Why is programming "hard"? Using robots to teach programming in a non-formal educational context: Implications for practice
-
Published:2024
Issue:2
Volume:37
Page:37-54
-
ISSN:0352-2334
-
Container-title:Inovacije u nastavi
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Inovacije u nastavi
Author:
Kuzmanović DobrinkaORCID, Baucal AleksandarORCID
Abstract
Programming is a digital competence necessary for life in the 21st century. In recent decades, education systems around the world have redefined curricula to include programming as a standalone subject or integrated into other subjects, from an early age. In addition to formal education, programming is also taught in non-formal educational contexts (NEC) and the use of educational robots is becoming more common. The aim of this paper is to familiarize with the advantages and challenges of using Sphero robots (BB-8 and SPRK+) in teaching visual programming in the NEC and to formulate practical implications. The research was conducted as a part of the Learning for the 21st Century project in 17 cities in Serbia. The quantitative research included 677 students (Mage = 12.16; SD = 1.10), and the qualitative 42 students and 5 workshop leaders. Descriptive quantitative and qualitative, thematic analysis was applied. The results show that using robots has additional educational and motivational value in the process of teaching visual programming and algorithmic thinking. From the point of view of the students and workshop leaders, the NEC has a number of advantages compared to traditional teaching of programming: learning through play, experiential learning, creativity and initiative of participants, insight that programming can be interesting, even though it is "hard". Challenges are formulated in the paper, as well as practical recommendations for teaching practice.
Publisher
Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science (CEON/CEES)
Reference43 articles.
1. 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), Article 2. https://doi. org/10.7771/2157-9288.1223; 2. Balanskat, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2015). Computing our future: Computer programming and coding priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. European Schoolnet; 3. Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Kampylis, P., Dagienė, V., Wastiau, P., Engelhardt, K., Earp, J., Horvath, M. A., Jasutė, E., Malagoli, C., Masiulionytė-Dagienė, V., & Stupurienė, G. (2022). Reviewing Computational Thinking in Compulsory Education. Publications Office of the European Union; 4. Bosse, Y., & Gerosa, M. A. (2016). Why is programming so difficult to learn? Patterns of Difficulties Related to Programming Learning. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 41(6), 1-6. http://doi.acm. org/10.1145/3011286.3011301; 5. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa;
|
|