Cross-Age Peer Tutoring in Educational Robotics to Support Technological Literacy in Young Learners’ STEAM Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46328/ijtes.6643Keywords:
STEAM, technological literacy, educational robotics, cross-age peer tutoring, mediation practices, elementary educationAbstract
Technological literacy is essential in a society where even the youngest children interact with devices and technologies. This study explores cross-age peer tutoring as an approach to support technological literacy in educational robotics (ER). The study focuses on the mediation practices employed by cross-age peer tutors (aged 11–12) when guiding younger tutees (aged 7–8). To examine these practices Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics (STEAM) education, a multiple case study was conducted with six cross-age teams. These teams conducted ER task with Sphero Indi robot while tutors guided the actions. Video recordings of the actions were analyzed through micro-level analysis. The results highlight three mediation practices: tutor-directed, tutee-directed, and collaborative practices. These practices identify six distinct types of mediators among the tutors labelled: gentle mediators, persistent facilitator, strict mediators, linear instructors, humour-based mediators, and hesitating mediators. The results suggest that cross-age peer tutoring as a pedagogical practice can support technological literacy through joint verbal and non-verbal mediation and collaborative mediation practices. Recommendations for organizing tutoring to support technological literacy are provided.
References
Abanoz, T., & Kalelioğlu, F. (2024). Unleashing the potential: illuminating pedagogical strategies employed by early childhood educators in stem education for cultivating algorithmic thinking skills in young learners. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 33(1), 138–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2024.2339274
Alibali, M. W., & Nathan, M. J. (2012). Embodiment in Mathematics Teaching and Learning: Evidence From Learners’ and Teachers’ Gestures. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(2), 247–286. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.611446
Alonso-García, S., Rodríguez Fuentes, A.-V., Ramos Navas-Parejo, M., & Victoria-Maldonado, J.-J. (2024). Enhancing computational thinking in early childhood education with educational robotics: A meta-analysis. Heliyon, 10(13), e33249-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e33249
Ash, D. (2007). Using video data to capture discontinuous science meaning making in non-school settings. In R. Goldman, R. Pea, B. Barron & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Video research in the learning sciences (pp. 207–226). Erlbaum.
Avsec, S., & Jamšek, J. (2016). Technological literacy for students aged 6–18: a new method for holistic measuring of knowledge, capabilities, critical thinking and decision-making. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(1), 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-015-9299-y
Belland, B. R. (2014). Scaffolding: Definition, current debates, and future directions. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 505–518). Springer.
Berghmans, I., Neckebroeck, F., Dochy, F., & Struyven, K. (2013). A typology of approaches to peer tutoring. Unraveling peer tutors’ behavioural strategies. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 28(3), 703–723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10212-012-0136-3
Bers, M. U. (2008). Robots to Blocks: Learning with Technology in the Early Childhood Classroom. Teachers College Press.
Bers, M. U., González-González, C., & Armas–Torres, M, B. (2019). Coding as a playground: Promoting positive learning experiences in childhood classrooms. Computers & Education, 138, 130–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.04.013
Beynon, M. (2017). Mindstorms Revisited: Making New Construals of Seymour Papert’s Legacy. In ., E. Menegatti, M. Moro, & D. Alimisis (Eds. pp. 3–19), Educational Robotics in the Makers Era. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-55553-9_1
Brainin, E., Shamir, A., & Eden. S. (2022). Robot programming intervention for promoting spatial relations, mental rotation and visual memory of kindergarten children. Journal of Research on Tehnology in Education, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2020.1858464
Casillas Martin, S., Cabezas Gonzalez, M., & Garcia Penalvo, F. J. (2020). Digital competence of early childhood education teachers: attitude, knowledge and use of ICT. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(2), 210–223. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2019.1681393
Cervera, N., Diago, P. D., Orcos, L., & Yáñez, D. F. (2020). The Acquisition of Computational Thinking through Mentoring: An Exploratory Study. Education Sciences, 10(8), 202-. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci10080202
Çetin, M., & Demircan, H. Ö. (2020). Empowering technology and engineering for STEM education through programming robots: a systematic literature review. Early Child Development and Care, 190(9), 1323–1335. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2018.1534844
Chaldi, D., & Mantzanidou, G. (2021). Educational robotics and STEAM in early childhood education. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1(2), 72–81. https://doi.org/10.25082/AMLER.2021.02.003
Chiazzese, G., Arrigo, M., Chifari, A., Lonati, V., & Tosto, C. (2018). Exploring the Effect of a Robotics Laboratory on Computational Thinking Skills in Primary School Children Using the Bebras Tasks. In F. J. García-Peñalvo (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Technological Ecosystems for Enhancing Multiculturality (pp. 25–30). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3284179.3284186
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among five approaches (Fourth edition.). SAGE.
Dakers, J. R. (2018). Nomadology: A Lens to Explore the Concept of Technological Literacy. In M. J. de Vries (Ed.) Handbook of Technology Education (pp. 17–31). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-44687-5_2
Davies, S., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2024). Knowledge creation through maker practices and the role of teacher and peer support in collaborative invention projects. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 19(3), 283–310. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11412-024-09427-2
Demetroulis, E. A., Theodoropoulos, A., Wallace, M., Poulopoulos, V., & Antoniou, A. (2023). Collaboration Skills in Educational Robotics: A Methodological Approach—Results from Two Case Studies in Primary Schools. Education Sciences, 13(5), 468-. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13050468
Derry, S. J., Pea, R. D., Barron, B., Engle, R. A., Erickson, F., Goldman, R., Hall, R., Koschmann, T., Lemke, J. L., Sherin, M. G., & Sherin, B. L. (2010). Conducting Video Research in the Learning Sciences: Guidance on Selection, Analysis, Technology, and Ethics. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 19(1), 3–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/10508400903452884
de Vries, M. J. (2016). Teaching about technology: an introduction to the philosophy of technology for non-philosophers. (2nd edition) Springer International Publishing AG.
DIGIKUMMI. (n.d.). DIGIKUMMI-sivusto: Digitaitoja Ilmajoen esi- ja perusopetukseen. DIGIKUMMI. Retrieved November 18, 2025, from https://sites.google.com/edu.ilmajoki.fi/digikummi/etusivu
Di Lieto, M. C., Inguaggiato, E., Castro, E., Cecchi, F., Cioni, G., Dell’Omo, M., Laschi, C., Pecini, C., Santerini, G., Sgandurra, G., & Dario, P. (2017). Educational Robotics intervention on Executive Functions in preschool children: A pilot study. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 16–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.018
Finnish National Board of Education [FNBE] (2014). National core curriculum for basic education. Publications 2016:5. Finnish National Board of Education.
Finnish National Board on Research Integrity (2019). The ethical principles of research with human participants and ethical review in the human sciences in Finland. Finnish National Board on Research Integrity TENK publications 3/2019. https://tenk.fi/sites/default/files/2021-01/Ethical_review_in_human_sciences_2020.pdf
Frederik, I., Sonneveld, W., & de Vries, M. J. (2011). Teaching and learning the nature of technical artifacts. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 21(3), 277–290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-010-9119-3
Fridberg, M, & Redfors, A. (2021). Teachers’ and children’s use of words during early childhood STEM teaching supported by robotics. International Journal of Early Years Education, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2021.1892599
Garmire, E. & Pearson, G. (2006). Tech Tally: Approaches to Assessing Technological Literacy (1st ed.). National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11691
Govender, I. (2025). Digital Literacy and STEM Skills – What is the Connection? A Systematic Review. Technology, Knowledge and Learning. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-025-09879-x
Greca Dufranc, I. M., García Terceño, E. M., Fridberg, M., Cronquist, B., & Redfors, A. (2020). Robotics and Early-Years STEM Education: The BotSTEM Framework and Activities. European Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 1-. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/7948
Hohlfeld, T. N., Ritzhaupt, A. D., & Barron, A. E. (2010). Development and Validation of the Student Tool for Technology Literacy (ST2L). Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(4), 361–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782556
Hsu, T.-C., Chang, Y.-S., Chen, M.-S., Tsai, I.-F., & Yu, C.-Y. (2023). A validity and reliability study of the formative model for the indicators of STEAM education creations. Education and Information Technologies, 28(7), 8855–8878. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11412-x
International Technology and Engineering Educators Association [ITEAA] (2020). Standards for technological and engineering literacy: The role of technology and engineering in STEM education. https://www.iteea.org/STEL.aspx
Jäggle, G., Lammer, L., Hieber, H., & Vincze, M. (2020). Technological Literacy Through Outreach with Educational Robotics. In M. Merdan, W. Lepuschitz, R. Balogh, G. Koppensteiner, & D. Obdržálek (Eds.), Robotics in Education (pp. 114–125). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26945-6_11
Kang, J. & Kim, J. (2024). Exploring the predictiveness of curiosity and interest in science learning in and after class. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 61(8), 1821–1857. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21920
Kara, N., & Cagiltay, K. (2017). In-service Preschool Teachers’ Thoughts about Technology and Technology Use in Early Educational Settings. Contemporary Educational Technology, 8(2), 119-. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6191
Kennedy-Lewis, B. L. (2012). When a Teacher Becomes a Researcher: Using Self-Narrative to Define One's Role as Participant Observer. Theory Into Practice, 51(2), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2012.662865
Kita, S., Alibali, M. W., Chu, M., & Holyoak, K. J. (2017). How Do Gestures Influence Thinking and Speaking? The Gesture-for-Conceptualization Hypothesis. Psychological Review, 124(3), 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000059
Korhonen, T., Kangas, K., Davies, S., Sormunen, K., Salo, L., & Packalén, M. (2023). Framework for Technological Competence in Invention Projects. In K. Kangas, T. Korhonen, & L. Salo (Eds.), Invention Pedagogy - The Finnish Approach to Maker Education (pp. 95–114). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003287360-9
Korkeaniemi, A., Lindfors, E., Tanhuanpää, S., & Luukka, E. (2023). Participatory teacher-child interaction in advancing teaching coding and robotics in pre-primary education. Australasian Journal of Technology Education, 9. https://doi.org/10.15663/ajte.v9.i0.98
Love, T. S., Bartholomew, S. R., & Yauney, J. (2022). Examining Changes in Teachers’ Beliefs Toward Integrating Computational Thinking to Teach Literacy and Math Concepts in Grades K-2. Journal for STEM Education Research., 5(3), 380–401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41979-022-00077-3
Luckay, M. B., & Collier-Reed, B. I. (2014). An instrument to determine the technological literacy levels of upper secondary school students. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 24(3), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-013-9259-3
Mantzanidou, G. (2020). Educational Robotics in Kindergarten, a Case Study. In M. Merdan, W. Lepuschitz, R. Balogh, G. Koppensteiner, & D. Obdržálek (Eds.), Robotics in Education (pp. 52–58). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26945-6_11
Marín-Marín, J.-A., Moreno-Guerrero, A.-J., Dúo-Terrón, P., & López-Belmonte, J. (2021). STEAM in education: a bibliometric analysis of performance and co-words in Web of Science. International Journal of STEM Education, 8(1), Article 41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-021-00296-x
Martínez-Bravo, M. C., Sádaba Chalezquer, C., & Serrano-Puche, J. (2022). Dimensions of Digital Literacy in the 21st Century Competency Frameworks. Sustainability, 14(3), 1867-. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031867
Mercer, N. (1996). The quality of talk in children’s collaborative activity in the classroom. Learning and Instruction, 6(4), 359–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00021-7
Mosley, P., Ardito, G., & Scollins, L. (2016). Robotic Cooperative Learning Promotes Student STEM Interest. American Journal of Engineering Education, 7(2), 117-
Nemiro, J. E. (2021). Building Collaboration Skills in 4th- to 6th-Grade Students Through Robotics. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 35(3), 351–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2020.1721621
Niiranen, S. (2021). Supporting the development of students’ technological understanding in craft and technology education via the learning-by-doing approach. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 31(1), 81–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-019-09546-0
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books.
Pugnali, A., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2017). The Impact of User Interface on Young Children’s Computational Thinking. Journal of Information Technology Education. Innovations in Practice, 16, 171–193. https://doi.org/10.28945/3768
Relkin, E., de Ruiter, L., & Bers, M. U. (2020). TechCheck: Development and Validation of an Unplugged Assessment of Computational Thinking in Early Childhood Education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(4), 482–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09831-x
Relkin, E., Johnson, S. K., & Bers, M. U. (2023). A Normative Analysis of the TechCheck Computational Thinking Assessment. Educational Technology ＆ Society, 26(2), 118–130. https://doi.org/10.30191/ETS.202304_26(2).0009
Rönkkö, M.-L., Yliverronen, V., & Kangas, K. (2021). Investigative activity in pre-primary technology education-The Power Creatures project. Design and Technology Education: an International Journal, 26(1), 29–44.
Schreier, M. (2012). Qualitative content analysis on practice. Sage.
Sisman, B., Kucuk, S., & Ozcan, N. (2022). Collaborative behavioural patterns of elementary school students working on a robotics project. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 38(4), 1018–1032. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12659
Sphero Central. (n.d.). Resources. Sphero, Inc. Retrieved May 12, 2025, from https://edu.sphero.com/indi/resources
Sung, J., Lee, J. Y., & Chun, H. Y. (2023). Short-term effects of a classroom-based STEAM program using robotic kits on children in South Korea. International Journal of STEM Education, 10(1), Article 26. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-023-00417-8
Svensson, M. & Johansen, G. (2019). Teacher’s didactical moves in the technology classroom. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29, 161–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-017-9432-1
Tartas, V., & Perret-Clermont, A.-N. (2008). Socio-cognitive dynamics in dyadic interaction: How do you work together to solve Kohs cubes? European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 5(5), 561–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405620701859522
Taylor, K., & Baek, Y. (2018). Collaborative Robotics, More Than Just Working in Groups. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 56(7), 979–1004. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633117731382
Temiz, Z., & Çevik, M. (2024). STEAM education with young learners: five different design processes. Early Years, 44(3–4), 918–933. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2023.2274293
Tenhovirta, S., Korhonen, T., Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P., & Hakkarainen, K. (2022). Cross-age peer tutoring in a technology-enhanced STEAM project at a lower secondary school. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32(3), 1701–1723. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-021-09674-6
Toh, L. P. E., Causo, A., Tzuo, P.-W., Chen, I.-M., & Yeo, S. H. (2016). A Review on the Use of Robots in Education and Young Children. Educational Technology ＆ Society, 19(2), 148–163.
Tsagaris, A., Chatzikyrkou, M., & Simeli, I. (2019). Educational robotics: The pleasure of participation. Journal of Contemporary Education, Theory & Research, 3(1), 31-35. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3598726
Turja, L., Endepohls-Ulpe, M., & Chatoney, M. (2009). A conceptual framework for developing the
curriculum and delivery of technology education in early childhood. International Journal of
Technology and Design Education, 19(4), 353–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-009-9093-9
Tzuriel, D. (2021). Mediated Learning and Cognitive Modifiability (1st ed. 2021.). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-75692-5
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind and society. The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge University Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (2007). Mediation. In H. Daniels, M. Cole, & J. V. Wertsch (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Vygotsky (pp. 178–192). Cambridge University Press.
Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: design and methods (Sixth edition.). SAGE.
Yliverronen, V., Marjanen, P., & Seitamaa-Hakkarainen, P. (2018). Peer Collaboration of Six-Year Olds When Undertaking a Design Task. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 23(2). https://openjournals.ljmu.ac.uk/DesignTechnologyEducation/article/view/1516
Zviel-Girshin, R., Luria, A., & Shaham, C. (2020). Robotics as a Tool to Enhance Technological Thinking in Early Childhood. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 29(2), 294–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-020-09815-x
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Technology in Education and Science
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
