Skip to main content

Development and application of internet of things educational tool based on peer to peer network

Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications volume 11, pages 1217–1229 (2018)Cite this article

Abstract

With growing interest in IoT across the Peer-to-Peer network industry, basic education programs on IoT for learners are expanding. The purpose of this study was to analyze the difficulties met by learners in basic IoT education, to design and develop hardware tool, and to evaluate the usability of these tool. In this study, the needs of teachers and learners on the tools were analyzed, and design guidelines established. The design guidelines, based on the analysis of needs, suggest the functions of hardware board, miniaturization of board, modularization of sensor parts, and usability and expandability of the tool. A hardware board is designed and developed based on the guidelines. The developed board is then used for basic education on IoT for learners, and the usability of the board is evaluated. The results showed that the new hardware tools provide higher usability than the existing Arduino board. This study is meaningful in that it provides a reference for future IoT educational tools, and that it highlights the importance of promoting learner-centered education.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6.

References

  1. Bradley J, Barbier J, Handler D (2013) Embracing the Internet of everything to capture your share of $14.4 trillion. White Paper, Cisco

  2. Manyika J, Chui M, Bisson P, Woetzel J, Dobbs R, Bughin J, Aharon D (2015) The internet of things: mapping the value beyond the hype. McKinsey & Company, San Francisco https://www.mckinsey.de/sites/mck_files/files/unlocking_the_potential_of_the_internet_of_things_full_report.pdf. Accessed 10 April 2017

  3. Viveca W (2015) Gartner Identifies the Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for 2016. Gartner. http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3143521 Accessed 10 April 2017

  4. Recommendation Y 2060 (2012) Overview of Internet of Things. ITU-T, Geneva, February 2012

  5. Ashton K (2009) That 'internet of things' thing. RFiD Journal 22(7):97–114

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chung K, Park RC (2016) P2P cloud network services for IoT based disaster situations information. Peer-to-Peer NetwAppl 9(3):566–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhang Y, Wen J (2017) The IoT electric business model: Using blockchain technology for the internet of things. Peer-to-Peer Netw Appl 10(4):983–994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Kortuem G, Bandara AK, Smith N, Richards M, Petre M (2013) Educating the Internet-of-Things Generation. Comput 46(2):53–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Charlton P, Avramides K (2016) Knowledge Construction in Computer Science and Engineering when Learning Through Making. IEEE Trans Learn Technol 9(4):379–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Corno F, De Russis L, Bonino D (2016) Educating Internet of Things Professionals: The Ambient Intelligence Course. IT Professional 18(6):50–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Adams Becker S, Cummins M, Davis A, Freeman A, Hall Giesinger C, Ananthanarayanan V (2017) NMC Horizon Report: 2017 Higher, Education edn. The New Media Consortium, Austin

  12. Joint Task Force on Computing Curricula, Association for Computing Machinery, IEEE Computer Society (2013) Computer Science Curricula 2013: Curriculum Guidelines for Undergraduate Degree Programs in Computer Science. ACM, New York

    Google Scholar 

  13. Adams Becker S, Freeman A, Hall Giesinger C, Cummins M, Yuhnke B (2016) NMC/CoSN Horizon Report: 2016 K-12 Edition. The New Media Consortium, Austin

    Google Scholar 

  14. Seehorn D, Carey S, Fuschetto B, Lee I, Moix D, OGrady-Cunniff D, Owens BB, Stephenson C, Verno A (2011) CSTA K-12 Computer Science Standards: Revised 2011. Computer Science Teachers Association, New York

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hague A, Wright K, Cruse R, Kingett P (2012) The Raspberry Pi Education Manual. Raspberry Pi Foundation

  16. Ministry of Education (2015) 2015 Revised National Curriculum: Middle School Informatics Curriculum. Sejong: Ministry of Education

  17. Ministry of Education (2015) 2015 Revised National Curriculum: High School Informatics Curriculum. Sejong: Ministry of Education

  18. Hamblen JO, van Bekkum GME (2013) An Embedded Systems Laboratory to Support Rapid Prototyping of Robotics and the Internet of Things. IEEE Trans Educ 56(1):121–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jamieson P, Herdtner J (2015) More missing the Boat - Arduino, Raspberry Pi, and small prototyping boards and engineering education needs them. In 2015 I.E. Frontiers in Education Conference

  20. Hartmann B, Klemmer SR, Bernstein M, Abdulla L, Burr B, Robinson-Mosher A, Gee J (2006) Reflective physical prototyping through integrated design, test, and analysis. In Proceedings of the 19th annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technology, pp 299–308

  21. Hadjakos A, Waloschek S (2014) SPINE: a TUI toolkit and physical computing hybrid. In 14th international conference on new interfaces for musical expression, pp 625–628

  22. DesPortes K, Anupam A, Pathak N (2016) BitBlox: a redesign of the breadboard. In proceedings of the 15th international conference on interaction design and children, pp 255–261

  23. Da Xu L, He W, Li S (2014) Internet of things in industries: a survey. IEEE Trans Ind Inf 10(4):2233–2243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Tucker A, Deek F, Jones J, McCowan D, Stephenson C, Verno A (2003) A Model Curriculum for K–12 Computer Science. ACM/Computer Science Teachers Association, New York

    Google Scholar 

  25. K-12 Computer Science Framework Steering Committee (2016) K-12 Computer Science Framework

  26. Voas J, Laplante P (2017) Curriculum Considerations for the Internet of Things. Computer 50(1):72–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. DFE UK (2013) National curriculum in England: computing programmes of study

  28. Kim J, Lee W (2014) Controversial issues in knowledge and problem solving skills of information subjects observed after amending the curriculum in the U.K. J Korean Assoc Comput Educ 17(3):53–63

    Google Scholar 

  29. Severance C (2014) Massimo Banzi: Building Arduino. Comput 47(1):11–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Maksimović M, Vujović V, Davidović N, Milošević V (2014) Raspberry Pi as Internet of things hardware: performances and constraints. In the 1st International Conference on Electrical, Electronic and Computing Engineering, Vrnjačka Banja

  31. Kim J, Choi S-C, Yun J, Lee J-W (2016) Towards the oneM2M standards for building IoT ecosystem: Analysis, implementation and lessons. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl:1–13 

  32. Ball T, Protzenko J, Bishop J, Moskal M, Halleux JD, Braun M, Hodges S, Riley C (2016) Microsoft touch develop and the BBC micro:bit. In Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Software Engineering Companion, pp 637–640

  33. Bdeir A, Ullrich T (2011) Electronics as material: littleBits. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on Tangible, embedded, and embodied interaction, pp 341–344

  34. Rollins M (2014) Beginning LEGO MINDSTORMS EV3. Apress, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. Kabátová M, Pekárová J (2010) Learning how to teach robotics. In Constructionism 2010 Conference

  36. Eom K, Jang Y, Kim J, Lee W (2016) Development of a Board for Physical Computing Education in Secondary Schools Informatics Education. The Journal of Korean Assoc Compu Educ 19(2):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jang Y, Lee W, Kim J (2015) Analysis of Pedagogical Usability about Tools in Physical Computing Education for Middle School Students. Int J Appl Eng Res 10(90):636–641

    Google Scholar 

  38. Jang Y, Lee W, Kim J (2016) The Changes of Middle School Students’ Perception and Achievement based on the Teaching Method in Physical Computing Education. Indian J Sci Technol 9(24):1–8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Booth T, Stumpf S, Bird J, Jones S (2016) Crossed Wires: Investigating the Problems of End-User Developers in a Physical Computing Task. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Santa Clara

  40. Brooke J (1996) SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry 189(194):4–7

    Google Scholar 

  41. Bangor A, Kortum PT, Miller JT (2008) An Empirical Evaluation of the System Usability Scale. Int J Hum-Compu Interact 24(6):574–594

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded by the Korea government(MSIP) (No. 2016R1A2B4014471).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science Education, Graduate School, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seungbuk-gu Seoul, Republic of Korea

    YunJae Jang

  2. Major of Computer Science Education, Graduate School of Education, 145 Anam-ro, Seungbukgu Seoul, Republic of Korea

    JaMee Kim

  3. Department of Computer Science and Engineering, College of Informatics, Korea University, 145 Anam-ro, Seungbuk-gu Seoul, Republic of Korea

    WonGyu Lee

Authors
  1. YunJae Jang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. JaMee Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. WonGyu Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to WonGyu Lee.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection: Special Issue on Convergence P2P Cloud Computing

Guest Editor: Jung-Soo Han

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Jang, Y., Kim, J. & Lee, W. Development and application of internet of things educational tool based on peer to peer network. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 11, 1217–1229 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-017-0608-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-017-0608-y

Keywords

  • Internet of things
  • Physical computing
  • Educational tool
  • Usability
  • Peer-to-peer network