Using Robotics to Motivate ‘Back Door’ Learning
This paper suggests that robotics can provide a vehicle for guiding primary and secondary school children toward an effective understanding of programming and engineering principles. It observes that children find robotics stimulating and motivating, and that their interest in, and focus on, ‘making the robot do what I want’ leads them ‘via the back door’ to learn about programming and engineering in a way that is both well-grounded and generaliseable.
These observations arise from empirical studies of children participating in robotics competitions: we conducted observations and interviews with all the participating teams at two robotics events (one regional, one international), and we followed one young robotics team in a case study. The children had almost all built their robots using LEGO MindStorms for specific competitions, with soccer, rescue and dance events. The children typically worked in teams, building robots as an extra-curricular activity supported by a teacher/mentor. The children came from a variety of educational and social backgrounds.
The paper considers what makes robotics motivating to children, including children who are not considered ‘technically oriented’. It describes learning that has emerged from children's experiences in building and programming robots. It describes examples of children learning subjects that they previously considered difficult and inaccessible, in order to solve problems in robotics. It describes examples of children identifying and understanding principles, concepts, and elements of practice that are fundamental to programming and engineering. It describes further how secondary school students working in teams learned that this programming and engineering knowledge has a social context.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Allwood, C. M. (1986) Novices on the computer: A review of the literature. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 25, 633–658.Google Scholar
- Beer, R. D., Chiel, H. J., and Drushel, R. F. (1999) Using autonomous robots to teach science and engineering. Communications of the ACM, 42(6), 85–92.Google Scholar
- Capozzoli, P. and Rogers, C. (1996) LEGOs and aeronautics in kindergarten through college. In Proceedings of AIAA 19th Advanced Measurement and Ground Testing Technology Conference. New Orleans, LA, June.Google Scholar
- Gallagher, S., Rosenthal, H., and Stepien, W. (1992) The effects of problem-based learning on problem solving. Gifted Child Quarterly, 36(4), 195–200.Google Scholar
- Harel, I. and Paper, S. (1991) Constructionism. Ablex, New Jersey.Google Scholar
- IEE Problem Based Learning Initiative (accessed 1 December 2003). <http://www.iee.org/professionalregistration/accreditation/pbl.cfm> Jadud, M. (2000) Teamstorms as a theory of instruction. In Proceedings of IEEE Systems, Cybernetics, and Man 2000 (SMC2000).Google Scholar
- Johnson, J. (2002) Children, robotics, and education. In Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Artificial Life and Robotics (AROB-7), pp. 491-496.Google Scholar
- Johnson, J. and Hirst, A. (2001) The Blue Peter-RoboFesta robot design competition. Technical Report, Faculty of Technology, The Open University, 23 March 2001. http:// robofesta.open.ac.uk/ report2/ Google Scholar
- Kaplan, S., Gruppen, L., Leventhal, L. M., and Board, F. (1986) The Components of Expertise: A Cross-Disciplinary Review. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
- Klassner, F. and Anderson, S. (2003) Lego MindStorms: Not just for K-12 anymore. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine.Google Scholar
- Kumar, D. and Meedan, L. (1998) A robot laboratory for teaching Artificial Intelligence. In Proceedings of the 1998 ACM SIGCSE Symposium, pp. 341-344.Google Scholar
- Miglino, O., Lund, H. H., and Cardaci, M. (1999) Robotics as an educational tool. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 10(1), 25–48.Google Scholar
- Nagchaudhuri, A., Singh, G., Kaur, M., and George, S. (2002) Lego robotics products boost student creativity in pre-college programs at UMES. In Proceedings of 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Boston, November, pp. S4D-1-S4D-6.Google Scholar
- Nostrand, B. (2000) Autonomous robotics projects for learning software engineering. In Proceedings of IEEE Systems, Cybernetics, and Man 2000 (SMC2000), pp. 724-729.Google Scholar
- Papert, S. (1980) MindStorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
- Piaget, J. and Inhelder, B. (1966) La Psychologie de L'Enfent. P.U.F., Paris.Google Scholar
- RoboCupJr (accessed 1 December 2003). http://www.artificialia.com/RoboCupJr/education/index.html Google Scholar
- RoboFesta (accessed 1 December 2003). http://robofesta.open.ac.uk Google Scholar
- Sajaniemi, J. (2002) A new approach to variable visualization: Roles as visualization objects. In Proceedings of the 2nd Program Visualization Workshop. Hornstrup Centret, Denmark, June, pp. 74-82.Google Scholar
- Sklar, E., Eguchi, A., and Johnson, J. (2002) RoboCup Junior: Learning with educational robotics. In Proceedings of RoboCup 2002, G. A. Kaminka, O. Lima, and P. Rojas (eds). Fukuoka Japan, June.Google Scholar
- Striegel, A. and Rover, D. (2002) Problem-based learning in an introductory computer engineering course. In Proceedings of 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference. Boston, November.Google Scholar
- Vandebona, U. and Attard, M. M. (1992) A problem-based learning approach in a civil engineering curriculum. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 1(1).Google Scholar
- Weinberg, J. B., Engel, G. L., Gu, K., Karacal, C. S., Smith, S. R., White, W. W., and Yu, X. W. (2001) A multidisciplinary model for using robotics in engineering education. In Proceedings of the 2001 ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition.Google Scholar
- Wolz, U. (2000) Teaching design and project management with LEGO RCX robots. In Proceedings of ACM 2001 SIGCSE Symposium. Charlotte, NC, pp. 95-99.Google Scholar