Adv Physiol Educ 40: 418–421, 2016;
doi:10.1152/advan.00173.2015.
Illuminations
The brain robot “Herr Tie”: discovering basic principles of brain function at
primary school
Alexander Lehmann and Laura Pittroff
Hertie Foundation, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Submitted 24 November 2015; accepted in final form 30 June 2016
Address for reprint requests and other correspondence: A. Lehmann, Hertie
Foundation, Grueneburgweg 105, Frankfurt am Main 60323, Germany (e-mail:
[email protected]).
418
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Robot. Herr Tie is a custom-made robot based on a microcontroller
(Arduino) lying inside a plastic body. The construction plan, construction files, and an example for the code are freely accessible (http://
www.ghst.de/herr-tie/supplementary) and can be used for noncommercial purposes. Attention was paid to the fact that the robotic nature
of Herr Tie is not the central feature of its design. Emphasis was
instead put on the brain, and the robot was designed to have an
appealing appearance with childlike characteristics (see Fig. 1). The
sensory organs [ears, eyes, and hands (in place of the skin)] and their
corresponding sensory cortical areas are colored (blue, yellow, and
red) to facilitate associating their assignments. At the centers of the
colored cortical areas, there are LED push buttons that can be pressed
to switch on or off the respective area. Whether a given area is active
or not is indicated by the states of the LED buttons.
Experimental paradigm. The students themselves prepare the experimental setting and build an arena out of objects available in every
classroom (see Fig. 2). The robot navigates autonomously in this
environment by avoiding obstacles that it detects with an infrared
sensor and by push switches (bumpers) in its hands. In addition, it can
be guided by discrete vocal instructions (“turn left,” “turn right,” and
“backwards”). However, it only reacts to the sensory stimuli if the
corresponding cortical sensory areas are active. By changing the states
of the sensory cortical areas, their roles for processing sensory
information can be explored by the students. The experiment starts
with the following question:
Which cortical regions take part in which sensory process?
During the experiment, students observe the robot’s reactions to
vocal instructions and its reactions to obstacles it sees or touches. The
protocol that guides the students through the experiment is shown in
Table 1, summarizing the experimental conditions. For every condition, students observe the robot’s behavior in the following predefined
order:
1. Does Herr Tie follow vocal instructions (i.e., auditory stimuli):
yes/no?
2. Does it avoid obstacles at sight (i.e., visual stimuli): yes/no?
3. Does it avoid obstacles it touches (i.e., somatosensory stimuli):
yes/no?
Students record the results of the four defined experimental conditions (Table 1), and, after testing, they are given the opportunity to
explore the robot’s functions without following any instructions. In
this “open” condition, they discuss and verify their assumptions and
draw conclusions. The following main conclusions are then presented
together:
1. The auditory cortex processes sensory information from the ears.
2. The visual cortex processes sensory information from the eyes.
3. The somatosensory cortex processes sensory information from
the skin.
In the closing discussion guided by the teacher, the students work
out and consolidate their knowledge about abstract processes derived
from their hands-on experiment:
1. We need the brain for processing sensory information and react
to our environment.
1043-4046/16 Copyright © 2016 The American Physiological Society
Downloaded from http://advan.physiology.org/ by 10.220.33.6 on June 18, 2017
regarding the brain are rarely found in curricula of
primary schools (ages 6-11 yr). There are several potential
reasons for the lack of neuroscientific contents at the primary
school level: the brain is a complex subject, it receives little
attention in teachers’ education, and there is a lack of appropriate teaching material. Therefore, there is a need to develop
and provide methods to teach basic knowledge of the brain.
Hands-on methods and inquiry-based learning have received a
lot of attention in science education in general (5, 8, 12) and in
neuroscience education in particular (2, 7). However, the
majority of the projects and studies described target students at
secondary school or undergraduate university level (4, 11).
Obviously, it is a challenge to address processes that occur
in the central nervous system by hands-on activities. Due to the
methodological and intellectual barriers, for primary school
students there is no way of examining a functional or active
brain. Therefore, the topic can seemingly only be addressed by
talking about reduced models at an abstract level.
In the present study, we propose an approach that allows for
guided inquiry-based learning of very basic and simple processing and organization principles of the brain. A custommade autonomous robot, named “Herr Tie,” serves as an
examination object to make a rather abstract process comprehensible for students. The name Herr Tie (German for “Mr.
Tie”) is derived from a wordplay with the name of the Hertie
Foundation. Herr Tie gives insights into the basic concepts of
sensory processing: The sensory information perceived with
our peripheral sensory organs is transmitted to the central
nervous system. Processing of the information in cortical areas
results in behavioral reactions. Herr Tie is equipped with
visual, somatosensory, and auditory senses. With those, the
robot can navigate in the classroom without running into
obstacles. The brain of the robot is accessible, and sensory
cortical areas involved in the processing of visual, somatosensory, and auditory information can be switched “on” or “off”
(see Fig. 1). The students, on their own, decipher the function
of the cortical regions and their role in sensory processing:
without activity in different areas of the brain, the robot cannot
navigate properly in its environment.
The experiment highlights two facts about the brain that are
learned by the students: 1) we need the brain for processing
sensory information and reacting to our environment and 2)
there are specialized regions in the brain that are relevant for
different processes.
TOPICS
Illuminations
THE BRAIN ROBOT “HERR TIE”
419
of the intervention on their learning success is currently being carried
out.
A
RESULTS
b
a
c
Fig. 1. The brain robot “Herr Tie.” A: the autonomous robot avoids obstacles
by the use of three senses. It detects somatosensory stimuli by push switches
in its hands (a), visual stimuli by an infrared sensor (b), and auditory stimuli
by a microphone (c). The sensory cortical areas are given the same colors as
their corresponding sensory organs. In every colored area, a LED push button
enables switching the respective area “on” or “off.” The state is indicated by
the LEDs. B: backview of Herr Tie, showing the occipital lobe with the visual
cortex in yellow.
2. There are specialized regions in the brain that are relevant for
these processes.
Intervention and survey. The intervention at school and interviews
with the teachers were carried out in accordance with the guidelines of
the Ministry of Education of the state of Hesse, Germany. The
experiment with the robot was tested in the context of a teaching unit
that additionally included another four topics dealing with basic brain
function. It has been tested so far in 29 classes at 12 schools in science
classes of grades 3 and 4 (ages of 8 –11 yr). The authors accompanied
the intervention in four classes to observe the applicability of the
approach.
After the intervention, 21 teachers (20 women and 1 man) that
guided the experiment in their classes took part in a survey. In
questionnaires, they were asked to respond to statements that referred
to the experiment using Likert scales with values from 1 to 5. In the
analysis, the median values as well as the values of the first quartile
(Q1) and third quartile (Q3) were determined. An overview of the
statements and results is shown in Table 2. The survey was carried out
outside of school classes and was followed by informal interviews
with the teachers.
In this study, feedback from students was not collected. A study
that focuses on the evaluation by the students and potential influences
DISCUSSION
There are a large number of projects and lots of material for
science, technology, engineering, and mathematics subjects in
general. The experiment described here addresses the topic of
A
B
Fig. 2. Experimental setting. A: the robot navigates in an arena that is built by
the students with objects that are available in the classroom (e.g., bags, books,
or boxes). Recommended dimensions of the arena are ⬃3 ⫻ 4 m. A few
obstacles can be placed inside, and the students can observe the robot from
outside the surrounding wall. B: Herr Tie is running into an obstacle (all
sensory cortical areas are switched off).
Advances in Physiology Education • doi:10.1152/advan.00173.2015 • http://advan.physiology.org
Downloaded from http://advan.physiology.org/ by 10.220.33.6 on June 18, 2017
B
Ideally, the experiment with Herr Tie is performed in groups
of up to five students, so that every student has the opportunity
to interact with the robot. However, in the test classes (n ⫽ 21),
it turned out to also work with groups of ⬃20 students.
Guidance by the teacher is then required to allow participation
of every student (feedback from teachers in the informal
interviews).
The general feedback from the students was highly positive,
i.e., they were very interested in the robot and liked the
experiment very much (observation by the authors). This view
was also supported by the feedback of teachers involved
(results from the informal interviews; representative examples:
“The experiment was highly motivating for both girls and
boys,” “The kids love Herr Tie,” and “The hands-on approach
of the experiment did strongly motivate the students.”). In the
survey after the intervention, teachers highlighted the high
motivational aspect of the model: of the 21 teachers, 20
teachers fully agreed to the statement “The teaching unit has
motivated the students” (scale from 1 ⫽ “I fully agree” to 5 ⫽
“I do not agree”; one teacher did not rate the statement).
Furthermore, the teachers considered Herr Tie as being a good
material for teaching: on a scale from 1 ⫽ “very good” to 5 ⫽
“inadequate”, the quality of the experiment was rated with a
median value of 2 (Q1 ⫽ 1 and Q3 ⫽ 2, n ⫽ 21). They also
emphasized their success in transferring difficult learning content: with a median value of 1 (Q1 ⫽ 1 and Q3 ⫽ 2, n ⫽ 21,
scale from 1 ⫽ “I fully agree” to 5 ⫽ “I do not agree”), they
very much agreed with the statement “The teaching unit allows
translation of challenging learning content” (a summary of
results from the survey is shown in Table 2). In the informal
interviews, several teachers appreciated the hands-on approach
that allowed the students to explore the abstract topic by
themselves.
Illuminations
420
THE BRAIN ROBOT “HERR TIE”
Table 1. Experimental protocol with conditions and results from observations
Status of the Sensory Cortex Areas
Condition
Auditory
Visual
Somatosensory
Observations of Herr Tie’s Behavior
1
On
On
On
2
Off
On
On
3
Off
Off
On
4
Off
Off
Off
The robot reacts to vocal instructions, to visual stimuli (obstacles), and to
touching stimuli.
The robot does not react to vocal instructions but still reacts to visual and
touching stimuli.
The robot does not react to vocal instructions, does not react to visual stimuli,
but still reacts to touching stimuli.
The robot does not react to any of the stimuli and is not able to avoid obstacles.
nically oriented (1, 3, 9). This natural curiosity is worth being
exploited to raise the student’s attention in brain-related topics
and to teach complex knowledge.
However, to gain reliable information on the success of the
approach, a detailed study is necessary that looks in depth at
the impact of the intervention. For a reliable assessment of the
learning success, feedback from the students themselves has to
be collected. In addition, the approach needs to be compared
with other methods that do not use the hands-on approach
(control groups, see Ref. 12). A study that focuses on the
evaluation by the students and potential influences of the
intervention on their learning success is currently being carried
out.
The robot can be further expanded and used to address other
topics like motor control, lateralization, or neurological disorders. The use of the robot can be extended not only with
respect to content but also with respect to older age groups:
since the microcontroller can be programmed freely, one could
also use the robot for creating and exploring models of conditioning or learning processes (6). Apart from these mechanistic
models, it can also be used to excite curiosity in the area of
computational neuroscience and draw attention to the research
area between neuroscience and informatics.
The project is open for further development spanning all
levels from optimizing physical construction and software,
adding further sensors and functional brain areas, to illustrating
additional neural processes and principles. The positive feedback from teachers in this study shows the potential of the
robot for the successful implementation of the topic of neuroscience by a hands-on approach at primary school.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank Antje Becker, Michael Madeja, Jens Renner, and Greta
Wonneberger for comments and advice during the development of “Herr Tie”
and the experiment. The authors thank Axel Kopp for the initial idea of an
interactive “brain puppet” and Emanuela Bernsmann for support with the
analysis of interviews. The authors also thank Rebecca Lam and Michael
Madeja for comments on the manuscript.
Table 2. Results from the teacher survey
GRANTS
Statement
“The teaching unit has motivated the
students.”
“Please rate the quality of the
teaching material Herr Tie.”
“The teaching unit allows translation
of challenging learning content.”
Median
Quartile 1
Quartile 3
n
1
1
1
20
2
1
2
21
1
1
2
21
This work was made possible and financed by a project from the Hertie
Foundation.
DISCLOSURES
In total, 21 teachers were asked to respond to statements using Likert scales
with values from 1 to 5. n is the number of responses given. See text for more
information.
No conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise, are declared by the author(s).
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
A.L. conception and design of research; A.L. performed experiments; A.L.
and L.P. analyzed data; A.L. and L.P. interpreted results of experiments; A.L.
Advances in Physiology Education • doi:10.1152/advan.00173.2015 • http://advan.physiology.org
Downloaded from http://advan.physiology.org/ by 10.220.33.6 on June 18, 2017
neuroscience at primary school (grades 3 and 4, students aged
8 –11 yr) using a guided inquiry-based approach. Neuroscience
education would profit from units that focus on the brain and its
processes for this age group, since a lot of the material
available mostly covers the topic of the senses. Indeed, there
are projects like “BrainU” (http://brainu.org/), tools like the
“Homunculus Mapper” (http://www.maxplanckflorida.org/
fitzpatricklab/homunculus/), or other resources (for an overview, see Ref. 2), but they mostly target older students. In
addition, teachers are often not aware of resources like these,
and it takes a lot of work and knowledge to prepare neuroscience topics (7).
The robot introduced here was embedded in a teaching unit
(including another four topics) with instructions allowing
teachers to conduct the unit on their own without external
experts. The teachers that conducted the unit gave the feedback
that Herr Tie is a very good material for teaching, showing that
this is a valuable approach for children of 8 –11 yr of age to
explore the brain by hands-on activities. This finding was
strongly supported by the teachers’ statement that the unit
allowed for the translation of challenging learning content.
Given that there is a model they can handle, children can get a
notion of basic processes and functional principles of the brain.
They themselves acquire content that would otherwise be
taught in a hypothetical, incomprehensible way beyond the
student’s horizon of experience.
Furthermore, students gain skills that are independent from
the described learning outcomes. Due to the inquiry-based
approach they learn to ask questions, make and analyze observations, and come to conclusions (10). Herr Tie excited the
curiosity of the students, an observation that was confirmed by
the teachers. In this context, it is important to note that the
approach introduced here also profits from the robot itself
being a highly motivational aspect. Other studies also observed
that children find robotics stimulating and motivating and that
this also holds true for students who are not considered tech-
Illuminations
THE BRAIN ROBOT “HERR TIE”
prepared figures; A.L. drafted manuscript; A.L. and L.P. edited and revised
manuscript; A.L. and L.P. approved final version of manuscript.
REFERENCES
6. Hofstötter C, Mintz M, Verschure PF. The cerebellum in action: a
simulation and robotics study. Eur J Neurosci 16: 1361–1376,
2002.
7. MacNabb C, Schmitt L, Michlin M, Harris I, Thomas L, Chittendon
D, Ebner TJ, Dubinsky JM. Neuroscience in middle schools: a professional development and resource program that models inquiry-based
strategies and engages teachers in classroom implementation. CBE Life Sci
Educ 5: 144 –157, 2006.
8. Michael J. Where’s the evidence that active learning works? Adv Physiol
Educ 30: 159 –167, 2006.
9. Mondada F, Bonani M, Raemy X, Pugh J, Cianci C, Klaptocz A,
Zufferey J, Floreano D, Martinoli A. The e-puck, a robot designed for
education in engineering. Robotics 1: 59 – 65, 2006.
10. Svinicki MD. A theoretical foundation for discovery learning. Adv Physiol
Educ 20: 4 –7, 1998.
11. Wilke RR, Straits WJ. The effects of discovery learning in a lowerdivision biology course. Adv Physiol Educ 25: 134 –141, 2001.
12. Wilson CD, Taylor JA, Kowalski SM, Carlson J. The relative effects
and equity of inquiry-based and commonplace science teaching on students’ knowledge, reasoning, and argumentation. J Res Sci Teach 47:
276 –301, 2010.
Advances in Physiology Education • doi:10.1152/advan.00173.2015 • http://advan.physiology.org
Downloaded from http://advan.physiology.org/ by 10.220.33.6 on June 18, 2017
1. Apiola M, Lattu M, Pasanen TA. Creativity and Intrinsic Motivation in
Computer Science education: Experimenting With Robots. Ankara, Turkey: Fifteenth Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in
Computer Science Education, 2010, p. 199 –203.
2. Cameron W, Chudler E. A role for neuroscientists in engaging young
minds. Nat Rev Neurosci 4: 763–768, 2003.
3. Faisal A, Kapila V, Iskander MG. Using Robotics to Promote Learning in
Elementary Grades (online). https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/
search?q⫽cache:LMqaKs4qvVoJ:https://www.asee.org/public/conferences/8/
papers/5480/download⫹&cd⫽1&hl⫽en&ct⫽clnk&gl⫽us [20 July 2016].
4. Freeman S, Eddy SL, McDonough M, Smith MK, Okoroafor N, Jordt
H, Wenderoth MP. Active learning increases student performance in
science, engineering, and mathematics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 111:
8410 – 8415, 2014.
5. Furtak EM, Seidel T, Iverson H, Briggs DC. Experimental and quasiexperimental studies of inquiry-based science teaching: a meta-analysis.
Rev Educ Res 82: 300 –329, 2012.
421