Abstract
This paper introduces our case study on using the NodeMCU device in educational activities with lower secondary school pupils aged between 8 and 13 years. Readily available at a cost acceptable for even small schools, our research is into how such activities can be integrated into the curriculum and describe the hardware package, environment and the four graded activities that we developed. We come to the conclusion that while this approach is not suitable for younger pupils, it did motivate pupils to continue programming and experimenting with physical computing.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Kaloti-Hallak, F., Armoni, M., Ben-Ari, M.: Students’ attitudes and motivation during robotics activities. In: Proceedings of the Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education, pp. 102–110. ACM (2015)
Sentance, S., Waite, J., Yeomans, L., MacLeod, E.: Teaching with physical computing devices: the BBC micro:bit initiative. In: Proceedings of WiPSCE 2017, Nijmegen (2017)
DesPortes, K., Anupam, A., Pathak, N., DiSalvo, B.: BitBlox: a redesign of the breadboard. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, pp. 255–261. ACM (2016)
Veselovská, M., Mayerová, K.: LEGO WeDo curriculum for lower secondary school. In: International Conference on Robotics and Education RiE 2017, pp. 53–64. Springer, Cham (2017)
NodeMCU MicroPython documentacion. https://www.micropython.sk
MicroPython. http://naucse.python.cz/lessons/beginners/micropython/
Endoh, H., Tanaka, J.: Integrating data/program structure and their visual expressions in the visual programming system. In: Computer Human Interaction, pp. 453–458. IEEE (1998)
Neag, I.A., Tyler, D.F., Kurtz, W.S.: Visual programming versus textual programming in automatic testing and diagnosis. In: AUTOTESTCON Proceedings, 2001, IEEE Systems Readiness Technology Conference, pp. 658–671. IEEE (2001)
Booth, T., Stumpf, S.: End-user experiences of visual and textual programming environments for Arduino. In: International Symposium on End User Development, pp. 25–39. Springer (2013)
Armoni, M., Meerbaum-Salant, O., Ben-Ari, M.: From scratch to “real” programming. ACM Trans. Comput. Educ. TOCE 14, 25 (2015)
Neutens, T., Staes, J., Wyffels, F.: Implementation and evaluation of a simulator and debugger for physical computing environments. In: Proceedings of WiPSCE 2017, Nijmegen (2017)
ESPBlocks. https://github.com/marekmansell/ESPBlocks
Lichtman, M.: Qualitative Research in Education. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks (2013)
The Micro:bit. http://microbit.org/
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Klimeková, E., Mansell, M., Mayerová, K., Veselovská, M. (2019). Case Study on Physical Computing with NodeMCU on Summer School. In: Lepuschitz, W., Merdan, M., Koppensteiner, G., Balogh, R., Obdržálek, D. (eds) Robotics in Education. RiE 2018. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 829. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97085-1_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-97085-1_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-97084-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-97085-1
eBook Packages: Intelligent Technologies and RoboticsIntelligent Technologies and Robotics (R0)