Cooperative Learning in Lego Robotics Projects: Exploring the Impacts of Group Formation on Interaction and Achievement

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to investigate how grouping of students influence students interaction and achievement in LEGO activities. Through LEGO Robotics learning activities, students&rsquo; interaction and performance were collected and analyzed through statistical analysis. In addition, qualitative data from interviews, video recordings, and related documents provided evidences for explanation. The findings of this study indicated that LEGO Robotics mediated learning by providing group-based learning experiences. The grouping of students with diversity of background resulted in differences in interactions and learning outcomes. The major findings are as follows: First, students&rsquo; gender, age, and family background are not related to their learning outcomes. Secondly, the groups of the same gender significantly engaged in more communication than the groups consisting of more female than male students. And, the groups of underprivileged students communicated significantly less than the non-underprivileged groups during programming activities. Thirdly, for programming activities, more interactions between group members would lead to higher scores on performance.<br /

Can Pair Learning Improve Students’ Troubleshooting Performance in Robotics Education?

“…In addition, the team members learn from one another’s experience and expertise by observing and communicating. In brief, students involved in the collaborative robotics projects experienced improved overall learning outcomes and performances (Cheng, Huang, & Huang, 2013; Mitnik et al., 2009; Taylor, 2016; Yuen et al., 2014).…”

“…Second, collaborative learning/problem-solving could cultivate students’ collaborative ability and socialization. In the collaborative robotics learning/problem-solving contexts, all students participate in the aspects of designing, assembling, programming, testing, debugging, and modifying together (Cheng et al., 2013). To make their artifacts work better, group members need to integrate others’ ideas, negotiate and coordinate viewpoints, and seek agreement on points of discussion.…”

“…Reviewing the existing evaluation for collaborative learning results in RE, several indicators were found as follows: The STEM-related content knowledge acquisition (Barak & Zadok, 2009; Benitti, 2012; Bers & Portsmore, 2005; Nugent et al., 2010); Students’ performance during the tasks, for instance, the task completion efficiency, engineering design, problem-solving, computational thinking, and the social interaction/teamwork skills (Bers et al., 2014; Cheng et al., 2013; Di Lieto et al., 2017; Nugent et al., 2010); Emotion and attitudes of the students, such as students’ enjoyment (comfort, interest), motivation, confidence, and self-efficiency (or satisfaction) in working with collaborative robotics projects (Avsec et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2010; Nugent et al., 2010). …”

İlkokul Öğrencileriyle Gerçekleştirilen Birebir Robotik Öğretiminde Öğreticilerin Deneyimleri

“…Bunun yanı sıra öğreticiler de öğrencilere bir sonraki adıma yönlendirici sorular yönelttikleri için etkileşimler sorular sorma üzerinde de yoğunlaşmıştır. Nitekim alan yazındaki çalışmalarda da robotik öğretim sürecinin etkileşimli, eğlenceli ve işbirlikli bir süreç olduğu belirtilmektedir (Alimisis, 2013;Cheng, Huang, & Huang, 2013;Çayır, 2010;Kim et al, 2015;Oliver & Roos, 2003;Pimlott-Wilson, 2012).…”

The Correlation between Temperament, Technology Preference and Proficiency in Middle School Students

“…Pair students on the opposite ends of the technology spectrum to help them strengthen their weaker areas (Cheng, Huang, & Huang, 2013). The greatest statistical differences occurred between the Blue and Green temperaments.…”