Reverse Engineering in Robotics Classrooms: Boosting Creative Thinking and Problem Solving
Keywords:
reverse engineering, robotics, creativity, problem-solving, secondary school studentsAbstract
This study explores the impact of robotics activities on the creativity and problem-solving performances of secondary school students. The participants consisted of 10 students from a computer science class at a secondary school. The robotics activities utilized Lego Ev3 kits and incorporated reverse engineering principles. Data were gathered using open-ended forms created to evaluate students' perspectives on creativity while engaging in tasks and their robotics problem-solving performances. The findings revealed that, most of the students demonstrated proficient skills, particularly in recognising problems, and creating alternatives, while their reasoning, applying the solution, and sharing skills were adequate. We hope this study will offer a valuable example of how to incorporate robotic activities within the reverse engineering approach.
Downloads
References
Abdüsselam, M. S., Turan-Güntepe, E., & Durukan, Ü. G. (2022). Programming education in the frameworks of reverse engineering and theory of didactical situations. Education and Information Technologies, 27-5, 6513-6532.
Adams, J. C. (2010). Scratching middle schoolers' creative itch. In Proceedings of the 41st ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (pp. 356-360). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/1734263.1734385
Afari, E., & Khine, M. S. (2017). Robotics as an educational tool: Impact of Lego Mindstorms. International Journal of Information and Education Technology, 7(6), 437-442. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18178/ijiet.2017.7.6.908
Almeida, L. S., L. P. Prieto, M. Ferrando, E. Oliveira, and C. Ferrándiz. 2008. “Torrance Test of Creative Thinking: The Question of its Construct Validity.” Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3 (1): 53–58. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2008.03.003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2008.03.003
Batni, S., Jain, M. L., & Tiwari, A. (2010). Reverse engineering: a brief review. International Journal on Emerging Technologies, 1 (2), 73-76.
Cavas, B., Kesercioglu, T., Holbrook, J., Rannikmae, M., Ozdogru, E., & Gokler, F. (2012). The effects of robotics club on the student's performance on science process & scientific creativity skills and perceptions on robots, human and society. In Proceedings of 3rd International Workshop Teaching Robotics, Teaching with Robotics Integrating Robotics in School Curriculum (Vol. 40, p. 50).,
Costa, M. F., & Fernandes, J. F. (2005). Robots at school. The Eurobotice project. Science and Technology, 1, 2.
Dempere, L. A. (2009). Reverse engineering as an educational tool for sustainability. In 2009 IEEE International Symposium on Sustainable Systems and Technology (pp. 1-3). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ISSST.2009.5156748
Evripidou, S., Georgiou, K., Doitsidis, L., Amanatiadis, A. A., Zinonos, Z., & Chatzichristofis, S. A. (2020). Educational robotics: Platforms, competitions, and expected learning outcomes. IEEE Access, 8, 219534–219562. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3042555
Eteokleous-Grigoriou, N., & Psomas, C. (2013). Integrating robotics as an interdisciplinary-educational tool in primary education. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 3877-3881). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
Eteokleous, N., Nisiforou, E., Christodoulou, C., Liu, L., & Gibson, D. (2018). Fostering children's creative thinking: A pioneer educational robotics curriculum. Research Highlights in Technology and Teachers Education, 89-98.
Fisher, I., & Ziviani, J. (2004). Explanatory case studies: Implications and applications for clinical research. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 51(4), 185-191. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1630.2004.00446.x
Gaz, C., Flacco, F., & De Luca, A. (2014). Identifying the dynamic model used by the KUKA LWR: A reverse engineering approach. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (pp. 1386-1392). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA.2014.6907033
Griffith, A. L. (2010). Persistence of women and minorities in STEM field majors: Is it the school that matters? Economics of Education Review, 29(6), 911-922.
Gubenko, A., Kirsch, C., Smilek, J. N., Lubart, T., & Houssemand, C. (2021). Educational Robotics and Robot Creativity: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 8, 178.
Huei, Y. C. (2014). Benefits and introduction to Python programming for fresh more students using inexpensive robots. In 2014 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (pp. 12-17). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE.2014.7062611
Jung, S. E., & Won, E. S. (2018). Systematic review of research trends in robotics education for young children. Sustainability, 10(4), 905. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905
Kerr, B., & Gagliardi, A. (2006). Measuring creativity in research and practice. Arizona State University.
Kafai, Y. B., & Resnick, M. (1996). Constructionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking, and Learning in a Digital World. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Kim, K. H. 2006. Can We Trust Creativity Tests? A Review of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking (TTCT). Creativity Research Journal, 18 (1): 3–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326934crj1801_2
Klimek, I., Keltika, M., & Jakab, F. (2011). Reverse engineering as an education tool in computer science. In 2011 9th International Conference on Emerging Elearning Technologies And Applications (ICETA) (pp. 123-126). IEEE. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/ICETA.2011.6112599
Papert, S. (1981). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. UK: Harvester Press.
Petre, M., & Price, B. (2004). Using robotics to motivate ‘back door’ learning. Education and Information Technologies, 9(2), 147-158. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:EAIT.0000027927.78380.60
Rogers-Chapman, M. F. (2014). Accessing STEM-focused education: Factors that contribute to the opportunity to attend STEM high schools across the United States. Education and Urban Society, 46(6), 716-737. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013124512469815
Sun, L., & Zhou, D. (2023). Effective instruction conditions for educational robotics to develop programming ability of K‐12 students: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 39(2), 380-398. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12750
Strawhacker, A., & Bers, M. U. (2015). “I want my robot to look for food”: Comparing Kindergartner’s programming comprehension using tangible, graphic, and hybrid user interfaces. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25(3), 293-319. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-014-9287-7
Thayer, K. (2017). How does reverse engineering work. Retrieved February, 6, 2021.
West, A. B., Sickel, A. J., & Cribbs, J. D. (2015). The science of solubility: Using reverse engineering to brew a perfect cup of coffee. Science Activities, 52(3), 65-73. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2015.1068734
Vatansever, Ö. (2018). Examining the Effects of Using Scratch Programming on 5th and 6th Graders’ Problem Solvıng Skills (Unpublished Master Dissertation, Bursa Uludag University, Turkey).
Verner, I., & Greenholts, M. (2016). Teacher education to analyze and design systems through reverse engineering. In International Conference EduRobotics 2016 (pp. 122-132). Springer, Cham.
Zhong, B., Kang, S., & Zhan, Z. (2021). Investigating the effect of reverse engineering pedagogy in K‐ 12 robotics education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29(5), 1097-1111.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2024 Sevinç PARLAK, Neriman TOKEL, Ünal ÇAKIROĞLU
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Most read articles by the same author(s)
- Unal CAKIROGLU, Suheda MUMCU, Melek ATABAY, Merve AYDIN, Understanding problem-solving processes of preschool children in CS unplugged activities , International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools: Vol. 5 No. 3 (2022): International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools
- Ünal ÇAKIROGLU, Samet ATABAS, Dogukan SARIYALÇINKAYA, Ibrahim Enes Öner, Learning programming online: Influences of various types of feedback on programming performances , International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools: Vol. 3 No. 3 (2020): International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools
