Abstract
Programming has been considered a crucial “object to think with”, which can integrate with various disciplines and facilitate learning in other areas. However, existing research primarily focuses on how children learn to code rather than how coding helps them to learn. To address this gap, a quasi-experimental case study was conducted with 31 kindergarten children, aiming to explore what young children could learn from a 4-week curriculum combining programmable robotics and road safety training. The findings indicate that teaching young children to code not only develops their computational thinking (CT), but also enhances their road safety knowledge and skills. The results contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of early childhood coding education and may inspire the innovation and diversification of coding curricula for young children.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Data availability
All the data support the findings of the study are available from the authors upon request.
References
Albert, R. R., & Dolgin, K. G. (2010). Lasting effects of short-term training on preschoolers’ street-crossing behavior. Accident Analysis & Prevention,42(2), 500–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.09.014
An, M.-Y., & Shin, K.-S. (2023). Teachers Perceptions on Early Childhood’s Traffic and Life Safety Education Program Using VR. Applied Sciences,13(2), 777. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13020777
Arfé, B., Vardanega, T., Montuori, C., & Lavanga, M. (2019). Coding in primary grades boosts children’s executive functions. Frontiers in Psychology,10, 2713. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02713
Barr, V., & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K–12: What is involved and what is the role of the computer science education community? ACM Inroads,2(1), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929905
Barton, B. K., Schwebel, D. C., & Morrongiello, B. A. (2007). Brief report: Increasing children’s safe pedestrian behaviors through simple skills training. Journal of Pediatric Psychology,32(4), 475–480. https://doi.org/10.1093/jpepsy/jsl028
Bati, K. (2022). A systematic literature review regarding computational thinking and programming in early childhood education. Education and Information Technologies,27, 2059–2082. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-021-10700-2
Bell, T., & Vahrenhold, J. (2018). CS Unplugged—How Is It Used, and Does It Work? In H. J. Böckenhauer, D. Komm, & W. Unger (Eds.), Adventures Between Lower Bounds and Higher Altitudes (pp. 29–43). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98355-4_29
Bers, M. U. (2017). The Seymour test: Powerful ideas in early childhood education. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction,14, 10–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2017.06.004
Bers, M. U. (2018). Coding, playgrounds and literacy in early childhood education: The development of KIBO robotics and ScratchJr. IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON),2018, 2094–2102. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363498
Bers, M. U. (2021). Coding as a playground: Programming and computational thinking in the early childhood classroom. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003022602
Bers, M. U. (2022). Beyond coding: How children learn human values through programming. The Mit Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/13775.001.0001
Bers, M. U., González-González, C., & Armas-Torres, M. B. (2019). Coding as a playground: Promoting positive learning experiences in childhood classrooms. Computers & Education,138, 130–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.013
Brooks, R. (1999). Towards a theory of the cognitive processes in computer programming. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,9(6), 737–751. https://doi.org/10.1006/ijhc.1977.0306
Brown, N., & Kölling, M. (2012). Position paper: Programming can deepen understanding across disciplines [DRAFT]. IFIP Working Conference-Addressing Educational Challenges: The Role of ICT. Manchester Metropolitan University.
Caporaso, J. S., Marcovitch, S., & Boseovski, J. J. (2021). Executive function and the development of social information processing during the preschool years. Cognitive Development,58, 101018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2021.101018
Crick, N. R., & Dodge, K. A. (1994). A review and reformulation of social information-processing mechanisms in children’s social adjustment. Psychological Bulletin,115, 74–101. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.115.1.74
Denham, S. A., Way, E. L., Kalb, S., Warren-Khot, H. K., & Bassett, H. H. (2013). Preschoolers’ social information processing and early school success: The challenging situations task. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology,31, 180–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.2012.02085.x
Denning, P. J. (2010). The great principles of computing. American Scientist,46(11), 15–20. https://doi.org/10.1511/2010.86.369
Elkin, M., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. (2016). Programming with the KIBO Robotics Kit in Preschool Classrooms. Computers in the Schools,33(3), 169–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2016.1216251
Fessakis, G., Gouli, E., & Mavroudi, E. (2013). Problem solving by 5–6 years old kindergarten children in a computer programming environment: A case study. Computers & Education,63, 87–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.016
Gounaridou, A., Siamtanidou, E., & Dimoulas, C. (2021). A serious game for mediated education on traffic behavior and safety awareness. Education Sciences,11, 127. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030127
Hwang, W., & Wu, S. (2014). A case study of collaboration with multi-robots and its effect on children’s interaction. Interactive Learning Environments,22, 429–443. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2012.680968
Jones, N. (2016). Digital technology to be added to education curriculum. New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11668961. Accessed 15 Aug 2023.
Jung, S. E., & Won, E. S. (2018). Systematic review of research trends in robotics education for young children. Sustainability,10(4), 905. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905
K-12cs.org (2016). K–12 computer science framework. Retrieved from https://k12cs.org/. Accessed 15 Aug 2023.
Kerawalla, L., & Crook, C. (2002). Children’s computer use at home and at school: Context and continuity. British Educational Research Journal,28(6), 751–771. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192022000019044
Liao, Y. K. C., & Bright, G. W. (1991). Effects of computer programming on cognitive outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research,7(3), 251–266. https://doi.org/10.2190/e53g-hh8k-ajrr-k69m
Macpherson, A., Roberts, I., & Pless, I. B. (1998). Children’s exposure to traffic and pedestrian injuries. American Journal of Public Health,88(12), 1840–1843. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.88.12.1840
Nam, K. W., Kim, H. J., & Lee, S. (2019). Connecting Plans to Action: The Effects of a Card-Coded Robotics Curriculum and Activities on Korean Kindergartners. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher,28, 387–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-019-00438-4
Nummenmaa, T., Syvänen, M., & Syvanen, M. (1974). Teaching Road Safety to Children in the Age Range 5–7 Years. Paedagogica Europaea,9(1), 151. https://doi.org/10.2307/1502395
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.
Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13398
Pugnali, A., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2017). The impact of user interface on young children’s computational thinking. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice,16, 171–193. https://doi.org/10.28945/3768
Relkin, E., & Bers, M. (2021). TechCheck-K: A measure of computational thinking for kindergarten children. In 2021 IEEE global engineering education conference (EDUCON) (pp. 1696–1702). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON46332.2021.9453926
Relkin, E., de Ruiter, L., & Bers, M. U. (2020). TechCheck: Development and Validation of an Unplugged Assessment of Computational Thinking in Early Childhood Education. Journal of Science Education and Technology,29(4), 482–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09831-x
Relkin, E., de Ruiter, L., & Bers, M. U. (2021). Learning to code and the acquisition of computational thinking by young children. Computers & Education,169, 104222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104222
Resnick, M (2023). Learn to code, code to learn. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2013-05-08-learn-to-code-code-to-learn. Accessed 13 May 2024.
Scherer, R. (2016). Learning from the Past-The Need for Empirical Evidence on the Transfer Effects of Computer Programming Skills. Frontiers in Psychology,7, 1390. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01390
Smith, M. (2016). Computer science for all. Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2016/01/30/computer-science-all. Accessed 23 Sept 2023.
Strawhacker, A., & Bers, M. U. (2018). Promoting positive technological development in a kindergarten makerspace: A qualitative case study. European Journal of STEM Education,3(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.20897/EJSTEME/3869
Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: Learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Technology and Design Education,26, 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9304-5
Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2017). Dancing robots: Integrating art, music, and robotics in Singapore’s early childhood centers. International Journal of Technology and Design Education,28(2), 325–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9397-0
Thomson, J. A., Tolmie, A., Foot, H. C., & McLaren, B. (1996). Child development and the aims of road safety education: A review and analysis. HMSO. https://doi.org/10.1136/ip.4.1.79-a
U.K. Department for Education (2013). The National Curriculum in England: Framework document. The Stationery Office.
U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Transforming American education: Learning powered by technology. Office of Educational Technology. Retrieved from http://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010. Accessed 29 Sept 2023.
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. CACM Viewpoint,49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Wing, J. M. (2011). Research Notebook: Computational Thinking—What and Why. The Link Magazine, 6, 20–23. Retrieved from https://www.cs.cmu.edu/link/researchnotebookcomputational-thinking-what-and-why
World Health Organization (2018). Global Status Report on Road Safety 2018: Summary. WHO. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-NMH-NVI-18.20. Accessed 17 Oct 2023.
Xing, Q., Wang, D., Zhao, Y., Wang, X. (2020). Clas-Maze: An Edutainment Tool Combining Tangible Programming and Living Knowledge. In Nunes, N.J., Ma, L., Wang, M., Correia, N., Pan, Z. (Eds.), Entertainment Computing – ICEC 2020 (pp.353–368). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65736-9_32
Yang, W., Ng, D. T. K., & Gao, H. (2022). Robot programming versus block play in early childhood education: Effects on computational thinking, sequencing ability, and self-regulation. British Journal of Educational Technology,53(6), 1817–1841. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13215
Yang, W., Ng, T., & Su, J. (2023). The Impact of Story-Inspired Programming on Preschool Children’s Computational Thinking: A Multi-Group Experiment. Thinking Skills and Creativity,47(101218), 101218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101218
Zeedyk, M. S., Wallace, L., Carcary, B., Jones, K., & Larter, K. (2001). Children and road safety: Increasing knowledge does not improve behaviour. British Journal of Educational Psychology,71(4), 573–594. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709901158686
Zhong, B., & Xia, L. (2021). Effects of new coopetition designs on learning performance in robotics education. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning,38, 223–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12606
Ziv, Y., & Sorongon, A. (2011). Social information processing in preschool children: Relations to sociodemographic risk and problem behavior. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,109, 412–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.02.009
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.
Credit author statement
Zhenhua Wu: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. Lingting Zheng: Investigation, Formal analysis, Writing – Original draft, Visualization. Li’an huang: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing, Supervision, Project administration.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix A
1.1 Scenarios in Robotics and Programming Curriculum
1.1.1 Scenario 1: Visiting a friend’s house in the neighborhood
Description:
Supposing Nini is one of your good friend. Today, you are coming to Nini’s house to play. You need to design a program for the robot going from entrance to Nini’s home according to the map of the neighborhood. Please pay particular attention to the traffic signs on the map.
Scenario map:
1.1.2 Scenario 2: Going from home to kindergarten
Description:
Supposing you are going to kindergarten from home by yourself. You need to design a program for the robot going from home to kindergarten according to the provided map. Please pay particular attention to the traffic light and zebra crossings on the map.
Scenario map:
1.1.3 Scenario 3: Slowing down
Description:
Supposing you are driving a car on the road. Remember you have to slow down when you see such traffic signs as “Pedestrian crossing”, “Children crossing” etc. You need to design a program for the robot going from the parking spot to the park according to the provided map. Please pay particular attention to the traffic signs on the map.
Scenario map:
1.1.4 Scenario 4: Finding a parking spot
Description:
Supposing you are looking for a parking spot in a public garage. You need to design a program for the robot going from the entrance to the desired parking spot according to the provided map. Please pay particular attention to the traffic signs on the map.
Scenario map:
Appendix B
2.1 Traffic Knowledge Assessment Task Scenarios
Scenario 1: Crossing the street 1.
Scenario 2: Crossing the street 2.
Scenario 3: Playing football on the street.
Scenario 4: Driving past a school.
Scenario 5: Turning around.
Appendix C
3.1 Simulated road situation Challenge
The site plan.
Task route and scoring points.
Number | Task routes | Correct road behaviors |
|---|---|---|
1 | Drive out of P1, and park at P2, go to the park, and then go to the toy shop | (1) Taking the driveway when out of P1; |
(2) Following the “turning left” traffic sign; | ||
(3) Slowing down when approaching crosswalk; | ||
(4) Following the “no right turning” traffic sign; | ||
(5) Following the “no entry” traffic sign; | ||
(6) Talking the walkway when out of P2; | ||
(7) Taking the crosswalk when cross the street; | ||
(8) Crossing the street when the light is green. | ||
2 | Drive out of P2, and park at P1, go to the toy shop, and then go to the supermarket | (1) Taking the driveway when out of P2; |
(2) Following the “no entry” traffic sign; | ||
(3) Slowing down when approaching “children crossing” sign; | ||
(4) Following the “no right turning” traffic sign; | ||
(5) Slowing down when approaching the tunnel; | ||
(6) Talking the walkway when out of P1; | ||
(7) Taking the crosswalk when cross the street; | ||
(8) Crossing the street when the light is green | ||
3 | Go to the park from the book store, go to the P2 and drive from P2 to P1, and walk out of P1 | (1) Taking the crosswalk when cross the street; |
(2) Crossing the street when the light is green | ||
(3) Taking the driveway when out of P2; | ||
(4) Following the “no entry” traffic sign; | ||
(5) Slowing down when approaching “children crossing” sign; | ||
(6) Following the “no right turning” traffic sign; | ||
(7) Slowing down when approaching the tunnel; | ||
(8) Talking the walkway when out of P1; |
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Wu, Z., Zheng, L. & Huang, L. Learning to code and coding to learn: A robotics curriculum integrating tangible programming and road safety education for young children. Educ Inf Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12757-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12757-1