How Do Elementary Childhood Education Teachers Perceive Robotic Education in Kindergarten? A Qualitative Study

Year 2021, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 421 - 434, 01.04.2021

Feray Uğur Erdoğmuş

https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.47.8.2

Cited By: 6

Abstract

Robotic education is a popular topic in recent years. There are robotic education courses from pre-K to K-12 and these courses claim that they support STEM education. However, the teacher’s perception of these activities and needs for this education is the missing part of the chain. The aim of this study to find out the perceptions and suggestions of early childhood teachers about robotic education in kindergartens. This is a qualitative phenomenological study. Ten early childhood education (ECE) teachers were the participants of this study. A semi-structured interview form was developed and in-depth interviews were conducted to collect qualitative data. After that codes and themes were defined through the content analysis process. The results of this study showed that ECE teachers have a positive attitude towards robotic education in kindergarten. The current status of kindergarten, perceived advantages/disadvantages of robotic education, and ideal robotic education were the emerged themes during data analysis. According to results, ECE teachers thought that there are many needs like teacher training, materials, curriculum, infrastructure, technical support, and parent education for implementing robotic education properly in kindergartens. Also, teachers underlined that robotics education could be beneficial for motivation, knowledge, thinking skills, development, and psychomotor skills of children. Results also revealed ECE teachers’ suggestions about ideal robotic education in kindergartens. Suggestions for future studies and practitioners were also included.

Keywords

robotic education, early childhood education, qualitative study

References

• Apiola, M., & Tedre, M. (2013). Deepening Learning through Learning-by-Inventing. Journal of Information Technology Education: Innovations in Practice, 12, 185–202. https://doi.org/10.28945/1885.
• Arís, N., & Orcos, L. (2019). Educational Robotics in the Stage of Secondary Education: Empirical Study on Motivation and STEM Skills. Educational Sciences, 9(2).
• Barak, M., & Zadok, Y. (2009). Robotics projects and learning concepts in science, technology and problem solving. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-007-9043-3
• Beisser, S. R. (2012). An examination of gender differences in elementary constructionist classrooms using lego/logo instruction. Classroom Integration of Type II Uses of Technology in Education. https://doi.org/10.1300/J025v22n03_02
• Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers and Education. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006
• Blackley, S., & Howell, J. (2015). A STEM Narrative: 15 Years in the Making. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(7).
• Blackwell, C. K., Lauricella, A. R., Wartella, E., Robb, M., & Schomburg, R. (2013). Adoption and use of technology in early education: The interplay of extrinsic barriers and teacher attitudes. Computers and Education, 69, 310–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.024
• Bybee, R. W. (2010). What is STEM Education. Science, 329. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194998
• Cherniak, S., Lee, K., Cho, E., & Jung, S. E. (2019). Child-identified problems and their robotic solutions. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 17(4), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X19860557
• Chootongchai, S., Songkram, N., & Piromsopa, K. (2019). Dimensions of robotic education quality: teachers’ perspectives as teaching assistants in Thai elementary schools. Education and Information Technologies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-10041-1
• Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th Ed.). Boylston Street, Boston: Pearson.
• Di Lieto, M. C., Inguaggiato, E., Castro, E., Cecchi, F., Cioni, G., Dell’Omo, M., … Dario, P. (2017). Educational Robotics intervention on Executive Functions in preschool children: A pilot study. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.018
• Fayer, S., Lacey, A., & Watson, A. (2017). STEM Occupations: Past, present, and future. Spotlight on Statistics, US Bureau of Labor Statistics, (January), 1–35. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/spotlight/2017/science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-occupations-past-present-and-future/pdf/science-technology-engineering-and-mathematics-stem-occupations-past-present-and-future.pdf%0Ahttp://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.
• Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2015). How to design and evaluate research in education (9th Ed.). McGraw-Hill Education: NY.
• Jaipal-Jamani, K., & Angeli, C. (2017). Effect of Robotics on Elementary Preservice Teachers’ Self-Efficacy, Science Learning, and Computational Thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9663-z
• Ioannou, A., & Makridou, E. (2018). Exploring the potentials of educational robotics in the development of computational thinking: A summary of current research and practical proposal for future work. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2531–2544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9729-z
• Jeong, H. I., & Kim, Y. (2017). The acceptance of computer technology by teachers in early childhood education. Interactive Learning Environments, 25(4), 496–512. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2016.1143376
• Joo, Y. J., Park, S., & Lim, E. (2018). Factors influencing preservice teachers’ intention to use technology: TPACK, teacher self-efficacy, and Technology Acceptance Model. Educational Technology and Society, 21(3), 48–59.
• Jung, S. E., & Won, E. (2018). Systematic Review of Research Trends in Robotics Education for Young Children. Sustainability.
• Kazakoff, E. R., & Bers, M. U. (2014). Put Your Robot in, Put Your Robot out: Sequencing through Programming Robots in Early Childhood. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 50(4), 553–573. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.50.4.f
• Kucuk, S., & Sisman, B. (2018). Pre-service teachers’ experiences in learning robotics design and programming. Informatics in Education, 17(2), 301–320. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2018.16
• Sisman, B., Kucuk, S., & Yaman, Y. (2020). The Effects of Robotics Training on Children’s Spatial Ability and Attitude Toward STEM. International Journal of Social Robotics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00646-9
• Lin, H. T., & Kuo, T. H. (2010). Teaching programming technique with edutainment robot construction. In ICETC 2010 - 2010 2nd International Conference on Education Technology and Computer (Vol. 3). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICETC.2010.5529557
• Lindh, J., & Holgersson, T. (2007). Does lego training stimulate pupils’ ability to solve logical problems? Computers and Education, 49(4), 1097–1111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.12.008
• Manches, A., & Plowman, L. (2017). Computing education in children’s early years: A call for debate. British Journal of Educational Technology, 48(1), 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12355
• Mariappan, M., Sing, J. C., & Nadarajan, M. (2015). A Design Methodology of Programmable Tangible Blocks for Early Childhood Educational Robotic System. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 11, 17-25.
• Marín-Marín, J. A., Costa, R. S., Moreno-Guerrero, A. J., & López-Belmonte, J. (2020). Makey makey as an interactive robotic tool for high school students’ learning in multicultural contexts. Education Sciences, 10(9), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10090239
• Mazman Akar, S. G. (2019). Does it matter being innovative: Teachers’ technology acceptance. Education and Information Technologies, 24(6), 3415–3432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09933-z
• Mubin, O., Stevens, C. J., Shahid, S., Mahmud, A. Al, & Dong, J.-J. (2013). a Review of the Applicability of Robots in Education. Technology for Education and Learning, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.2316/journal.209.2013.1.209-0015
• Musić, J., Bonković, M., Kružić, S., Marasović, T., Papić, V., Kostova, S., … Pachidis, T. (2020). Robotics and information technologies in education: four countries from Alpe-Adria-Danube Region survey. International Journal of Technology and Design Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09631-9
• Nemiro, J., Larriva, C., & Jawaharlal, M. (2017). Developing Creative Behavior in Elementary School Students with Robotics. Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(1), 70–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.87
• Noh, J., & Lee, J. (2020). Effects of robotics programming on the computational thinking and creativity of elementary school students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68(1), 463–484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09708-w
• Piedade, J. M. N. (2020). Pre-service and in-service teachers’ interest, knowledge, and self-confidence in using educational robotics in learning activities. Educação & Formação, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.25053/redufor.v6i1.3345
• Reeves, T. C., & Reeves, P. M. (2015). Reorienting educational technology research from things to problems. Learning Research and Practice, 1(1), 91–93.
• Sáez-López, J. M., Sevillano-García, M. L., & Vazquez-Cano, E. (2019). The effect of programming on primary school students’ mathematical and scientific understanding: educational use of mBot. Educational Technology Research and Development, 67(6), 1405–1425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09648-5
• Sohn, W.-S. (2014). Design and Evaluation of Computer Programming Education Strategy using Arduino. Advanced Science and Technology Letters, 66, 73–77. https://doi.org/10.14257/astl.2014.66.18
• Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9304-5
• Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2019). Investigating the use of robotics to increase girls’ interest in engineering during early elementary school. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(5), 1033–1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9483-y
• Sullivan, F. R. (2008). Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 373–394. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20238
• Taylor, M. S., Vasquez, E., & Donehower, C. (2017). Computer Programming with Early Elementary Students with Down Syndrome. Journal of Special Education Technology, 32(3), 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162643417704439
• Wong, G. K. W. (2016). The behavioral intentions of Hong Kong primary teachers in adopting educational technology. Educational Technology Research and Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9426-9
• Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2016). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri (10th Ed.). Seçkin Yayınları: Ankara.
• Zhong, B., & Xia, L. (2020). A Systematic Review on Exploring the Potential of Educational Robotics in Mathematics Education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 18(1), 79–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-018-09939-y
• 21st Century Learning for Early Childhood Guide. (2019). Retrieved November 18, 2020, from http://static.battelleforkids.org/documents/p21/P21EarlyChildhoodGuide.pdf