Systematic literature review: teaching novices programming using robots

Teaching programming to novices is a difficult task due to the complex nature of the subject, the negative stereotypes are associated with programming and because introductory programming courses often fail to encourage student understanding. This study investigates the effectiveness of using robots as tools in the teaching of introductory programming and to determine whether such technology can help to overcome the current barriers for learners in this context. The systematic literature review (SLR) methodology is used to address this aim. Nine electronic databases, the proceedings from six conferences and two journals were searched for relevant literature and exclusion criteria, and after performing several validation exercises, in total, 75% of included papers report that robots are an effective teaching tool and can help novice programmers in their studies. Most of these papers focus on the use of physical robots, however, and further research is needed to assess the effectiveness of using simulated robots.

[1]  Aaron Garrett,et al.  A web-based programming environment for LEGO mindstorms robots , 2005, ACM-SE 43.

[2]  Andrew B. Williams.  The qualitative impact of using LEGO MINDSTORMS robots to teach computer engineering , 2003, IEEE Trans. Educ..

[3]  Theocharis Kyriacou,et al.  Systematic literature review: Teaching novices programming using robots , 2011 .

[4]  Caitlin Kelleher,et al.  Lowering the barriers to programming: A taxonomy of programming environments and languages for novice programmers , 2005, CSUR.

[5]  Arne-Kristian Groven,et al.  Using Karel J collaboratively to facilitate object-oriented learning , 2004, IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, 2004. Proceedings..

[6]  D. Cook,et al.  Does quality of reports of randomised trials affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses? , 1998, The Lancet.

[7]  Byron Weber Becker.  Teaching CS1 with karel the robot in Java , 2001, SIGCSE '01.

[8]  Illah R. Nourbakhsh,et al.  CSbots: design and deployment of a robot designed for the CS1 classroom , 2009, SIGCSE '09.

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

[10]  Pearl Brereton,et al.  Lessons from applying the systematic literature review process within the software engineering domain , 2007, J. Syst. Softw..

[11]  Tore Dybå,et al.  Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review , 2008, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[12]  Brian C. O'Connor,et al.  Do LEGO® Mindstorms® motivate students in CS1? , 2009, SIGCSE '09.

[13]  Jonathan AC Sterne,et al.  Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy , 2005, The Lancet.

[14]  Pearl Brereton,et al.  Experiences of prospective high school teachers using a programming teaching tool , 2011, Koli Calling.

[15]  Barry Fagin.  An Ada interface to lego mindstorms , 2000, ALET.

[16]  Ka-Wing Wong.  Teaching Programming with Lego RCX Robots , 2001 .

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

[18]  Maria Satratzemi,et al.  Teaching Programming with Robots: A Case Study on Greek Secondary Education , 2005, Panhellenic Conference on Informatics.

[19]  Stefan Enderle,et al.  Grape - Graphical Robot Programming for Beginners , 2008, Eurobot Conference.

[20]  Tucker R. Balch,et al.  Personalizing CS1 with robots , 2009, SIGCSE '09.

[21]  J. Johnson,et al.  What is the best programming environment/language for teaching robotics using Lego Mindstorms? , 2003, Artificial Life and Robotics.

[22]  Paulo Martins,et al.  Using Second Life in Programming's Communities of Practice , 2009, CRIWG.

[23]  Laurence D. Merkle,et al.  Teaching computer science with robotics using Ada/Mindstorms 2.0 , 2001 .

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

[25]  Susumu Kanemune,et al.  Learning Computer Programming with Autonomous Robots , 2006, ISSEP.

[26]  Janet Rountree,et al.  Learning and Teaching Programming: A Review and Discussion , 2003, Comput. Sci. Educ..

[27]  Roberta Klibaner,et al.  Student Feedback on Robotics in CS1 , 2007, AAAI Spring Symposium: Semantic Scientific Knowledge Integration.

[28]  Duane Buck,et al.  JKarelRobot: a case study in supporting levels of cognitive development in the computer science curriculum , 2001, SIGCSE '01.

[29]  Pearl Brereton,et al.  Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering , 2006, ICSE.

[30]  Elizabeth Sklar,et al.  Robotics Across the Curriculum , 2007, AAAI Spring Symposium: Semantic Scientific Knowledge Integration.

[31]  Suzanne K. Damarin,et al.  The second self: Computers and the human spirit , 1985 .

[32]  Frank Klassner,et al.  The use of robots in the undergraduate curriculum: experience reports , 2001, SIGCSE '01.

[33]  Cheng-Chih Wu,et al.  Visualization of Program Behaviors: Physical Robots Versus Robot Simulators , 2008, ISSEP.

[34]  Thomas R. Flowers,et al.  Teaching problem solving, computing, and information technology with robots , 2002 .

[35]  D.C. Cliburn,et al.  Experiences with the LEGO Mindstorms throughout the Undergraduate Computer Science Curriculum , 2006, Proceedings. Frontiers in Education. 36th Annual Conference.

[36]  Stelios Xinogalos,et al.  An environment for teaching object-oriented programming: objectKarel , 2003, Proceedings 3rd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Technologies.

[37]  Roberta Klibaner,et al.  A robotics lab for CS1 , 2005 .