應用機器人於程式設計教學—實體機器人與模擬軟體使用成效比較

A Comparison of the Effectiveness of Using LEGO Mindstorms and its Simulation Software (LMS) in Learning Programming

曾義智(I-Chih Tseng)

指導教授 ： 吳正己

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/資訊教育學系/碩士(2006年)

摘要

本研究之目的在比較應用實體與模擬軟體機器人學習程式設計的成效。研究採準實驗研究法，參與者為台北市某高中一年級四班學生共151人，其中兩班學生共76人為實體組，使用實體機器人學習程式設計基本觀念；另兩班學生共75人為模擬軟體組，使用機器人模擬軟體學習程式設計基本觀念。實驗教學時間共實施七週十四小時。研究結果發現：（1）使用實體機器人或機器人模擬軟體對學生學習成就之影響並無差異。（2）學生對使用實體機器人有較高的學習興趣。（3）實體機器人較有助學生想像程式的執行。由於實體機器人與模擬軟體皆可達到程式執行過程視覺化的目的，且成就測驗均為習題類似題，比較著重學生理解與記憶層次的考驗，推論此為學習成就無差異之可能原因。建議後續研究者可加長教學實驗之時間，並將學習內容及成就測驗加深，以增加研究之效度。

關鍵字

程式設計教學 ； 機器人 ； LEGO Mindstorms ； 模擬軟體

並列摘要

The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of using LEGO Mindstorms and its simulation software (LMS) in learning programming. A quasi-experiment design was implemented and four classes of 10th grade students, with a total of 151 students, participated in the study. Two classes of 76 students served as the experiment group using LEGO Mindstorms (LM) in programming laboratories, whereas the other two classes of 75 students as the experiment group using LM simulation software. The experiment contained seven 2-hour laboratory sessions, a total of 14 hours. Analysis from students’ performance tests, replies on questionnaires, and focus group interview, we conclude the findings as following: (1) No significant difference was found on students’ performance between the LM group and the simulation software group, (2) Students who used LM robots showed better interests in learning activities, (3) Students using LM robots considered themselves more capable of imagining the execution process of programs. Future research should increase the duration of experiment and the depth of teaching contents, so that students’ abilities on programming comprehension and generation can be better assessed.

並列關鍵字

Learning Programming ； Robot ； LEGO Mindstorms ； Simulation

參考文獻

劉洲（2005）：應用Lego Mindstorms在高中程式設計教學的成效探討。未出版碩士論文，國立台灣師範大學資訊教育研究所，台北市。

Beer, R. D., Chiel, H. J., & Drushel, R. F. (1999). Using autonomous robotics to teach science and engineering. Communications of the ACM, 42(6), 85-92.

Blank, D. (2006). Robots make computer science personal. Communications of the ACM, 49(12), 25-27.

Borge, R., Fjuk, A., & Groven, A. K. (2004). Using Karel J Collaboratively to Facilitate Object-Oriented Learning. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT'04)-Volume 00, 580-584.

Clement, J. M. (2004). A Call for Action (Research): Applying Science Education Research to Computer Science Instruction. Computer Science Education, 14(4), 343-364.