In this novel empirical study, the authors investigate how creative are our children and how robotics education final projects can promote creative thinking and engage children in science, engineering, and technology topics. This study is based on a unique Early Age Robotics (EAR) program running since 2016 for over 2000 children. A final project, related to use of robots in Moon settlements, is used to motivate children to be creative and to promote inquiry-based science education. Using a mixed-methodstudy,we analyzed interviews and projects of 46 children (aged 5 - 7) who studied technology and robotics as a compulsory component of their curriculum. In addition, posters created by first graders were analyses by judges to establish diversity and originality of the solutions. Children’s explanations of the need, the technological challenge and the solution are analyzed. Child’s feelings about himself, his team and others’ creativity are investigated. The results show that most of the children are very creative, value their teams and their creativity. Also encouraging is the gender equality found in this technological area. The findings show that after careful decision process, when given the same problem, children successfully identified different needs and challenges and created numerous solutions. Interviews show that most of the children understood what the need of the project was, what the challenge was and what they created. These significant results should be considered by EAR stakeholders to motivate children to be original, to promote creative thinking and science education in early childhood.
References
[1]
Alimisis, D. (2013). Educational Robotics: Open Questions and New Challenges. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 6, 63-71.
[2]
Beghetto, R. A., Kaufman, J. C., & Baxter, J. (2011). Answering the Unexpected Questions: Exploring the Relationship between Students’ Creative Self-Efficacy and Teacher Ratings of Creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 5, 342-349.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022834
[3]
Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the Educational Potential of Robotics in Schools: A Systematic Review. Computers & Education, 58, 978-988.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006
[4]
Bers, M. U., Flannery, L., Kazakoff, E. R., & Sullivan, A. (2014). Computational Thinking and Tinkering: Exploration of an Early Childhood Robotics Curriculum. Computers & Education, 72, 145-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.020
[5]
Bers, M. U., González-González, C., & Armas-Torres, M. B. (2019). Coding as a Playground: Promoting Positive Learning Experiences in Childhood Classrooms. Computers & Education, 138, 130-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.013
[6]
Bers, M., Seddighin, S., & Sullivan, A. (2013). Ready for Robotics: Bringing Together the T and E of STEM in Early Childhood Teacher Education. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education, 21, 355-377.
[7]
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., & Rumble, M. (2010). Defining Twenty-First Century Skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (pp. 17-66). Springer.
http://cms.education.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/19B97225-84B1-4259-B423-4698E1E8171A
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2
[8]
Braund, M., & Driver, M. (2005). Pupils’ Perceptions of Practical Science in Primary and Secondary School: Implications for Improving Progression and Continuity of Learning. Educational Research, 47, 77-91. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013188042000337578
[9]
Cejka, E., Rogers, C., & Portsmore, M. (2006). Kindergarten Robotics: Using Robotics to Motivate Math, Science, and Engineering Literacy in Elementary School. International Journal of Engineering Education, 22, 711-722.
[10]
Corder, G. W., & Foreman, D. I. (2014). Nonparametric Statistics: A Step-by-Step Approach. John Wiley & Sons.
[11]
Creswell, J. W. (2014). A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. Sage Publications.
[12]
Danahy, E., Wang, E., Brockman, J., Carberry, A., Shapiro, B., & Rogers, C. B. (2014). Lego-Based Robotics in Higher Education: 15 Years of Student Creativity. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 11, Article ID: 27. https://doi.org/10.5772/58249
[13]
De Bono, E. (1995). Serious Creativity. The Journal for Quality and Participation, 18, 12-18.
[14]
Dede, C. (2010). Technological Supports for Acquiring 21st Century Skills. International Encyclopedia of Education, 3, 158-166.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-044894-7.00739-9
[15]
Di Lieto, M. C., Inguaggiato, E., Castro, E., Cecchi, F., Cioni, G., Dell’Omo, M. et al. (2017). Educational Robotics Intervention on Executive Functions in Preschool Children: A Pilot Study. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 16-23.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.018
[16]
Eck, J., Hirschmugl-Gaisch, S., Kandlhofer, M., & Steinbauer, G. (2014). A Cross-Generational Robotics Project Day: Pre-School Children, Pupils and Grandparents Learn Together. Journal of Automation Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems, 8, 12-19.
https://doi.org/10.14313/JAMRIS_1-2014/2
[17]
Eguchi, A. (2014). Educational Robotics for Promoting 21st Century Skills. Journal of Automation Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems, 8, 5-11.
https://doi.org/10.14313/JAMRIS_1-2014/1
[18]
Eguchi, A., & Uribe, L. (2017, March). Robotics to Promote STEM Learning: Educational Robotics Unit for 4th Grade Science. In 2017 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC) (pp. 186-194). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISECon.2017.7910240
[19]
Hernández-Torrano, D., & Ibrayeva, L. (2020). Creativity and Education: A Bibliometric Mapping of the Research Literature (1975-2019). Thinking Skills and Creativity, 35, Article ID: 100625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2019.100625
[20]
Huang, N. T., Chang, Y. S., & Chou, C. H. (2020). Effects of Creative Thinking, Psychomotor Skills, and Creative Self-Efficacy on Engineering Design Creativity. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 37, Article ID: 100695.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100695
[21]
Kaufman, J. C., & Baer, J. (2012). Beyond New and Appropriate: Who Decides What Is Creative? Creativity Research Journal, 24, 83-91.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.649237
[22]
Kucuk, S., & Sisman, B. (2020). Students’ Attitudes towards Robotics and STEM: Differences Based on Gender and Robotics Experience. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 23-24, Article ID: 100167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2020.100167
[23]
Land, G., & Jarman, B. (1992). Breakpoint Change. Training & Development, 46, 38-41.
[24]
Lindstrom, L. (2006). Creativity: What Is It? Can You Assess It? Can It Be Taught? International Journal of Art & Design Education, 25, 53-66.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1476-8070.2006.00468.x
[25]
Lunevich, L. (2021). Creativity in Teaching and Teaching for Creativity in Engineering and Science in Higher Education—Revisiting Vygotsky’s Psychology of Art. Creative Education, 12, 1445-1457. https://doi.org/10.4236/ce.2021.127110
[26]
Master, A., Cheryan, S., Moscatelli, A., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2017). Programming Experience Promotes Higher STEM Motivation among First-Grade Girls. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 160, 92-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2017.03.013
[27]
McLemore, B., & Wehry, S. (2016, April). Robotics and Programming in Prekindergarten (RAPP): An Innovative Approach to Introducing 4- and 5-Year Olds to Robotics. In Global Learn (pp. 169-175). Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
[28]
Mellou, E. (1996). Can Creativity Be Nurtured in Young Children? Early Child Development and Care, 119, 119-130. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443961190109
[29]
National Research Council (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. National Academies Press.
[30]
Noh, J., & Lee, J. (2020). Effects of Robotics Programming on the Computational Thinking and Creativity of Elementary School Students. Educational Technology Research and Development, 68, 463-484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09708-w
[31]
Robinson, K. (2017). Out of Our Minds: The Power of Being Creative. John Wiley & Sons.
[32]
Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Lenzen, D., Walberg-Henriksson, H., & Hemmo, V. (2007). Science Education Now: A Renewed Pedagogy for the Future of Europe. European Commission.
[33]
Rusk, N., Resnick, M., Berg, R., & Pezalla-Granlund M. (2008). New Pathways into Robotics: Strategies for Broadening Participation. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 17, 59-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-007-9082-2
[34]
Schweingruber, H. A., Duschl, R. A., & Shouse, A. W. (2007). Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8. Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten through 8th Grade.
[35]
Sharma, K., Papavlasopoulou, S., & Giannakos, M. (2019). Coding Games and Robots to Enhance Computational Thinking: How Collaboration and Engagement Moderate Children’s Attitudes? International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 21, 65-76.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.04.004
[36]
Sullivan, F. R. (2008). Robotics and Science Literacy: Thinking Skills, Science Process Skills and Systems Understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45, 373-394.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20238
[37]
Treffinger, D. J., Isaksen, S. G., & Stead-Dorval, K. B. (2006). Creative Problem Solving: An Introduction. Prufrock Press Inc.
[38]
Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st Century Skills: Learning for Life in Our Times. Jossey-Bass.
[39]
Zviel-Girshin, R., & Rosenberg, N. (2018). Child Friendly Robotics. In S. I. Ao, L. Gelman, D. W. Hukins, A. Hunter, & A. M. Korsunsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering (Vol. 1). International Association of Engineers.
[40]
Zviel-Girshin, R., Luria, A., & Shaham, C. (2020). Robotics as a Tool to Enhance Technological Thinking in Early Childhood. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29, 294-302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09815-x
