Evaluation of Ceebot 3
General idea of the software
Ceebot 3 is a instructional program by which one can program a robot to draw pictures and animations.
The language used is a pseudo-programming language close to C++ and Java. The language resembles English, the
procedures are like: move();,turn();, pendown();, yellow(); etc. Loops (repeat, for) and functions can be used.
The program is written and compiled. When the program is executed (run) the robot acts according to the program.
The code and the execution of the program can be seen simultaneously (image 1) or the actions of
the robot without the code (image 2).
Image 1: Programming editor and the executed program.
Image 2: View of the execution of the program.
Ceebot -site.
Producers
Epsitec
(Daniel Roux, Denis Fumoulen, Otto Kölbl, Michael Walz, Didier Gertsch)
Target group
Children between 10 and 15 years.
Subject area
Programming.
Price
Ceebot3 School: 480 e.
Ceebot3 Perso: 50 e.
The demo version is free.
Evaluation
The evaluation is done according to Tom Reeves' article: Evaluating
What Really Matters in Computer Based Evaluation.
Tom Reeves' article.
Epistemology
Objectivist. The things to learn are predefined.
Pedagogical philosophy
Somewhat instructivist. Tasks are organized hierarchally starting from the easy ones. Instructions
are given for every task. However, the student is not forced to follow the order of tasks, he is
not either forced to see the instructions before starting.
Underlying psychology
Behavioral. The student is supposed to start learning by doing easy tasks and continue to more difficult ones.
One
is not prevented from taking any task one wants, but the instructions and help are related to the chosen task.
Goal orientation
Between sharply-focused and unfocused. Students are supposed to learn programming, but at the same time
they are creating "art".
Experiential value
Concrete in the way that the programming creates visible actions and results.
Teacher role
The teacher is seen as a facilitator. The students are supposed to learn by themselves. Instructions
and help are provided by the program for every task. On the other hand the program does not give
feedback, the teacher is needed in that sense.
Program flexibility
Easily modifiable to some extent. Different views can be chosen,
the execution speed can be altered etc.
Settings (e.g. sound effects, shortcuts, resolution, graphics) can be modified by the teacher .
Value of errors
Learning from experience. If there are errors in the code the program won't work as it is expected.
The student however sees
the result immediately, and therefore it is easier to correct errors. The editor also
helps to correct incorrect code.
Motivation
Motivation is supposed to be intrinsic. The changing sceneries, animations and the fact
that one sees the result of
ones work immediately create motivation.
Accommodation of individual differences
The program can be tailored to some extent. One can freely select tasks of different difficulty,
although one is supposed to
start from the beginning.
Different views can be selected, the speed of the program can be adjusted, sounds can be added to images and
animations. If the program allowed the student to start drawing straight away instead of coding, it would be
even better.
Learner control
Learner control is somewhat non-existent. Tasks are hierarchally organized, but the student isn't forced to
follow their order.
User activity
Mathemagenic. The student is taught the predefined content. Neverheless the student has a
freedom to apply the content
as he wishes.
Cooperative learning
There is no support for cooperative learning but group works can always be done.
Cultural sensitivity
Cultural sensitivity is not taken into account.