Teacher Views on Educational Robotics and Its Introduction to the
Compulsory Curricula
Despoina Schina
a
, Mireia Usart
b
, Vanessa Esteve-Gonzalez
c
and Mercè Gisbert
d
Universitat Rovira I Virgili, Spain
Keywords: Educational Robotics, Teachers’ Perceptions, Curricular Robotics.
Abstract: Students’ engagement with Educational Robotics (ER) has a positive impact on the development of their
interdisciplinary knowledge and skills, however ER is not yet integrated into the school curriculum. The
present study examines how teachers with prior experience in ER, view their students’ learning through ER
and how they perceive the potential integration of ER into the school curriculum. It is a qualitative study and
the sample consists of teachers participating as coaches in the regional FIRST LEGO League Competition
(FLL) of Tarragona-Reus, in the region of Catalonia in Spain. The results show that teachers in this specific
context positively perceive their students’ learning through ER as their students develop various 21st century
skills and acquire programming knowledge. Teachers are also in favour of the ER integration into school
curricula even at early educational levels. Our research results, although they cannot be generalized, are of
use for educational institutions considering the integration of ER into the curriculum.
1 INTRODUCTION
The field of Educational Robotics (ER), as the name
suggests itself, is related to both the discipline of
robotics and education. In order to better understand
the relation between robotics and education, and the
learning taking place, definitions of the ER field
present in current literature will be reviewed.
According to Scaradozzi, Screpanti and Cesaretti
(2019), the ER field and its identifying characteristics
seem to not be clearly defined in current literature and
to vary among research papers. When reviewing
literature in ER, different definitions are encountered,
among which, Denis and Hubert (2001) propose that
“Educational robotics (ER) consists in building and
programming small robots and conducting them with
the help of computer programs that have to be built
by the learners themselves”. More recent research
studies define the ER field by putting emphasis on its
pedagogical perspective (Frangou and Papanikolaou,
2008; Mikropoulos and Bellou, 2013; Moro, Agatolio
and Menegatti, 2018). Moro et al. (2018) highlight
that “ER is not limited to the specific discipline of
a
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6691-9170
b
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4372-9312
c
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5909-1099
d
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8330-1495
robotics, but it functions as a didactical method,
based on constructivism and constructionism” while,
Frangou and Papanikolaou (2008) define ER
technology as an educational tool. Regarding the
characteristics of the ER field, authors highlight its
interdisciplinarity (Angel-Fernandez and Vincze,
2018; Scaradozzi, Screpanti and Cesaretti, 2019).
More specifically, according to Angel-Fernandez and
Vincze (2018) ER is a field of study that combines the
areas of education, robotics and human-computer
interface, whereas, Scaradozzi et al. (2019) point out
that ER field merges the disciplines of robotics,
pedagogy and psychology.
Based on the above, ER is considered a highly
interdisciplinary area combining additional
disciplines apart from education and robotics, and
when students are engaged with ER activities, they
acquire interdisciplinary knowledge and skills.
According to Denis and Hubert (2001), ER may
affect positively students’ learning in STEM
(Science, Technology, Engineering, and
Mathematics) subjects. In addition, Denis and Hubert
(2001) point out that students may develop skills as
Schina, D., Usart, M., Esteve-Gonzalez, V. and Gisbert, M.
Teacher Views on Educational Robotics and Its Introduction to the Compulsory Curricula.
DOI: 10.5220/0009316301470154
In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2020) - Volume 1, pages 147-154
ISBN: 978-989-758-417-6
Copyright
c
2020 by SCITEPRESS Science and Technology Publications, Lda. All rights reserved
147
problem-solving strategies, the formalisation of
thought, socialisation as well as the acquisition of
various concepts. The research of Barker, Nuget, and
Grandgenett (2008) confirms that engagement with
ER brings positive learning outcomes in mathematics,
programming and engineering. Furthermore, Di Lieto
et al. (2017) highlight that through ER students
improve their visuo-spatial working memory and
inhibition skills and robot programming skills. Gains
are also reported in students’ 21st century skills as
critical thinking, problem-solving, and collaboration
skills, creativity and innovation (Eguchi, 2015).
Students through ER also improve their attitudes
towards STEM subjects (Sahin, Ayar and Adiguzel,
2014; Eguchi, 2016). More specifically, girls’
involvement with robotics programs may have a
positive effect on the perceptions of their abilities in
STEM and career interests (Weinberg, Pettibone and
Thomas, 2007).
Through ER, students can acquire cross-curricular
knowledge, develop interdisciplinary skills and get
engaged in STEM disciplines and careers, however,
the question that arises here is whether teachers are
aware of the benefits students gain through their
involvement with ER. Based on previous literature,
students positively perceive their learning with ER
when carrying out ER activities in either formal or
informal contexts. Regarding informal contexts,
students consider FIRST LEGO League robotics
competition as a great opportunity for learning about
real word problems and for the acquisition of skills in
STEM areas of studies and at the same time they view
that they acquire social, collaborative and
communication skills (Schina, Usart and Esteve,
2020). Regarding, students’ engagement with ER in
formal contexts, students positively perceive ER as a
plaything, as a source of employment, and as a way
to high technology (Liu, 2010). Students’ perceptions
of their learning throughout ER activities are positive,
however, teachers’ perceptions of ER are not
sufficiently studied in current literature, despite the
fact that teachers play a crucial role in the
implementation of ER in the educational institutions.
The aim of the present study is to further examine
how teachers perceive ER in the context of the region
of Catalonia in Spain. This paper will particularly
focus on the effects of robotics on students’ skills and
learning of programming and engineering concepts,
as perceived by teachers, and will examine teacher
views on the potential ER integration into the formal
school curriculum.
2 THEORETICAL
BACKGROUND
Teachers and ER
The implementation of ER activities in the framework
of school subjects requires teachers to play a new role
in the teaching and learning process (Alimisis et al.,
2007). Addressing this need for change in the role of
teachers, Alimisis et al. (2007) suggested that
teachers need to receive specialized training in ER
technologies and its use in the school classroom.
More specifically, the TERECop project (Alimisis et
al., 2007), was launched aiming at enabling teachers
to implement the robotics-enhanced constructivist
learning in school and reflecting on their classroom
experience with robotics. According to Chambers and
Carbonaro (2003), introducing ER activities in the
school classroom is a demanding task for teachers.
Sisman, Kucuk, and An (2019) underline that there
are still teachers who are unfamiliar with the positive
effects of ER on students’ learning, while the teachers
who are indeed aware of the ER advantages, are not
adequately prepared to apply ER in their teaching.
When it comes to teachers’ perceptions of ER, a
research implemented in Canada demonstrates that
ER is perceived by teachers as to impact positively
students' lifelong learning skills (Khanlari, 2015).
This study highlights that teachers perceive ER as a
useful tool facilitating the learning of science and
technology related topics. However, teachers in this
study, do not view ER as a useful learning tool for
improving the learning of mathematics, although
some of them provided examples of mathematics
topics that can be taught using ER (Khanlari and
Kiaie, 2015). Despite the fact that teachers
acknowledge the benefits of ER for students’
learning, they mention a number of barriers that
impede the integration of ER into their teaching
(Khanlari and Kiaie, 2015). For example, they feel
that they need to receive further support regarding the
ER implementation in their teaching (Khanlari and
Kiaie, 2015). Taking everything into consideration,
based on the limited research on teacher views on ER,
it is observed that teachers acknowledge the benefits
of ER in teaching, however, they remain hesitant in
the integration of ER in their teaching.
ER Integration in the Curriculum
After reviewing the positive perceptions of students
and teachers of ER, a question that undoubtedly
comes up concerns the necessity of its integration in
CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
148
the school curriculum. Scaradozzi et al., (2019)
vividly support that ER should be part of the school
curriculum; ER should be a distinct school subject
within the school’s regular hours, with its own lesson
and evaluation plan. However, obstacles to
implementing robotics as part of the regular school
curriculum appear to be the fact that ER activities
tend to be time consuming, the cost of the equipment
high, while the effort required from teachers to
arrange the equipment quite demanding (Alimisis,
2013). Scaradozzi et al. (2019) underline that ER
should be integrated in the educational institutions at
an early stage either as a whole curriculum-based
education or as a regular activity inside another
broader subject. Kubilinskiene et al. (2017) suggest
integrating ER activities in the following areas of the
curriculum that extend further than STEM;
languages, development of general competencies (in
the subject “human safety” of primary and secondary
school), cognition of the world (in the subject
“world's knowledge” in primary school) and in the
general education for the deaf and hard of hearing in
primary school.
ER Integration in Spain
Nowadays, the educational community in Spain as in
the rest of Europe, shows increasing interest in ER.
However, back in 2007, Alimisis et al. (2007) pointed
out that the use of robotics in primary and secondary
education in Spain was very limited and not official
at all. At the same time Alimisis et al. (2007)
remarked that the activities in the field of Robotics in
Spain mainly were in research or industry while there
were also a few robot competitions organized for
secondary level students. The authors pointed out that
it was not common to encounter ER well-thought and
well-structured activities applied in the field of
education.
Nevertheless, since these observations in 2007
(Alimisis et al., 2007), ER field has developed and
expanded substantially across all educational fields
and levels in Spain. According to a research carried
out in Spain and in Latin American countries, the use
of robotics as a learning tool is significantly growing
in Spain and Latin America (Pittí et al., 2013). This
growth refers to ER extracurricular activities that take
place as after school programs and are most
commonly implemented by private enterprises (Pittí
et al., 2013).
Regarding the ER curricular implementation,
Pittí et al. (2013) report that the use of ER in the
classroom occurs in subjects closely related to
robotics. Interestingly, only 12% of the teachers
requested report to apply ER in Science, while even
less teachers, around 5% of them state that they
applied ER in Mathematics and Physics. In a
subsequent research carried out exclusively in Spain
(Pina and Rubio, 2017) it is reported that teachers
delivered classes through ER that are linked to several
fields, not limited to Computer Science. To be more
precise, according to Pina and Rubio (2017), the
teachers view that through ER, they could implement
activities beyond Computer Science, linked to
different areas of the curriculum (Mathematics,
Social Sciences, Arts, Language etc.) and they would
facilitate their students’ development of transversal
and social skills.
3 METHODOLOGY
The general objective of the present study is to further
examine how teachers perceive ER and the benefits it
offers when students are engaged with this field of
studies. The study is oriented towards two main
domains; (1) teacher views on the development of
students’ skills/ learning (2) teacher views on the
integration of ER in the school curriculum. It is a
qualitative study that aims to explore how teachers
with prior experience in ER, perceive the
development of their students’ learning of
programming and engineering basic concepts through
ER and their views on ER integration in the
curriculum. The variables of the study are the
following: teacher views on students’ skills, teacher
views on students’ learning of programming and
engineering, teacher views on ER integration into the
formal school curriculum. Based on these, the
research questions are formulated accordingly:
Research Questions
RQ1: How do teachers with prior experience in ER
perceive students’ learning with ER?
RQ2: How do teachers with prior experience in ER
view the potential integration of ER in the Spanish
compulsory curricula?
Research Context
The research took place in the province of Tarragona
in the region of Catalonia in Spain within the regional
FIRST LEGO League Competition (FLL) Tarragona-
Reus in 2019. The FIRST LEGO League Competition
is an international competition that is addressed to
students from 9 to 16 years old, while its Junior
Teacher Views on Educational Robotics and Its Introduction to the Compulsory Curricula
149
edition is addressed to younger primary school
students (FIRST LEGO League, 2020). FLL
Competition has a theme, in 2019 season the
competition was called “INTO ORBIT” referring to
the space theme (FIRST LEGO League, 2020). In the
FIRST LEGO League Competition teams compete in
4 categories, Robot Design, Core Values, Project and
Robot Game, while in the Junior Edition teams
present to a panel of judges what they learned and
created, without formally competing. The
competition is international and the participants are
assessed by the same evaluation rubrics across
countries, while the winners of the national
competitions participate in subsequent international
competitions. Based on previous research, (Usart et
al., 2019) the FLL competition, evaluates 21st
century skills through the evaluation rubrics for each
category (Robot Design, Core Values and Project).
The 21st century skills evaluated in the competition
are communication, collaboration, social/ cultural
skills, ICT literacy, creativity, critical thinking,
problem solving, developing quality products (Usart
et al., 2019). In this research paper, the
teachers/coaches accompanying the students at the
FLL Competition and FLL Competition Junior are
requested to provide their views on their students’
learning with ER and on the potential integration of
ER into the school curriculum.
Research Sample
The initial sample consists of 10 coaches whose
teams participated in the FIRST LEGO League and
FIRST LEGO League Junior Competition of
Tarragona-Reus in 2019. As main aim of this research
paper is to explore teacher views on robotics, two
questionnaires completed by coaches that are not
school teachers are not taken into consideration. As a
result, the sample studied for the purpose of this paper
is limited to 8 school teachers. The sample is
comprised of both primary and secondary school
teachers (5 out of 8 are primary school teachers, while
3 are secondary school teachers). The sample has
extensive teaching experience (2 out of 8 have been
working as teachers for over 15 years, 5 of them from
5 to 10 years and only one of them from 1 to 5 years),
is very familiar with Educational Robotics and carries
out ER activities on a regular basis, as they took over
the team preparation for the FIRST LEGO League
Competition and the FIRST LEGO League Junior
Edition.
5
Link for the questionnaire;
https://forms.gle/6EFotK6SSSxFfQHz6
Research Instrument
The research instrument is based on the questionnaire
of Theodoropoulos, Antoniou and Lepouras (2017).
It was translated from Greek into Spanish and it was
adapted to the research context. Initially, the
questionnaire was addressed to teachers whose
students were participating in the 7
th
PanHellenic ER
competition and for the purpose of this research was
adapted to the context of FIRST LEGO League
Competition. The adapted version of the
questionnaire can be found in the following link
5
. The
questionnaire was forwarded to coaches of the FIRST
LEGO League Competition by the organization
committee right after the completion of the regional
competition Tarragona-Reus. The questionnaire
collects the following data; coaches’ demographic
data, coaches’ competition participation data,
coaches’ views on students’ acquisition of skills/
learning of programming and engineering with ER
and coaches’ views on ER integration into the formal
school curriculum.
4 RESULTS
Students’ Learning with ER
RQ1: How do teachers with prior experience in ER
perceive students’ learning with ER?
The participants of our study report that students
through their involvement with Educational Robotics
gain important skills as problem-solving,
collaboration, creativity, discipline and presentation
skills (Figure 1). All teachers in our sample underline
that their students definitely develop problem-solving
skills and their creativity through ER. Regarding
collaboration skills, 7 out of 8 teachers support that
through ER students definitely develop collaboration
skills while one teacher is more hesitant, stating that
ER probably encourages students’ development of
collaboration skills. Teachers seem to be also positive
about students’ development of discipline and
presentation skills through ER. To be more precise, 5
teachers report that students definitely develop their
discipline and presentation skills through ER while 2
teachers are positive but hesitant stating that probably
students do develop these skills and one teacher stays
neutral.
CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
150
When teachers are asked to specify the benefits of
students’ involvement with ER both at short-term and
long-term, they make reference to the previously-
mentioned skills (e.g. collaboration skills, problem-
solving skills etc.) and remark some additional ones.
For example, as presented in Table 1, teachers
consider that students through ER may gain interest
in technology and robotics, they may have the chance
to put in practice previously acquired knowledge and
overcome themselves when dealing with challenges.
It is also pointed out that through ER students may
feel more motivated to learn and that through ER
students may broaden their horizons.
Figure 1: Teacher views on students’ skills acquired from
ER.
Table 1: Teacher views on the benefits from students’ ER
involvement.
Teacher views on benefits on students Number
of cases
Interest in technology and robotics 1
Overcoming themselves 2
Putting in practice knowledge
previously acquired
1
Broadening their horizons 1
Motivation for learning 1
Acquisition of collaboration skills 3
Acquisition of problem-solving skills 3
Fostering creativity 2
Becoming more disciplined 1
Regarding students’ learning of programming and
engineering through ER, teachers seem to be positive
regarding programming basic principles while a bit
unsure as far as engineering basic principles are
concerned. When it comes to engineering, as
displayed in Figure 2, 3 out of 8 teachers point out
that ER definitely fosters or somewhat fosters
students’ learning of basic engineering principles
while, 4 of the teachers remain neutral and one
teacher negative about students’ learning of
engineering through ER. As far as basic programming
skills are concerned, 5 out of 8 teachers (62.5%)
report that through ER students definitely develop or
somewhat develop their basic programming skills. In
this case, 2 teachers remain neutral and one teacher is
negative regarding the benefits in students’ learning
of programming. When teachers are asked to specify
the programming and engineering concepts that are
developed through ER they report a series of learning
outcomes that are displayed on Table 2. When it
comes to students’ learning of programming, teachers
make reference to the acquisition of basic
programming concepts as loops and conditions, they
state that their students learnt a visual programming
language, realized the importance of sensors and
learnt how to program. Interestingly teachers
underline that their students learnt how to optimize a
program referring to reducing the blocks required for
a specific program. As far as engineering principles
are concerned, teachers report that students get
familiar with mechanical movement, engineering
design and physics/mathematics knowledge in the
context of engineering.
Figure 2: Teacher views on students’ learning of
programming and engineering basic principles.
Taking everything into consideration, teachers
report that their students may acquire a number of
skills as problem-solving, collaboration, creativity,
discipline, presentation skills and other skills (see
0246810
problemsolving
collaboration
creativity
discipline
presentation
numberofteachers
skills
Teacherviewsonstudents'
skills
neutral probablyyes definitelyyes
0
1
2
3
4
5
basicprogramming
principles
basicengineering
principles
numberofteachers
agreementonstudents'learning
Teacherviewsonstudents'learning
definitelyyes somewhatyes neutral
somewhatno definitelyno
Teacher Views on Educational Robotics and Its Introduction to the Compulsory Curricula
151
Table 1), while at the same time they may acquire
knowledge related to programming and engineering.
Teachers seem to perceive their students’ learning of
programming more likely than their learning of basic
engineering principles.
Table 2: Teacher views on students’ learning of
programming and engineering.
Students’ learning of
Programming
Students’ learning of
Engineering
Basic programming
concepts (e.g. loops,
conditions etc.)
Mechanical movement
(e.g. speed, angles,
forces etc.)
Familiarization with Visual
Programming
Engineering design
Program optimization
(reducing blocks,
improving robot behavior)
Physics and
mathematics concepts
applied in engineering
Use and usefulness of
sensors
Integration of ER in the
Curriculum
RQ2: How do teachers with prior experience in ER
view the potential integration of ER in the Spanish
compulsory curricula?
The majority of the teachers participating in this
research report that they are in favour of the
integration of ER into the school curriculum; 7 out of
8 teachers report that they agree with the ER
integration into the school curriculum. In addition,
when they are requested about the appropriate school
level of the integration, 3 teachers report that ER
should be integrated across all educational levels,
while 2 teachers specify that ER should be integrated
into primary school curriculum, only one teacher
supports that ER should be integrated into secondary
school Education, and another teacher points out that
it should be integrated even in pre-school education
(see Table 3).
Table 3- Teacher views on the age and school level of ER
integration into the curriculum.
Teacher views on the age and
school level of ER integration
into the curriculum
Number of cases
Secondary school. 1
Primary school 2
All levels 3
All levels, pre-school included. 1
When teachers are asked about how would parents
view the curriculum integration of ER, most of them
(7 teachers in total) view that parents would definitely
or somewhat agree with this integration while one
teacher view that this integration would be negatively
perceived by parents.
Taking everything into consideration, the
majority of the teachers participating in the research
at the local context of Tarragona-Reus positively
perceive a potential integration of ER into the formal
school curriculum even from early educational levels.
5 DISCUSSION
The results of this study are in line with previous
research results on teacher views of their students’
learning: it is observed that teachers positively
perceive their students’ involvement with ER as they
develop 21
st
century skills as problem-solving,
collaboration, creative thinking and presentation
skills. These results are in line with Khanlari, (2015)
who support that teachers view that ER may boost
students' lifelong learning skills. In addition, the
research results of the present study are in line with
Theodoropoulos et al., (2017) who point out that
teachers consider that most students improve
important skills such as: problem-solving,
collaboration and creativity through ER. Positive
outcomes regarding collaboration and creativity are
also observed in the research of Pina and Rubio
(2017) who point out that teachers/coaches of the
FIRST LEGO League Competition observe
important learning outcomes primarily at teamwork
and secondly at creativity and innovation.
As far as programming and engineering skills are
concerned, the findings of this research demonstrate
that the teachers seem to positively perceive their
students’ learning outcomes in the area of
programming while they seem to perceive less
positively the learning outcomes in the area of
engineering. As displayed in Figure 2, the majority of
teachers view that their students acquire
programming skills through ER while, a minority
perceive students’ learning of engineering equally
positive. Our findings are in line with
Theodoropoulos et al. (2017) who point out that most
teachers believe that their students can learn
programming and engineering through ER. However,
as also observed in our study, these authors underline
that the results are not promising regarding
engineering. Consequently, the teachers view more
positively the development of students’ programming
CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
152
knowledge rather than their knowledge of
engineering through ER.
Regarding the integration of ER into the school
curriculum, the results are very promising as teachers
suggest the integration of ER even at early
educational levels. Teachers also view that parents
would be in favor of such a change in the school
curriculum. Based on our findings, the ER integration
into the school curriculum is desirable, however, it
would raise additional challenges for the educational
community. For instance, among the challenges
would be the kind of the ER integration into the
curriculum referring to whether it would be
introduced as an independent subject or as a sub-
discipline in other subjects. Additionally, the
integration of ER into the curriculum would require
dealing with two main barriers: the high cost of the
ER equipment and the teachers’ unfamiliarity with
ER technologies.
6 CONCLUSIONS
The results of this study confirm that ER is positively
viewed by teachers with prior experience in the field
of ER, in the local context of Tarragona-Reus in
Spain. Teachers value positively the learning
outcomes that students acquire through ER and
support its integration into the school curriculum. The
limitations of this study are related to the context of
the researchers. First, the limited sample size and the
teachers’ experience with robotics (all participants
are coaches of FLL and therefore very familiar with
ER), may impair us from generalizing our results to
other contexts. Therefore, next steps in this research
would be to implement a subsequent study at a
regional or national level with a more representative
and broader sample. The sample would be school
teachers coming from different disciplines and with
different degrees of knowledge and involvement with
ER activities. Provided teachers’ perceptions would
remain positive towards an ER curriculum
integration, the authorities, the research community
and educational institutions would need to further
study the integration of ER into the school
curriculum, to ensure the smooth implementation of
this curricular change. The first step to the ER
integration would be to determine whether ER would
be an independent subject in the curriculum or a sub-
discipline in certain subjects. After dealing with the
kind of the ER implementation and the educational
levels in which it would be applied to, in-service
teachers would need to receive specialized training in
ER, while pre-service teachers would need to receive
ER training throughout their teacher specialization
degree.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This project received funding from the European
Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation
programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant
agreement No. 713679 and from the Universitat
Rovira i Virgili (URV). The authors would like to
thank the organizers of the Regional FLL
Competition Tarragona- Reus for facilitating the data
retrieval.
REFERENCES
Alimisis, D., 2007. Robotics & constructivism in education:
The TERECoP project, In EuroLogo, pp. 1–11.
Available at: http://users.sch.gr/adamopou/docs/
syn_eurologo2007_alimisis.pdf.
Alimisis, D., 2013. Educational robotics: Open questions
and new challenges, Themes in Science & Technology
Education, 6(1), pp. 63–71. doi:
10.1109/FIE.2014.7044055.
Angel-Fernandez, J. M., Vincze, M., 2018. Introducing
storytelling to educational robotic activities, In IEEE
Global Engineering Education Conference, EDUCON.
2018, pp. 608–615. doi:
10.1109/EDUCON.2018.8363286.
Chambers, J. M., Carbonaro, M., 2003. Designing,
Developing, and Implementing a Course on LEGO
Robotics for Technology Teacher Education, Journal of
Technology and Teacher Education, 11, pp. 209–241.
Denis, B., Hubert, S., 2001. Collaborative learning in an
educational robotics environment, Computers in
Human Behavior, 17(5–6), pp. 465–480. doi:
10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00018-8.
Eguchi, A., 2015. Educational robotics to promote 21st
century skills and technological understanding among
underprivileged undergraduate students, In ISEC 2015
- 5th IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference.
IEEE, pp. 76–82. doi: 10.1109/ISECon.2015.7119949.
Eguchi, A., 2016. RoboCupJunior for promoting STEM
education, 21st century skills, and technological
advancement through robotics competition, Robotics
and Autonomous Systems. 75, pp. 692–699. doi:
10.1016/j.robot.2015.05.013.
FIRST LEGO League, 2020. FIRST LEGO League
website. Retrieved from firstinspires.org
Frangou, S., Papanikolaou, K., 2008. Representative
examples of implementing educational robotics in
school based on the constructivist approach, In
International Conference on Simulation, Modeling and
Programming for Autonomous Robots, pp. 54–65.
Teacher Views on Educational Robotics and Its Introduction to the Compulsory Curricula
153
Khanlari, A., Kiaie, F. M., 2015. Using robotics for STEM
education in primary/elementary schools: Teachers’
perceptions, In 10th International Conference on
Computer Science and Education, ICCSE 2015. IEEE,
pp. 3–7. doi: 10.1109/ICCSE.2015.7250208.
Kubilinskiene, S. Zilinskiene, I., Dagiene, V., Sinkevičius,
V., 2017. Applying Robotics in School Education: a
Systematic Review, Baltic Journal of Modern
Computing, 5(1), pp. 50–69. doi:
10.22364/bjmc.2017.5.1.04.
Di Lieto, M. C., Inguaggiato, E., Castro, E., Cecchi, F.,
Cioni, G., Dell’Omo, M, Laschi, C., Pecini, C,
Santerini, G., Sgandurra, G., Dario, P., 2017.
Educational Robotics intervention on Executive
Functions in preschool children: A pilot study,
Computers in Human Behavior. 71, pp. 16–23. doi:
10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.018.
Liu, E. Z. F., 2010. Early adolescents’ perceptions of
educational robots and learning of robotics, British
Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), pp. 44–47.
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00944.x.
Mikropoulos, T. A., Bellou, I., 2013. Educational Robotics
as Mindtools, Themes in Science & Technology
Education, 6(1), pp. 5–14. doi:
10.1016/j.dsr2.2010.10.007.
Moro, M., Agatolio, F., Menegatti, E., 2018. The RoboESL
Project, International Journal of Smart Education and
Urban Society, 9(1), pp. 48–60. doi:
10.4018/ijseus.2018010105.
Pina, A., Rubio, G., 2017. Using educational robotics with
primary level students (6-12 years old) in different
scholar scenarios: Learned lessons, In CSEDU 2017 -
Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on
Computer Supported Education, pp. 196–208. doi:
10.5220/0006381501960208.
Pittí, K., Moreno, V., Curto, B., Rodriguez, J., 2013.
Resources and Features of Robotics Learning
Environments (RLEs) in Spain and Latin America, In
ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, pp.
315–322. doi: 10.1145/2536536.2536584.
Sahin, A., Ayar, M. C., Adiguzel, T., 2014. STEM Related
After-School Program Activities and Associated
Outcomes on Student Learning, Educational Sciences:
Theory & Practice, 14(1), pp. 309–322. doi:
10.12738/estp.2014.1.1876.
Scaradozzi, D., Screpanti, L., Cesaretti, L., 2019. Towards
a Definition of Educational Robotics: A Classification
of Tools, Experiences and Assessments, Smart Learning
with Educational Robotics, doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-
19913-5.
Sisman, B., Kucuk, S., An, S., 2019. Educational Robotics
Course: Examination of Educational Potentials and
Pre- service Teachers’ Experiences, International
Journal of Research in Education and Science (IJRES),
5(2), 510-531.
Theodoropoulos, A., Antoniou, A., Lepouras, G., 2017.
Teacher and student views on educational robotics: The
Pan-Hellenic competition case,
Application and
Theory of Computer Technology, 2(4), p. 1. doi:
10.22496/atct.v2i4.94.
Usart, M., Schina, D., Esteve, V., Gisbert, M., 2019. Are
21st century skills evaluated in robotics competitions?
The case of first lego league competition’, In CSEDU
2019 - Proceedings of the 11th International
Conference on Computer Supported Education.
Weinberg, J., Pettibone, J., Thomas, S., 2007. The impact
of robot projects on girl’s attitudes toward science and
engineering, In RSS Robotics in Education Workshop,
2007, pp. 1–2.
CSEDU 2020 - 12th International Conference on Computer Supported Education
154