Systematic Review on Which Analytics and Learning Methodologies Are Applied in Primary and Secondary Education in the Learning of Robotics Sensors
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Research Questions
2.2. Search Strategy
2.3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
2.4. Trial Flow/Selection Process
3. Results
3.1. Study Descriptors
3.2. Main Data and Conclusions of Each Study
4. Discussion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Martín-Páez, T.; Aguilera, D.; Perales-Palacios, F.J.; Vílchez-González, J.M. What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education? A review of literature. Sci. Educ. 2019, 103, 799–822. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Francis, K.; Burke, C.-A.; Shanahan, M.-C. A Horizon of Possibilities: A Definition of STEM Education. In Proceedings of the STEM 2014 Conference, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 12–15 July 2014; pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Honey, M.A.; Pearson, G.; Schweingruber, H. STEM Integration in K-12 Education: Status, Prospects, and an Agenda for Research; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2014; Volume 500, ISBN 0309297966. [Google Scholar]
- Vasquez, C. STEM lesson essentials, grades 3–8: Integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Teach. Educ. Pract. 2013, 26, 358–364. [Google Scholar]
- White, D.W. What is STEM education and why is it important. Fla. Assoc. Teach. Educ. J. 2014, 1, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
- California Mathematics Council STEM Resources. Available online: https://www.cmc-math.org/stem (accessed on 19 December 2020).
- Baran, E.; Bilici, S.C.; Mesutoglu, C.; Ocak, C. Moving STEM beyond schools: Students’ perceptions about an out-of-school STEM education program. Int. J. Educ. Math. Sci. Technol. 2016, 4, 9–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Kelley, T.R.; Knowles, J.G. A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2016, 3, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moore, T.J.; Stohlmann, M.S.; Wang, H.H.; Tank, K.M.; Glancy, A.W.; Roehrig, G.H. Implementation and integration of engineering in K-12 STEM education. In Engineering in Pre-College Settings: Synthesizing Research, Policy, and Practices; Purdue University Press: West Lafayette, IN, USA, 2014; pp. 35–60. ISBN 9781612493572. [Google Scholar]
- García-Peñalvo, F.J. Innovative Teaching Approaches to Attract, Engage, and Maintain Women in STEM: W-STEM Project. 2019. Available online: http://repositorio.grial.eu/handle/grial/1787 (accessed on 15 October 2020).
- Screpanti, L.; Cesaretti, L.; Marchetti, L.; Baione, A.; Natalucci, I.N.; Scaradozzi, D. An educational robotics activity to promote gender equality in STEM education. In Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Information, Communication Technologies in Education (ICICTE 2018), Chania, Greece, 14–18 November 2018; pp. 336–346. [Google Scholar]
- Naizer, G.; Hawthorne, M.J.; Henley, T.B. Narrowing the gender gap: Enduring changes in middle school students’ attitude toward math, science and technology. J. STEM Educ. Innov. Res. 2014, 15, 29–34. [Google Scholar]
- Liao, C.; Motter, J.L.; Patton, R.M. Tech-savvy girls: Learning 21st-century skills through STEAM digital artmaking. Art Educ. 2016, 69, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- English, L.D. STEM education K-12: Perspectives on integration. Int. J. STEM Educ. 2016, 3, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marginson, S.; Tytler, R.; Freeman, B.; Roberts, K. STEM: Country comparisons international comparisons of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. Final report. Aust. Counc. Learn. Acad. Melb. Vic 2013, 178. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30059041 (accessed on 15 October 2020).
- Romero, S.; Aláez, M.; Amo, D.; Fonseca, D. Systematic review of how engineering schools around the world are deploying the 2030 agenda. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trad, S.P.; Hadgraft, R.G.; Gardner, A.P. Sustainability invisibility: Are we hooked on technical rationality? In Proceedings of the 46th SEFI Annual Conference 2018: Creativity, Innovation and Entrepreneurship for Engineering Education Excellence, Copenhagen, Danish, 17–21 September 2018; pp. 479–486. [Google Scholar]
- Gumaelius, L.; Kolmos, A. The future of engineering education: Where are we heading? In SEFI 47th Annual Conference: Varietas Delectat, Proceedings of the Complexity is the New Normality, Budapest, Hungary, 16–20 September 2019; Nagy, B.V., Murphy, M., Järvinen, H.-M., Kálmán, A., Eds.; SEFI, European Association for Engineering Education: Brussels, Belgium, 2020; pp. 1663–1672. [Google Scholar]
- Fan, S.C.; Yu, K.C. How an integrative STEM curriculum can benefit students in engineering design practices. Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ. 2017, 27, 107–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aldemir, J.; Kermani, H. Integrated STEM curriculum: Improving educational outcomes for Head Start children. Early Child Dev. Care 2017, 187, 1694–1706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thibaut, L.; Ceuppens, S.; De Loof, H.; De Meester, J.; Goovaerts, L.; Struyf, A.; Boeve-de Pauw, J.; Dehaene, W.; Deprez, J.; De Cock, M.; et al. Integrated STEM education: A systematic review of instructional practices in secondary education. Eur. J. STEM Educ. 2018, 3, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burrows, A.; Slater, T. A proposed integrated STEM framework for contemporary teacher preparation. Teach. Educ. Pract. 2015, 28, 318–331. [Google Scholar]
- Stohlmann, M.; Moore, T.; Roehrig, G. Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. J. Pre-Coll. Eng. Educ. Res. 2012, 2, 28–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- West, J.; Vadiee, N.; McMahon, A.; Lake, K.; Ray, B.; Billie, T. From classroom Arduinos to missions on Mars: Making STEM education accessible and effective through remotely operated robotics. In Proceedings of the ISEC 2017 7th IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference, Princeton, NJ, USA, 11 March 2017; pp. 88–95. [Google Scholar]
- Harris, C.A.; Guerri, L.; Mircic, S.; Reining, Z.; Amorim, M.; Jović, Ð.; Wallace, W.; DeBoer, J.; Gage, G.J. Neurorobotics workshop for high school students promotes competence and confidence in computational neuroscience. Front. Neurorobot. 2020, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Taylor, C.P. Why is a STEAM curriculum perspective crucial to the 21st century? In Proceedings of the 14th Annual conference of the Australian Council for Educational Research, Brisbane, Australia, 7–9 August 2016; pp. 89–93. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, C.; Watson, J. Does the rise of STEM education mean the demise of sustainability education? Aust. J. Environ. Educ. 2019, 35, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vega, J.; Cañas, J.M. PiBot: An open low-cost robotic platform with camera for STEM education. Electronics 2018, 7, 430. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Nugent, G.C.; Barker, B.; Grandgenett, N. The impact of educational robotics on student STEM learning, attitudes, and workplace skills. In Robotics: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications; IGI Global: Hershey, PA, USA, 2013; Volume 3, pp. 1442–1459. ISBN 9781466646087. [Google Scholar]
- Pentland, A.S.; Choudhury, T. Face recognition for smart environments. Computer (Long. Beach. Calif.) 2000, 33, 50–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Timms, M.J. Letting artificial intelligence in education out of the box: Educational cobots and smart classrooms. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 2016, 26, 701–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahmouni, A.; Aharrane, N.; El Moutaouakil, K.; Satori, K. A face recognition based biometric solution in education. Pattern Recognit. Image Anal. 2018, 28, 758–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Williamson, B. Digital education governance: Data visualization, predictive analytics, and ‘real-time’ policy instruments. J. Educ. Policy 2016, 31, 123–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Karaman, S.; Anders, A.; Boulet, M.; Connor, J.; Gregson, K.; Guerra, W.; Guldner, O.; Mohamoud, M.; Plancher, B.; Shin, R.; et al. Project-based, collaborative, algorithmic robotics for high school students: Programming self-driving race cars at MIT. In Proceedings of the ISEC 2017 7th IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference, Princeton, NJ, USA, 11 March 2017; pp. 195–203. [Google Scholar]
- González, E.; De La Pena, A.; Cortés, F.; Molano, D.; Baron, B.; Gualteros, N.; Páez, J.; Parra, C. Robotic theater: An architecture for competency based learning. Proc. Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput. 2020, 1023, 126–137. [Google Scholar]
- Cath, C.; Wachter, S.; Mittelstadt, B.; Taddeo, M.; Floridi, L. Artificial intelligence and the ‘Good Society’: The US, EU, and UK approach. Sci. Eng. Ethics 2018, 24, 505–528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- West, D.M. The Future of Work: Robots, AI, and Automation; Brookings Institution Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2018; ISBN 9780815732945. [Google Scholar]
- Madakam, S.; Holmukhe, R.M.; Kumar Jaiswal, D. The future digital work force: Robotic process automation (RPA). J. Inf. Syst. Technol. Manag. 2019, 16, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johal, W.; Robu, O.; Dame, A.; Magnenat, S.; Mondada, F. Augmented Robotics for Learners: A Case Study on Optics. In Proceedings of the 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, RO-MAN 2019, New Delhi, India, 14–18 October 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Pitt, J. Blurring the boundaries—STEM education and education for sustainable development. Des. Technol. Educ. 2009, 14, 37–48. [Google Scholar]
- Nguyen, T.P.L.; Nguyen, T.H.; Tran, T.K. STEM education in secondary schools: Teachers’ perspective towards sustainable development. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Del Cerro Velázquez, F.; Rivas, F.L. Education for sustainable development in STEM (technical drawing): Learning approach and method for SDG 11 in classrooms. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Narahara, T.; Kobayashi, Y. Personalizing homemade bots with plug & play AI for STEAM education. In Proceedings of the SIGGRAPH Asia 2018 Technical Briefs, SA 2018, New York, NY, USA, 4–7 December 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Altin, H.; Pedaste, M. Learning approaches to applying robotics in science education. J. Balt. Sci. Educ. 2013, 12, 365–377. [Google Scholar]
- Bascou, N.A.; Menekse, M. Robotics in K-12 formal and informal learning environments: A review of literature. In Proceedings of the ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, New Orleans, LA, USA, 26–29 June 2016; Volume 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Bers, M.U.; Seddighin, S.; Sullivan, A. Ready for robotics: Bringing together the T and E of STEM in early childhood teacher education. J. Technol. Teach. Educ. 2013, 21, 355–377. [Google Scholar]
- Kay, J.S.; Moss, J.G. Using robots to teach programming to K-12 teachers. In Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, Seattle, WA, USA, 3–6 October 2012; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Eguchi, A. What is Educational Robotics? Theories behind it and practical implementation. In Proceedings of the Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2010, San Diego, CA, USA, 29 March–2 April 2010; pp. 4006–4014. [Google Scholar]
- Alimisis, D. Educational robotics: Open questions and new challenges. Themes Sci. Technol. Educ. 2013, 6, 63–71. [Google Scholar]
- Mikropoulos, T.A.; Bellou, I. Educational robotics as mindtools. Themes Sci. Technol. Educ. 2013, 6, 5–14. [Google Scholar]
- Scaradozzi, D.; Cesaretti, L.; Screpanti, L.; Mangina, E. Identification of the students learning process during education robotics activities. Front. Robot. AI 2020, 7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Karalekas, G.; Vologiannidis, S.; Kalomiros, J. Europa: A case study for teaching sensors, data acquisition and robotics via a ROS-based educational robot. Sensors 2020, 20, 2469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ackermann, E. Piaget’s constructivism, Papert’s constructionism: What’s the difference. Future Learn. Group Publ. 2001, 5, 438. [Google Scholar]
- Alimisis, A.D.; Kynigos, C. Constructionism and robotics in education. In Teacher Education on Robotics-Enhanced Constructivist Pedagogical Methods; European Project TERECoP (2006-9); School of Pedagogical and Technological Education: Athens, Greece, 2009; Available online: http://www.terecop.eu/downloads/chapter_1.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2020).
- Daniela, L.; Lytras, M.D. Educational robotics for inclusive education. Technol. Knowl. Learn. 2019, 24, 219–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Matarić, M.J. Robotics education for all ages. Proc. AAAI Spring Symp. Tech. Rep. 2004, 1, 14–16. [Google Scholar]
- Plaza, P.; Carro, G.; Blazquez, M.; Sancristobal, E.; Castro, M.; Garcia-Loro, F. Crumble Day to introduce robotics. In Proceedings of the Frontiers in Education Conference, FIE, Covington, KY, USA, 16–19 October 2019; Volume 2018. [Google Scholar]
- Ben-Ari, M. Constructivism in computer science education. SIGCSE Bull. Assoc. Comput. Mach. Spec. Interes. Group Comput. Sci. Educ. 1998, 30, 257–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boudourides, M. Constructivism, education, science, and technology. Can. J. Learn. Technol. Rev. Can. L’apprentissage Technol. 2003, 29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jawaid, I.; Javed, M.Y.; Jaffery, M.H.; Akram, A.; Safder, U.; Hassan, S. Robotic system education for young children by collaborative-project-based learning. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2020, 28, 178–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aicardi, C.; Akintoye, S.; Fothergill, B.T.; Guerrero, M.; Klinker, G.; Knight, W.; Klüver, L.; Morel, Y.; Morin, F.O.; Stahl, B.C.; et al. Ethical and social aspects of neurorobotics. Sci. Eng. Ethics 2020, 26, 2533–2546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arbib, M.A.; Metta, G.; van der Smagt, P. Neurorobotics: From Vision to Action. In Springer Handbook of Robotics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; pp. 1453–1480. [Google Scholar]
- Rothe, I. Work in progress: Starter-project for first semester students to survey their engineering studies. In Proceedings of the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, Tallinn, Estonia, 18–20 March 2015; Volume 2015, pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Sklirou, T.S. Programming in secondary education: Applications, new trends and challenges. In Proceedings of the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, Athens, Greece, 25–28 April 2017; pp. 580–585. [Google Scholar]
- Hartigan, C.; Hademenos, G. Introducing ROAVEE: An Advanced STEM-based project in aquatic robotics. Phys. Teach. 2019, 57, 17–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fernández-Llamas, C.; Conde, M.Á.; Rodríguez-Sedano, F.J.; Rodríguez-Lera, F.J.; Matellán-Olivera, V. Analysing the computational competences acquired by K-12 students when lectured by robotic and human teachers: Can a robot teach computational principles to pre-university students? Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2020, 12, 1009–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Filvà, D.A.; Forment, M.A.; García-Peñalvo, F.J.; Escudero, D.F.; Casañ, M.J. Clickstream for learning analytics to assess students’ behavior with Scratch. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2019, 93, 673–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alvarez Caro, I. VEX robotics: STEM program and robotics competition expansion into Europe. In Proceedings of the Communications in Computer and Information Science, CCIS, Prague, Czech Republic, 15–17 June 2011; Volume 161, pp. 10–16. [Google Scholar]
- Eguchi, A. RoboCupJunior for promoting STEM education, 21st century skills, and technological advancement through robotics competition. Rob. Auton. Syst. 2016, 75, 692–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chung, C.J.C.; Cartwright, C.; Cole, M. Assessing the Impact of an Autonomous Robotics Competition for STEM Education. J. STEM Educ. Innov. Res. 2014, 15, 24–34. [Google Scholar]
- Bazylev, D.; Margun, A.; Zimenko, K.; Kremlev, A.; Rukujzha, E. Participation in Robotics Competition as Motivation for Learning1. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 152, 835–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Calnon, M.; Gifford, C.M.; Agah, A. Robotics competitions in the classroom: Enriching graduate-level education in computer science and engineering. Glob. J. Eng. Educ. 2012, 14, 6–13. [Google Scholar]
- Serrano Pérez, E.; Juárez López, F. An ultra-low cost line follower robot as educational tool for teaching programming and circuit’s foundations. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2019, 27, 288–302. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balaji, M.; Balaji, V.; Chandrasekaran, M.; Khan, M.K.A.A.; Elamvazuthi, I. Robotic Training to Bridge School Students with Engineering. Proc. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2015, 76, 27–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bellas, F.; Naya, M.; Varela, G.; Llamas, L.; Prieto, A.; Becerra, J.C.; Bautista, M.; Faiña, A.; Duro, R. The robobo project: Bringing educational robotics closer to real-world applications. Proc. Adv. Intell. Syst. Comput. 2018, 630, 226–237. [Google Scholar]
- Rodriguez, M.C.; Gonzalez, M.A.C.; Alvarez, A.; Larranaga, M.; Mones, A.M.; Munoz-Merino, P.J.; Hernandez-Garcia, A.; Pastor, R.; Cruz-Benito, J.; Munoz, S.R.; et al. Learning analytics trends and challenges in engineering education: SNOLA special session. In Proceedings of the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, Islas Canarias, Spain, 17–20 April 2018; Volume 2018, pp. 2066–2070. [Google Scholar]
- Siemens, G. Learning analytics: Envisioning a research discipline and a domain of practice. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge, LAK, Vancouver, BC, Canada, 29 April–2 May 2012; Volume 1, pp. 4–8. [Google Scholar]
- Siemens, G. Learning Analytics. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Learning_analytics&oldid=380572143 (accessed on 15 October 2020).
- Blikstein, P. Using learning analytics to assess students’ behavior in open-ended programming tasks. ACM Int. Conf. Proc. Ser. 2011, 110–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, L.; Sy, A.; Liu, L.; Piech, C. Learning to represent student knowledge on programming exercises using deep learning. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM 2017), Wuhan, China, 25–28 June 2017; pp. 324–329. [Google Scholar]
- Bey, A.; Pérez-Sanagustín, M.; Broisin, J. Unsupervised Automatic Detection of Learners’ Programming Behavior. In Proceedings of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), Grosseto, Italy, 16–19 June 2019; Volume 11722 LNCS, pp. 69–82. [Google Scholar]
- Berland, M.; Martin, T.; Benton, T.; Petrick Smith, C.; Davis, D. Using learning analytics to understand the learning pathways of novice programmers. J. Learn. Sci. 2013, 22, 564–599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In A New Era in Global Health; Division for Sustainable Development Goals: New York, NY, USA, 2018.
- Siemens, G.; Baker, R.S.J.D. Learning analytics and educational data mining: Towards communication and collaboration. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, Lyon, France, 9–25 July 2012; pp. 252–254. [Google Scholar]
- Amo, D.; Alier, M.; Casan, M.J. The student’s progress snapshot a hybrid text and visual learning analytics dashboard. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 2018, 34, 990–1000. [Google Scholar]
- Chatti, M.A.; Dyckhoff, A.L.; Schroeder, U.; Thüs, H. A reference model for learning analytics. Int. J. Technol. Enhanc. Learn. 2012, 4, 318–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nasir, J.; Norman, U.; Johal, W.; Olsen, J.K.; Shahmoradi, S.; Dillenbourg, P. Robot Analytics: What Do Human-Robot Interaction Traces Tell Us About Learning? In Proceedings of the 2019 28th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, RO-MAN 2019, New Delhi, India, 14–18 October 2019; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- Hong, N.W.W.; Chew, E.; Sze-Meng, J.W. The review of educational robotics research and the need for real-world interaction analysis. In Proceedings of the 2016 14th International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision, ICARCV 2016, Phuket, Thailand, 13–15 November 2016; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Spikol, D.; Friesel, A.; Ehrenberg, N. Supporting Robotics Education in STEM with Learning Analytics. In Proceedings of the 5th Israeli Robotics Conference on Robotics, Hertzilya, Israel, 13–14 April 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Liao, C. From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary: An arts-integrated approach to STEAM education. Art Educ. 2016, 69, 44–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, Y.; Park, N. Development and application of STEAM teaching model based on the rube Goldberg’s invention. In Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; Volume 203 LNEE, pp. 693–698. ISBN 9789400756984. [Google Scholar]
- Conde, M.; Rodríguez-Sedano, F.J.; Fernández-Llamas, C.; Gonçalves, J.; Lima, J.; García-Peñalvo, F.J. Fostering STEAM through challenge-based learning, robotics, and physical devices: A systematic mapping literature review. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, K.C.; Wong, B.T.M. Trends of learning analytics in STE(A)M education: A review of case studies. Interact. Technol. Smart Educ. 2020, 17, 323–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madden, M.E.; Baxter, M.; Beauchamp, H.; Bouchard, K.; Habermas, D.; Huff, M.; Ladd, B.; Pearon, J.; Plague, G. Rethinking STEM education: An interdisciplinary STEAM curriculum. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2013, 20, 541–546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tarnoff, J. STEM to STEAM—Recognizing the value of creative skills in the competitiveness debate. Huffingt. Post 2010, 4. Available online: http://stematehs.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/46306554/STEM2STEAM_Creativity.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2020).
- Land, M.H. Full STEAM ahead: The benefits of integrating the arts into STEM. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2013, 20, 547–552. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- García-Peñalvo, F.J.; Cruz-Benito, J. Computational thinking in pre-university education. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality, Salamanca, Spain, 2–4 November 2016; pp. 13–17. [Google Scholar]
- Ulger, K. The effect of problem-based learning on the creative thinking and critical thinking disposition of students in visual arts education. Interdiscip. J. Probl. Learn. 2018, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lewis, T. Creativity—A framework for the design/problem solving discourse in technology education. J. Technol. Educ. 2005, 17, 35–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G.; Altman, D.; Antes, G.; Atkins, D.; Barbour, V.; Barrowman, N.; Berlin, J.A.; et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Boccia, S. PRISMA: An attempt to improve standards for reporting systematic review and meta-analysis. Ital. J. Public Health 2009, 6, 352–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moher, D.; Cook, D.J.; Eastwood, S.; Olkin, I.; Rennie, D.; Stroup, D.F. Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: The QUOROM statement. Onkologie 2000, 23, 597–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamioka, H. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (prisma-p) 2015 statement. Jpn. Pharmacol. Ther. 2019, 47, 1177–1185. [Google Scholar]
- Solomon, C.; Harvey, B.; Kahn, K.; Lieberman, H.; Miller, M.L.; Minsky, M.; Papert, A.; Silverman, B. History of Logo. Proc. ACM Program. Lang. 2020, 4, 1–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papert, S. What is Logo? Who needs it. Logo Philos. Implement. 1999. Available online: https://www.ecoo.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/What-is-Logo-And-Who-Needs-It.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2020).
- Hocker, M. A History of LEGO Education, Part 1: Strong Foundations. Available online: https://www.brothers-brick.com/2020/01/14/a-history-of-lego-education-part-1-strong-foundations-feature/ (accessed on 18 December 2020).
- Hocker, M. A History of LEGO Education, Part 2: Path to Mindstorms. Available online: https://www.brothers-brick.com/2020/01/31/a-history-of-lego-education-part-2-path-to-mindstorms-feature/ (accessed on 18 December 2020).
- Hocker, M. A History of LEGO Education, Part 3: Mindstorms over Matter. Available online: https://www.brothers-brick.com/2020/02/03/a-history-of-lego-education-part-3-mindstorms-over-matter-feature/ (accessed on 18 December 2020).
- Danahy, E.; Wang, E.; Brockman, J.; Carberry, A.; Shapiro, B.; Rogers, C.B. LEGO-based robotics in higher education: 15 years of student creativity. Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. 2014, 11, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plaza, P.; Sancristobal, E.; Carro, G.; Castro, M. Home-made robotic education, a new way to explore. In Proceedings of the IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON, Athens, Greece, 25–28 April 2017; pp. 132–136. [Google Scholar]
- Costa, V.; Santos, D.; Sousa, A. Squirlrob: A Do It Yourself Arduino and Smartphone Hardware and Software Platforms for Robotics Education. In Proceedings of the INTED2018 Proceedings, Valencia, Spain, 5–7 March 2018; Volume 1, pp. 413–422. [Google Scholar]
- Blikstein, P. Maker movement in education: History and prospects. Handb. Technol. Educ. 2018, 419–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Halverson, E.R.; Sheridan, K.M. The maker movement in education. Harv. Educ. Rev. 2014, 84, 495–504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Foukarakis, G.; Syrris, I. Designing and Implementing a Robotics Course for High School Students. In Proceedings of the INTED2018 Proceedings, Valencia, Spain, 5–7 March 2018; Volume 1, pp. 8886–8894. [Google Scholar]
- Camargo, C.; Patino, K.; Benavides, C.; Sofrony, J. Iflab: Development Laboratory Platform. In Proceedings of the Iceri2015: 8th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation, Seville, Spain, 16–18 November 2015; pp. 3468–3477, ISBN 2340-1095978-84-608-2657-6. [Google Scholar]
- Teixeira, G.; Bremm, L.; Dos Santos Roque, A. Educational robotics insertion in high schools to promote environmental awareness about E-Waste. In Proceedings of the 15th Latin American Robotics Symposium, 6th Brazilian Robotics Symposium and 9th Workshop on Robotics in Education, LARS/SBR/WRE 2018, Paraiba, Brazil, 6–10 November 2018; pp. 598–603. [Google Scholar]
- Fonseca Solano, P.; Hernandez Ruiz, I. Olympiad in educational robotics the experience in the use of ict in a university project to help costa rican youth to avoid drug consumption. In Proceedings of the 2018 44th Latin American Computing Conference, CLEI 2018, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 1–5 October 2018; pp. 769–773. [Google Scholar]
- Stiehm, S.; Köttgen, L.; Thelen, S.; Weisskopf, M.; Welter, F.; Richert, A.; Isenhardt, I.; Jeschke, S. Blended learning through integrating lego mindstorms NXT robots in engineering education. In Proceedings of the ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition, Proceedings (IMECE), Houston, TX, USA, 13–19 November 2015; Volume 15–2015. [Google Scholar]
- Benitti, F.B.V. Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Comput. Educ. 2012, 58, 978–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Renz, A.; Krishnaraja, S.; Gronau, E. Demystification of artificial intelligence in education—How much AI is really in the educational technology? Int. J. Learn. Anal. Artif. Intell. Educ. 2020, 2, 14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- David, J.L. Project-based learning. Educ. Leadersh. 2008, 65, 80. [Google Scholar]
- Ford, A.; Kluge, D. Positive and negative outcomes in creative project-based learning: Two EFL projects. J. Nanzan Acad. Soc. 2015, 98, 113–154. [Google Scholar]
- Tims, N.R.; Garcia, H.W.R. Project-Based Learning (PBL) in Adult English as a Second Language (ESL) Programs: Students’ Perspectives; ERIC: St Luce, QC, Canada, 2009; Volume 3391961, ISBN 9781109584240. [Google Scholar]
- Sumarni, W. The strengths and weaknesses of the implementation of project based learning: A review. Int. J. Sci. Res. 2015, 4, 478–484. [Google Scholar]
- Beckett, G. Teacher and student evaluations of project-based instruction. TESL Can. J. 2002, 19, 52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cheng, R.W.Y.; Lam, S.F.; Chan, J.C.Y. When high achievers and low achievers work in the same group: The roles of group heterogeneity and processes in project-based learning. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2008, 78, 205–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Han, S.; Capraro, R.; Capraro, M.M. How science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (Stem) project-based learning (Pbl) affects high, middle, and low achievers differently: The impact of student factors on achievement. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 2015, 13, 1089–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Database | Search Terms |
---|---|
WOS complete searches | Search 1: TS = (robotics AND sensors AND secondary) OR TS = (robotics AND sensors AND primary) |
Search 2: TS = (robotics AND sensors AND secondary) | |
Search 3: TS = (robotics AND sensors AND school) | |
Search 4: TS = (robotics AND sensors AND “high school”) | |
Search 5: TS = (robotics AND sensors AND education) | |
SCOPUS complete searches | Search 1: TITLE (robotics sensors) AND KEY (primary) |
Search 2: TITLE (robotics sensors) AND KEY (secondary) | |
Search 3: TITLE (robotics sensors) AND KEY (school) | |
Search 4: TITLE (robotics sensors) AND KEY (“high school”) | |
Search 5: TITLE (robotics sensors) AND KEY (education) |
Database | Search Terms |
---|---|
WOS complete searches | Search 1: TS = (robotics AND sensors AND learning AND analytics) |
Search 2: TS = (robotics AND learning AND analytics) | |
Search 3: TS = (robotics AND sensors AND analytics) | |
Search 4: TS = (robotics AND analytics) | |
SCOPUS complete searches | Search 1: TITLE (robotics sensors) AND KEY (“learning analytics”) |
Search 2: TITLE (robotics) AND KEY (“learning analytics”) | |
Search 3: TITLE (robotics sensors) AND KEY (analytics) | |
Search 4: TITLE (robotics) AND KEY (analytics) |
Reference | Research Country | Reference | Journal/Conference |
---|---|---|---|
[25,34,43,65] | USA | [63,64,110] | EDUCON |
[28,57,75,110] | Spain | [60,73] | Computer Applications in Engineering Education |
[52,64,114] | Greece | [35,75] | Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing |
[35,115] | Colombia | [111,114] | INTED |
[24,74] | India | [24,34] | ISEC |
[51] | Italy | [52] | Sensors |
[111] | Portugal | [51] | Frontiers in Robotics and AI |
[39] | Suisse | [25] | Frontiers in Neurorobotics |
[116] | Brazil | [65] | The Physics Teacher |
[117] | Costa Rica | [28] | Electronics |
[60] | Pakistan | [74] | Procedia Computer Science |
[117] | Latin American Computing Conference | ||
[115] | International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation | ||
[116] | Latin American Robotics Symposium | ||
[39] | IEEE Int. Conf. on Robot & Human Interactive Communication | ||
[57] | Frontiers in Education | ||
[43] | SIGGRAPH Asia | ||
[118] | International Mechanical Engineering Congress & Exposition | ||
(a) | (b) |
Authorship (Year) [Reference] | Type of Document | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | |
Balaji et al., (2015) [74] | X | ||||||||
Bellas et al., (2018) [75] | X | X | |||||||
Camargo et al., (2015) [115] | X | ||||||||
Costa, Santos, & Sousa, (2018) [111] | X | ||||||||
Fonseca & Hernandez, (2018) [117] | X | ||||||||
Foukarakis & Syrris, (2018) [114] | X | ||||||||
Gonzalez et al., (2020) [35] | X | ||||||||
Harris et al., (2020) [25] | X | ||||||||
Hartigan & Hademenos, (2019) [65] | X | ||||||||
Jawaid et al., (2020) [60] | X | X | X | ||||||
Johal et al., (2019) [39] | X | ||||||||
Karalekas, (2020) [52] | X | ||||||||
Karaman et al., (2017) [34] | X | X | |||||||
Narahara & Kobayashi, (2018) [43] | X | ||||||||
Plaza et al., (2017) [110] | X | ||||||||
Plaza, et al., (2019) [57] | X | ||||||||
Rothe, (2015) [63] | X | X | |||||||
Scaradozzi et al., (2020) [51] | X | ||||||||
Serrano & Juarez, (2019) [73] | X | ||||||||
Sklirou, (2017) [64] | X | X | X | ||||||
Stiehm et al., (2015) [118] | X | X | |||||||
Teixeira, Bremm, & Roque, (2018) [116] | X | ||||||||
Vega, & Canas, (2018) [28] | X | ||||||||
West et al., (2017) [24] | X |
Authorship [Reference] | Methodologies (Based on Table 3) | Main Results |
---|---|---|
Balaji et al. [74] | A |
|
Bellas et al. [75] | A-D |
|
Camargo et al. [115] | B |
|
Costa, Santos, & Sousa [111] | A |
|
Fonseca & Hernandez [117] | C |
|
Foukarakis & Syrris [114] | B |
|
Gonzalez et al. [35] | F |
|
Harris et al. [25] | A |
|
Hartigan & Hademenos [65] | B |
|
Jawaid et al. [60] | B-G-H |
|
Johal et al. [39] | A |
|
Karalekas [52] | A |
|
Karaman et al. [34] | B-C |
|
Narahara & Kobayashi [43] | A |
|
Plaza et al. [110] | A |
|
Plaza, et al. [57] | A |
|
Rothe [63] | A-B |
|
Scaradozzi et al. [51] | B |
|
Serrano & Juarez [73] | B |
|
Sklirou [64] | B-D-E |
|
Stiehm et al. [118] | D-I |
|
Teixeira, Bremm, & Roque [116] | A |
|
Vega, & Canas [28] | A |
|
West et al. [24] | A |
|
Authorship [Reference] | Methodologies (Based on Table 4) | Main Results |
---|---|---|
Hartigan and Hademenos [65] | A |
|
Scaradozzi et al. [51] | B |
|
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Amo, D.; Fox, P.; Fonseca, D.; Poyatos, C. Systematic Review on Which Analytics and Learning Methodologies Are Applied in Primary and Secondary Education in the Learning of Robotics Sensors. Sensors 2021, 21, 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21010153
Amo D, Fox P, Fonseca D, Poyatos C. Systematic Review on Which Analytics and Learning Methodologies Are Applied in Primary and Secondary Education in the Learning of Robotics Sensors. Sensors. 2021; 21(1):153. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21010153
Chicago/Turabian StyleAmo, Daniel, Paul Fox, David Fonseca, and César Poyatos. 2021. "Systematic Review on Which Analytics and Learning Methodologies Are Applied in Primary and Secondary Education in the Learning of Robotics Sensors" Sensors 21, no. 1: 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21010153