International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies (iJIM) – eISSN: 1865-7923 – Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v14i18.16631 Stamatios Papadakis University of Crete, Crete, Greece stpapadakis@gmail.com Abstract—Educational robotics can consider one of the newest trends in ed- ucation and they have been introduced into the classrooms ranging from kinder- garten through high school as a means of enriching the learning environment and promote knowledge-building activities. Especially, robotics technologies offer opportunities for young age children, for a practical, hands-on understanding of the things they meet in their daily life but do not fully understand, such as prox- imity sensors, motion detectors, and light sensors, reasoning failures (software bugs) and connection problems (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth disconnection). In this article, we presented robots that can be used in early childhood and first primary classes of education. The purpose of this article is not to advocate against an educational robot or robotic kit but indeed to inform the educational community so that to make informed decisions regarding the introduction of this kind of technology into the classroom. Keywords—Educational Robotics, Robots, Robotics kits, Computational Thinking, Coding, Creativity, Reasoning Thinking, Critical Thinking, Preschool Education, Primary Education 1 Introduction From smart screen technologies to block-based programming environments de- signed for teaching and learning, digital technologies are introduced in the classroom even from an early age [1] [2]. Over the past decade, a wide range of interactive tech- nologies and tools designed especially for young age children, such as block-based vis- ual programming environments (ScratchJr, Scratch, MIT App Inventor, etc.), and ro- botics have been introduced into the classrooms [3] [4] as a means to improving teach- ing, learning [5]. Especially educational robotics can consider one of the newest trends in education and they have been introduced into the classrooms ranging from kindergarten through high school as a means of enriching the learning environment and promote knowledge- building activities [6] [7]. Sullivan and Bers state that robotics provides educational opportunities for children to engage with STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) subjects and coding activities and engineering concepts since kinder- garten [8]. What is also important is that the various elements of robotics kits, such as 34 http://www.i-jim.org https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v14i18.16631 mailto:stpapadakis@gmail.com Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age the variety of sensors and interaction possibilities, the possibilities for customization, the neutral gender colors and design in conjunction with children friendly programming environments make robots accessible to all children regardless of gender, ethnicity, race, etc. [9]. This is considered important as due to gender inequalities in access to computational resources, programming environments, and even school textbooks, fe- male students are much less likely to succeed in the informational society and technol- ogy-related jobs [10]. On the contrary, research has shown that male students tend to be more familiar with computers and web-based technologies and need a reduced level of cognitive effort to reach a given level of computational accuracy. Besides, the boys are more experienced with computers and their coding and have a more positive attitude toward programming and relative coding activities than their female classmates [11]. In the context of educational robotics (ER) learning activity children construct and program robots employing sensors, motors, etc. through play, group challenges, and hands-on activities [12]. Educational robotics found its roots in both the constructivist and constructionist learning theory [13]. Based on constructivism [14], students work out related concepts of authentic problems in small groups. Students’ relating experi- ences and knowledge are the necessary basis for possible further productive explora- tions. Based on constructionism [15], students acquire knowledge and skills based on discovery learning. In this way, constructionism as a theory supports student-centered learning environments that promote critical thinking and problem-solving skills. At the same time, it emphasizes discovery learning by associating prior experiences with tan- gible objects, integrating what they already know, by making connections between old and new information. The main difference between the two learning theories is that constructivism is referring to the mental processes involved in gaining knowledge, con- structionism refers to the construction processes by making things that are tangible and sharable [16]. Educational Robotics can be considered as a multidisciplinary approach involving aspects as diverse as design algorithms, design mechanical structures, construction, and operation of robots and robotics kits as well as the possibility of applying engineering mathematics, physics principles, and other science subjects [17]. In general, these char- acteristics and methods are very well suited for the design of activities with STEM orientation [2]. Educational robotics has many real-world applications in various fields of science, mathematics, and engineering helping to remove the abstractness of these scientific fields while improving skills, and effective learning strategies such as spatial ability, selective attention, risk-taking, decision-making skills, etc. [18]. Especially, ro- botics technologies offer opportunities for children and young people, for a practical, hands-on understanding of the things they meet in their daily life but do not fully un- derstand, such as proximity sensors, motion detectors and light sensors [19], reasoning failures (software bugs) and connection problems (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth disconnection). Except for STEM education purposes, robots and robotics kits are an effective way of introducing preschoolers to coding and the development of CT [20] [21] as young children through robotic activities are engaged in the attempt not only to solve some practical problems, but to implement the solutions [19]. Developmentally appropriate robotic activities can offer a ‘low floor’ (minimal amount of cognitive investment re- quired to start an activity), a ‘high ceiling’ (not set limits on how far can any idea be iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 35 Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age taken), and ‘wide walls’ (can be used for a wide variety of learning experiences) to preschoolers. Robots construction and programming requires children to engage in complex problem solving to address issues that are of immediate importance: prioritiz- ing and planning complex tasks and switching mental gears. Several higher-order cog- nitive functions are involved in these tasks, such as information processing, abstraction, reasoning, decision-making, and problem-solving and evaluating [12]. Additionally, as these tools have a physical artifact makes learning less abstract and more direct, an approach that can be used across all STEM disciplines [22] [23]. Positive changes were found among the children who have participated in various studies with robots as it was found that the children had acquired new knowledge and new skills on developing pro- gramming sequences through the use of developmentally appropriate robotics skills, as they were able to check the accuracy of their models and to detect errors in their coding sequences [13]. Educational activities with robots are widespread, considering the diverse options available both in terms of robotics kits and the learning activities designed to assist the learners to accomplish certain specific objectives [24]. In particular, the pedagogical objectives of robotics can be divided into two principal categories: a) handling robots and b) build a robot [23]. Educational robotics in early childhood education is mainly about handling and not building robots and endorses an alternative way of learning programming, through developing initial thinking component that is to move objects in space [24]. In this context we can distinguish two major types of contexts for early childhood and first school age: a) the robotics construction kits (e.g. LEGO®-WeDo, etc.) allows construction and programming of the robot and b) programmable robots (Bee-Bot, etc.) [25]. The scope of the article will be limited to the presentation of robots and robotics kits that can be used at early childhood and first classes of primary education building knowledge and computational thinking skills and are designed to bridging the theory- practice gap. Although several scientific papers describe prototype educational robots and/or robotic kits such as the Dr. Wagon [26], the Curlybot [27], the Electronic blocks [28], the Topodo (https://tangible.media.mit.edu/project/topobo/) or discontinued edu- cational robots such as Parallax Scribbler 2 Robot [9], and social robotic platforms such as DragonBot [29] or child-sized humanoid robots such as KASPAR [30] and NAO [31] it is out of the scope of this paper the presentation of these tools. As such, in this paper, we focus on commercial products that were available on the international online market and can thus be used by early childhood and first school-age students. 2 Robotics Construction Kit and Logo-Like Programmable Robots Robots can be classified as robotics construction kits and programmable robots. Ac- cording to Komis and Misirli (p.241), a robotics construction kit is an environment in which the robot is made of building blocks, Lego type typically [25]. This category represents the most typical example of educational robotics, as it combines both the 36 http://www.i-jim.org Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age construction and the programming section of this pedagogical approach. On the con- trary, programmable robots are prefabricated floor robots, which are programmed by the user to execute a sequence of commands [32]. 2.1 Robotics construction kit KIBO robotics kit: The KIBO robotics kit from Kinder Lab Robotics (https://kinderlabrobotics.com/kibo/) offers playful experiences for young children while they acquire computational thinking, coding, and engineering skills via the con- struction and programming of a robotic structure (see Figure 1). Children by using se- quences, loops, and variables as well as motors, sensors, and craft materials learn about algorithms, process redesign, modularity, analysis, etc. Unlike other robotics kits that target children at young ages, the KIBO robot doesn't require any screen-based device such as a PC or tablet. Indeed, it is programmed to respond to situations by using tan- gible programming blocks [19]. KIBO’s programming language is composed of 18 commands representing by an equal number of wooden programming blocks that sim- ulate simple motions such as ‘move Forward’ or more advanced programming concepts such as ‘Repeat Loops’. Fig. 1. The KIBO robotics kit Cubelets: The Cubelets from Modular Robotics (http://www.modrobotics.com/) al- low children aged as young as four to familiarize themselves with programming by connecting preprogrammed blocks (see Figure 2). Similar to the KIBO robotics kit the preprogrammed blocks do not need to connect to any screen-based device. The physical blocks can snap together to connect a power source to a sensor and a buzzer or make a light-dependent on a motion sensor or a motor respond to sound. When students need more functionality and mobility, they can graduate from the Cubelets robots to the MOSS robotics kits [33]. iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 37 https://kinderlabrobotics.com/kibo/ file:///E:/Dropbox/2%20Journals-Research/1%20BOOK%20IGI%203/Robotics%20kits%20for%20preschool%20and%20preprimary%20education/ijet/(http:/www.modrobotics.com/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Fig. 2. The Cubelets Cubetto: Cubetto from Primotoys (https://www.primotoys.com) is another robot tool that it doesn’t use any extra connections to screen-based devices (see Figure 3). Cubetto is made of durable wood and thus it is unlikely to be damaged [34]. The Cubetto consists of 4 different parts: 1. Cubetto 2. Programming table, 3. 16 blocks (4 forward, 4 right, 4 left, 4 function), and 4. Cubetto World Map which provides an ad- venture playground for children. Coding is done by placing blocks in the command lines of the programming table. Fig. 3. The Cubetto LEGO Education WeDo: The LEGO Education WeDo 2.0 from the LEGO Group (https://education.lego.com/) is a robot-based learning system that targets children aged seven and up and it can be considered as a simpler version of the sophisticated version of a Lego Mindstorms robot (see Figure 4). Lego WeDo has a small kit of motors and sensors that allow students to construct programmable LEGO projects. The main con- trol block connects via USB to a computer running either the native Lego WeDo pro- gram or Scratch 3.0. The programming platform that ships with WeDo have very little text and can be used by prereading students via a PC or a tablet type device. 38 http://www.i-jim.org https://www.primotoys.com/ https://education.lego.com/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Fig. 4. The LEGO Education WeDo 2.0 Edison robot: The Edison robot from Meet Edison (https://meetedison.com/) be- sides its low cost it is easily expandable using LEGO bricks (see Figure 5). Using pre- programmed series of activities, children as young as four can learn the fundamentals of computational thinking and coding as well as necessary skills such as critical think- ing, decision making, etc. The Edison robot comes with 2 IR LEDs and one IR receiver module. Edison can be programmed from a computer or tablet using various program- ming languages based on Scratch and Python make it compatible for older students. Fig. 5. The Edison robot MeeperBOT: The meeperBOT from Meeper Technology (https://meeperbot.com/) is a studded platform that is powered by two motors and controlled by a mobile app available for Apple or Android mobile devices (see Figure 6). The children after a brick- block creation with Lego, Mega Bloks, and/or other compatible bricks they can pro- gram it to move forward, backward, left, and right. iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 39 https://meetedison.com/ https://meeperbot.com/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Fig. 6. The meeperBOT COJI: The COJI from WOWWEE (https://wowwee.com/coji) is a wheeled robot with an LCD monitor, command buttons, LED, and speaker devices. An app for coding the robot that mainly includes motion command and emojis blocks (see Figure 7). The COJI can be controlled using a free app available on iTunes or the Google Play store for compatible smart devices featuring Bluetooth Smart technology. According to the WOWWEE company, the app features six fun and exciting modes that will teach the child to use the building blocks of coding, including commands, loops, sequences, and macros by using a language they already know – EMOJIS. Fig. 7. The COJI Sphero mini: The Sphero Mini robot from Sphero (https://sphero.com/collec- tions/for-school/products/sphero-mini) is a tiny programmable robot the size of a ping pong ball equipped with a gyroscope, accelerometer, and colorful LED lights (see Fig- ure 8). The robot comes with 3 Mini Traffic Cones and 6 Mini Bowling Pins to inspire children to engage with obstacle courses. The children can use the blocks drive mode to code the robot with basic drag and drop commands with the Sphero Edu app. The 40 http://www.i-jim.org https://wowwee.com/coji https://sphero.com/collections/for-school/products/sphero-mini https://sphero.com/collections/for-school/products/sphero-mini Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Sphero Edu app is compatible with smart mobile devices with iOS and Android OS as well as with PCs with macOS and Windows. Fig. 8. The Sphero Mini robot Max & Tobo coding robot: The Max & Tobo Coding robot by Tutobo (https://www.tutobo.com/) is featuring a programmable robot that tries to help young age children to learn coding by playing an intergalactic story (see Figure 9). The chil- dren by using a mobile app (available for Android and iOS-based devices) program the robot with the Blockly language. The robot comes with an interactive game board. In- teracting with the board, the children must complete a story comprising ten levels. Fig. 9. The Max & Tobo Coding robot Robo Wunderkind: The Robo Wunderkind from Robo Technologies (https://robowunderkind.com/) is a robotics kit that allows children to build function- ing, programmable robots with interchangeable parts, commanded by a Robo app (see Figure 10) available for smart mobile devices with iOS and Android Operating System. The colorful "smart cubes" embed gadgets as varied as cameras, proximity sensors and laser pointers. iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 41 https://www.tutobo.com/ https://robowunderkind.com/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Fig. 10. Robo Wunderkind 2.2 Programmable robots Logo-like environments Dash & Dot: The Dash & Dot from Wonder Workshop (https://www.makewon- der.com/) is a small mobile robot that moves around, make noise, and shin lights (see Figure 11). Dot is its sidekick. Both robots are full of characters and respond to voice commands or app-based commands from a smart mobile device [35]. It includes three microphones, a gyroscope, four infrared transmitters, and two receivers, three range distance sensors, and LEDs. Fig. 11. The Dash & Dot robot Bee-Bot / BlueBot: The Bee-Bot Programmable floor robot from TTS Group (www.bee-bot.us) is a bee shape child-friendly robot, while its features such as sounds, and lights make it attractive for use in children (see Figure 12) [36]. Also, the use of buttons on its back makes its use in practice quite easy. The robot supports up to 40 instructions in a single program (in its memory): advance, reverse, turn left (90º) or right (90º), start to move, etc. [13]. At the end of the coding process, Bee-Bot provides in terms of visuals and acoustics cues [12]. 42 http://www.i-jim.org https://www.makewonder.com/ https://www.makewonder.com/ file:///E:/Dropbox/2%20Journals-Research/1%20BOOK%20IGI%203/Robotics%20kits%20for%20preschool%20and%20preprimary%20education/ijet/www.bee-bot.us Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Fig. 12. The Bee-Bot Programmable floor robot The Blue-Bot is the new Bee-Bot robot with many features such as repeating com- mand sequences and 45-degree turns (see Figure 13). It can be programmed similar to Bee-Bot, but it also can be connected to a tablet or PC via Bluetooth. Thus, a child by using free apps can program Blue-Bot remotely. It is also literally transparent so that its components can be seen, helping to demystify technology. Fig. 13. The Blue-Bot Programmable floor robot Colby robotic mouse: The Colby from Génération Robots (https://www.genera- tionrobots.com/blog/en/tutorial-robot-mouse-colby/) is a mouse-like educational floor robot, that helps children develop their reasoning and problem-solving skills in a fun and engaging way (see Figure 14). In technical terms, it can be considered functionally equivalent to other programmable robots such as the BeeBot. Similar to BeeBot, Colby provides audio clues, turn on its light and it has 2 speeds as well as colored buttons on the back to program it. It comes also with an activity set that has square shapes and accessories to create a maze, activity cards, command cards, and a magnetic cheese block. iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 43 https://www.generationrobots.com/blog/en/tutorial-robot-mouse-colby/ https://www.generationrobots.com/blog/en/tutorial-robot-mouse-colby/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Fig. 14. The Colby robotic mouse Finch: The Finch from BirdBrain Technologies (https://store.birdbraintechnolo- gies.com/products/finch-robot) is a robot that supports a range of programming envi- ronments, providing coding options for students and ages 5 and up (see Figure 15). The Finch responds to light, temperature, and obstacles as it includes light, temperature, and obstacle sensors, accelerometers, among other capabilities. Fig. 15. The Finch robot Pro-Bot: The Pro-Bot from TTS Group (https://www.tts-international.com/pro-bot- rechargeable-floor-robot/1009825.html) is another turtle type robot, in the form of a race car (see Figure 16). Similar to Bee-Bot, the commands are entered via a set of arrows and a numeric keypad mounted on its back. Pro-Bot is a most sophisticated turtle type robot that can operate in two modes: a) in a Bee-Bot mode using only the arrow keys and GO button and b) in a Logo mode using arrow keys that can be combined with the number buttons. An extra advantage of Pro-Bot compared to similar type devices like the Bee-Bot is that it can hold a felt-tip pen in its built-in mechanism, allowing it to draw as it moves, much like the Logo turtle on the screen. 44 http://www.i-jim.org https://store.birdbraintechnologies.com/products/finch-robot https://store.birdbraintechnologies.com/products/finch-robot https://www.tts-international.com/pro-bot-rechargeable-floor-robot/1009825.html https://www.tts-international.com/pro-bot-rechargeable-floor-robot/1009825.html Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Fig. 16. The Pro-Bot robot Thymio: The Thymio robot from MOBOTS group (https://www.thymio.org/) is a little white box with wheels (see Figure 17). This neutral look makes it attractive for all the students, regardless of their age and gender. The robot is ‘LEGO-compatible’ al- lowing the construction of extension with LEGO bricks to be added to the original work. It also has a relatively large number of sensors and actuators for the successful implementation of advanced projects such as nine IR proximity sensors, an accelerom- eter, microphone, temperature sensor, remote control receiver, SD-card slot, five ca- pacitive buttons, two motors, a loudspeaker, and 39 LEDs. The Thymio comes with a set of pre-programmed behaviors but it can be also programmed via various program- ming environments such as Scratch, Blockly and Aseba for Windows and Mac software via the Thymio Suite [9] [37] [38]. Fig. 17. The Thymio robot Botley: The Botley toy robot from Learning Resources (https://www.learn- ingresources.com/shop/collections/botley), belongs to the category of non-connected, and thus screen-free smart toys (see Figure 18). Its programming happens with the help of a remote controller provided with the robot toy character [39]. The toy robot beside the basic coding sequences such as Forward, Loop, Right (45º), Left (45º), support also iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 45 https://www.thymio.org/ https://www.learningresources.com/shop/collections/botley https://www.learningresources.com/shop/collections/botley Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age advanced coding concepts such as If/Then logic and loop. It also can be programmed for object detection, to toggle between 3 sound settings, among others. Fig. 18. The Botley robot. Roamer: The roamer robot from Valiant Technology (http://www.roamer-educa- tional-robot.com/) is not simply another educational robot aimed at helping teach Pre- school to Year 12 as it provides increased flexibility because it is a modular system that a child can put together in different ways to suit his/her specific needs (see Figure 19). Its “shell” can be removed and customized, in effect acting as a “disguise” or Carnival costume. The first appearance of a Roamer robot in various schools around the globe has occurred in the early 90s [40]. The programming is performed on the robot itself, with no need for external computer connections, by using the several Logo-like Lan- guage commands (forward, back, right, and left) and settings buttons available [41]. The Early Years Roamer uses a counting paradigm to Move, Turn and Wait. The Roam- ers use numbers to tell the Roamer how far to Move, Turn, or Wait. Fig. 19. The roamer robot Code-a-Pillar: The Fisher-Price Think & Learn Code-a-Pillar Toy from Fisher- Price (https://www.fisher-price.com/en-us/product/think-learn-code-a-pillar-twist- gfp25) is a hands-on robotic caterpillar. The children by using the straight left and right 46 http://www.i-jim.org http://www.roamer-educational-robot.com/ http://www.roamer-educational-robot.com/ https://www.amazon.com/stores/Fisher-Price/page/2968E16E-A3C6-4109-B137-6AB39983451D?ref_=ast_bln https://www.amazon.com/stores/Fisher-Price/page/2968E16E-A3C6-4109-B137-6AB39983451D?ref_=ast_bln https://www.fisher-price.com/en-us/product/think-learn-code-a-pillar-twist-gfp25 https://www.fisher-price.com/en-us/product/think-learn-code-a-pillar-twist-gfp25 Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age segments, can arrange Code-a-Pillar segments and watch the caterpillar move accord- ingly while they can even add lights and sound effects [42] (see Figure 20). According to the Fisher-Price, the robot supports more than 1,000 possible coding combinations and it consists of 1 motorized head and 8 easy-to-connect segments for various combi- nations. Fig. 20. The Fisher-Price Think & Learn Code-a-Pillar Toy Osmo Coding Awbie: The Osmo Coding Awbie from TIDAL Lab at Northwestern University (https://www.playosmo.com/en/coding/) is considered as a hybrid toy that combines 19 Osmo Coding blocks (magnetic) including Walk, jump, grab, loop, if, wonder, multipliers, etc. and 1 game app (see Figure 21). Unfortunately, the coding Awbie app is compatible only with Apple iPad devices (iOS). The children by using the coding commands, control Awbie, a playful character who loves delicious straw- berries through a 2-dimensional world filled with strawberries and paths [43]. Fig. 21. The Osmo Coding Awbie Plobot: The Plobot robot created by NYU robotics professor Rudi Cossovich and ex-Google engineer Sean Purser-Haskell, (http://plobot.com/) is an educational robot iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 47 https://www.playosmo.com/en/coding/ http://plobot.com/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age that teaches young learners coding concepts without any need for computer screens (see Figure 22). The robot can move, sing, dance, and entertain while the children learn about algorithms, loops, and conditionals. The children program the robot by tapping or swiping command cards (that represent a block of code) on Plobot’s head to string them together and create a ‘program’ the robot follows - with the "play" card as an executive function [44]. Fig. 22. The Plobot robot mTiny: The mTiny from Makeblock (https://www.makeblock.com/mtiny) is an ed- ucation robot for children ages 4 and up (see Figure 23). The mTiny robot comes with a tap pen controller and an interactive map, two characteristics that distinguish it from other products. According to the Makeblock company the children through playful ma- terials including themed maps, coding cards, and a storybook, can develop their com- putational thinking skills either by completing the tasks assigned on the storybook or by playing freely to discover different solutions. The robot has a screen-free operation meaning that there is no need for the children to use smart mobile devices or PCs. Fig. 23. The mTiny robot 48 http://www.i-jim.org https://www.makeblock.com/mtiny Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Mind designer robot: The Mind Designer Robot from Clementoni (https://www.clementoni.com/) is a robot in the form of a car that the children can pro- gram either by pressing a series of buttons on its back or, by talking to it thanks to its embedded voice recognition (see Figure 24). The children can also load the bug-looking robot with a coloring pen to draw a picture. It comes also with a free app so that children can experiment with more advanced coding instruction blocks and create complex ge- ometrical shapes. Fig. 24. The Mind Designer Robot KUBO robot: The KUBO robot from KUBO Robotics (https://kubo.education/) is another screen-free coding solution for the first grades of Primary Education designed to teach young age students various subjects such as coding, language, and music through a tangible coding language; the TagTiles [45] (see Figure 25). The children have to use the Route TagTiles to lay down a route for KUBO to follow or create a function with the Function Tiles. Fig. 25. The KUBO Robot Evo – Bit: The Evo and Bit from Ozobot (https://ozobot.com/) are two educational robots for children ages five and up including proximity sensors for tricks and obstacle detection, optical sensors for detecting lines and color codes, LED lights and built-in iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 49 https://www.clementoni.com/ https://kubo.education/ https://ozobot.com/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age speakers (see Figure 26). Both robots come with 2 ways to code–screen-free with Color Codes and on-screen with OzoBlockly (a programming language based on Google’s Blockly programming language) via Evo App. Evo is a Bluetooth-enabled Ozobot while Bit is not Bluetooth-enabled. Programming Ozobots Evo and Bit with color codes mean that the robot uses sensors to follow lines and read color codes that the children make with markers or stickers. The Evo App is compatible with most iOS and Android devices. Fig. 26. Evo and Bit robots (Left: Bit, Right: EVO) Tinkerbots: The Tinkerbots from Tinker Bots (https://www.tinkerbots.de/) is a ro- botic building set for children ages 5 and up. The children by using easy-to-add robotics can create an endless number of toy robots simply by snapping together Tinkerbots’ patented Powerbrain, kinetic modules and passive pieces, and even bricks of other building sets (see Figure 27). No wiring or programming required. It is also app con- trolled by using an app for Android or iOS smart mobile devices as a remote control. Fig. 27. Tinkerbots robotic building kit 50 http://www.i-jim.org https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=bl_dp_s_web_0?ie=UTF8&search-alias=aps&field-keywords=Tinker+Bots https://www.tinkerbots.de/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age Matatalab Coding Set: The Matatalab Coding Set from Matatalab (https://matatalab.com/) is a block-based, screenless and tangible programming tool for kids aged 4 and up (see Figure 28). The Matatalab Coding Set allows children to move a robot through a nature map by way of a Bluetooth-enabled command tower and board. The Coding Set includes a Bluetooth-enabled command tower, control board, wheeled robot, and thirty-seven coding blocks in the form of enumerated tiles. Fig. 28. The Matatalab Coding Set 3 Drawbacks of the Study The main drawbacks of the study that lessen its overall impact are that this work did not follow a systematic mapping guideline, such as the PRISMA method (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Protocols) [46]. Indeed, this study used only the Google Scholar database using the terms ‘Educational robots’ OR ‘Educational Robotics kits’ and ‘early childhood’ or ‘First school-age children’ follow- ing the snowball’ ‘backward’ and ‘forward’ searches to improve the completeness of the study. Besides, other sources such as websites, workshops, etc. and other ‘grey lit- erature’ were also included in this study. Finally, it is important to note that the analysis reported in this paper was done only by one reviewer -the author. 4 Conclusion - Discussion In his pioneering work, Seymourt Papert showed that young children can acquire new knowledge, skills and learn by doing, by using the LOGO programming language to guide a "turtle" robot while they foster engagement and enjoyment of learning [15]. After three decades of research, it is widely recognized that the educational robots pro- vide a gateway for young age students to experience the opportunity to engage in edu- cational activities that promote both coding and non-coding approaches [16]. Due to technological advancements, the last decade the robots that can be used in educational iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 51 https://matatalab.com/ Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age activities in kindergarten and primary school have been increased dramatically [2]. Ed- ucational robotics is a pedagogical approach for developing students' cognitive and so- cial skills attracting the students' interests toward the topic [17]. In an educational ro- botics environment, children can practice and develop models of cognitive processes that foster creative thinking, effective teamwork, social communication among others [34]. But the introduction of robots in early childhood education settings is a complicated task as it involves both the technical requirements and the school environment [9]. To make learning fun for younger children educators must design techniques and ap- proaches to make robotics appealing to preschoolers [47-48]. For teachers, the success of adopting an educational robotics pedagogy depends on many factors such as the availability of robots and the proper training. Thus, there is an urgent need for quality training programs for the teaching faculty to acquire the necessary skills to bring peda- gogy, play, and fun into interaction with one another based on the key ideas of early childhood education [49-50]. Besides, the development of educational material by ed- ucational institutions and other organizations will reduce teachers' substantial cognitive load [51-53]. In this article, we presented only robots and robotic kits that can be used at early childhood and first primary classes of education aimed at building knowledge and com- petencies development of computational thinking and robotics. The interested readers can refer to the relevant literature, including the study of Yu and Roque for a detailed review of physical, virtual, and hybrid computational toys and kits that enable young children (ages 7 years old and under) to explore computational ideas and practices [44] and the literature review of Jung and Won for a systematic and thematic review on existing literature in robotics education using robotics kits (not social robots) for young children (Pre-K and kindergarten through 5th grade) [54]. Another valuable and inter- esting work is an online database available on the website https://robots-for-educa- tion.com in which someone can find a taxonomy of educational robotics [55]. In conclusion, the purpose of this article is not to advocate against an educational robot or robotic kit but indeed to inform the educational community so that to make informed decisions regarding the introduction of this kind of technology into the class- room. The detailed description of the characteristics of the robots and robotic kits was not within the scope of this article, but we hope this issue to be covered with a system- atic literature review in another article. 5 Competing Interests The author declares that he has no competing interests. 6 Funding The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publi- cation of this article. 52 http://www.i-jim.org Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age 7 References [1] Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., Orfanakis, V., & Zaranis, N. (2017). The appropriateness of scratch and app inventor as educational environments for teaching introductory program- ming in primary and secondary education. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies (IJWLTT), 12(4), 58-77. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijwltt.2017100106 [2] Urlings, C. C., Coppens, K. M., & Borghans, L. (2019). Measurement of Executive Func- tioning Using a Playful Robot in Kindergarten. Computers in the Schools, 36(4), 255-273. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2019.1677436 [3] Chatzopoulos, A., Papoutsidakis, M., Kalogiannakis, M., & Psycharis, S. (2019). Action Research Implementation in Developing an Open Source and Low-Cost Robotic Platform for STEM Education. International Journal of Computer Applications, 178(24), 33-46. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2019919039 [4] Duncan, C., Bell, T., & Tanimoto, S. (2014). Should your 8-year-old learn coding? In Pro- ceedings of the 9th Workshop in Primary and Secondary Computing Education (WiPSCE '14) (pp. 60-69), 05-07, Nov, Berlin, Germany. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2670 757.2670774 [5] Caballero-Gonzalez, Y. A., Muñoz-Repiso, A. G. V., & García-Holgado, A. (2019). Learn- ing computational thinking and social skills development in young children through problem solving with educational robotics. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (pp. 19-23). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3362789.3362874 [6] Nikolopoulou, K., & Gialamas, V. (2015). Barriers to the integration of computers in early childhood settings: Teachers’ perceptions. Education and Information Technologies, 20(2), 285-301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9281-9 [7] Papadakis, S., Vaiopoulou, J., Kalogiannakis, M., & Stamovlasis, D. (2020). Developing and Exploring an Evaluation Tool for Educational Apps (ETEA) Targeting Kindergarten Children. Sustainability, 12(10), 4201. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104201 [8] 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. https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s10798-015-9304-5 [9] Mondada, F., Bonani, M., Riedo, F., Briod, M., Pereyre, L., Rétornaz, P., & Magnenat, S. (2017). Bringing robotics to formal education: The thymio open-source hardware robot. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 24(1), 77-85. https://doi.org/10.1109/mra.2016. 2636372 [10] Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2019). Evaluating a course for teaching introductory programming with Scratch to pre-service kindergarten teachers. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 11(3), 231-246. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtel.2019.100478 [11] Noh, J., & Lee, J. (2020). Effects of robotics programming on the computational thinking and creativity of elementary school students. Educational Technology Research and Devel- opment, 68(1), 463-484. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09708-w [12] Di Lieto, M. C., Pecini, C., Castro, E., Inguaggiato, E., Cecchi, F., Dario, P., Cioni, G., & Sgandurra, G. (2020). Empowering Executive Functions in 5-and 6-Year-Old Typically De- veloping Children Through Educational Robotics: An RCT Study. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 3084. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03084 [13] García-Valcárcel-Muñoz-Repiso, A., & Caballero-González, Y. A. (2019). Robotics to de- velop computational thinking in early Childhood Education. Comunicar. Media Education Research Journal, 27(1). https://doi.org/10.3916/c59-2019-06 iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 53 https://doi.org/10.4018/ijwltt.2017100106 https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2019.1677436 https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2019919039 https://doi.org/10.1145/2670757.2670774 https://doi.org/10.1145/2670757.2670774 https://doi.org/10.1145/3362789.3362874 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-013-9281-9 https://doi.org/10.3390/su12104201 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9304-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9304-5 https://doi.org/10.1109/mra.2016.2636372 https://doi.org/10.1109/mra.2016.2636372 https://doi.org/10.1504/ijtel.2019.100478 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-019-09708-w https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.03084 https://doi.org/10.3916/c59-2019-06 Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age [14] Piaget, J. (1970). Genetic epistemology. New York: W. W. Norton and Company. [15] Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms. New York: Basic Rooks. [16] 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 (J-PEER), 9(2), 2. https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1223 [17] Souza, I. M., Andrade, W. L., Sampaio, L. M., & Araujo, A. L. S. O. (2018, October). A Systematic Review on the use of LEGO® Robotics in Education. In 2018 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE) (pp. 1-9). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/fie.2018.8658751 [18] Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to promote elementary education pre-service teachers' STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Com- puters & Education, 91, 14-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.005 [19] Sullivan, A. A., Bers, M. U., & Mihm, C. (2017). Imagining, playing, and coding with KIBO: using robotics to foster computational thinking in young children. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Thinking Education. Wanchai, Hong Kong. [20] Dorouka, P., Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2020). Tablets and apps for promoting robotics, mathematics, STEM education and literacy in early childhood education. Interna- tional Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 14(2), 255-274. https://doi.org/10. 1504/ijmlo.2020.10026334 [21] Rose, S. (2019). Developing Children’s Computational Thinking using Programming Games (Doctoral dissertation, Sheffield Hallam University). [22] Eteokleous, N. (2019). Robotics and Programming Integration as Cognitive-Learning Tools. In Advanced Methodologies and Technologies in Artificial Intelligence, Computer Simula- tion, and Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 1085-1099). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10. 4018/978-1-5225-7368-5.ch079 [23] Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A sys- tematic review. Computers & Education, 58(3), 978-988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. compedu.2011.10.006 [24] Komis, V., Romero, M., & Misirli, A. (2016). A scenario-based approach for designing ed- ucational robotics activities for co-creative problem solving. In International Conference EduRobotics 2016 (pp. 158-169). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319- 55553-9_12 [25] Komis, V., & Misirli, A. (2016). The environments of educational robotics in Early Child- hood Education: towards a didactical analysis. Educational Journal of the University of Pa- tras UNESCO Chair, 3(2), 238-246. [26] Chawla, K., Chiou, M., Sandes, A., & Blikstein, P. (2013). Dr. Wagon: a 'stretchable' toolkit for tangible computer programming. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on interaction design and children (pp. 561-564). New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/ 2485760.2485865 [27] Frei, P., Su, V., Mikhak, B., & Ishii, H. (2000). Curlybot: designing a new class of compu- tational toys. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 129-136). https://doi.org/10.1145/332040.332416 [28] Wyeth,P, & Wyeth, G. (2001). Electronic blocks: Tangible programming elements for pre- schoolers, in: Proc. Eighth IFIP TC13 Conf. Human-Computer Interact, 496–503.Lisbon, Portugal. [29] Gordon, M., Rivera, E., Ackermann, E., & Breazeal, C. (2015). Designing a relational social robot toolkit for preschool children to explore computational concepts. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 355-358). Medford, USA. ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2771839.2771915 54 http://www.i-jim.org https://doi.org/10.7771/2157-9288.1223 https://doi.org/10.1109/fie.2018.8658751 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2015.08.005 https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmlo.2020.10026334 https://doi.org/10.1504/ijmlo.2020.10026334 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7368-5.ch079 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-7368-5.ch079 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.006 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55553-9_12 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55553-9_12 https://doi.org/10.1145/2485760.2485865 https://doi.org/10.1145/2485760.2485865 https://doi.org/10.1145/332040.332416 https://doi.org/10.1145/2771839.2771915 Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age [30] Huijnen, C. A., Lexis, M. A., & de Witte, L. P. (2016). Matching robot KASPAR to autism spectrum disorder (ASD) therapy and educational goals. International Journal of Social Ro- botics, 8(4), 445-455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0369-4 [31] Lücking, P., Rohlfing, K., Wrede, B., & Schilling, M. (2016, September). Preschoolers' en- gagement in social interaction with an autonomous robotic system. In 2016 Joint IEEE In- ternational Conference on Development and Learning and Epigenetic Robotics (ICDL-Epi- Rob) (pp. 210-216). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/devlrn.2016.7846821 [32] Misirli, A., & Komis, V. (2014). Robotics and programming concepts in Early Childhood Education: A conceptual framework for designing educational scenarios. In Research on e- Learning and ICT in Education (pp. 99-118). Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-1-4614-6501-0_8 [33] Patterson, S. (2016). Programming in the primary grades: beyond the hour of code. Rowman & Littlefield. [34] Anzoátegui, L. G. C., Pereira, M. I. A. R., & Jarrín, M. D. C. S. (2017). Cubetto for pre- schoolers: Computer programming code to code. In 2017 International Symposium on Com- puters in Education (SIIE) (pp. 1-5), 9-11 November 2017, Lisbon, Portugal. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/siie.2017.8259649 [35] Schley, C. (2017). Learning Toys and STEM Toys We Love. Available: https://thewirecut- ter.com/reviews/learning-toys-and-stem-toys-we-love/ [Accessed July. 18, 2020]. [36] Glezou, K. V. (2020). Fostering Computational Thinking and Creativity in Early Childhood Education: Play-Learn-Construct-Program-Collaborate. In Mobile Learning Applications in Early Childhood Education (pp. 324-347). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998- 1486-3.ch016 [37] Riedo, F., Chevalier, M., Magnenat, S., & Mondada, F. (2013). Thymio II, a robot that grows wiser with children. In 2013 IEEE Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts (pp. 187-193). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/arso.2013.6705527 [38] Vitanza, A., Rossetti, P., Mondada, F., & Trianni, V. (2019). Robot swarms as an educational tool: The Thymio’s way. International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems, 16(1), 1729881418825186. https://doi.org/10.1177/1729881418825186 [39] Heljakka, K., Ihamäki, P., Tuomi, P., & Saarikoski, P. (2019). Gamified Coding: Toy Robots and Playful Learning in Early Education. In 2019 International Conference on Computa- tional Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI) (pp. 800-805). IEEE. https://doi.org/ 10.1109/csci49370.2019.00152 [40] Cardoso, I., & Cardoso, I. (2005). Roamer Robot in Portugal. EuroLogo Warsaw. [41] João-Monteiro, M., Cristóvão-Morgado, R., Cruz, M. G. B., & Morgado, L. (2003). A robot in kindergarten. Eurologo 2003, pp.382-387, Coimbra, Portugal. [42] Brauner, D. (2016). Code-A-Pillar. Available: https://www.perkinselearning.org/technol- ogy/posts/code-pillar [Accessed July. 18, 2020]. [43] Clarke-Midura, J., Lee, V. R., Shumway, J. F., & Hamilton, M. M. (2019). The building blocks of coding: a comparison of early childhood coding toys. Information and Learning Sciences, 120, 7/8, 505-518. https://doi.org/10.1108/ils-06-2019-0059 [44] Yu, J., & Roque, R. (2019). A review of computational toys and kits for young children. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction. 21, 17-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ijcci.2019.04.001 [45] Bertel, L. B., Brooks, E., & Dau, S. (2019). Robot-Supported Inclusion and Learning: A Case Study on the KUBO Robot in Early Childhood Education. In Global Challenges in Assistive Technology: Research, Policy & Practice (AAATE 2019), Vol. 31, No. 1. Bolo- gna, Italy. iJIM ‒ Vol. 14, No. 18, 2020 55 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0369-4 https://doi.org/10.1109/devlrn.2016.7846821 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6501-0_8 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6501-0_8 https://doi.org/10.1109/siie.2017.8259649 https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/learning-toys-and-stem-toys-we-love/ https://thewirecutter.com/reviews/learning-toys-and-stem-toys-we-love/ https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1486-3.ch016 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1486-3.ch016 https://doi.org/10.1109/arso.2013.6705527 https://doi.org/10.1177/1729881418825186 https://doi.org/10.1109/csci49370.2019.00152 https://doi.org/10.1109/csci49370.2019.00152 https://www.perkinselearning.org/technology/posts/code-pillar https://www.perkinselearning.org/technology/posts/code-pillar https://doi.org/10.1108/ils-06-2019-0059 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.04.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.04.001 Paper—Robots and Robotics Kits for Early Childhood and First School Age [46] Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews, 4(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/ 2046-4053-4-1 [47] Gialamas, V., & Nikolopoulou, K. (2010). In-service and pre-service early childhood teach- ers’ views and intentions about ICT use in early childhood settings: A comparative study. Computers & Education, 55(1), 333-341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.01.019 [48] Kalogiannakis, M., Nirgianaki, G. M., & Papadakis, S. (2018). Teaching magnetism to pre- school children: The effectiveness of picture story reading. Early Childhood Education Jour- nal, 46(5), 535-546. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0884-4 [49] Dunphy, L. (2020). A Picture Book Pedagogy for Early Childhood Mathematics Education. In MacDonald, A., Danaia, L., & Murphy, St. (Eds.) STEM Education Across the Learning Continuum (pp. 67-85). Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2821-7_5 [50] Papadakis, S., Zaranis, N., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2019). Parental involvement and attitudes towards young Greek children’s mobile usage. International Journal of Child-Computer In- teraction, 22, 100144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.100144 [51] Kanaki, K., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2018). Introducing fundamental object-oriented program- ming concepts in preschool education within the context of physical science courses, Edu- cation and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2673-2698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639- 018-9736-0 [52] Papadakis, S. (2020). Apps to Promote Computational Thinking Concepts and Coding Skills in Children of Preschool and Pre-Primary School Age. In Mobile Learning Applications in Early Childhood Education (pp. 101-121). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998- 1486-3.ch006 [53] Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Zaranis, N. (2018). The effectiveness of computer and tablet assisted intervention in early childhood students’ understanding of numbers. An em- pirical study conducted in Greece. Education and Information Technologies, 23(5), 1849- 1871. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9693-7 [54] Jung, S. E., & Won, E. S. (2018). Systematic review of research trends in robotics education for young children. Sustainability, 10(4), 905. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905 [55] Catlin, D., Kandlhofer, M., Cabibihan, J. J., Angel-Fernandez, J., Holmquist, S., & Csizma- dia, A. P. (2019). EduRobot taxonomy. In L. Daniela (ed.), Smart Learning with Educational Robotics (pp. 333-338). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19913-5_15 8 Author Dr. Stamatios Papadakis has been a postdoctoral researcher in Educational Tech- nology, with emphasis on mobile learning, at the Department of Preschool Education at the University of Crete, Greece since 2016. His scientific and research interests in- clude the study of mobile learning, especially on the use of smart mobile devices and their accompanying mobile applications (apps) in the use of Preschool and Primary Education, focusing on the development of Computational Thinking and students’ un- derstanding of numbers. Furthermore, he currently investigates how a STEM learning approach influences learning achievement through a context-aware mobile learning en- vironment in the preschool classroom and to explain effects on preschoolers' learning outcome. Article submitted 2020-06-26. Resubmitted 2020-08-05. Final acceptance 2020-08-06. Final version pub- lished as submitted by the authors. 56 http://www.i-jim.org https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.01.019 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0884-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2821-7_5 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2019.100144 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9736-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9736-0 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1486-3.ch006 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1486-3.ch006 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9693-7 https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040905 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19913-5_15