Fen Eğitiminde STEM İçerikli Eğitsel Robot Kullanımına İlişkin Bir Sistematik İnceleme
Özet
Bu bölümde, fen eğitiminde STEM içerikli eğitsel robot kullanımına ilişkin araştırmalar sistematik olarak incelenmiştir. PRISMA 2020 rehberi doğrultusunda Web of Science ve ERIC veri tabanlarından seçilen 25 çalışma; kullanılan robot türleri, ele alınan fen/STEM konuları, mühendislik tasarım süreci, öğretim yaklaşımları, araştırma desenleri, katılımcı düzeyleri ve veri toplama araçları açısından analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, LEGO tabanlı robotların yaygın olduğunu; çalışmaların çoğunlukla bilgisayar bilimi, fizik ve matematik alanlarında, öğrenci merkezli ve tasarım odaklı yaklaşımlarla yürütüldüğünü göstermektedir. Ayrıca araştırmaların üniversite öğrencileri ve öğretmen adayları üzerinde yoğunlaştığı belirlenmiştir.
In this chapter, studies on the use of STEM-based educational robots in science education were systematically reviewed. Twenty-five studies selected from the Web of Science and ERIC databases in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines were analyzed in terms of the types of robots used, the science/STEM topics addressed, the engineering design process, teaching approaches, research designs, participant levels, and data collection tools. The findings indicate that LEGO-based robots are widely used; most studies were conducted in the fields of computer science, physics, and mathematics, employing student-centered and design-oriented approaches. Additionally, it was determined that the research focused primarily on college students and pre-service teachers.
Referanslar
Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review.
Computers & Education, 58(3), 978–988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006
Mubin, O., Stevens, C. J., Shahid, S., Mahmud, A. A., & Dong, J.-J. (2013). A review of the applicability of robots in education.
Technology for Education and Learning, 1(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.2316/Journal.209.2013.1.209-0015
Alex Fegely, Cory Gleasman, & Tammi Kolski. (2024). Evaluating Educational Robotics as a Maker Learning Tool for Pre-Service Teacher Computer Science Instruction. Educational Technology Research and Development, 72(1), 133–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-023-10273-6
Araceli Martinez Ortiz, Beth Bos, & Shaunna Smith. (2015). The Power of Educational Robotics as an Integrated STEM Learning Experience in Teacher Preparation Programs. Journal of College Science Teaching, 44(5), 42–47. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst15_044_05_42
Aristawati, F. A., Budiyanto, C., & Yuana, R. A. (2018). Adopting Educational Robotics to Enhance Undergraduate Students’ Self-Efficacy Levels of Computational Thinking. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 15, 42–50.
Cervera, N., Diago, P. D., Orcos, L., & Yáñez, D. F. (2020). The Acquisition of Computational Thinking through Mentoring: An Exploratory Study. Education Sciences, 10.
Chen, T.-I., Lin, S.-K., & Chung, H.-C. (2023). Gamified Educational Robots Lead an Increase in Motivation and Creativity in STEM Education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 22(3), 427–438.
Chiriac, T. (2019). Promoting robotics in education: Towards a systemic integration of digital innovations in the school curriculum (Moldova initiatives). E-Learning: Unlocking the Gate to Education Around the Globe, 179–191.
Coufal, P. (2022). Comparison of face-to-face and online computer science education in high school. International Journal of Education and Information Technologies, 16, 148–153. https://doi.org/10.46300/9109.2022.16.17
Cross, J., Hamner, E., Zito, L., & Nourbakhsh, I. (2016). Engineering and computational thinking talent in middle school students: A framework for defining and recognizing student affinities. Proceedings of the IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference.
De Cristoforis, P., Pedre, S., Nitsche, M., Fischer, T., Pessacg, F., & Di Pietro, C. (2013). A Behavior-Based Approach for Educational Robotics Activities. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(1), 61–66. https://doi.org/10.1109/TE.2012.2220359
Dorotea, N., Piedade, J., & Pedro, A. (2021). Mapping K–12 computer science teachers' interest, self-confidence, and knowledge about the use of educational robotics to teach. Education Sciences, 11(8), 443. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11080443
Dökme, I., & Hancıoğlu, Z. (2025). Three-stage robotic STEM program ignites secondary school students' interest in STEM career and attitudes toward science. Education and Information Technologies, 30(9), 12079–12100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-025-13318-w
Fatma Keskinkiliç. (2024). The Effect of STEM Training with Educational Robotics Applications Designed for Classroom Teachers on the STEM Awareness and Attitudes of Teachers. International Journal of Computer Science Education in Schools, 6(3).
Jung, S., & Won, E. (2018). Systematic review of research trends in robotics education for young children. Sustainability, 10(4), 905. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905
Kamini Jaipal-Jamani. (2024). Educational Robotics and Preservice Teachers: STEM Problem-Solving Skills and Self-Efficacy to Teach. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 50(4).
Kim, C., Yuan, J., Vasconcelos, L., Shin, M., & Hill, R. (2018). Debugging during block-based programming. Instructional Science, 46(5), 767–787. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9453-5
Koerei, A., Szilagyi, S., & Vaiciulyte, I. (2024). An educational robotics approach to drawing and studying central trochoids at the university level. Sustainability, 16(22), 9684. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16229684
Luo, W., Wei, H.-R., Ritzhaupt, A. D., Huggins-Manley, A. C., & Gardner-McCune, C. (2019). Using the S-STEM Survey to Evaluate a Middle School Robotics Learning Environment: Validity Evidence in a Different Context. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 28(4), 429–443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09773-z
Merkouris, A., & Chorianopoulos, K. (2018). Programming touch and full-body interaction with a remotely controlled robot in a secondary education STEM course. Proceedings of the 22nd Pan-Hellenic Conference on Informatics, 225–229. https://doi.org/10.1145/3291533.3291537
Pöhner, N., & Hennecke, M. (2019). Educating future scientists, engineers, makers and inventors: Influence of students' participation in educational robotics competitions on their career choices in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). https://doi.org/10.1145/3364510.3366151
Rafael Herrero-Álvarez, Rafael Arnay, Eduardo Segredo, Gara Miranda, & Coromoto Leon. (2025). Using RoblockLLy in the Classroom: Bridging the Gap in Computer Science Education through Robotics Simulation. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 18, 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2024.3520329
Shaw, F., Kshirsagar, K., Wendell, K., Danahy, E., Bernstein, D., Puttick, G., & Cassidy, M. (2020). Characterizing student artifacts in a multi-disciplinary biomimicry and robotics unit. Proceedings of FabLearn 2020, 34–39. https://doi.org/10.1145/3386201.3386213
Stein, G., Jean, D., & Lédeczi, A. (2021). Demo abstract: Distributed virtual CPS environment for K12. Proceedings of the 20th ACM/IEEE Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, 394–395. https://doi.org/10.1145/3412382.3458780
Stein, G., Jean, D., Kittani, S., Deweese, M., & Ledeczi, A. (2025). A novice-friendly and accessible networked educational robotics simulation platform. Education Sciences, 15(2), 198. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15020198
Suárez-Gómez, A.-D., & Pérez-Holguín, W. J. (2020). Physical Visualization of Math Concepts Using Lego Mindstorms. Journal of Technology and Science Education, 10(1), 72–86.
