Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3576882.3617928acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescompedConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Guiding the Development of Undergraduate Educational Robotics

Published: 05 December 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Educational robotics, in which students program a physical robot to interact with the real world, can provide tangible active learning opportunities that are often linked to increases in student computational thinking, creativity, and motivation. To date, ER has focused on the use of robots to augment learning of adjacent fields (e.g., mathematics, programming, digital media) for K--12 students. As a result, we lack ER guidelines for: (1) supporting college robotics students learning the discipline of robotics itself and (2) college robotics students, who may possess distinct abilities and needs compared to K--12 students. To address this gap, we present a semester-long exploration of a college-levelIntroduction to Robotics course. Through student feedback, we identified three themes: (1) Positive learning opportunities, (2) Dealing with uncertainty, and (3) Successful results with simple solutions. and provide guidelines for improving ER in the context of college students learning to program and debug robots for the first time. We detail these themes and provide guidelines for improving ER in the context of college students learning to program and debug robots for the first time.

References

[1]
Feri Ardiana Aristawati, Cucuk Budiyanto, and Rosihan Ari Yuana. 2018. Adopting educational robotics to enhance undergraduate students' self-efficacy levels of computational thinking. Journal of Turkish Science Education 15, Special (2018), 42--50.
[2]
Alireza Badeleh. 2021. The effects of robotics training on students' creativity and learning in physics. Education and Information Technologies 26, 2 (2021), 1353--1365.
[3]
Fabiane Barreto Vavassori Benitti. 2012. Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education 58, 3 (2012), 978--988.
[4]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology 3, 2 (2006), 77--101.
[5]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2019. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative research in sport, exercise and health 11, 4 (2019), 589--597.
[6]
Erin Cejka, Chris Rogers, and Merredith Portsmore. 2006. Kindergarten robotics: Using robotics to motivate math, science, and engineering literacy in elementary school. International Journal of Engineering Education 22, 4 (2006), 711.
[7]
Vidushi Chaudhary, Vishnu Agrawal, Pragya Sureka, and Ashish Sureka. 2016. An experience report on teaching programming and computational thinking to elementary level children using lego robotics education kit. In 2016 IEEE Eighth International Conference on Technology for Education (T4E). IEEE, 38--41.
[8]
Jennifer Cross, Christopher Bartley, Emily Hamner, and Illah Nourbakhsh. 2013. A visual robot-programming environment for multidisciplinary education. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE, 445--452.
[9]
Ana Cruz-Martín, Juan-Antonio Fernández-Madrigal, Cipriano Galindo, Javier González-Jiménez, Corin Stockmans-Daou, and José-Luis Blanco-Claraco. 2012. A LEGO Mindstorms NXT approach for teaching at data acquisition, control systems engineering and real-time systems undergraduate courses. Computers & Education 59, 3 (2012), 974--988.
[10]
Stephen H Edwards. 2004. Using software testing to move students from trial-and-error to reflection-in-action. In Proceedings of the 35th SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer science education. 26--30.
[11]
NM Fonseca Ferreira, André Araujo, MS Couceiro, and David Portugal. 2018. Intensive summer course in robotics--Robotcraft. Applied Computing and Informatics 16, 1/2 (2018), 155--179.
[12]
Mohd Faisal Ibrahim, Aqilah Baseri Huddin, Fazida Hanim Hashim, Mardina Abdullah, Ashrani Aizzuddin Abd Rahni, Seri Mastura Mustaza, Aini Hussain, and Mohd Hairi Mohd Zaman. 2020. Strengthening Programming Skills among Engineering Students through Experiential Learning Based Robotics Project. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education 9, 4 (2020), 939--946.
[13]
Bryce Ikeda and Daniel Szafir. 2022. Advancing the Design of Visual Debugging Tools for Roboticists. In 2022 17th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). 195--204. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI53351.2022.9889392
[14]
Seul Jung. 2012. Experiences in developing an experimental robotics course program for undergraduate education. IEEE Transactions on Education 56, 1 (2012), 129--136.
[15]
Hyeong Ryeol Kam, Sung-Ho Lee, Taejung Park, and Chang-Hun Kim. 2015. Rviz: a toolkit for real domain data visualization. Telecommunication Systems 60 (2015), 337--345.
[16]
Jean-franois Lalonde, Christopher P Bartley, and Illah Nourbakhsh. 2006. Mobile robot programming in education. In Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006. IEEE, 345--350.
[17]
Jörgen Lindh and Thomas Holgersson. 2007. Does lego training stimulate pupils' ability to solve logical problems? Computers & education 49, 4 (2007), 1097--1111.
[18]
Hsin-Yu Liu, Wen-June Wang, and Rong-Jyue Wang. 2010. A course in simulation and demonstration of humanoid robot motion. IEEE Transactions on Education 54, 2 (2010), 255--262.
[19]
Yanan Liu, Rui Fan, Bin Yu, M. Junaid Bocus, Ming Liu, Hepeng Ni, Jiahe Fan, and Shixin Mao. 2018. Mobile Robot Localisation and Navigation Using LEGO NXT and Ultrasonic Sensor. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO). 1088--1093. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROBIO.2018.8665350
[20]
Vladimir J Lumelsky and Alexander A Stepanov. 1987. Path-planning strategies for a point mobile automaton moving amidst unknown obstacles of arbitrary shape. Algorithmica 2, 1-4 (1987), 403--430.
[21]
Bruce A Maxwell and Lisa A Meeden. 2000. Integrating robotics research with undergraduate education. IEEE Intelligent systems and their applications 15, 6 (2000), 22--27.
[22]
Caitlin McMullin. 2021. Transcription and qualitative methods: Implications for third sector research. VOLUNTAS: International journal of voluntary and nonprofit organizations (2021), 1--14.
[23]
Ruben Mitnik, Miguel Nussbaum, and Alvaro Soto. 2008. An autonomous educational mobile robot mediator. Autonomous Robots 25 (2008), 367--382.
[24]
Liam Paull, Jacopo Tani, Heejin Ahn, Javier Alonso-Mora, Luca Carlone, Michal Cap, Yu Fan Chen, Changhyun Choi, Jeff Dusek, Yajun Fang, et al. 2017. Duckietown: an open, inexpensive and flexible platform for autonomy education and research. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 1497--1504.
[25]
Fanny Riedo, Morgane Chevalier, Stéphane Magnenat, and Francesco Mondada. 2013. Thymio II, a robot that grows wiser with children. In 2013 IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts. IEEE, 187--193.
[26]
Laurel D Riek. 2012. Embodied computation: An active-learning approach to mobile robotics education. IEEE Transactions on Education 56, 1 (2012), 67--72.
[27]
Michael Rubenstein, Bo Cimino, Radhika Nagpal, and Justin Werfel. 2015. AERobot: An affordable one-robot-per-student system for early robotics education. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 6107--6113.
[28]
Javier Ruiz-del Solar and Roberto Avilés. 2004. Robotics courses for children as a motivation tool: the Chilean experience. IEEE Transactions on Education 47, 4 (2004), 474--480.
[29]
David Scaradozzi, Laura Sorbi, Anna Pedale, Mariantonietta Valzano, and Cinzia Vergine. 2015. Teaching robotics at the primary school: an innovative approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 174 (2015), 3838--3846.
[30]
Andrés-David Suárez-Gómez and Wilson Javier Pérez-Holguín. 2020. Physical visualization of math concepts using LEGO Mindstorms. JOTSE: Journal of Technology and Science Education10, 1 (2020), 72--86.
[31]
Christopher Steven Timperley, Afsoon Afzal, Deborah S Katz, Jam Marcos Hernandez, and Claire Le Goues. 2018. Crashing simulated planes is cheap: Can simulation detect robotics bugs early?. In 2018 IEEE 11th International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST). IEEE, 331--342.
[32]
Bernard Weiner. 2014. The attribution approach to emotion and motivation: History, hypotheses, home runs, headaches/heartaches. Emotion Review 6, 4 (2014), 353--361.
[33]
Douglas C Williams, Yuxin Ma, Louise Prejean, Mary Jane Ford, and Guolin Lai. 2007. Acquisition of physics content knowledge and scientific inquiry skills in a robotics summer camp. Journal of research on Technology in Education 40, 2 (2007), 201--216.
[34]
Yi Wu, Charlotte de Vries, and Qi Dunsworth. 2018. Using LEGO Kits to Teach Higher Level Problem Solving Skills in System Dynamics: A Case Study. Advances in Engineering Education 6, 3 (2018), n3.
[35]
Liying Xia and Baichang Zhong. 2018. A systematic review on teaching and learning robotics content knowledge in K-12. Computers & Education 127 (2018), 267--282.
[36]
Baichang Zhong and Liying Xia. 2020. A systematic review on exploring the potential of educational robotics in mathematics education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education 18 (2020), 79--101.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Incorporating Retakes in a Robotics Class with LabsProceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 210.1145/3626253.3635485(1676-1677)Online publication date: 14-Mar-2024

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
CompEd 2023: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Global Computing Education Vol 1
December 2023
180 pages
ISBN:9798400700484
DOI:10.1145/3576882
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 the author(s) 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].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 05 December 2023

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Badges

  • Chair's Award

Author Tags

  1. educational robotics (ER)
  2. undergraduate introduction to robotics

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

CompEd 2023
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 33 of 100 submissions, 33%

Upcoming Conference

CompEd '25
ACM Global Computing Education Conference 2025
October 21 - 25, 2025
Gaborone , Botswana

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)34
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
Reflects downloads up to 14 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Incorporating Retakes in a Robotics Class with LabsProceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 210.1145/3626253.3635485(1676-1677)Online publication date: 14-Mar-2024

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media