View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.

uk brought to you by CORE

provided by Smith College: Smith ScholarWorks

Masthead Logo Smith ScholarWorks

Computer Science: Faculty Publications Computer Science

2010

A Curriculum Unit on Programming and Robotics

Marina U. Bers
Tufts University

Louise Flannery
Tufts University

Elizabeth Kazakoff
Tufts University

R. Jordan Crouser
Tufts University, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.smith.edu/csc_facpubs

Part of the Computer Sciences Commons

Recommended Citation
Bers, Marina U.; Flannery, Louise; Kazakoff, Elizabeth; and Crouser, R. Jordan, "A Curriculum Unit on Programming and Robotics"
(2010). Computer Science: Faculty Publications, Smith College, Northampton, MA.
https://scholarworks.smith.edu/csc_facpubs/91

This Article has been accepted for inclusion in Computer Science: Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Smith ScholarWorks. For
more information, please contact [email protected]
A Curriculum Unit on Programming and Robotics

Prof. Marina U. Bers, Louise Flannery, Elizabeth Kazakoff, and R. Jordan Crouser

DevTech Research Group

Eliot Pearson Department of Child Development

Tufts University

http://ase.tufts.edu/DevTech/tangiblek/

© DevTech Research Group, Tufts University

 Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the following people for their hard work in piloting

this curriculum and for their valuable feedback:

Nehama Libman, Tufts University

Jared Matas & Miriam Newman, Jewish Community Day School of Boston

Ken Lee and Alyssa Ettinger, Tufts University

Rachael Fein, Tufts University

Michael Horn, Northwestern University

Thanks also to the teachers and children at the three schools and three summer camps that piloted this

curriculum.

The development and piloting of this curriculum is part of collaborative research by the Tufts

Developmental Technologies Research Group and the Tufts Human Computer Interaction Lab. This

research is supported by the National Science Foundation Advanced Learning Technology Grant No.

DRL-0735657

2
 Table of Contents
Introduction 5

The Curriculum 6

Materials 7

Pedagogy 8

Classroom Management 9

Assessments 12

Lesson One – Sturdy Building 17

Lesson Two – What Is a Robot? 20

Lesson Three – Hokey-Pokey: Sequence of Instructions 25

Lesson Four – Again & Again until I Say When: Loops and parameters 28

Lesson Five – Through the Tunnel: Sensors and Loops 31

Lesson Six – The Robot Decides: Sensors and Branches 34

Lesson Seven –Final Projects 37

Appendix A Robotics across Themes 41

Appendix B Songs and Games 43

Appendix C The Engineering Design Process 45

Appendix D A Sample Design Journal 54

Appendix E A Sample Engineer’s License 61

Appendix F Working with CHERP and the LEGO® RCX 64

Appendix G Starter Ideas for Mobile Robot Designs 66

Appendix H List of Materials and Robotic Parts 68

References 70

3
 Tables and Figures

Tables

Table 1: Powerful Ideas within the Activities 13

Table 2: ITEEA Standards and Massachusetts Frameworks Addressed 14

Figures

Figures 1-7: The Engineering Design Process 46

Figures 8-9: A Sample Engineer’s License 61

Figures 10: Starter Ideas for Mobile Robot Designs 65

Figure 11: Parts of a LEGO® Mindstorms™ Robot 69

4
Introduction

The Tangible Kindergarten project studies how, when given age-appropriate tools, young

children can actively engage in computer programming and robotics in a way that is consistent with

developmentally appropriate practice. This research project explores the creation of novel human-

computer interaction techniques to support learning with technology in early elementary school, with a

focus on kindergarten. Since many modern graphical user interfaces are not designed with the

developmental needs of such young learners in mind, they are generally ill-suited for use in early

elementary school classrooms, especially for computer programming activities. To overcome this

problem, this research project has created a tangible-graphical hybrid programming language

specifically for young children, the Creative Hybrid Environment for Robotics Programming, or CHERP.

See http://ase.tufts.edu/DevTech/tangiblek/research/cherp.asp for more information.

Rather than using a keyboard to type programs to control robots, children using CHERP

physically construct programs by connecting interlocking wooden blocks with labels which both a

computer and young child can recognize. Children also have the option to use graphical icons

manipulated on-screen with a mouse, or to switch between the two interfaces. This hybrid approach

creates a unique opportunity to separate the intellectual act of computer programming from the

confounding factors of many programming interfaces. It therefore provides a medium for young

learners to experience success with computer programming of robotic objects.

Just as young children can read age appropriate books, computer programming can be made accessible

by providing young children appropriate tools. When implemented with a curriculum such as the

following, CHERP provides a powerful tool for young children to program with.

5
The Curriculum

This curriculum introduces powerful ideas from computer science, specifically programming in a

robotics context, in a structured, developmentally appropriate way. The term powerful idea refers to a

central concept within a domain that is at once personally useful, interconnected with other disciplines,

and has roots in intuitive knowledge that a child has internalized over a long period of time.1 The

powerful ideas from computer science addressed in this curriculum include: the engineering design

process, robotics, control flow by sequencing and by instructions (loops and branches), parameters,

and sensors. See Table 1 for more in-depth descriptions. These powerful ideas are explored in the

context of a curriculum that draws on the theme of transportation and can be adapted to many other

common early childhood themes (see Appendix A). Each session follows the same basic structure: 1)

warm up games to playfully introduce or reinforce concepts, 2) introduction of the powerful idea

through a challenge, 3) work individually or in pairs, 4) technology circle, 5) free-explorations, and 6)

assessment. Teachers should adapt the lesson structure and its components to suit their class’s needs.

Pacing

The curriculum unit is designed to take about 20 hours of classroom time, 10 hours of activities

and 10 hours for work on final projects. This numbers are certainly not set in stone. Depending on

children’s developmental levels and prior experience with digital technology, programming, and

robotics, students might need more or less time than the guidelines here indicate. Ideally, these lessons

would be spread out over several months with 2-3 timeslots a week spent on the curriculum (either

activities, group conversations, or free-exploration). Less frequent exposure makes it harder for

students to retain and build on the ideas in the lessons. One issue for each teacher to resolve is how

long to allot for each session, keeping in mind that each lesson can be spread out over several sessions

to accommodate the classroom schedule and students’ attention spans for this work. Depending on the

1
Papert, S. (1991). What’s the big idea: Towards a pedagogy of idea power. IBM Systems Journal, 39(3-
4), 720-729.
6
students, a class may benefit from between 1 and 2 hours to devote to their robotics and programming

activities at a time.

Some classes or students may benefit from further division of the activities into smaller steps or

from more time to explore each new concept before moving onto the next, either in the context of

free-exploration or with teacher-design challenges. Each of the powerful ideas here can easily be

expanded into a more unit of study; the activities provide an introduction to each concept. For instance,

students could explore a range of different activities and challenges with sensors to learn how they

work in more depth.

To supplement the structured challenges, two to three hours of free-exploration are allotted

throughout the curriculum. These open-ended sessions are vital for children to fully understand the

complex ideas going on with their robotic creations and programs. The free-explore sessions also serve

as a time for teachers to observe students’ progress and understandings. These sessions are as

important for learning as the lessons themselves! In planning and adjusting the timeframe of this

curriculum, free-explore sessions should not be left by the wayside. Rather, if time is tight, teachers can

consider leaving out a particular lesson altogether, giving children enough time to really understand and

work with the ideas they are introduced to rather than skimming over all the lessons presented in this

curriculum.

Materials

The robotic pieces referred to in this curriculum come from the LEGO® Company’s Mindstorms™

robotics construction kit. In the next few years there may be other robotics construction sets on the

market for early childhood education and which could be used with this curriculum. A second, and

important, type of material used in the curriculum is the incorporation of inexpensive crafts and

recycled materials. Current robotic construction kits utilize materials such as LEGOs®, which can be very

expensive and challenging for young children with small hands to use. They also do not necessarily

appeal to all children and require some creativity to incorporate with other kinds of materials. The use
7
of crafts and recycled materials, a practice already common in other domains of early childhood

education, lets children build with a range of materials with which they are already comfortable. It may

also bring down the costs associated with acquiring robotic supplies, since a blend of materials may

reduce the need for complete, LEGO®-based kits and instead require the purchase of only select robotic

parts which give functionality and movement to the creations.

For example, a kindergarten class in Boston created a robotic Freedom Trail, using cardboard

boxes to recreate the historical buildings of the city. The children integrated the use of relatively more

expensive LEGO® pieces, such as light sensors, to bring their constructions to life2. This activity, while

engaging for the children, also proved very successful for the teacher, who was already familiar with the

use of recyclable materials and felt less intimidated by not having to learn about the mechanics of

LEGO® bricks.

Pedagogy

The theory of constructionism (Papert, 1993) claims that children learn best when they

construct artifacts and knowledge by playing with and exploring concrete materials. The social context

of these explorations is also crucial, and teachers can provide scaffolding by creating a learning

environment that supports children’s explorations and experimentation. Through questions and

observations, the teacher engages students in articulating and extending their own observations,

thought processes, and explorations. The teacher may not directly answer students’ questions but

rather show them how to find it themselves. This kind of exploration fosters an environment in which

what we often see as “failure” is actually a natural step of the learning process, a signal to ask questions

and explore further. A more detailed account of working with young children and technology,

especially robots, can be found in Blocks to Robotics: Learning with Technology in the Early Childhood

Classroom (Bers, 2008). See that book or an excerpt from it included in Appendix D for a description of

2
Bers, M. (2008). Blocks to Robots: Learning with Technology in the Early Childhood Classroom. New
York, NY: Teacher’s College Press .
8
supporting students with planning versus tinkering styles of approaching robotics, programming,

designing, and problem-solving.

Classroom Management
Teaching robotics and programming in an early childhood setting requires careful planning and

ongoing adjustments as needed when it comes to classroom management issues. These issues are not

new to the early childhood classroom or teacher, but they may play out differently during robotics

activities because of the novelty and behavior of the materials themselves. Issues and solutions other

than those described here may arise from classroom to classroom; teachers should find what works in

their particular circumstances. In general, provide and teach a clear structure and set of expectations

for using materials and for the routines of each part of the lessons (technology circles, clean up time,

etc). Make sure the students understand the goal(s) of each activity. Posters and visual aids can

facilitate children’s attempts to answer their own questions and recall new information.

Group Sizes

The curriculum refers to whole-group versus pair or individual work. In fact, some classrooms

may benefit from other groupings. Piloting of this curriculum has shown that kindergarteners are better

able to explore the main activities in the lessons when they have their own materials to work with and

can go to other students for help, rather than collaborating with the same materials. Whether individual

work is feasible depends on the availability of supplies, which may be limited for a number of reasons.

However, an effort should be made to allow students to work in as small groups as possible, preferably

individually, while working on the challenges. On the other hand, the curriculum includes numerous

conversations which are enriched by multiple voices, viewpoints, and experiences. Some classes may be

able to have these discussions as a whole group. Other classes may want to break up into smaller

groups to allow more children the opportunity to speak and to maintain focus. Some classes structure

robotics time to fit into a “center time” in the schedule, in which students rotate through small stations

around the room with different activities at each location. This format gives students more access to
9
teachers when they have questions and lets teachers tailor instruction and feedback as well as assess

each students’ progress more easily than during whole-group work. It is important to find a structure

and group size for each of the different activities (instruction, discussions, work on the challenges, and

the final project) that meet the needs of the students and teachers in the class.

Technology Circles

Group discussions, called technology circles in this curriculum, can be a good way to introduce

and reinforce the important concepts of each activity, share strategies, and more. Some teachers have

all the children sit together in the rug area for this. There are challenges to be addressed in order for

technology circles to successfully serve their purposes. Kids’ excitement to use the materials during

introductory conversations or their post-hard work tiredness during wrap-up discussions may

necessitate special attention to the structure and expectations for group discussions. For instance,

these conversations may need to be rather concise, making it a challenge to cover the many complex

ideas presented in this curriculum’s activities. To cover all the important ideas without losing the

children’s attention, the discussions might be broken up and held throughout the day rather than all at

once. It can also be helpful to make a “Robot Parking Lot” for all the robots to go while they are not

being worked on so children have empty hands help them focus at the technology circles. Each

classroom will have its own routines and expectations around group discussions and circle times, so

teachers are encouraged to adapt what already works in their class for the technology circles in this

curriculum.

Managing Materials

Classroom-scale robotics projects require a lot of parts and materials, and the question of how

to manage them brings up several key issues that can support or hinder the success of the unit. The first

issue is accessibility of materials. Some teachers give the same kit of materials to each child, pair, or

table of several children. Other teachers keep materials sorted by type and place all the materials in a

central location. Since different projects require different robotic and programming elements, this set-

10
up may allow children to take only what they need and leave other parts for children who need them. A

word of caution, however: If materials are set-up centrally, they must be readily visible and accessible so

children don’t forget what is available to them or find it too much of a hassle to get what they need.

Regardless, it is important to find a clearly visible place to set up materials for demonstrations, posters

or visual aids to display for reference, and for robotics and programming materials for each lesson.

The second question is of usability. In some cases, children’s desks or tables do not provide

enough space to build a robot or explore with the tangible blocks while a computer is also set up on it.

In this case, making use of the floor space is crucial. One option is for children to work on the floor. They

can also use both the desk and floor if they keep the computer set-up on the desk, aim the camera at

the floor, and place their tangible code on the floor under the camera to maximize the usable space in

their immediate area. Care must be taken to ensure that children have enough space to use the

materials available to them. If this is not the case they may tend towards choosing materials that fit the

space but not their robotics or programming goal or their interface preference.

Another question is of individual differences. Teachers know that different children will prefer

different computer interactions and may need different components for their unique robot and

program. The classroom culture should support that idea, for instance by portraying the tangible

programming blocks and the graphical interface are equal tools that can be used to accomplish the

same goals. This promotes the attitude that a material or interface is not inherently better or worse

than another; rather it is good in a particular context: that a child can successfully use it to accomplish a

particular task.

Teachers should carefully consider how to address these issues surrounding materials in a way

that makes sense for their class’s space, routines, and culture. Then, it is crucial to make expectations

for how to use and treat materials explicit. These issues are important not only in making the curriculum

logistically easier to implement, but also because, as described in the Reggio Emilia tradition, the

environment can act as the “third teacher” (Darragh, 2006).

11
Assessments

Children employ many different concepts and skills to create and program their own robots. The

assessments at the end of each lesson distill those ideas down to the 2-3 core ideas of each activity.

They are scored on a scale indicating how much support was needed for the child to succeed at that

concept or skill, from 0 (cannot achieve) to 5 (achieves without assistance). The final projects employ

most or all the concepts covered in the lessons, depending on students’ individual projects.

To keep assessment manageable in a busy classroom and also give children a tool to self-

regulate their exploration process and self-assess, the assessment criteria given with each lesson can

constitute a sequence of concrete achievements leading up to an “Engineer’s License.” Each lesson is

associated with a different level, e.g. “Sturdy Builder” or “Programmer I,” that incrementally completes

the license, at which point the child is ready to start a final project. During the course of each lesson,

children will explore and learn at different rates. When they think they have accomplished the criteria

for that lesson’s assessments, they demonstrate this to a teacher, who marks that licensure level on

their certificate or helps them identify missing components. Children re-attempt any level until they

have mastered it. This format allows for individual differences, helps teachers manage the amount of

time assessment takes, and provides a fluid way for teachers to assess both individual progress and that

of the whole class. Teachers should feel free to come up with their own analogy for the incremental

assessment described here as “licenses.” One teacher likened it to levels of achievement in video games

that you must complete before moving on to harder challenges. See Appendix E for a sample Engineer’s

License.

The design journal for planning the final project can also provide a means of documentation.

Appendix D shows a sample design journal. The writing can be done by children or by teachers taking

dictation as appropriate. The components of the journal should be tailored for the nature of the final

project. This format can also be adapted simply to document the final version of the project.

12
 Table 1: Powerful Ideas within the Activities
Powerful idea Definition Activity Academic connections

Engineering A cyclical process engineers Sturdy building: Children build  Engineering

design process use to meet a need. Its steps non-robotic vehicles to take toy  Computer science
include: identifying a people from home to school. The
problem, looking for ideas, vehicle needs to be sturdy as well
developing, testing, and as perform its intended functions.
improving solutions, and
sharing solutions with others. All other activities (see below)

Robotics An engineering field focused What Is a Robot?: Children share  Engineering

on the creation and and learn ideas about what robots  Computer science
programming of robots, are. They build their own robots
machines which can and explore robotic parts and the
automatically follow different instructions used to
instructions to do tasks. program them.

Control flow* by A program is a sequence of The Hokey-Pokey: Children choose  Organization of ideas
sequencing instructions that the robot the appropriate instructions and in writing or
acts out in order. Each put them in order to program a storytelling
instruction has a specific robot to dance the Hokey-Pokey.  Logical thinking
meaning, and the order of the  Procedural thinking
instructions affects the
robot’s overall actions.

Control flow* by Instructions can be modified Again and Again until I Say When:  Cyclical natural events
instruction: with a special instruction to Students use the “repeat”  Calendar time
Loops and repeat. Parameters, extra instruction to make the robot go  Number sense
Parameters pieces of information, can forward infinitely and also the
make loops repeat forever or number of times needed to arrive
a specific number of times. at a fixed location.

Sensors A robot can use sensors, akin Through the Tunnel: Children use  Scientific observations
to human sense organs, to light sensors and the “repeat  Cause and effect
gather information from its until” instruction to program a  Senses and sensors
environment. Sensor data robot to turn its lights on in the
can become parameters for dark and off in the light.
control flow instructions.

Control flow by A branch instruction tells a The Robot Decides: Students  Cause and effect
instruction: robot to follow one set of program their robot to travel  Decision-making
Branches instructions or another based differently depending on the  Senses and sensors
on a sensor’s state. current state of a touch sensor.

*“Control flow” is the concept that programmers can control the order in which a robot follows the instructions in its program
through various programmatic methods, some of which are included in this curriculum and describe in this table.

13
 Table 2: ITEEA Standards and MA Frameworks Addressed

MA Science and Technology / Engineering

International Technology and Engineering Educators
Powerful Idea (STE) and Technology Literacy (TL)
Association Standards by standard and grade
Frameworks by standard and grade

 People plan to help get things done. (Std 2E; K-2)

 Everyone can design solutions to a problem. (Std
8A; K-2)
 Design is a creative process (that leads to useful
 Engineering design requires creative
products and systems). (Std 8B; K-2/Std 8C; Gr 3-
thinking and consideration of a variety
5/Std 8E; Gr 6-8)
of ideas (and strategies) to solve
 All designs can be improved. (Std 8F; Gr 6-8)
practical problems (generated by needs
 The engineering design process includes
The Engineering and wants). (STE Std 2 Central Concept;
identifying a problem, looking for ideas,
Design Process PreK-2 (& Gr 3-5))
developing solutions, and sharing solutions with
 Engineering design is an iterative
others. (Std 9A; K-2)
process […] (STE Std 2 Central
 Asking questions and making observations helps
Concept; Gr 6-8)
a person to figure out how things work. (Std 10A;
K-2)
 Troubleshooting is a way of finding out why
something does not work so it can be fixed. (Std
10C; Gr 3-5)

 Materials both natural and human-made

have specific characteristics that
 Different materials are used in making things.
determine how they will be used. (STE
(Std 2D; K-2)
Std 1 Central Concept ; PreK-2)
 Materials have many different properties. (Std 2J;
 Identify and describe the safe and
Gr 3-5)
proper use of tools and materials to
Building  Some materials can be reused or recycled. (Std construct simple structures. (STE Tech
5A; K-2) Std 1.1; Gr PreK-2)
 Build or construct an object using the design  Appropriate materials, tools, and
process (K-2) machines enable us to solve problems,
invent, (and construct). (STE Std
1Central Concept ; Gr 3-5 (6-8))

 With teacher direction, use appropriate

 Build or construct an object using the design technology tools […] to define
process. (Std 11B; K-2) problems and propose hypotheses. (TL
 Discover how things work. (Std 12A; K-2) Std 3.6; Gr 3-5)
Robotics  Systems have parts that work together to  Describe the various ways that objects
accomplish a goal (Std 2B; K-2) can move, such as in a straight line,
 Tools, machines, etc use energy to do work. (Std zigzag, back-and-forth, round-and-
16D; Gr 3-5) round, fast, and slow. (STE Physics Std 3;
K-2)

14
  Recognize and use everyday symbols (Std 12C; K-
People write 2)
 Identify and explain how symbols and
programs for robots  People use symbols when they communicate by
icons […] are used to communicate a
(and robots act out technology (Std 17C; K-2)
message (STE Tech Std 3.4; Gr 6-8)
instructions)  The study of technology uses many of the same
ideas and skills as other subjects. (Std 3A; K-2)

Sequencing / control
 None at this point  None at this point
flow

 Characteristics of natural and human-

made materials (STE Tech Std 1.1; PreK-2)
 Human beings and animals use parts of
the body as tools (STE Tech Std 2.2;
 The natural world and human-made world are PreK-2)
Sensors
different. (Std 1A; K-2)  Differentiate between living and
nonliving things. Group both living and
nonliving things according to the
characteristics that they share. (STE Bio
Std 2; K-2)

15
The Curriculum

16
Lesson 1 Powerful Idea:
Sturdy Building The Engineering Design Process

Overview:
Time: 45-60 minutes

Students design and build non-robotic vehicles to transport small toy people from home to school. They
use the engineering design process to explore how to make their vehicles sturdy.

This lesson can be done before or after the following lesson, which introduces the robotic parts and
how to program. The powerful ideas in Lesson 1, building sturdily and using the engineering design
process, will prove important to the success of the children’s robots and should be rearticulated and
discussed during each activity.

Prior Knowledge Objectives

Students will understand that… Students will be able to…
 None, but  LEGO® bricks and other  Build a sturdy, non-robotic
 Prior experience building materials can fit together to vehicle using LEGO® bricks
with LEGO® and crafts or form sturdy structures. and other materials.
recycled materials is helpful.  The engineering design  Use the engineering design
process is useful for planning process to facilitate the
and guiding the creation of creation of their vehicle.
artifacts.

Materials / resources:
 LEGO® bricks and a variety of crafts and recycled materials for building and decorating
 Large “Home” and “school” icons or models, placed several feet apart on the floor
 Poster showing the steps of the engineering design process (see Appendix C)

17
 Activity description

Warm up (5 minutes): Sing “The Wheels on the Bus,” which focuses on transportation and the ideas that
vehicles are made out of different parts and that those parts have unique functions.

Introduce the concepts and the task (10 minutes): “Today we will be building cars (or other vehicles) to
drive toy people around, and we’re going to use a tool to help us make sure our cars do their job well.”
Discuss what an engineer is and introduce the steps of the engineering design process (see Appendix C
for a poster).

What is an engineer?
An engineer is anyone who invents or improves things (for instance, just about any object you see around
you) or processes (such as baking methods) to solve problems or meet needs. Any man-made object you
encounter in your daily life was influenced by engineers.

Individual / pair work (30 minutes): Students follow the steps of the engineering design process and use
LEGO® and crafts or recycled materials to create a vehicle that can transport small toy people from
home to school. They may use both structural and aesthetic materials. Students should demonstrate to
a teacher that their vehicles meet the following criteria as they are ready.

The criteria for a successful vehicle are that:

a. It should have wheels that roll,
b. You should be able to push it between two locations on the floor,
c. It must include a place for the toy people to ride in, and
d. It must stay intact while being handled and pushed along the floor.

Note:
Whether students work in pairs versus individually is left up to the teachers’ discretion based on several
factors. Materials may be limited, making pair work necessary. Teachers may also have goals for children’s
social development that an explicit focus on sharing and teamwork throughout this curriculum can
support. On the other hand, teamwork can be challenging at this age, so students may benefit from having
their own materials and the option rather than the requirement to collaborate with others when it makes
sense.

Technology Circle: After about 30 minutes of building, students share their creations. They may:
a. explain the features of their vehicle,
b. show how their vehicle moves,
c. describe the features of their final design that make it sturdy,
d. talk about what they found easy and difficult, and
e. share anything they changed from their original plan.

Free-play: ~30 minutes

Provide opportunities for children to build with LEGO® and other arts and crafts materials.

18
Assessments for Lesson 1 Student’s name: __________________________

Level 1: Sturdy Builder

When a child attempts this license level, also assess them according to the following scale. Use NA if not
applicable.

If assessing a child based on a partially complete project, note this in the “Notes” section. In this case,
assess the child based on their understanding of the core concepts below and how effectively they
implemented them on the part of the project they did complete.

5 4 3 2 1 0
Mostly Partially Very Did not
Complete Did Not
Complete Complete Incomplete attempt/Other
Achievement Complete
Achievement Achievement Achievement
of goal/task/ goal/task/
of goal/task/ of goal/task/ of goal/task/
understanding understanding
understanding understanding understanding

Skill Achievement Level

1. Vehicle has a working means of motion. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
2. Vehicle remains intact while being handled and moved as it is designed to 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
move.

Notes:

Overall Debugging:

1. A. Recognizes that something is not working. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

2. B. Keeps original goal or changes to an acceptable alternative. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. C. Has a hypothesis of the cause of the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. D. Attempts to solve the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

19
Lesson 2 Powerful Idea:
What Is a Robot? Robots have Special Parts to that let them Follow
Instructions

Overview:

Time: 90 minutes. These activities can be divided into multiple sessions.

This session has two parts. During Part 1, students explore how to program a robot using CHERP. During
Part 2, students discover the parts a LEGO® robot needs and build their own robotic vehicles.

Prior Knowledge Objectives

Students will understand that… Students will be able to…
 LEGO® bricks and other  Robots need moving parts,  Describe the components of
materials can fit together to such as motors, to be able to a robot, including the ‘brain’
form sturdy structures. perform behaviors specified (RCX), motors, and wires.
 The engineering design by a program.  Upload a program to a robot
process is useful for planning  The robotic ‘brain’ (RCX) has via the tangible blocks or
and guiding the creation of the programmed graphical icons, computer
artifacts. instructions that make the interface, and LEGO® IR
 Symbols (pictures, icons, robot perform its behaviors. tower.
words, etc) can represent  The RCX must communicate  Build a sturdy, robotic
ideas or things. with the motors for the vehicle using LEGO® bricks
 Some ability to recognize motors to function. and other materials.
letters or to read is helpful,
but not required.

Materials / resources:

 Pictures of different robots and non-robotics

 Large icons for games and reference displays
 Part 1: One simple pre-built two-motor RCX vehicle per pair of students
 Computers with CHERP software, webcams, IR towers, programming blocks
 Part 2: One set of robotic parts for each student/pair
 LEGO® bricks and a variety of crafts and recycled materials for building and decorating
 Some partially built vehicles (or pictures of them) to show possible sturdy motor attachments
 Location icons or models (e.g. “home and “school”), placed several feet apart on the floor

Note:
It is important to establish rules or expectations for how students should treat each others’ materials,
programs, and robots. Find a time for students generate these group expectations. Students may be better
able to imagine reasonable expectations after using the robots or programming interface once.

20
 Activity description

Warm up activities:

1) Jump for the robots! Children will be shown about 10 different images of robots and non-robots.
They jump up and down if they think the picture shown is of a robot. Later, make an “Is It a Robot?”
chart putting these images in one of three categories: Robots, Maybe or Sort of Robots, and Not
Robots.

2) Yes or No? Students jump up (or make another movement) for statements they think are true and sit
down for statements they think are false. Adults record who jumps up or sits down.

Extension: Incorporate graphing into this exercise by making a chart with True and False for each
question along the horizontal axis and number of students along the vertical axis. Have students
place a marker (sticker, symbol, etc) with their initials in the “True” column or the “False” column.
There are many other possible variations.

1. Robots are machines (YES). _____

2. All robots are made of the same materials (NO). _____
3. Robots must have moving parts (YES). _____
4. Robots can think by themselves (NO). _____
5. All robots look like alike (NO). _____
6. Robots must be able to move around the room (NO). _____
7. Robots are operated using remote controls (NO). _____
8. People tell robots how to behave with a list of instructions called a program (YES). _____
9. Some robots can tell what is going on around them (YES). _____
(Examples: sensing light, temperature, sound, or a touch.)
10. Robots are alive (NO). _____

3) Discussion: What is a robot? As a class, children discuss what they think a robot is and examples of
robots they know of. Children and teachers can bring in pictures of these objects later and put them
on the “Is It a Robot?” chart. The teacher shows a pre-built RXC vehicle and a non-robotic vehicle.
The class identifies that you have to push the non-robot to make it move. You can also push the
robot, but (as the teacher shows) you can give it instructions and push a button to make it follow
them. Why can the robot do this? It has special parts, which the teacher overview now. Students will
learn about them more later.

Notes:
The RCX, which is like the robot’s body, has an ‘ear’ for ‘hearing’ programs from the computer. It also has
its own ‘computer ‘brain’;’ which remembers instructions and tells the other parts what to do. The motors
are like muscles that move the wheels. Wires connect the motors to the computer ‘brain’ like nerves
connect our brains to our muscles.

It might help to discuss whether robots are (or are for) boys or girls. The girls in the class may especially
benefit from their teacher affirming that robots aren’t innately masculine or only for boys.

21
Part 1. Programming a Robot

Introducing the concepts and task: Explore what we can program the robots to do.

1. Communication with a robot: Explain that we can tell a robot what to do, as long as we use a
language it understands. Encourage the students to offer examples of how people communicate
(speaking, writing, drawing, facial expressions, etc) and other languages they (or people they know)
can speak. Discuss the idea of translating between languages, and the need to translate what we
want a robot to do into the robot’s language. A program is another word for instructions we give
the robot.
2. Show how to use the two programming interfaces. If we want to make our robot go forward, we
find the appropriate wooden blocks (or graphical icons) by their pictures or words and put the
program together. Show how to make, upload, and run a simple block program. Then, show that
you can make a graphical (“screen”) programs by editing the graphical version of the block
program. Upload and run it. Emphasize that the blocks and the icons on the screen offer two ways
of programming the same instructions.

To Upload from the Tangible Programming Blocks

Place the program in the camera’s field of view, and place the robot’s ‘ear’ in front of the IR tower. Click the
“Upload from blocks” button. The computer takes a photo to “see” the blocks, and shows us the program
on the screen.

To Upload from the Graphical Icons

Click and drag the icons together; they “snap together” when they are close enough and can make a logical
sequence. Place the robot’s ‘ear’ in front of the IR tower. Click the “Upload from screen” button.

Finally, in either case, the computer sends the program to the robot. When the robot beeps, it has
successfully downloaded the program. Press the green “Run” button on the RCX to make it do the
program. If the robot doesn’t move as expected, brainstorm why that might be and try to fix it.

Really, when we click on an “Upload” button, the computer reads the circular codes on the icons and
translates the program to robot language, which is made of 0’s and 1’s! Then the computer sends the
message to the robot using infrared light. …That’s a lot of translating between many special kinds of
languages from our idea to a robot moving! (This may also be too much information for many students.
Knowing enough to make the process work is enough.)

Learning the Instructions for the Robot:

Pair work: (10-15 minutes) Pairs explore putting different programs on pre-built robots to see what each
instruction makes the robot do and to learn the process of successfully uploading tangible and graphical
programs.

22
Whole class games: Review and reinforce instruction icon meanings.

1. Ask the students to pick a block and demonstrate what they think it means. For example, a student
might pick up a “shake” block and shake his body.
2. Play Simon Says using large pictures of the block icons as prompts. For example: Simon Says…
Forward! (Show the “forward” icon,) or, Simon Says… Shake, Spin (Show the “shake” and “spin”
icons). Use the Begin and End blocks around the instructions if you choose. If not, emphasize the
need for the Begin and End blocks in a CHERP program another way. Use this game as to observe
any challenges students have in their interpretations of the blocks and their internalizations of the
movement the icons represent.

Part 2: Building an RCX Robot

Introducing the concepts and task: Build a robotic vehicle that transports toy people.

1. Revisit the question of the robotic and non-robotic vehicles’ movement. Review the robot’s key
parts and their functions.
2. Individual/pair work: Students build their own robotic vehicles. Allow the students to build how they
see fit, but remind them that a working robot must have a computer “‘brain’,” motors, properly
connected wires, and an unobstructed IR receiver. When they think they have a working robot, they
bring it to a testing station where they upload “Begin, Forward, End” and run it. (See Appendix F for
set-up tips.) This test is to ensure that their robot follows the instruction properly and that it is
sturdy. Teachers can help make sure the robots’ wires are properly oriented so that the motors turn
as expected to make the robot go forward. Have the students name their robots!

Technology Circle: After about 45 minutes of building, have the students share their creations with the
rest of the class (or a small group). During this time, students can share the parts and features of their
robot, share what they found easy or difficult, or share what makes their robot sturdy.

What do you think will happen if you make a robot that is missing one of its pieces? Try it out!

Concluding activity: Simon Says, or another game. See Appendix B for examples.

Free-play: ~45 minutes

1. Exploring robots parts: Students rebuild the robots they started or build new ones to explore
different designs that incorporate all the necessary parts and strategies for sturdiness. They also
explore what happens if you build robots without all the necessary parts.

2. Exploring programs: Students create and upload programs to a working robot to to become familiar
with the icons and the process of uploading a program to the robot. Give students plenty of time to
work on this! It is critical for them to have experience programming robots with programs of their
choice – often random combinations of blocks. This experience allows them to see what’s possible
and move from “Wow, I made it move!” to “I wonder if I can make it do ______?” This exploration
prepares young programmers to try to program specific, planned behaviors.

23
Assessment for Lesson 2 Student’s name _____________________________

Level 2: Robot Builder

When a child attempts this license level, also assess them according to the following scale. Use NA if not
applicable.

If assessing a child based on a partially complete project, note this in the “Notes” section. In this case,
assess the child based on their understanding of the core concepts below and how effectively they
implemented them on the part of the project they did complete.

5 4 3 2 1 0
Mostly Partially Very Did not
Complete Did Not
Complete Complete Incomplete attempt/Other
Achievement Complete
Achievement Achievement Achievement
of goal/task/ goal/task/
of goal/task/ of goal/task/ of goal/task/
understanding understanding
understanding understanding understanding

1. Knows their robot needs specific parts for specific actions and uses those 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
parts.
2. Attaches all necessary robot parts so that they work correctly (i.e. wheels to 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
motors, motors to RCX, wires to ports).
3. Knows how to program the robot with TUI or GUI. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

Overall Debugging:

1. A. Recognizes that something is not working. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

2. B. Keeps original goal or changes to an acceptable alternative. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. C. Has a hypothesis of the cause of the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. D. Attempts to solve the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

24
Lesson 3 Powerful Idea:
Hokey-Pokey The Order of Instructions Matters

Overview:
Time: 45-60 minutes

Each day, play Simon Says with the programming instructions (or another game, see Appendix B) as an
opening and / or closing activity.

For the Hokey-Pokey, students choose the appropriate instructions and put them in order to program a
robot to dance the Hokey-Pokey. This activity can be done with many other children’s songs. If you wish,
think of other songs and how to program a robot to dance to the words. Be creative (the children will
be)!

Prior Knowledge Objectives

Students will understand that… Students will be able to…
 A robot is a machine that can  Each icon corresponds to a  Point out or select the
act on its own once it specific instruction appropriate block or icon
receives proper instructions.  A program is a sequence of corresponding to a planned
instructions that is followed robot action
by a robot  Connect a series of blocks by
 The order of the blocks fitting the pegs of one block
dictates the order in which into the hole of the following
the robot executes the block
instructions  Upload a program to the
computer and transmit it to a
robot

Materials / resources:

 Large icons for games and reference displays

 One working robot, built in Lesson 2, for each child or pair
 Computers with CHERP software, webcams, IR towers, programming blocks

25
 Activity description

Warm-Up: Play Simon Says or another game from Appendix B to review the actions each icon represents.

Introduce the concepts and task. Show an example robot and have the class name it. “Today we will give
instructions, or programs, to our robots so they will do the Hokey-Pokey.” The whole class sings and
dances the Hokey Pokey to make sure everyone remembers it. Conclude with a “robot verse”:

You put your robot in, you put your robot out,
You put your robot in, and you shake it all about.
You do the Hokey Pokey, and you turn yourself around.
And that’s what it’s all about. (Clap, clap.)

Hokey-Pokey: individual/pair work. Students program their robot to do the Hokey Pokey dance.

1. When all groups are done, everyone does the Hokey Pokey with the robots!

Technology circle:

1. Draw attention to what order to put the blocks in. Is it the Hokey-Pokey if the right blocks are in a
different order?
2. Extra: Ask where else you encounter programs, which are a kind of procedure that is followed
automatically, a set of instructions. Examples: using a recipe to bake a cake or following directions
to drive to a friend’s house.

Concluding activity: Simon Says, or another game. See Appendix B for other suggestions.

Free-Play ~30 minutes

Students continue to create and upload programs to a robot. As students are ready, prompt them to
plan ahead about what they want the robot to do.

26
Assessment for Lesson 3 Student’s name _____________________________

Level 3: Programmer I

When a child attempts this license level, also assess them according to the following scale. Use NA if not
applicable.

If assessing a child based on a partially complete project, note this in the “Notes” section. In this case,
assess the child based on their understanding of the core concepts below and how effectively they
implemented them on the part of the project they did complete.

5 4 3 2 1 0
Mostly Partially Very Did not
Complete Did Not
Complete Complete Incomplete attempt/Other
Achievement Complete
Achievement Achievement Achievement
of goal/task/ goal/task/
of goal/task/ of goal/task/ of goal/task/
understanding understanding
understanding understanding understanding

1. Selects the right instructions. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

2. Arranges instructions in the correct order. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

Overall Debugging:

1. A. Recognizes incorrect instructions or order by reading the program or 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

watching the robot run the program.
2. B. Keeps original goal. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. C. Has a hypothesis of the cause of the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. D. Attempts to solve the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

27
Lesson 4 Powerful Ideas:
Again and Again until I Say When! Loops and Number Parameters

Overview
Time: 90 minutes

Students will learn about a new instruction that makes the robot repeat other instructions infinitely or a
given number of times. They use these new instructions to program their robots to move between two
destinations on opposite ends of “road” with a turn in it.

Prior Knowledge Objectives

Students will understand that… Students will be able to…
 Arranging the same blocks in  An instruction or sequence  Recognize a situation that
a different order will result in of instructions may be requires a looped program.
a different program. modified to repeat.  Make a program that loops.
 Some programming  Use number parameters to
instructions, like ‘Repeat,’ modify the number of times
can be qualified with a loop runs.
additional information.

Materials / resources:

 Large icons for games and reference displays

 One working robot, built in Lesson 2, for each child or pair
 Computers with CHERP software, webcams, IR towers, programming blocks
 “Home” and student-made destination icons or models for the robots’ trips

28
 Activity description

Warm-Up: Game or song that uses repetition. See Appendix B for examples.

Introduce the concepts: Repeats

1. Introduce the “Repeat Forever” and “End Repeat” blocks. What does it mean to repeat something?
Make a model repeating program to demonstrate the proper syntax. What will the robot do?
Emphasize that the robot only repeats the instructions in between the “Repeat” and the “End
Repeat” blocks. The robot does the program in order: any instruction before the “Repeat,” the
repeating chunk, and then any instructions after the “End Repeat.”
2. Make a road of tape on the floor, and have the students choose the destination at its end. All
together, build a program to make the robot drive along just the long portion of an “L” shaped
road, but with no number parameter: [Begin, Repeat Forever, Forward, End Repeat, End].
3. Upload the program to a robot and run it. The robot drives past the end of the road. Ask the
students to think about how to resolve this issue. Introduce the Number Parameters (“Numbers”)
and model how to add them to the repeating program so that it loops the given number of times
before stopping. Now what happens to instructions placed before “Repeat” or after “End Repeat”?
4. Use the display icons to post the program (including the Number Parameter) visibly in the room.

The task: Robot Trips (individual/pair work). Students explore a situation in which some but not all the
instructions need to be repeated.

1. The students program the robot to drive from one destination to another along an “L” shaped road,
making the robot stop when it arrives. (Stopping close to the destination icon counts!) Set up
several roads, perhaps of different lengths, with one leg of each road being at least 2-3 “Forwards”
long.

Notes:
Adaptation: Break the challenge into parts: first have students program their robots to drive along one
part of their road before adding the turn and the second leg of the journey. Such adjustments can make a
big difference for some students as using Repeats can be complex.

Technology Circle:

1. Students share their programs and discuss how Repeats work, especially how order is important.

Concluding Activity: Song or game. See Appendix B for examples.

Free-play: ~30 minutes

Students need to explore the new instructions. They should build programs that use (or don’t use)
them. In doing so, they will gain comfort with sequencing the blocks correctly, how the robot follows
instructions before, between, or after the “Repeat” and “End Repeat” blocks, and when Repeats are
helpful to use.
29
Assessment for Lesson 4 Student’s name______________________

Level 4: Programmer II-A

When a child attempts this license level, also assess them according to the following scale. Use NA if not
applicable.

If assessing a child based on a partially complete project, note this in the “Notes” section. In this case,
assess the child based on their understanding of the core concepts below and how effectively they
implemented them on the part of the project they did complete.
5 4 3 2 1 0
Mostly Partially Very Did not
Complete Did Not
Complete Complete Incomplete attempt/Other
Achievement Complete
Achievement Achievement Achievement
of goal/task/ goal/task/
of goal/task/ of goal/task/ of goal/task/
understanding understanding
understanding understanding understanding

1. Knows when and how to use Repeats. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

2. Knows when and how to use number parameters. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. Selects the right instructions. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. Arranges the instructions in the correct order. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

Overall Debugging:

1. A. Recognizes incorrect instructions or order by reading the program or 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

watching the robot run the program.
2. B. Keeps original goal. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. C. Has a hypothesis of the cause of the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. D. Attempts to solve the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

30
Lesson 5 Powerful Ideas:
Through the Tunnel Sensors and Loops

Overview
Time: 2 hours

The students program a robot vehicle to drive through a dark tunnel and turn its headlights on.

Notes:
The LEGO® sensors detect light vs. dark or touched vs. not touched. CHERP uses this information in a binary
way: “Do I see light?” or, “Is the touch sensor button pressed?” Yes or no? CHERP does not use information
about degrees of brightness or pressure.

Sensors MUST be attached to Port 1 (one at a time) to work. Sensors must be triggered at the right
moment. Set the sensor (press the touch sensor or create the desired light) before running the program.

The light bulb MUST be attached to Port B, but it can be attached by a wire and placed elsewhere on the
robot. You need to program the light to turn off at the end of the program or else it will remain on, even
when you press Run again. Alternatively, you can turn the robot on and off before rerunning the program.

The light sensors can be finicky in different lighting. TEST OUT THIS ACTIVITY BEFORE HAVING STUDENTS
TRY IT. If the light sensors don’t work well in your classroom, it is possible to do this lesson using touch
sensors. Lesson 6 also uses sensors, so it is reasonable to also choose just one of Lessons 5 or 6 to do.

Prior Knowledge Objectives

Students will understand that… Students will be able to…
 Examples of human or  A robot can feel and see its  Connect a light or touch
animal sense organs and that surroundings with a sensor. sensor to the correct port on
people and animals use  A robot can react to the RCX.
information provided by collected data by changing  Write a program that
their senses to help make its behavior. includes waiting for a
decisions.  Certain instructions (like specific condition.
“Repeat”) can be modified
with sensor data.

Materials / resources:

 Large icons for games and reference displays

 One working robot, built in Lesson 2, for each child or pair
 Computers with CHERP software, webcams, IR towers, programming blocks
 A cardboard box (or other material) to create a dark tunnel for the robots to drive through
 A LEGO® light, light (or touch) sensor, and 2 short wires for each robot

31
 Activity description

Warm-Up: Game or song that uses the 5 human senses. See Appendix B for examples.

Introduce the concepts: Sensors and Sensor Parameters:

1. Discuss examples of human / animal senses and how these senses let us gather information about
what’s going on around us, so that we can make decisions based on this information.
2. Show the Light Sensor and explain how it works. (It detects light, but is not a camera. It tells the
robot if it’s light or dark out, but doesn’t tell it what to do.) How might this be useful? Add these to
the Robot Parts poster if one is being used.
3. We need programming instructions to tell the robot what to do with the information from its
sensors. Show the Repeat blocks, which are now familiar, and the new Until Light/ Until Dark blocks.
Create an example program together, such as: [Begin, Repeat Until Light, Shake, End Repeat, Spin,
End]
4. Run the program, and have students discuss what the robot is doing.
5. Display the reference program visibly in the room.

The task: Through the Tunnel: individual/pair work.

1. The students add a light and a sensor to their robot and program their vehicle to drive into a dark
tunnel and turn on its light when it’s inside. You can use either sensor: a light sensor is like an eye
and the touch sensor can be thought of as a light switch in this program.
2. As an extension, they can program the robot to continue driving and turn off its light when it exits
the tunnel.
3. The final program could look something like: [Begin, Repeat Until Dark (or Pushed), Forward, End
Repeat, Light On, Forward, Light Off, End]

Technology Circle:

Understanding how the sensors work and how CHERP uses the information from them can be
challenging. Have students discuss their understandings of the sensors and why different programs do
or do not accomplish the goal.

Concluding Activity: Song or game. See Appendix B for examples.

Free-play ~45 minutes

Have students explore adding sensors to robots and making programs with Repeats and Sensor
Parameter instructions. Sensors use complex concepts and often work in unexpected ways. Offer
support in observing the robot’s behavior so students may fully understand these concepts.

32
Assessment for Lesson 5 Student’s name ______________________

Level 4: Programmer II-B

When a child attempts this license level, also assess them according to the following scale. Use NA if not
applicable.

If assessing a child based on a partially complete project, note this in the “Notes” section. In this case,
assess the child based on their understanding of the core concepts below and how effectively they
implemented them on the part of the project they did complete.
5 4 3 2 1 0
Mostly Partially Very Did not
Complete Did Not
Complete Complete Incomplete attempt/Other
Achievement Complete
Achievement Achievement Achievement
of goal/task/ goal/task/
of goal/task/ of goal/task/ of goal/task/
understanding understanding
understanding understanding understanding

1. Knows how to use sensors and what they are for. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

2. Knows when and how to use sensor parameters. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. Selects the right instructions. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. Arranges instructions in the correct order. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

Overall Debugging:

1. A. Recognizes incorrect instructions or order by reading the program or 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

watching the robot run the program.
2. B. Keeps original goal. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. C. Has a hypothesis of the cause of the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. D. Attempts to solve the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

33
Lesson 6 Powerful Ideas:
The Robot Decides Sensors and Branches

Overview
Time: 90 minutes

The students program a robot vehicle to take different actions based on the state of a sensor.

Notes:
The LEGO® sensors detect light vs. dark or touched vs. not touched. CHERP uses this information in a binary
way: “Do I see light?” or “Is the touch sensor button pressed?” Yes or no? CHERP does not use information
about degrees of brightness or pressure.

Sensors MUST be attached to Port 1 (one at a time) to work. They must be triggered at the right moment.
Set the sensor condition (press the touch sensor or create the desired light) before rerunning the program.

The light sensors can be finicky in different lightings. TEST OUT THIS ACTIVITY BEFORE HAVING STUDENTS
TRY IT. If the light sensors don’t work well in your classroom, use the lesson’s adaptations for touch
sensors. Lesson 6 also uses sensors, so it is reasonable to also choose just one of the two lessons.

Prior Knowledge Objectives

Students will understand that… Students will be able to…
 Some instructions can be  A robot can ‘choose’  Connect a light or touch
qualified with additional between two sequences of sensor to the correct port on
information. instructions depending on the RCX.
 A robot can feel and see its the state of a sensor.  Identify a situation that
surroundings with a sensor. needs a branched program.
 A robot can react to  Make a program that uses a
information it collects by branch.
changing its behavior.

Materials / resources:
 Large icons for games and reference displays
 One working robot, built in Lesson 2, for each child or pair
 Light or touch sensor, a short and long wire for each robot
 Computers with CHERP software, webcams, IR towers, programming blocks
 “Home” and destination icons or models placed on the floor, tape roads

34
 Activity description

Warm-Up: Game or song. See Appendix B for examples.

Introduce the concept: “If”

1. In the programs so far, the robot has only one choice of what instructions to do next. Today we will
learn an instruction that give the robot two choices, and the robot uses a sensor to know which set
of instructions to follow each time the program is run. Solicit examples of times we rely on sensors
to help us make decisions. (If I feel something prickly, I’ll move away from it. Or, if I see it’s rainy out,
I’ll bring an umbrella; if not, I’ll leave the umbrella at home.)
2. Play “Simon Says” to help the students gain familiarity with the thought process behind branches.
For example, “Simon says, ‘If the lights are on, jump twice, (if not, stand on one foot).”
3. Introduce If, End-If blocks and light/dark and pushed / released parameters. Make and act out a
model program together. Upload it to a robot to see how it works. It is best to start out with a
program that uses only “If” and to save the “If Not” segment for an extension if students are ready
for it. Students will have a much better understanding of how “If” gives the robot choices once they
have run the program themselves in both sensor conditions.
4. Once the students run the program, use the reference icons to post the program in the room.

The task: The Robot Chooses a Program: individual/pair work. Here are several suggestions of challenges.

1. Touch sensor: Students use the touch sensor to set a “switch” for the robot to take a trip (or not)
when its program is run.
2. Light Sensor: The robot is at the park. Program the robot so that when you start the program, the
robot will go home if it’s dark out.
3. Extension: Students program their robot to follow one branch of a T-shaped map or another
depending on light sensor input. The robot starts at the base of the T, and the sun is shining (or not)
at it. If it’s still ‘light out,’ the robot has time to go play at the park (to the right). If not, the robot
should go right home (to the left). (This can be adapted to use a touch sensor.)

Technology Circle:

1. Students share the program they made, what it does, and anything they found easy, hard, or
surprising during the activity. Children sometimes think that Ifs make the robot do one program or
the other whenever the sensor is in that state rather than as a one-time decision-maker for which set
of instructions the robot will follow. This is important to identify and clarify with demonstrations.

Concluding activity: Song or game. See Appendix B for other suggestions.

Free-play ~30 minutes

Let students explore building programs with the If blocks. This exploration gives them a chance to learn
how to use the block in a program, think of situations that require it, and further understand how to use
sensors.

35
Assessment for Lesson 6 Student’s name: ____________________________

Level 5: Programmer III

When a child attempts this license level, also assess them according to the following scale. Use NA if not
applicable.

If assessing a child based on a partially complete project, note this in the “Notes” section. In this case,
assess the child based on their understanding of the core concepts below and how effectively they
implemented them on the part of the project they did complete.
5 4 3 2 1 0
Mostly Partially Very Did not
Complete Did Not
Complete Complete Incomplete attempt/Other
Achievement Complete
Achievement Achievement Achievement
of goal/task/ goal/task/
of goal/task/ of goal/task/ of goal/task/
understanding understanding
understanding understanding understanding

1. Knows how and when to use Ifs. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

2. Knows how and when to use If Nots (if applicable). 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. Selects the right instructions. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. Arranges instructions in the correct order. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

Overall Debugging:

1. A. Recognizes incorrect instructions or order by reading the program or 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

watching the robot run the program.
2. B. Keeps original goal. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. C. Has a hypothesis of the cause of the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. D. Attempts to solve the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

36
Lesson 7
Community Routes: Final Projects

Overview
Time: ~10 hours

This project should be tailored to fit with a curriculum unit, project, or event happening in the classroom
so that it meets the goals of the teachers and the interests of the students and teachers. Students work
together to build and program a robot to demonstrate their understandings and ideas related to the
robotics and programming curriculum as well as the content of the project theme or topic. During the
course of the final project, students put to use all the concepts learned during the previous lessons but
transfer them to a new context. When possible, teachers should encourage the use of crafts and
recycled materials.

Individual/pair work:

a. Students plan their robot and program in a design journal (see Appendix D).
b. Students build a robot and decorate it with LEGOs® and crafts and recycled materials.
c. Students program their vehicles to exhibit a behavior representing an aspect of the project’s
theme.
d. Students articulate the goal of their robot and its program and how they accomplished it.
(Teachers can document and print children’s responses to these questions to go along with the
design journals.)
e. Students practice how they will present their creations at the final exhibition.

Presentations: Students share :

a. the vehicle they made,

b. why they chose the features they did for their robot,
c. the goal of their program and why they wanted it to do that / what it represents,
d. the final program they built, and
e. anything that was hard, easy, surprising, interesting, etc about the process.

Materials / resources:

 Large icons for games and reference displays

 Robotic parts (RCXs, motors, wheels, sliders, wires, lights, sensors, and batteries) for each child
or pair to make a robot, plus extras
 Crafts and recycles materials for robots and for building an environment for them to run in
 Computers with CHERP software, webcams, IR towers, programming blocks
 Design journals, small icons for cutting and taping/gluing in the design journals

37
Assessment for Lesson 7 Student’s name: _____________________

Level 6: Expert

Part 1: Assess each child along these scales when they have finished their final project.

5 4 3 2 1 0
Mostly Partially Very Did not
Complete Did Not
Complete Complete Incomplete attempt/Other
Achievement Complete
Achievement Achievement Achievement
of goal/task/ goal/task/
of goal/task/ of goal/task/ of goal/task/
understanding understanding
understanding understanding understanding

1. Has a goal for the project. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

2. Selects the right instructions to accomplish the goal. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. Arranges instructions in the correct order to accomplish the goal. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. Knows how and when to use Repeats. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
5. Knows how and when to use number parameters. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
6. Knows how to use sensors and what they are for. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
7. Knows how and when to use sensor parameters with Repeats. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
8. Knows how and when to use Ifs with sensor parameters. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

Overall Debugging:

1. A. Recognizes incorrect instructions or order by reading the program or 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

watching the robot run the program.
2. B. Keeps original goal. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
3. C. Has a hypothesis of the cause of the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA
4. D. Attempts to solve the problem. 5 4 3 2 1 0 NA

Notes:

38
Assessment for Lesson 7 Student’s name: ____________________

Level 6: Expert, cont.

Part 2: Ask each child these questions to supplement the students’ journals and the teachers’
observations of and conversations with students during work and sharing times.

 What does your program tell your robot to do? How did you choose those instructions?
 What parts does your robot have (robotic and/or aesthetic)? Why did you choose them?

Mark the students’ level of understanding of how to program a robot along the following criteria.

Units: Understands the function of individual robot parts and individual programming
instructions, but not how to choose and assemble them to make a functional robot
or program that accomplishes a given goal.
Connections: Chooses appropriate parts for the robot and instructions for the program. Puts
parts together correctly and instructions in the right order. Understands that
putting the parts together in certain ways creates an overall outcome. Does not see
the connection between the whole program and then accomplishment of the
chosen goal.
Context: Understands the function of each element and that the order they are put in results
in a specific overall outcome. Is able to purposefully put the right instructions in the
right order for the program to achieve the given goal.

39
 Appendix A
Robotics across Themes

40
Robotics across Themes

This robotics and programming curriculum can be used within the context of study on a wide

variety of topics. The challenges presented in this curriculum relate to particular themes, but the

challenges and the basic ideas can be reconfigured to make sense with many other topics commonly

studied in early childhood settings. Below are some suggestions for such contexts. These ideas may also

help children focus in choosing what kind of robot to make if the curriculum uses an open-ended theme

such as “communities.”

 Person who lives in the community

 Person who works in the community
 Responsive or interactive building or structure
 Vehicles and road-related structures (traffic lights, drawbridges, etc)
 Nature (plants, animals, landscape, weather)
 Safety (alarms, crossing signals)
 Places and structures for entertainment, fun, or commerce
 Basic needs (food, housing)

The activities in this curriculum can easily be adapted to fit other themes. Use your imagination to

find a story context for each powerful idea. For instance, if this curriculum were to accompany a unit on

the study of animals, the activities might look like these:

Lesson 1: (Study building) Build a sturdy animal that can move like its real-life counterpart.

Lesson2: (What Is a Robot?) Build a robotic animal. (It can have wheels like a vehicle and use crafts
or recycled materials to give it the appearance of the chosen animal.)

Lesson 3: (Hokey-Pokey) This song (or another of your choosing) is a fun and concrete way to start
the unit regardless of the theme.

Lesson 4: (Robot Trips) Program animals (maybe at a zoo) to visit each other along different paths.

Lesson 5: (Through the Tunnel) Animals have many senses just like people do, so this activity can be
adapted in all sorts of ways. As examples, animals might do an action until (or when) someone pets
them (touch sensor) or when someone gives them food (the food might cover a light sensor to
make it dark).

Lesson 6: (The Robot Chooses) The activities for this can stem from those chosen for Lesson 5.

41
Appendix B
Songs and Games

42
Songs and Games
Many common songs and games can be used to support children’s understandings of robots

and programming concepts. For instance, Simon Says is a way to internalize instructions and understand

them in a more complete way, both kinesthetically and verbally. Here are some other suggestions for

songs and games to reinforce various concepts from the curriculum. Teachers may think of many more!

 Simon Says, traditional style: emphasizes ways our own bodies move, but without having kids
sit out for mistakes,
 Simon Says w/ icons cards: helps students learn new programming icons’ symbols, spoken
name, and kinesthetic action. Variation: Kids pick icons/strings for peers to act out,Head,
Shoulders, Knees, and Toes: emphasizes peoples’ body parts vs. robot parts,
 Act out blocks and programs or ‘program’ a friend to move along a line on the floor,
 ‘Memory’ card game or other matching game with icons: spurs use of instruction icons’ names.
When a child finds a match, they name and act out the icon.
 ‘The Wheels on the bus.’ Variation: Sing with programming instructions,
 Programming Charades: Mentor shows a child a program made from block icons. The child acts
out the program. The other children identify what icons made up the program.
 Walk-Through Progams. Make large programming icons that can be placed on the floor. Children
literally walk through the program step by step and carry out the actions to internalize how the
robot processes its programs. This can be especially helpful when working with “Repeats” and
“Ifs.”

43
 Appendix C
The Engineering Design Process

44
The Engineering Design Process
When working with young children and robotics, there are some interesting challenges around

helping children structure their problem-solving processes. Marina Bers, in her Blocks to Robots’ book

(2008), talks about the role of the engineering design process.

“On the one hand, we want to help them [the children] follow their ideas, but we do not

want them to become frustrated to the point they quit the work. On the other hand, we do

not want their success to be scripted, too easy, or without failure. One of the approaches

for how to handle this is by helping them understand and follow the design process. This is

similar to what engineers or software developers do in their own work. They identify a

problem. They do research to understand better the problem and to address it. They

brainstorm different potential solutions and evaluate the pros and cons. They choose the

best possible solution and plan in advance how to implement it. They create a prototype

and they implement it. They test it and redesign it based on feedback. This happens many,

many times. And finally, they share their solutions with others. This cycle is repeated

multiple times.”

The following diagram, Figure 1, shows one of many possible simplified versions of the engineering

design process. One suggestion for using this graphic is to give each child or pair a small copy of it along

with a token, similar to a playing piece in a board game. Children can move their token around the

diagram to reinforce the steps of the process. Figures 2-5 show individual steps of the engineering

design process to facilitate making a large poster of the whole process for the class to see from

anywhere around the room.

45
Figure 1: Simplified steps involved in the engineering design process.

46
Figure 2: Engineering Design Process step 1: Ask a question about a problem you want to solve or a goal
you want to accomplish.

47
Figure 3: Engineering Design Process step 2: Imagine as many different ways to accomplish your goal or
answer your question as you can.

48
Figure 4: Engineering Design Process step 3: Choose one solution and plan out how to do it in detail.

49
Figure 5: Engineering Design Process step 4: Create a prototype or working version of your plan.

50
Figure 6: Engineering Design Process step 5: Test your creation to see how well it accomplishes the
goals you have for it. Try different ways to improve it and test whether the improvements work better.

51
Figure 7: Engineering Design Process step 6: Share what you have done and get feedback.

52
Appendix D
Design Journals

53
Design Journals
Providing children with a design journal and with many opportunities to talk about their ideas

throughout the process can be helpful. However, before working with design journals it is useful to be

aware of different approaches to the design and problem-solving processes. Following is an excerpt from

Marina Bers’ book Blocks to Robots.

“As children work on their projects, many iterations and revisions will be done. Design
journals make transparent to the children themselves, as well as teachers and parents, their
own thinking and the project evolution. […] Some children might choose to avoid using
design journals or follow a systematic design process. They do not like to plan in advance.
They might belong to a group of learners that Papert and Turkle have characterized as
tinkerers and bricoleurs (Turkle & Papert, 1992). They engage in dialogues and negotiations
with the technology, their ideas happen as they design, build and program. As Papert and
Turkle write, “The bricoleur resembles the painter who stands back between brushstrokes,
looks at the canvas, and only after this contemplation, decides what to do next” (Turkle &
Papert, 1992).

“Constructionist learning environments allow for different epistemological styles, or ways of

knowing, to flourish. Some children want and need constraints and top-down planning
because they know what they want to make. Others enjoy working bottom-up and messing
around with the materials to come up with ideas. Some methods of teaching robotics and
programming, directly derived from engineering and computer sciences, provide structured
paths for children to navigate the process from idea to product. For example, the formal
steps of the engineering design process presented earlier are laid out in a design journal
consisting of teacher made worksheets. This approach might or might not work, depending
on the child, the way the learning environment is set up and the educational goals. In this
book I advocate both pathways: design journals with a directive focus, in the forms of
questions and design journals with lots of white pages, for those children that might want to
invent their own strategies. Tinkerers and planners complement each other and can also
learn from each other. Constructionist environments should be inviting and supportive to
little engineers who thrive working with constraints and making advanced plans, and little
tinkerers who create in dialogue with the materials.”

Taking these ideas into consideration, a sample design journal follows.

54
 A Design Journal
for the
Transportation
project

My Name is: ________________

My Partner’s Name is: _____________

55
We are going to build:

It is a(n) ________________________
Its name is _______________________

It will look like this because

________________________________
________________________________
________________________________

56
We will tell the robot to do this:

It will do that to show

57
This is a picture of me and my partner
with our final robot:

We made it like this because

________________________________
________________________________
________________________________

58
We told the robot to do this:

It did that to show

59
 Appendix E
A Sample Engineer’s License
*Thanks to Jared Matas and Nehama Libman for this idea and example.

60
 ___________’s Engineer’s License

Level 1 – Sturdy Builder Level 2 – Robot Builder

Level 3 – Programmer I Level 4 – Programmer II

Level 5 – Programmer III Level 6 – Expert

Figure 8: Sample Engineer’s License

61
Engineer’s License: Key
Level 1: Builder

Robot stays intact.

Robot moves.

Level 2: Robot Builder

Robot has all attached parts

Child uses tangible / graphical interface to

upload a program to the robot.
Level 3: Programmer I
Child picks right icons.

Child puts icons in order.

Level 4: Programmer II

Child knows when to use / not use repeats.

Child knows what sensors are for and how to

use them.

Child knows when & how to use sensor

parameters.

Level 5: Programmer III

Child understands Ifs and how to use them.

Level 6: Expert
See criteria for assessing final projects and
overall levels of understandings.

Figure 9: Key to the icons on the sample Engineer’s License

62
 Appendix F
Working with CHERP and the LEGO® RCX

63
Working with CHERP and the LEGO® RCX
Note: More information can be found in The CHERP Documentation
http://ase.tufts.edu/DevTech/tangiblek/research/Cherp%20Documentation.pdf

Testing a Robot’s Motors:

It is necessary to test a newly built robot to make sure that its motors turn as expected when
programmed with a Forward instruction (or another instruction with an easily verifiable outcome, e.g.
NOT Shake or Spin). The wires can attach to the RCX or motors parts in four directions. Two directions
will make the motors turn clockwise; the other two will make the motors turn counterclockwise.
Turning a wire connection 180 will always reverse the direction the motor spins; turning it 90 does not
guarantee a direction change. See Appendix G, picture (f) for an example of an orientation that works.
Once you have this orientation, you can place the motors to make any side of the RCX the “front” of the
robot.

Setting up the Tangible Programming Materials

The spacing between the computer’s webcam and the tangible programming blocks is
important for the computer vision to work properly. The webcam must have a direct line of sight to the
blocks, the blocks should be at least 18 inches from the webcam, and the whole program must fit in the
camera’s field of view. To test your set-up, upload tangible programs and check the photo that appears
on the screen and the graphical version of the program that the computer saw in that picture. Some
helpful hints: Mark where to place blocks relative to the webcam. This could mean placing labeled
notecards, paper strips, or tape on the surfaces where you know the set-up works. Or, have 18-inch
strings or paper strips available for students to measure (and mark) the distance between their webcam
and blocks. Best yet, experiment with how far left and right the end of a program can go without
leaving the webcam’s field of view and mark those edges on paper strips taped to the work surface. The
more of this spacing that can be pre-marked, the quicker students can get to work during the activities
if the equipment is not already set up.

It is also important the all the blocks be in one straight line, which is usually only tricky with the
magnet parameters, which can be twisted, or children might not place them in view of the webcam, and
the roped Repeat and If blocks, whose cords can block the webcam’s view or misalign the blocks (if the
cord is underneath them).

Using the IR Tower

The IR receiver port on the RCX (the smooth black rectangle on one end of it) must be aligned
with the IR tower’s transmitter. It is best to place the RCX as close as possible to the tower so the RCX
does not accidentally pick up a program sent by a different tower. However, the RCX’s IR port should be
lined up near the green light on the tower that turns on while it transmits. This means you might have to
prop up or hold the RXC to be lined up properly.

64
 Appendix G
Starter Ideas for Mobile Robot Designs

65
Starter Ideas for Mobile Robot Designs
There are many ways to put together a mobile LEGO® robot, but starting out can be confusing for
children and adults alike. Here are some ideas, intended to inspire the exploration of different designs.

 Watch out that the wires don’t rub the tires and that the wheel or tire does not rub on other parts
of the robot. This will slow the motor down or prevent the wheel from turning properly.
 With some designs, you can wrap the wire back between the motors toward the back of the RCX
and up onto the ports (see example (a) below).
 Use a “slider” instead of a wheel on the front “leg(s)” of the robot. This is simpler and it allows the
robot to turn smoothly. A tire in front will cause a lot of friction while the robot turns.
 Try wheels of different sizes. Try using other round parts, like LEGO® gears as wheels.
 Make sure all the robot’s parts and other LEGO® and crafts or recycled pieces are connected
STURDILY. It can be frustrating and time-consuming to rebuild a robot over and over!
 Keep the IR port (“ear”) unobstructed so the robot can receive programs.

(a) Motor attachment (b) Reinforcement of motors (c) Reinforcement of motors

(d) Reinforcement of motors (e) Wrapping the wire. (f) Orienting the wire ends

(g) Front leg with “slider” (h) Front legs with “sliders” (i) Different possible wheels

Figure 8: Possible mobile robot designs

66
Appendix H
List of Materials

67
List of Materials
Robotics materials

 1 set of robot parts for each child or pair, plus extras of each part: RCX “computer brain” brick, 2
motors, 3+ wires (2+ short and 1+ long), a variety of different-sized wheels, LEGO® light bulb piece;
touch sensor and light sensor.
 LEGO® “slider” pieces, assortment of LEGOs® and recycled materials;
 Batteries (each RCX runs on 6 AA batteries).

Programming materials:

 Computers with CHERP installed, webcam, IR tower (1 set for each student or pair who will be
working at one time);
 1 set of tangible programming blocks for at least every two students, regardless of whether they are
working together or separately.

Teaching materials:

 Posters showing robot parts, the uploading processes;

 Chart and images for “Is It a Robot?”;
 Large icons for display / reference programs. They could be magnetic or felt-backed for magnetic
whiteboards or felt-boards. Use whatever display surfaces are readily available;
 Design journals for final project and icons on paper for students to cut and tape / glue into their
design journals;
 Assessment forms for each student.

68
Figure 11: Parts of a LEGO® Mindstorms™ Robot

69
 References
Bers, M. (2008). Blocks to robots: Learning with technology in the early childhood classroom. New York,

NY: Teachers College.

Crouser, R.J. (2010). C.h.e.r.p. Retrieved from http://ase.tufts.edu/DevTech/tangiblek/research/cherp.asp

Crouser, R.J. (2010). Cherp documentation Retrieved from

http://ase.tufts.edu/DevTech/tangiblek/research/Cherp%20Documentation.pdf

Darragh, J.C. (2006). The environment as the third teacher. Retrieved from http://

http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED493517.pdf

International Technology and Engineering Educators Association, (2007). Standards for technological

literacy: Content for the study of technology. Reston, VA: International Technology Educators

Association.

Massachusetts Department of Education (2006). Massachusetts Science and Engineering/Technology

Curriculum Framework. Retrieved from http://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/current.html

Massachusetts Department of Education (2008). Massachusetts Technology Literacy Standards and

Expectations. Retrieved from http://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/current.html

Papert, S. (1993). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York, NY: Basic Books.

70