Using robots to teach programming to K-12 teachers

Abstract

Abstract-We present the results of a pilot study in which twenty K-12 teachers were introduced to LEGO NXT-G robot programming through a three-day summer workshop. Our aim was to give teachers the confidence and skills to start after-school robotics programs with their students. We present details on the workshop, including the approach we used to recruit teachers and an overview of the three-day course. We discuss the data gathered from the teachers following the workshop and also give our own recommendations for others who may wish to run a similar program.Participants ranged from elementary school general classroom teachers to high school math, science, and even computer science teachers. Prior to attending our workshop, 89% of the teachers had little or no programming experience and generally were not very confident in their own ability to be able to learn how to program a robot. After completing the workshop, their confidence increased dramatically and they had a strong expectation that they would use the material with their students. A follow-up survey nine months later indicated that hundreds of students and many colleagues were impacted in the first year alone.

An overview of teacher training programs in educational robotics: characteristics, best practices and recommendations

“…In the research studies we selected, the educational backgrounds of the participants differ substantially. In some studies, for example, the participants are ICT teachers/teacher candidates (von Wangenheim et al 2017;Major et al 2014;Major et al 2011), while in others they are teachers of STEM subjects (Goodale 2013;Hodges et al 2016;Kay and Moss 2012;Nagchaudhuri and Mitra 2007) or from a variety of subject areas (Gilkes et al 2014;Hamner et al 2016;Leonard et al 2017;Riedo et al 2012;Scaradozzi et al 2019). The participants' prior experience with programming also varies from study to study.…”

“…The participants' prior experience with programming also varies from study to study. In Kay and Moss (2012), for example, most participants had little or no programming experience and were not very confident of their own ability to learn how to program a robot. Similarly, in Kaya et al (2017) Some research studies also provide information about the trainers responsible for preparing and delivering the training programs.…”

“…As well as experts, training assistants also seem to play an important role in teacher training programs. In Chambers and Carbonaro (2003), a teaching assistant supported the participants with challenges or problems, while in Kay and Moss (2012), five Computer Science undergraduate assistants supported the participants during the lectures and hands-on periods. The assistants' role in this training is important since they make learning easier for participants and lessen their frustration with kits/equipment during a fast-paced training session (Gilkes et al 2014).…”

“…However, they do not state explicitly which learning theory their teacher training program is based on. Finally, several studies in our sample were clearly not based on any pedagogical approach or theory (Caballero-González and Muñoz-Repiso 2017; Hamner et al 2016;Kay and Moss 2012;Major et al 2011;Riedo et al 2012;Gilkes et al 2014;Nagchaudhuri and Mitra 2007), since none of the sections in those articles refers to learning theories or pedagogical approaches.…”

“…Alimisis et al (2009) suggested that teachers need a sufficient number robotics kits available in order to use robotics in their classroom teaching, while Riedo et al (2012) asserted that teachers need to be given the equipment they used in the training for free so that they can apply in their classrooms what they had learned during their training. It has also been suggested that teachers should take the materials they used in training to school to showcase them to their students and colleagues (Kay and Moss 2012). Providing the participants with teaching materials is also good practice because it facilitates the future…”