Impact of robotics within Scratch block-based visual programming on computational thinking in primary school students
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26577/JES.2023.v77.i4.09Abstract
This paper examines the impact of a robotics course using the Scratch 3.0 tool on the computational thinking of elementary school students. The study was conducted at the KSU «IT school-lyceum № 28 named after Kuljabai Kasymov» in Kazakhstan among 48 third-graders with basic programming skills, divided into a control group and an experimental one. Prior to the experiment, all participants were asked to create a robot in Scratch 3.0. The students in the experimental group attended robotics classes for two weeks, while the participants in the control group followed conventional curriculum. Upon completion of the course, participants in both groups were tasked with creating a game. The students' projects before and after the experiment were scored using the Dr. Scratch platform. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to obtain group averages and standard deviations. In order to examine the effect of using the Scratch 3.0 tool on students' computational thinking, an independent two-tailed t-test was performed to estimate the size of between-group differences. Post-test computational thinking scores of the students who completed practical tasks on Scratch were significantly higher by 31.8% compared to their peers who attended regular classes (P <0.001), indicating an improved computational thinking in the experimental group participants.
Key words: robotics, block-based programming, Scratch, computational thinking, schoolchildren.
References
Список литературы
Mukhasheva, M. et al. The impact of educational robotics on cognitive outcomes in primary students: A meta-analysis of recent studies // European Journal of Educational Research, 2023. № 12(4). – P. 1684. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.4.1683
Мынбаева А. К. От классической педагогики к образованию 4.0: преемственность методологии, процессов и принципов // Вестник КазНУ. Серия педагогическая. – 2022. – № 2(71). – С. 14. https://doi.org/10.26577/JES.2022.v71.i2.02
Castro, A. et al. Robotics education in STEM units: Breaking down barriers in rural multigrade schools // Sensors, 2022. № 23(1), Article 387. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23010387
Madariaga, L. et al. Offline and online user experience of gamified robotics for introducing computational thinking: Comparing engagement, game mechanics and coding motivation // Computers & Education, 2023. № 193, Article 104664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104664
Yu, X., Gutierrez-Garcia, M. A., & Soto-Varela, R. Are educational robots any good for communicative English learning for primary school students? // Texto Livre, 2023. № 16, Article e41469. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-3652.2023.41469
Makhambetova, Z. T., & Magauova, A. S. Professional competences in the context of inclusive education: A model design // European Journal of Educational Research, 2023. № 12(1). – Р. 202. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.1.201 c. 202
Bozkurt, O., & Pasabeyoglu, N. G. The effect of Lego robotics coding on primary school students' academic achievement and attitudes of science // Education Quarterly Reviews, 2023. № 6(1). – Р. 271.
Corral Abad, E. et al. Improving the learning of engineering students with interactive teaching applications // Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 2021. № 29(6). – Р. 1666. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22415
Michalopoulos, P. et al. Introducing STEM to primary education students with Arduino and S4A // Innovating STEM Education: Increased Engagement and Best Practices, 2022. – Р. 77-87.
Aytekin, A., Sönmez Çakır, F., Yücel, Y., & Kulaözü, İ. Coding science directed to future and some methods to be available and coding learned // Eurasian Journal of Social and Economic Research, 2018. № 5(5). – Р. 24-41.
Ibashova, A., & Belessova, D. Information and educational environment for Scratch and robotics courses in elementary school: features and relevance // Sciences of Europe, 2022. № 107. – Р. 82-89. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7479758
Plaza, P. et al. STEM and educational robotics using Scratch // 2019 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 2019. – Р. 330-336.
Yamamori, K. Classroom practices of low-cost STEM education using Scratch // Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 2019. № 4(6). – Р. 192-198. https://dx.doi.org/10.26500/JARSSH-04-2019-0601
Çakir, N. K., & Güven, G. Effect of 5E learning model on academic achievement and attitude towards the science course: A meta-analysis study // Cukurova university faculty of education journal, 2019. № 48(2). – Р. 1111-1140.
Yulianti, D., Sugianto, S., & Ngafidin, K. M. Scratch assisted physics learning with a STEM approach in the pandemic era to develop 21st Century learning skills // Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 2022. № 11(1). – Р. 185-194. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.32607
Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. Preparing Greek pre-service kindergarten teachers to promote creativity: Opportunities using Scratch and Makey Makey // Children’s Creative Inquiry in STEM, 2022. – Р. 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94724-8_20
Minnakhmitova, L., Ibashova, A., & Belesova, D. The possibilities of using ispring in teaching Scratch programming to elementary school students // Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 2023. № 10(1). – Р. 143-156.
Koray, A., & Duman, F. G. Subject-oriented educational robotics applications with Arduino in science teaching: digital dynamometer activity in accordance with 5E instractional model // Science Activities, 2022. № 59(4). – Р. 168-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2022.2093824
Wei, X. et al. The effectiveness of partial pair programming on elementary school students’ computational thinking skills and self-efficacy // Computers & Education, 2021. № 160. – Р. 104023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104023
References
Aytekin, A., Sönmez Çakır, F., Yücel, Y., & Kulaözü, İ. (2018). Coding science directed to future and some methods to be available and coding learned. Eurasian Journal of Social and Economic Research, 5(5), 24-41.
Bozkurt, O., & Pasabeyoglu, N. G. (2023). The effect of Lego robotics coding on primary school students' academic achievement and attitudes of science. Education Quarterly Reviews, 6(1), 271.
Çakir, N. K., & Güven, G. (2019). Effect of 5E learning model on academic achievement and attitude towards the science course: A meta-analysis study. Cukurova university faculty of education journal, 48(2), 1111-1140.
Castro, A. et al. (2022). Robotics education in STEM units: Breaking down barriers in rural multigrade schools. Sensors, 23(1), Article 387. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23010387
Corral Abad, E. et al. (2021). Improving the learning of engineering students with interactive teaching applications. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29(6), 1666. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22415 с. 1666
Ibashova, A., & Belessova, D. (2022). Information and educational environment for Scratch and robotics courses in elementary school: features and relevance. Sciences of Europe, 107, 82-89. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7479758
Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2022). Preparing Greek pre-service kindergarten teachers to promote creativity: Opportunities using Scratch and Makey Makey. Children’s Creative Inquiry in STEM, 347-364. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-94724-8_20
Koray, A., & Duman, F. G. (2022). Subject-oriented educational robotics applications with Arduino in science teaching: digital dynamometer activity in accordance with 5E instractional model. Science Activities, 59(4), 168-179. https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2022.2093824
Madariaga, L. et al. (2023). Offline and online user experience of gamified robotics for introducing computational thinking: Comparing engagement, game mechanics and coding motivation. Computers & Education, 193, Article 104664. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104664
Makhambetova, Z. T., & Magauova, A. S. (2023). Professional competences in the context of inclusive education: A model design. European Journal of Educational Research, 12(1), 202. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.1.201 c. 202
Michalopoulos, P. et al. (2022). Introducing STEM to primary education students with Arduino and S4A. Innovating STEM Education: Increased Engagement and Best Practices, 77-87.
Minnakhmitova, L., Ibashova, A., & Belesova, D. (2023). The possibilities of using ispring in teaching Scratch programming to elementary school students. Avrasya Sosyal ve Ekonomi Araştırmaları Dergisi, 10(1), 143-156.
Mynbayeva, A. (2023). Ot klassicheskoj pedagogiki k obrazovaniju 4.0: preemstvennost' metodologii, processov i principov [From classical pedagogy to Education 4.0: continuity of methodology, approaches and principles]. Bulletin of KazNU. The pedagogical sciences series, 2(71), 14. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.26577/JES.2022.v71.i2.02
Mukhasheva, M. et al. (2023). The impact of educational robotics on cognitive outcomes in primary students: A meta-analysis of recent studies. European Journal of Educational Research, 12(4), 1684. https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.12.4.1683
Plaza, P. et al. (2019). STEM and educational robotics using Scratch. 2019 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 330-336.
Wei, X. et al. (2021). The effectiveness of partial pair programming on elementary school students’ computational thinking skills and self-efficacy. Computers & Education, 160, 104023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104023
Yamamori, K. (2019). Classroom practices of low-cost STEM education using Scratch. Journal of Advanced Research in Social Sciences and Humanities, 4(6), 192-198. https://dx.doi.org/10.26500/JARSSH-04-2019-0601
Yu, X., Gutierrez-Garcia, M. A., & Soto-Varela, R. (2023). Are educational robots any good for communicative English learning for primary school students? Texto Livre, 16, Article e41469. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-3652.2023.41469
Yulianti, D., Sugianto, S., & Ngafidin, K. M. (2022). Scratch assisted physics learning with a STEM approach in the pandemic era to develop 21st Century learning skills. Jurnal Pendidikan IPA Indonesia, 11(1), 185-194. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v11i1.32607
