Şeyma Betül Çelik, Muhammet Demirbilek
pp. 68 – 90, download
(https://doi.org/10.55612/s-5002-063-004)
Abstract
This study aimed to determine the effectiveness of robotic programming education on learner’s thinking and critical thinking skills at the 6th-grade elementary school level. Student experiences were determined after each week. For this purpose, in the 2017-2018 academic year, four weeks of robotic programming training was applied to 20 students in the 6th grade of a public school in Uşak. The research was conducted by using video recording, critical thinking skill scales, and activity perception scales. At the end of the research, the findings obtained were included and suggestions were made for the inclusion of robotic programming in the education curriculum and the researchers and the application. In this study, one group pretest-posttest experimental model was used. In the analysis of quantitative data, a dependent samples t-test was used. As the process of adapting the perception of efficacy scale into Turkish was not fully concluded, the data obtained were interpreted on a substance-by-item basis. At the end of the study, a significant difference was found between the pre-test and post-test perception scores of the students in the experimental group. At the end of the activity perception scale, it was observed that students had positive experiences with robotic coding.
Keywords: Robotics programming, Critical thinking, STEM, Coding.
References
1. Slangen, L., van Keulen, H., & Gravemeijer, K.:What pupils can learn from working with robotic direct manipulation environments. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(4), pp. 449–469 (2011)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9130-8
2. Ebelt, K. R.: The effects of a robotics program on students skills in STEM, problem solving and teamwork (2012)
3. Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U.: Dancing robots: integrating art, music, and robotics in Singapore’s early childhood centers. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(2), pp.325–346 (2018)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9397-0
4. Rogers, C., & Portsmore, M.:Bringing engineering to elementary school. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations & Research, 5 (2004) 17-28. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/bringing-engineering- elementary school/docview/222795467/se-2
5. Resnick, M.:Technologies for lifelong kindergarten. Educational technology research and development, 46(4), pp. 43–55 (1998)
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02299672
6. Resnick, M., Bruckman, A., & Martin, F.:Pianos not stereos: Creating computational construction kits (1996)
https://doi.org/10.1145/234757.234762
7. Eguchi, A.:Bringing robotics in classrooms. Robotics in STEM education: Redesigning the learning experience, pp. 3–31(2017)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57786-9_1
8. Kazakoff, E., & Bers, M.:Programming in a robotics context in the kindergarten classroom: The impact on sequencing skills. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 21(4), pp.371–391 (2012)
https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.50.4.f
9. Bers, M. U.:Using robotic manipulatives to develop technological fluency in early childhood. Contemporary perspectives on science and technology in early childhood education, pp.105–125 (2008)
10. Rusk, N., Resnick, M., Berg, R., & Pezalla-Granlund, M.:New pathways into robotics: Strategies for broadening participation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17(1), pp.59–69 (2008)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-007-9082-2
11. Chambers, J. M., Carbonaro, M., Rex, M., & Grove, S.:Scaffolding knowledge construction through robotic technology: A middle school case study. Electronic Journal for the Integration of Technology in Education, 6, pp.55–70 (2007)
12. Kazakoff, E. R., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U.:The effect of a classroom-based intensive robotics and programming workshop on sequencing ability in early childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(4), pp.245–255 (2013)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-012-0554-5
13. Mataric, M. J.:Robotics education for all ages. In Proc. AAAI Spring Symposium on Accessible, Hands-on AI and Robotics Education (2004)
14. Benitti, F. B. V.:Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), pp.978–988 (2012)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006
15. Blanchard, S., Freiman, V., & Lirrete-Pitre, N.:Strategies used by elementary school children solving robotics-based complex tasks: Innovative potential of technology. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), pp.2851–2857 (2010)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.427
16. Castledine, A. R., & Chalmers, C.:LEGO Robotics: An authentic problem solving tool?. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 16(3) (2011)
17. Mauch, E.:Using technological innovation to improve the problem-solving skills of middle school students: Educators’ experiences with the LEGO mindstorms robotic invention system. The Clearing House, 74(4), pp.211–213 (2001)
https://doi.org/10.1080/00098650109599193
18. Barker, B. S., & Ansorge, J.:Robotics as means to increase achievement scores in an informal learning environment. Journal of research on technology in education, 39(3), pp.229–243 (2007)
https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2007.10782481
19. Alimisis, D.:Robotics in education & education in robotics: Shifting focus from technology to pedagogy. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Robotics in Education, pp. 7–14 (2012)
20. Tocháček, D., Lapeš, J., & Fuglík, V.:Developing technological knowledge and programming skills of secondary schools students through the educational robotics projects. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 217, pp. 377–381 (2016)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2016.02.107
21. Ennis, R. H.:A logical basis for measuring critical thinking skills. Educational leadership, 43(2), pp. 44–48 (1985)
22. Hatcher, D. L., & Spencer, L. A.:Reasoning and writing: From critical thinking to composition(2005)
DOI: 10.5840/inquiryct20132827
23. Sternberg, R. J.:Critical Thinking: Its Nature, Measurement, and Improvement (1986)
24. Norris, S. P.:Synthesis of research on critical thinking. Educational Leadership, 8, pp. 40–45 (1985)
25. Semerci, Ç.:Eleştirel düşünme becerilerinin geliştirilmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim, 28(127) (2003)
26. McMahon, G.:Critical thinking and ICT integration in a western australian secondary school. Journal of Educational Technology&Society, 12(4), pp. 269–281 (2009)
27. Beer, R. D., Chiel, H. J., & Drushel, R. F.:Using autonomous robotics to teach science and engineering. Communications of the ACM, 42(6), pp. 85–92(1999)
https://doi.org/10.1145/303849.303866
28. Duron, R., Limbach, B., & Waugh, W. (2006). Critical thinking framework for any discipline. International Journal of teaching and learning in higher education, 17(2), 160-166.
29. Jordan, B., & Henderson, A.:Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The journal of the learning sciences, 4(1), pp. 39–103 (1995)
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls0401_2
30. Sullivan, F. R. (2008). Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 373-394.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20238
31. Sullivan, F. R.:Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), pp. 373–394 (2008)
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20238
32. Kasalak, İ.:Robotik Kodlama Etkinliklerinin Ortaokul Öğrencilerinin Kodlamaya İlişkin Özyeterlik Algılarına Etkisi Ve Etkinliklere İlişkin Öğrenci Yaşantıları (Master’s thesis, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü) (2017)
33. Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U.:Dancing robots: integrating art, music, and robotics in Singapore’s early childhood centers. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(2), pp. 325–346 (2018)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9397-0
34. Norton, S. J., McRobbie, C. J., & Ginns, I. S.:Problem solving in a middle school robotics design classroom. Research in Science Education, 37(3), pp. 261–277 (2007)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-006-9025-6
35. Blanchard, S., Freiman, V., & Lirrete-Pitre, N.:Strategies used by elementary schoolchildren solving robotics-based complex tasks: Innovative potential of technology. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), pp. 2851–2857 (2010)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.427
36. McMahon, G.:Critical thinking and ICT integration in a western australian secondary school. Journal of Educational Technology&Society, 12(4), pp. 269–281 (2009)
37. Petre, M., & Price, B.:Using robotics to motivate ‘back door’learning. Education and information technologies, 9(2), pp. 147–158 (2004)
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EAIT.0000027927.78380.60
38. Blanchard, S., Freiman, V., & Lirrete-Pitre, N.:Strategies used by elementary school children solving robotics-based complex tasks: Innovative potential of technology. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), pp. 2851–2857 (2010)
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.427
39. Liu, H., Sheng, J., & Zhao, L. (2022). Innovation of teaching tools during robot programming learning to promote middle school students’ critical thinking. Sustainability, 14(11), 6625. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14116625
40. Mincemoyer, C., Perkins, D. F., & Munyua, C. (2001). Youth Life skills evaluation project at Penn State. Instrument also cited by the CYFAR Life Skills Project. Texas A & M University.
41. Deci, E. L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B. C., & Leone, D. R. (1994). Facilitating internalization: The self‐determination theory perspective. Journal of personality, 62(1), 119-142.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1994.tb00797.x
42. Ozkan, B. C. (2004). Using NVivo to analyze qualitative classroom data on constructivist learning environments. The qualitative report, 9(4), 589-603.
43. Beer, R. D., Chiel, H. J., & Drushel, R. F. (1999). Using autonomous robotics to teach science and engineering. Communications of the ACM, 42(6), 85-92
https://doi.org/10.1145/303849.303866
44. Eguchi, A. (2014). Educational robotics for promoting 21st century skills. Journal of Automation, Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems, 5-11.
https://doi.org/10.14313/JAMRIS_1-2014/1
45. Rim, H., Choi, I., & Noh, S. (2014). A study on the application of robotic programming to promote logical and critical thinking in mathematics education. The Mathematical Education, 53(3), 413-434.
https://doi.org/10.7468/mathedu.2014.53.3.413