modeling knowledge of view and geometry modules, whereas they had a relatively weak grasp of the modeling knowledge of other modules. Grade 1 and grade 2 primary school students had a relatively poor grasp of the modeling knowledge of deformation function modules. Although the teacher explained and demonstrated the deformation function in class, it was difficult for some junior students to correctly apply this function in practice. It was possible that the deformation function was too abstract for junior students to understand. Grade 3 and grade 4 primary school students had a relatively balanced grasp of the modeling knowledge of all modules.

4.3. Comprehensive Competency Assessments

The cumulative mean score for each of the six Cs of the PTD framework was calculated after the course. As shown in Figure 7, there was no significant difference between the five grades. The 3D cartoon toy design course had the best performance in developing students’ collaboration (mean score 4.18). The course involved students discussing and completing the model together in the form of group cooperation. Especially in the process of model making and displaying, students borrowed tools or provided materials from each other more frequently, which was conducive to an improvement in their cooperation ability. For content creation (mean score 4.06), students also showed better performance in using software to build their own models and coping with problems in the modeling process. For communication (mean score 3.62), many students asked teachers or their classmates for help when they encountered problems, such as the specific use of a modeling function or the use of modeling materials. Therefore, they had an ideal mean score in communication. At the same time, most students were able to follow the classroom orderly and showed respect to other students and teachers (choices of conduct mean score 3.01), and they were also willing to share their work with the family (community-building mean score 2.98). Students’ ability to apply technology in innovative ways had yet to be improved (creativity mean score 2.19). In general, students used the functional modules of modeling software in the way that the teachers taught them. They seldom independently developed other ways of using software functions. In the process of modeling, they mainly used the conventional materials produced by toys provided in the class, which had certain limitations on the expansion of materials.

4.4. Teachers’ Experience

Based on the teachers’ daily recorded feedback, they were usually able to successfully achieve their course goals. They chose to use a variety of guiding strategies when introducing complex concepts to the students. Some concept introduction strategies were directly from the 3D cartoon toy design course, whereas others were the teachers’ own ideas. For example, teachers introducing a new concept in class by presenting a story, game, or song used a magic-like way to introduce the modeling tools (e.g., using the swing function to directly turn a curve into a 3D hat). Sometimes teachers used small group discussions and combined parental participation in the class.

Teachers also proposed some suggestions for the adaptation and modification of the 3D cartoon toy design course to meet the needs of the students (Appendix C). In the classroom, the teachers were encouraged to teach in a flexible way; thus, they could adjust the course by adding or skipping some activities, or adjusting or changing the structure of the activities and the length of the course.

In interviews and daily records, the teachers shared their experiences related to the 3D cartoon toy design course, and Appendix D shows of the most frequent experiences mentioned by the teachers. From the perspective of the teachers, the course was successful; it stimulated students’ interest, improved their self-study initiative, cultivated students’ comprehensive competency and hands-on ability, and allowed students to develop collaboration and communication skills. It is well known that creativity is stimulating in the process of problem solving. Throughout the course, students acquired the social and individual capacity for “learning” that went well beyond the limits of conventional elementary education systems and met the need of sustainability [31]. That is, students actively participated in and promoted change, and were involved in problem-solving and action-taking for sustainability. Through the information given by the teachers in Appendix D, we can see students’ curiosity and their attempts to solve problems in their own way and apply new materials were the main guiding factors stimulating the development of creativity. At the same time, the teachers also mentioned the mutual communication and cooperation between students in order to solve the problems in this process.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

This study collected data from students and teachers in China by quantitative and qualitative methods, and conducted a comprehensive assessment of the 3D cartoon toy design course through quantitative (students’ attitude, modeling knowledge score, and comprehensive ability behavior frequency measurement) and qualitative data (teacher interviews and daily records). Unlike traditional classroom instruction, the maker course focused more on students’ acquisition of diverse knowledge in practice and taught them a comprehensive set of practical skills, from design ideas to hand-making skills, that allowed them to learn to express ideas in different forms and inspire potential in the learning of skills. In the 3D cartoon toy design course, the students’ ability to explore, discover, and construct their own understandings through the use of technology, social interaction, and interactive activities helped to enhance their learning.

The course began with cartoon image designing, teaching students first how to design cartoon toys, using 3D modeling software and pattern design software to design 3D models and 2D patterns, then hand-sewing toys, and finally allowing students to display their work in groups or as individuals. For senior students, relatively complex model cases in the explanation and practice of modeling concepts were used, whereas for junior students, we used relatively simple model cases in the explanation and practice of modeling concepts to meet the needs of different students. For different students, in addition to the adjustment of class time and course content, we also examined students’ abilities in computer modeling to improve the teaching software.

This study mainly focused on the four issues mentioned in the introduction and led to the following conclusions through the experiments.

(1)

The attitude scores demonstrated that the participation of junior students in the course was mainly influenced by the fun nature of the course, whereas the participation of senior students in the course was more because of their demand for technology.

(2)

The students’ 3D modeling knowledge scores demonstrated that all students were highly successful at mastering foundational modeling concepts. At the same time, the study provided preliminary evidence that 3D modeling software could be a useful and educational tool in the classroom.

(3)

The PTD scores indicated that students in this study showed high engagement across PTD behaviors. Students not only had fun working during the course, but also showed positive learning outcomes.

(4)

Results from the teachers’ interviews and daily records indicate that the course was not only a positive experience for students, but also for them. Teachers were able to promote a collaborative, communicative, and creative environment in the course, and were able to make flexible adjustments to the course according to the actual classroom environment.

Practice results show that with the popularity of computer education, senior students generally had good basic capabilities of computer operation. Almost all students in second grade or above could operate computers for 3D modeling flexibly, whereas the computer operation ability of lower grade students varied. Students could basically turn their own hand-drawn manuscripts into a 3D model within the specified time. Because the modeling software in teaching was a sketch-based modeling technique, students quickly grasped the basic operations of modeling. Through the imitation and practice of cases, they mastered modeling skills from basic geometry to simple cartoon modeling after two courses. Based on feedback from the students, they were most interested in computer modeling—most students said that the modeling process was challenging but interesting. As for other aspects, students’ preferences varied, but most students believed that the whole course was very interesting; they learned many new skills and they were very happy to design and make toys by themselves.

This study preliminarily verifies the usefulness of the 3D cartoon toy design course in students’ education. The 3D cartoon toy design course is a participatory activity in which students can also obtain positive learning outcomes while gaining a fun experience. They were highly motivated and interested in using technological tools to learn. In kindergarten and elementary school, students can use technology such as modeling software to learn basic spatial geometry and gradually increase the complexity of learning as the grade increases. At the same time, students can also cultivate their studies of traditional subjects such as arts and crafts in the process of learning new technologies. The course encourages students to engage in problem-solving, self-direction, and collaborative work and improves students’ comprehensive competency. Such learning helps students to translate skills, knowledge, and attitudes acquired through coursework into forms that can be applied in the working world and society at large.

6. Limitations and Foresight

The 3D cartoon toy design course is a brand-new course. So far, we have only carried out a preliminary exploration. With the in-depth application of the course, the course, software, and teaching all need to be continuously improved. Combining the maker space and comprehensive practice classes in kindergartens and primary schools, we plan to integrate the technical strength of the research team and the teaching experience of frontline educators to attract more students to participate in education of 3D cartoon design. In the future development, we hope to not only provide high-quality technical tools and courses, but also develop professional teachers to further enhance the influence of the course on students.

Some limitations of this study also need to be addressed in the future.

• It takes too little time to complete the 3D cartoon toy design course in eight weeks, especially for kindergarten students, who cannot fully understand and practice the learning concept. Lower-grade students with slower behavior need more time to learn and practice than upper-grade students. Although they could complete the course content and tasks and produced their own cartoon toys, students in lower grades rarely made complex ones.
• As an exploratory study, this paper applies only to a small sample population. Future research can expand the sample size to produce broader results.
• The tools and courses can be adjusted and redesigned accordingly.

Two main additional future tasks can be considered:

• The deformation function modules of the tool can be simplified to give students more convenience.
• The demonstration of abstract modeling concepts can be strengthened to further educate students.