Keywords
Physical Computing
Making
affective factors
Primary Education
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Luisa Greifenstein, Ewald Wasmeier, Ute Heuer, Gordon Fraser
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Abstract
Computational thinking is increasingly fostered in primary schools. While this current development can be challenging for teachers, especially regarding the support of students, there is a huge opportunity in promoting affective components such as interest and motivation. Playful and action-oriented methods and tasks are often used which is why the maker education approach is particularly suitable. This paper describes a making course on robotics and discusses initial empirical findings. During the course, all children built their own robot in four hours by screwing, plugging, gluing, soldering and wiring on their own. In another four hours, the robot was programmed with the help of a child-friendly development environment. In order to derive criteria for promoting children affectively, we conducted a study with 45 children aged nine to eleven years. The children’s difficulties during building and programming the robot were noted. By this, several criteria could be derived that lead to frequent difficulties. In addition, the children were asked about their fun (as a preliminary stage of intrinsic motivation) after they had finished building and programming. By this, we found that difficulties that limit autonomy or competence are related to reduced fun. Practical recommendations that enable making activities in the classroom that promote affective components are discussed.
References
Amo, Daniel, Paul Fox, David Fonseca, und César Poyatos. 2020. «Systematic review on which analytics and learning methodologies are applied in primary and secondary education in the learning of robotics sensors». Sensors 21 (1): 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21010153.
Aroca, Rafael V, Rafael B Gomes, Dalton M Tavares, Anderson Abner S Souza, Aquiles MF Burlamaqui, Glauco AP Caurin, und Luiz MG Goncalves. 2012. «Increasing students’ interest with low-cost cellbots». IEEE Transactions on Education 56 (1): 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2012.2214782.
Bergman, Max. 2010. «Hermeneutic Content Analysis: Textual and Audiovisual Analyses Within a Mixed Method Framework». Sage Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social & Behavioral Research. Second edition. Sage Publication.
Best, Alexander, Christian Borowski, Katrin Büttner, Rita Freudenberg, Martin Fricke, Kathrin Haselmeier, Henry Herper, u. a. 2019. «Kompetenzen für informatische Bildung im Primarbereich». [Report], Bonn: Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V.
Blikstein, Paulo. 2013. «Digital fabrication and ‘making’in education: The democratization of invention». FabLabs: Of machines, makers and inventors 4 (1): 1–21. https://doi.org/10.14361/transcript.9783839423820.203.
Blok, Henk, Ron Oostdam, Martha E Otter, und Marianne Overmaat. 2002. «Computer-assisted instruction in support of beginning reading instruction: A review». Review of educational research 72 (1): 101–30. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543072001101.
Bunke-Emden, Hannah. 2020. «Potenziale von Making-Aktivitäten in informellen Lernumgebungen für die Medienpädagogik: Ergebnisse einer qualitativen Studie im Rahmen der Maker Days for Kids Leipzig». Medienimpulse 58 (4): 23-Seiten. https://doi.org/10.21243/mi-04-20-11.
Catlin, Dave, Martin Kandlhofer, Stephanie Holmquist, Andrew Paul Csizmadia, Julian Angel-Fernandez, und J Cabibihan. 2018. «Edurobot taxonomy and Papert’s paradigm». Constructionism 2018: 151–59.
Chalmers, Christina. 2018. «Robotics and computational thinking in primary school». International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction 17: 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.06.005.
Chevalier, Morgane, Christian Giang, Laila El-Hamamsy, Evgeniia Bonnet, Vaios Papaspyros, Jean-Philippe Pellet, Catherine Audrin, Margarida Romero, Bernard Baumberger, und Francesco Mondada. 2022. «The role of feedback and guidance as intervention methods to foster computational thinking in educational robotics learning activities for primary school». Computers & Education 180: 104431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104431.
Deci, Edward L, und Richard M Ryan. 1993. «Die Selbstbestimmungstheorie der Motivation und ihre Bedeutung für die Pädagogik». Zeitschrift für Pädagogik 39 (2): 223–38. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:11173.
Döbeli Honegger, Beat, und Michael Hielscher. 2017. «Vom lehrplan zur lehrerinnenbildung-erste erfahrungen mit obligatorischer informatikdidaktik für angehende schweizer primarlehrerinnen». Informatische Bildung zum Verstehen und Gestalten der digitalen Welt. 97-107, Gesellschaft für Informatik, Bonn.
Du, Yuemeng, Andrew Luxton-Reilly, und Paul Denny. 2020. «A review of research on Parsons problems». In Proceedings of the twenty-second australasian computing education conference, 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1145/3373165.3373187.
Feierabend, Sabine, T Rathgeb, H Kheredmand, und S Glöckler. 2021. «KIM-Studie 2020. Kindheit, Internet, Medien. Basisuntersuchung zum Medienumgang 6-bis 13-Jähriger in Deutschland». Medienpädagogischer Forschungsverbund Südwest (mpfs). Landesanstalt für Kommunikation Baden-Württemberg (LFK), Stuttgart.
Frädrich, Christoph, Florian Obermüller, Nina Körber, Ute Heuer, und Gordon Fraser. 2020. «Common bugs in scratch programs». In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM conference on innovation and technology in computer science education, 89–95. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341525.3387389.
Fraser, Neil. 2015. «Ten things we’ve learned from Blockly». In 2015 IEEE Blocks and Beyond Workshop (Blocks and Beyond), 49–50. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/BLOCKS.2015.7369000.
Geldreich, Katharina, Alexandra Simon, und Elena Starke. 2019. «Which Perceptions Do Primary School Children Have about Programming?». In Proceedings of the 14th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1145/3361721.3361728.
Greifenstein, Luisa, Isabella Graßl, und Gordon Fraser. 2021. «Challenging but Full of Opportunities: Teachers’ Perspectives on Programming in Primary Schools». In Proceedings of the 21st Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3488042.3488048.
Greifenstein, Luisa, Isabella Graßl, Ute Heuer, und Gordon Fraser. 2022. «Common Problems and Effects of Feedback on Fun When Programming Ozobots in Primary School». In Proceedings of the 17th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3556787.3556860.
Greifenstein, Luisa, Isabella Grassl, Ute Heuer, und Gordon Fraser. 2024. «“Help Me Solve It” or “Solve It For Me”: Effects of Feedback on Children Building and Programming Robots». In Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3626252.3630752.
Greifenstein, Luisa, Ute Heuer, und Gordon Fraser. 2024. «Hint Cards for Common Ozobot Robot Issues: Supporting Feedback for Learning Programming in Elementary Schools.» In Proceedings of the 55th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education V. 1, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3626252.3630868.
Grover, Shuchi, und Satabdi Basu. 2017. «Measuring student learning in introductory block-based programming: Examining misconceptions of loops, variables, and boolean logic». In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGCSE technical symposium on computer science education, 267–72. https://doi.org/10.1145/3017680.3017723.
Hainey, Thomas, Thomas M Connolly, Elizabeth A Boyle, Amanda Wilson, und Aisya Razak. 2016. «A systematic literature review of games-based learning empirical evidence in primary education». Computers & Education 102: 202–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.09.001.
Heintz, Fredrik, Linda Mannila, und Tommy Färnqvist. 2016. «A review of models for introducing computational thinking, computer science and computing in K-12 education». In FIE ’16, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2016.7757410.
Ingold, Selina, und Björn Maurer. 2019. «Making in der Schule. Reibungspunkte und Synergieeffekte». Chance Makerspace–Making trifft auf Schule. 59–86. München: kopaed.
Knaus, Thomas, und Jennifer Schmidt. 2020. «Medienpädagogisches Making: ein Begründungsversuch». Medienimpulse 58 (4): 50 Seiten. https://doi.org/10.21243/mi-04-20-04.
Köller, Olaf, Felicitas Thiel, Isabell van Ackeren, Yvonne Anders, Michael Becker-Mrotzek, Ulrike Cress, Claudia Diehl, u. a. 2022. «Digitalisierung im Bildungssystem: Handlungsempfehlungen von der Kita bis zur Hochschule. Gutachten der Ständigen Wissenschaftlichen Kommission der Kultusministerkonferenz (SWK)». 185 pages. https://doi.org/10.25656/01:25273.
Lee, Irene, Fred Martin, Jill Denner, Bob Coulter, Walter Allan, Jeri Erickson, Joyce Malyn-Smith, und Linda Werner. 2011. «Computational thinking for youth in practice». Acm Inroads 2 (1): 32–37. https://doi.org/10.1145/1929887.1929902.
Levy, Ronit Ben-Bassat, und Mordechai Ben-Ari. 2015. «Robotics activities–Is the investment worthwhile?» In Informatics in Schools. Curricula, Competences, and Competitions: 8th International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution, and Perspectives, ISSEP 2015, Ljubljana, Slovenia, September 28-October 1, 2015, Proceedings 8, 22–31. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25396-1_3.
Long, Ju. 2007. «Just For Fun: using programming games in software programming training and education». Journal of Information Technology Education: Research 6 (1): 279–90. https://doi.org/10.28945/216.
Marwan, Samiha, Joseph Jay Williams, und Thomas Price. 2019. «An evaluation of the impact of automated programming hints on performance and learning». In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research, 61–70. https://doi.org/10.1145/3291279.3339420.
Michaeli, Tilman, und Ralf Romeike. 2019. «Current status and perspectives of debugging in the k12 classroom: A qualitative study». In 2019 ieee global engineering education conference (educon), 1030–38. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/EDUCON.2019.8725282.
Nenner, Christin, und Nadine Bergner. 2022. «Informatics Education in German Primary School Curricula». In Informatics in Schools. A Step Beyond Digital Education: 15th International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution, and Perspectives, ISSEP 2022, Vienna, Austria, September 26–28, 2022, Proceedings, 3–14. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15851-3_1.
Obermüller, Florian, Robert Pernerstorfer, Lisa Bailey, Ute Heuer, und Gordon Fraser. 2022. «Common Patterns in Block-Based Robot Programs». In Proceedings of the 17th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3556787.3556859.
Przybylla, Mareen, und Ralf Romeike. 2014. «Physical Computing and Its Scope–Towards a Constructionist Computer Science Curriculum with Physical Computing.» Informatics in Education 13 (2): 241–54. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2014.05.
Read, Janet C. 2008. «Validating the Fun Toolkit: an instrument for measuring children’s opinions of technology». Cognition, Technology & Work 10: 119–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-007-0069-9.
Renninger, K Ann. 2009. «Interest and identity development in instruction: An inductive model». Educational psychologist 44 (2): 105–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520902832392.
Riedo, Fanny, Morgane Chevalier, Stéphane Magnenat, und Francesco Mondada. 2013. «Thymio II, a robot that grows wiser with children». In 2013 IEEE workshop on advanced robotics and its social impacts, 187–93. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ARSO.2013.6705527.
Scaradozzi, David, Laura Sorbi, Anna Pedale, Mariantonietta Valzano, und Cinzia Vergine. 2015. «Teaching robotics at the primary school: an innovative approach». Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 174: 3838–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.1122.
Selby, Cynthia, und John Woollard. 2014. «Refining an understanding of computational thinking». [E-Print] 1-23.
Sentance, Sue, und Andrew Csizmadia. 2017. «Computing in the curriculum: Challenges and strategies from a teacher’s perspective». Education and Information Technologies 22: 469–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9482-0.
Spieler, Bernadette, Vesna Krnjic, Wolfgang Slany, Karin Horneck, und Ute Neudorfer. 2020. «Design, Code, Stitch, Wear, and Show It! Mobile Visual Pattern Design in School Contexts». In 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 1–9. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE44824.2020.9274120.
Spieler, Bernadette, Tobias M Schifferle, und Manuela Dahinden. 2022. «Exploring Making in Schools: A Maker-Framework for Teachers in K12». In 6th FabLearn Europe/MakeEd Conference 2022, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3535227.3535234.
Vivian, Rebecca, Shuchi Grover, und Katrina Falkner. 2020. «Knowledge, Skills, Attitudes, & Beliefs: Learning Goals for Introductory Programming». In Computer Science in K-12: An A to Z Handbook on Teaching Programming, 113–24. Edfinity.
Weiner, Bernard. 1985. «An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion.» Psychological review 92 (4): 548. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.92.4.548.
Wisniewski, Benedikt, Klaus Zierer, und John Hattie. 2020. «The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research». Frontiers in Psychology 10: 3087. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087.
Yadav, Aman, Sarah Gretter, Susanne Hambrusch, und Phil Sands. 2016. «Expanding computer science education in schools: understanding teacher experiences and challenges». Computer science education 26 (4): 235–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2016.1257418.