Advertisement

The Educational Robotics Landscape Exploring Common Ground and Contact Points

  • Lara Lammer
  • Markus Vincze
  • Martin Kandlhofer
  • Gerald Steinbauer
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 457)

Abstract

In the last decades, educational robotics has gained increased attention evoking a need to discuss and document different approaches and lessons learned. In this article, we report our findings made during the “Educational Robotics Café”, a workshop format where experts engage in an open discussion about opportunities and challenges of the educational robotics landscape as well as advantages and shortcomings of various approaches. Interestingly, participants working on different educational robotics topics with different methods realized that all seemed to have similar problems and experiences. They could define areas of common ground, yet had difficulties in finding contact points between their educational robotics approaches to compare them. Known categorizations seemed not to fit or to be too high level. Based on these findings, we finish our article by suggesting a “tagging” approach to enable better communication between experts from different domains like education or robotics.

Keywords

Educational robotics Teacher School Society 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Thanks to the participants of the workshop at the RIE 2015 for their contribution. This research has partly received funding from the FWF Science Communication Project WKP42, “Schraege Roboter” (“crazy robots”) as well as from Land Steiermark (“Wissenschaft und Forschung”).

References

  1. 1.
    IEEE Trans. Educ. 56(1) (2013). Special Issue on Robotics in EducationGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Catlin, D., Blamires, M.: Principles of Educational Robotic Application (ERA). In: Constructionism Conference, Paris (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brown, J.: The world cafe: living knowledge through conversations that matter. PhD thesis. The Fielding Institute (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pahl, N., Richter, A.: SWOT Analysis. Methodology and a Practical Approach. GRIN Verlagr, Idea (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cacco, L., Morro, M.: The hedgehog: how to integrate robotics in natural science scenarios. In: Workshop position paper at International Conference on Robotics in Education (RiE 2015), Yverdon-les-Bains, May 2015Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kandlhofer, M., Steinbauer, G., Hirschmugl-Gaisch, S., Eck, J.: Children discover science: robotics, informatics and artificial intelligence in kindergarten and school. In: Workshop position paper at International Conference on Robotics in Education (RiE 2015), Yverdon-les-Bains, May 2015Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koppensteiner, G., Vittori, L., Miller, P., Goodgame, S.: Teaching programming on the elementary level. In: Workshop position paper at International Conference on Robotics in Education (RiE 2015), Yverdon-les-Bains, May 2015Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lammer, L., Vincze, M.: Crazy robots—Introducing children with different backgrounds and interests to robotics. In: Workshop position paper at International Conference on Robotics in Education (RiE 2015), Yverdon-les-Bains, May 2015Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Diekmann, A.: Empirische Sozialforschung—Grundlagen, Methoden. Rowohlt, Anwendungen (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lara Lammer
    • 1
  • Markus Vincze
    • 1
  • Martin Kandlhofer
    • 2
  • Gerald Steinbauer
    • 2
  1. 1.Automation and Control Institute, Vienna University of TechnologyViennaAustria
  2. 2.Institute for Software Technology, Graz University of TechnologyGrazAustria

Personalised recommendations