Educational robotics in Kurikulum Merdeka

Dian Hendriana

doi:10.17509/jik.v20i1.54018

Educational robotics in Kurikulum Merdeka

Dian Hendriana

Abstract

Technological developments have an influence on educational changes. Various skills are needed to prepare society for the 21st Century. Educational robotics provides a comprehensive offering to provide the required skills experience. The purpose of this research is for educators in an educational institution to know how robotics can be utilized in carrying out learning and teaching activities so as to provide convenience in each of its activities. thus requiring any institution to be able to implement these skills in an institution, especially educational institutions. The type of research used is the study of literature / literature. Learning programs can be carried out through the integration of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics/STEM and can be expanded with other subjects. The System Thinking Approach is a subject integration approach. The involvement of parents, teachers, university researchers, industry, and robotics course organizations is necessary in designing the robotics curriculum. The Approach Activity Template as a form of operational curriculum in schools can assist in the initial steps of program design. The Merdeka Curriculum imposes a third of the learning load in an integrated manner and provides opportunities for robotics to be applied to create a Pancasila Student Profile.

Abstrak

Perkembangan teknologi membawa pengaruh terhadap perubahan pendidikan. Berbagai keterampilan dibutuhkan untuk mempesiapkan masyarakat di Abad ke-21. Robotika pendidikan memberikan tawaran yang menyeluruh untuk membekalkan pengalaman keterampilan yang dibutuhkan. Tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah agar tenaga pendidik dalam sebuah institusi Pendidikan mengetahui bagaimana sebuah robotika dapat dimanfaatkan dalam pelaksanaan kegiatan belajar dan mengajar sehingga memberikan kemudahan pada setiap kegiatannya, Alasam dilakukan nya penelitian ini karena melihat peluang bagaimana masyarakat abad ke-21 mulai mengembangkan berbagai macam skill sehingga mengharuskan institusi manapun agar dapat mengimplementasikan keterampilan tersebut dalam sebuah institusi terutama institusi Pendidikan. Jenis penelitian yang digunakan adalah studi literatur/kepustakaan. Program pembelajaran dapat dilakukan melalui integrasi Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics/STEM dan dapat diperluas dengan mata pelajaran lainnya. System Thinking Approach menjadi pendekatan integrasi mata pelajaran. Pelibatan orangtua, guru, peneliti universitas, industri, dan organisasi kursus robotika diperlukan dalam merancang kurikulum robotika. Approach Activity Template sebagai salah satu bentuk kurikulum operasional di sekolah dapat membantu langkah awal perancangan program. Kurikulum Merdeka membebankan sepertiga beban belajar dilakukan secara terintegrasi dan memberikan peluang bagi robotika diterapkan untuk menciptakan Profil Pelajar Pancasila.

Kata Kunci: Keterampilan Abad 21; Robotika Pendidikan; System Thinking Approach; Kurikulum Merdeka

Keywords

21st Century Skills; Educational Robotics; Kurikulum Merdeka; System Thinking Approach

Full Text:

PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)

References

Angel-Fernandez, J. M., & Vincze, M. (2018). Towards a formal definition of educational robotics. Austrian Robotics Workshop 2018, July, 37–42.

Anwar, S., Bascou, N. A., Menekse, M., & Kardgar, A. (2019). A systematic review of studies on educational robotics. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 9(2), 19–42.

Atmatzidou, S., & Demetriadis, S. (2016). Advancing students’ computational thinking skills through educational robotics: a study on age and gender relevant differences. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 75, 661–670.

Ben-Bassat Levy, R., & Ben-Ari, M. (2018). The evaluation of robotics activities for facilitating STEM learning. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, 630, 132–137.

Çetin, M., & Demircan, H. Ö. (2020). Empowering technology and engineering for STEM education through programming robots: a systematic literature review. Early Child Development and Care, 190(9), 1323–1335.

Chalmers, C., & Nason, R. (2017). Systems Thinking Approach to Robotics Curriculum in schools. In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Robotics in STEM Education: Redesigning the Learning Experience (pp. 33–58). Springer.

Chang, C. C., & Chen, Y. (2020). Using mastery learning theory to develop task-centered hands-on STEM learning of Arduino-based educational robotics: psychomotor performance and perception by a convergent parallel mixed method. Interactive Learning Environments, 0(0), 1–16.

Ching, Y. H., Yang, D., Wang, S., Baek, Y., Swanson, S., & Chittoori, B. (2019). Elementary School student development of STEM attitudes and perceived learning in a STEM Integrated Robotics Curriculum. TechTrends, 63(5), 590–601.

Chookaew, S., Howimanporn, S., Pratumsuwan, P., Hutamarn, S., Sootkaneung, W., & Wongwatkit, C. (2018). Enhancing High-School Students’ Computational Thinking with educational robotics learning. Proceedings - 2018 7th International Congress on Advanced Applied Informatics, IIAI-AAI 2018, 204–208.

ebotic. (2022). What is educational robotics?. https://ebotics.com/what-is-educational-robotics/ diakses pada 27 Februari 2023.

Eguchi, A. (2015). Educational robotics as a learning tool for promoting rich environments for active learning (REALs). Handbook of Research on Educational Technology Integration and Active Learning, 19–47.

Eguchi, A. (2017). Robotics in STEM education. Robotics in STEM Education (pp. 3–32).

Iberdrola. (2022). Do you know how educational robots can help your children to develop?. https://www.iberdrola.com/innovation/educational-robots diakses pada 27 Februari 2023.

Indarta, Y., Jalinus, N., Waskito, W., Samala, A. D., Riyanda, A. R., & Adi, N. H. (2022). Relevansi Kurikulum Merdeka Belajar dengan model pembelajaran Abad 21 dalam perkembangan Era Society 5.0. Edukatif : Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, 4(2), 3011–3024.

Ioannou, A., & Makridou, E. (2018). Exploring the potentials of educational robotics in the development of computational thinking: A summary of current research and practical proposal for future work. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2531–2544.

Johnson, J. (2003). Children, robotics, and education. Artificial Life and Robotics, 7(1–2), 16–21.

Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What knowledge is of most worth. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 29(4), 127–140.

Kopcha, T. J., McGregor, J., Shin, S., Qian, Y., Choi, J., Hill, R., Mativo, J., & Choi, I. (2017). Developing an Integrative STEM Curriculum for Robotics Education Through Educational Design Research. Journal of Formative Design in Learning, 1(1), 31–44.

Kusnandar. (2022). Menyambut Kurikulum 22: menumbuhkan kreativitas siswa melalui pengembangan model pembelajaran ATM Robotik Bagian 1. http://pusdatin.kemdikbud.go.id/menyambut-kurikulum-22-menumbuhkan-kreativitas-siswa-melalui-pengembangan-model-pembelajaran-atm-robotik-bagian-1/ diakses pada 27 Februari 2023.

Lammer, L., Lepuschitz, W., Kynigos, C., Giuliano, A., & Girvan, C. (2017). ER4STEM educational robotics for Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. In M. Merdan, W. Lepuschitz, G. Koppensteiner, & R. Balogh (Eds.), Robotics in Education: Research and Practices for Robotics in STEM Education (457th ed., pp. 95–101). Springer International Publishing.

Merdan, M., Lepuschitz, W., Koppensteiner, G., & Balogh, R. (2016). Robotics in education research and practices for robotics in STEM education. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing.

Mishra, P., & Mehta, R. (2017). What we educators get wrong about 21st-Century Learning: results of a survey. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 33(1), 6–19.

P21. (2007). Framework for 21st century learning. P21 Partnership for 21st Century Learning, 2. http://www.p21.org/our-work/p21-framework

Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. In News.Ge. Basic Book, Inc.

Roussou, E., & Rangoussi, M. (2020). On the use of robotics for the development of computational thinking in Kindergarten: educational intervention and evaluation. In M. Merdan, W. Lepuschitz, G. Koppensteiner, R. Balogh, & D. Obdržálek (Eds.), Robotics in Education: Current Research and Innovations (pp. 31–44). Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

Satria, R., Adiprima, P., Wulan, K. S., & Harjatanaya, T. Y. (2022). Projek Penguatan Profil Pelajar Pancasila.

Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 3–20.

Sullivan, F. R. (2008). Robotics and science literacy: thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 373–394.

Tsai, M. J., Wang, C. Y., Wu, A. H., & Hsiao, C. Y. (2021). The development and validation of the roboticsl learning Self-Efficacy Scale (RLSES). Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59(6), 1056–1074.

Weng, C., Matere, I. M., Hsia, C. H., Wang, M. Y., & Weng, A. (2022). Effects of LEGO robotic on freshmen students’ computational thinking and programming learning attitudes in Taiwan. Library Hi Tech, 40(4), 947–962.

Witherspoon, E. B., Higashi, R. M., Schunn, C. D., Baehr, E. C., & Shoop, R. (2017). Developing computational thinking through a virtual robotics programming curriculum. ACM Transactions on Computing Education, 18(1), 1–20.

Yilmaz, M., Ozcelik, S., Yilmazer, N., & Nekovei, R. (2013). Design-oriented enhanced robotics curriculum. IEEE Transactions on Education, 56(1), 137–144.

Zed, M. (2014). Metode Penelitian Kepustakaan (3rd ed.). Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia.

Zubaidah, S. (2019). Memberdayakan keterampilan Abad ke-21 melalui Pembelajaran Berbasis Proyek. Seminar Nasional Nasional Pendidikan Biologi, October, 1–19.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17509/jik.v20i1.54018