2022
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-82544-7_30
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Correction to: Robotics in Education

Abstract: The original versions of the Chapters 17 and 25 were previously published as non-open access. They have now been changed to open access under the CC BY 4.0 license and the copyright holder updated to ‘The Author(s)’. The book and the chapters have been updated with the changes.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…While earlier studies utilizing educational robots to teach various STEM concepts (Mason & Cooper, 2013; Touretzky, 2013) have focused more on teaching programming, others have evolved to teaching a broader set of computer science concepts and skills such as ‘computational thinking’ (Bers et al, 2014). When implemented, administered and assessed rigorously, the use of educational robotics in classrooms has shown to increase students' interest and engagement in STEM (e.g., Kim et al, 2015; Mohr‐Schroeder et al, 2014), improve students' attitudes towards STEM education and foster problem‐solving and teamwork skills (Merdan et al, 2017). For example, Menekse et al (2017) argued that educational robotics and participation in a robotics team produced a significant impact on students' critical thinking and problem‐solving through designing, assembling, coding, operating and modifying robots for specific goals.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While earlier studies utilizing educational robots to teach various STEM concepts (Mason & Cooper, 2013; Touretzky, 2013) have focused more on teaching programming, others have evolved to teaching a broader set of computer science concepts and skills such as ‘computational thinking’ (Bers et al, 2014). When implemented, administered and assessed rigorously, the use of educational robotics in classrooms has shown to increase students' interest and engagement in STEM (e.g., Kim et al, 2015; Mohr‐Schroeder et al, 2014), improve students' attitudes towards STEM education and foster problem‐solving and teamwork skills (Merdan et al, 2017). For example, Menekse et al (2017) argued that educational robotics and participation in a robotics team produced a significant impact on students' critical thinking and problem‐solving through designing, assembling, coding, operating and modifying robots for specific goals.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pemikiran tentang kurikulum robotika dan penerapannya perlu untuk dikonsepkan dan dioperasionalkan, untuk itu penulis mengadopsi, mengadaptasi dan mempromosikan kerangka yang dianggap sangat komprehensif. Merdan et al (2016)…”
Section: Guruunclassified
“…In addition to the unique challenges due to the nature of the subject, there is also a research gap in the pedagogical needs of the rapidly evolving field of robotics. Existing instructional paradigm for engineering robotics rely heavily on didactic approaches via lectures with limited extent of problem-based learning (PBL) [1], [2] or hands-on sessions in laboratories [3], [4], partly due to the stiff prerequisite needed in the subject for immersive experience through active learning. Instructional activities, like PBL and practical hands-on sessions facilitate active learning by requiring learners to engage the tasks at hand with an active thought process and responses under the guidance of the instructor progressively [5].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%