Computational thinking and programming with Arduino in education: A systematic review for secondary education

Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 Available online 3 April 2024 2405-8440/© 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/). Research article Computational thinking and programming with Arduino in education: A systematic review for secondary education Jos´ e-Antonio Marín-Marín a , * , Pedro Antonio García-Tudela b , Pablo Duo-Terr´ on c a Universidad de Granada, Spain b Universidad Antonio Nebrija, Spain c International University of La Rioja, Spain ARTICLE INFO Keywords: Arduino Secondary education STEM Computational thinking Programming Robotics Educational innovation Educational technology ABSTRACT The development of programming skills and computational thinking in the formal educational context is one of the most recent horizons set by many educational systems worldwide. Although the first computational thinking initiatives are being applied from the earliest school ages, this research focuses on the secondary education level. Specifically, the objective is the following: to analyse the implementation of Arduino, as well as the benefits and opportunities it brings to secondary school students. For this purpose, documentary research has been undertaken applying a systematic review according to the PRISMA 2020 framework following the PiCoS strategy. Atlas.ti 9 was used to analyse the information. Out of 316 papers identified, 37 were included in the research. In relation to the results, Arduino is primarily used in technology and physics subjects, although it is also used to develop interdisciplinary STEAM projects. As a rule, it is used to learn programming languages, but likewise as a resource to develop science experiments. LED lights, servomotors and breadboards are among the most commonly used resources together with the Arduino board. and Scratch was the most widely used software. The initiatives implemented have yielded both positive and negative results, for example, one drawback is that some projects are very difficult, and some achievements such as: increased motivation towards the contents addressed or also the development of some soft skills, such as problem solving. 1. Introduction Twenty-first century society is undergoing a plethora of changes and advancements in the social, economic, labour, and technological fields [1]. The speed of these transformations is creating imbalances that, in many cases, are challenging to resolve due to their immediacy. In this changing context, education systems are not exempt from these changes. Educational administrations are undertaking the mammoth task of improvements and adaptations to respond to these changes, which are largely prompted by advanced technologies, and which have a direct effect on classrooms [2]. Thus, responses are being provided to prepare and train citizens for an increasingly digitised labour market [3]. In light of this scenario, education systems are revising the academic curricula of the different non-university educational stages to integrate knowledge, elements and strategies that equip students with the necessary tools to perform competently and thrive in a changing world. For these reasons, As a result, current education systems emphasise the acquisition of competences and not just * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (J.-A. Marín-Marín). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Heliyon journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e29177 Received 14 November 2023; Received in revised form 20 March 2024; Accepted 2 April 2024 Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 2 knowledge. Students are expected to apply their knowledge and use same in various contexts in an appropriate and diligent manner. In this regard, taking as a reference the Spanish education law, which was designed based on the Recommendation of the Council of the European Union for lifelong learning, some of the key competences included are: mathematical competence and science, technology, and engineering competence; digital competence; and entrepreneurial competence [4]. Three competences relevant to the subject matter of this research that is, computational thinking, and programming in the formal educational context. In order to provide training that integrates the three aforementioned competences, a prevalent possibility in educational practices is to apply the STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics) methodological approach [5–7], which combines the development of scientific, technological and artistic competences through interdisciplinary collaborative projects in which each student plays an active role in achieving the set objectives [ [8,9,10]]. It should be noted that this methodological approach has fostered the development of computational thinking, due to the possibilities it offers, and the skills and cognitive processes involved. Insofar as computational thinking is concerned, this is characterised by offering a model for problem solving [11[12]] that involves the application of computer science concepts and techniques to approach problems systematically and logically, breaking down complex problems into simpler and more manageable tasks [13]. The idea of introducing computer science in education is not new. Since the middle of the last century, Papert had already conceived this idea by developing the Logo programming language and the Turtle robot with the objective of teaching programming to students at an early age and, thereby, bringing the world of programming to schools [14]. This author, influenced by Piaget’s postulates, developed his own theory of learning, which he called constructionism [ [15,16]]. His theory of learning the learner therein is encouraged and motivated to draw his or her own conclusions through creative experimentation and the creation of socially useful artefacts promoting active learning [17]. As can be seen, Papert’s vision was more insightful, because his interest went beyond the learning of programming itself, but in the development of other types of skills such as computational thinking, which would allow students to apply these to other disciplines as a more efficient learning strategy [18]. Over the years, this movement and its implications for school curricula declined until its disappearance from academic curricula [19]. It was not until 2006 when Janette Wing, a computer science professor at Columbia University published the article Computational Thinking [20] that the need to introduce the acquisition and development of this skill in the classroom was raised again. For Wing, computational thinking is defined as “the thought processes involved in formulating a problem and expressing its solution(s) in such a way that a computer (human or machine) can effectively carry out” [ [21], p. 8]. She likewise emphasised that computational thinking “represents a universally applicable attitude and skill set that everyone, not just computer scientists, would not hesitate to learn and use” [ [20], p. 33]. Therefore, it is seen as a skill which goes beyond computer science and that can be integrated as a transversal, interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary element in school curricula [ [22,18]], providing students, from an early age, with skills in addition to their analytical capacity [23]. In this way, students can benefit from the acquisition and development of skills such as the ability to decompose a complex problem into smaller, more manageable tasks (decomposition); the ability to identify the key aspects of a problem and simplify same to make these easier to understand (abstraction); the ability to find similarities and patterns in data (pattern recognition); the ability to create a step-by-step plan to solve a problem (algorithms); and the ability to identify and correct errors in the code (debugging). In other words, to equip students with cognitive strategies that enable same to formulate hypotheses, identifying and proposing solutions to specific problems from an analytical and efficient approach. The integration of these skills into the educational system is possible due to several factors. On the one hand, technological development has led to the availability of more accessible to the general public, both children and young people, and, on the other, the emergence of simpler and more user-friendly programming languages that facilitate the work of less experienced teachers [14] These factors, combined with the need to promote and develop digital competence in non-university students, have facilitated the inclusion of computational thinking in school curricula. In this regard, in an increasingly computerised world, educational administrations at an international level have recognised this need and are integrating computational thinking in the classroom as another competence that students should acquire [ [24,25,26]]. In particular, this work is primarily being developed through robotics, virtual programming, and Artificial Intelligence (AI) [ [27,28,29,30,31]]. From these approaches, one of the paradigms proposed for the inclusion of technology in educational programmes is the TPACK (Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge) model [ [32,33,34]]. This methodological approach has the versatility of bringing together the curriculum content to be developed, the pedagogical component for its teaching, the characteristics of the target students and the technology involved in the teaching and learning process [35]. This model, together with the Project Based Learning (PBL) methodology [25], provides an ideal framework for fostering and developing computational thinking in the classroom [36]. In this way, it enhances motivation to learn by creating a hands-on learning situation which enables students to work on real and meaningful projects. Papers such as those by Refs. [37,38] have shown the benefits of using this framework to foster computational thinking skills. Furthermore, this methodology provides students with useful skills to deal with real-life problems [39], and promotes collaboration, teamwork, and critical thinking. In the specific case of the educational stage of secondary education, the most commonly used technology to develop computational thinking is programming software for visual or textual blocks [40] such as the Scratch 3.0 programming environment [ [41,42,43,44]]; robotics or programming boards such as KeyStudio, Micro:BIT [ [45,46]] or Lego in its various versions and models (NXT Mindstorm and EV3) [ [47,48,49]]; educational robotics simulators [ [50,51]]; the combination of the Internet of Things (IoT) with AI technology called AIoT to create numerous smart applications [31]; the Python programming language [52]; the App Inventor programming environment, maintained by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and designed at developing applications for the Android operating system; iArm kit, a low-cost, programmable, open-source robotic arm [53]; mBlock, a graphical programming environment based on the Scratch 2.0 editor for teaching simple programming of Arduino-based robots [54]; Minecraft, an “open world” construction video game enabling one to create and control the world as one wishes, stimulating creativity and curiosity [55]; the open J.-A. Marín-Marín et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 3 source Arduino platform [ [56,57,37,58]]; and the BBC’s open source programmable board, Micro:bit [59]. For this work, we shall focus on the Arduino board, a low-cost and easy-to-program open-source electronic prototyping platform. This board allows students to become familiar with and acquire knowledge of the programming world and serves as a bridge to more advanced and highly effective resources in the field of computer science [60]. Due to its technical characteristics, this board is capable of reading inputs from devices or sensors and converting these into outputs, with the possibility of creating interactive projects, from robots to automatic control systems, by combining actuators, microcontrollers, or sensors. Its programming is performed through its own programming language based on Wiring and the Arduino software (IDE) based on Processing [ [14,61]]. 1.1. Justification and objectives The results and conclusions of this study provide researchers and educational administrations with a basis and starting point for a resource that enables educational projects to develop computational thinking and its correlation to STEM jobs for the future of students. The use of Arduino in the education field has experienced a considerable increase due to its potential, the versatility of design and types that exist, the enormous possibilities for experimentation that it provides and the low cost thereof. Its software and hardware are open source and facilitate its programming from various operating systems and the extension thereof with more devices and sensors [62]. Nevertheless, the use of the Arduino controller board in education is a little studied topic [63]. For this reason, we have chosen to conduct a systematic review of the articles found in the scientific literature, given the fact that it is a tool of significant relevance which serves to inform and develop practice and invite discussion of the subject matter in question [64]. On the subject that concerns us, the use of Arduino in the educational field, and more specifically in the educational stage of secondary education, the literature consulted offers a very promising outlook. Just as studies are limited in primary education [14], the use of these devices for the development of computational thinking is more prolific in secondary education. From the variety of studies and experiences that have been evidenced in the inclusion of robotics and programming in the curricula of non-university education systems, there is an underlying idea that for the adults of the future to be prepared for the evolutions, transformations and challenges of the 21st century, the youth of today must be empowered with a series of tools and strategies that equip them with the necessary skills and abilities which will make them competent for a constantly changing world. In this context, computational thinking brings together a series of skills that are aligned with the so-called 21st century competences. Boards and robotics skills are considered educational resources and are the basis for the development of computational thinking and access to STEM jobs increasingly common in our day-to-day life and work sectors [65]. For this reason, the objective of this paper is to analyse the implementation of Arduino, as well as the benefits and opportunities it brings to secondary school students. The research questions that articulate this paper are the following. RQ1. To what extent has the usage of Arduino in the formal framework of Secondary Education been documented in published works? RQ2. How has Arduino been implemented and what resources have been used? RQ3. For what purpose was the Arduino used and what were the results? 2. Methodology 2.1. Method This study is framed within the framework of documentary research, with the objective to understand the reality and knowledge derived from analysing various types of scientific documents [66]. To this end, a systematic review has been applied, as it is a widely used research technique in the field of education [67]. Primarily as it provides an overview of the state of the art substantiated by empirical and reliable evidence [68]. To carry out a systematic review in an adequate manner, a protocol which adheres to a systematic approach is required. In this regard, there are different methodological frameworks, such as SALSA [69], PSALSAR [58,[70]], among others. In particular, for this study one of the most widespread frameworks in SR-based theoretical work, namely the PRISMA framework in its 2020 version was used [71]. The chosen framework outlines a three-stage process for creating the flowchart. The initial stage consists of identification, in which the selected descriptors are entered into the databases and then duplicate records, those flagged as ineligible by automation tools, and likewise papers eliminated for other reasons are removed. The screening stage follows next, during which eligibility criteria are applied. These criteria, as suggested in various publications [ [72,73]], include aspects such as time, language, type of paper and geographical area. For this research, in order to create a frame of reference to establish the exclusion criteria for the second screening stage, the PICoS strategy has been taken into account. In this regard, it should be noted that for the screening stage there are different strategies, such as PICO, SPIDER [ [74,75]]... are available. Nevertheless, for this research, PICoS strategy has been considered: population, phenomenon of interest, context and study design. For the analysis of the qualitative information, the Atlas.ti 9 software was used. The following process was applied: creation of the units of information (quotations), condensation/coding and creation of categories. Likewise, for the presentation of the results, both J.-A. Marín-Marín et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 4 double-entry tables and semantic networks were used to present the different codes generated. 2.2. Stages of research The use of the keywords and Boolean operators used enabled the identification of 316 relevant documents in Scopus and Web of Science (WoS) between the period 2016–2022. In particular, the search applied was Arduino AND ["high school” OR “secondary school” OR “middle school"]. The total number of extracted papers was reduced to 286 after eliminating 30 duplicate papers. This was subsequently followed by a screening stage as per the time frame, document type and language, which resulted in the exclusion of 78 papers. Subsequently 11 further papers were likewise excluded as these lacked the entire text. Finally, the filters of the PICoS strategy were applied. First, the initial subject, which is the population and phenomenon of interest. In this case these are didactic proposals to develop computational thinking through Arduino. The next criterion is the context. In particular, for this study are papers based on didactic proposals implemented at the Secondary Education level are specifically eligible, those works applied to the ages of the aforementioned level, but that have been developed in an informal or non-formal context, will not be considered. Finally, the study design criterion. In this case, those papers whose nature is not theoretical (systematic reviews and meta-analyses) have been included. Lastly, from this screening stage, a total of 160 papers were excluded and a sample of 37 papers was finally obtained. Fig. 1 below shows a diagram of the different stages followed. For this purpose, the PRISMA 2020 flow chart [ [76,71]] has been considered. 3. Results The generated codebook is composed of a total of 109 codes, of which 9 are free codes and 425 citations. In particular: Theoretical basis, subjects, objectives, resources, and results. Table 1 below shows each free code with its corresponding density of associated codes. Fig. 1. Flowchart of the applied systematic review. J.-A. Marín-Marín et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 5 As can be seen, the code with the highest related density is resources, while the two with the lowest are theoretical basis and subjects. 3.1. Published papers The following table provides a descriptive overview of the papers included in the analysis (Table 2). The year of publication, country and type of document are specified for each paper. 3.2. Implementing initiatives: methodologies and resources To address the implementation of the didactic proposals supported by Arduino, the results extracted from each of the free codes generated are presented. 3.2.1. Theoretical basis for initiatives Some of the papers that have been analysed specify the theoretical basis on which the practices developed in the classroom are justified. The framework of this work, theoretical bases are specifically defined as those methodological principles, psychological theories etc. and in conclusion, any conceptualisation under which didactic proposals are developed. Table 3 below shows the codified theoretical bases, as well as their grounding. As can be seen, the most prevalent code in the documents analysed is STEAM (n =10), followed by Computational Thinking (n =8). Nevertheless, constructivist theory (n =1) and maker movement (n =1) are the least represented. 3.2.2. Subjects addressed by the initiatives The focus of this study is in relation to the formal educational context, that is, considering the work carried out within the framework of subjects or interdisciplinary projects, but always taking into account the development of the educational curriculum. As in the previous case, the codes generated together with their grounding are listed in Table 4. Arduino is primarily used in the technology subject (n =13) and likewise in physics (n =11). Furthermore, the development of interdisciplinary STEAM projects also stands out (n =10). Chemistry is the only field where a singular experience can be developed. 3.2.3. Objectives of the initiatives In relation to the objectives of the initiatives developed, two free codes have been created: didactic objectives and other objectives. The first of these is oriented towards particular content or competences specific to science or technology. While the code for other objectives is focused on more transversal or general objectives. As can be seen in Fig. 2, the most frequent didactic objective is to learn the basics of programming languages (n =18). This is followed by conducting a science experiment (n =12). Likewise, regarding other objectives, the most significant objective is to develop general projects (n =11), thus learning to be competent in the development of the various stages of a project. And then, to apply problem-solving strategies (n =10). 3.2.4. Resources used for the initiatives The category with the highest density is that of the free code. In particular, 50 related codes. Therefore, these have been organised depending on whether these are software related codes (Fig. 3), Arduino board related components (Fig. 4) or other resources used in the initiatives developed (Fig. 5). As shown in Fig. 3, the software most frequently used in the proposals analysed was Scratch (n =5), followed by the Linux operating system (n =4). Nevertheless, principally the wide diversity of codes generated stands out. This demonstrates that, depending on the nature and objective of each project, the corresponding software has been used. There is a variety of software focused on block programming available, such as Scratch (n =5), Blockly (n =2) or ArduBlock (n =2). Programming through C language, such as Arduino IDE (n =2) or LabView (n =1) is likewise available. There are also other more specialised examples, such as Tinkercad (n =2) for 3D modelling, MOVEit (n =1) for file transfers etc. In relation to the programming-related components used (Fig. 4), unquestionably, the Arduino board code stands out (n =35). Next, and in stark contrast to the remaining components, LED (n =19) and servomotors (n =12) are the most used components. These components are even more specifically mentioned than the breadboard (n =11), even though the latter is a fundamental component when creating an electronic circuit connected to the Arduino. And subsequently, in relation to other resources (Fig. 5), the devices used to interact with the circuits developed being the most Table 1 Free codes according to density. Code Density Theoretical basis 6 Subjects 6 Objectives 15 Resources 50 Results 14 J.-A. Marín-Marín et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 6 Table 2 Papers selected for systematic review. Title Year Country Document type Using an Arduino Seismograph to Raise Awareness of Earthquake Hazard Through a Multidisciplinary Approach 2016 Italy Article DidacTronic: A Low-cost and Portable Didactic Lab for Electronics 2016 Brazil Conference paper Computerisation of a telescope at secondary education 2016 Spain Conference paper Connecting hardware and software in a middle school engineering outreach effort-RTP 2016 US Conference paper Low-cost robot arms for the robotic operating system (ROS) and moveit 2016 US Conference paper A browser-based ide for the MUzECS platform 2016 US Conference paper The Study on Integrating the Design Thinking Model and STEM Activity Unit for Senior High School Living Technology Course 2017 Taiwan Conference paper From classroom Arduinos to missions on Mars: Making STEM education accessible and effective through remotely operated robotics 2017 US Conference paper Sustaining making in the era of accountability: STEM integration using E-textiles materials in a high school physics class 2017 US Conference paper Fundamental level measurement and control concepts demonstrated using microprocessor activities 2017 US Article The design focused engineering outreach to a middle school using Arduino projects 2017 US Conference paper Development and application of Arduino-based education program for high school students’ 2017 Korea Article Educational Robotics: Algorithm Logic Learning Comparison 2017 Colombia Article Coding and computational thinking with Arduino 2018 Italy Conference paper Inclusive education on stem subjects with the Arduino platform 2018 Greece Conference paper The impact of an integrated robotics STEM course with a sailboat topic on high school students’ perceptions of integrative STEM, interest, and career orientation 2018 Taiwan Article Experiences with the use of Snap Circuits and Arduino boards as tools for human development with students in an insular Colombian community 2018 Colombia Conference paper Low-cost programmable air quality sensor kits in science education 2018 Norway Conference paper Assessment of Computational Thinking in regular basic education: case IETP “Jose Obrero" 2019 Peru Conference paper Teaching Microcontrollers using Arduino Nano Based Quadcopter 2019 Indonesia Conference paper Measuring CO 2 with an Arduino: Creating a Low-Cost, Pocket-Sized Device with Flexible Applications That Yields Benefits for Students and Schools 2019 Spain Article Development of Arduino Assisted Microcontroller Instructional Devices in Vocational High Schools 2019 Indonesia Conference paper The effect of project-based Arduino educational robot applications on students’ computational thinking skills and their perception of basic stem skill levels 2019 Turkey Article ArViz: An IoT Teaching Tool for High School Students 2019 Thailand Conference paper Analysis of Influencing Factors of Learning Engagement and Teaching Presence in Online Programming Classes 2020 Korea Article Use of sensors and automatic data collection equipment in the practical work of Physics and Chemistry of middle and high school: The Arduino platform 2020 Spain Article An environmental education project that measures particulate matter via an Arduino interface 2020 Greece Article Android based wireless measurement module for an educational tool in mechatronics 2020 Indonesia Conference paper Teaching CT through Internet of Things in High School: Possibilities and Reflections 2020 Brazil Conference paper Educational robotics: building and applying an App-controlled car to study newton’s laws 2021 Brazil Article Arduino and LabVIEW-based remote data acquisition system for magnetic field of coils experiments 2021 Indonesia Article Computational thinking development through physical computing activities in STEAM education 2021 Lithuania Article Teaching Chemistry with Arduino Experiments in a Mixed Virtual-Physical Learning Environment 2021 Greece Article Arduino Platform as Learning Tool in High School and College Education 2021 Croatia Conference paper Physical computing strategy to support students’ coding literacy: An educational experiment with Arduino boards 2021 Taiwan Article Using accelerometer smartphone sensor and phyphyox for friction experiment in high school 2021 Indonesia Conference paper Solving Ecological Problems through Physical Computing to Ensure Gender Balance in STEM Education 2022 Lithuania Article J.-A. Marín-Marín et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 7 Table 3 Codes related to theoretical basis according to their grounding. Code Grounding STEAM 10 Computational thinking 8 Problem/Project Based Learning (PBL) 5 Design thinking 3 Constructivist theory 1 Maker movement 1 Table 4 Codes related to subjects according to their grounding. Code Grounding Technology 13 Physics 11 STEAM 10 Mathematics 5 Natural Sciences 2 Chemistry 1 Fig. 2. Semantic network of target-related codes. J.-A. Marín-Marín et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 8 prevalent, that is, both PCs (n =8) and Smartphones or tablets (n =7). The Bluetooth module was also subsequently coded on six occasions. 3.3. Results of the initiatives To analyse the results, two free codes have been created: negative perspective and positive perspective (Fig. 6). Among those results which provide a more critical perspective of the initiatives developed, the projects were very difficult (n =3). Other specific results were students demand more detail in the lab (n =1), material was too expensive (n =1) and creative problem solving did not improve (n =1). Conversely, the most positive perspective is related to the increase of motivation (n =9), the development of problem solving (n =8) and, the improvement of mechatronics-related knowledge (n =7). 4. Discussion Based on the results of the study, the Arduino board is considered a technological educational resource in secondary education which fosters computational thinking and may be used to carry out transversal, interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary projects at various educational stages. Despite the potential of this educational resource described in the introduction, after analysing the review of the scientific literature in this study, the authors of this paper consider, based on the criteria used, Arduino is a resource that, that in the field of research, only thirty works have been found whose context of application is secondary education. This is despite the fact that the resources have been disseminated since 2005 [77] between 2016 and 2022. Despite a high number of articles discarded as these did not fit the context or educational stage, the articles that were selected are closely related to the STEAM disciplines (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Mathematics), that is, at the secondary stage the word “Art” has a greater presence, which in the words of [5] is related to the creativity it fosters in students at the secondary stage and the possibility of knowing and experiencing the world made possible by art forms, practices or even specific pedagogies. Nevertheless, in other educational stages at earlier ages such as primary education, art or creativity is not a prevalent presence, and the STEM discipline is furthered [14] points out to foster computational thinking. The theoretical underpinnings of this study likewise highlight the relationship between computational thinking and the STEAM field in education, this correlation is in line with the study by [ [78,79]], which considers computational thinking an essential part of STEAM as it facilitates understanding how machines work and is a recent research subject matter popular among researchers although support, time and expertise is needed among teachers to translate these practices as a methodology in the classroom. Furthermore, the authors of this study agree with the research of [11] that implementing practices that foster computational thinking offers benefits for problem solving in light of the results of the theoretical underpinning and classroom practices developed in the results of this study (n =8) of the Arduino board. In relation to the areas found in this study, technology and physics are the most prevalent subject matters, in both cases the possibility of carrying out transversal and multidisciplinary projects as postulated by Ref. [22] offers new possibilities to bring students Fig. 3. Semantic network of software-related codes. J.-A. Marín-Marín et al. Heliyon 10 (2024) e29177 9 closer to the world around us by making use of technological and digital tools to learn other subjects of the curriculum through robotics, virtual programming and artificial intelligence in line with the studies of [27,30]. The world of physics requires manipulative practices and a maker culture to acquire more lasting knowledge over time, therefore, the authors agree with the research of [51] that considers the Arduino board as a resource and a possibility to learn physical phenomena of great difficulty due to its ease of use and can be replaced by expensive machines within the educational field and in relation to the learning of physics. The objectives pursued by the papers analysed in this research demonstrate that knowing and knowing how to use basic programming languages (n =18) is a fundamental objective at the secondary school stage in relation to the Arduino board for carrying out classroom projects. In this regard [19], considers that learning programming from an early age is an essential discipline to open new paths opportunities for pupils, such as visual programming language by blocks or textual programming. In this regard, Scratch software is considered in the studies of [ [41,42,43]] to be a programming environment widely used in the secondary school stage to develop computational thinking. In line with Resnick’s words, another objective that stands out in the results of this study is to conduct science experiments (n =12), according to Ref. [13] which entail the application of computer science concepts and techniques to approach problems in a logical and methodical manner, breaking down complex problems into simpler and more manageable tasks. This ability to learn to use programming languages is consistent with the results of this study in relation to the resources used, wherein Scratch software (n =5) appears as the most commonly used among researchers. Therefore, the authors consider that the knowledge and skills acquired by carrying out projects using the Scratch programme can be extrapolated to other scientific fields, taking as a reference [54], robotics programmes with artificial intelligence can be carried out using the Arduino board as a resource, fostering the acquisition of problem solving, creativity skills and the development of a Maker culture, that is, learning by doing. Initiation into the world of robotics, according to the results of the study at secondary school level, coincides with the implementation of projects related to components such as LED lights (n =19) and servomotors (n =12), namely, it can be inferred that carrying out simple programmes such as a traffic light with LEDs or turning the wheels of a robot by means of servomotors is related to the implementation of projects with the Arduino board itself (n =35), which is highlighted in the components section. These projects as pointed out by Ref. [50] can be undertaken through online simulators such as Tinkercad (n =2) which appears in the results of this Fig. 4. Semantic network of component-related codes. J.-A. Marín-Marín et al.