Skill Development and Knowledge Acquisition Cultivated by Maker Education: Evidence from Arduino-based Educational Robotics

This study investigated elementary school students’ learning performances and behaviors in a maker education program. An informal after-school learning environment entitled Robot MakerSpace was created at a public elementary school in Taiwan and 30 grade 5 students voluntarily participated in a 16-week educational experiment. The student participants were randomly divided into two experimental groups. Students in the maker group received weekly educational robotics lessons, whereas those in the nonmaker group only engaged in other after-school learning activities such as homework practice in traditional classrooms. Mixed methods research was used for data collection. An experiment with a pretest–posttest and control group design was employed to measure the students’ electrical engineering and computer programming content knowledge and problem-solving skills. In addition, a qualitative approach with an emphasis on filed observation was adopted to evaluate the instructional implementation of the maker education program. The quantitative findings revealed that maker education training significantly improved the electrical engineering and computer programming content knowledge of the students and improved their problem-solving skills. The qualitative findings showed the students required considerable learning support from the instructor such as strategies for software and hardware debugging.

[1]  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..

[2]  A. Lillard,et al.  Playful Learning and Montessori Education. , 2013 .

[3]  S. Papert The children's machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer , 1993 .

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

[5]  Secondary Education. Office for Career Massachusetts science and technology/engineering curriculum framework , 2006 .

[6]  Mary Lu Love,et al.  Engaging Young Engineers: Teaching Problem Solving Skills Through STEM , 2015 .

[7]  Benjamin S. Bloom,et al.  A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives , 2000 .

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

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

[10]  Breanne K. Litts,et al.  Learning in the Making: A Comparative Case Study of Three Makerspaces. , 2014 .

[11]  Julie S. Linsey,et al.  The Invention Studio: A University Maker Space and Culture. , 2014 .

[12]  Demetra Evangelou,et al.  Practicing engineering while building with blocks: identifying engineering thinking , 2016 .

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

[14]  Lewis R. Aiken,et al.  Psychological testing and assessment, 9th ed. , 1994 .

[15]  University of California-Davis,et al.  The Promise of the Maker Movement for Education , 2017 .

[16]  Jay B. Labov,et al.  STEM Learning Is Everywhere: Summary of a Convocation on Building Learning Systems , 2014 .

[17]  Luis Ariel Mesa Mesa,et al.  Engineering for children by using robotics , 2017 .

[18]  J. Dewey Experience and Education , 1938 .

[19]  D. Dougherty The Maker Movement , 2012, Innovations: Technology, Governance, Globalization.

[20]  Lee Martin,et al.  The Promise of the Maker Movement for Education , 2015 .

[21]  Sonia Chernova,et al.  Guest Editorial Special Issue on Robotics Education , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Education.

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

[23]  B. Tabachnick,et al.  Using multivariate statistics, 5th ed. , 2007 .

[24]  C. Donohue Technology and Digital Media in the Early Years : Tools for Teaching and Learning , 2014 .

[25]  Damian Bebell,et al.  One to One Computing: A Summary of the Quantitative Results from the Berkshire Wireless Learning Initiative , 2010 .

[26]  Cecilia Laschi,et al.  Educational Robotics intervention on Executive Functions in preschool children: A pilot study , 2017, Comput. Hum. Behav..

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

[28]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research , 2006 .

[29]  National Academy of Sciences: Annual Meeting , 1954, Nature.

[30]  M. Patton Qualitative research and evaluation methods , 1980 .

[31]  Jeng Liu Does Cram Schooling Matter? Who Goes to Cram Schools? Evidence from Taiwan. , 2012 .

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

[33]  C. Moustakas Phenomenological Research Methods , 1994 .

[34]  Dimitris Alimisis,et al.  Educational robotics: Open questions and new challenges , 2013 .

[35]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Editorial: Differing Perspectives on Mixed Methods Research , 2007 .