Should We Use Educational Robots to Introduce Students to Computational Thinking? Insights From Two Experimental Studies

IF 5.1 2区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Pub Date : 2025-06-05 DOI:10.1111/jcal.70074

Kevin Sigayret, Nathalie Blanc, André Tricot

{"title":"Should We Use Educational Robots to Introduce Students to Computational Thinking? Insights From Two Experimental Studies","authors":"Kevin Sigayret, Nathalie Blanc, André Tricot","doi":"10.1111/jcal.70074","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Teaching programming and computational thinking is becoming a major issue in many education systems. Numerous approaches are possible, but very few studies compare these different ways of implementing programming and computational thinking learning.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>We compared three ways of teaching programming and computational thinking to grade 5 students: unplugged activities, block-based programming software and educational robotics.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Method</h3>\n \n <p>This paper re-exploits previously published data on the comparison between unplugged and plugged-in (using the block-based programming software Scratch) learning, by adding a new experimental condition centred on the use of Scratch associated with an educational robot, and incorporates new mixed model statistical analyses. Based on these results, we conducted a second experiment to explore the cognitive load associated with a learning situation on Scratch, with or without an educational robot.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Our first experiment revealed that novice grade 5 students using Scratch without a robot learned better programming concepts and skills, compared to students involved in unplugged activities or using Scratch with a robot. Experiment 2 showed that the detrimental effect of using a robot is probably due to an increased extraneous cognitive load in the Scratch with a robot condition. However, robots had a large positive effect on students' motivation. Gender differences were also observed, as girls showed slightly better learning performance but were less motivated than boys when using Scratch without a robot.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Overall, these results provide key elements for understanding the advantages and disadvantages of using robots to sustain computational thinking learning in children.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"41 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.70074","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.70074","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Teaching programming and computational thinking is becoming a major issue in many education systems. Numerous approaches are possible, but very few studies compare these different ways of implementing programming and computational thinking learning.

Objectives

We compared three ways of teaching programming and computational thinking to grade 5 students: unplugged activities, block-based programming software and educational robotics.

Method

This paper re-exploits previously published data on the comparison between unplugged and plugged-in (using the block-based programming software Scratch) learning, by adding a new experimental condition centred on the use of Scratch associated with an educational robot, and incorporates new mixed model statistical analyses. Based on these results, we conducted a second experiment to explore the cognitive load associated with a learning situation on Scratch, with or without an educational robot.

Results

Our first experiment revealed that novice grade 5 students using Scratch without a robot learned better programming concepts and skills, compared to students involved in unplugged activities or using Scratch with a robot. Experiment 2 showed that the detrimental effect of using a robot is probably due to an increased extraneous cognitive load in the Scratch with a robot condition. However, robots had a large positive effect on students' motivation. Gender differences were also observed, as girls showed slightly better learning performance but were less motivated than boys when using Scratch without a robot.

Conclusions

Overall, these results provide key elements for understanding the advantages and disadvantages of using robots to sustain computational thinking learning in children.

查看原文本刊更多论文

我们应该使用教育机器人向学生介绍计算思维吗？来自两项实验研究的见解

编程和计算思维教学已成为许多教育系统的主要问题。有许多可能的方法，但很少有研究比较这些不同的实现编程和计算思维学习的方法。我们比较了五年级学生编程和计算思维的三种教学方式：不插电活动、基于块的编程软件和教育机器人。方法本文重新利用先前发表的关于不插电和插电（使用基于块的编程软件Scratch）学习的比较数据，通过增加一个新的实验条件，以使用Scratch与教育机器人相关联，并结合新的混合模型统计分析。基于这些结果，我们进行了第二个实验，以探索与Scratch学习情境相关的认知负荷，有或没有教育机器人。我们的第一个实验表明，与不插电活动或与机器人一起使用Scratch的学生相比，初级五年级学生使用没有机器人的Scratch学习了更好的编程概念和技能。实验2表明，使用机器人的不利影响可能是由于在机器人抓挠条件下增加了外部认知负荷。然而，机器人对学生的学习动机有很大的积极影响。性别差异也被观察到，在没有机器人的情况下使用Scratch时，女孩的学习表现略好，但动力不如男孩。总的来说，这些结果为理解使用机器人来维持儿童计算思维学习的利弊提供了关键要素。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Computer Assisted Learning EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-

CiteScore

9.70

自引率

6.00%

发文量

116

期刊介绍： The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope