Search

The integration of the Arduino board into educational settings has penetrated across various educational levels. The teaching of this subject can be accomplished by (a) using real components in breadboards, (b) prefabricated modular boards that snap together, and (c) utilizing computer simulations. Yet, it is unknown which interface offers a more effective learning experience. Therefore, this experimental study aims to compare the effectiveness of these interfaces in a series of three laboratory exercises involving 110 university students, who were divided into three groups: (a) the first group used a tangible user interface, implementing circuits on breadboards, (b) the second group also used a tangible interface but with modular boards, and (c) the third group used a graphical user interface to simulate circuits using Tinkercad. For each laboratory exercise, students completed both pretests and posttests. Also, they provided feedback through five Likert-type attitude questions regarding their experiences. In terms of data analysis, t-tests, ANOVA, and ANCOVA, along with bootstrapping, and principal component analysis were employed. The results suggest that among the participants, those who used a graphical user interface stated that their understanding of the interconnection of components in microcontroller circuits was enhanced, while students with previous experience in microcontroller labs found the circuit creation process easier than students without experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]