ROBOESL activities 2nd meeting

Riga 15/06/2016 - Latvia

Activities and experiences from our 1st implementation

56th Junior High School of Athens

Marianthi Zichnali

Tassos Karampinis

Ages – Framework - Selection - Age of our pupils is between 12-15 but we

have pupils older than 15 because they failed to pass the class (low performance in lessons, absences etc)

* Low social economic profile

* Migrant families

* …

Pupils chosen between those who wanted to take part of the project

Preparations

•Separate the three Core Set in their Boxes,

•Label the most significant robots parts,

•Made the necessary class/ environment arrangements

Separate the three Core Set in their Boxes • Done together with pupils who used the

robots integrated in their lessons (Technology-Computer Science) – Unofficially. Not the pupils who participate in the program

Label the most significant robots parts

• We have labeled our significant robots parts (color-coded them too) so we diminish the possibility to “shuffle”/ mix them and put them in different trays!

Made the necessary class/ environment arrangements (1/3)

• We organized a robot laboratory inside the IT laboratory. We put 4 desk, in the middle of the IT lab, with appropriate shelves to keep our robots and work with our pupils

Made the necessary class/ environment arrangements (2/3)

• We made our “tracks” for our tests

- one of cardboard,

- one of wood and …

Made the necessary class/ environment arrangements (3/3)

• We made our “tracks” for our tests

…

- two printed on canvas –these are used in exhibitions too

Teams

EPLITT editorial and photographic laboratory IT team

C1a class / section c1

B-GR02 class b/ sample

Implementation (official team)

B-GR02

class b/ sample

τάξη β / δείγμα

1st day (05/04/2016 – 10:40-14:00 (time: 03:20))

- We started with the student/teacher meeting, in the IT laboratory in which the group would work the project,

- We discussed why they chose to take part in this program, - We informed them about the program as well as about the

responsibilities that come with it, - They connected onto the web so that they could note their answers

down (prerequisite for our program), - They:

- divided into three groups (of 3 and 4 pupils) - became familiar with the Lego Mindstorms kits - assembled three different robots (each group built his own)

- They experimented with different blocks (move steering, move tank, large motor),

- They made their first program (they were asked to update the software, 2 of the robots got stuck while the third one stopped working)

1st day (05/04/2016 – 10:40-14:00 (time: 03:20))

2nd day (06/04/2016 – 10:40-14:00 (time: 03:20))

• They checked their programs “follow the black line”, • We started discussing about trains, cars, movement and sensors, • Student groups made tests and figured out different ways to move

their robot, • They experimented with the “steering” block, • They made the programs they were asked to do, • Pupils asked to adapt their programs on a canvas we had designed

(The previous measurements had been taken in front of their computers using different distances),

• We informed them that on the next day we would create the parking program,

• We discussed the main actions the robot had to take in order for them to think of some solutions for the next day.

2nd day (06/04/2016 – 10:40-14:00 (time: 03:20))

Working and Testing

Working and Testing

Working and Testing

Working and

Testing

3rd day (07/04/2016 – 10:40-14:00 (time: 03:20))

• Pupils commenced the parking program, • We experienced problems with the ultrasonic

sensor, • They tried making a hexagon, • Students were enthusiastic with the trials they run

for the creation of the hexagons (at least in the beginning),

• The results were not as expected, • We had many difficulties, • Finally, students managed to achieve the goals we

have set up*

3rd day (07/04/2016 – 10:40-14:00 (time: 03:20))

Deployment (unofficial teams)

C1a class / section c1

B-GR02 class b/ sample

1st & 2nd day

- information about our project,

- get to know EV3 materials,

- assemble the robots,

- made and run their only program (follow the black line)

1st & 2nd day

Participation in the Athens Science Festival

•Show our programs, •Help those who wanted to make/ modify a simple program, •Explain our participation in ROBOESL program

Exhibition: Athens Science Festival (10/04/2016)

Helped them to strengthen their self-confidence

Theory, Strategy

•Constructivist pedagogy,

•Problem Based Learning activities

Constructivist pedagogy - Activities

• Scaffolding

• Zone of approximate development

• Creative thinking and involvement through the “transparent” construction of their tangible model (robot/ vehicle EV3)

• Our intervention tried to follow the methodology proposed in our 1st training course in Athens

Problem Based Model*

• Identify the problem (understand, motivate)

• Represent the problem (drawing, diagram)

• Selecting a strategy (choose the appropriate strategy for the problem)

• Carry out the strategy (try out the quality of their thinking)

• Evaluating results (judge the validity of the solutions)

• Analyzing Problem Solving (most important in long-terms goals)

*Eggen, P. & Kauchak, D. (2001). Strategies for teachers: teaching content and thinking skills. Boston:

Allyn and Bacon

Thoughts – Discussions – Implementations

•Type of robots to build (a concrete robot/ vehicle, have the possibility to choose? •Position of light sensors, ports reading •Importance of the framework •Time, Results …

Which robot? How to choose?

• Choose among some concrete models

• Built the same robot model

• Construct any robot pupils want

Choose different constructions, among 4 concrete models, provide opportunities for reflections without wasting lots of time testing models (They had 4 models to choose –each team build a different one)

Parameters influence the results

• Distance from surface: Red (1 cm), Yellow (1,5 cm)

and Black (2,1 cm and slightly upwards) • Other Parameters (Brightness of lights, hour of the

day, the curtains of IT laboratory “position”, the surface of the test fields, power’s battery, indoors/outdoors …)

Changing the framework

• Outside, in the sun, objects’ shadow, robots’ shadow itself created problems!

• Authentic, realistic Problem Based situations, good for observations and provoking discussions

Time

• IT and Technology two hours per week (both) means 40-44 hours per school year

• Our implementation took 12-14 hours in ideal conditions (but time and money consuming) [80 pupils~20-27 EV3! :( ]

• Synergies with other lessons are important • Flexibility needed. We had difficulties having pupils during lesson hours. • Solution: Project-based approach –after school classes (possible) / change

curriculum (rather difficult)

Results

• Active participation/ involvement of pupils

• Direct feedback help understanding what they have to change through trials and errors

• Triggering interest/ curiosity

Thanks a lot for your attention