The "scientist game" for learning the scientific method at primary school

Main Article Content

Edoardo Datteri
Gilda Bozzi
Luisa Zecca


This learning experience differs from conventional approaches to educational robotics in that, instead of programming a robot, children have to discover how the robot has been programmed, which they do by making hypotheses, designing experiments and evaluating their effectiveness.

Article Details

Column "Field experiences"


Benitti, F. B. V. (2012). Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers and Education, 58(3), 978-988. doi:10.1016/j.compedu. 2011.10.006

Braitenberg, V. (1984). I veicoli pensanti. Saggio di psicologia sintetica. Milano, IT: Garzanti.

Bredenfeld, A., Hofmann, A., & Steinbauer, G. (2010). Robotics in Education Initiatives in Europe: Status, Shortcomings and Open Questions. In Proceedings of SIMPAR 2010 Workshops, International Conference on Simmulation, Modeling and Programming for Autonomous Robots (pp. 568–574).

Gopnik, A. (2012). Scientific Thinking in Young Children: Theoretical Advances, Empirical Research, and Policy Implications. Science, 337(6102), 1623- 1627. doi:10.1126/science.1223416

Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge, MA, USA: Cambridge University Press.

Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1988). The child is a theoretician, not an inductivist. Mind & Language, 3(3), 183-196.

Kuhn, D., & Pearsall, S. (2000). Developmental origins of scientific thinking. Journal of Cognition and Development, 1(1), 113-129. doi:10.1207/s15327647jcd01 01n_11

Levy, S. T., & Mioduser, D. (2008). Does it “want” or “was it programmed to...”? Kindergarten children’s explanations of an autonomous robot’s adaptive functioning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 18(4), 337-359. doi:10.1007/s10798.007.9032–6

Martin-Hansen, L. (2002). Defining Inquiry. The Science Teacher, 69(2), 34-37. Retrieved from kubaskod/SEC_406_506/documents/Defi ningInquiry.pdf

Mioduser, D., Levy, S. T., & Talis, V. (2007). Episodes to scripts to rules: concreteabstractions in kindergarten children’s explanations of a robot’s behavior. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 19(1), 15-36. Retrieved from

Mubin, O., Stevens, C. J., Shahid, S., Mahmud, A. Al, & Dong, J.-J. (2013). A review of the applicability of robots in education. Technology for Education and Learning, 1. doi:10.2316/Journal.209.2013.1.209-0015

Rocard, M., Csermely, P., Jorde, D., Walberg- Henriksson, H., & Hemmo, V. (2007). Science education now: A renewed pedagogy for the future of Europe. EUR22845. Retrieved from sciencesociety/ document_library/pdf_06 /reportrocard- on-science-education_ en.pdf

Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. London, UK: Oxford University Press.

Sadeh, I., & Zion, M. (2009). The development of dynamic inquiry performances within an open inquiry setting: A comparison to guided inquiry setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(10), 1137-1160. doi: 10.1002/tea.20310

Siegel, M. (1997). Knowing Children. Experiments in Conversation and Cognition. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

Sullivan, F. R. (2008). Robotics and Science Literacy : Thinking skills, science process skills and systems understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(3), 373-394. doi:10.1002/tea.20238