Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

You are an astroneer: the effects of robotics camps on secondary school students’ perceptions and attitudes towards STEM

  • Published:
International Journal of Technology and Design Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Creativity, critical thinking, communication and collaboration are thought to be the core skills that will enable students to be successful in the future. Economic and social development of a nation is associated with the individuals’ such new skills, which are commonly referred as the twenty-first-century skills. However, the educational methods used in transmitting knowledge from teachers to students are not capable enough to bring up such competent individuals. The “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics” (STEM) education is a promising approach to help students gain those skills and robotics offers opportunities to integrate STEM education. This study aims to investigate the effects of robotics summer camps with STEM activities on students’ perception and attitudes towards STEM. The researchers organized two robotics summer camps in 2017 and 2018 with 48 students. Data were collected by using the STEM Perception Test and STEM Attitude Test. The pre-test post-test quasi-experimental design without a control group was used in the study. Wilcoxon’s Matched-Pairs Signed-Ranks tests showed that students’ perceptions towards STEM increased at the first robotics camp; however, students’ attitudes towards STEM did not change significantly in both robotics camps. Furthermore, mathematics sub-dimension of STEM perception at the first camp and science sub-dimension of STEM attitude at the second camp significantly increased.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behavior. . McGraw-Hill Education.

  • Alimisis, D. (2013). Educational robotics: Open questions and new challenges. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 6(1), 63–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alimisis, D., & Kynigos, C. (2009). Constructionism and Robotics in education. In Alimisis, D (Ed.) Teacher education on robotics-enhanced constructivist pedagogical methods (pp. 11–26). Retrieved from http://dide.ilei.sch.gr/keplinet/education/docs/book_TeacherEducationOnRobotics-ASPETE.pdf

  • Bazzett, T. J., Zahid, Z., & Brady, M. A. (2018). Engaging, entertaining, and educating under-served and at-risk youth with STEM-based activities. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 17(1), A89–A96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beers, S. Z. (2011). What are the skills students will need in the 21 st century? 1–6. Retrieved from https://cosee.umaine.edu/files/coseeos/21st_century_skills.pdf

  • Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers and Education, 58(3), 978–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benitti, F. B. V., & Spolaôr, N. (2017). How have robots supported STEM teaching? In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Robotics in STEM education: Redesigning the learning experience. (pp. 103–129). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57786-9_5.

  • Binns, I. C., Polly, D., Conrad, J., & Algozzine, B. (2016). Student perceptions of a summer ventures in science and mathematics camp experience. School Science and Mathematics, 116(8), 420–429. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Büyüköztürk, Ş, Kılıç Çakmak, E., Akgün, Ö. E., Karadeniz, Ş, & Demirel, F. (2017). Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemleri. (22nd ed.). Pegem. https://doi.org/10.14527/9789944919289.

  • Bybee, R. W. (2010a). Advancing STEM education: A 2020 vision. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 70(1), 30–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W. (2010b). What is STEM education? Science, 329(5995), 996–996. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bybee, R. W. (2013). The case for STEM education: Challenges and opportunities. NSTA Press. https://doi.org/10.2505/9781936959259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castro, E., Cecchi, F., Salvini, P., Valente, M., Buselli, E., Menichetti, L., & Dario, P. (2018). Design and impact of a teacher training course, and attitude change concerning educational robotics. International Journal of Social Robotics, 10(5), 669–685. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-018-0475-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chalmers, C. (2018). Robotics and computational thinking in primary school. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 17, 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2018.06.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, Y., & Chang, C. C. (2018). The impact of an integrated robotics STEM course with a sailboat topic on high school students’ perceptions of integrative STEM, interest, and career orientation. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 14(12), 1614–1633. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/94314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., Shen, J., Barth-Cohen, L., Jiang, S., Huang, X., & Eltoukhy, M. (2017). Assessing elementary students’ computational thinking in everyday reasoning and robotics programming. Computers & Education, 109, 162–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ching, Y. H., Yang, D., Wang, S., Baek, Y., Swanson, S., & Chittoori, B. (2019). Elementary school student development of STEM attitudes and perceived learning in a STEM integrated robotics curriculum. TechTrends, 63(5), 590–601. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00388-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, R., Knezek, G., & Tyler-Wood, T. (2015). Alignment of hands-on STEM engagement activities with positive STEM dispositions in secondary school students. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 24(6), 898–909. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-015-9572-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung, C. J. C., Cartwright, C., & Cole, M. (2014). Assessing the impact of an autonomous robotics Competition for STEM education. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 15(2), 24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conrad, J., Polly, D., Binns, I., & Algozzine, B. (2018). Student perceptions of a summer robotics camp experience. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 91(3), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2018.1436819.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corlu, M. S., Capraro, R. M., & Capraro, M. M. (2014). Introducing STEM education : Implications for educating our teachers for the age of innovation. Education & Science, 39(171), 74–85.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ding, F., Cai, M., & Chen, S. (2019). Application of STEAM Theory in Robot Teaching. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on economics and management, education, humanities and social sciences-EMEHSS 2019 (pp. 109–113). https://doi.org/10.2991/emehss-19.2019.24

  • Eguchi, A. (2014). Educational robotics for promoting 21st century skills. Journal of Automation Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems, 8(1), 5–11. https://doi.org/10.14313/jamris_1-2014/1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eguchi, A. (2015). Educational robotics as a learning tool for promoting rich environments for active learning (REALs). Handbook of Research on Educational Technology Integration and Active Learning. IGI Global, PA (pp. 19–47). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-8363-1.ch002

  • Eguchi, A. (2016). RoboCupJunior for promoting STEM education, 21st century skills, and technological advancement through robotics competition. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 692–699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2015.05.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eguchi, A. (2017). Bringing robotics in classrooms. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Robotics in STEM education. (pp. 3–31). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57786-9_1.

  • Fraenkel, J., Wallen, N., & Hyun, H. (2011). How to Design and evaluate research in education. (8th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

  • Friday Institute for Educational Innovation (2012). Student Attitudes toward STEM: Survey-upper Elementary School Students, Raleigh, NC: Author

  • Gazibeyoglu, T., & Aydin, A. (2019). The effect of STEM-based activities on 7th grade students’ academic achievement in force and energy unit and students’ opinions about these activities. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 7(5), 1275–1285. https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2019.070513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garber, G. (2013). Instant LEGO Mindstorm EV 3. Packt Publishing. Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/book/253053736/Instant-LEGO-Mindstorm-EV3

  • Gura, M. (2012). Lego robotics: STEM sport of the mind. Learning & Leading with Technology, 40(1), 12–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzey, S. S., Harwell, M., & Moore, T. (2014). Development of an instrument to assess attitudes toward science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). School Science and Mathematics, 114(6), 271–279. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12077.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gülhan, F., & Şahin, F. (2016). The effects of science-technology-engineering-math (STEM) integration on 5th grade students’ perceptions and attitudes towards these areas. International Journal of Human Sciences, 13(1), 602. https://doi.org/10.14687/ijhs.v13i1.3447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallström, J., & Schönborn, K. J. (2019). Models and modelling for authentic STEM education: Reinforcing the argument. International Journal of STEM Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-019-0178-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmquist, S. K. (2014). A Multi-Case Study of Student Interactions with Educational Robots and Impact on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) Learning and Attitudes. University of South Florida. Retrieved from https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6239&context=etd

  • Howell, D. C. (2014). Fundamental Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Retrieved from https://www.uvm.edu/~statdhtx/fundamentals8/index.html

  • Ioannou, A., & Makridou, E. (2018). Exploring the potentials of educational robotics in the development of computational thinking: A summary of current research and practical proposal for future work. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2531–2544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9729-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jim, C. K. W. (2010). Teaching with LEGO Mindstorms Robots: Effects on Learning Environment and Attitudes toward Science. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. The University of Texas at Dallas, United States, Texas. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/851128461

  • Kafai, Y. (Ed.), Resnick, M. (Ed.). (1996). Constructionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking, and Learning in a Digital World. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203053492

  • Kaloti-Hallak, F., Armoni, M., & Ben-Ari, M. (2015). Students' attitudes and motivation during robotics activities. In Proceedings of the Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (pp. 102–110). https://doi.org/10.1145/2818314.2818317

  • Kelley, T. R., & Knowles, J. G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. International Journal of STEM Education. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-016-0046-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khanlari, A. (2013). Effects of educational robots on learning STEM and on students’ attitude toward STEM. In Proceedings of 5th international conference on engineering education: aligning engineering education with industrial needs for nation development, ICEED 2013, (pp. 62–66). https://doi.org/10.1109/iceed.2013.6908304

  • Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers’ STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Computers & Education, 91, 14–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knezek, G., Christensen, R., Tyler-Wood, T., & Periathiruvadi, S. (2013). Impact of environmental power monitoring activities on middle school student perceptions of STEM. Science Education International, 24(1), 98–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knezek, G., & Christensen, R. (1998). Internal consistency reliability for the teachers’ attitudes toward information technology (TAT) questionnaire. In Proceedings of the society for information technology in teacher education annual conference (pp. 831–836).

  • Kucuk, S., & Sisman, B. (2017). Behavioral patterns of elementary students and teachers in one-to-one robotics instruction. Computers & Education, 111, 31–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.04.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkins, D. B., Moore, J. C., Rubbo, L. J., & Covington, L. R. (2013). Application of the Cognitive Apprenticeship Framework to a Middle School Robotics Camp. In Proceeding of the 44th ACM technical symposium on computer science education-SIGCSE13 (pp. 89–94). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2445196.2445226

  • Leonard, J., Buss, A., Gamboa, R., Mitchell, M., Fashola, O. S., Hubert, T., & Almughyirah, S. (2016a). Using robotics and game design to enhance children’s self-efficacy, STEM attitudes, and computational thinking skills. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25(6), 860–876. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9628-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard, J., Buss, A., Unertl, A., & Mitchell, M. (2016b). Using robotics and game design to promote pathways to STEM. North American Chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (pp. 1487–1494). Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED583748.pdf

  • Lin, K. Y., Hsiao, H. S., Williams, P. J., & Chen, Y. H. (2020). Effects of 6E-oriented STEM practical activities in cultivating middle school students’ attitudes toward technology and technological inquiry ability. Research in Science & Technological Education, 38(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/02635143.2018.1561432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Huang, Z., Jiang, M., & Chang, T. W. (2016). The effect on pupils’ science performance and problem-solving ability through lego: An engineering design-based modeling approach. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(3), 143–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maio, G. R., & Haddock, G. (2004). Theories of attitude: Creating a witches’ brew. In Contemporary perspectives on the psychology of attitudes (pp. 443–471). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446214299

  • Maio, G. R., Haddock, G., & Verplanken, B. (2018). The psychology of attitudes and attitude change. Sage Publications Limited. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446214299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malec, J. (2001). Some thoughts on robotics for education. In 2001 AAAI spring symposium on robotics and education. Retrieved from http://fileadmin.cs.lth.se/cs/Personal/Jacek_Malec/psfiles/aaai01rae.pdf

  • Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among US students. Science Education, 95(5), 877–907. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20441.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mataric, M. J., Koenig, N. P., & Feil-Seifer, D. (2007). Materials for enabling hands-on robotics and STEM education. In AAAI Spring symposium: Semantic scientific knowledge integration (pp. 99–102). Retrieved from https://www.aaai.org/Papers/Symposia/Spring/2007/SS-07-09/SS07-09-022.pdf

  • Maxwell, J. W. (2006). Re-situating constructionism. The International Handbook of Virtual Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-3803-7_11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı (MEB), (2016). Bilim ve Sanat Merkezleri Yönergesi. Retrieved from https://orgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2016_10/07031350_bilsem_yonergesi.pdf

  • Moore, T. J. (2008). STEM integration: Crossing disciplinary borders to promote learning and engagement. Invited Presentation to the Faculty and Graduate Students of the UTeachEngineering, UTeachNatural Sciences, and STEM Education Program Area at University of Texas at Austin, 1–13.

  • Myers, D. G., & DeWall, C. N. (2018). Psychology (12th Ed.). Macmillan Learning. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=16iIswEACAAJ

  • National Education Association. (2012). Preparing 21st century students for a global society: An educator’s guide to the “Four Cs.” . National Education Association.

  • National Research Council. (2011). Successful K-12 STEM education: Identifying effective approaches in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. . National Academies Press.

  • Nemiro, J., Larriva, C., & Jawaharlal, M. (2017). Developing Creative behavior in elementary school students with robotics. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 51(1), 70–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/jocb.87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nugent, G., Barker, B., Grandgenett, N., & Welch, G. (2016). Robotics camps, clubs, and competitions: Results from a US robotics project. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 686–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2015.07.011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortiz, A. M., Bos, B., & Smith, S. (2015). The power of educational robotics as an integrated STEM learning experience in teacher preparation programs. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(5), 42–47. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst15_044_05_42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Páez, T. M., Aguilera, D., Javier, F., & Palacios, P. (2019). What are we talking about when we talk about STEM education ? A review of literature. Science Education, 103(4), 799–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21522.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Papert, S. (1993). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.

  • Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). (2009). Framework for 21st Century Learning P21 Tucson, AZ. Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/storage/documents/docs/P21_framework_0816.pdf. Accessed 20 Sept 2018.

  • Pickens, J. (2005). Attitudes and Perceptions. Organizational Behavior in Health Care, 43–76.

  • Reich-Stiebert, N., Eyssel, F., & Hohnemann, C. (2019). Involve the User! changing attitudes toward robots by user participation in a robot prototyping process. Computers in Human Behavior, 91, 290–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.09.041.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, T., Jackson, C., Mohr-Schroeder, M. J., Bush, S. B., Maiorca, C., Cavalcanti, M., & Cremeans, C. (2018). Students’ perceptions of STEM learning after participating in a summer informal learning experience. International Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-018-0133-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sahin, A., Ayar, M. C., & Adiguzel, T. (2013). STEM related after-school program activities and associated outcomes on student learning. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(1), 309–323. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.1.1876.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sansing, C. (2014). A highly intelligent brick. . Media Source Inc.

  • Scott, C. E. (2009). A Comparative Case Study of the Characteristics of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Focused High Schools. (M. Hjalmarson, Ed.), Development. George Mason University, Virginia, United States.

  • Sherrod, S. E., Dwyer, J., & Narayan, R. (2009). Developing science and math integrated activities for middle school students. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 40(2), 247–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simonson, M. R., & Maushak, N. (1996). Situated learning, instructional technology, and attitude change. Situated Learning Perspectives, 225–242.

  • Takacs, A., Eigner, G., Kovács, L., Rudas, I. J., & Haidegger, T. (2016). Teacher’s Kit: Development, Usability, and Communities of Modular Robotic Kits for Classroom Education. In Proceedings of IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 23, (pp. 30–39). https://doi.org/10.1109/mra.2016.2548754

  • Tanenbaum, C. (2016). STEM 2026: A vision for innovation in STEM education. . US Department of Education.

  • Tang, K., & Williams, P. J. (2019). STEM literacy or literacies? Examining the empirical basis of these constructs. Review of Education, 7(3), 675–697. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, K., & Baek, Y. (2019). Grouping Matters in computational robotic activities. Computers in Human Behavior, 93, 99–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thibaut, L., Knipprath, H., Dehaene, W., & Depaepe, F. (2018). The influence of teachers’ attitudes and school context on instructional practices in integrated STEM education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 71, 190–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.12.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsupros, N., Kohler, R., & Hallinen, J. (2009). STEM education: A project to identify the missing components, Intermediate Unit 1 and Carnegie Mellon. . Pennsylvania.

  • Unfried, A., Faber, M., Stanhope, D. S., & Wiebe, E. (2015). The development and validation of a measure of student attitudes toward science, technology, engineering, and math (S-STEM). Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33(7), 622–639. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282915571160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vennix, J., den Brok, P., & Taconis, R. (2018). Do outreach activities in secondary STEM education motivate students and improve their attitudes towards STEM? International Journal of Science Education, 40(11), 1263–1283. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1473659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiebe, E., Unfried, A., & Faber, M. (2018). The Relationship of STEM attitudes and career interest. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/92286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimbardo, P. G., & Leippe, M. R. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social influence. . Mcgraw-Hill Book Company.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Education and Instructional Technologies, Education Faculty at Kırıkkale University, Yahşihan, Kırıkkale, Turkey

    Memet Üçgül & Serhat Altıok

Authors
  1. Memet Üçgül
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Serhat Altıok
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Memet Üçgül.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Üçgül, M., Altıok, S. You are an astroneer: the effects of robotics camps on secondary school students’ perceptions and attitudes towards STEM. Int J Technol Des Educ 32, 1679–1699 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09673-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09673-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation