Promoting Students’ Problem-Solving Competencies: Peer Interactions in a Robotics Learning Environment
Authors: 
Jingru Qu, Ling DaiAuthors Info & Claims
Pages 84 - 89
Abstract
In a robotics learning environment, this study aims to explore: 1) The relationship between students’ time spent on peer interactions and their problem-solving measures; 2) The patterns of peer interactions which might promote students’ PS competencies. A mixed-method research, adopting pre-post test, semi-structured interview, and classroom observation, was conducted with 32 primary school students and one dedicated robotics teacher in a robotics summer camp. Results showed that: 1) students’ time spent on peer interaction was positively correlated to students’ problem-solving self-efficacy. 2) Among various peer interactions, discussion, the division of work, and observational learning were found to be effective for developing students’ problem-solving competencies, while off-task interaction was excluded.
Supplementary Material
Presentation slides
- Download
- 1.52 MB
References
[1]
Castledine Alanah-Rei and Chris Chalmers. 2011. LEGO robotics: An authentic problem solving tool? Des. Technol. Educ. An Int. J. 16, 3 (2011), 19–27.
[2]
Margarita Azmitia. 1988. Peer interaction and problem solving: When are two heads better than One? Child Dev. 59, 1 (1988), 87–96.
[3]
Marina U. Bers. 2010. The TangibleK robotics program: Applied computational thinking for young children. Early Child. Res. Pract. 12, 2 (2010), 1–20.
[4]
Marina U. Bers, Louise Flannery, Elizabeth R. Kazakoff, and Amanda Sullivan. 2014. Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Comput. Educ. 72, (2014), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.020
[5]
Chih-Wei Chang, Jih-Hsien Lee, Po-Yao Chao, Chin-Yeh Wang, and Gwo-Dong Chen. 2010. Exploring the possibility of using humanoid robots as instructional tools for teaching a second language in primary school. Educ. Technol. Soc. 13, 2 (2010), 13–24.
[6]
Edward C. Chang, Thomas J. D'Zurilla, and Lawrence J. Sanna. 2004. Social problem solving: Theory, research, and training. American Psychological Assosciation, Washington, DC.
[7]
Louis Cohen, Lawrence Manion, and Keith Morrison. 2011. Research methods in education (7th ed.). Routledge, Abingdon, England.
[8]
Thomas J. D'zurilla and Marvin R. Goldfried. 1971. Problem-solving and behavior modification. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 78, (1971), 104–126.
[9]
Eleanor Duckworth. 2005. Critical exploration in the classroom. New Educ. 1, 4 (2005), 257–272.
[10]
Amy Eguchi. 2012. Educational robotics theories and practice: Tips for how to do it right. In Robots in K-12 education: A new technology for learning. IGI Global, Hershey, PA, 1–30. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0182-6
[11]
Amy Eguchi. 2013. Educational robotics for promoting 21st century skills. J. Autom. Mob. Robot. Intell. Syst. 8, 1 (2013), 5–11. https://doi.org/10.14313/JAMRIS_1-2014/1
[12]
Shakir Hussain, Jörgen Lindh, and Ghazi Shukur. 2006. The effect of LEGO training on pupils’ school performance in mathematics, problem solving ability and attitude: Swedish data. J. Educ. Technol. Soc. 9, 3 (2006), 182–194.
[13]
David H. Jonassen. 2000. Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 48, 4 (2000), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02300500
[14]
Michelle E. Jordan and Reuben R. McDaniel Jr. 2014. Managing uncertainty during collaborative problem solving in elementary school teams: The role of peer influence in robotics engineering activity. J. Learn. Sci. 23, 4 (2014), 490–536.
[15]
Sung-Eun Jung and Eun-Sok Won. 2018. Systematic review of research trends in robotics education for young children. Sustainability 10, 905 (2018), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905
[16]
Alison King. 2002. Structuring peer interaction to promote high-level cognitive processing. Theory Pract. 41, 1 (2002), 33–39.
[17]
Brian D. Larkins, Christopher J. Moore, Louis J. Rubbo, and Laura R. Covington. 2013. Application of the cognitive apprenticeship framework to a middle school robotics camp. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on computer science education, 89–94. https://doi.org/10.1145/2445196.2445226
[18]
Kenneth TH Lee, Amanda Sullivan, and Marina U. Bers. 2013. Collaboration by design: Using robotics to foster social interaction in kindergarten. Comput. Sch. 30, 3 (July 2013), 271–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2013.805676
[19]
Chong-De Lin. 2017. 构建中国化的学生发展核心素养 [To construct sinicized core competencies and values for student development] (in Chinese). J. Beijing Norm. Univ. Sci. 1 (2017), 66–73.
[20]
Michael E. Martinez. 1998. What is problem solving? Phi Delta Kappan 79, 8 (1998), 605–609.
[21]
Albert. Maydeu-olivares and Thomas J. D'Zurilla. 1997. The factor structure of the Problem Solving Inventory. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess. 13, 3 (1997), 206–215.
[22]
David J. Messer, Richard Joiner, Nerys Loveridge, Paul Light, and Karen Littleton. 1993. Influences on the effectiveness of peer interaction: Children's level of cognitive development and the relative ability of partners. Soc. Dev. 2, 3 (1993), 279–294.
[23]
Omar Mubin, Catherine J. Stevens, Suleman Shahid, Abdullah Al Mahmud, and Jian-Jie Dong. 2013. A review of the applicability of robots in education. Technol. Educ. Learn. 1, 1 (2013). https://doi.org/10.2316/Journal.209.2013.1.209-0015
[24]
OECD. 2013. PISA 2012 problem-solving framework. PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris. https://doi.org/10.1787/19963777
[25]
Marian Petre and Blaine Price. 2004. Using robotics to motivate ‘Back Door’ learning. Educ. Inf. Technol. 9, 2 (2004), 147–158. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EAIT.0000027927.78380.60
[26]
Donald R. Rardin and Charles E. Moan. 1971. Peer interaction and cognitive development. Child Dev. 42, (1971), 1685–1699.
[27]
Chris Rogers and Merredith Portsmore. 2004. Bringing engineering to elementary school. J. STEM Educ. 5, 3&4 (2004), 17–28.
[28]
Florence R. Sullivan. 2008. Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 45, 3 (2008), 373–394.
[29]
Chin-Feng Tsei. 2009. Lego Mindstorms提升國小學童問題解決能力與科學態度之研究 [A study of applying Lego Mindstorms learning activities to promote problem solving ability and scientific attitude for elementary school students](in Chinese(. Master's Thesis, National Taitung University.
[30]
Susan Preston Wagner. 1998. Robotics and children: Science achievement and problem solving. J. Comput. Child. Educ. 9, 2 (1998), 149–176.
[31]
Margaret C. Wang, Geneva D. Haertel, and Herbert J. Walberg. 1990. What influences learning? A content analysis of review literature. J. Educ. Res. 84, 1 (1990), 30–43.
[32]
Timothy T Yuen, Melanie Boecking, Erin Price Tiger, Alvaro Gomez, Adrienne Guillen, Analisa Arreguin, and Jennifer Stone. 2014. Group tasks, activities, dynamics, and interactions in collaborative robotics projects with elementary and middle school children. J. STEM Educ. 15, 1 (2014), 39–46.
[33]
Xiao-Hui Zhao. 2018. 基于项目式学习的小学机器人课程设计研究-以༊༊小学的༶༥༸༩༱机器人教育课程为例 [A study of project-based robotics curriculum design in primary school: A case study of one primary school's VEXIQ robotics learning curriculum](in Chinese). Master's Thesis, Shaanxi Normal University.
Recommendations
Promoting college students’ knowledge acquisition and ill-structured problem solving: Web-based integration and procedure prompts
AbstractThis study examined how web-based integration and procedure question prompts differentially affected students’ knowledge acquisition and ill-structured problem solving skills, particularly in representing problem(s), developing ...
Promoting learning in online, ill-structured problem solving: The effects of scaffolding type and metacognition level
AbstractThis study aims to identify the effects of scaffolding type (supportive or reflective) and metacognition level (low or high) on presence, problem-solving performance, and achievement in online ill-structured problem solving. One ...
Highlights- For ill-structured problem solving, reflective scaffolding was effective for cognitive, social presence.
Teaching behaviors in problem-oriented instruction for robotics education
AbstractRobotics education is valuable for developing students’ 21st century competencies. It is of significant importance for teachers and researchers to explore its effective pedagogies. Robotics learning is interdisciplinary, and the most effective ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
April 2021
163 pages
ISBN:9781450389662
DOI:10.1145/3463531
Copyright © 2021 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 20 July 2021
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
ICETT 2021
ICETT 2021: 2021 7th International Conference on Education and Training Technologies
April 14 - 16, 2021
Macau, China
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 57Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)7
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 13 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign inFull Access
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML Format