Pythagorean Approximations for LEGO: Merging Educational Robot Construction with Programming and Data Analysis

  • Ronald I. Greenberg
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 630)


This paper can be used in two ways. It can provide reference information for incorporating diagonal elements (for bracing or gear meshing) in educational robots built from standard LEGO® kits. Alternatively, it can be used as the basis for an assignment for high school or college students to recreate this information; in the process, students will exercise skills in both computer programming and data analysis. Using the paper in the second way can be an excellent integrative experience to add to an existing course; for example, the Exploring Computer Science high school curriculum concludes with the units “Introduction to Programming”, “Computing and Data Analysis”, and “Robotics”.


Computer science education Robotics Computer programming Data analysis 


  1. 1.
    Dettori, L., Greenberg, R.I., McGee, S., Reed, D.: The impact of the exploring computer science instructional model in Chicago Public Schools. Comput. Sci. Eng. 18(2), 10–17 (2016). (Special Issue: Best of RESPECT 2015). CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ericson, B., McKlin, T.: Effective and sustainable computing summer camps. In: SIGCSE 2012, pp. 289–294. Association for Computing Machinery (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Exploring Computer Science: A national program (2016).
  4. 4.
    Goode, J., Chapman, G.: Exploring computer science (version 7.0) (2016).
  5. 5.
    Grabowski, L.M., Brazier, P.: Robots, recruitment and retention: Broadening participation through CS0. In: Proceedings of 2011 Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), pp. F4H1–F4H5 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Greenberg, R.I.: Pythagorean combinations for LEGO robot building. In: Proceedings of the Global Conference on Educational Robotics (GCER). KISS Institute for Practical Robotics (2016).
  7. 7.
    Kim, S.H., Jeon, J.W.: Introduction for freshmen to embedded systems using LEGO mindstorms. IEEE Trans. Educ. 52(1), 99–108 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    KISS Institute for Practical Robotics: Products. Accessed 21 May 2017
  9. 9.
    KISS Institute for Practical Robotics: Botball® educational robotics program (2015). Accessed 8 June 2016
  10. 10.
    KISS Institute for Practical Robotics: Regions & teams (2016). Accessed 2 Jan 2017
  11. 11.
    Martin, F.G.: The art of LEGO design. Robot. Pract. J. Robot Build. 1(2), 1–20 (1995)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    McGee, S., Greenberg, R.I., Reed, D.F., Duck, J.: Evaluation of the IMPACTS computer science presentations. J. Comput. Teachers 26–40 (2013). International Society for Technology in Education.
  13. 13.
    McGee, S., McGee-Tekula, R., Duck, J., Greenberg, R.I., Dettori, L., Reed, D.F., Wilkerson, B., Yanek, D., Rasmussen, A.M., Chapman, G.: Does a taste of computing increase computer science enrollment? Comput. Sci. Eng. 9(3), 8–18 (2017). (Special Issue: Best of RESPECT 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Osborne, R.B., Thomas, A.J., Forbes, J.R.N.: Teaching with robots: a service learning approach to mentor training. In: SIGSCE 2010, pp. 172–176. Association for Computing Machinery (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    The LEGO Group: Bricks & pieces. Accessed 15 Aug 2016
  16. 16.
    The LEGO Group: Pick a brick. Accessed 21 May 2017
  17. 17.
    The LEGO Group: MINDSTORMS EV3 (2016). Accessed 11 July 2016

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Loyola UniversityChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations