Adapting a robotics program to enhance participation and interest in STEM among children with disabilities: a pilot study

References

• Cannon K, LaPoint M, Bird N, et al. Using robots to raise interest in technology among underrepresented groups. IEEE Robot Automat Mag. 2007;14:73–81.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dasgupta N, Stout J. Girls and women in science, technology, engineering and mathematics: STEMing the tide and broadening the participation in STEM careers. Policy Insights Behav Brain Sci. 2014;1:21–29.
   Google Scholar
• Eisenhart M, Weis L, Allen C, et al. High school opportunities for STEM: comparing inclusive STEM-focused and comprehensive high schools in two US cities. J Res Sci Teach. 2015;52:763–789.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics. Women, minorities and persons with disabilities in science and engineering (NSF 13-304) [Internet] [cited 2013]. Available from: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2015/nsf15311/.
   Google Scholar
• Yuen T, Mason L, Gomez A. Collaborative robotics projects for adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. J Special Educ Technol. 2014;29:51–62.
   Google Scholar
• Bech-Winchatz B, Riccobono M. Advancing participation of blind students in science, technology, engineering and math. Adv Space Res. 2008;42:1855–1858.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duerstock B, Shingledecker C, From college to careers: Fostering inclusion of persons with disabilities in STEM [Internet] [cited 2014]. Available from: http://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/CtC_full.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Miller B, Krockover G, Doughty T. Using iPads to teach inequity science to students with a moderate to severe intellectual disability: a pilot study. J Res Sci Teach. 2013;50:887–911.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mutch-Jones K, Puttick G, Minner D. Lesson study for accessible science: building expertise to improve practice in inclusive science classrooms. J Res Sci Teach. 2012;49:1012–1034.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsay S. Discrimination and other barriers to employment for teens and young adults with disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2011;33:1340–1350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Benitti R. Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: a systematic review. Comput Educ. 2012;58:978–988.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Commission on Professionals in Science and Technology. Persons with disabilities in STEM [Internet] [cited 2007]. Available from: http://www.cpst.org/hrdata/documents/pwm13s/C454D041.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• FIRST® Robotics Canada. FIRST® Robotics Canada 2015 annual report [Internet] [cited 2015]. Available from: http://www.firstroboticscanada.org/main/wp-content/uploads/2015-Year-End-Report.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Grbich C, Qualitative data analysis: an introduction. London, UK: Sage; 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Ucgul M, Cagiltay K. Design and development issues for educational robotics training camps. Int J Technol Design Educ. 2014;24:203–222.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ludi S, Reichlmayr T. The use of robotics to promote computing to pre-college students with visual impairments. ACM Trans Comput Educ. 2011;11:1–20.
   Google Scholar
• Howard A, Park C, Remy S. Using haptic and auditory interaction tools to engage students with visual impairments in robot programing activities. IEEE Trans Learn Technol. 2012;5:87–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dorsey R, Park C, Howard A. Developing the capabilities of blind and visually impaired youth to build and program robots. J Technol Persons Disabil. 2013;1:57–69.
   Google Scholar
• Thomaz S, Aglaé A, Fernandes C, et al. RoboEduc: a pedagogical tool to support educational robotics. Paper presented at: Proceedings of the 39th American Society of Engineering Education and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; 2009 Oct 18–21; San Antonio, TX: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
   Google Scholar
• Virnes M, Sutinen E, Karna-Lin E, How children’s individual needs challenge the design of educational robotics. Paper presented at: International Conference on Interactive Design and Children; June 2008; Chicago, IL.
   Google Scholar
• Stump G, Hilpert J, Husman J, et al. Collaborative learning in engineering students: gender and achievement. J Eng Educ 2011;100:475–497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang K, Huang P, Lego robotics and group learning: Exploring the effects of gender, age, and family background. Paper presented at: IEEE 3rd International Conference on Communication Software and Networks, Xi’an, China; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Rahm J, Moore J. A case study of long-term engagement and identity-in-practice: insights into the STEM pathways of four underrepresented youths. J Res Sci Teach. 2016;53:768–801.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denis B, Hubert S. Collaborative learning in an educational robotics environment. Comput Hum Behav. 2001;17:465–480.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barak M, Zadok Y. Robotics projects and learning concepts in science, technology and problem solving. Int J Design Educ. 2009;19:289–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rusk N, Resnick M, Berg R, et al. New pathways into robotics: strategies for broadening participation. J Sci Educ Technol. 2008;17:59–69.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook A, Adams K, Volden J, et al. Using Lego robots to estimate cognitive ability in children who have severe physical disabilities. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol. 2011;6:338–346.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Adams K, Cook A. Programing and controlling robots using scanning on a speech generating communication device: a case study. Technol. Disabil. 2014;25:49–59.
   Google Scholar
• Panadero C, Román J, Kloos C, Impact of learning experiences using LEGO Mindstorms in engineering courses. Paper presented at: IEEE Conference on Education Engineering, Madrid, Spain; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• McCarthy C. Effects of a thematic-base, hands-on science teaching versus a textbook approach for students with disabilities. J Res Sci Teach. 2005;42:245–263.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsay S, Hounsell K, Cassiani C. A scoping review of Lego therapy interventions for children with autism. Disability & Health; in review.
   Google Scholar
• Danahy E, Russell A, Increasing STEM accessibility for students with cognitive disabilities via interactive curriculum. Paper presented at: 2011 Annual Conference & Exposition, Vancouver, BC; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Cameto R, Knokey A, Sanford C. Participation in postsecondary education of young adults with learning disabilities: findings from NLTS2. Learn Disabil. 2011;17:45–53.
   Google Scholar
• Coxon S. The malleability of spatial ability under treatment of a FIRST LEGO league-based robotics simulation. J Educ Gifted. 2012;35:291–316.
   Google Scholar
• Feng E, Lin C. Student satisfaction and self-efficacy in a cooperative robotics course. Social Behav Person. 2010;38:1135–1145.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skorinko J, Doyle J. Do goals matter in engineering education? An exploration of how goals influence outcomes for FIRST robotics participants. J Pre-College Eng Educ Res. 2012;2:9–20.
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.
   Google Scholar
• Caelli K, Ray L, Mill J. Clear as mud: toward greater clarity in generic qualitative research. Int J Qual Methods. 2003; 2:1–25.
   Google Scholar
• Krefting L. Rigor in qualitative research: the assessment of trustworthiness. Am J Occup Ther. 1991; 45:214–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grumbine R, Alden P. Teaching science to students with learning disabilities. Sci Teach. 2006;73:26–31.
   Google Scholar
• Lindh J, Holgersson T. Does Lego training stimulate pupils’ ability to solve logical problems? Comput Educ. 2007;49:1097–1111.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albo-Canals J, Heerink M, Diaz M, et al. Comparing two LEGO robotics-based interventions for social skills training with children with ASD. RO-MAN IEEE 2013;638–643.
   Google Scholar