Saturday 31 January 2015

Computational thinking is a life skill. Here's why... › Merton Park Code ClubMerton Park Code Club

Taken from:Computational thinking is a life skill. Here's why... › Merton Park Code ClubMerton Park 

Code Club:


To read more on this go to http://mppcodeclub.primaryblogger.co.uk/new-curriculum/computational-thinking-is-a-life-skill-heres-why/ 



"Running is a great way to keep fit – lots of fresh air and things to look at. And it’s free – you should try it. Try Park Run.

But I hate running. I really do – it’s a difficult sport to take up in your fifties! However, I realised today that computational thinking skills are what has enabled me to get my running up to 15k/week. And maybe I hate it less. Maybe I’ll love it one day. I’ll let you know.

Can you think of non-computing areas of your life where you have used computational thinking skills to improve on something, or to solve a problem? Please comment below – tell us which skills you have used, which problem you have overcome, and why you think these skills helped you. Here’s my experience:

Decomposition – I break my run into chunks. There are difficult bits (uphills) and easy bits (downhills). I give myself permission to stop at various points if I’m tired. But I generally don’t. As I get through each chunk I give myself a pat on the back and carry on. Chunking it up gives me the motivation both to get started and to carry on til it’s finished.

Logical reasoning – I predict what I need to wear (kit, hat, gloves – weather dependent) & I work out my route in advance to decide which music I will need and how long the run will take me.

Resilience – sometimes the weather’s bad, or I’m tired. But I keep on going, knowing that the end result will be worth the cold, or the pain.

Perseverance – I’m still doing it, aren’t I?! And I have built up my runs gradually from a much smaller distance

Creativity – If I walk uphill, I change my music track to a marching sort of song, to ensure that I walk at a good pace. (My favourite – “Men of Harlech” ). If I’m really tired I swap to interval training.  I tinker with my schedule depending on my mood and level of ambition!

Patterns – I group similar bits of the walk together eg flats, uphills, downhills, and change my rhythm, music & approach appropriate to each type of section.

Evaluating & Debugging - Throughout my run I am evaluating my technique and relative fitness and changing things about my run accordingly, to help me improve."



'via Blog this'

Saturday 24 January 2015

Waste as a tool for computational thinking













A modified version of the blog post in: 

An article in the Northampton Herald and Post " How a university is using waste as tool to inspire students" by Lawrence John discusses the Junkbots project. 
"FUNNY looking robots called junkbots could be the key to encouraging more children across the county to become engineers, computer programmers or scientists.
 
One force which is driving this idea forward is the University of Northampton.
 
For the past few years, staff from its science and technology department have been going out to primary and secondary schools to spread the word that science is fun.

By working with schools, the university hopes to show pupils a different side to computing and hopefully raise their interest in what they can achieveLawrence John

For the whole article click here.

For more on the junkbots project work go to: http://junkbots.blogspot.co.uk/


All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Tuesday 20 January 2015

TYNKER - a fun set of games.

I have been playing with (and so has my son) the Tynker app (available at http://www.tynker.com/mobile/ ). It has a mixture of features, several games and activities to play with concepts of programming and computational thinking.

It has a Scratch/Alice look, with graphical blocks. The coding puzzles gradually build up in complexity. 

App also comes with a games creation option.


All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Sunday 18 January 2015

Using Minecraft to Challenge Students and Keep Learning Fun

Using Minecraft to Challenge Students and Keep Learning Fun: "Much more than just a video game, Minecraft is being used by thousands of educators to tackle difficult learning concepts in an amazingly fun and collaborative digital environment. Students are exploring, crafting and making in 3D virtual worlds where their creativity and imagination can run wild. No matter what your discipline, the many different elements of Minecraft can be employed to add fun and meaning to just about any lesson."



To read more go to: https://www.fractuslearning.com/2015/01/12/minecraft-challenge-students-learning-fun/





'via Blog this'



All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Saturday 17 January 2015

How Making Robots Captivates Kids' Imaginations


Taken from: How Making Robots Captivates Kids' Imaginations | Edutopia:

All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Problems First, Second and Third

A paper has recently been published in International Journal of Quality Assurance in Engineering and Technology Education on problem-solving and programming by two members of the Department of Computing and Immersive Technologies, University of Northampton.



Problems First, Second and Third. 
Gary Hill and Scott Turner

Abstract
This paper considers the need to focus initial programming education on problem-solving, prior to the teaching of programming syntax and software design methodology. The main vehicle for this approach is simple Lego based robots programmed in Java, followed by the programming of a graphical representation/simulation to develop programming skills. Problem solving is not trivial (Beaumont and Fox, 2003) and is an important skill, central to computing and engineering. The paper extends the authors earlier research on problems first and problem solving (Hill and Turner, 2011) to further emphasise the importance of problem-solving, problem based learning and the benefits of both physical and visual solutions. An approach will be considered, illustrated with a series of problem-solving tasks that increase in complexity at each stage and give the students practice in attempting problem-solving approaches, as well as assisting them to learn from their mistakes. Some of the problems include ambiguities or are purposely ill-defined, to enable the student to resolve these as part of the process. The benefits to students will be discussed including students' statements that this approach, using robots, provides a method to visually and physically see the outcome of a problem. In addition, students report that the method improves their satisfaction with the course. The importance of linking the problem-solving robot activity and the programming assignment, whilst maintaining the visual nature of the problem, will be discussed, together with the comparison of this work with similar work reported by other authors relating to teaching programming using robots (Williams, 2003). In addition, limitations will be discussed relating to the access to the physical robots and the alternative attempts to simulate the robots using three options of, Microsoft Robotics Studio (MSRS), Lego Mindstorms and Greenfoot simulators.





To read a preview of the paper go to: http://www.igi-global.com/viewtitlesample.aspx?id=117560&ptid=91662&t=Problems%20First,%20Second%20and%20Third




If you'd like to find out more about Computing at the University of Northampton go to: www.computing.northampton.ac.uk. All views and opinions are the author's and do not necessarily reflected those of any organisation they are associated with

All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Monday 12 January 2015

Probably the cutest computational thinking in the world

Wonder Workshop (https://www.makewonder.com/) recently released their long anticipated robots Dash and Dot robots (see picture above). It is hard not to be charmed by these robots, they are cute, easy to use, download the Apps and you are ready to go almost out of the box - and add to this an easy to use but fairly powerful tool for developing programming.


At the time of writing the software is only available for IOS but there are plans for Android. 

Blockly, available as one of apps, can be used to program the robots. It is a simple looking graphical language (simpler looking but similar to Scratch). A simple example (shown opposite) where Dash (the bigger of the two) does things such as  moves forward,  going left, lights change to orange, , left ear changes colour, head moves forward and it roars like a dinosaur. It relatively easy to then add loops and test (such as checking if it's 'friend' Dot is in view). Below is a very short video of Dash moving around until it 'sees' Dot.





It is difficult not to anthropomorphise these, especially when they are left alone they try and attract your attention with noises. I would be very surprised if these don't start popping up in a lot of primary schools soon. Personally, their ease of use, 'cuteness', combined with a suitably powerful programming language means I think they have great potential for the development of computational thinks and problem-solving skills. The are just fun as well.




All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Friday 9 January 2015

Raspberry Pi Junkbot - Home

Raspberry Pi Junkbot - Home: A new website providing more information of the Raspberry Pi Junkbot project (combining Raspberry Pi, Scratch programming and junk). This will be added to as the  project develops.





At the moment it includes

- Introduction

-Discussion about the robot controller card

-ScratchGPIO

- Example of the drawing bot.



All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Introduction to junkbots

The School of Science and Technology at the University of Northampton have been working with local schools to create robots made from junk. This is an initiative by the University to introduce environmental sustainability, engineering and computing to students and has been been funded by Northampton Enterprise Limited and east midlands development agency (emda).


This project sets out to engage pupils with a set of activities over four three-hour sessions that provides an insight into STEM subjects. The workshops will be structured in the following way:
(a)Session 1: Introduction to waste management, its impact, recycling and reuse. An introduction to the idea of making robots from rubbish.
(b)Two sessions involving guided exercises.
· Session 2: Involves some problem-solving exercises (approx. ½ hour), then in groups investigate adding ‘junk’ with a new electrical components such as batteries and motors to use vibrations to move the robots.
· Session 3: To apply some of the ideas on problem solving and use of materials developed previously to build a little junk-clearing robot.
· Lego based robots are provided with two light sensors;
· a play area (containing borders and area for the junk to be placed);
The facilitators will help with programming the robots and the instructions to be used.
(c) The final session will involve the students, with the help of the facilitators, demonstrating and presenting their group’s solutions.
a. Each group will present their work to the other groups in a way they feel is most appropriate- with facilitators help if needed.
b. An hour tinkering time before the presentation will be given to solve any last minute problems.
The project aims to provide an opportunity for year 9 or 10 pupils to meet a range of people working or training in STEM subjects; the selection of the facilitators aims to have diverse mix of ethnicity to attempt to dispel stereotypes of scientists and engineers.

Details can be found at the project site including some example exercises.

For further details please contact: Scott.turner@northampton.ac.uk or +44 1604 893028

All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Thursday 8 January 2015

Computational Thinking is for Everyone



Problem solving is not trivial (Beaumont and Fox, 2003).  In fact, if we think about Bloom’s Taxonomy’s (Bloom 1956) and the Cognitive Domain, problem-solving involves the high-level skills of synthesis, evaluation, analysis and applications, so perhaps it is not surprising that student’s often struggle in this area and with subjects based around problem-solving (such as programming). A much discussed and related area of Computational Thinking (Wing, 2006) has raised the profile of areas such as problem-solving, by highlighting the importance of “thinking like a computer scientist” (Wing 2006). The thought processes involved in being a computer scientist are more complicated than just being able to program, “Computational thinking is reformulating a seemingly difficult problem into one we know how to solve, perhaps by reduction, embedding, transformation, or simulation.” (Wing, 2006). The skills of computer scientists are applicable to a much wider range of areas or as Wing states: “One can major in computer science and go on to a career in medicine, law, business, politics, any type of science or engineering, and even the arts.” (Wing, 2006).

Characteristics of Computational Thinking (Wing 2006):
“Conceptualizing, not programming. Computer science is not computer programming. Thinking like a computer scientist means more than being able to program a computer. It requires thinking at multiple levels of abstraction;
Fundamental, not rote skill. A fundamental skill is something every human being must know to function in modern society. Rote means a mechanical routine. Ironically, not until computer science solves the AI Grand Challenge of making computers think like humans will thinking be rote;
A way that humans, not computers, think. Computational thinking is a way humans solve problems; it is not trying to get humans to think like computers. Computers are dull and boring; humans are clever and imaginative. We humans make computers exciting. Equipped with computing devices, we use our cleverness to tackle problems we would not dare take on before the age of computing and build systems with functionality limited only by our imaginations;
Complements and combines mathematical and engineering thinking. Computer science inherently draws on mathematical thinking, given that, like all sciences, its formal foundations rest on mathematics. Computer science inherently draws on engineering thinking, given that we build systems that interact with the real world. The constraints of the underlying computing device force co puter scientists to think computationally, not just mathematically. Being free to build virtual worlds enables us to engineer systems beyond the physical world;
Ideas, not artifacts. It’s not just the software and hardware artifacts we produce that will be physically present everywhere and touch our lives all the time, it will be the computational concepts we use to approach and solve problems, manage our daily lives, and communicate and interact with other people; and
For everyone, everywhere. Computational thinking will be a reality when it is so integral to human endeavors it disappears as an explicit philosophy.”(Wing 2006)

Carnegie Mellon now has a Centre of Computational Thinking 


Beaumont, C., & Fox, C. (2003). Learning Programming: Enhancing Quality Through Problem-Based Learning (pp. 90-95) 4th Annual Conference of the ICS HE Academy Galway: ICS.
Bloom, B., S. (ed.) (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the classification of educational goals – Handbook I: Cognitive Domain New York: McKay.




All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Problem Solving with Robots in Computing

Scott Turner and Gary Hill from the Division of Computing an Immersive Technologies  of the University of Northampton UK,have been investigating teaching and developing problem solving skills as a first step developing programming skills through the use of LEGO-based robots and graphics based programming.


Work on problem-solving has been on-going in the School of Science and Technology (was School of Applied Sciences) for the last four years looking at the concept of teaching and developing problem-solving first, then programming. The main vehicle for developing the problem-solving skills has been LEGO Mindstorms robotics kits and series of gradually more challenging robot-based tasks.





Lawhead et al (2003) stated that robots “…provide entry level programming students with a physical model to visually demonstrate concepts” and “the most important benefit of using robots in teaching introductory courses is the focus provided on learning language independent, persistent truths about programming and programming techniques. Robots readily illustrate the idea of computation as interaction”. Synergies can be made with our work and those one on pre-object programming and simulation of robots for teaching programming as a visual approach to the teaching of the widely used programming language  Java.

The main benefits that the students stated of this approach was they  believe robots provide a method to visually and physically see the outcome of a problem. The approach taken the module has been visually-orientated. The appropriateness of this seems to be borne out by the student comments. Student satisfaction  for a module based around this approach is over 92%. One of the comments made was that the linking of the problem-solving robot task and the programming assignment was liked. This feedback is similar to that reported by other authors when teaching programming using robots (Williams et al, 2003).  There is enough scope in this approach to have different levels of complexity/functionality within an assignment task offering a basic ‘pass’ level for a particular task, but also the scope for those students that desire more of a challenge.


Reference
Lawhead PB, Bland CG, Barnes DJ, Duncan ME, Goldweber M, Hollingsworth RG,
Schep M (2003), A Road Map for Teaching Introductory Programming Using
LEGO Mindstorms Robots SIGCSE Bulletin, 35(2): 191-201.
Williams AB (2003) The Qualitative Impact of Using LEGO MINDSTORMS Robot
to Teach Computer Engineering IEEE Trans. EducVol. 46 pp 206.


Publications
  • Turner S and Hill G (2010) "Innovative use of Robots and Graphical Programming in Software Education" Computer Education Ser. 117 No. 9 pp 54-57 ISSN: 1672-5913
  • Turner S, Hill G, Adams J (2009) "Robots in problem solving in programming" 9th 1-day Teaching of Programming Workshop, University of Bath, 6th April 2009.  
  • Turner S and Hill G(2008) "Robots within the Teaching of Problem-Solving" ITALICS vol. 7 No. 1 June 2008 pp 108-119 ISSN 1473-7507 
  • Turner S and Adams J (2008) "Robots and Problem Solving" 9th Higher Education Academy-ICS Annual Conference, Liverpool Hope University, 26th August - 28th August 2008. pp. 14 ISBN 978-0-9559676-0-3. 
  • Adams, J. and Turner, S., (2008) Problem Solving and Creativity for Undergraduate Computing and Engineering students: the use of robots as a development tool Creating Contemporary Student Learning Environments 2008, Northampton, UK. 
  • Adams, J. and Turner, S., (2008) Problem Solving and Creativity for Undergraduate Engineers: process or product? International Conference on Innovation, Good Practice and Research in Engineering Education 2008, Loughborough, UK. 
  • Adams, J., Turner, S., Kaczmarczyk, S., Picton, P. and Demian, P.,(2008). Problem Solving and Creativity for Undergraduate Engineers: findings of an action research project involving robots International Conference on Engineering Education ICEE 2008, Budapest, Hungary. 
  • Turner S and Hill G(2007) Robots in Problem-Solving and Programming 8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information and Computer Sciences, University of Southampton, 28th - 30th August 2007, pp 82-85 ISBN 0-978-0-9552005-7-1 
  • Turner S (2007) Developing problem-solving teaching material based upon Microsoft Robotics Studio. 8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information and Computer Sciences, University of Southampton, 28th - 30th August 2007 pp 151 ISBN 0-978-0-9552005-7-1 
  • Turner S (2007) Developing problem-solving teaching materials based upon Microsoft Robotics Studio. Innovative Teaching Development Fund Dissemination Day 1st March 2007 Microsoft:London 
  • Turner S and Hill G (2006) The Inclusion Of Robots Within The Teaching Of Problemsolving: Preliminary Results Proceedings of 7th Annual Conference of the ICS HE Academy Trinity College, Dublin, 29th - 31st August 2006 Proceedings pg 241-242 ISBN 0-9552005-3-9 



All views are those of the author and should not be seen as the views of any organisation the author is associated with.

Answers not on the Screen

  2.  The answers not on the screen Hill, G. ,  Turner, S. J.  and  Childs, K.  (2017)  Abstract:  Reflection from two areas on the issues...