On the Edge of Chaos

Robots in the Classroom
  • Steve V. Coxon
Part of the Advances in Creativity and Giftedness book series (ACAG, volume 25)

Abstract

Robot is a term first coined in 1920 by Czech playwright Karel Capek from the Czech word for forced labor, robota (James & Leon, n.d.). Although once only a playwright’s fancy, today’s robots labor around the world and beyond, and they are playing increasingly important roles in society. Robots are autonomous machines that respond with motor movements to input from the external world through sensors in accordance with computer programs.

Keywords

Spatial Ability Student Thinking Traditional Classroom Gifted Student Video Game Addiction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, D. E. (1996). The power of problem-based learning in teaching introductory science courses. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambrose, D. (2009). Expanding visions of creative intelligence: An interdisciplinary exploration. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  3. American Academy of Pediatrics. (2001). Pediatrics, 107 (2), 423–426. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/107/2/423.full.pdf+html
  4. Anderson, D. R., Huston, A. C., Schmitt, K. L., Linebarger, D. L., Wright, & Larson, R. (2001). Early childhood television viewing and adolescent behavior: The recontact study. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 6 6, i–viii, 1–154.Google Scholar
  5. Brooks, J. G., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.Google Scholar
  6. Coxon, S. V. (2009). Challenging neglected spatially gifted students with FIRST LEGO League. Addendum to Leading Change in Gifted Education. Williamsburg, VA: Center for Gifted Education. Retrieved from http://cfge.wm.edu/Documents/Festschrift Supplement.pdf#page=25Google Scholar
  7. Coxon, S. V. (2010). STEMbotics. Steve Coxon’s Web: Presentations. Retrieved from http://stevecoxon.com/ Google Scholar
  8. Coxon, S. V. (2012). The malleability of spatial ability under treatment of a FIRST LEGO League simulation. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 3 5, 91–316.Google Scholar
  9. Eilers, S., Abrahamsen, M., Durhuus, B. (2005). A LEGO counting problem. University of Copenhagen. Retrieved from http://www.math.ku.dk/~eilers/ LEGO.html
  10. Flanagan, J. C. (1979). Findings from Project TALENT. Educational Forum, 43 (4), 489–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fox, H. W. (2007). Using robotics in the engineering technology classroom. The Technology Interface. Retrieved from http://technologyinterface.nmsu.edu/Spring07/18_Fox/index.pdf
  12. Geeter, D. D., Golder, J. E., & Nordin, T. A. (2002). Creating engineers for the future. Proceedings of the 2002 American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, 1–7.Google Scholar
  13. James, D., & Leon, M. (n.d.). Liftoff to learning: Let’s talk robotics. NASA Quest. Retrieved from http://quest.nasa.gov/space/teachers/liftoff/robotics.html
  14. Kim, K. H. (2011). The creativity crisis: The decrease in creative thinking scores on the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 23, 285–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kim, K. H., & Coxon, S. V. (2013). The creativity crisis, possible causes, and what schools can do about it. In J. B. Jones. & L. J. Flint (Eds.), The creative imperative: School librarians and teachers cultivating curiosity together. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries Unlimited.Google Scholar
  16. Korchnov, E., & Verner, I. M. (2010). Characteristics of learning computer-controlled mechanisms by teachers and students in a common laboratory environment. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 2 0, 217–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lillard, A. S., & Peterson, J. (2011). The immediate impact of different types of television on young children’s executive function. Pediatrics, 128 (4), e1–e6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. LOGO Foundation. (2000). What is LOGO? Retrieved from http://el.media.mit.edu/Logo-foundation/logo/index.html Google Scholar
  19. Melchior, A., Cohen, F., Cutter, T., & Leavitt, T. (2005). More than robots: An Evaluation of the FIRST Robotics Competition participant and institutional impacts. Waltham, MA: Center for Youth and Communities, Brandeis University. Retrieved from http://www.usfirst.org/who/content.aspx?id=46 Google Scholar
  20. Melchior, A., Cutter, T., & Cohen, F. (2004). Evaluation of FIRST LEGO League. Waltham, MA: Center for Youth and Communities, Brandeis University. Retrieved from http://www.usfirst.org/who/content.aspx?id=46 Google Scholar
  21. McDonough, P. (2009, October 26). TV viewing among kids at an eight-year high. Nielsenwire. Retrieved from: http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/media_entertainment/tv-viewing-among-kids-at-an-eightyear-high/ Google Scholar
  22. MIT Media Lab. (2007). Seymour Papert. Retrieved from http://web.media.mit.edu/~papert/
  23. Moriguchi, Y., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Itakura, S. (2010). Children perseverate to a human’s actions but not to a robot’s actions. Developmental Science, 13, 62–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. National Academy of Sciences. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11463 Google Scholar
  25. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers and powerful ideas. New York, NY: Basic.Google Scholar
  26. Petre, M., & Price, B. (2004). Using robotics to motivate ‘back door’ learning. Education and Information Technologies, 9, 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8-18 year-olds. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved from: http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf
  28. Rideout, V. J., Vandewater, E. A., & Wartella, E. A. (2003). Zero to six: Electronic media in the lives of infants, toddlers, and preschoolers. Kaiser Family Foundation. Retrieved from: http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/Zero-to-Six-Electronic-Media-in-the-Lives-of-Infants-Toddlers-and-Preschoolers-PDF.pdf
  29. Robots.com. (n.d.). Industrial robot history. Robots.com. Retrieved from http://www.robots.com/roboteducation.php?page=industrial+history
  30. Robots.net. (n.d.). Robot competitions. Robots.net. Retrieved from http://robots.net/rcfaq.html
  31. Schroeder, C. M., Scott, T. P., Tolson, H., Huang, T.–Y., & Lee, Y.–H. (2007). A meta-analysis of national research: Effects of teaching strategies on student achievement in science in the United States. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44 (10), 1436–1460.Google Scholar
  32. Super, D. E., & Bachrach, P. B. (1957). Scientific careers and vocational development theory. New York, NY: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
  33. Tallent-Runnels, M. K., & Candler-Lotven, A. C. (2008). Academic competitions for gifted students: A resource book for teachers and parents (2 nd ed.) . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.Google Scholar
  34. Tomopoulos, S., Dreyer, B. P., Berkule, S., Fierman, A. H., Brockmeyer, C. A., & Mendelsohn, A. L. (2010). Infant media exposure and toddler development. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 164 (12), 1105–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Toye, A., & Williams, B. (n.d.). Robotics in the classroom: Introduction to Robiotics. Wright, OH: Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Educational Outreach Office. Retrieved from http://edoutreach.wpafb.af.mil/Robotics/media/resources/intro_robotics_5th.pdf
  36. US FIRST. (2013). FIRST At-A-Glance. Retrieved from http://www.usfirst.org/aboutus/first-at-a-glance
  37. Vandewater, E. A., Bickham, D. S., & Lee, J. H. (2006). Time well spent? Relating television use to children’s free-time activities. Pediatrics, 117, 181–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Verner, I. M., & Hershko, E. (2003). School graduation project in robot design: A case study of team learning experiences and outcomes. Journal of Technology Education, 14, 40–55.Google Scholar
  39. Verner, I. M. (2004). Robot manipulations: A synergy of visualization, computation and action for spatial instruction. International Journal of Computers for Mathematical Learning, 9, 213–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wai, J., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2009). Spatial ability for STEM Domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 817–835.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Williams, D. C., Ma, Y., Prejean, L., Ford, M. J., & Lai, G. (2007). Acquisition of physics content knowledge and scientific inquiry skills in a robotics summer camp. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40, 201–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Sense Publishers 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steve V. Coxon

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations