Research on the Teaching Reform of Programming Courses Based on Robotics Education in High School
- 1 Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
- 2 Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
- 3 Joint Laboratory by Ministry of Education, China Mobile Company, Beijing, China
- 4 Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China
Abstract
Programming is of great importance to the cultivation of computational thinking and logical thinking ability. However, the programming course in the middle school stage has been unpopular for years among most students. There are two reasons that contribute to this phenomenon: First, teachers paid more attention to grammar teaching than computational and logical thinking; second, students perceived that the content of programming course was not important, and unrelated to actual situation, and not enthusiastic for programming course. Out of fear about debugging, students tend to have lower intention for getting good grades or attain programming skills. Under these circumstances, this research introduced robot design and application into programming courses for students in high school, using robot teaching as a carrier, and integrating the cultivation of logical thinking into teaching. Carrying out teaching practice and related research with robot education as the carrier, this study succeed s in stimulating students’ sense of self-efficacy in the field of programming, cultivating students’ logical thinking ability, scientific research ability, and developing their scientific inquiry spirit.
- Alshaigv, B. (2013). Development of an Interactive Learning Tool to Teach Python Programming Language. Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education, July 2013, 344. https://doi.org/10.1145/2462476.2465601
- Chen, Q., & Liu, R. D. (2007). Contemporary Educational Psychology (p. 235). Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press.
- Denis, B., & Hubert, S. (2001). Collaborative Learning in an Educational Robotics Environment. Computer in Human Behavior, 17, 465-480. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00018-8
- Gorrieri, A., & Ferrari, G. (2015). Irresponsible AODV Routing. Vehicular Communications, 3, 47-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vehcom.2015.01.002
- He, Y. (2018). Research on Teaching Design and Application of Junior Middle School Program Design Course Based on Network Learning Community. Wuhan: Central China Normal University.
- He, Z., Hu, Y. N., & Allen (2006). Review on the Educational Value of Robot Competition for Primary and Middle School Students. China Educational Technology & Equipment, 1, 13-15.
- Karahoca, D., Karahoca, A., & Uzunboylub, H. (2011). Robotics Teaching in Primary School Education by Project Based Learning for Supporting Science and Technology Courses. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 1425-1431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2011.01.025
- Lan, W. F., & Zheng, B. J. (2012). Conception of Curriculum Construction of Advanced Language Programming. Computer Education, 6, 30-32+67.
- Li, X., Zhang, Y., Huang, J., Zhang, M., Zhang, Y., & Wang, J. (2019). Research on the Influence of STEM+C Teaching Based on Design on Primary School Students’ Computational Thinking. China Educational Technology, 11, 104-112.
- Liu, J. (2009). Relying on Robot School-Based Textbooks to Implement Robotics Education. Experiment Teaching and Apparatus, 12, 52-53.
- Liu, M. Y., Xu, Y. H., & Zhou, S. Y. (2017). Outcomes-Based Teaching Design of “Python Programming”. Computer Knowledge and Technology, 13, 105-107.
- Nourbakhsh, I. R., Crowley, K., Bhave, A., Hamner, E., Hsiu, T., Perez-Bergquist, A. et al. (2005). The Robotic Autonomy Mobile Robotics Course: Robot Design, Curriculum Design and Educational Assessment. Autonomous Robots, 18, 103-127. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:AURO.0000047303.20624.02
- Peng, M. X. (2009). Research on the Design and Development of the Three-Dimensional Teaching Material for Primary School Robotics Education. Xian: Shaanxi Normal University.