Skip to main content
Disciplines
Automotive Business IT + Informatics Construction + Real Estate Electrical Engineering + Electronics Energy + Sustainability Insurance + Risk Finance + Banking Management + Leadership Marketing + Sales Mechanical Engineering + Materials
Events
DE
EN
Books
Journals
Topic Page
Marketing
Start single access now
Access for companies
EXTENDED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Technology, Knowledge and Learning
Published in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning 2/2019

09-08-2018 | Original research

How to Implement Educational Robotics’ Programs in Italian Schools: A Brief Guideline According to an Instructional Design Point of View

Authors: G. B. Ronsivalle, A. Boldi, V. Gusella, C. Inama, S. Carta

Published in: Technology, Knowledge and Learning | Issue 2/2019

Log in

Activate our intelligent search to find suitable subject content or patents.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Nowadays, children and teenagers use technology products in an increasingly passive way. As simple consumers they cannot benefit from the opportunities of designing technology, which has a learning value. Educational Robotics (ER) programs are particularly effective in delivering contents of difficult disciplines: they can re-establish a balance between the learners and the technological devices, because the learners act as programmers and can develop their computational thinking. Therefore, we believe the school should upgrade its teaching methods, through the implementation of ER programs. This could be done without introducing a new subject, since technology could be considered like an interdisciplinary application module within pre-existing subjects. In this paper, we provide an overview of ER programs to share a practical guidance with those who want to plan educational workshops in their institutes. First, we analyze ER theoretical and epistemological fundamentals: ER has roots in recent and classic disciplines (psychology, cybernetics, robotics, cognitive science…), but it is also consistent with the principles of widely recognized pedagogies. Then, we describe successful Italian projects with a focus on regulations concerning ER programs. As a result of this analysis, we propose a brief guideline on the following topics: (a) needs analysis, (b) target segmentation, (c) objectives, (d) laboratory setting, (e) contents definition, (f) activities, (g) evaluation tools. Finally, we show that designing learning paths according to this method could also promote a more rigorous (and not only qualitative) evaluation, and then enhance both research and practice in this field.
previous article Educational Robotics for Inclusive Education
next article Implementation and Assessment Methodologies of Teachers’ Training Courses for STEM Activities

Dont have a licence yet? Then find out more about our products and how to get one now:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

inform now
Footnotes
1
D. M. 11th March, 2016, n. 157.
 
2
C (2014) 9952, 17th December, 2014.
 
3
C. M. 21th May, 2002, n. 5; C.M. 28th October, 2002, n.116.
 
4
D. M. 19th October, 2016, n. 797.
 
Literature
Ackermann, E. K. (1996). Perspective-taking and object construction: Two keys to learning. In Y. Kafai & M. Resnick (Eds.), Constructionism in practice: Designing, thinking, and learning in a digital world (pp. 25–37). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Agostini, A., Micucci, D., & Rolandi, A. (2014). La robotica educativa: Un’esperienza condotta nelle scuole primarie. Nuovi Processi e Paradigmi per la Didattica (pp. 551–560). Napoli: AICA–Università degli Studi di Napoli.
AICA (2012). Informatica per la didattica. In DIDAMATICA 2012–Informatica per la didattica. Università degli Studi di Bari, Bari.
AICA (2014). Nuovi Processi e Paradigmi per la Didattica. In DIDAMATICA 2014—Nuovi Processi e Paradigmi per la Didattica. Università degli Studi di Napoli, Napoli.
AICA (2016). Innovazione: sfida comune di scuola, università, ricerca e impresa. In DIDAMATICA 2016—Innovazione: sfida comune di scuola, università, ricerca e impresa. Università degli Studi di Udine, Udine.
Alimisis, D. (2012). Exploring paths to integrate robotics in science and technology education: From teacher training courses to school classes. International Journal of Robots, Education and Art, 2(2), 16–23.CrossRef
Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2012). Evaluating the role of collaboration scripts as group guiding tools in activities of Educational Robotics. Paper presented at the 2012. In 12th IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies, Rome, Italy.
Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers and Education, 58, 978–988.CrossRef
Bers, M.U., Ponte, I., Juelich, C., Viera, A. & Schenker, J. (2002). Teachers as Designers: Integrating Robotics in Early Childhood Education. Information technology in childhood education annual, 2002 (1), 123–145. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved October 11, 2017 from https://​www.​learntechlib.​org/​p/​8850/​.
Besio S., Caprino F., & Laudanna E. (2008). Profiling robot-mediated play for children with disabilities through ICF-CY: The example of the european project IROMEC. In: Miesenberger K., Klaus J., Zagler W., Karshmer A. (eds) Computers Helping People with Special Needs. ICCHP 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5105. Springer, Berlin.
Bhargava, R. (2002). Designing a computational construction kit for the blind and visually impaired (Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
Bley, S. J., Hametner, M., Dimitrova, A., Ruech, R., De Rocchi, A., Gschwend, E., & Umpfenbach, K. (2017). Smarter, greener, more inclusive? Indicators to support the Europe 2020 strategy, 2017 (ed).
Bloom, B., Krathwohl, D., & Masia, B. (1984). Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.
Cejka, E., Rogers, C., & Portsmore, M. (2006). Kindergarten robotics: Using robotics to motivate math, science, and engineering literacy in elementary school. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22(4), 711–722.
Celli, L. M., & Young, N. D. (2017). Contemporary pedagogy for the adult learning. Pupil: International Journal of Teaching, Education and Learning., 1(4), 67–77.
Censis. (2017). 51° Rapporto sulla situazione sociale del Paese. Angeli.
Cilliers, E. J. (2017). The challenge of teaching Generation Z. People: International Journal of Social Sciences, 3(1), 188–198.
Claparède, E. (1971). L’educazione funzionale. Firenze: Giunti Bemporad Marzocco.
Dauksevicuite, I. (2016). Unlocking the full potential of digital native learners. Mc Graw Hill Education handouts: Henley Business School.
Dautenhahn, K. (1999). Robots as social actors: Aurora and the case of autism. In Proceedings CT99, the third international cognitive technology conference, San Francisco (Vol. 359, p. 374).
Dautenhahn, K., & Werry, I. (2004). Towards interactive robots in autism therapy: background, motivation and challenges. In Pragmatics and cognition, 12:1 2004 (pp. 1–35).
Decroly, O., Boon, G., & Valeri, M. (1973). Verso la scuola rinnovata. Firenze: La nuova Italia.
Denicolai, L., Grimaldi, R., & Palmieri, S. (2016). Un protocollo di osservazione nella scuola dell’infanzia: individuazione e potenziamento delle abilità prescolari In: Innovazione: sfida comune di scuola, università, ricerca e impresa. Udine, AICA—Università degli Studi di Udine.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Commission, European. (2014). Agenda Digitale Europea. Lussemburgo: Ufficio delle pubblicazioni dell’Unione europea.
Eguchi, A. (2015). Educational robotics as a learning tool for promoting rich environments for active learning (REALs). Handbook of Research on Educational Technology Integration and Active Learning (pp. 19–47). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Elkind, D. (2008). Forward. In M. U. Bers (Ed.), Block to robots (pp. xi–xiv). New York: Teachers College Press.
European Commission (2010). A Digital Agenda for Europe, COM (2010) 245 final, Brussels.
Ferrari, E., Robins, B., & Dautenhahn, K. (2009). Robot as a social mediator-a play scenario implementation with children with autism. In 8th international conference on interaction design and children, IDC (pp. 243–252).
Feuerstein, R., & Feuerstein, S. (1991). Mediated learning experience: A theoretical review. In R. Feuerstein, P. S. Klein, & A. J. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Mediated Learning Experience (MLE): Theoretical, Psychosocial and Learning Implications. London: Freund Publishing House Ltd.
Grimaldi, R. (2014). Robotica educativa, nuovi linguaggi, inclusione scolastica e sociale. In: Gallina, M. and Riverso, T. (Eds), Modelli culturali, socio-educativi e linguaggi. Riflessioni sul pensiero di Emanuele Riverso. Milano: Angeli, (pp. 124–128).
Grimaldi, R. (2015). A scuola con i robot. Innovazione didattica, sviluppo delle competenze e inclusione sociale. Il Mulino, Bologna.
Grimaldi, R., Grimaldi, B., Marcianò, G., Palmieri, S., & Siega, S. (2012). Robotica educativa e potenziamento delle abilità visuo-spaziali. Didamatica 2012—Informatica per la didattica (pp. 1–10). Bari: AICA—Università degli Studi di Bari.
Huang, R., & Price, J. K. (2016). ICT in education in global context. Springer: Berlin.
Kauppinen, M., Kiili, C., & Coiro, J. (2018). Experiences in digital video composition as sources of self- efficacy toward technology use. International Journal of Smart Education and Urban Society, 9, 1.CrossRef
Kazakoff, E. R., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M.U. (2013). The Effect of a Classroom-Based Intensive Robotics and Programming Workshop on Sequencing Ability in Early Childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(4), pp. 245–255.
Khine, M. S. (Ed.). (2017). Robotics in STEM education: redesigning the learning experience. Springer.
Kolberg, E., & Orlev, N. (2001). Robotics learning as a tool for integrating science-technology, curriculum in K-12 schools. In Paper presented at the 31st ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Reno.
Kozulin, A., Gindis, B., Ageyev, V. S., & Miller, S. M. (Ed.) (2003). Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context. Cambridge.
Mager, R. F. (2004). Preparing instructional objectives. Mumbai: Jaico Pub. House.
Marcianò, G. (2013). Robotica educativa: un metodo per la didattica laboratoriale, Bricks, Giugno 3(2), (pp. 5–9).
Merino, E. (2013). mOway Italia: una nuova risorsa per la Robotica Educativa nelle scuole del I ciclo. Bricks, Giugno, 3(2), pp. 54–57.
Miller, D. P., Nourbakhsh, I. R., & Sigwart, R. (2008). Robots for education. In B. Siciliano & O. Khatib (Eds.), Springer handbook of robotics (pp. 1283–1301). New York: Springer.CrossRef
Montessori, M. (1950). La Scoperta del bambino. Garzanti Editore Milano.
Nourbakhsh, I. R., Hamner, E., Crowley, K., & Wilkinson, K. (2004). Formal measures of learning in a secondary school mobile robotics course. In Paper presented at the 2004 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, New Orleans.
Oppliger, D. (2002). Using FIRST LEGO league to enhance engineering education and to increase the pool of future engineering students (work in progress). In Paper presented at the 32nd ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, Boston.
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers and Powerful Ideas (2nd ed.). New York: Basicbooks.
Papert, S. (1986). Constructionism. [Massachusetts]: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Media Laboratory, Epistemology and Learning Group.
Pennazio, V. (2015). Disabilità, gioco e robotica nella scuola dell’infanzia. TD Tecnologie Didattiche, 23(3), 155–163.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRef
Redecker, C. (2017). European Framework for the Digital Competence of Educators: DigCompEdu (No. JRC107466). Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
Reed, D. K., & Vaughn, S. (2010). Reading interventions for older students. In T. A. Glover & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Response to intervention: Empowering all students to learn, a critical account of the science and practice (pp. 143–186). New York: Guilford Press.
Sklar, E., & Eguchi, A. (2004). RoboCupJunior—Four years later. In Proceedings of RoboCup-2004: Robot Soccer World Cup VIII.
Sklar, E., Eguchi, A., & Johnson, J. (2002). Examining the team robotics through RoboCupJunior. In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of Japan Society for Educational Technology.
Sklar, E., Eguchi, A., & Johnson, J. (2003). Scientific challenge award: robocupjunior-Learning with Educational Robotics. AI Magazine, 24(2), 43–46.
Strawhacker, A., & Bers, U. M. (2014). I want my robot to look for food: Comparing Kindergartner’s programming comprehension using tangible, graphic, and hybrid user interfaces. In International journal of technology and design education, 25(3), (pp. 293–319).
Metadata
Title
How to Implement Educational Robotics’ Programs in Italian Schools: A Brief Guideline According to an Instructional Design Point of View
Authors
G. B. Ronsivalle
A. Boldi
V. Gusella
C. Inama
S. Carta
Publication date
09-08-2018
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Technology, Knowledge and Learning / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 2211-1662
Electronic ISSN: 2211-1670
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9389-5

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Technology, Knowledge and Learning 2/2019 Go to the issue

Original research

Teacher Training in Educational Robotics: The ROBOESL Project Paradigm

Original research

EdTech Leaders’ Beliefs: How are K-5 Teachers Supported with the Integration of Computer Science in K-5 Classrooms?

Original research

Designing Robots for Special Needs Education

Original research

A Wide View on Gamification

Original research

Group Formation Techniques in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: A Systematic Literature Review

Original research

The Design Student Association “Etsidi-Design” as an Active Tool in the Participation of the Students in the Formal Education in the Degree in Engineering in Industrial Design and Product Development

Premium Partners

    Image Credits