More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/

research-article

Learning to Program with Personal Robots: Influences on Student Motivation

Author:

Monica M. McGillAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Computing Education (TOCE), Volume 12, Issue 1

Article No.: 4, Pages 1 - 32

https://doi.org/10.1145/2133797.2133801

Published: 01 March 2012 Publication History

Abstract

One of the goals of using robots in introductory programming courses is to increase motivation among learners. There have been several types of robots that have been used extensively in the classroom to teach a variety of computer science concepts. A more recently introduced robot designed to teach programming to novice students is the Institute for Personal Robots in Education (IPRE) robot. The author chose to use this robot and study its motivational effects on non-computer science students in a CS0 course. The purpose of this study was to determine whether using the IPRE robots motivates students to learn programming in a CS0 course. After considering various motivational theories and instruments designed to measure motivation, the author used Keller’s Instructional Materials Motivation Survey to measure four components of motivation: attention, relevance, confidence, and satisfaction. Additional items were added to the survey, including a set of open-ended questions. The results of this study indicate that the use of these robots had a positive influence on participants’ attitudes towards learning to program in a CS0 course, but little or no effect on relevance, confidence, or satisfaction. Results also indicate that although gender and students interests may affect individual components of motivation, gender, technical self-perception, and interest in software development have no bearing on the overall motivational levels of students.

References

[1]

Adams, D. B. 2010. Explore-create-present: A project series for CS. In Proceedings of the ASEE North Central Sectional Conference (ASEE’10).

[2]

AAUW. 2000. Tech-Savvy: Educating Girls in the New Computer Age. American Association of University Women Education Foundation, New York.

[3]

Apiola, M., Lattu, M., and Pasanen, T. 2010. Creativity and intrinsic motivation in computer science education: Experimenting with robots. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’10). 199--203.

Digital Library

[4]

Balch, T., Summet, J., Blank, D., Kumar, D., Guzdial, M., O’Hara, K., Walker, D., Sweat, M., Gupta, G., Tansley, S., Jackson, J., Gupta, M., Muhammad, M. N., Prashad, S., Eilbert, N., and Gavin, A. 2008. Designing personal robots for education: Hardware, software, and curriculum. IEEE Pervas. Comput. 7, 2, 5--9.

Digital Library

[5]

Bandura, A. 1997. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. Freeman, New York.

[6]

Barker, L. J., McDowell, C., and Kalahar, K. 2009. Exploring factors that influence computer science introductory course students to persist in the major. In Proceedings of 40th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGSCE’09).

Digital Library

[7]

Barnes, T., Powell, E., Chaffin, A., and Lipford, H. 2008. Game2Learn: Improving the motivation of CS1 Students. In Proceedings of Game Development in Computer Science Education (GDCSE’08).

Digital Library

[8]

Barr, J., Cooper, S., Goldweber, M., and Walker, H. 2010. What everyone needs to know about computation. In Proceedings of the SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’10).

Digital Library

[9]

Becker, B. 2001. Teaching CS1 with Karel the robot in Java. In Proceedings of the 32nd SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’01). 50--54.

Digital Library

[10]

Besana, G. and Dettori, L. 2004. Together is better: Strengthening the confidence of women in computer science via a learning community. In Proceedings of the Consortium for Computing Sciences in Colleges, Northeastern Conference (CSCC’04). 130--139.

[11]

Bierre, K., Ventura, P., Phelps, A., and Eggert, C. 2006. In Proceedings of the 32nd SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’01). 354--358.

[12]

Biggs, J. B. 1987a. The Study Process Questionnaire (SPQ): Manual. Australian Council for Educational Research, Hawthorn, Vic.

[13]

Biggs, J. B. 1987b. The Learning Process Questionnaire (LPQ): Manual. Australian Council for Educational Research, Hawthorn, Vic.

[14]

Boyer, K. E., Phillips, R., Wallis, M. D., Vouk, M. A., and Lester, J. C. 2009. Investigating the role of student motivation in computer science education through one-on-one tutoring. Comput. Sci. Ed. 19, 2, 111--135.

[15]

Bransford, J., Brown, A., and Cocking, R., Eds. 1999. How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.

[16]

Byrne, P. and Lyons, G. 2001. The effect of student attributes on success in programming. In Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’01). 49--52.

Digital Library

[17]

Chan, T. S. and Ahern, T. C. 1999. Targeting motivation -- Adapting flow theory to instructional design. J. Ed. Comput. Res. 21, 2, 152--163.

[18]

Cliburn, D. 2006. A CS0 course for the liberal arts. In Proceedings of the 37th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’06). 77--81.

Digital Library

[19]

Cooper, S. and Cunningham, S. 2010. Teaching computer science in context. Inroads 1, 1, 5--8.

Digital Library

[20]

Covington, M. V. 2000. Goal theory, motivation and school achievement: An integrative review. Ann. Rev. Psych. 51, 171--200.

[21]

Csikszentmihalyi, M. 1975. Beyond Boredom and Anxiety. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA.

[22]

Creswell, J. W. 2008. Educational Research. Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson Education, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

[23]

Cutts, Q., Cutts, E., Draper, S., O’Donnell, P., and Saffrey, P. 2010. Manipulating mindset to positively influence introductory programming performance. In Proceedings of the SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’10). 431--435.

Digital Library

[24]

Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M. 1985. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Plenum, New York.

[25]

Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A., Sheinman, L., and Ryan, R. M. 1981. An instrument to assess adults’ orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. J. Ed. Psych. 73, 642--650.

[26]

Egbert, J. 2003. A study of flow theory in the foreign language classroom. Mod. Lang. J. 87, 4, 499--518.

[27]

Elliott, E. S. and Dweck, C. S. 1988. Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. J. Person. Soc. Psych. 54, 5--12.

[28]

Entwistle, N. J. and Ramsden, P. 1983. Understanding Student Learning. Croom Helm, London.

[29]

Fagin, B. and Merkle, L. 2003. Measuring the effectiveness of robots in teaching computer science. SIGCSE Bull. 35, 1, 307--311.

Digital Library

[30]

Fishbein, M. and Ajzen, I. 1972. Beliefs, Attitudes, Intentions and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.

[31]

Friedman, B. A. and Mandel, R. G. 2010. The prediction of college student academic performance and retention: Application of expectancy and goal setting theories. J. Coll. Stud. Retent. 11, 2, 227--246.

[32]

Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., and Marshall, S. 2003. A Handbook for Teaching & Learning in Higher Education. Routledge Farmer, New York, NY.

[33]

Glanz, K., Riber, B. K., and Lewis, F. M. 2002. Health Behavior and Health Education. Theory, Research and Practice. Wiley & Sons, New York.

[34]

Goto, S. T. and Martin, C. 2009. Psychology of success: Overcoming barriers to pursuing further education. J. Contin. High. Ed. 57, 1, 10--21.

[35]

Gregg, C. M. 2009. Self-Determination, Culture, and School Administration: A Phenomenological Study on Student Success. ProQuest LLC.

[36]

Guzdial, M. 2008. Teaching computing to everyone. Comm. ACM 52, 5, 31--33.

Digital Library

[37]

Guzdial, M. 2010. Does contextualized computing education help? Inroads 1, 4, 4--6.

Digital Library

[38]

Heider, F. 1958. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. Wiley, New York.

[39]

Hoegh, A. and Moskal, B. M. 2009. Examining science and engineering students’ attitudes toward computer science. In Proceedings in the 39th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (ASEE’09).

Digital Library

[40]

Huang, W., Huang, W., Diefes-Dux, H., and Imbrie, P. K. 2006. A preliminary validation of attention, relevance, confidence and satisfaction model-based instructional material motivational survey in a computer-based tutorial setting. Brit. J. Ed. Technol. 37, 16.

[41]

Huang, W.-H., Huang, W.-Y., and Tschopp, J. 2010a. Sustaining iterative game playing processes in DGBL: The relationship between motivational processing and outcome processing. Comput. Ed. 55, 2, 789--797.

Digital Library

[42]

Huang, Y., Backman, S. J., and Backman, K. F. 2010b. Student attitude toward virtual learning in second life: A flow theory approach. J. Teach. Travel & Tour. 10, 4, 312--334.

[43]

Hundley, J. and Pritt, W. 2009. Engaging students in software development course projects. In Proceedings of the Richard Tapia Celebration of Diversity in Computing Conference (TAPIA’09). 87--92.

Digital Library

[44]

Imberman, S. and Klibaner, R. 2005. A robotics lab for CS1. J. Comput. Sci. Coll. 21, 2, 131--137.

Digital Library

[45]

Institute for Personal Robots in Education. 2011. http://wiki.roboteducation.org.

[46]

Irobot Create Forum. 2011. http://createforums.irobot.com/irobotcreate/.

[47]

Jiau, H. C., Chen, J. C., and Ssu, K. 2009. Enhancing self-motivation in learning programming using game-based simulation and metrics. IEEE Trans. Ed. 52, 4, 555--562.

Digital Library

[48]

Keller, J. M. 1983. Motivational design of instruction. In Instructional Design Theories and Models: An Overview of Their Current Status. C. M. Reigeluth Ed., Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 386--434.

[49]

Keller, J. M. 1987a. The systematic process of motivational design. Perform. Instruc. 26, 9/10, 1--8.

[50]

Keller, J. M. 1987b. IMMS: Instructional materials motivation survey. Florida State University.

[51]

Keller, J. M. and Subhiyah, R. G. 1987a. Course effort survey. Florida State University.

[52]

Keller, J. M. and Subhiyah, R. G. 1987b. Course interest survey. Florida State University.

[53]

Kinnunen, P. and Malmi, L. 2008. CS minors in a CS1 course. In Proceedings of the Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’08). 79--90.

Digital Library

[54]

Kinnunen, P. and Simon, B. 2010. Experiencing programming assignments in CS1: The emotional toll. In Proceedings of the Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’10). 77--85.

Digital Library

[55]

Kinnunen, P., McCartney, R., Murphy, L., and Thomas, L. 2007. Through the eyes of instructors: A phenomenographic investigation of student success. In Proceedings of the Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’07). 61--72.

Digital Library

[56]

Kölling, M. and Rosenberg, J. 2001. Guidelines for teaching object orientation with Java. SIGCSE Bull. 33, 3, 33--36.

Digital Library

[57]

Kumar, D., et al. 2008. Engaging computing students with AI and robotics. Using AI to motivate greater participation in computer science. Tech. rep. SS-08-08, AAAI Press.

[58]

Landson-Billings, G. 1995. Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. In Curriculum: Problems, Politics, and Possibilities, Beyer and Apple Eds.

[59]

Landry, C. L. 2003. Self-efficacy, motivation, and outcome expectation correlates of college students’ intention certainty. Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University.

[60]

Latta, M. R. 1974. Relation of causal attribution and success to performance. ED102474, ERIC.

[61]

Lauwers, T., Nourbakhsh, I., and Hamner, E. 2009. CSbots: Design and deployment of a robot designed for the CS1 classroom. In Proceedings of the 40th Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’09). 428--432.

Digital Library

[62]

Layman, L., Williams, L., and Slaten, K. 2007. Note to self: Make assignments meaningful. In Proceedings of the 40th Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’07). 459--463.

Digital Library

[63]

Lego. 2010. LEGO Mindstorms for education. http://mindstorms.lego.com/.

[64]

Levesque-Bristol, C. and Stanek, L. 2009. Examining self-determination in a service learning course. Teach. Psych. 36, 4, 262--266.

[65]

Levin, T. and Long, R. 1981. Effective Instruction. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria, VA.

[66]

Margolis, H. 2009. Student motivation: A problem solving focus. http://www.reading2008.com/MotivationProblem_Solving_Questionnaire-HowardMargolis-2009Jan1-c.pdf.

[67]

Margolis, J. and Fisher, A. 2002. Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.

[68]

Markham, S. A. and King, K. N. 2010. Using personal robots in CS1: Experiences, outcomes, and attitudinal influences. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM Innovations and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’10). 204--208.

Digital Library

[69]

Martin, A. J. 2003. The student motivation scale: Further testing of an instrument that measures school students’ motivation. Austral. J. Ed. 47, 1, 88--106.

[70]

Martins, S. W., Mendes, A. J., and Figueiredo, A. D. 2010. Diversifying activities to improve student performance in programming courses. In Proceedings of CompSysTech (CompSysTech’10). 540--545.

Digital Library

[71]

Maslow, A. H. 1943. A theory of human motivation. Psych. Rev. 50, 370--396.

[72]

Mawhorter, P., Shaver, E., Koziol, Z., and Dodds, Z. 2009. A tale of two platforms: Low-cost robotics in the CS curriculum. J. Comput. Sci. Coll., 180--188.

Digital Library

[73]

McNally, M. F. 2006. Walking the grid: Robotics in CS 2. In Proceedings of the 8th Australian Conference on Computing Education (ACE’06). D. Tolhurst and S. Mann Eds., vol. 52, Australian Computer Society, Inc., 151--155.

Digital Library

[74]

McWhorter, W. and O’Connor, B. 2009. Do LEGO Mindstorms motivate students in CS1? In Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’09). 438--442.

Digital Library

[75]

Mills, N., Pajares, F., and Herron, C. 2007. Self-efficacy of college intermediate French students: Relation to achievement and motivation. Lang. Learn. 57, 3, 417--442.

[76]

Mosley, P. and Kline, R. 2006. Engaging students: A framework using LEGO robotics to teach problem solving. Inf. Technol., Learn. Perform. J. 24, 1, 39--45.

[77]

Mueller, R. J. 1984. Building an Instrument to Measure Study Behaviors and Attitudes: A Factor Analysis of 46 Items. University of Northern Illinois, De Kalb, IL.

[78]

O’Kelly, J. and Gibson, J. P. 2006. RoboCode & problem-based learning: A non-prescriptive approach to teaching programming. In Proceedings of the 11th Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’06). 217--221.

[79]

Pintrich, P. 1999. A Manual for the Use of the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (MSLQ). National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Training and Learning, Ann Arbor, MI.

[80]

Pintrich, P. R. and De Groot, E. V. 1990. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. J. Ed. Psych. 82, 33--40.

[81]

Pittenger, A. and Doering, A. 2010. Influence of motivational design on completion rates in online self-study pharmacy-content courses. Dist. Ed. 31, 3, 275--293.

[82]

Ramalingam, V. and Wiedenbeck, S. 1998. Development and validation of scores on a computer programming self-efficacy scale and group analyses of novice programmer self-efficacy. J. Ed. Comput. Res. 19, 4, 365--379.

[83]

Rheinberg, F., Vollmeyer, R., and Burns, B. 2001. FAM: A questionnaire on motivation in learning and performance situations. Diagnostika 2, 57--66.

[84]

Rich, L., Perry, H., and Guzdial, M. 2004. A CS1 course designed to address interests of women. In Proceedings of the 34th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’04). 190--195.

Digital Library

[85]

Rodgers, D. and Withrow-Thorton, B. 2005. The effect of instructional media on learner motivation. Int. J. Instruc. Media 21, 4, 333--342.

[86]

Roebken, H. 2007. The influence of goal orientation on student satisfaction, academic engagement and achievement. Electron. J. Res. Ed. Psychol. 5, 3, 679--704.

[87]

Roundtree, N., Rountree, J., Robins, A., and Hannah, R. 2004. Interacting factors that predict success and failure in a CS1 course. SIGCSE Bull. 35, 4, 101--104.

Digital Library

[88]

Ryan, R. M. 1982. Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. J. Person. Soc. Psychol. 43, 450--461.

[89]

Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Amer. Psychol. 55, 68--78.

[90]

Ryan, R. M., Frederick, C. M., Lepes, D., Rubio, N., and Sheldon, K. M. 1997. Intrinsic motivation and exercise adherence. Int. J. Sport Psychol. 28, 335--354.

[91]

Schonwetter, D. J., et al. 1994. Implications for higher education in the linkages of student differences and effective teaching. Annual Meeting of the American Eduactional Research Association.

[92]

Schuler, H., Thornton, G., Frintrup, A., and Mueller-Hanson, R. 2004. AMI Achievement Motivation Inventory: Technical and User’s Manual. Hogrefe & Huber.

[93]

Simon, S., Robins, A., Sutton, K., Baker, B., Box, I., De Raadt, M., Hamer, J., Hamilton, M., Lister, R., Petre, M., Tolhurst, D., and Tutty, J. 2006. Predictors of success in a first programming course. In Proceedings of the 8th Australian Conference on Computing Education (ACE’06). D. Tolhurst and S. Mann Eds., vol. 52, 181--188.

Digital Library

[94]

Skinnger, B. F. 1954. The science of learning and the art of teaching. Harvard Ed. Rev. 24, 2, 86--97.

[95]

Small, R. V. 1997. Motivation in instructional design. In ERIC Digest, ERIC Clearinghouse on Information and Technology Syracuse NY.

[96]

Stanley, D. T. and Campbell, J. C. 1963. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Houghton Mifflin Company.

[97]

Stevenson, D. E. and Wagner, P. J. 2006. Developing real-world programming assignments for CS1. In Proceedings of the ACM Innovations and Technology in Computer Science Education (ITiCSE’06). 158--162.

Digital Library

[98]

Summet, J., Kumar, D., O’Hara, K., Walker, D., Ni, L. L., Blank, D. L., and Balch, T. 2009. Personalizing CS1 with robots. In Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (SIGCSE’09). 433--437.

Digital Library

[99]

Svinicki, M. A. 2010. Guidebook on conceptual frameworks for research in engineering education. www.ce.umn.edu/~Smith/docs/RREE-Research-Frameworks_Svinicki.pdf.

[100]

Taylor, F. W. 1916. The Principles of Scientific Management. Bulletin of the Taylor Society.

[101]

Turner, E. A., Chandler, M., and Heffer, R. W. 2009. The influence of parenting styles, achievement motivation, and self-efficacy on academic performance in college students. J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 50, 3, 337--346.

[102]

Tyler, R. 1971. Theory and practice: Bridging the gap. Grade Teach. May/June, 46--65.

[103]

Uguroglu, M. and Walberg, H. J. 1979. Motivation and achievement: A quantitative synthesis. Amer. Ed. Res. J. 16, 375--389.

[104]

Vallerand, R. J., et al. 1992. The academic motivation scale: A measure of intrinsic, extrinsic and amotivation in education. Ed. Psychol. Measure. 52, 1003--1017.

[105]

Vollmeyer, R. and Rheinberg, F. 2006. Motivational effects on self-regulated learning with different tasks. Ed. Psychol. Rev. 18, 239--253.

[106]

Wambach, C. A. 1993. Motivational themes and academic success of at-risk freshmen. J. Dev. Ed. 16, 3, 8--10, 12, 37.

[107]

Weibe, E., Williams, L. A., Yang, K., and Miller, C. 2003. Computer science attitude survey. Tech. rep. CSC TR-2003-01, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.

Digital Library

[108]

Weiner, B. 1974. Achievement Motivation and Attribution Theory. General Learning Press, Morristown, N.J.

[109]

Weiss, R. and Overcast, I. 2008. Finding your bot-mate: Criteria for evaluating robot kits for use in undergraduate computer science education. J. Comput. Sci. Coll., 43--49.

Digital Library

[110]

Wiedenbeck, S. 2005. Factors affecting the success of non-majors in learning to program. In Proceedings of the Conference on International Computing Education Research (ICER’05). 13--24.

Digital Library

[111]

Wilson, B. C. 2006. Gender differences in types of assignments preferred: Implications for computer science instruction. J. Ed. Comput. Res. 34, 3, 245--255.

[112]

Wilson, B. C. and Schrock, S. 2001. Contributing to success in an introductory computer science course: A study of twelve factors. ACM SIGCSE Bull. 33, 1.

Digital Library

[113]

Wlodkowski, R. and Ginsberg, M. 2003. Diversity and Motivation: Culturally Responsive Teaching. Jossey-Bass.

[114]

Xu, D., Blank, D. and Kumar, D. 2008. Games, robots, and robot games: Complementary contexts for introductory computing education. In Proceedings of Game Development in Computer Science Education (GDCSE’08).

Digital Library

[115]

Yonghiu, C. 2010. Study of flow theory and experiential learning. In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Multimedia and Information Technology (MMIT’10). 2, 334--337.

Digital Library

[116]

Zaini, Z. and Ahmad, W. 2010. A study on students’ motivation in learning mathematics using multimedia courseware. In Proceedings of the 2010 International Symposium in Information Technology (ITSim’10). 1--3.

Cited By

Giannoulaki CSioutis AKypraios GTsinarakis GDoitsidis L(2024)ColourBot: A New Modular Tool for STEM Education2024 32nd Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED)10.1109/MED61351.2024.10566228(400-405)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/MED61351.2024.10566228
Julianto VSumintono BAlmakhi NAvetazain HWilhelmina TWati D(2024)Academic Motivation Scale’s psychometric attribute: analysis using Rasch measurement modelCurrent Psychology10.1007/s12144-024-07142-7Online publication date: 17-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-07142-7
Chou HThong LChew HLau Y(2023)Barriers and Facilitators of Robot-Assisted Education in Higher Education: A Systematic Mixed-Studies ReviewTechnology, Knowledge and Learning10.1007/s10758-022-09637-328:2(477-516)Online publication date: 26-Jan-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-022-09637-3
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Learning to Program with Personal Robots: Influences on Student Motivation
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Computing education
      1. Computing education programs
        Computer science education
        Information science education

Recommendations

Using personal robots in CS1: experiences, outcomes, and attitudinal influences
ITiCSE '10: Proceedings of the fifteenth annual conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education

We employed a context-based teaching strategy using personal robots in an introductory computer science course. The purpose of this paper is twofold. First we describe our experiences using the IPRE (Institute for Personal Robots in Education) program ...
Personal robots in CS1: implementing the Myro API in Java
CompSysTech '11: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computer Systems and Technologies

Personal robots, where each student has access to her/his own robot to use both in and out of class, are becoming popular platforms to use in CS1 courses. The Myro API developed by the Institute for Personal Robots in Education (IPRE) is a Python-based ...
The effects of teaching programming with scratch on pre-service information technology teachers' motivation and achievement

The aim of this study is to examine the effect of programming instruction with Scratch on student motivation and their programming achievements. The study group consisted of 52 sophomore students attending the Department of Computer Education and ...

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Computing Education

ACM Transactions on Computing Education Volume 12, Issue 1

March 2012

106 pages

EISSN:1946-6226

DOI:10.1145/2133797

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2012 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: 01 March 2012

Accepted: 01 November 2011

Revised: 01 August 2011

Received: 01 January 2011

Published in TOCE Volume 12, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

78
Total Citations
View Citations
1,990
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)122
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)13

Reflects downloads up to 23 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Giannoulaki CSioutis AKypraios GTsinarakis GDoitsidis L(2024)ColourBot: A New Modular Tool for STEM Education2024 32nd Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED)10.1109/MED61351.2024.10566228(400-405)Online publication date: 11-Jun-2024
https://doi.org/10.1109/MED61351.2024.10566228
Julianto VSumintono BAlmakhi NAvetazain HWilhelmina TWati D(2024)Academic Motivation Scale’s psychometric attribute: analysis using Rasch measurement modelCurrent Psychology10.1007/s12144-024-07142-7Online publication date: 17-Dec-2024
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-07142-7
Chou HThong LChew HLau Y(2023)Barriers and Facilitators of Robot-Assisted Education in Higher Education: A Systematic Mixed-Studies ReviewTechnology, Knowledge and Learning10.1007/s10758-022-09637-328:2(477-516)Online publication date: 26-Jan-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-022-09637-3
Ariza J(2023)Bringing active learning, experimentation, and student‐created videos in engineering: A study about teaching electronics and physical computing integrating online and mobile learningComputer Applications in Engineering Education10.1002/cae.2267331:6(1723-1749)Online publication date: 2-Aug-2023
https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22673
Coşkunserçe O(2023)Comparing the use of block‐based and robot programming in introductory programming education: Effects on perceptions of programming self‐efficacyComputer Applications in Engineering Education10.1002/cae.2263731:5(1234-1255)Online publication date: 8-May-2023
https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22637
Chronis CVarlamis I(2022)FOSSBot: An Open Source and Open Design Educational RobotElectronics10.3390/electronics1116260611:16(2606)Online publication date: 20-Aug-2022
https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11162606
Tan YRizk MStein GLedeczi A(2022)User-Extensible Block-Based Interfaces for Internet of Things Devices as New Educational ToolsSoutheastCon 202210.1109/SoutheastCon48659.2022.9763937(711-717)Online publication date: 26-Mar-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/SoutheastCon48659.2022.9763937
Salomons NWallenstein TGhose DScassellati B(2022)The Impact of an In-Home Co-Located Robotic Coach in Helping People Make Fewer Exercise Mistakes2022 31st IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)10.1109/RO-MAN53752.2022.9900722(149-154)Online publication date: 29-Aug-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN53752.2022.9900722
Ariza JGil S(2022) RaspyLab : A Low-Cost Remote Laboratory to Learn Programming and Physical Computing Through Python and Raspberry Pi IEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje10.1109/RITA.2022.316687717:2(140-149)Online publication date: May-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2022.3166877
Lancheros-Cuesta DFabregat R(2022)Educational Robotics Intervention in the Motivation of StudentsIEEE Revista Iberoamericana de Tecnologias del Aprendizaje10.1109/RITA.2022.316685617:2(131-139)Online publication date: May-2022
https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2022.3166856
Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

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

Full Access

Get this Article

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents