Learning to Program with Lego Mindstorms – Difference Between K-12 Students and Adults
In this paper, a workshop that was originally designed for K-12 students as a first introduction into programming by using Lego Mindstorms is conducted on adults coming from different companies. The aim of the study is to compare attitudes and results of adult learners with K-12 students and to see how their interests and understanding of programming concepts differ from the original audience. It is found that the exact same workshop is suitable for older audience and, as expected, the adults are showing slightly better learning outcomes. Using Lego as a tool for teaching is not a problem for adults.
KeywordsLego Mindstorms Adult education Programming education Educational data mining Lifelong learning
Author wants to thank Indrek Karo and Martin Jaanus for conducting some of the workshops. Author also wants to thank Innovation and Business Center Mektory for facilitating the workshops.
Publication of this research has been supported by European Social Fund’s Doctoral Studies and Internationalization Programme DoRa and DoRa+.
- 1.Umbleja, K.: Can K-12 students learn how to program with just two hours? In: International Workshop on Learning Technology for Education in Cloud, pp. 250–264. Springer (2016)Google Scholar
- 5.Korkmaz, Ö.: The effect of lego mindstorms Ev3 based design activities on students’ attitudes towards learning computer programming, self-efficacy beliefs and levels of academic achievement. Balt. J. Mod. Comput. 4(4), 994 (2016)Google Scholar
- 6.Lykke, M., Coto, M., Mora, S., Vandel, N., Jantzen, C.: Motivating programming students by problem based learning and LEGO robots. In: 2014 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), pp. 544–555. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
- 9.Kim, S., Oh, H., Choi, J., Tsourdos, A.: Using hands-on project with lego mindstorms in a graduate course. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 30(2), 458–470 (2014)Google Scholar
- 10.Sauppé, A., Szafir, D., Huang, C.-M., Mutlu, B.: From 9 to 90: engaging learners of all ages. In: Proceedings of the 46th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 575–580. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
- 11.Gómez, I.M., Rodríguez, R., Otero, J.J., Merino, M., Molina, A.J., Cabrera, R.: The role of small robots in designed play workshops in centers of adults with cerebral palsy. In: International Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs, pp. 515–522. Springer (2016)Google Scholar
- 12.Grey, F., Li, J., Shi, Q., Doney, E., Chen, W.H., Shen, J.: Lifelong learning lab: collaborative design of hands-on science for Chinese schools. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp. 383–386. ACM (2015)Google Scholar
- 13.Leitão, P., Fraile, J.C., Moreno, V., Harrison, R., Altun, H., Colombo, A.W., Turiel, J.P., Curto, B.: Transnational lifelong education course in robotic systems. In: Industrial Electronics Society, IECON 2015–41st Annual Conference of the IEEE, pp. 004181–004186. IEEE (2015)Google Scholar
- 14.Umbleja, K.: The first year experience of using LEGO Mindstorms robots in the Tallinn University of Technology outreach program for secondary and primary school learners. In: New Technologies and Innovation for Global Business: ICEE 2015 International Conference of Engineering Education, Zagreb, Croatia, 20–24 July 2015, pp. 741–748 (2015)Google Scholar