Simultaneously Improving Computational Thinking and Foreign Language Learning: Interdisciplinary Media With Plugged and Unplugged Approaches

Abstract

This study proposed plugged and unplugged approaches for young students to simultaneously improve their interdisciplinary learning performance in English and Computational Thinking (CT). The plugged approach involved adopting educational robots to enhance CT and to provide English vocabulary and sentence practice via a board game. The unplugged version of the educational board game involved using a conventional board game without a computer, although it was designed for practicing CT as well as some foreign language vocabulary and conversational sentences. The results show that both approaches were helpful for simultaneously improving the students’ English proficiency of the target vocabulary and sentences, and their CT competence. The students’ foreign language learning anxiety during the English conversation in the plugged game was significantly lower than that of the students playing the unplugged game. On one hand, the cooperation tendency of the CT scale improved significantly for the students playing the unplugged game. On the other hand, the critical thinking of the CT scale improved significantly for those using the plugged approach. This research provides an innovation development and evaluation for plugged and unplugged approaches.

Keywords

computational thinking interdisciplinary learning educational robots board games foreign language learning anxiety cooperation tendency critical thinking

English is being increasingly used as a medium of instruction in non-English-speaking countries (Min et al., 2019). Vocabulary and sentences play key roles in communication. Vocabulary is indispensable for understanding interdisciplinary courses and performance, and understanding is one of the factors that could effectively help with vocabulary learning (Ardasheva et al., 2018). However, for many learners, memorizing English words is generally considered a tedious task (Tsai & Tsai, 2018). When learners are asked to speak a foreign language, or are unable to use a familiar language or resources, speech anxiety often occurs (Ardasheva et al., 2018; Tsai & Tsai, 2018; Wilson, 2013). This could result in learners having less motivation to learn English (Wu, 2018). Some scholars have found that learners lacking motivation to learn English have a fear of English communication and make negative comments in the classroom.

Foreign language anxiety is thus a problem that needs to be taken seriously, as its existence might have a negative impact on learners’ language learning (Marwan, 2016). The potential reactions of other classmates in the classroom might also be an important factor in learners’ anxiety (Öztürk & Gürbüz, 2014). Those students learning English to achieve valuable goals may feel less anxious than those who are under internal or external stress when learning English (Khodadady & Khajavy, 2013). Effective language teaching is an issue for many language teachers around the world, as many learners do not want to use traditional textbooks and are not interested in activities disassociated with the learning goals (Ilin et al., 2013). Communicative language teaching is currently one of the main teaching methods. It emphasizes real and natural language use and social interactions, and could result in less anxiety than other teaching methods (Park & French, 2013). Increasing the opportunities for learners to communicate naturally in the target language could help them enhance their language performance (Rastegar & Karami, 2015).

Research has also found that group-oriented oral practice can lessen anxiety (Alghonaim, 2014). Cooperative learning is a group teaching style that has learners cooperate with their group members to achieve a learning objective (Johnson & Johnson, 2018). Learners could expand their thinking ability and imagination via cooperation. Thus, if they could change from studying alone to cooperative learning with two or more students working together, they could explore and clarify what they could not deal with by themselves through communication and cooperation. Nevertheless, some studies have shown that although cooperative learning could encourage participation in groups as well as in the entire class and can enhance learning motivation, it could not stimulate learners to improve their academic performance (Premo et al., 2018). As for learning English, it has been suggested that teachers could create a friendly and supportive atmosphere in the classroom to encourage learners to participate in classroom activities, and teach learners strategies for reducing their foreign language learning anxiety.

The environment of game-based learning has evolved into a powerful learning tool (Groff, 2018). Yang et al. (2018) found that digital game-based learning was particularly effective for highly anxious learners. Game performance was the reason for these learners to improve their learning performance, and game-based learning could also lessen their anxiety and increase their participation (Kiili & Ketamo, 2018). Additionally, game functions are external factors that might influence learners’ participation and learning (Abdul Jabbar & Felicia, 2015). According to previous research, integrating game-based learning into the school environment could help learners connect knowledge acquired in the game with that gained in school. Learners can also be stimulated to study in formal school environments with learning programs and science concepts presented via games (Barzilai & Blau, 2014; Garneli & Chorianopoulos, 2018). In the field of education, educators have begun to explore how to integrate games into tutoring courses and offer them to learners (Godwin-Jones, 2016).

Instructors have also tried to transform the current single-subject learning mode in the classroom into interdisciplinary curricula. In elementary school, if there is no technology course for young students, integrating Computational Thinking (CT) into popular courses such as English class is a good way to simultaneously cultivate CT literacy and language proficiency. In the digital era, everyone should have CT capabilities. CT is a factor for evaluating education and a basic skill for learners (Zhong et al., 2016). Learners of the younger generation need to grow up with experience of using digital software and develop a set of problem-solving skills (Román-González et al., 2017). CT is a goal that could prepare learners in the next few years (García-Peñalvo & Mendes, 2018). Most CT activities adopt cooperative learning and game-based learning (Hsu, 2018). Robots have attracted great attention in schools where they are being used to develop valuable work and social skills, and have been used to support interdisciplinary learning activities (Alimisis, 2013). The educational robots used in cooperative scenarios also provide students with communicational opportunities. Learners’ cooperation and tolerance are significant components related to society and personal interactions (Razak et al., 2013).

Accordingly, this study proposed a plugged approach which refers to using educational robots in an English course to simultaneously cultivate English proficiency and computational thinking literacy. This study also proposed an unplugged approach which refers to using an educational board game without a computer in English classes to cultivate English proficiency and computational thinking literacy at the same time. It was expected that both approaches would be useful for the young students. Therefore, an empirical study was conducted in the third grade of an elementary school. The questions that guided this study are listed as follows.

Were both approaches helpful for improving the students’ English proficiency of the target vocabulary and sentences?

Were both approaches helpful for improving CT competence?

Were both approaches helpful for improving the students’ self-described cooperation and critical thinking?

Did the students who learned with the pugged approach have lower foreign language learning anxiety than those who learned with the unplugged approach?

Literature Review

Educational Robots in CT and Language Learning

Smart robots are expected to become rule-reformers in factories where they will play an indispensable role, working together with humans in teams (Richert et al., 2016). CT and robotic activities have a natural symbiotic relationship which could arouse interest in education (Catlin & Woollard, 2014). Alemi et al. (2017) found that learners’ motivations were stimulated with the increase in active interactions with robots. They could gain a positive influence when using robots to collaborate, and robots could also help educators make use of scientific, strategic, and purposeful robot design programs to improve learners’ attitudes toward the robot experience (Taylor & Baek, 2018). Educational robots are considered to be an effective medium to improve self-efficacy, cultivate learners’ understanding of scientific concepts, and promote the development of CT (Jaipal-Jamani & Angeli, 2017).

An increasing number of educational robots with interactive skills have been applied in various educational fields such as foreign language education (Cheng, et al., 2020). Educational robots have kept pace with the development of 21st century technology, taking cooperation, critical thinking and CT as examples (Komis et al., 2016). Educational robots have also provided promising help for teaching and learning (Cheng et al., 2017; Di Lieto et al., 2017; Sisman et al., 2019). Consequently, they have been considered as an effective learning tool (Chin et al., 2014) which could be used in a variety of science education methods, such as inquiry learning and problem solving (Altin & Pedaste, 2013). Herrmann (2013) found that educational robots effectively motivated learners and encouraged them to learn material that they considered to be difficult and boring. From early childhood to higher education, educational robots are increasingly being incorporated into learning processes. Hong et al. (2016) also found that learning English listening and reading through robotic teaching tools could raise learners’ attention and reduce their anxiety.

Learning Anxiety

Anxiety is one of the emotions influencing language learning, such as communication anxiety and foreign language learning anxiety. Understanding the cause of anxiety could help teachers identify and analyze problems resulting from learners’ anxiety. Teachers could then adopt effective strategies to help their students successfully complete their studies and enhance their learning performance (Amiri & Ghonsooly, 2015; Hashemi & Abbasi, 2013; Hu & Wang, 2014). Horwitz (1986) suggested that there are two methods for dealing with anxious learners: helping them cope with the conditions bringing about anxiety, and reducing pressure in the learning environment. These strategies tend to assist teachers in lessening participants’ anxiety (Gopang et al., 2017). Dewaele et al. (2018) found that effective teachers could stimulate learners’ enthusiasm and interest without spending so much time worrying about their English classroom anxiety, including creating a friendly environment with low anxiety instead of focusing on a single negative emotion.

English classroom anxiety has also been shown to be more important than other anxiety levels, as learners with high levels of anxiety might have had less success and have had embarrassing experiences in their previous language learning, while learners with low anxiety might have had successful or pleasant experiences (Amiri & Ghonsooly, 2015; Baran-Łucarz, 2013; Ge, 2018; Rassaei, 2015). Marwan (2016) noted that most learners have experienced certain kinds of foreign language anxiety, and many have adopted special strategies to overcome it. If anxiety is properly controlled in learning foreign languages, learning could be improved. Teachers could help learners overcome anxiety related to English lessons and English to enhance their learning effectiveness (Saranraj & Meenakshi, 2016). Educational robots are a kind of medium or tool, and a sound design for the learning process could achieve the effectiveness of the learning and technology (Alimisis, 2013). Huang (2013) found that multimedia environments could reduce learners’ anxiety and offer less stressful classroom environments.

Game-Based Learning

Some scholars have delved into the learning process of game-based learning environments while also taking learners’ anxiety into account (Hwang et al., 2017). For example, scholars have found that game methods were conducive to learners’ academic performance and motivations (Hsu, 2017). Fearing to make a mistake is one of the factors that affect speaking anxiety. In a joyful condition, learners are less likely to experience speaking anxiety. English teachers could also design a variety of classroom activities to help relieve learners of their pressure when practicing sentence speaking, such as games to liven up the atmosphere, or group conversations with partners. On the other hand, English teachers should develop appropriate and effective strategies to help learners eliminate their speaking anxiety in English lessons (Hong, 2017). Some scholars have pointed out that the advancements in game-based English learning could encourage self-learning to gain knowledge in terms of reducing time and space limits, and foreign language anxiety (Chen, 2018).

Given that the findings of many studies support the positive effects of games on learning, an increasing number of researchers have been developing educational games to boost the development of learners’ 21st century skills (Qian & Clark, 2016). In addition, incorporating game-based learning into educational environments could help learners connect knowledge acquired from games with that given by teachers (Barzilai & Blau, 2014). The game-based learning environments could be put into practice in the field of education (Hamari et al., 2016). However, designers of game-based learning should focus more on learning content rather than on visual design. When narrative plays a key role, combining it with the learning content and applying teaching support to cultivate cognitive skills and acquire knowledge are the main design purposes (Wouters & Van Oostendorp, 2013).

Research Methods

Teaching Materials

System Structure

This research examined the effects of “using” (i.e., the plugged approach) or “not using” (i.e., the unplugged approach) educational robots with an educational CT board game (Kuo & Hsu, 2020), and designed teaching materials to be used in the classroom. The system structure of the plugged approach is shown in Figure 1. The study organized sentence and vocabulary content suitable for the EFL novices, shown as Figures 2 and 3. In the plugged approach, the learners used the educational robots to sense (read) the control cards, so as to control the robots’ movements on the map, which resulted in the possibilities of obtaining constructive resources to complete building construction tasks in the board game.

Figure 1.

System Structure Diagram.

Figure 2.

Teaching Materials Design: Simple English Sentences.

Figure 3.

Teaching Materials Design: Introduction of the Rules of Sequential Cards.

The English vocabulary and sentences (as shown in Figure 2) are useful for novices to ask for directions in their daily life. The target vocabulary refers to the new words in the English course and includes “move, where, go, forward, want, turn, left, right, step, forward, start, one, two, three.” The students were expected to be able to naturally apply the English vocabulary and sentences when playing either board game. The empirical study randomly assigned two students as a team, such as teams A and B shown in Figure 2. Each game was played and completed by two teams. In one round, one student played the role of asking the opposite team one question, “Where do you want to go?”. The other student in the same team played the role of answering the opposite team’s question in English in the reverse round. In other words, in the foreign language conversation practice, every student learned how to ask and answer the question in turn during the process of playing the game.

After the student spoke a complete sentence, he/she could start to move the robot on the board game map. The team members cooperated to complete the constructive tasks in the board game shown as Figure 2. The CT board game is introduced in the next section.

Teaching Materials Design of the Experimental Group

The plugged approach and content taught to learners in the experimental group was divided into two parts. The first part was the introduction of the rules of the sequential cards. Learners could acquire the CT concepts of sequential process through the board game and practice English vocabulary and sentences through English interactions (shown as Figure 3). For example, before the educational robot was allowed to read the two cards shown in the left of Figure 3, the student had to speak what he or she was going to do in English; for instance, “I want to move two steps forward.” Then, the educational robot would automatically move two steps forward on the map of the board game after it scanned the two cards in the left of Figure 3 in sequence.

In the second part, in addition to the existing sequential cards, repeat cards were added, so that the learners could practice and improve their CT concepts of conditional and repeated processes through the board game (shown as Figure 4). The item moving on the map of the board game is the educational robot with the components shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Teaching Materials Design: Introduction of the Rules of Repeat Cards.

Teaching Materials Design of the Control Group

The unplugged approach and content taught to the learners in the control group was also divided into two parts. The first was the introduction of the rules of the sequential cards. The learners could acquire the CT concept of sequential process through the board game, and practice English vocabulary and sentences through English interactions (shown as Figure 5). The student arranged his/her control cards in sequence like the left of Figure 5. Then, the student had to speak what he or she was going to do in English; for instance, “I want to move two steps forward.” Finally, the student had to use his/her own hand to pick up the robot made of paper, and move it step by step on the map according to the arrangement of the control cards.

Figure 5.

Introduction of the Rules of Sequential Cards.

In the second part, in addition to the existing sequential cards, repeat cards were added for the learners to use, so that they could learn and improve the CT concepts of conditional and repeated processes through the board game (shown as Figure 6). The item moving on the map of the board game is the paper robot without any motor, so this is named the unplugged approach in the current study.

Figure 6.

Teaching Materials Design: Introduction of the Rules of Repeat Cards.

Preparation Before Playing the Board Game With the Plugged or Unplugged Approaches

The empirical study was conducted in the third-grade English course of an elementary school. The participants were English and CT novices. Therefore, before playing the computational thinking board game using either approach, the instructors taught the vocabulary and sentence patterns in class. After the students knew all of the target language, how to play the game was introduced, such as the rules of using the board game, and the number of cards used (shown as Figure 7).

Figure 7.

Teaching Materials Design: Introduction of the Rules of the Game.

After the students put their CT concepts into practice by playing the CT board game, and naturally practiced the English vocabulary and sentences to ask for and give directions, the learners completed the task by trying to win the game with the required number of cards. Those who received higher points were the winners. Through the process of playing the game, the learners not only learned how to communicate and cooperate with their team members so as to complete the tasks, but they could also compete with the other team. All the students had natural opportunities to speak English, and applied the target English vocabulary and sentences during the playing process.

Participants

The participants were third-grade students in an elementary school. There were 48 students from two classes, with an average age of 8–10 years old. The participants in the experimental group were 24 students who had never played educational CT board games; they used the educational robots to conduct cooperative learning in groups (shown as Figure 8). The robot is like a reader pen so it would move based on the results of sensing the hidden code inside each control card.

Figure 8.

The Experimental Group: Moving Robots Through Card Scanning.

On the other hand, 24 students in the control group made use of the educational CT board game to conduct cooperative learning in groups (shown as Figure 9). The robot in the control group did not need to sense the control cards as there were no hidden codes in the cards. The robot was moved by the players according to the presence of the control cards ranked by the player.

Figure 9.

The Control Group: Moving Characters to Corresponding Positions Through Instruction Cards.

Experimental Design

This research adopted a quasi-experimental design to evaluate whether the learners could enhance their performance of both CT and English by integrating CT and English interactions into game-based learning. The experimental process is shown as Figure 10. Before the experiment, the learners took a pre-test to evaluate their basic abilities of CT and the foreign language. At the same time, they completed the learning questionnaire, including items about their foreign language anxiety and CT, which took 40 minutes. After teaching the vocabulary and sentences, the teacher introduced how to operate the game interface and explained the rules. Then, the students took classes which involved games, rule introduction and game operation teaching.

Figure 10.

The Experimental Procedure.

Measuring Tools

The measuring apparatus used in this research included a pre-test and post-test of learning achievement, and learning questionnaires for the participants to self-describe their foreign language learning anxiety, cooperative tendency, and critical thinking.

This study used the pre-test to evaluate the prior English proficiency and CT knowledge before the experiment. The English test was divided into two parts, multiple-choice questions and matching questions, with a total score of 60 points. There were 10 multiple-choice questions in the CT test, with a total of 40 points.

After the learning activities, the post-test was conducted. Both the pre- and post-tests of learning performance were designed by one experienced English teacher and one technology education teacher to assess whether the learners of the two groups improved their CT concepts and foreign language knowledge. All items were validated by two experts.

The students had to say English sentences with the vocabulary they had learned naturally to answer the questions asked by the opposing team. Therefore, fearing to make a mistake was a scale of the Foreign Language Classroom Anxiety proposed by Horwitz (1986), with three items adopting a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). The Cronbach’s alpha value for reliability was .93. The foreign language learning anxiety about fearing to make a mistake was self-described by the students before and after the experiment.

The plugged and unplugged approaches were carried out by pairs of students. Therefore, this study utilized the scales of cooperation tendency and critical thinking of the CT scale developed by Korkmaz et al. (2017), with a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). There were four items for cooperation tendency and five for critical thinking. The Cronbach’s alpha value of reliability was .82. This was a self-report questionnaire used before and after the experiment.

Results

Q1: Were Both Approaches Helpful for Improving the Students’ English Proficiency of the Target Vocabulary and Sentences?

This study performed paired sample t tests to evaluate whether the students in the experimental group with the plugged approach and those in the control group with the unplugged approach improved their English proficiency. The results are shown in Table 1. The overall English learning performance of the students in the control group with the unplugged approach was significantly improved (t = −3.15**; p = .004 <.01) with a medium effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.57) (Cohen, 2013). At the same time, Table 1 shows that the English learning performance of the students in the experimental group with the plugged approach was greatly enhanced (t = −4.87**; p = .000 <.01) with a better effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.87) (Cohen, 2013). Accordingly, the use of CT board games combined with English oral interactions, regardless of approach, could help learners boost their English learning performance. Both groups made significant improvement in their English learning performance, so no significant difference was found in the ANCOVA statistics (F = 2.15; p = .15>.05) which passed the Levene’s test of homogeneity (F = 0.12; p = .74>.05) between the English learning effectiveness of the experimental group (Adjusted mean = 42.42; SE = 17.54) and control group (Adjusted mean = 33.71; SE = 18.93).

Table 1.

Paired Sample t Test of Learners’ English Learning Performance.

Pairs of pre-and post-test			Pre-test		Post-test				Effect Size
Groups	N	Df	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	t	p	Effect Size
Experimental group	24	23	27.08	17.54	42.42	17.54	−4.87***	.000	0.87
Control group	24	23	23.21	18.05	33.71	18.93	−3.15**	.004	0.57

**p < .01; ***p < .001.

Q2: Were Both Approaches Helpful for Improving the Students’ CT Competence?

Table 2.

Paired Sample t Test of Learners’ CT Concepts.

Pairs of pre-and post-test			Pre-test		Post-test				Effect Size
Groups	N	Df	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	t	p	Effect Size
Experimental group	24	23	15.50	8.28	27.83	8.38	−6.26***	.000	1.48
Control group	24	23	10.00	9.44	18.17	13.29	−3.33**	.003	0.71

**p < .01; ***p < .001.

From the independent t test on the post-tests of the experimental and control group, the significant difference (t = 3.01**; p = .005<.01) of CT concepts was found, shown as Table 3. The CT concept of the students in the experimental group was significantly better than that of the students in the control group with a large effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.87). Consequently, to sum up the overall performance of English and CT, it was found that the overall performance of the experimental group (Adjusted mean = 67.24; SE = 4.32) outperformed the overall outcome of the control group (Adjusted mean = 54.37; SE = 4.33) in the ANCOVA statistics (F = 4.44*; df = 1; MS = 1900.25; SS = 1900.25; P = .04 <.05; effect size = 0.092) with the prerequisite reaching the Levene’s test of homogeneity (F = 0.12; p = .74>.05).

Table 3.

The Difference Between the CT Concepts of the Experimental and Control Group After the Learning Activities.

Groups	N	Df	Mean	SD	t	p	Effect Size
Experimental group	24	38.79	27.83	8.38	3.01**	.005	0.87
Control group	24		18.17	13.29

**p < .01.

Q3: Were Both Approaches Helpful for Improving the Students’ Self-Described Cooperation and Critical Thinking?

This study performed a paired sample t test on the pre-test and post-test of cooperation and critical thinking. The results of the control group are shown in Table 4. The cooperation of the students in the control group increased significantly (t = −5.75*; p = .000 <.001) with a medium to large effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.77). This result implied that the students in the control group were not used to cooperating with each other before the learning activities, but they developed a cooperative tendency after the learning activities of the unplugged approach. However, there was no significant difference in the self-described critical thinking of the students in the control group before and after the learning activities.

Table 4.

Paired Sample t Test on the Pre-Test and Post-Test of Cooperation and Critical Thinking for the Control Group.

Pairs of pre-and post- test			Pre-test		Post-test
Scales	N	Df	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	t	p	Effect Size
Cooperation	24	23	1.82	0.84	2.40	0.66	−5.75***	.000	0.77
Critical Thinking	24	23	2.52	1.14	2.34	0.76	1.27	.216

***p < .001.

The paired sample t test on the pre-test and post-test of cooperation and critical thinking for the experimental group is shown in Table 5. The critical thinking of the students in the experimental group increased significantly (t = −2.64*; p<.05) with a small effect size (Cohen’s d = 0.39), illustrating that the plugged approach could help the students analyze and determine the next step according to the way the robots walked, which could not only make the learners think more clearly, but also helped them examine the results of their thinking. However, the cooperative perception of the students did not significantly vary before and after the learning activities of the plugged approach.

Table 5.

Paired Sample t Test on the Pre-Test and Post-Test and Cooperation and Critical Thinking for the Experimental Group.

Pairs of pre-and post-test			Pre-test		Post-test
Scales	N	Df	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	t	p	Effect Size
Cooperation	24	23	2.42	1.29	2.51	1.25	−0.56	.579
Critical Thinking	24	23	2.63	1.03	3.05	1.14	−2.64*	.015	0.39

**p < .05.

Overall, from the results of the independent t test, there was no significant difference (t = 0.38; df = 34.72; p = .71>.05) between the cooperation scale as perceived by the students in the experimental and control groups after the learning activities. However, the critical thinking of the students in the experimental group significantly outperformed that of the students in the control group (t = 2.52*; df = 46; p = .015<.05) after the learning activities.

Q4: Did the Students Who Learned With the Plugged Approach Have Lower Foreign Language Test Anxiety Than Those Who Learned With the Unplugged Approach?

This study performed the ANCOVA test to rule out the discrepancy of anxiety from fearing to make a mistake between the two groups, shown as Table 6. Through the ANCOVA test of homogeneity of variance, the results of anxiety did not reach significance (F = 0.57, p = .45>.05), which meant that analysis of covariance could be further conducted. The results of the analysis of covariance confirmed that the students in the experimental group with the plugged approach had significantly lower anxiety (F = 5.21*, df = 1; MS = 1.352; SS = 1.352; p = .03<.05; effect size = 0.106) than those in the control group with the unplugged approach.

Table 6.

ANCOVA Test of Foreign Language Learning Anxiety.

Groups	N	Df	Mean	SD	Adjusted Mean	SE	F	p	Effect Size
Experimental group	24	23	2.71	0.60	2.75	0.11	5.21^*	.03	0.106
Control group	24	23	3.13	0.75	3.10	0.11

**p<.01.

Discussion

English has now become a global language, but Rassaei (2015) found that high levels of anxiety might affect learners’ memories, and their perceptions might also be disturbed by their anxiety. Students may feel that they will fail to react in English and may be afraid of making mistakes, reflecting the anxiety of learning foreign languages (Er, 2015; Öztürk & Gürbüz, 2014). The results of the current study indicated that the plugged approach employing educational robots in the natural interaction with English in the board game resulted in less anxiety for the students in comparison with the unplugged approach without robots. The results echoed a previous study’s finding that educational robots have great potential to be used as learning tools (Alimisis, 2013). Kindergartens and elementary school students are confident in discovering new robots or other technological equipment, and have a positive attitude towards robotics (Zviel-Girshin, et al., 2020). In this study, the presence of the robot in the board game seems to have affected the affection of the process, resulting in better CT competence, lower foreign language anxiety and higher critical thinking, while at the same time having similar cognitive outcomes in English vocabulary and sentence practice in comparison with the performance of the students playing without robots.

In the interdisciplinary learning effectiveness of English and CT, both groups with the CT board game and the same oral interactions made significant improvements. The results infer that game-based learning had a positive impact on learning effectiveness, which conforms to the previous study finding that students could acquire knowledge through game-based learning (Hwang et al., 2013). Students using both approaches achieved similar high performance in English, but the students in the experimental group achieved slightly higher CT competence in comparison with those in the control group when both groups used the same board game and practiced the same English vocabulary and sentences. The students with educational robots achieved CT competence because students learning CT with educational robots tend to concentrate on the decomposition of problems and the provision of solutions (Choi & Lee, 2020) like the possible routing on the map of the board game in the current study.

Because previous scholars have noted that cooperation and critical thinking are important for 21st-century students’ development, and they are also considered to be useful factors for the development of CT perspectives (Ardito et al., 2020), this study further explored the variation of cooperation tendency and critical thinking in both groups. The results of the experimental group in the current study showed significant improvement in critical thinking, implying that the plugged approach with educational robots could help them to clarify their thoughts, and this then allowed them to correct and be aware of the problems by themselves. Therefore, they also achieved slightly better outcomes on the post-test of CT competence. The previous study has also noted that robot activity has a positive impact on children’s discovery, learning and critical thinking, because it aims to provide children with opportunities to enable them to practice their functions (Ucgul & Cagiltay, 2014).

On the other hand, the students with the unplugged approach significantly improved their cooperation tendency. The students in the experimental group did not need to use their hands to move their robots because the robots would move automatically according to the instructions which they provided together in advance. Their cooperative tendency did not significantly change as a result. On the other hand, the control group students had to operate the movement of the robot made of paper with their hands, and needed more cooperation so as to pay attention together to the game scenario in order to prevent team members from moving in the wrong direction. A previous study explored the pros and cons of purposefully integrating technology with cooperative learning in physical education, and found that cooperative learning would not automatically achieve positive learning experiences for students when the students were distracted by operating iPads (Bodsworth & Goodyear, 2017). Consequently, the educational robot employed in the CT board game can automatically move on the map according to the instructions of the board game cards the students allocated and thought about in advance. This seemed to be helpful for the students to verify their solution, but it did not cause their cooperative attitudes to change.

Conclusions

This study concluded that the plugged and unplugged approaches were both beneficial for learning effectiveness of the interdisciplinary learning. The results found that the plugged approach with a robot brought less anxiety than the unplugged approach. The plugged approach increased critical thinking, while the unplugged approach increased their cooperative tendency. Foreign language anxiety about fearing to make a mistake was lower for the plugged than for the unplugged approach. Based on the complete evaluation mentioned above, it appears that well-used robots have value in education. Therefore, future studies are encouraged to develop many useful ways for students to learn interdisciplinary subjects. However, as the main limitation of this study was that the participants were EFL and CT novices in an elementary school, it is suggested that empirical studies involving students of different ages be conducted in the future.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our deepest appreciation to the research projects of Ministry of Science and Technology (project number: MOST 108-2511-H-003-056-MY3). Moreover, we would like to thank the Industry-University Cooperation Project supported by the Institute for Information Industry, Taiwan in 2019 so as to connect the companies with researchers. The two companies in Taiwan included both Reading & Rhythm Co., Ltd. and Ampus Technology Co., Ltd.. We would like to thank them for providing the T. Robot as a reader machine and providing the cards as well as maps with code embedded to be read and recognized, to allow us to conduct the instructional experiments in the experimental group.

Statements on Open Data and Ethics

The dataset is available by contacting the corresponding author.

Ethics rules and regulations were followed during the experiment. All the participants voluntarily participated in the experiment and were told that they could quit the study at any time. Their parents also signed the consent form.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Ting-Chia Hsu

Author Biographies

Ting-Chia Hsu is a distinguished professor at National Taiwan Normal University. Her research interests are computer education and e-learning.

Yi-Sian Liang has a Master’s degree in the department of Technology Application and Human Resource Development in National Taiwan Normal University.

References

Abdul Jabbar

A. I.

Felicia

(2015). Gameplay engagement and learning in game-based learning: A systematic. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 740–779. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315577210.

Alemi, M., Meghdari, A., Sadat Haeri, N. (2017). Young EFL learners' attitude towards RALL: An observational study focusing on motivation, anxiety, and interaction. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Social Robotics 2017 (pp. 252--261). Basel, Switzerland: Springer International. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9

Alghonaim

(2014). Saudi university students’ perceptions and attitudes towards communicative and non-communicative activities and their relationship to foreign language anxiety. Research Journal of English Language and Literature, 2(2), 83–101.

Alimisis

(2013). Educational robotics: Open questions and new challenges. Themes in Science and Technology Education, 6(1), 63–71.

Altin

Pedaste

(2013). Learning approaches to applying robotics in science education. Journal of Baltic Science Education, 12(3), 365–377.

Amiri

Ghonsooly

(2015). The relationship between English learning anxiety and the students’ achievement on examinations. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 6(4), 855–865. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.17507/jltr.0604.20.

Ardasheva

Carbonneau

K. J.

Roo

A. K.

Wang

(2018). Relationships among prior learning, anxiety, self-efficacy, and science vocabulary learning of middle school students with varied English language proficiency. Learning and Individual Differences, 61, 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2017.11.008.

Ardito

Czerkawski

Scollins

(2020). Learning computational thinking together: Effects of gender differences in collaborative middle school robotics program. TechTrends, 64(3), 373–387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00461-8.

Baran-Łucarz

(2013). Phonetics learning anxiety–results of a preliminary study. Research in Language, 11(1), 57–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10015-012-0005-9.

10.

Barzilai

Blau

(2014). Scaffolding game-based learning: Impact on learning achievements, perceived learning, and game experiences. Computers & Education, 70, 65–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.08.003.

11.

Bodsworth

Goodyear

V. A.

(2017). Barriers and facilitators to using digital technologies in the cooperative learning model in physical education. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 22(6), 563–579. https://doi.org/10.1080/17408989.2017.1294672

12.

Catlin

Woollard

(2014). Educational robots and computational thinking. In Proceedings of 4th International workshop teaching robotics, teaching with robotics ' 5th International conference robotics in education (pp. 144--151).

13.

Chen

C.-P.

(2018). Understanding mobile English-learning gaming adopters in the self-learning market: The uses and gratification expectancy model. Computers & Education, 126, 217–230. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.015.

14.

Cheng

Y.-W.

Sun

P.-C.

Chen

N.-S.

(2017). An investigation of the needs on educational robots [Paper presentation]. 2017 IEEE 17th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) . IEEE.

15.

Cheng

Y. W.

Wang

Yang

Y. F.

Yang

Z. K.

Chen

N. S.

(2020). Designing an authoring system of robots and IoT-based toys for EFL teaching and learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1799823

16.

Chin

K.-Y.

Hong

Z.-W.

Chen

Y.-L.

(2014). Impact of using an educational robot-based learning system on students’ motivation in elementary education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7(4), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2014.2346756.

17.

Choi

Lee

(2020). The effects of educational robot-based SW convergence education on primary students' computational thinking, collaborative and communication skills. Journal of the Korean Association of Information Education, 24(2), 131–138. https://doi.org/10.14352/jkaie.2020.24.2.131

18.

Cohen

(2013). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Academic Press.

19.

Dewaele

J. M.

Witney

Saito

Dewaele

(2018). Foreign language enjoyment and anxiety: The effect of teacher and learner variables. Language Teaching Research, 22(6), 676–697. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817692161.

20.

Di Lieto

M. C.

Inguaggiato

Castro

Cecchi

Cioni

Dell’Omo

Laschi

Pecini

Santerini

Sgandurra

Dario

(2017). Educational robotics intervention on executive functions in preschool children: A pilot study. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 16–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.018.

21.

(2015). Foreign language learning anxiety of Turkish children at different ages. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching, 2(2), 68–78.

22.

García-Peñalvo

F. J.

Mendes

A. J.

(2018). Exploring the computational thinking effects in pre-university education. Computers in Human Behavior, 80, 407–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.005

23.

Garneli

Chorianopoulos

(2018). Programming video games and simulations in science education: Exploring computational thinking through code analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 26(3), 386–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2017.1337036.

24.

Z.-G.

(2018). The impact of a forfeit-or-prize gamified teaching on e-learners’ learning performance. Computers & Education, 126, 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.009.

25.

Godwin-Jones

(2016). Emerging technologies augmented reality and language learning: From annotated vocabulary to place-based mobile games. Language Learning & Technology, 20(3), 9–19.

26.

Gopang

I. B.

Ansari

Kulsoom

Laghari

(2017). An empirical investigation of foreign language anxiety in Pakistani university. International Journal of English Linguistics, 7(2), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.5539/IJEL.V7N2P21.

27.

Groff

J. S.

(2018). The potentials of game‐based environments for integrated, immersive learning data. European Journal of Education, 53(2), 188–201. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12270.

28.

Hamari

Shernoff

D. J.

Rowe

Coller

Asbell-Clarke

Edwards

(2016). Challenging games help students learn: An empirical study on engagement, flow and immersion in game-based learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 170–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.045.

29.

Hashemi

Abbasi

(2013). The role of the teacher in alleviating anxiety in language classes. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 4(3), 640–646.

30.

Herrmann, K. J. (2013). The impact of cooperative learning on student engagement: Results from an intervention. Active learning in higher education, 14(3), 175--187.

31.

Hong

(2017). Self-efficacy studies and English language learners’ self-efficacy. Modern Journal of Language Teaching Methods, 7(4), 162–176. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.26655/mjltm.2017.4.1

32.

Hong, Z.-W., Huang, Y.-M., Hsu, M., & Shen, W.-W. (2016). Authoring robot-assisted instructional materials for improving learning performance and motivation in EFL classrooms. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 19(1), 337--349.

33.

Horwitz, E. K. (1986). Preliminary evidence for the reliability and validity of a foreign language anxiety scale. Tesol Quarterly, 20(3), 559--562.

34.

Hsu, T.-C. (2017). Learning English with augmented reality: Do learning styles matter? Computers & Education, 106, 137--149.

35.

Hsu, T.-C., Chang, S.-C., & Hung, Y.-T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296--310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004

36.

Wang

(2014). Anxiety in foreign language learning [Paper presentation]. 2014 International Conference on Global Economy, Commerce and Service Science (GECSS-14) . (pp. 122--124). Atlantis Press.

37.

Huang, P., & Hwang, Y. (2013). An exploration of EFL learners' anxiety and e-learning environments. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(1), 27.

38.

Hwang, G.-J., Hsu, T.-C., Lai, C.-L., & Hsueh, C.-J. (2017). Interaction of problem-based gaming and learning anxiety in language students' English listening performance and progressive behavioral patterns. Computers & Education, 106, 26--42.

39.

Hwang

G. J.

Sung

H. Y.

Hung

C. M.

Yang

L. H.

Huang

(2013). A knowledge engineering approach to developing educational computer games for improving students’ differentiating knowledge. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 183–196. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01285.x.

40.

Ilin

Kutlu

Ö.

Kutluay

(2013). An action research: Using videos for teaching grammar in an ESP class. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 272–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.065.

41.

Jaipal-Jamani

Angeli

(2017). Effect of robotics on elementary preservice teachers’ self-efficacy, science learning, and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 26(2), 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-016-9663-z.

42.

Johnson

D. W.

Johnson

R. T.

(2018). Cooperative learning: The foundation for active learning. In S. M. Brito (Ed.), Active learning-beyond the future (pp. 59--70). IntechOpen. http://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.81086

43.

Khodadady

Khajavy

G. H.

(2013). Exploring the role of anxiety and motivation in foreign language achievement: A structural equation modeling approach. Porta Linguarum: Revista Internacional de Didáctica de Las Lenguas Extranjeras, 20, 269–286.

44.

Kiili

Ketamo

(2018). Evaluating cognitive and affective outcomes of a digital game-based math test. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 11(2), 255–263. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2017.2687458.

45.

Komis

Romero

Misirli

(2016). A scenario-based approach for designing educational robotics activities for co-creative problem solving [Paper presentation]. International Conference EduRobotics 2016 (pp. 158--169). Springer, Cham.

46.

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.

47.

Kuo, W.-C., & Hsu, T.-C. (2020). Learning computational thinking without a computer: How computational participation happens in a computational thinking board game. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 29(1), 67--83.

48.

Marwan

(2016). Investigating students’ foreign language anxiety. Malaysian Journal of ELT Research, 3(1), 19.

49.

Min

Wang

Liu

(2019). Integrating a cloud learning environment into English-medium instruction to enhance non-native English-speaking students’ learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(4), 493–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1483838

50.

Öztürk

Gürbüz

(2014). Speaking anxiety among Turkish EFL learners: The case at a state university. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 10(1), 1–17. http://jlls.org/index.php/jlls/article/download/178/165.

51.

Park

G.-P.

French

B. F.

(2013). Gender differences in the foreign language classroom anxiety scale. System, 41(2), 462–471. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2013.04.001.

52.

Premo

Cavagnetto

Davis

W. B.

Brickman

(2018). Promoting collaborative classrooms: The impacts of interdependent cooperative learning on undergraduate interactions and achievement. CBE Life Sciences Education, 17(2), ar32 116. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-08-0176

53.

Qian

Clark

K. R.

(2016). Game-based learning and 21st century skills: A review of recent research. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 50–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.023.

54.

Rassaei

(2015). The effects of foreign language anxiety on EFL learners’ perceptions of oral corrective feedback. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 87–101. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2013.837912

55.

Rastegar

Karami

(2015). On the relationship between foreign language classroom anxiety, willingness to communicate and scholastic success among Iranian EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(11), 2387–2394. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.17507/tpls.0511.25.

56.

Razak

N. A.

Saeed

Ahmad

(2013). Adopting social networking sites (SNSs) as interactive communities among English foreign language (EFL) learners in writing: Opportunities and challenges. English Language Teaching, 6(11), 187–198. https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.5539/elt.v6n11p187

57.

Richert

Shehadeh

Plumanns

Groß

Schuster

Jeschke

(2016). Educating engineers for industry 4.0: Virtual worlds and human-robot-teams: Empirical studies towards a new educational age [Paper presentation]. 2016 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON). IEEE.

58.

Román-González

Pérez-González

J.-C.

Jiménez-Fernández

(2017). Which cognitive abilities underlie computational thinking? Criterion validity of the computational thinking test. Computers in Human Behavior, 72, 678–691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.047

59.

Saranraj

Meenakshi

(2016). The influence of anxiety in second language learning: A case study with reference to engineering students in Tamil Nadu. India. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(42), 1–5.

60.

Sisman

Gunay

Kucuk

(2019). Development and validation of an educational robot attitude scale (ERAS) for secondary school students. Interactive Learning Environments, 27(3), 377–388. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1474234

61.

Taylor

Baek

(2018). Collaborative robotics, more than just working in groups. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(7), 979–1004. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117731382.

62.

Tsai

Y.-L.

Tsai

C.-C.

(2018). Digital game-based second-language vocabulary learning and conditions of research designs: A meta-analysis study. Computers & Education, 125, 345–357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.06.020.

63.

Ucgul

Cagiltay

(2014). Design and development issues for educational robotics training camps. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(2), 203–222. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-013-9253-9

64.

Wilson

(2013). Another language is another soul. Language and Intercultural Communication, 13(3), 298–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2013.804534

65.

Wouters

Van Oostendorp

(2013). A meta-analytic review of the role of instructional support in game-based learning. Computers & Education, 60(1), 412–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.018

66.

T. T.

(2018). Improving the effectiveness of English vocabulary review by integrating ARCS with mobile game‐based learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 315–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12244

67.

Yang

J. C.

Lin

M. Y. D.

Chen

S. Y.

(2018). Effects of anxiety levels on learning performance and gaming performance in digital game-based learning. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34(3), 324–334. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12245

68.

Zhong

Wang

Chen

(2016). An exploration of three-dimensional integrated assessment for computational thinking. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 53(4), 562–590. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633115608444

69.

Zviel-Girshin

Luria

Shaham

(2020). Robotics as a tool to enhance technological thinking in early childhood. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(2), 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09815-x