Perception of Teachers Regarding Role of STEAM Robotics laboratories in Removing Boredom from Learning Science at the Elementary Level

Kainat Rana, Fozia Fatima, Sohaib Sultan


Educational technology is finding new ways to attain the attention of students towards science. One of the innovations in teaching science in the integrated classroom at STEAM robotics laboratories. The purpose of the research is to examine the perception of teachers regarding the role of STEAM robotics laboratories in removing boredom from science classrooms. The objectives of the research were to find out teachers’ perception regarding students’ boredom in learning science in the integrated classroom and innovative STEAM robotics and to analyze learners’ interest in learning science through STEAM robotics concerning their teachers at the elementary level. The population was the teachers having experience of teaching science through STEAM robotics and traditional method of learning science in the science classroom. A sample of eighteen teachers was selected by the universal sampling technique. The quantitative research methodology was used and descriptive statistics were for analyses of data. The responses were analyzed through descriptive analysis. The results were concluding by taking the mean of each item. The results showed that the students are participating actively in STEAM robotics classrooms as compared to the traditional method of learning science. The results depicted that STEAM robotics laboratories help increase learner’s interest and remove boredom from science learning.

Full Text:



Afari, E. & Khine, M.S. (2017). Robotics as an educational tool: impact of Lego mindstorms. International Journal of Information and Educational Technology, 7(6), 437-442.

Anwar, S., Bascou, N. A., Menekse, M., & Kardgar,A. (2019). A systematic review of studies on educational robotics. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 9(2), 19-42.

Bocconi, S., Chioccariello, A., Dettori, G., Ferrari, A.,& Engelhardt, K. (2016). Developing computational thinking in compulsory education: implications for policy and practice. European Union: Joint Research Center.

Catterall, L. (2017 ). A brief history of STEM and STEAM from an Inadvertent Insider. The STEAM Journal, 3(2), DOI: 10.5642/steam.20170301.05.

Daugherty, M. (2013). The prospect of an “A” in STEM education. Journal of STEM Education, 14(2), 10-15.

Davidson, C.D. & Simms, W. (2017). Science theater as STEAM: a case study of "save it now". The STEAM Journal, 3(1), DOI: 10.5642/steam.20170301.14.

Erba, M. (2019). Policy considerations for STEAM education. Education Commission of the States.

Fatima, F., Zamir, S., Ali, S., & Fatima, S. (2018). Demographic effects over the achievement motivation of the students at university level. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 11(3), 212-224.

Fatima, F. (2019). Teachers’ attitude towards brain based learning and its effects on achievement motivation of the students at university level (Ph.D. Dissertation). Department of Education, Faculty of Social sciences, National University of Modern Languages, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Gunn, J. (2017). The evolution of STEM and STEAM in the U.S. Retrieve from on 22-12-2019.

Gunn, J. (2017). Why the “A” in STEAM Education is Just As Important As Every Other Letter. Retrieve from: on 22-12-2019.

Gabriele, L., Bertacchini, F., Tavernise, A., Vaca-Cárdenas, L., Pantano, P., & Bilotta, E. (2017). An educational robotics lab investigate cognitive strategies and to foster learning in an arts and humanities course degree. International Journal of Online and Biomedical Engineering, 13(4), 7-19.

Guyotte, K. (2015). Collaborative creativity in STEAM: narratives of art education students’ experiences in transdisciplinary spaces. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 16(15), ISSN: 1529-8094.

Guyotte, K., Sochacka, N., Costantino, T., Kellam, N., & Walther, J. (2015 ). Collaborative creativity in STEAM: narratives of art education students’. International Journal of Education & the Arts, 16(15), ISSN: 1529-8094.

Kamienski, N. & Radziwill, N. (2018). Design for STEAM: creating participatory art with purpose. The STEAM Journal, 3(2), DOI: 10.5642/steam.20180302.08.

Khanlari, A. (2013). Effects of educational robots on learning stem and on student’s attitude toward STEM. IEEE 5th Conference on Engineering Education (ICEED), (pp. 62-66).

Kim, P. (2016). The wheel model of STEAM education based on traditional korean scientific contents. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 12(9), 2353-2371.

Land, M. (2013). Full STEAM Ahead: the benefits of integrating the arts into STEM. Procedia Computer Science, 20, 547-552.

Liliawati, W., Rusnayati, H., Purwanto, & Aristantia, G. (2017). Implementation of STEAM education to improve mastery concept. The 2nd Annual Applied Science and Engineering Conference (AASEC ) (pp. doi:10.1088/1757-899X/288/1/012148). Insitute of Physics.

Mosley, P., Ardito, G., & Scollins, L. . (2016). Robotics cooperative learning Promotes student STEM interest. American Journal of Education. 7(2), 117-118.

Nicholes, J. (2018). Developing STEM interest and genre knowledge through science fiction prototyping. The STEAM Journal, 3(2), DOI:10.5642/steam.20180302.14.

Zhbanova, K. S. (2019). Editorial: Developing creativity through STEM subjects Integrated with the arts. . Journal of STEM Arts, Crafts, and Constructions, 4(1), 1-15.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Maintained By: Hatib Shabbir, Directorate Of ICT, AIOU