Comparing learning ecologies of primary graphical programming: create or fix?

Abstract

In the last few years, programming, computational thinking, and robotics are more frequently integrated into elementary education. This integration can be done in many different ways. However, it is still unclear which teaching methods work in which situations. To provide some clarity in this area, we compared two methods of integrating programming into a primary robotics workshop for learners aged ten to twelve. In one method, students create programs from scratch; in the other, they start with a faulty program they have to fix. These teaching methods were evaluated using the framework of learning ecology, which provides a holistic framework for assessing complex learning environments. We identified different indicators of learning ecology and assessed our workshops using a mixed-methods approach. Our results showed no difference between the groups on the intrinsic dimension of a learning ecology. However, on the experiential dimension, the learners in the create group scored better on all tests. Our results show the value of a multidimensional assessment of learning ecology to understand different teaching techniques. Additionally, the results provide us with important insights on how to integrate programming into a primary robotics curriculum enabling teachers to select better methods for teaching computing in their classroom.