Designing a teaching guide for the use of simulations in undergraduate robotics courses: a pilot study

  • Salvador González-García
  • Jorge Rodríguez-ArceEmail author
  • Gerardo Loreto-Gómez
  • Víctor M. Montaño-Serrano
Original Paper


In the educational area of engineering, there has been research using simulations to illustrate the concepts and exercises seen in class, as in the case of robotics course classes in which simulations have been used to demonstrate theoretical concepts. Results have been inconclusive whether or not the use of state-of-the-art simulations with traditional teaching methods improve the academic performance of students. From the point of view of the authors, some of these negative results could be because teachers do not receive any guidance on how to incorporate the use of simulations in their teaching strategy. This paper reports the evaluation of a platform to simulate industrial robots based on the MATLAB™ and Simulink™ environment. The platform was used by 3 teachers of undergraduate robotics courses. Each teacher was trained how to use the platform. For teachers of groups A and B, in addition to this training, they also received guidance on how to use the platform in their classes, while the teacher of group C freely decided on his own how to use the platform in his classes. In each group, the teacher covered the same topics about forward kinematics, and the same exercises were given to the students to solve during the practical sessions. As a result, students in groups A and B attained better academic performance compared to students of group C. This fact shows that it is necessary to train the professors not only in the use of the platform but also in the incorporation of this technology into their courses.


Educational innovation Educational platforms Teaching strategy 3D simulations Tools for teaching 



The authors would like to thank the students who participated in the experiment during the robotics course of semester 2017B in the following universities: Instituto Tecnológico Superior de Uruapan, Tecnologico de Monterrey and Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México. The authors also would like to acknowledge the financial and the technical support of Writing Lab, TecLabs and Tecnologico de Monterrey, Mexico in the production of this work.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there are no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.


  1. 1.
    Cortes, F. R.: ROBOTICA control de robots manipuladores. Alfaomega Grupo EDITOR (2011)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lauwers, T., et al.: Analysing the effect of the use of 3D simulations on the performance of engineering students in a robotics course: findings from a pilot study. Int. J. Electr. Eng. Educ. 23(3), 002072091879011 (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spong, M.W., Hutchinson, S., Vidyasagar, M.: Robot Modeling and Control. Wiley, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Craig, J.J.: Introduction to Robotics Mechanics and Control. Pearson Education, London (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Denavit, J., Hartenberg, R.S.: A kinematic notation for lower-pair mechanisms based on matrices. Trans. ASME J. Appl. Mech. 22(2), 215–221 (1965)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gil, A., Reinoso, O., Marin, J.M., Paya, L., Ruiz, J.: Development and deployment of a new robotics toolbox for education. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 23(3), 443–454 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tellez, R.: A thousand robots for each student: using cloud robot simulations to teach robotics. In: Robotics in Education, Springer International Publishing, pp. 143–155Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Loreto-Gomez, G., Rodriguez-Arce, J., Gonzalez-Garcia, S., Montano-Serrano, V.M.: Analysing the effect of the use of 3D simulations on the performance of engineering students in a robotics course: findings from a pilot study. Int. J. Electr. Eng. Educ. 002072091879011 (2018)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moreno-Olivos, T.: Competencias en educación. Una mirada crítica. Rev. Mex. Investig. Educ. 15(44), 289–297 (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moreno-Olivos, T.: El currículo por competencias en la universidad: más ruido que nueces. Rev. Educ. Super. 39(154), 77–90 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vera Noriega, J.Á., LE Torres Moran, Martínez García, E.E.: Evaluación de competencias básicas en TIC en docentes de educación superior en México, Píxel-Bit. Rev. Med. Educ. 2014(44), 143–155 (2014)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baroni, S., Pastore, A.: A teaching guide of nuclear physics: the concept of bonds. Phys. Educ. 53(6), 65017 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Houghton, W.: Engineering Subject Centre Guide: Learning and Teaching Theory for Engineering Academics. Higher Education Academy Engineering Subject Centre, Loughborough University (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Uskov, V.L., Bakken, J.P., Penumatsa, A., Heinemann, C., Rachakonda, R.: Smart pedagogy for smart universities. In: Smart Education and e-Learning 2017, Springer International Publishing, pp. 3–16 (2017)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    D’Souza, M.J., Rodrigues, P.: Extreme pedagogy: an agile teaching-learning methodology for engineering education. Indian J. Sci. Technol. 8(9), 828 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Braunl, T.: Robotics education using embedded systems and simulations. In: American Association for Artificial Intelligence Fall Symposia (2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    McGill, M.M.: Learning to program with personal robots. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. 12(1), 1–32 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lauwers, T., Nourbakhsh, I., Hamner, E.: CSbots. In: Proceedings of the 40th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Eguchi, A.: Educational robotics theories and practice. In: Advances in Early Childhood and K-12 Education, Global, pp. 1–30 (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang, J., Wang, Y., Xiong, R.: Industrial robot programming by demonstration. In: 2016 International Conference on Advanced Robotics and Mechatronics (ICARM) (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Al-Dois, H., Jha, A.K., Mishra, R.B.: GA-based control of a robot manipulator in a foundry workcell. In: Asia-Pacific World Congress on Computer Science and Engineering (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Abreu, P., Barbosa, M.R., Lopes, A.M.: Robotics virtual lab based on off-line robot programming software. In: 2013 2nd Experiment@ International Conference (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goldstain, O., Ben-Gal, I., Bukchin, Y.: Remote learning for the manipulation and control of robotic cells. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 32(4), 481–494 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jara, C.A., Candelas, F.A., Puente, S.T., Torres, F.: Hands-on experiences of undergraduate students in automatics and robotics using a virtual and remote laboratory. Comput. Educ. 57(4), 2451–2461 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cakir, M., Butun, E.: An educational tool for 6-DOF industrial robots with quaternion algebra. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 15(2), 143–154 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    López-Nicolás, G., Romeo, A., Guerrero, J.J.: Active learning in robotics based on simulation tools. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 22(3), 509–515 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fagin, B., Merkle, L.: Measuring the effectiveness of robots in teaching computer science. In: Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Boulos, M.N.K., Taylor, A.D., Breton, A.: A synchronous communication experiment within an online distance learning program: a case study. Telemed. e-Health 11(5), 583–593 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Loreto-Gomez, G., Rodriguez-Arce, J., Montano Serrano, V.M., Sanchez-Villa, Y.E., Gonzalez-Garcia, S., Barriga-Flores, D.: Enhancing the learning of robotics for undergraduate students through a software platform based on cad designs and matlab. In: EDULEARN17 Proceedings (2017)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dunn, T.L., Wardhani, A.: A 3D robot simulation for education. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques in Australia and South East Asia (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Subudhi, B., Pradhan, S.K.: A flexible robotic control experiment for teaching nonlinear adaptive control. Int. J. Electr. Eng. Educ. 53(4), 341–356 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Leblanc, D.C.: Statistics: Concepts and Applications for Science. Jones & Bartlett Pub, Burlington (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Departamento Regional de Computación y Mecatrónica, Escuela de Ingeniería y Ciencias Región CentroTecnologico de Monterrey Campus MoreliaMoreliaMexico
  2. 2.Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México, Ciudad Universitaria Cerro de Coatepec s/nColonia UniversidadTolucaMexico
  3. 3.Departamento de Ingeniería MecatrónicaInstituto Tecnologico Superior de UruapanUruapanMexico

Personalised recommendations