Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Smart Learning Objects for Smart Education in Computer Science pp 287–310Cite as

Smart Education in CS: A Case Study

  • Chapter

Abstract

Today, computer science (CS) is regarded as a fundamental course (similarly to mathematics, physics, etc.), which is delivered in both universities and schools. Its importance has been recognized far ago because it is a source of the primary and fundamental knowledge needed for our lives and activities, which are highly penetrated by the use of computers, the Internet and other modern technologies. On the other hand, CS can be also seen as an interdisciplinary course, for example, with respect to its relation to robotics and e-learning domains. Furthermore, combining CS topics with the use of robots in learning adequately, it is possible to make a significant contribution to the STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) paradigm, a new interdisciplinary approach to learning and teaching for the twenty-first century. Though we have not considered this paradigm explicitly so far, in fact, by introducing and combining two novel approaches, smart LOs and robot-based smart educational environments, we have paved a way for researching and studying the STEM approach too. But first, we need to show how smart LOs and smart educational environments interact among themselves and to approve this interaction in the real learning and teaching setting.

This chapter should be referenced and cited as follows: Vytautas Štuikys and Renata Burbaitė. Smart Education in CS: A Case Study. In Smart Learning Objects for the Smart Education in Computer Science (Theory, Methodology and Robot-Based Implementation), Springer, 2015.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Anderson L, Krathwohl DA (2001) Taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Adams J, Kaczmarczyk S, Picton P, Demian P (2010) Problem solving and creativity in engineering: conclusions of a three year project involving reusable learning objects and robots. Eng Educ 5(2):4–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Alimisis D, Moro M, Arlegui J, Pina A, Frangou S, Papanikolaou K (2007) Robotics & constructivism in education: the TERECoP project. In: Kalas I (ed) Proceedings of the 11th European logo conference, Slovakia, Comenius University, pp 1–11

    Google Scholar 

  4. Atmatzidou S, Markelis I, Demetriadis S (2008) The use of LEGO mindstorms in elementary and secondary education: game as a way of triggering learning. Workshop Proc SIMPAR 2008:22–30

    Google Scholar 

  5. Arlegui J, Pina A, Moro M (2011) A paradox in the constructive design of robotic projects in school. In: Proceedings of 2nd international conference on robotics in education (RiE 2011), Vienna, pp 29–34

    Google Scholar 

  6. Ben-Ari M (1998) Constructivism in computer science education. In: Proceedings of SIGCSE’98, ACM, Atlanta, pp 257–261

    Google Scholar 

  7. Burbaite R, Stuikys V, Marcinkevicius R (2012) The LEGO NXT robot-based e-learning environment to teach computer science topics. Electron Elect Eng 18(2):133–136

    Google Scholar 

  8. Burbaitė R (2014) Advanced generative learning objects in informatics education: the concept, models, and implementation. Summary of doctoral dissertation, physical sciences, informatics (09P), Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas

    Google Scholar 

  9. Castledine A, Chalmers C (2011) LEGO Robotics: an authentic problem-solving tool? Des Technol Educ 6(3):19–27

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cowden D, O’Neill A, Opavsky E, Ustek D, Walker HM (2012) A C-based introductory course using robots. In: Proceedings of the 43rd ACM technical symposium on computer science education. ACM, pp 27–32

    Google Scholar 

  11. Cromack J, Savenye W (2007) Learning about learning in computational science and science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education

    Google Scholar 

  12. DeLuca D (2003) Robotics and teaching: promoting the effective use of technology in education (Honors thesis). Tufts University. Retrieved from http://ceeo.tufts.edu/robolabatceeo/references/thesis/DianaDeluca_undergrad.pdf

  13. Ertmer PA, Newby TJ (2013) Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Perform Improv Quart 26(2):43–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Fagin BS, Merkle L (2002) Quantitative analysis of the effects of robots on introductory computer science education. J Educ Res Comput 2(4):2

    Google Scholar 

  15. Fagin BS, Merkle LD, Eggers TW (2001) Teaching computer science with robotics using Ada/Mindstorms 2.0. ACM SIGAda Ada Lett 21(4):73–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Frangou S, Papanikolaoum K, Aravecchia L, Montel L, Ionita S, Arlegui J, Pina A, Menegatti E, Moro M, Fava N, Monfalcon S, Pagello I (2008) Representative examples of implementing educational robotics in school based on the constructivist approach. In: SIMPAR workshop on teaching with robotics: didactic approaches and experiences, Venice, pp 54–65

    Google Scholar 

  17. IEEE Computer Society (1990) IEEE Standard glossary of software engineering terminology, IEEE Std. 610.12-1990

    Google Scholar 

  18. Grabowski LM, Brazier P (2011) Robots, recruitment, and retention: broadening participation through CS0. In: Frontiers in education conference (FIE), F4H-1–F4H-5

    Google Scholar 

  19. Gerndt R, Lüssem J (2011) Mixed-reality robotics – a coherent teaching framework. In: Proceedings of 2nd international conference on robotics in education (RiE), pp 193–200

    Google Scholar 

  20. Harfield AJ (2007) Empirical modelling as a new paradigm for educational technology, Doctoral dissertation. University of Warwick

    Google Scholar 

  21. Harlen W (2013) Assessment & inquiry-based science education: Issues in policy and practice. Global Network of Science Academies – Science Education Programmes, Trieste

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hazzan O, Lapidot T, Ragonis N (2011) Guide to teaching computer science: an activity-based approach. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  23. Hamada M, Sato S (2011) A game-based learning system for theory of computation using Lego NXT Robot. Procedia Comput Sci 4:1944–1952

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Jenkins T (2001) The motivation of students of programming. Thesis of Master of Science, The University of Kent

    Google Scholar 

  25. Janiszek D, Pellier D, Mauclair J, Baron GL, Parchemal Y (2011) Feedback on the use of robots in project-based learning: how to involve students in interdisciplinary projects in order to increase their interest in computer science. INTED2011 proceedings, Valence, Spain, pp 1815–1824

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kim HS, Jeon JW (2009) Introduction for freshmen to embedded systems using LEGO Mindstorms. Educ IEEE Trans 52(1):99–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kurebayashi S, Kanemune S, Kamada T, Kuno Y (2007) The effect of learning programming with autonomous robots for elementary school students. In: 11th European logo conference, Comenius University Press, Bratislava, pp 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  28. Leonard D (2002) Learning theories: A to Z. Oryx Press, Westport

    Google Scholar 

  29. Lubitz WD (2011) Rethinking the first year programming course. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association. http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/PCEEA/article/view/3811/3767

  30. Ley CN, Wong WK, Chiou A (2011) Framework for educational robotics: a multiphase approach to enhance user learning in a competitive arena. In: Edutainment’11, Proceedings of the 6th international conference on E-learning and games, edutainment technologies. Springer, Berlin, pp 317–325

    Google Scholar 

  31. Miller G (1956) The magic number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev 63(2):81–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Mosley P, Kline R (2006) Engaging students: a framework using LEGO robotics to teach problem solving. Inform Technol Learn Perform J 21(1):39–45

    Google Scholar 

  33. Papert S (1993) The children’s machine: rethinking school in the age of the computer. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  34. Petrovič P, Balogh R (2012) Deployment of remotely-accessible robotics laboratory. Int J Online Eng 8(2):31–35

    Google Scholar 

  35. Pears AN (2010) Enhancing student engagement in an introductory programming course. In: 40th Frontiers in education conference, ser. Proceedings of the frontiers in education conference (No. 40)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Pap-Szigeti R, Pásztor A, Lakatos-Török E (2010) Effects of using model robots in the education of programming. Inform Educ Int J 9_1:133–140

    Google Scholar 

  37. Smith MK (2003) Learning theory. The encyclopedia of informal education. www.infed.org/biblio/b-learn.htm. Accessed 11 Apr 2014

  38. Sucar EL, Noguez J, Huesca G (2005) Project oriented learning for basic robotics using virtual laboratories and intelligent tutors. In: Frontiers in education. Proceedings of 35th annual conference, Indianapolis, S3H-12

    Google Scholar 

  39. Sklar E, Parsons S, Azhar MQ (2007). Robotics across the curriculum. In: AAAI Spring symposium on robots and robot venues: resources for AI education, pp 142–147

    Google Scholar 

  40. Štuikys V, Damaševičius R (2013) Meta-programming and model-driven meta-program development: principles, processes and techniques. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  41. Štuikys V, Burbaitė R, Damaševičius R (2013) Teaching of computer science topics using meta-programming-based GLOs and LEGO robots. Inform Educ Int J. ISSN 1648–5831. 12:125–142

    Google Scholar 

  42. Turner S, Hill G (2007) Robots in problem-solving and programming. In: 8th annual conference of the subject centre for information and computer sciences, University of Southampton, UK, pp 82–85

    Google Scholar 

  43. Urquiza-Fuentes J, Velázquez-Iturbide JÁ (2009) Pedagogical effectiveness of engagement levels – a survey of successful experiences. J Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci 224:169–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Weingarten JD, Koditschek DE, Komsuoglu H, Massey C (2007) Robotics as the delivery vehicle: a contextualized, social, self paced, engineering education for life-long learners. In: Robotics science and systems workshop on “Research in Robots for Education”, pp 1–6

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Software Engineering, Kaunas University of Technology, Kaunas, Lithuania

    Vytautas Štuikys

Authors
  1. Vytautas Štuikys
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Štuikys, V. (2015). Smart Education in CS: A Case Study. In: Smart Learning Objects for Smart Education in Computer Science. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16913-2_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16913-2_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-16912-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-16913-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation