adriana moscatelli - robot games for girls
TRANSCRIPT
Children associate boys with math and science in elementary school
(Cvencek, Meltzoff, & Greenwald, 2011; Farenga & Joyce, 1999)
Extensive experience with computer programming leads to
equal success among girls and boys
(Bers, Flannery, Kazakoff, & Sullivan, 2014)
H1 2013 H2 2013 H1 2014 H2 2014 H1 2015 H2 2015
V1 prototype
user test
V2 prototype
University of WashingtonCS Ed Week
V3 prototype
1st study @ UW’s I-LABS
N=96children
Play Works incorporated
Paperprototyping1st user test
NSF SBIR Grant
Go to Market
Departmentof Education
SBIR grant
Studies & Summer Camps
Boze Elementary
Research led by Allison Master and Andrew MeltzoffInstitute for Learning & Brain SciencesUniversity of Washington
Research Questions
What are young children’s gender stereotypes about programming and robotics?
Can experience playing a robot-programming game increase girls’ technology-related motivation (without decreasing boys’)?
Participants
96 6-year-old children (48 girls, 48 boys)
Randomly assigned to one of three conditions
– “Robot” treatment group– “Game” control group– “Baseline” control group
Robot GroupChildren chose a “pet” robot and used a smartphone to program the robot to navigate an experimentally specified spatial path
Two Control Groups
“Game” control group: children played a storytelling card game
“Baseline” control group: no games
Dependent Measures
STEM-Gender Stereotypes (4 items; 1–4 scale): – Are boys or girls better at science, math, programming, and
robots?
Technology-related motivation (3 items; 1–6 scale):– How fun is programming?– How fun are robots?– How good are you with robots?
STEM-Gender Stereotypes
All error bars are +/- s.e. *p < .05, ***p < .001
Science Math Programming Robots1
2
3
4
Wh
o i
s b
ett
er?
(1
=g
irls
, 4
=b
oy
s)
* ***
Programming Enjoyment
Condition main effect: p = .017Gender main effect: p = .013**p = .01, ***p < .001
Girls Boys1
2
3
4
5
6
Both control conditionsRobot condition
Ho
w f
un
is
pro
gra
mm
ing
?
(1=
low
, 6
=h
igh
)
*****
Robot Enjoyment
Girls Boys1
2
3
4
5
6
Both control conditionsRobot condition
Ho
w f
un
are
ro
bo
ts?
(1
=lo
w,
6=
hig
h)
*
Condition main effect: p = .03Gender main effect: p = .01*p < .05
Robot Self-Efficacy
Girls Boys1
2
3
4
5
6
Both control conditionsRobot condition
Ho
w g
oo
d a
re y
ou
at
rob
ots
? (
1=
low
, 6
=h
igh
)
*****
Condition main effect: p = .013Gender main effect: p = .021**p < .01, ***p = .001
Conclusions
• Children held strong stereotypes associatingboys with robots and programming
• The 20-minute experience increased girls’technology-related motivation
• It increased girls’ self-efficacy, and therobot treatment eliminated the gendergap in self-efficacy
Next Steps• Classroom tests with 1st grade students• Curriculum integration
– Math– Reading/writing– Life sciences– 21st century skills
• Support for teachers (tools)• Support for different game styles
– Puzzle/logic– Strategy/RPG– Simulation/sandbox– Combat/arena– Infiltration/tower defense