Impact of robotics and geospatial technology interventions on youth STEM learning and attitudes

Journal of Research on Technology in Education

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 391-408

  Nugent, Gwen ^a   Barker, Bradley ^a   Grandgenett, Neal ^b   Adamchuk, Viacheslav I ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA LINCOLN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

Author keywords

Geographic information systems; GIS; Global positioning system; GPS; Robotics

Indexed keywords

EID: 85008756777     PISSN: 15391523     EISSN: 19450818     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15391523.2010.10782557     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Albanese, M. A., & Mitchell, S. (1993). Problem-based learning: A review of literature on its outcomes and implementation issues. Academic Medicine, 68, 52-81.
2. Alsop, S., & Watts, M. (2003). Science education and affect. International Journal of Science Education, 25,1043-1047.
3. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychology Review, 84,191-215.
4. Barker, B., & Ansorge, J. (2007). Robotics as means to increase achievement scores in an informal learning environment. Journal of Research on Technology Education, 39, 229-243.
5. Barnes, D. J. (2002). Teaching introductory java through LEGO Mindstorms models. In SIGCSE (Ed.), Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education. Covington, Kentucky.
6. Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 68, 85-92.
7. Beer, R., Hillel, J., Chiel, J., &Drushel, R. (1999). Using robotics to teach science and engineering. Communications of the ACM, 42, 85-92.
8. Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A., & Feder, M. (2009). Learning science in informal environments. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
9. Bonvillian, W. B. (2002). Science at a crossroads. FASEB Journal, 16, 915-921.
10. Chambers, J., & Carbonaro, M. (2003). Designing, developing, and implementing a course on LEGO robotics for technology teachers education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 11, 209-241.
11. Council, N. R. (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
12. DeBacker, T. K., & Nelson, R. M. (1999). Variations on an expectancy-value model of motivation in science. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24, 71-94.
13. Deen, M. Y., Bailey, S. J., & Parker, L. (2001). View life skills. Retrieved on April 28,2010, from http://www2.montana.edu/lifeskills/viewlife.asp
14. Dijbels, D. (2008, October). Effectiveness of problem-based learning. Retrieved October 9, 2009, from http://ww7.nationalacademiesorg/bose/Gijbels_ComissionedPaper.pdf
15. Education Week. (2008). Technology counts—STEM: The push to improve science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Bethesda, MD: Editorial Projects in Education. Retrieved on April 28, 2010, from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2008/03/27/30intro.h27.html
16. Gurses, A., Acikyildiz, M., Dogar, C., & Mustafa, S. (2007). An investigation into the effectiveness of problem-based learning in a physical chemistry laboratory course. Research in Science & Technology Education, 25, 99-113.
17. Hmelo, C. E., Gotterer, G. S., & Bransford, J. D. (1997). Theory-driven approach to assessing the cognitive effects of PBL. Instructional Science, 25, 387-408.
18. Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16,235-266.
19. Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Computers as mindtools for schools: Engaging critical thinking (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
20. Junge, S., Manglallan, S., & Raskauskas, J. (2003). Building life skills through afterschool participation in experiential and cooperative learning. Child Study Journal, 33, 165-174.
21. Koballa, J. E., & Glynn, S. (2007). Attitudinal and motivational constructs in science learning. In S. Abell & N. G. Lederman (Eds.), Handbook of research in science education (pp. 75-102). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Lemke, M., Sam, A., Pahike, E., Partelow, L., Miller, D., Williams, D., et al. (2004).
23. International outcomes of learning in mathematics literacy and problem solving: PISA 2003 results from the U.S. perspective. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
24. Mauch, E. (2001). Using technological innovation to improve the problem-solving skills of middle school students. The Clearing House, 75,211-213.
25. McWilliams, H., & Rooney, P. (1997, March). Mapping our city: Learning to use spatial data in the middle school science classroom. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED407264)
26. Milla, IC, Lorenzo, A., &Brown, C. (2005). GIS, GPS, and remote sensing technologies in extension services: Where to start, what to know. Journal of Extension, 43. Retrieved on April 28, 2010, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2005june/a6.shtml
27. Miller, D. P., &Stein, C. (2000). So that’s what pi is for and other educational epiphanies from hands-on robotics. In A. Druin & J. Hendler (Eds.), Robots for kids: Exploring new technologies for learning experiences (pp. 219-243). San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.
28. National Academy of Engineering. (2005). Engineering research and America’s future: Meeting the challenges of a global economy. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.
29. National Governors Association (n.d.). Building a science, technology, engineering and math agenda. Retrieved on April 28,2010, from http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/0707INNOVATIONFINAL.PDF
30. National Research Council. (2007). Taking science to school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences.
31. Norman, G. R., & Schmidt, H. G. (1992). The psychological basis of problem-based learning: A review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 67, 557-565.
32. Nourbakhsh, I. R., Crowley, K., Bhave, A., Hamner, E., Hsiu, T., Perez-Bergquist, A., et al. (2005). The robotic autonomy mobile robotics course: Robot design, curriculum design and educational assessment. Autonomous Robots, 18, 103-127. Retrieved on April 28, 2010, from http://www.springerlink.com/content/m5m6k5351lh08511/fulltext.pdf
33. Nourbakhsh, I., Hamner, E., Crowley, K., & Wilkinson, K. (2004). Formal measures of learning in a secondary school mobile robotics course. Paper presented at the International Conference on Robotics and Automation, New Orleans, LA.
34. Nugent, G., Barker, B., Toland, M., Grandgenett, N., & Adamchuk, V. I. (2009). Measuring the impact of robotics and geospatial technologies on youth science, technology, engineering, and mathematics attitudes. In C. Fulford & G. Siemens (Eds.), Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia, and Telecommunications (pp. 3331-3340). Chesapeake, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.
35. Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development. (2007). Education at a glance 2007: OECD indicators. Paris, France: Author.
36. Partnership for 21st Century Skills. (n.d.). Retrieved October 9,2009, from www.21stCenturySkills.org
37. Pedersen, S., &Liu, M. (2002). The transfer of problem-solving skills from a problem-based learning environment: The effect of modeling an expert’s cognitive processes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 35, 303-320.
38. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., & McKeachie, W. (1991). A manual for the use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning.
39. Pintrich, P. R., Smith, D. A. F., Garcia, T., &McKeachie, W J. (1993). Reliability and predictive validity of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire (MSLQ). Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53, 801-814.
40. Pressley, M., Hogan, K., Wharton-McDonald, R., Misretta, J., &Ettenberger, S. (1996). The challenges of instructional scaffolding: The challenges of instruction that supports students thinking. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 11,138-146.
41. Robinson, M. (2005). Robotics-driven activities: Can they improve middle school science learning. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 25, 73-84.
42. Rogers, C., &Portsmore, M. (2004). Bringing engineering to elementary school. Journal of STEM Education, 5,17-28.
43. Sampson, S. A. (1995). Determining need for a geographic information system (GIS). Journal of Extension, 35. Retrieved on April 28,2010, from http://www.joe.org/joe/1995october/tt2.html
44. Slavin, R. (2000). Educational psychology: Theory and practice (6th Ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Allyn and Bacon.
45. Sorge, C. (2007). What happens: Relationship of age and gender with science attitudes from elementary to middle school. Science Educator, 16, 33-37.
46. Wanner, S., &Kerski, J. (1999, July). The effectiveness of GIS in high school education. Paper presented at the 1999 ESRI Users Conference, San Diego, CA. Retrieved on April 28,2010, from http://proceedings.esri.eom/library/userconf/proc99/proceed/papers/pap203/p203.htm
47. Watson, S., Segarra, E., Lascano, R., Bronson, K., & Schubert, A. (2005). Guidelines for recommending precision agriculture in southern crops. Journal of Extension, 43. Retrieved on April 28,2010, from http://www.joe.org/joe/2005april/rb7.shtml
48. Williams, D., Ma, Y., Prejean, L., & Ford, M. J. (2007). Acquisition of physics content knowledge and scientific inquiry skills in a robotics summer camp. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 40, 201-216.