Unlocking the Potential of Programming Education: Enhancing Conceptual Understanding and Student Engagement with Sphero SPRK Robot
Article Sidebar
-
Computer programming, Learning programming, Programming language, Robotic assistant, Interactive learning, Novice programmers
Abstract
This research investigates the use of the 'Sphero SPRK+' robot as a programming assistant to enhance conceptual understanding and engagement in programming education. The research addresses the challenges of teaching programming and underlines the significance of students understanding programming structures, semantics, syntax and planning. The Sphero robot offers multiple programming options, including graphic blocks, a pictorial command line, and text commands, catering to diverse learning styles. The approach of the study is based on a cognitive learning model, with the Sphero robot providing immediate feedback throughout practising. The experiment incorporates two groups: one using Blocks and the other using JavaScript code with Sphero's assistance. Results suggest that using Sphero SPRK robot enhances programming learning outcomes, particularly for novice learners. Participants express satisfaction with the engaging and practical learning experience, favouring the ease of Blocks for learning programming logic. The study provides significance for educational settings and emphasises the value of robotics and block-based programming in promoting algorithmic thinking and computational skills.
Full text article
References
[1] Xinolagos, S (2011). Object-Oriented Programming -What do Students Think of Objects and Classes?, Proceedings of the 14th IASTED International Conference on Computers and Advanced Technology in Education.
[2] Maliszewski, I & Tan, G (2007). Befriending computer programming: a proposed approach to teaching introductory programming, Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 4, 277-289.
[3] Malik, IS., & Coldwell-Neilson, J (2017). Impact of a New Teaching and Learning Approach in an Introductory Programming Course, Journal of Educational Computing, 55(6), 789-819.
[4] Pite ire, M., & Costa, C., (2013). Learning Computing Programming: Study of difficulties in learning programming. ISDOC, 75-79.
[5] Black, TR (2006). Helping Novice Programming Students Succeed, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 22(2), 109-114.
[6] Mubin, O., Stevens, CJ., Shahid, S., Al Mahmud, A., & Dong, JJ (2013). A review of the Applicability of Robotics in Education, Technology for Education and Learning, 1, 1-7.
[7] Buttler, M., & Morgan, M (2007). Learning challenges faced by novice programming students studying high level and low feedback concepts, ASCILITE, 99-107.
[8] Lee, I., Martin, F., Denner, J., Coulter, B., Allan, W & Erickson, J (2011). Computational thinking for youth in practice, ACM Inroads, 2, 32-37.
[9] Mubin, O., Stevens, CJ., Shahid, S., Al Mahmud, A & Dong, JJ (2013). A review of the applicability of robots in education, Technology for Education and Learning 1(1), 1-7.
[10] Kelleher, C., & Pausch, R (2003). Lowering the Barriers to Programming: a survey of programming environments and languages for novice programmers, Journal Computer Surveys, 37(2), 83-137.
[11] Giangrande, E (2007). CSI Programming Language Options, Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 3, 153-160.
[12] Winslow, LE (1996). Programming pedagogy –a psychological overview, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 28(3), 17-25.
[13] Robins, A., Rountree, J & Rountree, N (2003). Learning and teaching programming: A review and Discussion, Computer Science and Education, 13(2), 137-172.
[14] Programming with Sphero EDU. (2018, February 2). Retrieved from https://support.sphero.com/support/solutions/articles/9000100576-programming-with-sphero-edu-
[15] Booth, T., & Stumpf, S. (2013). End-user experiences of visual and textual programming environments for Arduino. In End-User Development: 4th International Symposium, IS-EUD 2013, Copenhagen, Denmark, June 10-13, 2013. Proceedings 4 (pp. 25-39). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[16] De Raadt, M (2008). Teaching programming strategies explicitly to novice programmers, Thesis Dissertation-USQ Faculty of Business, 1-124.
[17] Wing, JM (2006). Computational thinking, Communications of the ACM -Self Managed Systems, 49(3), 33-35.
[18] Tamzid, S & Demetriades, S (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 661-670.
[19] Wing, JM (2008). Computational thinking and thinking about computing, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society a Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Science, 366, 3717-3725.
[20] Benetti, FB (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review, Journal of Computers & Education, 58(3), 978-988.
[21] Mitnik, R., Reaburn, M., Nussbaum, M & Soto, A (2009). Collaborative robotic instruction: A graph teaching experience, Journal of Computers and Educational Computing, 53, 330-342.
[22] Blanchard, S., Freiman, V & Larreta-Pitre, N (2010). Strategies used by elementary schoolchildren solving robotics-based complex task: Innovative Potential of Technology, Social Behavioral Science, 2, 2851-2857.
[23] Chambers, JM., Carbonaro, M., Rex, M & Grove, S (2007). Scaffolding knowledge construction through robotic technology: A middle school case study, Journal of Integration Technology and Education, 6, 55-70
[24] Fushek, G., & Mishits, J (2011). Learning algorithmic thinking with tangible objects eases transition to computer programming. In Informatics in Schools. Contributing to 21st Century Education: 5th International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution and Perspectives, ISSEP 2011, Bratislava, Slovakia, October 26-29, 2011. Proceedings 5 (pp. 155-164). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
[25] Ko, A. J., Myers, B. A., & Aung, H. H. (2004, September). Six learning barriers in end-user programming systems. In 2004 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages-Human Centric Computing (pp. 199-206). IEEE.
[26] Repenning, A., Webb, D & Loaned, A (2010). Scalable Game Design and the Development of a Check List for Getting Computational Thinking into Public Schools, Symposium of Computing Science and Education, 265-269.
[27] Schulte, C & Bennedsen, J (2006). What do teachers teach in introductory programming?, Proceedings the 2006 International workshop on Computing Education Research ICER, 17-28.
[28] Fan champs, N. L., Slanged, L., Jennissen, P., & Specht, M. (2021). The influence of SRA programming on algorithmic thinking and self-efficacy using Lego robotics in two types of instruction. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31, 203-222.
[29] Hashi, MM. & Alameel, AM (2013). Difficulties Facing Students in Learning Computer Programming Skills at Tabuk University, Conference on Recent Advances in Modern Educational Technology, 1-10.
Authors
Copyright (c) 2023 Journal of Pure & Applied Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
In a brief statement, the rights relate to the publication and distribution of research published in the journal of the University of Sebha where authors who have published their articles in the journal of the university of Sebha should how they can use or distribute their articles. They reserve all their rights to the published works, such as (but not limited to) the following rights:
- Copyright and other property rights related to the article, such as patent rights.
- Research published in the journal of the University of Sebha and used in its future works, including lectures and books, the right to reproduce articles for their own purposes, and the right to self-archive their articles.
- The right to enter a separate article, or for a non-exclusive distribution of their article with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in the journal of Sebha University.
Privacy Statement The names and e-mail addresses entered on the Sabha University Journal site will be used for the aforementioned purposes only and for which they were used.