History and Educational Potential of LEGO Mindstorms NXT

Educational usage of the robotics has accelerated recently because of educational potential of robotics has been recognized by educators and popularity of international robotics tournaments. Many university and schools prepare technology and robotics related summer schools for children. LEGO Mindstorms NXT is the most popular and commonly used robotics set for educational purposes. These robot sets rooted to Seymour Papert’s LOGO studies which have much influence Instructional Technology in 1960’s. This study aims to present a literature review on educational potential of LEGO Mindstorms NXT robotics sets. Robotics mainly used in education for supporting the STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) education. Most of the related studies resulted with positive effects of the robotics activities in STEM education. Robotics also used in education to increase some skills of the children such as discovery learning, critical thinking and social skills.

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

[2]  Maria L. Gini,et al.  No fear: University of Minnesota Robotics Day Camp introduces local youth to hands-on technologies , 2006, Proceedings 2006 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2006. ICRA 2006..

[3]  Randall D. Beer,et al.  Using autonomous robotics to teach science and engineering , 1999, Commun. ACM.

[4]  E. Mauch.  Using Technological Innovation to Improve the Problem-Solving Skills of Middle School Students: Educators' Experiences with the LEGO Mindstorms Robotic Invention System , 2001 .

[5]  Bradley S. Barker,et al.  Impact of Robotics and Geospatial Technology Interventions on Youth STEM Learning and Attitudes , 2010 .

[6]  Barry S. Fagin,et al.  Measuring the effectiveness of robots in teaching computer science , 2003, SIGCSE.

[7]  Jörgen Lindh,et al.  Does lego training stimulate pupils' ability to solve logical problems? , 2007, Comput. Educ..

[8]  E. Ackermann.  Piaget ’ s Constructivism , Papert ’ s Constructionism : What ’ s the difference ? , 2001 .

[9]  Fabiane Barreto Vavassori Benitti,et al.  Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review , 2012, Comput. Educ..

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

[11]  Javier Ruiz-del-Solar,et al.  Robotics courses for children as a motivation tool: the Chilean experience , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Education.

[12]  Molly Watt,et al.  What is Logo , 1982 .

[13]  Bradley S. Barker,et al.  Robotics as Means to Increase Achievement Scores in an Informal Learning Environment , 2007 .

[14]  W. Campbell,et al.  THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT DALLAS , 2004 .

[15]  Re-situating Constructionism , 2006 .

[16]  Thomas Bjørner.  If I had a Robot it should do Everything for me , 2009 .

[17]  Illah R. Nourbakhsh,et al.  Formal measures of learning in a secondary school mobile robotics course , 2004, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2004. Proceedings. ICRA '04. 2004.

[18]  Maja J. Mataric,et al.  Materials for Enabling Hands-On Robotics and STEM Education , 2007, AAAI Spring Symposium: Semantic Scientific Knowledge Integration.

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

[20]  G. Kuh,et al.  Engaging Students , 2019, Learning and Teaching in Higher Education.

[21]  Ghazi Shukur,et al.  The Effect of LEGO Training on Pupils' School Performance in Mathematics, Problem Solving Ability and Attitude: Swedish Data , 2006, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[22]  Blaine A. Price,et al.  Using Robotics to Motivate ‘Back Door’ Learning , 2004, Education and Information Technologies.

[23]  Bryan Hill,et al.  A Day Camp For Middle School Girls To Create A Stem Pipeline , 2008 .

[24]  J. Johnson,et al.  Children, robotics, and education , 2003, Artificial Life and Robotics.

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

[26]  Frank Klassner,et al.  Do lego mindstorms robots have a future in CS education? , 2006, SIGCSE '06.

[27]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  Constructionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking, and Learning in A Digital World , 1996 .

[28]  Timothy S. McNerney.  From turtles to Tangible Programming Bricks: explorations in physical language design , 2004, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[29]  Merredith Portsmore,et al.  Bringing Engineering to Elementary School , 2004 .

[30]  Fred Martin,et al.  Children, cybernetics, and programmable turtles , 1988 .

[31]  Seymour Papert,et al.  Twenty Things To Do With A Computer , 1971 .

[32]  Robert Akl,et al.  Attracting and Retaining Women in Computer Science and Engineering: Evaluating the Results , 2007 .

[33]  Nikolaos Papanikolopoulos,et al.  Second annual robotics summer camp for underrepresented students , 2007, ITiCSE.

[34]  M. Robinson.  Robotics-Driven Activities: Can They Improve Middle School Science Learning? , 2005 .

[35]  Peta Wyeth,et al.  Scaffolding Children's Robot Building and Programming Activities , 2003, RoboCup.

[36]  Mitchel Resnick,et al.  To mindstorms and beyond: evolution of a construction kit for magical machines , 2000 .