Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Articles

Vol. 9 (2022)

Autonomous Robotics Math Curriculum Development Using C Coding Language to Increase Student Attitudes and Learner Outcomes

DOI
https://doi.org/10.31875/2409-9694.2022.09.07
Submitted
November 29, 2022
Published
29.11.2022

Abstract

Abstract: Educational robotics is increasingly becoming incorporated into K12 instructional curriculum. The addition of autonomous robotics into mathematics lessons increases student engagement and attitudes towards robotics and STEM. This mixed methods study provides educators with an autonomous robotics curriculum, developed in C coding language, to increase learner attitude outcomes towards robotics and STEM. According to research from Vollstedt et al. (2007) as society progresses, students need to increase their knowledge of science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (STEM) to compete with the rest of the world and to efficiently utilize the new technologies that are introduced. This study was conducted at a STEM school in a small suburb of Boise, Idaho. Thirty-two fifth grade students participated in the study incorporating qualitative observations and quantitative surveys. The study concluded that coding using C coding language is one way of increasing attitudes towards robotics and STEM. Future curriculum development and research using autonomous robotics is needed to provide educators with tools to increase learner attitude outcomes towards robotics and STEM.

References

  1. Nugent, G., Barker, B., Grandgenett, N., & Welch, G. (2016). Robotics camps, clubs, and competitions: Results from a US robotics project. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 686-691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2015.07.01
  2. Anwar, S., Bascou, N. A., Menekse, M., & Kardgar, A. (2019). A Systematic Review of Studies on Educational Robotics. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research (J-PEER), 9(2). https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1223
  3. Barker, B. S., Nugent, G., Grandgenett, N., & Adamchuk, V. I. (2012). Robots in K-12 Education: A New Technology for Learning (Premier Reference Source) (1st ed.). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-0182-6
  4. Benitti, F., Barreto, V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978-988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006
  5. Bers, M. U., & Portsmore, M. (2005). Teaching Partnerships: Early Childhood and Engineering Students Teaching Math and Science Through Robotics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(1), 59-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-2734-1
  6. Clements, D.H., & Meredith, J.S. (1993). Research on Logo: Effects and efficacy. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 4, 263-290.
  7. Creswell, J.W., & Creswell, D.J. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
  8. Kopcha, T. J., Wilson, C. Y., & Yang, D. (2022). Improving teacher use of educational robotics to teach computer science in K-5 mathematics. Computational Thinking in PreK-5, 47-54. https://doi.org/10.1145/3507951.3519287
  9. Ioannou, A., & Makridou, E. (2018). Exploring the potentials of educational robotics in the development of computational thinking: A summary of current research and practical proposals for future work. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2531-2544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9729-z
  10. Lopez-Caudana, E., Ramirez-Montoya, M. S., Martínez-Pérez, S., & Rodríguez-Abitia, G. (2020). Using Robotics to Enhance Active Learning in Mathematics: A Multi-Scenario Study. Mathematics, 8(12), 2163. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8122163
  11. Matarić, M. J., Koenig, N., & Feil-Seifer, D. (2007). Materials for enabling hands-on robotics and STEM education. AAAI Spring Symposium on Robots and Robot Venues: Resources for AI Education. http://www.aaai.org/Papers/Symposia/Spring/2007/SS-07-09/SS07-09-022.pdf
  12. Okita, S. Y. (2013). The relative merits of transparency: Investigating situations that support the use of robotics in developing student learning adaptability across virtual and physical computing platforms. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 844-862. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12101
  13. Papert, S. (1993). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas (2nd ed.). Basic Books.
  14. Savard, A., & Highfield, K. (2015). Teachers' t. alk about robotics: Where is the mathematics? In http://www.merga.net.au/ (No. ED572527). Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED572527.pdf
  15. Shipepe, A., Uwu-Khaeb, L., De Villiers, C., Jormanainen, I., & Sutinen, E. (2022). Co-learning lomputational and design thinking using educational robotics: A case of primary school learners in Namibia. Sensors, 22(21), 8169. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22218169
  16. Stork, M. G. (2020). Supporting Twenty-First Century Competencies Using Robots and Digital Storytelling. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 4(1), 43-50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41686-019-00039-w
  17. Tengler, K., & Sabitzer, B. (2022). Examining Teachers' Intention to integrate Robotics-based Storytelling Activities in Primary Schools. International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 16(06), 221-240. https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v16i06.28905
  18. Ucgul, M., & Cagiltay, K. (2013). Design and development issues for educational robotics training camps. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(2), 203-222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-013-9253-9
  19. Vollstedt, A. M., Robinson, M., & Wang, E. (2007). Using robotics to enhance science, technology, engineering, and mathematics curricula. In Proceedings of American Society for Engineering Education Pacific Southwest annual conference, Honolulu: Hawaii.
  20. Yelland, N. (1994). The strategies and interactions of young children in LOGO tasks. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 10(1), 33-49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1994.tb00280.x