Teaching CS1 with karel the robot in Java
Proceedings of the thirty-second SIGCSE technical symposium on Computer Science Education
Facilitating active learning with inexpensive mobile robots
CCSC '01 Proceedings of the sixth annual CCSC northeastern conference on The journal of computing in small colleges
Core LEGO MINDSTORMS Programming
Core LEGO MINDSTORMS Programming
Mini-languages: a way to learn programming principles
Education and Information Technologies
Use of Lego mindstorm kits in introductory programming classes: a tutorial
Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges
Teaching problem solving, computing, and information technology with robots
Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges
A road map for teaching introductory programming using LEGO© mindstorms robots
Working group reports from ITiCSE on Innovation and technology in computer science education
Quantitative analysis of the effects of robots on introductory Computer Science education
Journal on Educational Resources in Computing (JERIC)
A study of the difficulties of novice programmers
ITiCSE '05 Proceedings of the 10th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education
Teaching (with) Robots in Secondary Schools: Some New and Not-So-New Pedagogical Problems
ICALT '05 Proceedings of the Fifth IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies
Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas
Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas
Hi-index | 0.00 |
This study compared the effects of using physical robots (LEGO Mindstorms) and robot simulators (LEGO Mindstorms Simulator, LMS) in teaching novice programming concepts. A quasi-experiment design was implemented in this study. Four classes of high school students, totaling 151 students, participated in the study. Two classes of 76 students used the physical robots to learn programming, whereas the other two classes of 75 students used LMS. The students' post-experiment achievement tests, replies on questionnaires, and focus group interview data were collected and analyzed. The findings of the study were: (1) no significant difference was found on students' performance between the physical robot group and the simulator group, (2) the physical robot group demonstrated more positive attitudes toward the learning activities, and (3) the physical robot group indicated that they could better imagine the program behaviors.