skip to main content
10.1145/3218585.3218600acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdsaiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Educational Robotics and Down syndrome: Investigating student performance and motivation

Authors Info & Claims
Published:20 June 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper addresses the implementation of a particular didactic scenario using educational robotics in special education and examines its impacts. It reports on a single subject experiment study which involved the design, implementation and evaluation of a didactic intervention in which a child with Down syndrome (CDS) constructed and programmed a programmable robot, using the Lego Wedo 2.0 kit, in order to learn about one particular subject of History (the Odyssey in Greek Mythology). The research questions are related to the impact of this particular educational robotics intervention on the performance of the child and the motivation to participate. The qualitative results collected through initial/final evaluations, interviews and non-participative observation are very encouraging. It seems that there was a positive effect both on the performance and motivation of the child. Educational robotics seem to offer new opportunities and potentials in alternative education of children with Down syndrome.

References

  1. PEKaP (Greek Union of Computer Science Teachers). (2010). Educational robotics in elementary school, (dide.ilei.sch.gr/keplinet/education/docs/pekap_edurobotic.pdf, last access 01/03/2018)Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Raptis, A., & Rapti, A. (2014). Learning and teaching in the information age, Volume 1. Athens. Aristotle Raptis Vasaiou.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Alimisis, D. (2013). Educational Robotics: new challenges and trends. Themes in Science and Technology, 63--71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Johnson, J. (2003). Children, robotics, and education, Artif Life Robotics. ISAROB.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Margetusaki, A., Anagnostakis, S., & Michaelides, P. (2008). Informal learning in an educational robotics environment. 4th Greek Conference on Didactic of Computer Science, Patra.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Kärnä-Lin, E., Pihlainen-Bednarik, K., Sutinen, E., & Virnes, M. (2006). Can Robots Teach? Preliminary Results on Educational Robotics in Special. 6th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. IEEE Computer Society. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Andruseac, G. et al. (2015). Benefits of new laboratory tools in research and education. Recent Advances in Computer Science, 19th International Conference on Computers. Zakynthos.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Anagnostakis, S., Margetusaki, A., & Michaelides, P.G. (2008). Possibility of a robotics educational lab in schools. 4th Panhellenic Conference on Computer Science Teaching. Patra.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Karatrantou, A., Panagiotakopoulos, Ch., & Pieris, E. (2006). Lego Mindstorms removable constructions in the distribution of natural physics in the primary school, Information and Communication Technologies in Education.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Terzidis, S., Goumanakis, G., & Spyratou, E. (2009). A proposal for teaching systems. 5th conference on syropets in education. Syros.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Pennisi, P., Tonacci, A., Tartarisco, G., et al (2016). Autism and Social Robotics: A Systematic Review. Autism Research, 165--183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Polychronopoulou, S. (2010). Children and teenagers with special needs and potential, Volume B. Athens. ATRAPOS.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Sarafidou, C.-D. (2011). Bridging quantitative and qualitative approaches: Empirical Research. Athens. Gutenberg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Babbie, E. (2011). Introduction to social research. Athens. Criticism.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Agaliotis, I. (2011). Educational assessment of pupils with learning and adaptation difficulties: The Assessment System of Learning Needs. Athens. GRIGORI.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Mautone J. A., DuPaul, G. J., & Jitendra, A. K. (2005). The effects of computer-assisted instruction on the mathematics performance and classroom behavior of children with ADHD. Journal of Attention Disorders, 9,301--312.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Darais, K.A. (2002). Reading, writing and people with Down syndrome. Thessaloniki. University Studio Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Viazis, A.-O. (2012). Genetic Syndromes Related to Cognitive Deficiency - Mental Delay. Clinical Pediatric Psychology, 314--355. Thessaloniki. GOTSIS.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Virnes, M. (2008). Robotics in Special Needs Education. IDC 2008 Proceedings - Doctor Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Educational Robotics and Down syndrome: Investigating student performance and motivation

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      DSAI '18: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusion
      June 2018
      365 pages
      ISBN:9781450364676
      DOI:10.1145/3218585

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 June 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      DSAI '18 Paper Acceptance Rate17of23submissions,74%Overall Acceptance Rate17of23submissions,74%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader