Abstract
The fields of robotics and game consoles offer an interesting and broad range of lab platforms with appropriate characteristics for teaching Computer Architecture concepts. This work analyzes the impact of one approach based on game consoles and another one based on robotics from a triple dimension: student motivation, acquired knowledge, and perception of the employed platform. The study has been carried out on a sample of 96 students using the Arduino-based robot and 75 students using the Nintendo-DS console. A mixed methodology is employed encompassing quantitative and qualitative approaches. Five instruments are used to measure the three aforementioned dimensions. Results show that despite both platforms performing similarly in the three considered dimensions (student motivation, acquired knowledge, and perception of the employed platform), the robotics platform does it slightly better than game console, based on the obtained average scores for the considered instruments. Despite this outperforming, motivation and perception decrease for the students using the robotics platform as result of some identified constraint. This suggests that changes are required in the organization of the lab sessions to promote teamwork skills and to overcome the lack of simulators to remove the obstacles hinting motivation and performance. However, a clear correlation between motivation and perception and acquired knowledge has not been identified on computer architecture. Implications of affordances and constraints of both platforms, types of activities, and their impact on results have been discussed.
Highlights
The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and IEEE Computer Society Joint Task Group on Computer Engineering Curricula consider the Computer Architecture and Organization area part of the body of knowledge for the curricula of Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Computer Science [1]
The results show that, despite the a priori advantages of Arduino as a more engageable tool [30] and pedagogical affordances related to easiness of low-level programming and machine and assembly language, the differences among both approaches at the end of the interventions are not conclusive in terms of motivation and learning outcomes
These results are discussed regarding the different types of learning activities, pedagogical affordances and constraints, and attitudes developed by the students in both didactic sequences
Summary
The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) and IEEE Computer Society Joint Task Group on Computer Engineering Curricula consider the Computer Architecture and Organization area part of the body of knowledge for the curricula of Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, and Computer Science [1]. Despite its importance, this area has traditionally suffered from poor student performance [2]. Engagement and the under performance in this area in the different degrees. The role that the practical platform plays in the teaching process is essential, and many different approaches have been proposed to this end [5], [6] being a recurrent discussion whether simulators or virtual laboratories should be adopted instead of real platforms [7]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
