You are here:

Teaching of Computer Science Topics Using Meta-Programming-Based GLOs and LEGO Robots
ARTICLE

, ,

Informatics in Education Volume 12, Number 1, ISSN 1648-5831

Full Text

Abstract

The paper's contribution is a methodology that integrates two educational technologies (GLO and LEGO robot) to teach Computer Science (CS) topics at the school level. We present the methodology as a framework of 5 components (pedagogical activities, technology driven processes, tools, knowledge transfer actors, and pedagogical outcomes) and interactions among the components. GLOs are meta-programmed entities to generate LO instances on demand depending on the context of use and learning objectives. A GLO is a black-box entity, which is integrated in the framework through the generating process to source the teaching and learning process via robot-based visualization to demonstrate how programs and algorithms are transformed into real-world tasks and processes. The methodology is tested in the real e-learning setting. The pedagogical outcomes are evaluated by empirical data showing the increase of student engagement level, higher flexibility and reuse enhancement in learning.

Citation

Štuikys, V., Burbaite, R. & Damaševicius, R. (2013). Teaching of Computer Science Topics Using Meta-Programming-Based GLOs and LEGO Robots. Informatics in Education, 12(1), 125-142. Retrieved August 11, 2024 from .

This record was imported from ERIC on November 3, 2015. [Original Record]

ERIC is sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) of the U.S. Department of Education.

Copyright for this record is held by the content creator. For more details see ERIC's copyright policy.

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Adams, J., Kaczmarczyk, S., Picton, P., Demian, P. (2010). Problem solving and creativity in engineering: conclusions of a three year project involving reusable learning objects and robots. Engineering Education, 5(2), 4–17.
  2. Alimisis, D., Moro, M., Arlegui, J., Pina, A., Frangou, S., Papanikolaou, K. (2007). Robotics& Constructivism in education: the TERECoP project. In: Kalas, I. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th European Logo Conference, Bratislava, Slovakia, Comenius University, 1–11.
  3. Arlegui, J., Pina, A., Moro M. (2011). A paradox in the constructive design of robotic projects in school. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Robotics in Education (RiE 2011), Vienna, Austria, 29–34.
  4. Atmatzidou, S., Markelis, I., Demetriadis, S. (2008). The use of LEGO mindstorms in elementary and secondary education: game as a way of triggering learning. Workshop Proceedings of SIMPAR 2008, 22–30.
  5. Ben-Ari, M. (1998). Constructivism in computer science education. In: Proceedings of SIGCSE’98, Atlanta, USA, ACM, 257–261.
  6. Boyle, T., Leeder, D., Chase, H. (2004). To boldly GLO – towards the next generation of learning objects. In: Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education 2004, Chesapeake, VA, AACE, 28–33.
  7. Castledine, A., Chalmers, C. (2011). LEGO Robotics: an authentic problem-solving tool? Design and Technology Education, 6(3), 19–27.
  8. Ley, C.N, Wong, W.K., Chiou, A. (2011). Framework for educational robotics: a multiphase approach to enhance user learning in a competitive arena. In: Edutainment’11, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on E-Learning and Games, Edutainment Technologies, Springer-Verlag Berlin, 317–325.
  9. Cowden, D., Ustek, D., O’Neill, A., Opavsky, E., Walker, H.M. (2012). A C-based Introductory course using robots. In: The 43rd Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, 463–468.
  10. Sucar, E.L., Noguez, J., Huesca, G. (2005). Project oriented learning for basic robotics using virtual laboratories 140 V. Štuikys et al.
  11. Fagin, B.S., Merkle, L. (2002). Quantitative analysis of the effects of robots on introductory computer science education. Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC), 2(4), 1–18.
  12. Fagin, B.S., Merkle, L.D., Eggers, T.W. (2001). Teaching Computer Science with Robotics Using Ada/Mindstorms 2.0, SIGAda, Bloomington, MN, USA, 73–77.
  13. Gerndt, R., Lüssem, J. (2011). Mixed-reality robotics– a coherent teaching framework. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Robotics in Education (RiE), 193–200.
  14. Grabowski, L.M., Brazier, P. (2011). Robots, recruitment, and retention: Broadening participation through CS0. In: Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), F4H-1–F4H-5.
  15. Hamada, M., Sato, S. (2011). A game-based learning system for theory of computation using Lego NXT Robot. Procedia Computer Science, 4, 1944–1952.
  16. Han, P., Krämer, B.J. (2009). Generating interactive learning objects from configurable samples. In: International Conference on Mobile, Hybrid, an On-Line Learning (ELML’09), Cancun, 1–6.
  17. Hazzan, O., Lapidot, T., Ragonis, N. (2011). Guide to Teaching Computer Science– An Activity-Based Approach. Springer-Verlag, London.
  18. Janiszek, D., Pellier, D., Mauclair, J., Baron, G.L., Parchemal, Y. (2011). Feedback on the use of robots in project-based learning: how to involve students in interdisciplinary projects in order to increase their interest in computer science. INTED2011 Proceedings, 1815–1824.
  19. Jenkins, T. (2001). The Motivation of Students of Programming. Thesis of Master of Science. The University of Kent.
  20. Kurebayashi, S., Kanemune, S., Kamada, T., Kuno, Y. (2007). The effect of learning programming with autonomous robots for elementary school students. In: 11th European Logo Conference, Comenius University Press, Bratislava, 1–9.
  21. Leonard, D. (2002). Learning Theories, A to Z. Westport, Conn, Oryx Press.
  22. Ley, C.N, Wong, W.K., Chiou, A. (2011). Framework for educational robotics: a multiphase approach to enhance user learning in a competitive arena. In: Edutainment’11, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on E-Learning and Games, Edutainment Technologies, Springer-Verlag Berlin, 317–325.
  23. Lin, C.H., Liu, E.Z.F. (2012). The effect of reflective strategies on students’ problem solving in robotics learning. In: Digital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning (DIGITEL), IEEE Fourth International Conference, 254–257.
  24. Lubitz, W.D. (2007). Rethinking the first year programming course. In: Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association. Http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/PCEEA/article/view/3811/3767.
  25. Morales, R., Leeder, D., Boyle, T. (2005). A case in the design of generative learning objects (GLOs): applied statistical methods. In: Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications, Chesapeake, VA, AACE, 2091–2097.
  26. Mosley, P., Kline, R. (2006). Engaging students: a framework using LEGO robotics to teach problem solving. Information Technology, Learning, and Performance Journal, 21(1), 39–45.
  27. Northrup, P.T. (2007). Learning Objects for Instruction: Design and Evaluation. Information Science Publishing, New York.
  28. Oldfield, J.D. (2008). An implementation of the generative learning object model in accounting. In: Proceedings of ASCILITE, Melbourne. Http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/melbourne08/ procs/oldfield.pdf.
  29. Pásztor, A., Pap-Szigeti, R., Lakatos Török, E. (2010). Effects of using model robots in the education of programming. Informatics in Education, 9(1), 133–140.
  30. Pears, A.N. (2010). Enhancing student engagement in an introductory programming course. In: 40th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Arlington, F1E1–F1E2. Petroviˇc, P., Balogh, R. (2012). Deployment of remotely-accessible robotics laboratory. International Journal of Online Engineering, 8(2), 31–35.
  31. Smith, M.K. (2003). Learning theory. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education. Www.infed.org/biblio/b-learn.htm. Last update: May 29, 2012.
  32. Štuikys, V., Burbaite, R. (2012). Two-stage generative learning objects. In: Skersys, T., Butleris, R., Butkiene, R. (Eds.), 18th International Conference, ICIST, Kaunas, Lithuania. Proceedings Series: Communications in Computer and Information Science, Vol. 319, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 332–347.
  33. Turner, S., Hill, G. (2007). Robots in problem-solving and programming. In: 8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information and Computer Sciences, University of Southampton, UK, 82–85.
  34. Urquiza-Fuentes, J., Velázquez-Iturbide, J.Á. (2009). Pedagogical effectiveness of engagement levels– a survey of successful experiences. Journal Electronic Notes Theoretical Computer Science, 224, 169–178.
  35. Weingarten, J.D., Koditschek, D.E., Komsuoglu, H., Massey, C. (2007). Robotics as the delivery vehicle: a contextualized, social, self paced, engineering education for life-long learners. In: Robotics Science and Systems Workshop on “Research in Robots for Education”, 1–6.

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Links

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts