Journals / Turkish Studies (Elektronik) / 2020 / Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 7

Educational Robotics Supported STEM Course for Prospective Science Teache

Fen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarına Yönelik Eğitsel Robotik Destekli STEM KursuFen Bilimleri Öğretmen Adaylarına Yönelik Eğitsel Robotik Destekli STEM Kursu

Pages
2853–2875
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Due to the Global Covid-19 pandemic, this type of research can be organized as "Mass Open Online Course (MOOC)" studies.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:With the rapidly developing science and technology, the increasing number of robotic devices in schools is a very important step for STEM education.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study was conducted with 35 prospective science teachers within the Instructional Technologies and Material Development course. "STEM Questionnaire" and "Using Robotic Technology as a Learning Tool" were applied as pre and post tests as data collection tools.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Due to the Global Covid-19 pandemic, this type of research can be organized as "Mass Open Online Course (MOOC)" studies.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

With the rapidly developing science and technology, the increasing number of robotic devices in schools is a very important step for STEM education. On the other hand, the successful and effective use of educational robotic tools in STEM classrooms has become dependent on the interests and knowledge of teachers and teacher candidates. The aim of this study is to develop a robotic assisted STEM course for prospective science teachers and examine its effectiveness. In the study, a single group pretest-posttest quasiexperimental design without control group was used, which is one of the quantitative research designs. The study was conducted with 35 prospective science teachers within the Instructional Technologies and Material Development course. "STEM Questionnaire" and "Using Robotic Technology as a Learning Tool" were applied as pre and post tests as data collection tools. The obtained findings were analyzed descriptively in terms of frequency and percentage and with the dependent t-test method. According to the findings obtained, the robotic supported STEM course contributed to both prospective teachers' constructing the relationship between STEM disciplines in a meaningful way and changing their positive thoughts against the use of robotic tools as a teaching tool in science lessons. On the other hand, at the end of the course, most of the candidates think that they will encounter some obstacles such as cost, time limitation and technical problems during robotic assisted science teaching. In this context, robotic supported STEM education can be carried out as a separate course and classroom applications of educational robotic activities can be applied in "Teaching Practice I-II" courses under the guidance of expert instructors. Due to the Global Covid-19 pandemic, this type of research can be organized as "Mass Open Online Course (MOOC)" studies.

Özet

Hızla gelişen bilim ve teknolojiy ile birlikte okullarda robotik araçların sayısının gittikçe artması, STEMeğitimi için oldukça önemli bir adımdır. Diğer taraftan STEM sınıflarında eğitsel robotik araçların başarılı veetkin bir şekilde kullanılması öğretmenlerin ve öğretmen adaylarının ilgilerine ve bilgilerine bağımlı hâlegelmiştir. Bu çalışmanın amacı fen bilimleri öğretmen adaylarına yönelik robotik destekli STEM kursugeliştirmek ve etkililiğini incelemektir. Araştırmada nicel araştırma desenlerinden biri olan tek grup öntestsontestkontrol grupsuz yarı deneysel desen kullanılmıştır. Çalışma Öğretim Teknolojileri ve MateryalGeliştirme dersi bünyesinde 35 fen bilimleri öğretmen adayı ile yürütülmüştür. Veri toplama aracı olarak‘‘STEM Anketi’’ ve ‘‘Öğrenme Aracı Olarak Robotik Teknoloji Kullanma Görüş Anketi’’ ön ve son testolarak uygulanmıştır. Elde edilen bulgular betimsel olarak frekans ve yüzde şeklinde ve bağımlı t-testiyöntemi ile analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen bulgulara göre robotik destekli STEM kursu hem öğretmenadaylarının STEM disiplinleri arasındaki ilişkiyi anlamlı bir şekilde yapılandırmasına hem de robotikaraçların fen bilimleri dersinde bir öğretim aracı olarak kullanılmasına karşı pozitif yönde düşüncelerinindeğişmesine katkı sağlamıştır. Diğer taraftan kurs sonunda adayların çoğunluğu robotik destekli fen öğretimisırasında maliyet, zaman sınırlılığı ve teknik problemler gibi birtakım engeller ile de karşılaşacaklarınıdüşünmektedir. Bu bağlamda robotik destekli STEM eğitimi ayrı bir ders olarak yürütülebilir ve eğitselrobotik etkinliklerin sınıf uygulamaları ‘‘Öğretmenlik Uygulaması I-II’’ derslerinde uzman öğretimelemanları rehberliğinde uygulanabilir. Küresel Covid-19 pandemisi nedeniyle bu tür araştırmalar ‘‘KitleselAçık Çevrimiçi Kurs (MOOC)’’ çalışmaları şeklinde düzenlenebilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇINAR, S. (2020). Educational Robotics Supported STEM Course for Prospective Science Teache. Turkish Studies (Elektronik), Cilt: 15 - Sayı: 7, 2853–2875. https://ajindex.com/articles/357356

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Alimisis, D. (2012). Robotics in Education & education in robotics: Shifting focus from technology to pedagogy. Paper presented at the Robotics in Education Alimisis, D., & Kynigos, C. (2009). Constructionism and Robotics in education. In: Alimisis, D. (ed.) Teacher Education on Robotic-Enhanced Constructivist Pedagogical Methods, (pp. 11-26).
  2. ASPETE. Altin, H., & Pedaste, M. (2013) Learnıng Approaches to Applyıng Robotıcs in Scıence, Educatıon, Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(3), 365-377.
  3. Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, N.S. (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75B, 661-670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2015.10.008
  4. Benitti, F.B.V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 58 (3), 978-988.
  5. Bers, M., & M. Portsmore (2006). Teaching partnerships: early childhood and engineering students teaching math and science through robotics. Journal of Science Education and Technology 14 (1), 59–73.
  6. Bers, M.U., Flannery, L., Kazakoff, E.R., & Sullivan, A. (2014). Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Computers & Education, 7(2), 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.020
  7. Butting, A., Konar, S., Rumpe, B., & Wortmann, A. (2018). Teaching Model-Based Systems Engineering for Industry 4.0: Student Challenges and Expectations. In ACM/IEEE 21th International Conference on Model Driven Engineering Languages and Systems, Copenhagen, Denmark. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2007). Deneysel desenler öntest-sontest kontrol grubu desen ve veri analizi. Pegem A Yayıncılık. Bybee, R.W. (2010). What is STEM education. Science, 329, 996. 10.1126/science.1194998 Cameron, R.G. (2005). Mindstorms Robolab: Developing Science Concepts During a Problem Based Learning Club. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation. The University of Toronto. Çayır, E. (2010). Lego-Logo ile Desteklenmiş Öğrenme Ortaminin Bilimsel Süreç Becerisive Benlik Algisi Üzerine Etkisinin Belirlenmesi. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Sakarya Üniversitesi.
  8. Chen, Y., & Chang, C. (2018). The Impact of an ıntegrated robotics STEM course with a sailboat topic on high school students’ perceptions of ıntegrative STEM, ınterest, and career orientation, URASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(12),1-19, https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/94314
  9. Çınar, S