The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The role of feedback and guidance as intervention methods to foster computational thinking in educational robotics learning activities for primary school
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/003465430298487 · Cited by 12,905
THE ROLE OF TUTORING IN PROBLEM SOLVING *
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976) · Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry · doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x · Cited by 8,851 · cited 1×
“Indeed, from the same worksheet perspective, Fabre and Musquer (2009) recommend that science teachers build what they call “ problematisation inductors, ” aiming at “ marking critical features ” (Wood et al., 1976, p. 98), which is one of the six functions of scaffolding.”
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 · Cited by 7,776 · cited 5×
“Unfortunately, the programming act, or any form of experimentation in itself, is not sufficient to ensure learning (Mayer, 2004), with explicit guidance being required (Kirschner et al., 2006) to help students reflect on their practices.”
InfluentialShute, V. J. (2008) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/0034654307313795 · Cited by 4,631
The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research
Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03087 · Cited by 1,199
Tikva, C., & Tambouris, E. (2021) · Computers & Education · doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104083 · Cited by 296
Computational thinking development through creative programming in higher education
Romero, M., Lepage, A., & Lille, B. (2017) · International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education · doi:10.1186/s41239-017-0080-z · Cited by 250
Chevalier, M., Giang, C., Piatti, A., & Mondada, F. (2020) · International Journal of STEM Education · doi:10.1186/s40594-020-00238-z · Cited by 223 · cited 8×
“They accomplished the task more quickly (Siegfried et al., 2017; Mayer, 2004; Biesta & Burbules, 2003) but to the detriment of developing all the cognitive processes necessary in CT (Chevalier & Giang et al., 2020).”
InfluentialSelf-citationBringing Robotics to Formal Education: The Thymio Open-Source Hardware Robot
Mondada, F., Bonani, M., Riedo, F., Briod, M., Pereyre, L., Retornaz, P., & Magnenat, S. (2017) · IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine · doi:10.1109/mra.2016.2636372 · Cited by 148
The Cambridge Handbook of Instructional Feedback
(2018) · doi:10.1017/9781316832134 · Cited by 144
Research works printed but not linked: 32
- Ajjawi, 2017, Researching feedback dialogue: An interactional analysis approach, Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 42, 252, 10.1080/02602938.2015.1102863 · DOI
- Alimisis, 2019, Teacher training in educational robotics: The ROBOESL Project paradigm, Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24, 279, 10.1007/s10758-018-9357-0 · DOI
- Aranha, 2012, The importance of video-feedback and instruction, Journal of Physical Education and Sports Management, 3
- Atmatzidou, 2016, Advancing students' computational thinking skills through educational robotics: A study on age and gender relevant differences, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 661, 10.1016/j.robot.2015.10.008 · DOI · Paper page
- Atmatzidou, 2018, How does the degree of guidance support students' metacognitive and problem-solving skills in educational robotics?, Journal of Science Education and Technology, 27, 70, 10.1007/s10956-017-9709-x · DOI
- Bahula, 2020, Exploring student perceptions of video feedback: A review of the literature, Vol. 9, 10
- Bakala, 2021, Preschool children, robots, and computational thinking: A systematic review, International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100337 · DOI
- Brennan, 2012, New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking, Vol. 1, 25
- Bruner, 1983, Play, thought, and language, Peabody Journal of Education, 60, 60, 10.1080/01619568309538407 · DOI
- Chen, 1999, All other things being equal: Acquisition and transfer of the control of variables strategy, Child Development, 70, 1098, 10.1111/1467-8624.00081 · DOI · Paper page
- Clark, 2012, Putting students on the path to learning: The case for fully guided instruction, American Educator, 36, 6
- Coletta, 2020, Why normalised gain should continue to be used in analysing preinstruction and postinstruction scores on concept inventories, Physical Review Physics Education Research, 16, 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.16.010108 · DOI
- Denner, 2014, Pair programming: Under what conditions is it advantageous for middle school students?, Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46, 277, 10.1080/15391523.2014.888272 · DOI
- Evans, 2013, Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education, Review of Educational Research, 83, 70, 10.3102/0034654312474350 · DOI · Paper page
- Fabre, 2009, Les inducteurs de problématisation, Les Sciences de l'Éducation pour l'Ère Nouvelle, 42, 111, 10.3917/lsdle.423.0111 · DOI
- Guggemos, 2021, On the predictors of computational thinking and its growth at the high school level, Computers & Education, 161, 10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104060 · DOI
- Henderson, 2017, What works and why? Student perceptions of ‘useful’digital technology in university teaching and learning, Studies in Higher Education, 42, 1567, 10.1080/03075079.2015.1007946 · DOI · Paper page
- Honomichl, 2012, The role of guidance in children's discovery learning, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 3, 615
- Li, 2020, On computational thinking and STEM education, Journal for STEM Educ Res, 3, 147, 10.1007/s41979-020-00044-w · DOI
- Lye, 2014, Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12?, Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51, 10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012 · DOI · Paper page
- Mayer, 2004, Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning?, American Psychologist, 59, 14, 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14 · DOI · Paper page
- Merian, 2007, Le feedback vidéo en éducation physique scolaire, Staps, 76, 107, 10.3917/sta.076.0107 · DOI
- Mondada, 2016, R2T2: Robotics to integrate educational efforts in South Africa and Europe, International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 13, 10.1177/1729881416658165 · DOI
- Papadakis, 2020, Robots and robotics kits for early childhood and first school age, International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM), 14, 34, 10.3991/ijim.v14i18.16631 · DOI
- Patchan, 2016, Using tablet computers to teach preschool children to write letters: Exploring the impact of extrinsic and intrinsic feedback, Computers & Education, 102, 128, 10.1016/j.compedu.2016.07.007 · DOI
- Sapounidis, 2020, Educational robotics for stem: A review of Technologies and some educational considerations, 167
- Schmidt, 2013, Motor learning and performance, 5E with web study guide: From principles to application, Human Kinetics
- Sullivan, 2008, Robotics and science literacy: Thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding, Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 45, 373, 10.1002/tea.20238 · DOI
- Sweller, 2007, Why minimally guided teaching techniques do not work: A reply to commentaries, Educational Psychologist, 42, 115, 10.1080/00461520701263426 · DOI · Paper page
- Swinnen, 1996, Information feedback for motor skill learning: A review, 37
- Yadav, 2016, Computational thinking for all: Pedagogical approaches to embedding 21st-century problem-solving in K-12 classrooms, TechTrends, 60, 565, 10.1007/s11528-016-0087-7 · DOI
- Zhang, 2019, A systematic review of learning computational thinking through Scratch in K-9, Computers & Education, 141, 10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103607 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Chevalier, M., Giang, C., El-Hamamsy, L., Bonnet, E., Papaspyros, V., Pellet, J.-P., Audrin, C., Romero, M., Baumberger, B., & Mondada, F.
- Venue
- Computers & Education
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2022-04
- Volume
- 180
- Pages
- 104431
- ISSN
- 0360-1315
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 10
- Language
- en
- Licence
- Funders
- National Centre of Competence in Research Robotics
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
