Teacher Views on Educational Robotics and Its Introduction to the

Compulsory Curricula

Despoina Schina

, Mireia Usart

, Vanessa Esteve-Gonzalez

and Mercè Gisbert

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

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6691-9170

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4372-9312

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5909-1099

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

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.

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

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

. 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

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

problem‐solving

collaboration

creativity

discipline

presentation

numberofteachers

skills

Teacherviewsonstudents'

skills

neutral probablyyes definitelyyes

basicprogramming

principles

basicengineering

principles

numberofteachers

agreementonstudents'learning

Teacherviewsonstudents'learning

definitelyyes somewhatyes neutral

somewhatno definitelyno

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

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