Direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics: a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perception
Abstract Educational Robotics (ER) has emerged as one of the tools to improve STEM learning in primary education if students are properly instructed. However, there is a lack of studies that guide teachers on which type of instruction should be used for ER in STEM between direct (DI) and indirect in...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2024-03-01
|
| Series: | Smart Learning Environments |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00298-6 |
| _version_ | 1827309968479485952 |
|---|---|
| author | Branko Anđić Mirjana Maričić Filiz Mumcu Theodosia Prodromou Janika Leoste Musa Saimon Zsolt Lavicza |
| author_facet | Branko Anđić Mirjana Maričić Filiz Mumcu Theodosia Prodromou Janika Leoste Musa Saimon Zsolt Lavicza |
| author_sort | Branko Anđić |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Educational Robotics (ER) has emerged as one of the tools to improve STEM learning in primary education if students are properly instructed. However, there is a lack of studies that guide teachers on which type of instruction should be used for ER in STEM between direct (DI) and indirect instruction (II). As a result, the present study aims to compare the two types of instructions in terms of their effect on learning outcomes, students’ perceptions, and students’ gender differences. We adopted a quasi-experiment comparative research design involving 100 ninth-grade students (13–14 years old). We collected data through achievement tests and perception questionnaires and analyzed them using Cochran’s Q-test, Mann–Whitney U-test, and independent samples t-test. Results show that the group in which II was used performed better than those from the group where DI was used. Also, the results show that girls performed better with DI than boys. Furthermore, students perceived ER as useful for developing collaboration and interest in STEM. Therefore, teachers should be supported in learning how to use II and DI strategically in ER to enhance STEM learning. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T19:51:08Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-e03243b8890049ef9e31ae082cdcf6d4 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2196-7091 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T19:51:08Z |
| publishDate | 2024-03-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Smart Learning Environments |
| spelling | doaj.art-e03243b8890049ef9e31ae082cdcf6d42024-03-24T12:36:59ZengSpringerOpenSmart Learning Environments2196-70912024-03-0111112710.1186/s40561-024-00298-6Direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics: a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perceptionBranko Anđić0Mirjana Maričić1Filiz Mumcu2Theodosia Prodromou3Janika Leoste4Musa Saimon5Zsolt Lavicza6Austrian Educational Competence Centre for Biology – AECCbio, University of ViennaDepartment of Sciences and Management in Education, School of Education, University of Novi SadDepartment of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies, Faculty of Education, Manisa Celal Bayar UniversityUniversity of New EnglandSchool of Educational Sciences, Tallinn University, and ITCollege, TalTechDepartment of STEM Education, School of Education, Science Park 5, Johannes Kepler UniversityDepartment of STEM Education, School of Education, Science Park 5, Johannes Kepler UniversityAbstract Educational Robotics (ER) has emerged as one of the tools to improve STEM learning in primary education if students are properly instructed. However, there is a lack of studies that guide teachers on which type of instruction should be used for ER in STEM between direct (DI) and indirect instruction (II). As a result, the present study aims to compare the two types of instructions in terms of their effect on learning outcomes, students’ perceptions, and students’ gender differences. We adopted a quasi-experiment comparative research design involving 100 ninth-grade students (13–14 years old). We collected data through achievement tests and perception questionnaires and analyzed them using Cochran’s Q-test, Mann–Whitney U-test, and independent samples t-test. Results show that the group in which II was used performed better than those from the group where DI was used. Also, the results show that girls performed better with DI than boys. Furthermore, students perceived ER as useful for developing collaboration and interest in STEM. Therefore, teachers should be supported in learning how to use II and DI strategically in ER to enhance STEM learning.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00298-6Educational roboticsDirect instructionIndirect instructionSTEM education |
| spellingShingle | Branko Anđić Mirjana Maričić Filiz Mumcu Theodosia Prodromou Janika Leoste Musa Saimon Zsolt Lavicza Direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics: a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perception Smart Learning Environments Educational robotics Direct instruction Indirect instruction STEM education |
| title | Direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics: a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perception |
| title_full | Direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics: a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perception |
| title_fullStr | Direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics: a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perception |
| title_full_unstemmed | Direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics: a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perception |
| title_short | Direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics: a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perception |
| title_sort | direct and indirect instruction in educational robotics a comparative study of task performance per cognitive level and student perception |
| topic | Educational robotics Direct instruction Indirect instruction STEM education |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-024-00298-6 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT brankoanđic directandindirectinstructionineducationalroboticsacomparativestudyoftaskperformancepercognitivelevelandstudentperception AT mirjanamaricic directandindirectinstructionineducationalroboticsacomparativestudyoftaskperformancepercognitivelevelandstudentperception AT filizmumcu directandindirectinstructionineducationalroboticsacomparativestudyoftaskperformancepercognitivelevelandstudentperception AT theodosiaprodromou directandindirectinstructionineducationalroboticsacomparativestudyoftaskperformancepercognitivelevelandstudentperception AT janikaleoste directandindirectinstructionineducationalroboticsacomparativestudyoftaskperformancepercognitivelevelandstudentperception AT musasaimon directandindirectinstructionineducationalroboticsacomparativestudyoftaskperformancepercognitivelevelandstudentperception AT zsoltlavicza directandindirectinstructionineducationalroboticsacomparativestudyoftaskperformancepercognitivelevelandstudentperception |