Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life
Vol. 8(1); June (2021), pp. 60–65
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2991/jrnal.k.210521.014; ISSN 2405-9021; eISSN 2352-6386
https://www.atlantis-press.com/journals/jrnal

Research Article

Initiatives and Development of Secondary School Robotics
Education in Camarin High School
Jeffrey Rivera Galino1,2, Hideyuki Tanaka2,*
Camarin High School, Address Cadena de Amor Street, Area B, Camarin Caloocan City, Philippines
Graduate School of Humanity and Social Science, Hiroshima University, Address 1-1-1 Kagamiyama, Higashi-Hiroshima City, Hiroshima 739-8524, Japan

1
2

ARTICLE INFOABSTRACT

Article History

Camarin High School is one of the schools in the Philippines that is making an initiative in improving Science, Technology
Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education through robotics education. In this paper, the authors report the developmentof a robotics program for students in junior high school. Through the Teacher Training Program of the Japanese Government
for international teachers, localized challenges were identified, and advances in technology education were examined forconsideration. This paper informs how the teacher-in-charge (the first author) grasps the problems in Camarin High School
and tries to improve robotics education by using available simple materials. Focuses are on basics in robotics education forsecondary school, step-by-step education in project learning, and low-cost devices. It is hoped to provide useful insights to bothpractitioners of robotics education and initiators in a similar situation.

Received 13 November 2020
Accepted 23 April 2021
Keywords
Robotics education
STEM education
robotics club© 2021 The Authors. Published by Atlantis Press B.V.
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/).

1. INTRODUCTION
Various research has substantiated positive effects of robotics inScience, Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) education. According to Mosley et al. [1], robotic cooperative learning
methodologies promote STEM interest and enhance critical thinking of students. Kandlhofer and Steinbauer [2] revealed the significant impact of educational robotics on pupil’s mathematics andscientific investigation, teamwork, and social skills. A systematic
review of Benitti [3] showed that the most common result on the
topic is that the use of robotics helps the understanding of concepts
related to the STEM areas.
Robotics activities can be beneficial to students in various ways.
Participation of the youth in robotics summer camps, academic
year clubs, and competitions increase their STEM content knowledge, their perceived problem-solving skills, and their interest inengineering careers [4]. Robotics clubs positively change students’
perception of robots, humans and society while they increase skillsin scientific creativity and science process skills [5].
Various robotics competitions reported positive impacts on students. Participants of FIRST LEGO League, FIRST Tech Challenge,
and FIRST Robotics Competition show significantly greater gains in
STEM-related measures such as interest, careers, identity, involvement and knowledge [6]. RoboCup Junior has presented successon enhancing learning of STEM contents and skills for innovationand creativity among students partaking the competition [7]. Using
test of science related attitudes, it has been shown that students who
Corresponding author. Email: tanakalpha@hiroshima-u.ac.jp*

participated in a robotics competition had positive attitude towardscience and areas such as social implication of science, normality ofscientists, attitude toward scientific inquiry and adoption of scientific attitudes [8].
Robotics programs are seen to yield positive outcomes. First LEGO
League robotics program conveyed prospects for learning 21st
century skills such as systems thinking, decision making, problem
solving, teamwork, conflict resolution, flexibility, perseverance,and self-management [9]. Students acknowledged that learning
skills in cooperation and communication as well as collaboration
as one of the best results of an educational robotics course [10].
Robotics programs can be done with various approaches.
Instructional strategies such as modeling, coaching, scaffolding,examples, and case studies provide fruitful experiences to children[9]. A project-based robotics program can be beneficial to students in implementing informal instruction in science, technology,
and problem solving [11]. Challenge-based learning approaches
in robotics are able to enhance student’s course achievement andmotivation [12].
Most of the cited studies use LEGO kits (e.g. [1,2,5,6,7,9–11]).
LEGO is one of the most sophisticated products for students tolearn robotics in education. Students can easily assemble mechanical structures and can make programs with icons without writing
source codes. Different from these studies, this paper is based on
the use of available simple materials. There are several demerits ofusing simple materials. Since these materials are not ready made,it is possibly hard for students to build the structures, skills ofprogramming is required, and problems encountered by students
may be more difficult than sophisticated kits. However, several

J.R. Galino and H. Tanaka / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 8(1) 60–65

merits in using simple materials under the adequate guidance
include: flexibility in adding materials and parts, and students cantry more advanced projects.
A teacher of robotics education in secondary schools is required tohave the basic knowledge and to establish the basics in constructing
robot systems for teaching students efficiently. The teacher, moreover, has to guide students in a project-based robotics program.
In case that simple materials are used, it is inevitable for students
to divide problems to effectively deal with the problems encountered in project-based robotics programs. The notion of step-bystep education is therefore more important for the teacher in using
simple materials than sophisticated ones. Low-cost materials provide many students with a variety of experiences.
This paper informs the initiative and development of a schoolrobotics program for a public general high school primarily
enthused by the participation in science and technology fairs.
Localized challenges and advances in technology education are
explored for consideration, focusing on basics in robotics education for secondary school, step-by-step education in project
learning, and low-cost devices. Although there are papers focusing on low-cost materials [13,14], this paper is written from theview point of teacher training for enhancing skills in robotics
education. Different from the earlier paper [15] presented by theauthors, this paper will explain challenges and improvement inmore detail.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: Sections 2 and 3
explain robotics education and developments in Camarin HighSchool, and summarize problems encountered. Based on the problems, Section 4 describes challenges for improvement. Section 5
concludes the paper.

In 2018, a robotics team was formed to satisfy the need of producing entries for science and technology fair competitions. Robotics
team members were selected from grade 10 students based on their
Science and Mathematics performance as well as their dedication
to give time to the endeavor. Members received basic training on
micro-controllers and proceeded to develop their own projects.
Figure 1 shows the first robotics team.
Robotics club was also offered as an after-school activity to students interested in robotics. Since the training was only given tomembers of the robotics team, a 3-day workshop was conducted
to teach the students the fundamentals of robotics and microcontrollers.
In 2019, robotics class was offered as a non-credit elective subject for grades 7 and 8 students of special class and an option forresearch for grade 9 special class. Figure 2 shows the robotics class.
The teacher-in-charge of the robotics team, robotics class, androbotics club was selected among the existing faculty members
based on exposure to related seminars and training. The teacherin-charge (the first author) also attended available training inrobotics prior to the formation of the robotics team and start of
the robotics class.

3. DEVELOPMENTS IN ROBOTICSEDUCATION IN CAMARIN HIGH SCHOOLThis section explains initial developments in robotics education at
Camarin High school as well as the problems encountered during
the development.

2. ROBOTICS IN CAMARIN HIGH SCHOOL
Camarin High School is the largest public junior high school in
Caloocan City and one of the largest schools in the Philippines
in terms of population size. The school caters four grade levels –grade seven, grade eight, grade nine, and grade 10 with ages 13–16
respectively. As of 2019, it has 347 staff members and 9923 students
divided into 224 sections.
Camarin High School has Special class sections comprised of students selected based on their elementary school grade and screening examination scores. The program started in 2017 with the firstsection in grade 7 rolling out as the years pass. As of 2019, there arethree sections of special class, one for grades 7–9. Aside from theregular core-subjects, additional Mathematics, English and Scienceclasses are taken by the students of Special class. Students of the
program are also required to do research projects during theirgrades 9 and 10.
National Science and Technology Fair is an annual science fairorganized by the Department of Education of the Philippines thataims to promote Science and Technology and a culture of innovation among the youth. It also aims to identify the most creative andinnovative student researchers from junior and senior high school
who shall represent the country in the international science fairs.
There are four categories, one of which is Robotics and Intelligent
Machines category [16].

61Figure 1 | Training of robotics team members.

Figure 2 | Robotics class.

62

J.R. Galino and H. Tanaka / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 8(1) 60–65

3.1. Use of Arduino
Arduino was used to introduce the students to micro-controllers.
Arduino is an open-source electronics platform based on easyto-use hardware and software [17]. It is a low-cost alternative
to popular robotics kits. An Arduino set was purchased for the
robotics team. Sensors and other materials were bought according to need.

3.2. Use of Simulations
To cater more students in the workshop, Tinkercad was used. It isa free and easy to use application for 3D design, electronics, andcoding [18]. Students who can borrow and bring laptops to school
were strategically grouped to form teams. Simulation is a way to
reduce the need for more Arduino kits and to prevent unnecessary
breakage of devices.

(i)	 Software and Programming:
		 (a) C coding
		 (b) State transition diagrams(ii) Electronics:
		 (a) Pull-up and pull-down registers		 (b) Transistors		 (c) Oscilloscope		 (d) Relay logic circuit(iii) Hardware and micro-controller:		 (a) Digital input and output
		(b) Analog-to-Digital (AD) converter
		(c) Pulse-Width Modulation (PWM)
		 (d) Real-time interrupt

3.3. Project-based Learning
Since the initial purpose of the robotics initiative is to provide
entries to science and technology fairs, students studied robotics based on the needs in the project the groups are working on.
Project-based learning is a teaching method in which students areengaged in complex real-world tasks that result in a product or apresentation (e.g. [19]). The use of project-based learning enabled
the students to learn tools and techniques required for developing
their projects in a short amount of time.

		(e) Digital-to-Analog (DA) converter
		 (f) Motor driver		 (g) Bypass capacitor
		 (h) Sensors(iv) Mechanism:		 (a) Linkages
		 (b) Pulleys, gears, and cams(v) Teaching:

3.4. Problems Encountered		 (a) Connecting the electrical devices on the breadboard

With the establishment of a local robotics program, several problems
were encountered such as (1) topics and projects to be included in
the robotics program (class, team, and club) and effective practices
in teaching to students, (2) further training of teacher-in-charge
project development and supervision, and (3) low-cost devices andinstructional materials.

		 (b) Wiring layout diagram

4. CHALLENGES FOR IMPROVEMENTWith the participation of the teacher-in-charge on the Teacher
Training Program of the Japanese Government for foreign teachers, several activities have been executed. The activities are seminars, robotics projects, and instruction materials for low-cost
devices.

4.1. Seminars
Seminars on micro-controllers and mechanisms for the teacherin-charge provided technical training and pedagogical examples
in teaching robotics as well as the outline of topics for a classroombased robotics program. Since the teacher-in-charge had noformal training on technology education, the second author provided several seminars in Hiroshima University. Topics include
basics in robotics education for secondary school and are listed
as follows:

The topics cover programming, electronics, microcontrollers,mechanics, and robotics. They are selected from the viewpoint ofpractical robot education of junior high school.

4.2. Robotics Projects
In project-based learning, students sometimes encounter several
problems and have to solve them. However, problems in robotics
projects are often difficult and complicated, since robotics systems are related with various elements of mechanisms, electronics,
hardware and microcontrollers, and software and programming.
Further training of the teacher-in-charge is therefore required for
project development and supervision.
Divide and conquer is one of powerful methods to solve difficultand complicated problems in project-based learning of robotics
education. Hence step-by-step education is the basis for further
training of teacher-in-charge. Based on the characteristics of therobotic systems, step-by-step education for robotics project is listed
as follows:
Step 1: Mechanics and robotics.
Step 2: Electronics including actuators.
Step 3: Software and hardware.

J.R. Galino and H. Tanaka / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 8(1) 60–65

Teacher-in-charge can learn making robotics systems step-by-stepfrom Steps 1 to 3.
The first author has built various low-cost robotics projects during
the teacher training to be used as common projects for projectbased-learning in Camarin High School. The building process
was also a coaching example in guiding students in creating theirprojects. According to the above Steps from 1 to 3, the following
projects were created for training teacher-in-charge for project
development and supervision:
Project 1: Tank type robot.
Project 2: Remote controlled robot.
Project 3: Edge avoidance and obstacle avoidance robot.
Creating robotics projects integrate connected robotics topics.
The tank-type robot was chosen because it is simple for a learner
to build it. The project (Project 1) involves the basics of making
robot bodies and mechanics. The remote-controlled robot project (Project 2) deals with robotic control practices without using
microcontrollers. In Project 2, a learner can practically study the
implementation of the electrical systems based on Project 1.

Pi as an alternative to laptop computers in teaching Arduino.
Using switching power supply (AC input for 100–240 V and 0.5 A
with 50/60 Hz, DC output for 5 V and 3000 mA), Raspberry Pi 4
(Computer Model B) successfully provides power supply to
Arduino. It electrically powers Arduino and an electrical circuit
without using extra power supply. Figure 6 shows Raspberry Pi 4
and Arduino, where four LEDs are used, and resisters for the LEDs
are 470 Ω.
Several displays were examined for usability subject to low costs.
The sizes of 3.5, 5.0, and 7.0 inches displays can be used for sending
the sources to Arduino, but the 7.0-inch display is too small to write
programs in the second author’s impression. Though small displays
are obtained at low cost, it is desirable for a teacher to prepare students for large ones for a good programming environment.
Preventing unnecessary breakage of devices is necessary to minimize the cost in educating students. One of topics of further
development of instruction materials is the use of simulation. It
is important to combine simulation and real practice for effective

The edge avoidance and obstacle avoidance robot project(Project 3) includes topics on sensors, actuators and microcontrollers. The teacher-in-charge made edge-avoidance and obstacle
avoidance robots based on the experiences of Projects 1 and 2. Bymaking different robots, the teacher-in-charge had more experience of making robots. By carrying out Projects from 1 to 3, theteacher-in-charge, a learner, can take training for project development and supervision step-by-step. Figures 3 and 4 show robots ofProjects 1 and 2, and Figures 4 and 5 those of Project 3.

4.3. Instruction Materials via
Low-cost Devices
Guidance on the use of Raspberry Pi is valuable to the teacher-incharge in utilizing it as a low-cost computer for programming andproject development. The authors explored the use of Raspberry

Figure 3 | Tank type robot and remote controlled robot (Projects 1 and 2),
showing a robot of Project 2.

63

Figure 4 | Edge avoidance robot (Project 3).

Figure 5 | Obstacle avoidance robot (Project 3).

J.R. Galino and H. Tanaka / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 8(1) 60–65

64

Figure 6 | Raspberry Pi 4 and Arduino Uno.

education. Another topic is to examine whether the low-cost
devices can be used for real situation.

5. CONCLUSION
This paper reported that the robotics program of Camarin HighSchool consists of the robotics team, robotics class, and robotics
club, primarily enthused by the participation in science and technology fairs. In its initial phase, project-based learning was conductedusing an Arduino kit. Simulation was used to cater many students.
It also reported that the teacher-in-charge (the first author) is in theteacher training program of the Japanese Government and that hehas received seminars in Hiroshima University and created robotics
projects for enhancing teaching skills in robot education. Different
from other projects, this project uses simple available materials andhence focuses on basics in robotics education for secondary school,
step-by-step education in project learning, and low-cost devices.
Challenges and improvement were explained in more detail thanthe earlier paper [15] presented by the authors. Since our interestsin this paper were focused on grasping the problems of the project and on reporting the training of the teacher-in-charge in Japan,
evaluation of the effectiveness of the project in the Philippines is apossible future topic.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
The authors declare they have no conflicts of interest.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The teacher training program of the first author was sponsoredby the Japanese Government through the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology.

REFERENCES[1] P. Mosley, G. Ardito, L. Scollins, Robotic cooperative learning promotes student STEM interest, Am. J. Eng. Educ. 7 (2016), 117–128.
[2] M. Kandlhofer, G. Steinbauer, Evaluating the impact of educational robotics on pupils’ technical- and social-skills and science
related attitudes, Robot. Autonom. Syst. 75 (2016), 679–685.

[3] F.B.V. Benitti, Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: a systematic review, Comput. Educ. 58 (2012),
978–988.
[4] G. Nugent, B. Barker, N. Grandgennett, G. Welch, Robotics
camps, clubs and competitions: results from a US robotics project. Robot. Autonom. Syst. 75 (2016), 686–691.
[5] B. Cavas, T. Kesercioglu, J. Holbrook, M. Rannikmae, E. Ozdogru,
F. Gokler, The effects of robotics club on the students’ performance on science process & scientific creativity skills andperceptions on robots, human and society, Proceedings of 3rdInternational Workshop Teaching Robotics, Teaching with
Robotics Integrating Robotics in School Curriculum, Trento,
Italy, 2012, pp. 40–50, Available from: http://www.terecop.eu/
TRTWR2012/trtwr2012_submission_06.pdf (accessed January 2,2017).
[6] A. Melchior, C. Burack, M. Hoover, Z. Haque, FIRST® longitudinal study: findings at 72 month follow-up, The Center for
Youth and Communities, Heller School for Social Policy andManagement, Brandeis University, Waltham, MA, 2020.
[7] A. Eguchi, RoboCupJunior for promoting STEM education, 21st
century skills, and technological advancement through robotics
competition, Robot. Autonom. Syst. 75 (2016), 692–699.
[8] A.G. Welch, Using the TOSRA to assess high school students’attitudes toward science after competing in the FIRST robotics competition: an exploratory study, EURASIA J. Math. Sci.
Technol. Educ. 6 (2010), 187–197.
[9] Y. Ma, D.C. Williams, The potential of a first LEGO league robotics program in teaching 21st century skills: an exploratory study,
J. Educ. Technol. Dev. Exch. 6 (2013), 13–28.
[10] A. Eguchi, Educational robotics for promoting 21st century skills,
J. Autom. Mobile Robot. Intell. Syst. 8 (2014), 5–11.
[11] M. Barak, Y. Zadok, Robotics projects and learning concepts inscience, technology and problem solving, Int. J. Technol. Des.
Educ. 19 (2009), 289–307.
[12] M. Jou, C.K. Hung, S.H. Lai, Application of challenge basedlearning approaches in robotics education, Int. J. Technol. Eng.
Educ. 7 (2010), 17–20.
[13] L.A. Junior, O.T. Neto, M.F. Hernandez, P.S. Martins, L.L.
Roger, F.A. Guerra, A low-cost and simple arduino-based
educational robotics kit, J. Select. Areas Robot. Control (JSRC)
3 (2013), 1–7.
[14] E.M. Tomko, W.D. Hunt, R.P. McQuaid, J.A. Sussman,
Introducing a robotics club in Albania, Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, MA, USA, 2014.
[15] J.R Galino, H. Tanaka, Secondary school robotics education in
Camarin high school: developments and challenges for improvement, Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on
Artificial Life and Robotics (ICAROB2021), Japan, 2021, Alife
Robotics, pp. 231–234.
[16] DepEd Memorandum No. 113, s. 2019. Retrieved from: https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/DM_s2019_113.
pdf (accessed March 31, 2021).
[17] Arduino. Available from: https://www.arduino.cc/ (accessed
March 31, 2021).
[18] Autodesk. Available from: https://www.tinkercad.com/ (accessed
March 31, 2021).
[19] C.H. Chen, Y.C. Yang, Revisiting the effects of project-basedlearning on students’ academic achievement: a meta-analysis
investigating moderators, Educ. Res. Rev. 26 (2019), 71–81.

J.R. Galino and H. Tanaka / Journal of Robotics, Networking and Artificial Life 8(1) 60–65

65

AUTHORS INTRODUCTION
Mr. Jeffrey Rivera Galino
He graduated a Bachelor course in physics
education at Philippine Normal University.
He is a junior high school science teacher
and robotics club adviser at Camarin HighSchool. He is now a teacher trainee at
Hiroshima University under the Teacher
Training Program of the Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology.

Dr. Hideyuki Tanaka
He graduated Master course at Graduate
School of Engineering in Kyoto
University and received Dr. (Eng.) from
Kyoto University. He is now a memberof Division of Educational Sciences,
Graduate School of Humanities andSocial Sciences in Hiroshima University.
He is a member of IEEE, SICE, and ISCIE.