Computer Literacy in Early Childhood Education: Difficulties and Benefits in a 3-year-old Classroom
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15359/ree.26-2.15Keywords:
Early childhood education, educational robots, difficulties, computer literacy, mathematics educationAbstract
Objective. In this work, we analyze the type of difficulties and arguments that three-year-old children show when they carry out tasks related to programming and educational robotics. Method. A theoretical design has been developed, and a sequence of activities has been implemented in a classroom of 3-year-old children. A case study was conducted with 8 children. Results. Among the results, we identified three types of difficulties, those derived from the characteristics of the robot, those associated with the action-instruction comprehension dimension of computational thinking, and those associated with the cognitive stage of the children. Conclusions. Based on the analysis of the arguments expressed in the development of the task, we conclude that the use of educational robots at early ages favors the development of computer literacy, and this makes its inclusion in classroom activities recommendable.
References
Alsina, Á. y Acosta Inchaustegui, Y. (2018). Iniciación al álgebra en educación infantil a través del pensamiento computacional: Una experiencia sobre patrones con robots educativos programables. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación Matemática, 14(52), 218-235. https://union.fespm.es/index.php/UNION/issue/view/59
Bellas, F., Salgado, M., Blanco, T. F. y Duro, R. J. (2019). Robotics in primary school: A realistic mathematics approach. En L. Daniela (Ed.), Smart Learning with Educational Robotics. Using robots to scaffold learning outcomes (pp.149-182). Springer Nature Switzerland AG. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19913-5_6
Bers, M. U., Flannery, L., Kazakoff, E. R. y 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
Botero Espinosa, J. (2018). Educación STEM. Introducción a una nueva forma de enseñar y aprender. STEM Educación Colombia.
Bravo Sánchez, F. Á. y Forero Guzmán, A. (2012). La robótica como un recurso para facilitar el aprendizaje y desarrollo de competencias generales. Teoría de la Educación. Educación y Cultura en la Sociedad de la Información, 13(2), 120-136. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks.9002
Diago Nebot, P. D., Arnau Vera, D. y González-Calero Somoza, J. A. (2018). Elementos de resolución de problemas en primeras edades escolares con Bee-bot. Edma 0-6: Educación Matemática en la Infancia, 7(1), 12-41. https://doi.org/10.24197/edmain.1.2018.12-41
Edo, M., Blanch, S., y Anton, M. (Coords.). (2016). El juego en la primera infancia. Octaedro.
Ferrada, C., Díaz-Levicoy, D., Salgado-Orellana, N. y Parraguez, R. (2019). Propuesta de actividades STEM con Bee-bot en matemática. Edma 0-6: Educación Matemática en la Infancia, 8(1), 33-43. https://doi.org/10.24197/edmain.1.2019.33-43
Freudenthal, H. (1991). Revisiting mathematics education. China Lectures. Springer.
García Valiente, M. y Navarro Montaño, M. J. (2017). Robótica para todos en educación infantil. Paideia. Revista de Educación, (60), 81-104. http://www.revistapaideia.cl/index.php/PAIDEIA/article/view/164/126
García-Valcárcel-Muñoz-Repiso, A. y Caballero-González, Y.-A. (2019). Robótica para desarrollar el pensamiento computacional en educación infantil. Comunicar, 27(59), 63-72. https://doi.org/10.3916/C59-2019-06
Gaudiello, I. y Zibetti, E. (2016). Learning robotics, with robotics, by robotics: Educational robotics (Vol. 3). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119335740
Instituto Nacional de Tecnologías Educativas y de Formación de Profesorado. (2018). Programación, robótica y pensamiento computacional en el aula. Situación en España, enero 2018. Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. https://bit.ly/2UqTtRh
Freeman, A., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Davis, A., y Hall Giesinger, C. (2017). Resumen Informe Horizon 2017. Educación primaria y secundaria. INTEF. https://bit.ly/2vF55aY
McClure, E. R., Guernsey, L., Clements, D. H., Bales, S. N., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N. y Levine, M. H. (2017). STEM starts early: Grounding science, technology, engineering, and math education in early childhood. The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.
Novo, M. L, Alsina, Á., Marbán, J.-M y Berciano, A. (2017). Inteligencia conectiva para la educación matemática infantil. Comunicar, 25(52), 29-39. https://doi.org/10.3916/C52-2017-03
Odorico, A. (2004). Marco teórico para una robótica pedagógica. Revista de Informática Educativa y Medios Audiovisuales, 1(3), 34-46. http://laboratorios.fi.uba.ar/lie/Revista/Articulos/010103/A4oct2004.pdf
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2015). Students, computers and learning: Making the connection. PISA, OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/fr/publications/students-computers-and-learning-9789264239555-en.htm
Papert, S. (1995). La máquina de los niños. Replanteársela educación en la era de los ordenadores. Paidós Ibérica Ediciones.
Piaget, J. (1962). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. Norton.
Piaget, J. e Inhelder, B. (1982). Psicología del niño (11.a ed.). Morata.
Pinto Salamanca, M. L., Barrera Lombana, N. y Pérez Holguín, W. J. (2010). Uso de la robótica educativa como herramienta en los procesos de enseñanza. I2+D Ingeniería, Investigación y Desarrollo, 10(1), 15-23. https://revistas.uptc.edu.co/revistas/index.php/ingenieria_sogamoso/article/view/912
Pintrich, D. R. y Schunk, D. H. (2001). Motivation in education. Theory, research, and applications (2.a ed.). Pearson Education.
Ruiz-Velasco Sánchez, E. (2007). Educatrónica. Innovación en el aprendizaje de las ciencias y la tecnología. Ediciones Díaz de Santos.
Sáinz, M. C. y Argos, J. (1998). Educación infantil: Contenidos, procesos y experiencias. Narcea.
Scaradozzi, D., Sorbi, L., Pedale, A., Valzano, M. y Vergine, C. (2015). Teaching robotics at the primary school: an innovative approach. Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 174, 3838-3846. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.1122
Shute, V. J., Sun, C. y Asbell-Clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review, 22 142-158. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2017.09.003
Sullivan, A. y Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: Learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 3-20. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9304-5
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Becoming a self-regulated learner: Which are the key subprocesses? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 11(4), 307-313. https://doi.org/10.1016/0361-476X(86)90027-5 s
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
1. In case the submitted paper is accepted for publication, the author(s) FREELY, COSTLESS, EXCLUSIVELY AND FOR AN INDEFINITE TERM transfer copyrights and patrimonial rights to Universidad Nacional (UNA, Costa Rica). For more details check the Originality Statement and Copyright Transfer Agreement
2. REUTILIZATION RIGHTS: UNA authorizes authors to use, for any purpose (among them selfarchiving or autoarchiving) and to publish in the Internet in any electronic site, the paper´'s final version, both approved and published (post print), as long as it is done with a non commercial purpose, does not generate derivates without previous consentment and recognizes both publisher's name and authorship.
3. The submission and possible publication of the paper in the Educare Electronic Journal is ruled by the Journal’s editorial policies, the institutional rules of Universidad Nacional and the laws of the Republic of Costa Rica. Additionally, any possible difference of opinion or future dispute shall be settled in accordance with the mechanisms of Alternative Dispute Resolution and the Costa Rican Jurisdiction.
4. In all cases, it is understood that the opinions issued are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position and opinion of Educare, CIDE or Universidad Nacional, Costa Rica. It is also understood that, in the exercise of academic freedom, the authors have carried out a rogorous scientific-academic process of research, reflection and argumentation thar lays within the thematic scope of interest of the Journal.
5. The papers published by Educare Electronic Journal use a Creative Commons License:
The articles published by Educare Electronic Journal can be shared with a Creative Commons License: 
