Implementation of STEM-Robotics as High School Intra-curricular

Abdul Latip, Aristo Hardinata

Abstract


The study aim to describe STEM-Robotic implementation as an intra-curricular in regular curriculum. STEM-Robotics is usually implemented as an extracurricular program in many schools. In the 2019/2020 school year, Edu Global Senior High School Bandung implemented STEM-Robotics as an intra-curricular for the ten-grade science program. STEM-Robotic implementation as an intra-curricular based on the challenges of 21st-century learning that lead to innovative creative learning and skills development. The method in this study is descriptive qualitative research method through the observations, questionnaires, and interview with teacher teams. The results of this study show that, 1) The implementation of STEM-Robotic as an intra-curricular has a curriculum that focuses about robots NXT and Arduino to provide the basics of engineering and technological skills in robotics and coding, while the concepts of science and mathematics have not been directly linked in STEM-Robotic, 2) The implementation of STEM-Robotic dominated by hands-on and mind-on activities in the learning process and its assessment. 3) Generally, students responded positively to the implementation of STEM-Robotics as an intra-curricular that makes learning more interesting, useful, fun, challenging, and develop engineering and technology skills. This result indicates that STEM-Robotic is an alternative subject or learning strategy in regular curriculum to accommodate science learning with educational robotics.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Anwar, S. et al. (2019). A Systematic Review of Studies on Educational Robotics. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research. 9 (2). 19-42.

Blackley and Howell. (2019). The Next Chapter in the STEM Education Narrative: Using Robotics to Support Programming and Coding. Australian Journal of Teacher Education. 44(4), 51-64.

Cakir and Guven. (2019). Arduino-Assisted robotic and coding applications in science teaching: Pulsimeter activity in compliance with the 5E learning model. Science Activities.https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2019.1675574.

Chen and Chang. (2018). The Impact of an Integrated Robotics STEM Course with a Sailboat Topic on High School Students’ Perceptions of Integrative STEM, Interest, and Career Orientation. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education. 14(12), 1-19.

Ebelit, R. (2012). “The Effects of a Robotics Program on Students Skills in STEM, Problem Solving and Teamwork. Science Education. Montana State University. Bozeman, Montana.

Eguchi. A. (2013). Educational Robotics for Promoting 21st Century Skills. Journal of Automation, Mobile Robotics & Intelligent Systems. 8(1), 5-11.

Goh and Bilal Ali. (2014). Robotics as a Tool to STEM Learning. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research. 2(10), 66-78.

Gura, M. (2011). Getting Started with LEGO Robotics: A Guide for K-12 Educators. Retrieved 22 Dec. 2019, from http://www.iste.org/images/excerpts/ROBOTS-excerpt.pdf.

Greenstein, L. (2012). Assessing 21st Century Skills: A Guide to EvaluatingMastery and Authentic Learning. California: Corwin A Sage Company.

Hinton, T.R. (2017). “An Exploratory Study of a Robotics Educational Platform on STEM Career Interests in Middle School Students”. Department of Educational Leadership, Policy, and Technology Studies in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama. Tuscaloosa.

Irigoyen, et al. (2013). Low-cost platforms used in Control Education: An educational case study. 10th IFAC Symposium Advances in Control Education The International Federation of Automatic Control, August 28-30, 2013. Sheffield, UK.

Jiea, et al. (2018). Integrated Robotics STEM Curriculum Towards Industry 4.0. International Journal of Human and Technology Interaction. 2(2), 17-23.

Karaahmetoglu and Korkmaz. (2019). The effect of project-based arduino educational robot applications on students' computational thinking skills and their perception of Basic STEM skill levels. Participatory Educational Research (PER). 6(2), pp.1-14.

Khanlari. (2013). Effects of Educational Robots on Learning STEM and on Students’ Attitude Toward STEM. 2013 IEEE 5th Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED).

Lantz Jr., H.B. (2009). Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Education What Form? What Function? Retrieved 20 December 2019, from http://www.currtechintegrations.com/pdf/STEMEducationArticle.pdf.

McCoog, I.J. (2008). 21st Century Teaching an Learning. Education Resource Center. Retrieved 19 December 2019, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED502607.pdf.

McKay, M. (2015). Student Learning of STEM Concepts Using a Challenge-based Robotics Curriculum. In Proceedings of 2015 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Seattle, Washington. https://doi.org/10.18260/p.24756.

Menekse, et al. (2017). The Role of Robotics Teams’ Collaboration Quality on Team Performance in a Robotics Turnament. Journal of Enggineering Education. 106 (4), 564–584. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20178.

Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative Research in Education: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Fransisco: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Mosley, et al. (2016). Robotic Cooperative Learning Promotes Student STEM Interest. American Journal of Engineering Education. 7 (2), 117-128.

Permanasari, A. (2016). STEM Education : Inovasi dalam Pembelajaran Sains. Prosiding Seminar Nasional Pendidikan Sains (SNPS). 23-34.

Turiman, et al. (2012). Fostering the 2st Century Skills through Scientific Literacy and Science Process Skills. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 59:110-116.

Whitehead, S.H., (2010). Relationship of Robotic Implementation on Changes in Middle School Students’ Beliefs and Interest Toward Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics. Doctor of Education Dissertation. Indiana University of Pennsylvania.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21043/thabiea.v3i1.6770

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.