Advertisement

Emerging Pedagogies in Robotics Education: Towards a Paradigm Shift

  • Dimitris AlimisisEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Biosystems & Biorobotics book series (BIOSYSROB, volume 25)

Abstract

This paper comments on the current situation in robotics education at school level and introduces the need for a paradigm shift towards the incorporation of making culture and practices. Then emerging pedagogies are suggested inspired from the maker movement to inform the pedagogical foundations where the INBOTS project interventions in school education are being built. The paper concludes with the INBOTS method of work and ambition to reform and improve robotics school education.

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 780073 (INBOTS).

References

  1. 1.
    Fullan, M., Langworthy, M.: Towards a New End: New Pedagogies for Deep Learning (2013). http://www.newpedagogies.nl/images/towards_a_new_end.pdf
  2. 2.
    Alimisis, D.: Educational Robotics: Open questions and new challenges. Themes Sci. Technol. Educ. 6(1), 63–71 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Project INBOTS 2018–2020. http://inbots.eu
  4. 4.
    Castro, E., Cecchi, F., Valente, M., Buselli, E., Salvini, P., Dario, P.: Can educational robotics introduce young children to robotics and how can we measure it? J. Comput. Assist. Learn. (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schon, S., Ebner, M., Kumar, S.: The Maker Movement Implications from modern fabrication, new digital gadgets, and hacking for creative learning and teaching. In: Laia C., P.A.U. Education (Ed.) eLearningPapers Special edition p. 86–100 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blikstein, P.: Digital fabrication and ‘making’ in education: the democratization of invention. In: Walter-Herrmann, J., Büching, C. (eds.) FabLabs: Of Machines, Makers and Inventors. Transcript Publishers, Bielefeld (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Papert, S., Harel, I.: Constructionism. Ablex Publishing Corporation, NY (1991)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Piaget, J.: To Understand is to Invent. Basic Books, New York (1974)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gonzalez-Gomez, J., Valero-Gomez, A., Prieto-Moreno, A., Abderrahim, M.: A new open source 3D-Printable mobile robotic platform for education. In: Rückert, U., Joaquin, S., Felix, W. (eds.) Advances in Autonomous Mini Robots. Springer, Berlin (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Resnick, M., Rosenbaum, E.: Designing for tinkerability. In: Honey, M., Kanter, D. (eds.) Design, Make, Play: Growing the Next Generation of STEM Innovators, pp. 163–181. Routledge, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kafai, Y., Peppler, K.: Transparency reconsidered: creative, critical, and connected making with e-textiles. In: Boler, M., Ratto, M. (eds.) DIY Citizenship, pp. 179–188. MIT Press, Cambridge (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Blikstein, P., Worsley, M.: Children are not hackers: building a culture of powerful ideas, deep learning, and equity in the maker movement. In: Makeology: Makerspaces as Learning Environments, vol. 1 (Kindle Locations 56–59). Taylor and Francis. Kindle Edition (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Resnick, M., Silverman, B.: Some reflections on designing construction kits for kids. In: Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp. 117–122 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European Lab for Educational Technology-EDUMOTIVASpartaGreece

Personalised recommendations