Bridging Virtual and Physical
Exploring Students’ Computational Thinking and Creativity in Robot-Guided vs. Simulation-Based Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2025.8837Keywords:
collaborative learning, computational creativity, computational thinking, higher education, robot-guided learning, student log data, research paperAbstract
Computational thinking (CT) is a critical 21st-century skill that equips undergraduate students to solve problems systematically and think algorithmically. A key component of CT is computational creativity, which enables students to generate novel solutions within programming constraints. Humanoid robots are increasingly explored as promising tools to enhance CT skills, fostering teamwork and creativity in collaborative settings. However, gaps remain in understanding how different learning modalities impact the development of these skills. This study examines the comparative effects of robot-guided and simulation-based collaborative learning on undergraduate students’ computational creativity and CT skills. The study involved 71 undergraduate students, divided into small groups and randomly assigned to begin with either a robot-guided or simulation-based modality, switching to the alternate modality in the following session. Data were collected through group log data and pre- and post-intervention questionnaires. The results indicated that the robot-guided modality significantly enhanced computational creativity in terms of originality and elaboration, while both modalities supported flexibility equally. Additionally, students reported higher CT skills following the robot-guided activity, with the most notable improvements in cooperation and creativity. Lastly, fewer group interaction difficulties were reported during the robot-guided activity, supporting its value for collaborative learning. These findings highlight humanoid robots as a valuable complement to virtual learning environments, offering unique opportunities to foster creativity, collaboration, and problem-solving in undergraduate education.
References
Ardito, G., Czerkawski, B., & Scollins, L. (2020). Learning computational thinking together: Effects of gender differences in collaborative middle school robotics program. TechTrends, 64, 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00461-8
Astutik, S., & Prahani, B. K. (2018). The practicality and effectiveness of collaborative creativity learning (CCL) model by using PhET simulation to increase students’ scientific creativity. International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 409–424. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11426a
Buchem, I., & Baecker, N. (2022). NAO robot as scrum master: Results from a scenario-based study on building rapport with a humanoid robot in hybrid higher education settings. In S. Nazir (Ed.), Training, education, and learning sciences: Proceedings of the AHFE 2022 international conference (Vol. 59, pp. 65–73). AHFE Open Access. https://doi.org/10.54941/ahfe1002385
Barak, M., & Usher, M. (2020). Innovation in a MOOC: Project-based learning in the international context. In J. J. Mintzes & E. M. Walter (Eds.), Active learning in college science: The case for evidence-based practice (pp. 639–653). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33600-4_39
Chen, C.-H., & Chung, H.-Y. (2023). Fostering computational thinking and problem-solving in programming: Integrating concept maps into robot block-based programming. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 62(1), 186–207. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231205052
Chou, E., Fossati, D., & Hershkovitz, A. (2024). A code distance approach to measure originality in computer programming. In O. Poquet, A. Ortega-Arranz, O. Viberg, I.-A. Chounta, B. McLaren, & J. Jovanovic (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th international conference on computer supported education (Vol. 2, pp. 541–548). SciTePress. https://doi.org/10.5220/0012632100003693
Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage Publications.
Evripidou, S., Amanatiadis, A., Christodoulou, K., & Chatzichristofis, S. A. (2021). Introducing algorithmic thinking and sequencing using tangible robots. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 14(1), 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2021.3058060
Hershkovitz, A., Sitman, R., Israel-Fishelson, R., Eguíluz, A., Garaizar, P., & Guenaga, M. (2019). Creativity in the acquisition of computational thinking. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(5–6), 628–644. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1610451
Hooshyar, D., Pedaste, M., Yang, Y., Malva, L., Hwang, G.-J., Wang, M., Lim, H., & Delev, D. (2021). From gaming to computational thinking: An adaptive educational computer game-based learning approach. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(3), 383–409. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120965919
Hsu, T.-C., Chang, C., Wu, L.-K., & Looi, C.-K. (2022). Effects of a pair programming educational robot-based approach on students’ interdisciplinary learning of computational thinking and language learning. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 888215. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.888215
Israel-Fishelson, R., Hershkovitz, A., Eguíluz, A., Garaizar, P., & Guenaga, M. (2020). The associations between computational thinking and creativity: The role of personal characteristics. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58(8), 1415–1447. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633120940954
Israel-Fishelson, R., & Hershkovitz, A. (2022). Studying interrelations of computational thinking and creativity: A scoping review (2011–2020). Computers & Education, 176, Article 104353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104353
Kong, S.-C., Lai, M., & Sun, D. (2020). Teacher development in computational thinking: Design and learning outcomes of programming concepts, practices and pedagogy. Computers & Education, 151, Article 103872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103872
Korkmaz, Ö., Çakir, R., & Özden, M. Y. (2017). A validity and reliability study of the computational thinking scales (CTS). Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.005
Kovalkov, A., Paaßen, B., Segal, A., Pinkwart, N., & Gal, K. (2021). Automatic creativity measurement in Scratch programs across modalities. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 14(6), 740–753. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2022.3144442
Kurtz, G., & Kohen-Vacs, D. (2024). Humanoid robot as a tutor in a team-based training activity. Interactive Learning Environments, 32(1), 340–354. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2022.2086577
Lee, I., Grover, S., Martin, F., Pillai, S., & Malyn-Smith, J. (2019). Computational thinking from a disciplinary perspective: Integrating computational thinking in K–12 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-019-09803-w
Liu, S., Peng, C., & Srivastava, G. (2023). What influences computational thinking? A theoretical and empirical study based on the influence of learning engagement on computational thinking in higher education. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 31(6), 1690–1704. https://doi.org/10.1002/cae.22669
Luhmann, J., & Burghardt, M. (2022). Digital humanities: A discipline in its own right? An analysis of the role and position of digital humanities in the academic landscape. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 73(2), 148–171. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24533
Manske, S., & Hoppe, H. U. (2014). Automated indicators to assess the creativity of solutions to programming exercises. In D. G. Sampson, N.-S. Chen, & R. Huang (Eds.), The 14th IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT 2014) (pp. 497–501). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2014.147
Marrone, R. L., & Cropley, D. H. (2022). The role of learning analytics in developing creativity. In Y. Wang, S. Joksimović, M. O. Z. San Pedro, J. D. Way, & J. Whitmer (Eds.), Social and emotional learning and complex skills assessment (pp. 75–91). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-06333-6_5
Norman, U., Chin, A., Bruno, B., & Dillenbourg, P. (2022). Efficacy of a ‘misconceiving’ robot to improve computational thinking in a collaborative problem solving activity: A pilot study. In S. Rossi & A. Sgorbissa (Eds.), The 31st IEEE international conference on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN) (pp. 1413–1420). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN53752.2022.9900775
Papert, S. (1971, October). Teaching children thinking (Artificial intelligence memo No. 247, Logo memo No. 2). MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory.
Peracaula-Bosch, M., & González-Martínez, J. (2023). Towards a hermeneutics of computational thinking in Wing’s approximations. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 61(8), 1675–1694. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331231193142
Rehmat, A. P., Ehsan, H., & Cardella, M. E. (2020). Instructional strategies to promote computational thinking for young learners. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 36(1), 46–62. https://doi.org/10.1080/21532974.2019.1693942
Resnick, M. (2017). Lifelong kindergarten: Cultivating creativity through projects, passion, peers, and play. The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11017.001.0001
Román-González, M., Moreno-León, J., & Robles, G. (2019). Combining assessment tools for a comprehensive evaluation of computational thinking interventions. In S.-C. Kong & H. Abelson (Eds.), Computational thinking education (pp. 79–98). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6528-7_6
Stewart, W. H., Baek, Y., Kwid, G., & Taylor, K. (2021). Exploring factors that influence computational thinking skills in elementary students’ collaborative robotics. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(6), 1208–1239. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633121992479
Tang, X., Yin, Y., Lin, Q., Hadad, R., & Zhai, X. (2020). Assessing computational thinking: A systematic review of empirical studies. Computers & Education, 148, Article 103798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103798
Thornhill-Miller, B., Camarda, A., Mercier, M., Burkhardt, J.-M., Morisseau, T., Bourgeois-Bougrine, S., Vinchon, F., El Hayek, S., Augereau-Landais, M., Mourey, F., Feybesse, C., Sundquist, D., & Lubart, T. (2023). Creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration: Assessment, certification, and promotion of 21st century skills for the future of work and education. Journal of Intelligence, 11(3), Article 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11030054
Torrance, E. P. (1974). Torrance tests of creative thinking. Scholastic Testing Service.
Usher, M. (2025). Generative AI vs. instructor vs. peer assessments: A comparison of grading and feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2487495
Usher, M., & Amzalag, M. (2025). From prompt to polished: Exploring student–chatbot interactions for academic writing assistance. Education Sciences, 15(3), Article 329. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15030329
Usher, M., & Barak, M. (2020). Team diversity as a predictor of innovation in team projects of face-to-face and online learners. Computers & Education, 144, Article 103702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103702
Usher, M., & Hershkovitz, A. (2022). Interest in educational data and barriers to data use among massive open online course instructors. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 31(5), 649–659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-022-09984-x
Weintrop, D., Rutstein, D. W., Bienkowski, M., & McGee, S. (2021). Assessing computational thinking: An overview of the field. Computer Science Education, 31(2), 113–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2021.1918380
Wing, J. M. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33–35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
Yadav, A., & Cooper, S. (2017). Fostering creativity through computing. Communications of the ACM, 60(2), 31–33. https://doi.org/10.1145/3029595
Yeni, S., Grgurina, N., Saeli, M., Hermans, F., Tolboom, J., & Barendsen, E. (2024). Interdisciplinary integration of computational thinking in K–12 education: A systematic review. Informatics in Education, 23(1), 223–278. https://doi.org/10.15388/infedu.2024.08
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Learning Analytics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
