Using Lego Mindstorms Robotics Programming in Enhancing Computational Thinking among Middle School in Saudi Arabia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.61841/hg1m6v46Keywords:
Lego Mindstorms, Robotics Programming, Computational Thinking (CT), Saudi ArabiaAbstract
The study employed will employ LEGO Mindstorms EV3 robotics in the learning environment of the computer curriculum of the 3rd level of Saudi Arabia middle schools to examine whether this kind of learning environment enhances computational thinking skills and learning programming concepts and attitudes toward learning. The study will be conducted in Riyadh. 60 student participants will be selected through purposive sampling techniques to participate in a quasi-experimental study. Before the implementation of the experimental study, a preliminary study will be conducted through a descriptive survey among students who are randomly selected from middle schools in Saudi Arabia to respond to computational thinking tests and attitude questionnaires to determine their level of CT and their attitude toward learning programming. After that, the researcher will do the experimental study with both groups. The T-test will be conducted to compare both groups' scores for CT and test for programming skills from their books and questionnaires for students’ attitude toward learning to program with LEGO Mindstorms Ev3. However, the results of the pre-test and post-test will help to reveal the differences between both groups in this study. Furthermore, the result will help to build a framework for implementing CT with LEGO Mindstorms robotics in learning programming in the computer curriculum of Saudi Arabia middle schools.
Downloads
References
[1] Álvarez, A., & Larrañaga, M. (2016). Experiences incorporating Lego Mindstorms Robots in the basic
Programming syllabus: Lessons learned. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, 81(1).
[2] Anastasiadou, S.D., Karakos, A.S. (2011). The beliefs of electrical and computer engineering student’s
regarding computer programming. The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society, 7(1):
37-51.
[3] Barr, V. & Stephenson, C. (2011). Bringing computational thinking to K-12: what is Involved and what is
the role of the computer science education community?
[4] Basu, S. (2016). Fostering Synergistic Learning of Computational Thinking and Middle School Science in
Computer-Based Intelligent Learning Environments. Vanderbilt University.
[5] Buitrago Flórez, F., Casallas, R., Hernández, M., Reyes, A., Restrepo, S., & Danies, G. (2017). Changing a
generation’s way of thinking: teaching computational thinking through programming. Review of
Educational Research, 87(4), 834-860.
[6] Capraro, R. M., & Slough, S. W. (2013). Why PBL? Why STEM? Why now? An introduction to STEM
project-based learning: An integrated science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
approach. In STEM project-based learning (pp. 1-5). Brill Sense.
[7] Creswell, John W. "Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches." Los
Angeles: University of Nebraska–Lincoln (2009).
[8] Erdogan, Y., Aydin, E., Kabaca, Y.T. (2008) Exploring the Psychological Predictors of Programming
Achievement. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 35(3): 264-270.
[9] GASTAT (2016). Tenth Development Plan. K.S.A. General Authority for Statistics.
[10] González, M. R. (2015). Computational thinking test: Design guidelines and content validation. In
Proceedings of EDULEARN15 Conference (pp. 2436-2444).
[11] Hwang, G., Wu, P., Chen, C. (2012). An online game approach for improving students’ learning
performance in web-based problem-solving activities. Computers and Education, 59: 1246–1256.
[12] Jim, C. K. W. (2010). Teaching with LEGO mindstorms robots: Effects on learning environment and
attitudes toward science.
[13] Kaloti-Hallak, F., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. M. (2015, November). Students' Attitudes and Motivation
during robotics activities. In Proceedings of the Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing
Education (pp. 102-110). ACM
[14] Korkmaz, Ö. (2016). The Effect of Lego Mindstorms Ev3 Based Design Activities on Students' Attitudes
towards Learning Computer Programming, Self-efficacy Beliefs, and Levels of Academic Achievement.
Baltic Journal of Modern Computing, 4(4), 994.
[15] Liu, A. S., Schunn, C. D., Flot, J., & Shoop, R. (2013). The role of physicality in rich programming
environments. Computer Science Education, 23(4), 315-331
[16] Major, L., Kyriacou, T., & Brereton, O. P. (2012). Systematic literature review: teaching novices
programming using robots. IET software, 6(6), 502-513.
[17] Meccawy, M. (2017). Raising a programmer: teaching Saudi children how to code. International Journal
of Educational Technology, 4(2), 56-65.
[18] Mohamed, B., & Koehler, T. (2012). The effect of project-based Web 2.0 learning on students’ outcomes.
In Towards Learning and Instruction in Web 3.0 (pp. 51-70). Springer, New York, NY.
[19] Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. New York: Basic Books.
[20] 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.
[21] Resnick, M., Maloney, J., Monroy-Hernández, A., Rusk, N., Eastmond, E., Brennan, K., ... & Kafai, Y.
(2009). Scratch: programming for all. Communications of the ACM, 52(11), 60-67.
[22] Sartatzemi, M., Dagdilelis, V., & Kagani, K. (2008). Teaching introductory programming concepts with
LEGO Mindstorms in Greek High Schools: A Two-Year Experience. In Service Robot Applications. InTech.
[23] Slough, S. W., & Milam, J. O. (2013). Theoretical framework for the design of STEM project-based
learning. In STEM Project-Based Learning (pp. 15-27). Brill Sense.
[24] Tedre, Matti, and Peter J. Denning. "The long quest for computational thinking." Proceedings of the 16th
Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research. ACM, 2016.
[25] Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning.
[26] Wing, J. M. 2006. Computational thinking. Commun. ACM 49, 33–35.
[27] Wing, J. (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing. Paper presented.
[28] Wu, C. C., Tseng, I. C., & Huang, S. L. (2008, July). Visualization of program behaviors: physical robots versus robot simulators. In International Conference on Informatics in Secondary Schools-Evolution and Perspectives (pp. 53-62). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
[29] Yadav, A., Mayfield, C., Zhou, N., Hambrusch, S., & Korb, J. T. (2014). Computational thinking in elementary and secondary teacher education. ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), 14(1), 14(1),1-16.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2020 AUTHOR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
You are free to:
- Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.
- Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
- The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.
Under the following terms:
- Attribution — You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
- No additional restrictions — You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation .
No warranties are given. The license may not give you all of the permissions necessary for your intended use. For example, other rights such as publicity, privacy, or moral rights may limit how you use the material.
