In the educational context, there are three practical educational applications of robotics: the learning of robotics, learning with robotics and learning by robotics. The educational purpose of the latter is the acquisition of mathematical, scientific and technological knowledge and skills, but also the acquisition of transversal skills and the development of students’ cognitive, metacognitive and social skills. The educational interest of this robotic technology is illustrated here by an example of collaboration between teachers and researchers recently carried out in France in a primary school.
Recommendations:
- Provide a space large enough for students to spread out the material and form groups of maximum 3-4 students per kit
- Plan short lessons, including problems of increasing complexity in terms of construction and programming, encourage students to find several solutions.
- Negotiate with students a theme that interests them, enhance the work of students (exhibitions, meetings …)
- Use tutorials and debriefings throughout problem-solving activities to help students relate the experience to the concepts they acquire.
Robotics For Education
Interest in robotics has greatly increased in recent years. In particular, what arouses interest in constructable and programmable robotic kits for educational contexts is their dimension of “tool with which to think” (Resnick, et al ., 1996). This tool can adapt to different educational objectives and encourage several types of learning.
In fact, from its birth, robotics in an educational environment was designed in this way, and not only as a technology to be mastered . In France, the “digital plan for schools”, aiming among other things to introduce students to computer coding from the start of the 2015 school year, puts a lot into the potential offered by this technology to address notions of computer science, facilitate development skills (for example problem solving), modernize education and help fight against school failure.
The integration and acceptance of any innovative educational technology in teaching are crucial issues, especially since the educational practices supported by the technology are implemented by teachers.
Research must therefore provide answers to their questions such as: Besides computer science and robotics, what subjects can I teach thanks to robotics? What kind of knowledge and skills do students learn when working on robotic projects? What is the role of the teacher in the implementation of these projects? And finally, does it have a real impact on students’ academic results?
Robotic Technology And Educational Purposes
Experimental studies that have looked at the use of robots in an educational context basically show three concrete educational applications (Gaudiello & Zibetti, 2014).
First, learning robotics involves using the robot as a support to learn robotics (i.e. mechanics, electronics and computer science) through practical collaborative activities. The educational aim is therefore the acquisition of knowledge and skills inherent in the construction and programming of robots.
Then, Learning with robotics is based on the interaction between young learners and a humanoid or animoid robot which covers the role of companion for learners or assistant for the teacher. The educational aim is to provoke empathic reactions and to create cognitive and social interactions.
Finally, learning by robotics involves the use of construction and programming robotic kits. The educational aim is the acquisition of knowledge and skills linked to a specific school subject – mathematics, science, technology. But its educational purpose also lies in the acquisition of transversal skills (solving problems, communicating, taking initiatives, etc.) and in the development of students’ cognitive, metacognitive and social skills through self-correction, planning, critical thinking, collaborative work, self-confidence, etc.
What Are The Learning Favored By Robotics?
As with any technological device, it is difficult to maintain that the use of robotics constitutes in itself a real gain for learning. However, a number of studies have demonstrated significant progress in understanding technology (programming, systems), mathematics (distances, fractions, proportions) and the exact sciences (time, temperature, etc.) ( eg, Robinson, 2005). Some more rare studies also demonstrate a contribution of this technology in the learning of SVT ( eg, Gaudiello, 2015), music and art ( eg, Rusk, Resnick, Berg et al . 2008).
Other studies show that the use of robotics at school also brings a real improvement in the development of transversal skills such as scientific reasoning – observation, formulation of hypotheses, manipulation of variables, etc. . ( eg, Sullivan, 2008); attitude towards learning science and the ability to cope with academic failure and to progress ( eg, McDonald and Howell, 2012). The use of robotics also stimulates the development of cognitive skills (consultation of documents, listening, writing reports) metacognitive (structuring and formalization of thought), affective (students engage in meaningful activities) and social (they learn to manage socio-cognitive conflicts) which can be transferred to other areas.
The results of numerous studies show that robotics can have an impact on the acquisition of specific knowledge and on the development of transversal skills.
However, a recent meta-analysis puts these conclusions into perspective (Benitti, 2012). Two points can be raised:
1) Much of the literature on the use of robotics in education is descriptive or anecdotal, based on reports from teachers. Rigorous or longitudinal experimental studies, and in particular with control groups, are rare.
2) The potential of robotics for learning is directly linked to the implementation of an adapted pedagogical approach and scripting.
How To Implement Robotics Activities At School?
Research on pedagogical approaches compatible with the “learn by robotics” paradigm currently constitutes an active area of study within Educational Robotics (Alimisis, 2013; Gaudiello, 2015): this was the subject of the European Pri-Sci project -Net between 2011 and 2014, combining researchers in Education Sciences and Psychology. In this context, educational activities have been designed and tested using robotic technologies for learning science. The workshops took place in a primary school with 25 students from CM1-CM2 and focused on activities developed using an educational approach called IBL ( Inquiry-Based Learning ), which, applied to Sciences, becomes IBSE ( Inquiry Based Science Education). The objective of these workshops was to test the possible benefits of the robotic and IBSE combination.
The IBSE advocates learning based on research and experimentation which draws its philosophy from the founding principles of constructivist theory.
The latter advocates progressive and active learning, where students build their knowledge by alternating phases of practical activities and abstract thinking that allow them to organize new knowledge in mental patterns essential for awareness of their own learning. . Using this approach, students are confronted with open questions or challenges, the answers, and solutions of which involve the acquisition of empirical, collaborative and transferable knowledge (Bell, 2010). The IBSE approach makes it possible to structure educational activities in stages, starting from the formulation of questions on the part of the students on the subject proposed by the teacher, until the resolution of the problem posed while promoting active participation by the class.
One of the workshops tested, called RObeeZ, consisted of creating a robotic hive, including 5 types of robot bees (queen, nurse, mason, guardian, forager). Throughout the school year, the 25 students of a CM1 class built, programmed and perfected these robot bees by working as a team. At the end of the project, exhibitions and seminars for college students were organized to share this educational experience.
The objective of the study was to assess the combined effects of the IBSE approach and robotics on learning processes and on the evolution of academic results. In particular on the acquisition of knowledge in mathematics and in SVT, the acquisition of transversal skills and the development of cognitive, metacognitive and social faculties. To assess these effects, four types of data were collected: quantitative (comparison of transcripts from the first and last quarter of 2014), qualitative (comparison of personal skills reports from the first and last quarter of 2014 made by teachers), student self-assessment (questionnaire including 19 questions on the cognitive, affective, social and metacognitive dimensions of learning, which students had to answer by assigning a score of 0 to 5) and an interview with teachers,
The results show a statistically significant impact on the academic results in mathematics: the marks of the students in problem-solving, geometry, and measurements are higher at the end of the RObeeZ project. On the other hand, no convincing effect was noted on the results in SVT.
At the end of the project, the teachers were invited by the researchers to provide a qualitative assessment of the impact of the RObeez project on the progression of pupils’ skills such as:
consult documents, express themselves orally and in writing in an appropriate vocabulary, organize the data of a problem with a view to its resolution, communicate, practice an investigative process (observe, question, experiment, etc. .), get involved in a project, show persistence, and self-assess. Two groups of students thus emerged, on the basis of the results noted in the skill reports: the group with low progression, and group with strong progression. The results of this qualitative evaluation show a strong progression in the last term for the pupils who were in great difficulty at first.
The self-assessment of the students involved reveals that the project had a positive impact, especially on the affective (appreciation of the project and desire to commit to the realization of a new project) and social (exchange, organize group work) dimensions. ), but also on the cognitive dimension (correction of naive knowledge about bees and robots, acquisition of new knowledge) and metacognitive (becoming aware of the usefulness of technology to learn the content of a lesson, being able to transfer acquired know-how to other projects).
Finally, interviews with teachers reveal that the educational robotics activities supported by the IBSE approach also have an impact on students’ attitudes. The latter is described by the teachers as curious, eager to express their point of view, attentive to their peers, and constant in their commitment to the project. For their part, the teachers testify that the way of conceiving teaching changes in this type of teaching environment: the active participation of the class and the success of the project gave, in their opinion, an important impulse for the implementation of new projects.
Overall, these results appear to be consistent with those of the theoretical and experimental literature on the benefits of educational robotics in schools, especially when the latter is supported by the IBSE approach ( eg, Eguchi & Uribe, 2012).
Conclusion
In view of the studies available on the subject, the integration of robotics into schools is possible when it is “orchestrated” within an adapted educational approach.
It can then stimulate a real transformation in the way of teaching and learning, based on the co-construction of knowledge, skills, and attitudes of students. The combination of robotic activities and the IBSE approach thus seems to allow an in-depth understanding of concepts in mathematics and favor the change of posture of students and teachers. In this context, the complementarity between the two dimensions of “human-oriented” and “technology-oriented” learning could truly deploy its educational potential and encourage students to experience technology as intentional learners and co-authors of their own knowledge and tools. learning.
Leave a Reply