Primary and Secondary School Students Perspective on Kolb-based STEM Module and Robotic Prototype

Noor Faridatul Ainun Zainal, Rosseni Din, Nazatul Aini Abd Majid, Mohammad Faidzul Nasrudin, Abdul Hadi Abd Rahman

Abstract


The aim of this paper is to assess students' perceptions of their competency and interests in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) throughout Malaysia. These perceptions are obtained during and after they were engaged in using a STEM module and building a robotic prototype that was in line with the STEM teachers' specification, and was conducted at the National Science Centre, Malaysia. This activity was undertaken because the target ratio for the number of students enrolling in STEM programs is not met. The developed STEM module is based on four stages of the learning cycle in Kolb's experiential learning theory. The stages are Concrete Experience, Reflective  Observation, Abstract Conceptualization, and Active Experimentation. These stages have five key educational activities which are watching videos, reading modules, assembling robotic components, drag and drop using blockly software and lastly playing a robotic game.  The key element of the activities is the utilisation of a robotic prototype as the main component in increasing the students’ interest in STEM via games. This module was evaluated in both qualitative and quantitative case studies of students to inform teachers’ perceptions of the developed modules and robotic prototypes. Data were collected through two training events at a science exhibition at the National Science Centre and taken from two distinct groups, namely primary and secondary school students in range 11 to 15 year old. The evaluation comprised of five areas which were interaction, engagement, challenge, competency and interest. The results show that developed module and robotic prototype based n teacher’s perception received positive response from the respondents. It can efficiently raise students’ interest in STEM that meets the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013-2025. 


Keywords


Robotic Module; STEM education; Game-based learning; Student Perception; Interest.

Full Text:

PDF

References


H. M. Fadzil and R. M. Saat, “Enhancing STEM Education during School Transition: Bridging the Gap in Science Manipulative Skills,†EURASIA J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 209–218, Jun. 2014.

E. Susilo et al., “STORMLab for STEM Education: An Affordable Modular Robotic Kit for Integrated Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Education,†IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag., vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 47–55, 2016.

S. Ziaeefard, N. Mahmoudian, M. Miller, and M. Rastgaar, “Engaging students in STEM learning through co-robotic hands-on activities (Evaluation),†in ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition, Conference Proceedings, 2016, vol. 2016–June.

C. C. Meng, N. Idris, and L. K. Eu, “Secondary Students’ Perceptions of Assessments in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM),†EURASIA J. Math. Sci. Technol. Educ., vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 219–227, Jun. 2014.

K. Francis-Poscente and B. Davis, “LEGO ROBOTICS TEACHER PROFESSIONAL LEARNING,†in First Meeting between the National Pedagogic University and the Faculty of Education of the University of Calgary, 2013, pp. 113–117.

J. Fan, S., & Ritz, “International Views of STEM Education,†in Proceedings PATT-28 Conference, 2014, pp. 4–14.

Aina Nasa & Zafira Anwar, “Too few STEM students,†New Straits Time, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.nst.com.my/news/2016/05/147260/too-few-stem-students. [Accessed: 28-Nov-2017].

N. K. DeJarnette, “America’s children: Providing early exposure to STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) initiatives,†Education, vol. 133, pp. 77–84, 2012.

X. Wang, “Why Students Choose STEM Majors: Motivation, High School Learning, and Postsecondary Context of Support,†Am. Educ. Res. J., vol. 50, no. 5, pp. 1081–1121, 2013.

The Star, “PM: Success STEMs,†7 Jun 2014, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2014/06/07/pm-success-stems-from-motivation-dont-be-afraid-of-subjects-like-science-and-math/. [Accessed: 28-Nov-2017].

N. A. Abd Majid and N. K. Husain, “Mobile learning application based on augmented reality for science subject: Isains,†ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci., vol. 9, no. 9, pp. 1455–1460, 2014.

V. Gopalan et al., “Evaluation of E-star: An enhanced science textbook using augmented reality among lower secondary school students,†J. Teknol., vol. 77, no. 29, pp. 55–61, 2015.

H. S. Park, A. Hiroyuki, and J. M. Kim, “The Extraction of Knowledge Factors of Teachers for Physical Computing Education,†Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 30–36, 2018.

A. B. Bawamohiddin and R. Razali, “Problem-based learning for programming education,†Int. J. Adv. Sci. Eng. Inf. Technol., vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 2035–2050, Jan. 2017.

Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, Kemahiran Berfikir Aras Tinggi Aplikasi di Sekolah. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia Bahagian Pembangunan Kurikulum, 2014.

S. Bruder and K. Wedeward, “Robotics in the Classroom,†IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, vol. 10, no. 3. pp. 25–29, 2003.

and L. S. P. Mosley, G. Ardito, “Robotic Cooperative Learning Promotes Student STEM Interest,†Am. J. Eng. Educ., vol. 7, no. 2, 2016.

S. Ludi, “Section 2 Educational Robotics in K-12 Formal Learning Chapter 5 Robotics and Problem-Based Learning in STEM Formal Educational Environments.â€

A. J. L. J McLurkin, J Rykowski, M John, Q Kaseman, Using Multi-Robot Systems for Engineering Education: Teaching and Outreach with Large Numbers of an Advanced, Low-Cost Robot, vol. 56, no. 1. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 1963.

C. Chalmers, B. Wightman, and R. Nason, “Engaging students (and their teachers) in STEM through robotics,†Fac. Educ., Jul. 2014.

J. Ben Brahim, T., Marghitu, D. & Weaver, “A Survey on Robotic Educational Platforms for K-12,†in E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare and Higher Education, 2012, vol. 2012, no. 1, pp. 41–48.

T. a Mikropoulos and I. Bellou, “Educational Robotics as Mindtools,†Themes Sci. Technol. Educ., 2013.

G. Ardito, P. Mosley, and L. Scollins, “WE, ROBOT Using Robotics to Promote Collaborative and Mathematics Learning in a Middle School Classroom,†Middle Grades Res. J., 2014.

A. Yuen, T.T., Boecking, M., Stone, J., Tiger, E.P., Gomez, A., Guillen, A. & Arreguin, “Group Tasks, Activities, Dynamics, and Interactions in Collaborative Robotics Projects with Elementary and Middle School Children,†J. STEM Educ. Innov. Res., vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 39–45, 2014.

S. Blanchard, V. Freiman, and N. Lirrete-Pitre, “Strategies used by elementary schoolchildren solving robotics-based complex tasks: innovative potential of technology,†Procedia - Soc. Behav. Sci., vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 2851–2857, Jan. 2010.

S. Atmatzidou and S. Demetriadis, “Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences,†Rob. Auton. Syst., vol. 75, pp. 661–670, Jan. 2016.

T. Keane, C. Chalmers, M. Williams, and M. Boden, “The impact of humanoid robots on students’ computational thinking,†Sch. Teach. Educ. Leadership; Fac. Educ., 2016.

Nelson Carl A., “Generating Transferable Skills in STEM through Educational Robotics,†in Robots in K-12 Education, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, USA: IGI Global, 2012, pp. 54–65.

D. A. Kolb, Experiential learning : experience as the source of learning and development. 1984.

S. M. Salleh, Z. Shukur, and H. M. Judi, “Scaffolding Model for Efficient Programming Learning Based on Cognitive Load Theory,†Int. J. Pure Appl. Math., vol. 118, no. 7, pp. 77–83, 2018.

R. Mason and G. Cooper, “Mindstorms robots and the application of cognitive load theory in introductory programming Publication details,†Comput. Sci. Educ., vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 296–314, 2013.

K. C. Yir, H. Arshad, and E. Sundararajan, “Offline Programming to Control Robot Manipulator in Virtual Kinematic Learning Tool,†Adv. Mater. Res., vol. 845, pp. 740–744, Dec. 2013.

N. F. A. Zainal et al., “Robotic prototype and module specification for increasing the interest of Malaysian students in STEM Education,†Int. J. Eng. Technol., vol. 7, no. 25, pp. 286–290, 2018.

T. W. Price and T. Barnes, “Comparing Textual and Block Interfaces in a Novice Programming Environment.â€

A. Konak, T. K. Clark, and M. Nasereddin, “Using Kolb’s Experiential Learning Cycle to improve student learning in virtual computer laboratories,†Comput. Educ., vol. 72, pp. 11–22, Mar. 2014.

M. A. Zahiri Megat Zakaria, B. Aris, and J. Harun, “KEMAHIRAN ICT DI KALANGAN GURU-GURU PELATIH UTM : SATU TINJAUAN,†1st Int. Malaysian Educ. Technol. Conv., 2007.

Jamil Ahmad and Subahan Meerah, “Pemupukan budaya penyelidikan di kalangan guru di sekolah : Satu penilaian.,†Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 2002.

U.S. Department of Education, “National education technology plan 2010,†National education technology plan 2010, 2010. [Online]. Available: http://www.ed.gov/technology/netp-2010/recommendations. [Accessed: 03-Jul-2018].




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.8.4-2.6794

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Published by INSIGHT - Indonesian Society for Knowledge and Human Development