Explore and create: Exploratory Creation lab 
Preregistration Required
Attendees will develop coding challenges to align math standards, Learning Targets, and Success Criteria for math instruction in the classroom. Attendees will be introduced to block coding using Bee Bots, Ozobots, UBTECH Robotics and autonomous coding with Botball robots to implement math instruction. Bee Bots, Ozobots, and UBTECH robots use block coding to successfully complete challenges with the robots. Botball autonomous robots use C coding language to implement coding challenges. Instructional activities employed in this session include introduction to, and hands on practice, with Bee Bot, Ozobot, and UBTECH robots. The attendees will watch a demonstration of the autonomous Botball robot operating in C coding language before completing a math challenge. Evidence of success will be the attendees creating one Success Criteria, one Learner Target, and one coding challenge aligned with math standards to implement in the classroom.
Presentation Outline:
5 minutes - Introductions (Peer to Peer)
15 minutes - robotics overview (Interaction)
5 minutes - retrieve state math standards (Device Based)
15 minutes - brainstorm coding challenges aligned to state math standards (Peer to Peer and Device Based)
10 minutes - Develop one Success Criteria and one Learning Target for a coding math challenge implemented in the classroom (Peer to Peer and Device Based)
10 minutes - questions/closing (Peer to Peer)
Research from Barker et al. (2012) found educational robotics open a door for helping children learn about mathematics and scientific concepts through the practice of inquiry, as well as for developing technological fluency.Educational robotics can provide a learning environment rich with opportunities for using an interdisciplinary approach to integrating many disciplines, such as mathematics, writing and language, technology, science, social studies, dance, music and art (Barker et al., 2012).
Robots provide an open-ended environment for teachers to develop innovative curriculum that integrates technology with different content areas (Bers & Portsmore, 2005). This supports the findings from Ucgul & Cagiltay (2013) who stated in recent years, interest in using robots for educational purposes has increased.
Literature on manipulatives for elementary math learning has found that the transparent nature of learning materials and direct physical interaction with these materials help build explicit bridges between informal understandings and formal mathematical concepts and symbols (Okita, 2013). Through the robotics curriculum, in C coding language, it is projected that learner outcomes will be increased.
Robotics has been shown to be a superb tool for hands-on learning, not only of robotics itself, but of general topics in science, technology, engineering, and math (Mataric et al. 2007). A fusion of project based learning (PBL) and cooperative learning (CL) will increase learner outcomes. Educational theorists such as Papert (1993) believe that robotics activities have tremendous potential to improve classroom teaching. According to Barreto (2012) educators have started to generate ideas and develop activities to incorporate robotics into the teaching of various subjects, including math, science, and engineering.
References
Barker, B. S., Nugent, G., Grandgenett, N., & Adamchuk, V. I. (2012). Robots in K-12 Education: A New Technology for Learning (Premier Reference Source) (1st ed.). IGI Global.
Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006
Bers, M. U., & Portsmore, M. (2005). Teaching Partnerships: Early Childhood and Engineering Students Teaching Math and Science Through Robotics. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-005-2734-1
Clements, D.H., & Meredith, J.S. (1993). Research on Logo: Effects and efficacy. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 4, 263-290.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, D. J. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications, Inc.
Matarić, M. J., Koenig, N., & Feil-Seifer, D. (2007). Materials for enabling hands-on robotics and STEM education. AAAI Spring Symposium on Robots and Robot Venues: Resources for AI Education. http://www.aaai.org/Papers/Symposia/Spring/2007/SS-07-09/SS07-09-022.pdf
Okita, S. Y. (2013). The relative merits of transparency: Investigating situations that support the use of robotics in developing student learning adaptability across virtual and physical computing platforms. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(5), 844–862. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12101
Papert, S. (1993). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas (2nd ed.). Basic Books.
Savard, A., & Highfield, K. (2015). Teachers' talk about robotics: Where is the mathematics?. Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia.
Ucgul, M., & Cagiltay, K. (2013). Design and development issues for educational robotics training camps. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(2), 203–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-013-9253-9
Vollstedt, A., Robinson, M., & Wang, E.L. (2007). Using Robotics to Enhance Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics Curricula.
Yelland, N. (1994). The strategies and interactions of young children in LOGO tasks. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 10(1), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2729.1994.tb00280.x
Return
Trips and Tours