=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-3927/paper10
|storemode=property
|title=Cultivating Computational Thinking Skills via Educational Robotics Activities in a Blended Learning Environment
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3927/paper10.pdf
|volume=Vol-3927
|authors=Nafsika Pappa
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/ectel/Pappa24
}}
==Cultivating Computational Thinking Skills via Educational Robotics Activities in a Blended Learning Environment==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-3927/paper10.pdf
Cultivating Computational Thinking Skills via
Educational Robotics Activities in a Blended Learning
Environment
Nafsika Pappa
University of West Attica, Ag. Spyridonos Str., Egaleo Postal Code 12243, Athens, Greece
Abstract
There is a significant trend in the integration of Educational Robotics at all educational levels, and along
with this, the promotion of Computational Thinking is one of the related learning outcomes of this
integration. At the same time, the transfer of face-to-face learning to online or Blended Learning
context due to the COVID-19 pandemic has led to the development of several technological tools, such
as Educational Robotic simulators and online collaborating environments, to support this transfer. In
this field, this PhD research aims to design a framework in which students collaborate in a Blended
Learning context while solving Educational Robotic activities to cultivate Computational Thinking
skills.
Keywords
Computational Thinking, Educational Robotics, Blended Learning, Robotics Simulators, Secondary
Education1
1. Introduction This PhD research aims to design a framework for
promoting CT skills through collaborative ER in a
Although Computational Thinking (CT) appeared in the Blended Learning (BL) environment.
research spotlight as a concept related to Computer
Science, it quickly established its presence within main 2. Theoretical Framework
life skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic [1]. In
the last few years, CT has been considered a key concept The framework to be developed is determined by the
in education, and many countries worldwide have three factors (CT, ER, and BL) and their interrelations.
revised curricula to integrate it across several Therefore, 2.1.1 discusses Cultivating Computational
educational contexts [2]. Thinking through ER, 2.2 addresses Blended Learning
Due to CT’s problem-solving approach, CT and ER, and 2.3 highlights the emergence and use of ER
cultivation was soon related to Educational Robotics, simulators.
leading to strong research interest in CT promotion
through ER activities [3, 4, 5]. Several 2.1. Cultivating Computational Thinking
frameworks/models have been proposed in the literature through ER
to promote CT skills by combining CT with various A recent review of CT in European compulsory
learning outcomes. Most of them are inspired by Piaget’s education [2] highlighted visual programming
constructivism theory and Papert’s constructionism environments and ER as the main trends for cultivating
theory of the additional pedagogical value of interaction CT. Since the term CT appeared in the literature,
with a real object when constructing knowledge [6]. programming has been an appropriate vehicle for CT
Until the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the cultivation. Several CT assessment tools are based on
strongest point of this link was ER's experiential and programming concepts or activities to evaluate students’
hands-on learning nature. When transferring the CT skills [8, 9]. Although programming is part of an ER
activities online, the main advantage was lost, leading to project, when referring to CT cultivation through ER in
the need to rediscover the frame of CT and ER. Several this research, CT is mainly related to ER concepts and
solutions were available instead of physical robots, such not only programming concepts. Several frameworks
as ER simulators or online collaborative environments and methodologies to promote CT through ER have been
[7]. Various ER technologies and good practices have proposed in the literature. CPG+ [3] and CCPS [5]
emerged from the research conducted during the models shed light on the design of ER environments for
pandemic period, which can serve to cultivate CT in a cultivating CT. Apart from the type and orchestration of
mixed learning context involving face-to-face and online the activities, they suggest that ER environments where
ER activities. activities are supervised and implemented in sufficient
Proceedings of the Doctoral Consortium of the 19th European Conference 0009-0001-3930-420X (N. Pappa)
on Technology Enhanced Learning, 16th September 2024, Krems, Austria © 2025 Copyright for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under
Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
npappa@uniwa.com (N. Pappa)
CEUR
ceur-ws.org
Workshop ISSN 1613-0073
Proceedings
time lead to more effective CT cultivation. In addition, provide is considered a great advantage during students’
when working in such environments, students benefit learning process [16]. Recent reviews describe a variety
from more guidance [3] and teachers’ delayed feedback of ER simulators in the form of a) desktop environments,
[10]. Still, the clarification of classroom orchestration b) mobile applications, and cloud- based platforms
remains a major research priority [6]. [17,18], highlighting their strengths and weaknesses.
Students work in the simulated environment to cultivate
2.2. Blended Learning and ER CT through realistic missions they must complete [9,12].
Within these missions, students are confronted with
The literature shows ongoing research interest in BL,
situations they may encounter in the real world and
and its benefits have been widely reported. BL
make decisions about robot responses based on sensor
environments are considered effective when they
and motor parameters. The approaches regarding the
integrate benefits from mixed environments (face-to-
order of the activities (simulated or with physical robots)
face and online) [24, 25]. Regardless of the subject, a BL
differ. There are proposals for engaging students first
should incorporate flexibility and interaction, facilitate
with the simulators and then with the physical robot,
learning processes, and create an effective learning
and others that start with the physical robot to increase
climate [24]. Various models, such as flipped, flex, self-
students' motivation [14]. Most research conducted over
blend, and rotation, have been proposed [26], and
the last four years investigating using ER simulators in
several important challenges have been documented
blended learning environments [19,20] involves mainly
regarding learners’ self–regulation and technology
university students.
competencies [25,26]. During the COVID-19 pandemic,
Given the above, a research gap emerges regarding
several studies on CT and ER in BL environments start
the ER blended learning framework for CT cultivation in
appearing, mainly in higher education.
secondary education. In addition, the changes in the
Regarding the transfer of ER in the BL context,
curricula of Information and Communication
although there are few studies for formal education,
Technology subject (ICT) and Robotics classes
methodologies [27] that involve a phase/step in which
worldwide highlight the need for helping teachers
the student does not have physical contact with the
organise their courses to address the CT's new cognitive
robots are proposed [5, 28]. This characteristic could
goals. Finally, the variety of ER, CT, and BL technologies
promote the design of online activities where students
used during the COVID-19 pandemic and the experience
continue working without noticing the absence of the
gained need to be evaluated towards extending CT
physical robot. Regarding methodology, the flipped
cultivation through ER beyond the classroom
classroom [7], using instructional videos for every unit
environment.
or challenge, has been proposed in several studies [7,12].
The appropriate combination of them should be
Νo models are proposed that include stages
considered a new means for enhancing the pedagogical
implemented remotely, individually, or collaboratively
goals of the related fields. This is the expected
among secondary students.
contribution of the research in the domain of TEL.
To address the research gap on the lack of secondary
students’ experience with ER in effective BL
environments, one of this research’s expected results 3. Goal and research questions
will be the evidence-based heuristics about students' The objective of this PhD research is to design a
current practices on working with ER in different framework where secondary school students cultivate
modalities. CT skills through ER activities in a BL context using ER
simulators (Figure 1). The main question addressing the
2.3. ER Simulators aim of the research is:
The use of Robotic Simulators is gaining more ground,
and due to their flexibility [11,12], they have been used
by a larger population in recent years. In addition, the
cost of purchasing and maintaining the robotics kits and
the increased time required for implementation
[11,12,13] are some of the educators’ challenges
eliminated using simulators.
Many studies agree that using physical robots over
simulators enhances students’ engagement [14,15], but
regarding the expected learning outcomes, there does
not seem to be a significant difference between them
[15]. Moreover, the direct feedback that simulators
Figure 1. Thesis diagram overviewing the context, the research question, learning objectives, contributions and
evaluation
RQ: How to design, implement, and evaluate a RQ1: How to combine ER activities in ER environments
framework for integrating ER in BL context (physical face-to-face in the classroom and remotely?
robots and simulators) where students cultivate CT RQ2: How can CT skills be cultivated when shifting
skills? from hands-on activities with physical robots to the ER
simulation environment, and what modifications occur
The main question is divided into three sub- during this shift?
questions: RQ3: How does collaboration orchestration affect CT
cultivation in both modalities?
4. Methodology and the exploratory study's feedback will help
conceptualise two pilot studies with students working
The methodology chosen is Design-Based Research on ER activities with ER simulators face-to-face and
(DBR) [29]. This methodological approach best fits the online.
PhD objectives of solving real-world educational Both qualitative and quantitative data will be
problems through researchers' and practitioners' collected and analysed (to explore students' practices
collaboration. The DBR research process involves four and needs). This phase will result in the initial version
design phases, from identifying the problem to of a framework accommodating teachers’ and students’
validating the generated principles and artefacts, and it needs.
is applied iteratively (see Figure 2). In the third phase, the initial version of the
Several exploratory studies will be implemented framework designed will be implemented (first
based on the DBR approach. The participants will iteration) with secondary school students attending ER
include pre-service and in- service teachers, who are courses as part of the formal curriculum (RQ2). Data that
expected to inform design explorations. Students will will be collected include student deliverables, analytics
also be involved in informing implementation from the ER simulator, student perceptions through
explorations. Exploratory studies will use a mixed- questionnaires, and audio/ video recordings from
method design [20] incorporating quantitative and student interaction and collaboration (RQ3). After data
qualitative data collection and analysis, aiming at a analysis and further refinements, a second
comprehensive approach. implementation (second iteration) will be carried out.
Following the typical four phases of a DBR, the first In the fourth phase, based on the second iteration,
phase includes conducting a systematic literature review the framework will be reconceptualised and evaluated
to explore the research context around ER, CT, and BL. by in-service teachers, and conclusions will be drawn.
The review's primary focus is related to RQ1, including
existing practices, available technologies (e.g., ER 5. Current Progress
simulators and online communication platforms), and
pedagogical approaches in educational contexts [21]. The research is still in its first phase. The Systematic
Furthermore, the first phase includes an exploratory Literature Review [23] of “ER Simulators, Trends,
study with practitioners to explore their practices, Methods Applied and Learning Outcomes” is due to
attitudes, and challenges while designing ER activities conclude soon. Currently, 72 articles from the ERIC and
with ER simulators for cultivating CT skills, as well as SCOPUS databases are being analysed.
their needs. Educators, working in pairs or triads, will At the same time, an ER activity with two different
co- design ER activities in two different ER simulators. simulators is designed to trigger the educators'
They will then reflect on their design experience and the interaction and co-design a framework for using ER
critical points analysed in the literature review. Both activities in various simulators in the BL context.
qualitative and quantitative data will be analysed. Furthermore, the questionnaire provided at the end of
The data from the exploratory study will be analysed the activity is currently finalised.
during the second phase. The literature review findings
Figure 2. DBR methodology followed.
Acknowledgements [9] Román-González, M., Moreno-León, J., & Robles,
G. (2019). Combining assessment tools for a
The author would like to thank her supervisors, K. comprehensive evaluation of computational
Papanikolaou, G. Fesakis, and K. Sgouropoulou, for their thinking interventions. Computational thinking
valuable guidance and support. education, 79-98.
[10] Chevalier, M., Giang, C., El-Hamamsy, L., Bonnet,
References E., Papaspyros, V., Pellet, J. P., ... & Mondada, F.
(2022). The role of feedback and guidance as
[1] Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational Thinking. Vol.
intervention methods to foster computational
49(Communications of the ACM), 33–35.
thinking in educational robotics learning activities
[2] Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Kampylis, P.,
for primary school. Computers & Education,
Dagiené, V., Wastiau, P., Engelhardt, K., Earp, J.,
104431.
Horvath, M.A., Jasutė, E., Malagoli, C.,
[11] Kerimbayev, N., Nurym, N., Akramova, A., &
Masiulionytė-Dagienė, V. and Stupurienė, G.,
Abdykarimova, S. (2023). Educational robotics:
Reviewing Computational Thinking in
Development of computational thinking in
Compulsory Education, Inamorato dos Santos, A.,
collaborative online learning. Education and
Cachia, R., Giannoutsou, N. and Punie, Y. editor(s),
Information Technologies,
Publications Office of the European Union,
doi:10.1007/s10639-023- 11806-5
Luxembourg, 2022, ISBN 978-92- 76-47208-7,
[12] Witherspoon, E. B., Higashi, R. M., Schunn, C. D.,
https://doi:10.2760/126955
Baehr, E. C., & Shoop, R. (2017). Developing
[3] Atmatzidou, S., Demetriadis, S., & Nika, P. (2018).
computational thinking through a virtual robotics
How does the degree of guidance support
programming curriculum. ACM Transactions on
students’ metacognitive and problem-solving
Computing Education (TOCE), 18(1), 1-20.
skills in educational robotics? Journal of Science
[13] Stein, G., & Ledeczi, A. (2021). Enabling
Education and Technology, 27(1), 70-85.
collaborative distance robotics education for
[4] Chiazzese, G., Arrigo, M., Chifari, A., Lonati, V., &
novice programmers. Paper presented at the
Tosto, C. (2019). Educational Robotics in Primary
Proceedings of IEEE Symposium on Visual
School: Measuring the Development of
Languages and Human-Centric Computing,
Computational Thinking Skills with the Bebras
VL/HCC, 2010-October
Tasks. Informatics, 6.
doi: 10.1109/VL/HCC51201.2021.9576314
https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics6040043
[14] Kurniawan, O., Lee, N. T. S., Datta, S.,
[5] Chevalier, M., Giang, C., Piatti, A. et al. Fostering
Sockalingam, N., & Leong, P. K. (2018, December).
computational thinking through educational
Effectiveness of physical robot versus robot
robotics: a model for creative computational
simulator in teaching introductory programming.
problem-solving. IJ STEM Ed 7, 39 (2020).
In 2018 IEEE International Conference on
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-020-00238-z
Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for
[6] Ioannou, A., & Makridou, E. (2018). Exploring the
Engineering (TALE) (pp. 486-493). IEEE.
potentials of educational robotics in the
[15] Bermúdez, A., Casado, R., Fernández, G., Guijarro,
development of computational thinking: A
M., & Olivas, P. (2019). Drone challenge: A
summary of current research and practical
platform for promoting programming and robotics
proposal for future work. Education and
skills in K-12 education. International Journal of
Information Technologies, 23(6), 2531-2544.
Advanced Robotic Systems, 16(1)
[7] Gomes, A. S. A., Da Silva, J. F., & Teixeira, L. R. D.
doi:10.1177/1729881418820425
L. (2020, November). Educational robotics in times
[16] Joventino, C. F., Silva, R. A. A., Pereira, J. H. M.,
of pandemic: challenges and possibilities. In 2020
Yabarrena, J. M. S. C., & de Oliveira, A. S. (2023). A
Latin American Robotics Symposium (LARS), 2020
sim-to-real practical approach to teach robotics
Brazilian Symposium on Robotics (SBR), and 2020
into K-12: A case study of simulators, educational
Workshop on Robotics in Education (WRE) (pp. 1-
and DIY robotics in competition-based
5).
learning. Journal of Intelligent and Robotic
[8] Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012, April). New
Systems: Theory and Applications, 107(1)
frameworks for studying and assessing the
doi:10.1007/s10846-022-01790-2
development of computational thinking. In
[17] Tselegkaridis, S., & Sapounidis, T. (2021).
Proceedings of the 2012 annual American
Simulators in educational robotics: A review.
Educational Research Association meeting,
Education Sciences, 11(1), 1-12.
Vancouver, Canada (Vol. 1, p. 25).
doi:10.3390/educsci11010011
[18] Camargo, C., Gonçalves, J., Conde, M. Á., active learning outcomes. Educational
Rodríguez-Sedano, F. J., Costa, P., & García- psychologist, 49(4), 219-243.
Peñalvo, F. J. (2021). Systematic literature review
of realistic simulators applied in an educational
robotics context. Sensors, 21(12)
doi:10.3390/s21124031
[19] Cañas, J. M., Martín-Martín, D., Arias, P., Vega, J.,
Roldán-Álvarez, D., García-Pérez, L., & Fernández-
Conde, J. (2020). Open- source drone programming
course for distance engineering education.
Electronics, 9(12), 2163.
[20] Tupac-Yupanqui, M., Vidal-Silva, C., Pavesi-
Farriol, L., Ortiz, A. S., Cardenas- Cobo, J., &
Pereira, F. (2022). Exploiting Arduino features to
develop programming competencies. IEEE
Access, 10, 20602-20615.
[21] Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research:
Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative
and qualitative research. Pearson.
[22] Baumgartner, Eric & Bell, Philip & Brophy, Sean &
Hoadley, Christopher & Hsi, Sherry & Joseph,
Diana & Orrill, Chandra & Puntambekar, Sadhana
& Sandoval, William & Tabak, Iris. (2003). Design-
Based Research: An Emerging Paradigm for
Educational Inquiry. Educational Researcher. 32.
5-8, 35.
10.3102/0013189X032001005.
[23] Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for performing
systematic reviews. Keele, UK, Keele University,
33(2004), 1-26.
[24] Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four
key challenges to the design of blended learning:
A systematic literature review. Educational
Research Review, 22, 1.
[25] Rasheed, R. A., Kamsin, A., & Abdullah, N. (2020).
Challenges in the online component of blended
learning: A systematic review. Computers &
Education, 144, 103701.
[26] Bizami, N. A., Tasir, Z., & Kew, S. N. (2023).
Innovative pedagogical principles and
technological tools capabilities for immersive
blended learning: a systematic literature review.
Education and Information Technologies, 28(2),
1373-1425.
[27] Lin, C. J., & Mubarok, H. (2024). Promoting young
learners’ computational thinking with AI-based
robots and the ICAP model in blended learning
contexts. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-15.
[28] Lin, C. J., & Mubarok, H. (2024). Promoting
young learners’ computational thinking with AI-
based robots and the ICAP model in blended
learning contexts. Interactive Learning
Environments, 1-15.
[29] Chi, M. T., & Wylie, R. (2014). The ICAP
framework: Linking cognitive engagement to