Total views : 448

The Effect of Robot Programming Education on Attitudes towards Robots


  • Department of Computer Education, Korea National University of Education, Korea, Republic of


Background/Objectives: How robot programming education affects the attitude of pre-service teachers toward robots was analyzed, along with how pre-service teachers appreciate robot programming classes. Methods/Statistical Analysis: In this research, the Negative Attitude toward Robots Scale of Nomura et al. was used as a test tool. Research subjects were divided into an experimental group taking robot programming education and a control group taking ordinary classes. Both groups took a test to indicate their attitudes toward robots before and after the experiment; the experimental group also took a test asking their appreciation of robot programming education. Each group's test results were analyzed using paired t-tests and independent t-tests. The attitude toward robot programming education was analyzed through frequency analysis. Findings: Before the experiment, the groups' results did not show statistically significant differences; however, after the experiment, they did. Comparing pre- and post-testing of each group, the control group showed no significant difference; however, the experimental group showed significant difference. This implied that robot programming education affected pre-service teachers' attitudes toward robots, especially in a positive way. When asked their attitude toward robots, pre-service teachers answered that programming education promoted more interest in robots because they could make and realized with their own hand; however, the design and the assembly of robot would be negative. Pre-existing research had only studied attitudes toward robots and compared them by countries or investigated effect elements. This research focused on not only the attitude of pre-service teachers toward robots but also elements that could improve those attitudes. In follow-up studies, researchers could attempt to solve the imbalance of research subjects and add the group taking programming classes. Application/Improvements: The result of this study could be used for the development of robot education programs and basic material for the training of teachers.


Attitude toward Robots, Robot Programming, Robotic Education, Robot, Programming.

Full Text:

 |  (PDF views: 220)


  • Barnes D. Teaching introductory Java through LEGO MINDSTORMS models. ACM SIGCSE bulletin. Proceedings of the 33rd SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education; United States, 2002. p. 147-51.
  • Blank D. Robots make computer science personal. Communications of the ACM. 2006 Dec; 49(12):25-7.
  • Yu B, Lee W, Kim J. Consideration for the acquisition of the concept of object in the robot programming. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015 Oct; 8(26):1-6.
  • Park I, Kim D, Oh J, Jang Y, Lim K. Learning effects of pedagogical robots with programming in elementary school environments in Korea. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015 Oct; 8(26):7-11.
  • Chen H, Wigand R, Nilan M. Exploring web users’ optimal flow experiences. Information Technology and People. 2000 Dec; 13(4):263-77.
  • Hussain S, Lindh J, Shukur G. The effect of LEGO training on pupils’ school performance in mathematics, problem solving ability and attitude: Swedish data. Journal of Educational Technology and Society. 2006 Jul; 9(3):182-94.
  • Lee E, Lee Y. The effects of robot programming on pre-service computer science teacher training. Proceedings of Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference; United States. 2008. p. 3826-31.
  • Onishi Y, Tominaga H, Hayashi T, Yamasaki T. Exercise analysis and lesson plan with robot behavior in LEGO programming contest for problem solving learning. Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications; United States. 2006. p. 1943-51.
  • Tzafestas C, Palaiologou N, Alifragis M. Virtual and remote robotic laboratory: comparative experimental evaluation. IEEE Transactionson Education. 2006 Aug; 49(3):360-9.
  • Subramanian K, Kumaravel AM, Jennifer P. Effectiveness in teaching’ introductory programming’ for the students of engineering and technology: The need of hour. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015 Nov; 8(31):1-5.
  • Jang Y, Lee W, Kim J. Assessing the usefulness of objectbased programming education using arduino. Indian Journal of Science and Technology. 2015 Jan; 8(1):1-8.
  • Choi J, Seo Y, Lee Y. Analysis of the status of the robot education researches. Proceedings of the Korean Society of Computer Information Conference; Korea. 2011. p. 397400.
  • Kim C. An analysis of domestic research trend and educational effects in relation to robot education. Journal of the Korean Association of Information Education. 2012 Jun; 16 (2):233-43.
  • Park G. A review of current status and directon of education of robot and educational materials in elementary schools. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education. 2011 Sep; 24(3):323-43.
  • Freeman D. Teacher training, development, and decision making: A model of teaching and related strategies for language teacher education. Tesol Quarterly. 1989 Mar; 23(1): 27-45.
  • Correlates of computer anxiety in college students. 2016. Available from: AAI8208027
  • Nomura T, Suzuki T, Kanda T, Kato K. Measurement of anxiety toward robots. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication. The 15th IEEE International Symposium; Italy. 2006. 372-7.
  • Bartneck C, Nomura T, Kanda T, Suzuki T, Kato K. Cultural differences in attitudes towards robots. Proceedings of Symposium on Robot Companions; United Kingdom. 2005. p. 1-4.
  • Nomura T, Kanda T, Suzuki T. Experimental investigation into influence of negative attitudes toward robots on human–robot interaction. Ai and Society. 2006 Feb; 20(2):138-50.
  • Nomura T, Suzuki T, Kanda T, Kato K. Altered attitudes of people toward robots: Investigation through the Negative Attitudes toward Robots Scale. Proceedings of AAAI-06 Workshop on Human Implications of Human-Robot Interaction; United States. 2006. p. 29-35.
  • Nomura T, Kanda T, Suzuki T, Han J, Shin N, Burke J, Kato K. Implications on humanoid robots in pedagogical applications from cross-cultural analysis between Japan, Korea and the USA. The 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication; Korea. 2007. p. 1052-7.
  • Nomura T, Kanda T, Suzuki T, Kato K. Prediction of human behavior in human--robot interaction using psychological scales for anxiety and negative attitudes toward robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics. 2008 Apr; 24(2):442-51.
  • Lee C. elementary students’ attitude towards robot in Korea. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education. 2013 Jun; 26(2):83-96.
  • Lee C. Korean students’ attitude scale towards robot. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education. 2013 May; 19(2):151-68.
  • Baek S, Keum J. The effects of after school robot program on the attitudes toward robot and technological thinking disposition of children. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education. 2014 May; 20(2):183-201.
  • Shin Na, Kim S. Korean students’ attitudes towards robots: Two survey studies. Journal of Korea Robotics Society. 2009 Feb; 4(1):10-6.
  • Kim S, Lee Y. A survey on elementary school teachers’ attitude toward robot. Proceedings of E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education; United States. 2015. p. 1802-7.
  • Lee J, Song J, Lee T. An effect of the programming learning using robot on attitude toward computer learning and computer in practical arts education. Journal of Korean Practical Arts Education. 2009 Aug; 15(3):89-108.
  • Bartneck C, Suzuki T, Kanda T, Nomura T. The influence of people’s culture and prior experiences with Aibo on their attitude towards robots. Ai & Society. 2007 Nov; 21(12):217-30.
  • Sapounidis T, Demetriadis S, Stamelos I. Evaluating children performance with graphical and tangible robot programming tools. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing. 2015 Jan; 19(1):225-37.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.