IJSTR

International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Home About Us Scope Editorial Board Blog/Latest News Contact Us
0.2
2019CiteScore
 
10th percentile
Powered by  Scopus
Scopus coverage:
Nov 2018 to May 2020

CALL FOR PAPERS
AUTHORS
DOWNLOADS
CONTACT

IJSTR >> Volume 9 - Issue 6, June 2020 Edition



International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research  
International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research

Website: http://www.ijstr.org

ISSN 2277-8616



Physical Programming Language

[Full Text]

 

AUTHOR(S)

Akshay Baweja

 

KEYWORDS

Programming; Playful Learning; Education; Flowcharts; Logic Development; Experiential Learning; Code Blocks;

 

ABSTRACT

This paper explains the physical programming language that helps its user understand the fundamentals and concepts used in a programming language. It uses LEGO-style blocks and colors to help kids learn the basics of programming and aims to increase the learning effectiveness of programmers. The Physical Programming Language takes the form of a kit that comprises different sub-modules like variable blocks, value blocks, marker blocks, display blocks, loop blocks, conditionals blocks, and operator blocks. The physical programming language aims to provide a tangible and tactile learning in a physical environment. It also re-imagines how we think of programming language today. Instead of a traditional programming setup that involves a minimum of a keyboard and a screen to function, it uses physical blocks. It helps the user visualize how a program would look in an actual physical space than inside a storage disk.

 

REFERENCES

[1] Arduino. Pro Mini. (2014). https://store.arduino.cc/usa/arduino-pro-mini. 2020.
[2] Mark J. Brosnan. 1998. Spatial Ability in Children’s Play with Lego Blocks. Perceptual and Motor Skills 87, 1(1998), 19–28. DOI: 10.2466/pms.1998.87.1.19
[3] Northern Illinois University Department of Computer Science. 2013. Using a Stack to Evaluate an Expression. (2013). http://faculty.cs.niu.edu/~hutchins/csci241/eval.htm. 2020.
[4] Min Fan, Alissa N. Antle, Maureen Hoskyn, Carman Neustaedter, and Emily S. Cramer. 2017. Why Tangibility Matters: A Design Case Study of At-Risk Children Learning to Read and Spell. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1805–1816. DOI: 10.1145/3025453.3026048
[5] Agus Kurniawan. 2015. Arduino Uno: A Hands-On Guide for Beginner. PE Press.
[6] Jui-Pin Lin. 2012. Pogo pin connector. (Dec.25 2012). https://patents.google.com/patent/US8337256B1. US Patent 8,337,256B1.
[7] Zohare Manna and Richard Waldinger. 1984. The Logical Basis for Computer Programming: Deductive Reasoning. (1984).
[8] Margaret Mead. 1977. Letters from the field (1 ed.). Harper & Row.
[9] Microchip. 2018. megaAVR® Data Sheet, ATmega48A/PA/88A/PA/168A/PA/328/P. (oct 2018). https://www.microchip.com/wwwproducts/en/ATmega328. 2020.
[10] Maria Moundridou and Alexander Kalinoglou. 2008. Using LEGO Mindstorms as an Instructional Aid in Technical and Vocational Secondary Education: Experiences from an Empirical Case Study, Vol. 5192. 312–321. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-87605-2_35
[11] Dora Simões, Margarida M. Pinheiro, and Claudia Amaral. 2014. How the use of Different Teaching and Learning Methodologies Echoes in Learners: The Students’ Perspectives. TEM Journal 3, 3 (2014), 262–271.