SUGISAKAMASANORI

Journal of Advances in Artificial Life Robotics
Vol. 4(3); December (2023), pp. 133–137
ON LINE ISSN 2435-8061; ISSN-L 2435-8061
https://alife-robotics.org/jallr.html

Research Article

Rescue Robot Challenge to Develop Problem-Solving Skills inJunior High School Students
Kazuo Kawada, Keita Murai, Yuta Susawa, Hiroyuki Y. Suzuki

Graduate School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Hiroshima University, 7398524 Hiroshima, Japan

ARTICLE INFO
Article History
Received December 7, 2022
Accepted 27 March 2024
Keywords
Rescue robot
Junior high school
Technology education
Robot evaluation
Modified excavator

ABSTRACTThe ”Junior High School Rescue Robot Challenge'' is an activity held every year by Hiroshima
University in cooperation with construction machinery manufacturers. The challenge has beenongoing for 18 years with the given theme of rescue. However, starting in 2022, the program's
policy has essentially changed, with emphasis placed on both problem-finding and problemsolving abilities. A prototype rescue robot was created by modifying a radio-controlled excavator
model, and students were responsible for everything from proposing problems to be solved in thedisaster area to finding solutions.

© 2022 The Author. Published by Sugisaka Masanori at ALife Robotics Corporation Ltd.
This is an open access article distributed under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)

According to above mentioned situations, the Japanese
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology (MEXT) also revised “Courses of Study”
from 2008 [4], [5], [6], focusing more on social issues inschool study and aiming to create new values, putting theboth "problem finding and solving skills" in the central
position for school education.
Introduced a new perspective to technology educationthat focuses on both problem-finding and problemsolving skills. The theme was changed to "Junior HighSchool Rescue Robot Challenge," which started with thestudents discovering a challenge. They then modified aremote-controlled excavator to create a real robot. Tenteams of junior high school students participated, finding
unique problems and creating real robots exactly as they
imagined them, which was effective in fostering
innovative minds among the younger generation.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the challenge wascanceled in 2021, with final revisions to the program
taking place in 2022. We realized that there were many
variations in disasters and changed the basic frameworkof the program. Currently, problem finding is included in
students' assignments. After finding a problem to solve,
students created a prototype rescue robot to solve the1. Introduction
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) wereproclaimed at the UN Summit, in 2015, which will beattained by 2030 according to the statement of “The 2030
Agenda for Sustainable Development”. Around the sametime, “Society 5.0” was proposed in “Fifth Science andTechnology Basic Plan” [1] by Japanese Cabinet Office,as an image of upcoming society structure. It will beexpected that the Society 5.0 will play a central role toachieve the SDGs in Japan. Recently, the Sixth Plan wasalso publicized [2] with advanced guidelines for Society
5.0 to realize SDGs more realistically. The plan focusedon innovation creation by fostering “human resources
who can create new value”. Besides that, the wholesociety around the world had affected remarkably, from2010s, by global environmental changes, political andeconomic uncertainty, COVID-19 epidemic, and so on.
There is a growing need for innovation creation to solvea wide variety of social issues, which is called “socialchange-type innovation” [3].

Corresponding author’s E-mail: kawada@hiroshima-u.ac.jp, m212958@hiroshima-u.ac.jp, m220547@hiroshima-u.ac.jp, hiro-suzuki@hiroshimau.ac.jp URL:

133

problem. We also reviewed the evaluation systemdescribed below.

The worksheets were evaluated from following threeviewpoints:(1) Innovation (10 points)
Is it an innovative idea that utilizes shovels?
(2) Feasibility (10 points)
Is it a highly feasible concept or idea?
(3) Functionality (10 points)
Whether the concept/idea is expected to be
sufficiently effective for the rescue activities set up.

2. Challenge Theme in 2022
2.1. Challenge Theme
Since “the Contest” era, the central theme of theChallenge was “Rescuing Quickly a dummy doll from alarge 1/8-scale simulated earthquake site to a safe zone.”[7], [8] Large-scale field (1 to 3 meters ling) and thedummy dolls were prepared by the program staff. The
students made rescue robots on which the dummy doll
was placed, and so on. The evaluation had focused on thetime required for rescue, ideas for rescue methods,
humanitarian viewpoints, and especially the "gentleness"of the robot to the dummy during the rescue.

Based on the above evaluation, all 10 teams were past thefirst selection.
For the second evaluation, each team made the rescue
robot and put it in disastrous area to rescue people orsomething they assumed. Rescue activity was taken byvideo and the submitted to us. Documentation on therobot was submitted as well. Those materials wereevaluated through an online conferencing system(Teams) in a public session. Three judges were selected
to evaluate and announce the results. The following two
items were evaluated for the robot:(1) Feasibility/Improvement (30 points)
How much was the robot fulfilled the planned ideas
shown in the first worksheets, and how much was it
improved and realized, through real robot making
process.
(2) Design (30 points)
Whether the robot's features and performance can beunderstood by users (or three judges who see it for
the first time).

The theme of the challenge in 2022 has been significantly
changed expecting further growth of junior high school
students' ability to find and solve social problems. The
project was started from problem-finding by themselves.
After finding a problem, they are going to build aprototype rescue robot by modifying a 1/14-scale remotecontrolled excavator shown in Fig. 1. We did not restrict
the problem to be chosen, but had a restriction of theselection of problems, it may be a disaster-stricken area,
because of the excavator model.

The presentation was evaluated on the following twopoints:(1) Objectivity (15 points)
Whether the performances of the rescue robot can beunderstood and analyzed objectively and accuratelyby three judges.
(2) Expression (15 points)
Whether the features of the rescue robot wasexpressed, throughout the presentation, in an easyto-understand manner.

Fig.1. RC excavator to be modified
2.2. Rescue Robot Idea Evaluation Method
The evaluation of rescue robot ideas was consisted of two
major evaluating sessions.

In addition, the results of the first evaluation were also
taken into account.

The first was evaluation of ideas, including fromproblem-finding to problem-solving, that is, what kind ofsituation were chosen and how rescue activities could beperformed. Each team made a worksheet of conceptual
plan with drawings and submit it to us. Before theworksheet making and submission, we instructed them
how to incorporate measurement and control techniques.

134

3. Robot Evaluation Results
The 7th Annual Middle School Rescue Robot Challenge
in 2022 (in Japanese fiscal year of 2021) was held onFebruary 12, 2022. A total of 10 teams participated. Theresults of the first and second rounds of judging areshown in Table 1 and 2, respectively.

(a)Robot A(b)Robot B(c)Robot C(d)Robot D(e)Robot E(f)Robot F

The appearances of the robots they built are shown in Fig.
2. Their robots had buckets, cabins, rollers, crawlers,traveling parts, and so on, by modifying excavator partsand utilizing its functions with clever modifications.
Table 1. First Evaluation ResultsTeamABCDEFGHIJ

Innovation

4.6

5.06.8

5.5

8.0

5.8

8.1

7.4

8.4

7.3

Realization

8.1

8.1

7.2

7.6

5.6

7.3

4.9

5.1

5.3

6.4

Functionality

5.8

7.3

6.3

6.5

7.3

5.9

7.4

7.6

7.1

7.1

Total Point

18.5

20.4

20.3

19.6

20.9

18.9

20.4

20.1

20.8

20.8

Table 2. First Evaluation Results
TeamA

B

CDE

FG

H

I

J

Realization /Improvement

21.0

22.0

19.0

17.0

25.0

18.0

22.0

24.0

25.0

23.0

Design

17.0

21.0

24.0

19.0

22.0

20.0

23.0

21.0

23.0

24.0

Robot
Point

38.0

43.0

43.036.0

47.0

38.0

45.0

45.0

48.0

47.0

Objectivity

10.5

9.5

11.0

9.0

12.0

10.5

10.5

9.0

11.5

12.0

Expression

13.0

11.0

11.5

8.0

11.0

10.0

11.5

11.0

13.0

11.0

Presentation
Point

23.5

20.5

22.5

17.0

23.0

20.5

22.0

20.0

24.5

23.0

Total
Point

61.5

63.5

65.5

53.0

70.0

58.5

67.0

65.0

72.5

70.0

(g)Robot G(h)Robot H

4. Discussion
This challenge asked middle high school students topropose a rescue robot by modifying an excavator. We
hope, by the Challenge, the students will develop theirproblem finding as well as problem solving skills.
Judgements given from the first and second rounds ofevaluation are shown in Table 1 and Table 2.

(i)Robot I(j)Robot J
Fig.2. Robots made by junior high school students
rating although a high realization rating. This may showthat these teams took more realistic solutions for theproblems. In contrast, teams E, G, and I are rated highfor innovation but low for realization because they weretried to add further functions that looked hard to berealized than others. These results indicate that thesethree evaluations were able to accurately assess thebalance among concepts, ideas and reality of the robots

Table 1 shows that the total score for innovation,realization, and functionality. Many team got around 20
points (on a 30-point scale).
It is noteworthy point that, among three evaluation points
there can be found somehow trade-off relationship. For
example, teams A, B, D, and F have a low innovation
135

modifying a remote-controlled shovel. Ten teams ofjunior high school students participated, found uniqueproblems, and created real robots exactly as they
imagined them. This challenge was effective in fostering
an innovative mindset among the younger generation.

they made.
Table 2 shows the evaluation of realization/improvement
points of the robot they made. Unfortunately, the teams
with poor motion video were rated low evaluations. In
design evaluation, the robots which were scarcely
modified from those of commercially available power
shovels got low scores.
As for the evaluation of presentation, the objectivity wasrated by the use of documents and quantitative data. The
teams which provided realistic evidence were highlyevaluated. In the expression, which is the evaluation ofcomprehensibility of the presentation, the teams that
proposed a clear rescue sequence got high scores. These
results indicate that these evaluations were able toaccurately assess the robots and presentations made by
the junior high school students.

References
1.
2.
3.

4.
5.

Appearances of robots built by a junior high school
student shown in Fig.2 clearly indicate that the students
manage to born a brand new rescue robots from theirbrains. No two robots had the same appearances nor thesame function. The robots built by the 10 teams can beclassified into the following three categories.
(1) Modification of the bucket part (Fig.2 (a), Fig.2 (b),Fig.2 (c), Fig.2 (f) and Fig.2 (j))
The bucket was modified to make it easier to scoop
debris or to have other functions.
(2) Modification of the traveling part (Fig.2 (d), Fig.2(h) and Fig.2 (i))
New parts were added to make it easier to travel overrubble, and floats were added to enable movement
over water.
(3) Adding new functions (Fig.2 (e) and Fig.2 (g))
The excavator had added functions completely
different from those of shovels, such as shovelingand leveling.

6.
7.

8.

Japan Cabinet Office: The 5th Science andTechnology Basic Plan (2016) (in Japanese)
Japan Cabinet Office: The Sixth Science, Technology
and Innovation Basic Plan (2021) (in Japanese)
Center for Research and Development Strategy,
Japan Science and Technology Agency: Trends andchallenges of mission-oriented science, technology
and innovation policies for solving social problems(2021) (in Japanese)
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology: Elementary School CurriculumGuideline 2017-03 Notification (2017)
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology: Lower Secondary School Curriculum
Guideline 2017-03 Notification (2017)
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science andTechnology: Upper Secondary School Curriculum
Guideline 2017-03 Notification (2018)
Kazuo Kawada, Masayasu Nagamatsu, Toru
Yamamoto: A Practice of Rescue Robot Contest inJunior High Schools, Journal of Japanese Society forEngineering Education, Vol.58-2, pp.33-39 (2010)(in Japanese)
Kazuo Kawada, Keisuke Iuchi, Keita Murai,Hiroyuki Y. Suzuki: Junior High School Rescue
Robot Challenge using Shock Sensitive Tiny Dummy
Robot, Journal of Robotics, Networking andArtificial Life, Vol.8(2), pp. 90–93 (2021)

Authors Introduction
Dr. Kazuo Kawada
He received his B.Eng. degree fromHiroshima University 1995, and hisPh.D. from Hiroshima University in2005. He is currently an Associate
Professor in the Dept. of Technology
and Information Education, Graduate
School of Humanities and Social
Sciences at Hiroshima University. His
research interest areas are thedevelopment of educational materials related tomechatronics education, data science education andinnovation human resource development for K-16.

In total, we can conclude that the junior high school
students who participated “the Challenge in 2022” wereable to set and solve their own problems, indicating that
our revision of theme setting for “the Challenge” waseffective.
5. Conclusion
A new perspective has been introduced to technology
education that focuses on both problem-finding andproblem-solving skills. In line with this, the ``Junior HighSchool Rescue Robot Challenge'' started with students
discovering a problem and creating a real robot by136

Mr. Keita Murai

He received his B.Ed. degree in
Education in 2021 from the Faculty of
Education, Hiroshima University. Heis acquiring the M.Ed. in the Graduate
School of Humanities and Social
Sciences, Hiroshima University. His
research interest areas are thedevelopment of programming thinking
and STEAM materials for K-12.

Mr. Yuta Susawa

He received his B.Ed. degree inEducation in 2022 from the Faculty ofEducation, Hiroshima University. He
is acquiring the M.Ed. in the Graduate
School of Humanities and Social
Sciences, Hiroshima University. His
research interest areas are thedevelopment of educational materials
on programming problem solving inmeasurement and control and data science problem solving
for K-12.
Dr. Hiroyuki Y. Suzuki
He received his B.Eng. degree fromHiroshima University 1992, and hisD.E. from Hiroshima University in
2000. He is currently an Associate
Professor in the Dept. of Technology
and Information Education, Graduate
School of Humanities and Social
Sciences at Hiroshima University. His
research interest areas are education onmaterials science, engineering and processing and theirapplication on educations, and STEM/STEAM educations.

137