Examining 4-H Robotics in the Learning of Science, Engineering and Technology Topics and the Related Student Attitudes

Youths’ natural fascination and identification with robots make them an ideal teaching and learning platform. Robots would seem to be excellent hands-on tools to teach science, engineering and technology (SET) concepts. However, while research supports their use to increase interest and motivation, the effectiveness of robots to directly teach science, engineering, and technology concepts is less clear. The purpose of this study was to measure the effectiveness of a 4-H robotics program to support the learning of specific SET concepts and to examine related student attitudes towards science. This study compared the pretest and posttest scores on an assessment of basic SET concepts and attitudes of youth who participated in the 4-H robotics intervention with the scores of youth in a control group. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) results revealed that youth in the robotics intervention scored better on a SET concepts posttest. Student attitudes toward science were also investigated. The results suggested that educational robotics can engage youth in activities that support their learning of SET topics, but that it may have more limited impact on general student attitudes towards science, as measured by the study's attitudinal instrument.

[1]  David C. Miller,et al.  International Outcomes of Learning in Mathematics Literacy and Problem Solving: PISA 2003 Results From the U.S. Perspective. Highlights. NCES 2005-003. , 2004 .

[2]  William B. Bonvillian.  Science at a crossroads , 2002 .

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

[4]  A. Ahlgren,et al.  Science for all Americans , 1990 .

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

[6]  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 .

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

[8]  David J. Barnes,et al.  Teaching introductory Java through LEGO MINDSTORMS models , 2002, SIGCSE '02.

[9]  Richard W. Moore,et al.  The development, field test and validation of an inventory of scientific attitudes , 1970 .

[10]  J. E. Stake,et al.  Evaluating the Impact of Science-Enrichment Programs on Adolescents' Science Motivation and Confidence: The Splashdown Effect. , 2005 .

[11]  J. Suls,et al.  Flawed Self-Assessment , 2004, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[12]  Jay R. Campbell,et al.  The Nation's Report Card: Reading, 2002. , 2003 .

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

[14]  Norman G. Lederman.  Students' and teachers' conceptions of the nature of science: A review of the research , 1992 .

[15]  K. Crowley,et al.  The Robotic Autonomy Mobile Robotics Course: Robot Design, Curriculum Design and Educational Assessment , 2005, Auton. Robots.

[16]  Stephen G. West,et al.  Validity of self-evaluation of ability: A review and meta-analysis , 1982 .

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

[18]  M. Watts,et al.  Science education and affect , 2003 .

[19]  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.

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

[21]  Richard W. Moore,et al.  The scientific attitude inventory: A revision (SAI II) , 1997 .