Systems Thinking Approach to Robotics Curriculum in Schools

This chapter presents a systems thinking approach for the conceptualization, design, and implementation of robotics curriculum to scaffold students’ learning of important Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) concepts and processes. This approach perceives the curriculum as a system of integrated elements and allows for the investigation of the interdependencies amongst the elements and the dynamics of the curriculum as a whole. Through this approach, we believe that students can be provided with robotics curriculum units that facilitate the learning of STEM “Big Ideas” of and about STEM. A STEM “Big Idea” is central to the understanding and application of STEM across a wide range of fields, one that links numerous STEM discipline understandings. Robotics is a rich context in which students can establish deep knowledge and robust understanding of STEM “Big Ideas”. Curriculum units based on this systems thinking approach can do much to ensure that students engaged in robotics activities focus not only on the completion of robotics tasks but also on the social construction of integrated networks of authentic STEM knowledge centred around “Big Ideas” of and about STEM.

[1]  Stephen M. Fiore,et al.  Process mapping and shared cognition: Teamwork and the development of shared problem models. , 2004 .

[2]  Carol Anne Beatty,et al.  Building Smart Teams: A Roadmap to High Performance , 2004 .

[3]  Stephen J. Norton,et al.  Problem Solving in a Middle School Robotics Design Classroom , 2007 .

[4]  Michael E. Grubbs.  Robotics Intrigue Middle School Students and Build STEM Skills , 2013 .

[5]  Marina Umaschi Bers,et al.  Teaching Partnerships: Early Childhood and Engineering Students Teaching Math and Science Through Robotics , 2005 .

[6]  Ralph J. Jasparro.  Applying Systems Thinking to Curriculum Evaluation , 1998 .

[7]  R. Marx,et al.  Design‐based science and student learning , 2004 .

[8]  Mike Carbonaro,et al.  Developing conceptual understanding of mechanical advantage through the use of Lego robotic technology , 2008 .

[9]  Tuba Pinar Yildirim,et al.  Model-eliciting activities: assessing engineering student problem solving and skill integration processes , 2010 .

[10]  Marina Umaschi Bers,et al.  Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum , 2014, Comput. Educ..

[11]  Philip M. Sadler,et al.  Engineering Competitions in the Middle School Classroom: Key Elements in Developing Effective Design Challenges , 2000 .

[12]  David W. Johnson,et al.  Assessing Students in Groups: Promoting Group Responsibility and Individual Accountability , 2003 .

[13]  R. Nason,et al.  Developing Primary Students' Group Metacognitive Processes in a Computer Supported Collaborative Learning Environment , 2003 .

[14]  Christina Chalmers.  Primary students' group metacognitive processes in a computer supported collaborative learning environment , 2009 .

[15]  Yuxin Ma,et al.  Acquisition of Physics Content Knowledge and Scientific Inquiry Skills in a Robotics Summer Camp , 2007 .

[16]  E. Salas,et al.  Reflections on shared cognition , 2001 .

[17]  Mike Carbonaro,et al.  Scaffolding Knowledge Construction through Robotic Technology: A Middle School Case Study , 2007 .

[18]  Richard J. Stiggins,et al.  Classroom assessment for student learning : doing it right -- using it well , 2006 .

[19]  C. Rogers.  Engineering in Kindergarten: How Schools Are Changing , 2012 .

[20]  Moshe Barak,et al.  Robotics projects and learning concepts in science, technology and problem solving , 2009 .

[21]  Andrew Lane,et al.  A Review of Diagramming in Systems Practice and How Technologies Have Supported the Teaching and Learning of Diagramming for Systems Thinking in Practice , 2013 .

[22]  Kristen B. Wendell,et al.  Engineering Design‐Based Science, Science Content Performance, and Science Attitudes in Elementary School , 2013 .

[23]  Malcolm Welch,et al.  Analyzing the Tacit Strategies of Novice Designers , 1999 .

[24]  Christian D. Schunn,et al.  Designing Technology Activities that Teach Mathematics , 2010 .

[25]  Matthew Berland,et al.  Comparing Virtual and Physical Robotics Environments for Supporting Complex Systems and Computational Thinking , 2015, Journal of Science Education and Technology.

[26]  P. Black,et al.  Working inside the Black Box: Assessment for Learning in the Classroom , 2004 .

[27]  Seymour Papert,et al.  Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas , 1981 .

[28]  Marina Umaschi Bers,et al.  Teachers as Designers: Integrating Robotics in Early Childhood Education. , 2002 .

[29]  Janet L. Kolodner,et al.  Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research: Learning Disciplinary Ideas and Practices Through Engineering Design , 2014 .

[30]  M. Scardamalia.  Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge , 2002 .

[31]  C. Hmelo‐Silver.  Problem-Based Learning: What and How Do Students Learn? , 2004 .

[32]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  New Pathways into Robotics: Strategies for Broadening Participation , 2008 .

[33]  Richard Lesh,et al.  Beyond Constructivism: Models and Modeling Perspectives on Mathematics Problem Solving, Learning, and Teaching , 2003 .

[34]  Christian D. Schunn,et al.  Resources for learning robots: environments and framings connecting math in robotics , 2011 .

[35]  J. Kolodner,et al.  Toward implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design , 2005 .

[36]  Richard Lesh,et al.  Beyond Constructivism , 2003 .

[37]  L. Earl,et al.  Assessment as Learning: Using Classroom Assessment to Maximize Student Learning , 2003 .

[38]  Kamaran Fathulla,et al.  What is a diagram? , 2007, 2007 11th International Conference Information Visualization (IV '07).

[39]  Florence R. Sullivan,et al.  Robotic Construction Kits as Computational Manipulatives for Learning in the STEM Disciplines , 2016 .

[40]  G. Michael Bowen,et al.  Teachers' tendencies to promote student-led science projects: Associations with their views about science , 2006 .

[41]  Chalmers Chris.  Learning with FIRST LEGO League , 2013 .

[42]  Rodney Nason,et al.  Group Metacognition in a Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning Environment , 2005, ICCE.

[43]  John Wallace,et al.  The Wheels of the Bus: Children designing in an early years classroom , 2000 .

[44]  Brigid Barron.  Achieving Coordination in Collaborative Problem-Solving Groups , 2000 .

[45]  Chris Rogers,et al.  Kindergarten Robotics: Using Robotics to Motivate Math, Science, and Engineering Literacy in Elementary School* , 2006 .

[46]  Christina Chalmers,et al.  Learning with FIRST LEGO League , 2013 .

[47]  Richard Lesh,et al.  Formulating Operational Definitions of Desired Outcomes of Instruction in Mathematics and Science Education. , 2000 .

[48]  Florence R. Sullivan.  Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding , 2008 .

[49]  Anthony E. Kelly,et al.  Multitiered Design Experiments in Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education , 2008 .

[50]  D. Sadler.  Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems , 1989 .

[51]  Howard Kimmel,et al.  Advancing the "E" in K-12 STEM Education , 2010 .

[52]  Richard Lesh,et al.  Model development sequences , 2003 .

[53]  Vasilije Kokotovich,et al.  Problem analysis and thinking tools: an empirical study of non-hierarchical mind mapping , 2008 .

[54]  Ian T. Cameron,et al.  Development and deployment of a library of industrially focused advanced immersive VR learning environments , 2008 .

[55]  Richard Lesh,et al.  Model-Eliciting Activities (MEAs) as a Bridge Between Engineering Education Research and Mathematics Education Research , 2008 .

[56]  Susan M. Brookhart,et al.  How to Create and Use Rubrics for Formative Assessment and Grading , 2013 .