skip to main content
10.1145/3563657.3596092acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdisConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Teaching technical and societal aspects of IoT - A case study using the Orbit IoT Kit

Published: 10 July 2023 Publication History

Abstract

Increasingly, IoT kits are used in pedagogical contexts to support learning experiences and teach students about IoT. However, few of them focus on both the technical aspects and the societal implications of IoT, such as cybersecurity and privacy. In this paper, we describe the Orbit IoT Kit, a micro:bit-based toolkit that supports teachers in IoT activities. The kit combines the microcontroller with relays and a web application, enabling students to connect everyday objects to the Internet and visualize the devices’ data flow. Based on an intervention in a secondary school with 3 teachers and 20 students of ages 12-13, our results indicate that the design and features of the kit — internet communication and data visualization — support teachers to engage students in learning about a holistic perspective of IoT. We reflect on our research propositions, discuss design strategies, and present three design recommendations for IoT toolkits: Connectivity, Visualization, and Openness.

References

[1]
Jatin Arora, Kartik Mathur, Manvi Goel, Piyush Kumar, Abhijeet Mishra, and Aman Parnami. 2019. Design and evaluation of dio construction toolkit for co-making shared constructions. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 3, 4 (2019), 1–25.
[2]
Karl-Emil Kjær Bilstrup, Magnus Høholt Kaspersen, Mille Skovhus Lunding, Marie-Monique Schaper, Maarten Van Mechelen, Mariana Aki Tamashiro, Rachel Charlotte Smith, Ole Sejer Iversen, and Marianne Graves Petersen. 2022. Supporting Critical Data Literacy in K-9 Education: Three Principles for Enriching Pupils’ Relationship to Data. In Interaction Design and Children. 225–236.
[3]
Susanne Bødker and Morten Kyng. 2018. Participatory design that matters—Facing the big issues. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 25, 1 (2018), 1–31.
[4]
Emanuelle Burton, Judy Goldsmith, and Nicholas Mattei. 2015. Teaching AI Ethics Using Science Fiction. In Aaai workshop: Ai and ethics. Citeseer.
[5]
Daniel Callahan and Sissela Bok. 2012. Ethics teaching in higher education. Springer Science & Business Media.
[6]
Michael E Caspersen. 2022. Informatics as a Fundamental Discipline in General Education: The Danish Perspective. Perspectives on Digital Humanism (2022), 191.
[7]
Konstantinos T Delistavrou and Achilles D Kameas. 2017. Exploring ways to exploit UMI technologies in STEM education: Comparison of secondary computer science curricula of Greece, Cyprus and England. In 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). IEEE, 1824–1830.
[8]
Christian Dindler, Rachel Smith, and Ole Sejer Iversen. 2020. Computational empowerment: participatory design in education. CoDesign 16, 1 (2020), 66–80.
[9]
Christian Dindler, Rachel Smith, and Ole Sejer Iversen. 2020. Computational empowerment: participatory design in education. CoDesign 16, 1 (2020), 66–80.
[10]
Christian Dindler, Rachel Charlotte Smith, and Ole Sejer Iversen. 2019. En designtilgang til teknologiforståelse. Dafolo.
[11]
Benedict Du Boulay, Tim O’Shea, and John Monk. 1981. The black box inside the glass box: presenting computing concepts to novices. International Journal of man-machine studies 14, 3 (1981), 237–249.
[12]
Micro:bit Educational Foundation. 2022. Micro:Bit educational foundation. Micro (2022). https://microbit.org/
[13]
A. Freeman, S. Adams Becker, M. Cummins, A. Davis, and C. Hall Giesinger. 2017. NMC/CoSN Horizon Report: 2017 K-12 Edition. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED588803 ERIC Number: ED588803.
[14]
Dimitrios Glaroudis, Athanasios Iossifides, Natalia Spyropoulou, and Ioannis D Zaharakis. 2018. Investigating secondary students’ stance on iot driven educational activities. In European conference on ambient intelligence. Springer, 188–203.
[15]
Tom Hitron, Yoav Orlev, Iddo Wald, Ariel Shamir, Hadas Erel, and Oren Zuckerman. 2019. Can children understand machine learning concepts? The effect of uncovering black boxes. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–11.
[16]
Netta Iivari, Sumita Sharma, Leena Ventä-Olkkonen, Tonja Molin-Juustila, Kari Kuutti, Jenni Holappa, and Essi Kinnunen. 2021. Critical agenda driving child–computer interaction research—Taking a stock of the past and envisioning the future. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction (2021), 100408.
[17]
Ole Sejer Iversen, Rachel Charlotte Smith, and Christian Dindler. 2017. Child as protagonist: Expanding the role of children in participatory design. In Proceedings of the 2017 conference on interaction design and children. 27–37.
[18]
Ole Sejer Iversen, Rachel Charlotte Smith, and Christian Dindler. 2018. From computational thinking to computational empowerment: a 21st century PD agenda. In Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers-Volume 1. 1–11.
[19]
Mohammad S. Jalali, Jessica P. Kaiser, Michael Siegel, and Stuart Madnick. 2019. The Internet of Things Promises New Benefits and Risks: A Systematic Analysis of Adoption Dynamics of IoT Products. IEEE Security & Privacy 17, 2 (2019), 39–48. https://doi.org/10.1109/MSEC.2018.2888780
[20]
Yasmin Kafai, Chris Proctor, and Debora Lui. 2020. From theory bias to theory dialogue: embracing cognitive, situated, and critical framings of computational thinking in K-12 CS education. ACM Inroads 11, 1 (2020), 44–53.
[21]
Vassilis Kostakos, Eamonn O’Neill, Linda Little, and Elizabeth Sillence. 2005. The social implications of emerging technologies., 475–483 pages.
[22]
Marge Kusmin, Merike Saar, and Mart Laanpere. 2018. Smart schoolhouse—Designing IoT study kits for project-based learning in STEM subjects. In 2018 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). IEEE, 1514–1517.
[23]
Kalliopi Magdalinou and Spyros Papadakis. 2017. The use of educational scenarios using state-of-the-art it technologies such as ubiquitous computing, mobile computing and the internet of things as an incentive to choose a scientific career. In Interactive Mobile Communication, Technologies and Learning. Springer, 915–923.
[24]
[24] MakeCode Micro:bit. 2022. https://makecode.microbit.org/
[25]
Filipe T Moreira, Mário Vairinhos, and Fernando Ramos. 2020. Open IoT technologies in the classroom—a case study on the student’s perception. In 2020 15th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI). IEEE, 1–6.
[26]
[26] Eclipse Mosquitto. 2018. https://mosquitto.org/
[27]
Georgios Mylonas, Dimitrios Amaxilatis, Ioannis Chatzigiannakis, Aris Anagnostopoulos, and Federica Paganelli. 2018. Enabling sustainability and energy awareness in schools based on iot and real-world data. IEEE Pervasive Computing 17, 4 (2018), 53–63.
[28]
Koki Ota, Tsuyoshi Nakajima, and Hiroki Suda. 2020. A short-term course of steam education through iot exercises for high school students. In 2020 IEEE 44th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC). IEEE, 153–157.
[29]
Arun Rai. 2020. Explainable AI: From black box to glass box. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 48, 1 (2020), 137–141.
[30]
Sandip Ray, Yier Jin, and Arijit Raychowdhury. 2016. The changing computing paradigm with internet of things: A tutorial introduction. IEEE Design & Test 33, 2 (2016), 76–96.
[31]
Daniele Rotolo, Diana Hicks, and Ben R. Martin. 2015. What is an emerging technology?Research Policy 44, 10 (2015), 1827–1843. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2015.06.006 arxiv:1503.00673
[32]
Joel Sadler, Lauren Shluzas, Paulo Blikstein, and Riitta Katila. 2016. Building blocks of the maker movement: Modularity enhances creative confidence during prototyping. In Design Thinking Research. Springer, 141–154.
[33]
William A Sandoval and Philip Bell. 2004. Design-based research methods for studying learning in context: Introduction. Educational psychologist 39, 4 (2004), 199–201.
[34]
Marie-Monique Schaper, Rachel Charlotte Smith, Mariana Aki Tamashiro, Maarten Van Mechelen, Mille Skovhus Lunding, Karl-Emil Kjæer Bilstrup, Magnus Høholt Kaspersen, Kasper Løvborg Jensen, Marianne Graves Petersen, and Ole Sejer Iversen. 2022. Computational empowerment in practice: Scaffolding teenagers’ learning about emerging technologies and their ethical and societal impact. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction (2022), 100537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2022.100537
[35]
Gelson Schneider, Flavia Bernardini, and Clodis Boscarioli. 2020. Teaching CT through Internet of Things in High School: Possibilities and Reflections. In 2020 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE). IEEE, 1–8.
[36]
Rachel Charlotte Smith and Ole Sejer Iversen. 2018. Participatory design for sustainable social change. Design Studies 59 (2018), 9–36.
[37]
Natalia Spyropoulou, Dimitrios Glaroudis, Athanasios Iossifides, and Ioannis D Zaharakis. 2020. Fostering Secondary Students’ STEM Career Awareness through IoT Hands-On Educational Activities: Experiences and Lessons Learned. IEEE Communications Magazine 58, 2 (2020), 86–92.
[38]
Matti Tedre, Tapani Toivonen, Juho Kaihila, Henriikka Vartiainen, Teemu Valtonen, Ilkka Jormanainen, and Arnold Pears. 2021. Teaching Machine Learning in K-12 Computing Education: Potential and Pitfalls. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.11034 (2021).
[39]
MQTT The standard for IOT messaging. 2022. The standard for IOT messaging. https://mqtt.org/
[40]
Mike Tissenbaum and Anne Ottenbreit-Leftwich. 2020. A vision of K— 12 computer science education for 2030. Commun. ACM 63, 5 (2020), 42–44.
[41]
Mike Tissenbaum, David Weintrop, Nathan Holbert, and Tamara Clegg. 2021. The case for alternative endpoints in computing education. British Journal of Educational Technology 52, 3 (2021), 1164–1177.
[42]
Cecília Cristina Dos Reis Tomás and António Moreira Teixeira. 2020. Ethical Challenges in the Use of Iot in Education: On the Path to Personalization. In EDEN Conference Proceedings. 217–226.
[43]
Lorraine Underwood, Karen Smith, Elisa Rubegni, and Joe Finney. 2022. Energy in Schools: Empowering Children to Deliver Behavioural Change for Sustainability. In Interaction Design and Children. 308–314.
[44]
United Nations Children’s Fund UNICEF. 2019. 1–12 pages.
[45]
Alex Vakaloudis, Kieran Delaney, Brian Cahill, and Jacqueline Kehoe. 2019. Enabling primary school teachers to deliver STEM programmes with the Internet of Things: Challenges and recipes for success. In Proceedings of the 2019 11th International Conference on Education Technology and Computers. 80–83.
[46]
Maarten Van Mechelen, Rachel Smith, Marie-Monique Schaper, Mariana Tamashiro, Karl-Emil Bilstrup, Mille Lunding, Marianne Petersen, and Ole Iversen. 2022. Emerging Technologies in K-12 Education: A Future HCI Research Agenda. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (09 2022).
[47]
Olga Viberg and Anna Mavroudi. 2018. The role of ubiquitous computing and the internet of things for developing 21 st century skills among learners: Experts’ views. In European Conference on Technology Enhanced Learning. Springer, 640–643.
[48]
Stéphan Vincent-Lancrin and Reyer van der Vlies. 2020. Trustworthy artificial intelligence (AI) in education: Promises and challenges. (2020).

Cited By

View all
  • (2023)Expanding Remote Student Learning-Internet of Things Applications and Exercises2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343065(1-8)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2023

Index Terms

  1. Teaching technical and societal aspects of IoT - A case study using the Orbit IoT Kit

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    DIS '23: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference
    July 2023
    2717 pages
    ISBN:9781450398930
    DOI:10.1145/3563657
    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 the author(s) 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].

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 10 July 2023

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Emerging Technologies
    2. K-12 education
    3. Societal Implications of Technology
    4. Technology Education
    5. Toolkit for Educators

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    DIS '23
    Sponsor:
    DIS '23: Designing Interactive Systems Conference
    July 10 - 14, 2023
    PA, Pittsburgh, USA

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 1,158 of 4,684 submissions, 25%

    Upcoming Conference

    DIS '25
    Designing Interactive Systems Conference
    July 5 - 9, 2025
    Funchal , Portugal

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)83
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)15
    Reflects downloads up to 14 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2023)Expanding Remote Student Learning-Internet of Things Applications and Exercises2023 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE)10.1109/FIE58773.2023.10343065(1-8)Online publication date: 18-Oct-2023

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media