Children programming teaching method based on life actual cases
Through children's programming teaching methods based on actual life cases, the logical correlation problems caused by abstract cases in traditional teaching are solved, the consistency of teaching links and the effective reuse of knowledge points are achieved, and the programming learning effect of children is improved.
Patent Information
- Application Number
- CN202510862683.X
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- Filing Date
- 2025-06-25
- Publication Date
- 2025-09-02
AI Technical Summary
In the existing children's programming teaching, the direct use of abstract cases makes it difficult for children to establish the relationship between logic and real things, the teaching links are separated, and the knowledge transformation efficiency is inefficient.
The teaching method based on actual life cases is adopted, and by selecting cases from daily life scenarios, designing programming tasks, integrating programming knowledge points, and using multimedia tools to display the relationship between cases and programming tasks, providing real-time guidance and code verification, forming a complete teaching closed loop.
It significantly lowers the threshold for programming understanding, improves learning coherence and knowledge reuse ability, enhances children's logical thinking and problem-solving ability, and reduces the sense of frustration caused by initial understanding bias.
Smart Images
Figure CN120580909A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] The present invention belongs to the technical field of programming teaching, and specifically relates to a children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases. Background Art
[0002] Programming is the process of controlling a computer to perform specific tasks by writing coded instructions. It is both a problem-solving tool and a means of creating digital solutions. Its core lies in translating human logic and creativity into a language understandable by computers. This involves algorithm design, data structure optimization, and programming language application. Children's programming instruction is an educational activity designed for children and adolescents, aiming to cultivate logical thinking, creativity, problem-solving skills, and computational thinking through learning programming skills.
[0003] In the existing technology, traditional children's programming teaching directly uses abstract cases, such as using variables A and B to demonstrate conditional judgments. The cases are divorced from reality, and it is difficult for children to establish the connection between logic and real things. At the same time, case explanations are separated from programming practice, and the teaching links are fragmented, resulting in low knowledge conversion efficiency. Summary of the Invention
[0004] In order to solve the above-mentioned problems existing in the prior art, the present invention provides a children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases, aiming to solve the technical problem that traditional children's programming teaching in the prior art directly uses abstract cases, making it difficult for children to establish the connection between logic and real things.
[0005] To achieve the above-mentioned objectives, the present invention provides the following technical solutions: a children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases, comprising the following steps: step one, selecting cases from children's daily life scenes; step two, designing programming tasks based on the cases, and integrating programming knowledge points into the tasks; step three, guiding children to write code to implement the case functions based on the programming tasks; step four, running the code and verifying the functions, and correcting the code according to the verification results.
[0006] Furthermore, the case is selected from at least one of traffic light control, weather condition judgment and performance evaluation.
[0007] Furthermore, in step three, the relationship between life cases and programming tasks is demonstrated through multimedia tools.
[0008] Furthermore, the step three includes a detailed explanation of the task objectives and the logical transformation process.
[0009] Furthermore, in step three, real-time guidance is provided when children are writing codes.
[0010] Furthermore, in step four, the cause of the code error is analyzed together with the children.
[0011] Furthermore, it also includes step five, which is to expand the basic case and increase the programming complexity.
[0012] Furthermore, the expansion of the traffic light control includes adding yellow light state judgment logic.
[0013] Furthermore, the expansion of the performance evaluation includes introducing a loop structure to realize batch performance processing.
[0014] Furthermore, the programming knowledge points include at least one of conditional judgment, loop structure or conditional nesting.
[0015] Compared with the prior art, the present invention has the following beneficial effects:
[0016] 1. This invention uses everyday examples, such as traffic lights and weather forecasting, as teaching starting points. Through "case selection, task binding, coding implementation, and verification and correction," a complete teaching loop is formed. Children naturally develop a familiarity with everyday scenarios and can quickly map programming logic to known experiences. For example, a conditional judgment like "stop at a red light" eliminates the need to start from abstract concepts, significantly lowering the threshold for understanding. The full process from case understanding to code implementation is covered, avoiding fragmentation of knowledge points and improving learning continuity.
[0017] 2. In the prior art, traditional classrooms only explain logic through verbal descriptions or static diagrams. Children cannot intuitively perceive how the code changes reality, resulting in one-way indoctrination teaching. Students are easily frustrated when encountering stuck points when coding independently. Teachers lack process intervention and find it difficult to intervene in time. In the present invention, multimedia tools are used to visualize the mapping relationship between cases and codes, and guide logical transformation in real time during coding. For example, animation is used to demonstrate how weather is transformed into if and else statements. Multimedia dynamic demonstrations transform abstract programming logic, such as conditional branches, into observable behaviors, such as holding an umbrella when it rains, thereby strengthening the concretization of logic and providing real-time guidance when writing code to prevent subsequent logical collapse due to initial comprehension deviations.
[0018] 3. In the existing technology, traditional teaching cases are independent of each other. For example, traffic lights are taught first and then grade assessment. Knowledge points cannot be reused in series, resulting in isolated and rigid cases. Basic cases lack connection with complex tasks. Students are easily disconnected when suddenly faced with the comprehensive application of multiple knowledge points, and there is a difficulty gap. In the present invention, complexity is dynamically superimposed on basic cases, such as single grade assessment, such as adding loop batch processing of grades to form an expandable task chain. By upgrading the difficulty in the same scenario, such as adding yellow light logic to traffic lights, children can naturally transition to high-level knowledge points, thereby smoothly improving their abilities. Multiple iterations of the same case strengthen the core logic, such as the ability to draw inferences from one example to another in conditional judgment, thereby deepening knowledge reuse. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0019] The accompanying drawings are used to provide a further understanding of the present invention and constitute a part of the specification. Together with the embodiments of the present invention, they are used to explain the present invention and do not constitute a limitation of the present invention. In the accompanying drawings:
[0020] Figure 1 is a flow chart of the method of the present invention;
[0021] Figure 2 Flowchart designed for the tasks in this invention;
[0022] Figure 3 This is a flowchart of the verification correction in the present invention. DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0023] The following will clearly and completely describe the technical solutions in the embodiments of the present invention in conjunction with the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only part of the embodiments of the present invention, not all of the embodiments. Based on the embodiments of the present invention, all other embodiments obtained by ordinary technicians in this field without making creative efforts are within the scope of protection of the present invention.
[0024] Example 1:
[0025] See also Figure 1-Figure 3 This embodiment provides the following technical solutions: a children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases, comprising the following steps: Step 1: selecting cases from children's daily life scenarios; Step 2: designing programming tasks based on the cases and integrating programming knowledge points into the tasks; Step 3: guiding children to write code that implements the case functions based on the programming tasks; Step 4: running the code and verifying the functions, and correcting the code based on the verification results. Through the closed-loop design of "selecting cases from real-life scenarios, binding programming tasks, guiding coding, and verifying and correcting", abstract logic is transformed into daily behaviors familiar to children, such as stop at a red light and go at a green light, without the need for additional explanation of basic concepts, significantly lowering the threshold for understanding programming logic.
[0026] The cases are selected from at least one of traffic light control, weather condition judgment and grade assessment. The cases are limited to high-frequency life scenarios such as traffic light control, weather judgment, and grade assessment as technical features, so that the cases naturally have a cognitive foundation for children, and teachers do not need to construct an additional understanding background, ensuring that the universality of the cases matches children's cognition.
[0027] In step three, multimedia tools are used to demonstrate the relationship between real-life cases and programming tasks, and multimedia tools are used to dynamically demonstrate the relationship between cases and codes (technical features). For example, animation is used to demonstrate the if-else statement corresponding to "when it rains, bring an umbrella", and the abstract syntax is converted into a visual action chain to achieve a concrete mapping of programming logic.
[0028] Step three includes a detailed explanation of the task objectives and the logical transformation process, and a detailed breakdown of the task objectives and logical transformation steps (technical features). For example, "a score greater than or equal to 90 is excellent" can be decomposed into: input score, conditional judgment, and output result. The corresponding relationship of each step is clarified to open up the transformation path from life logic to code.
[0029] In step three, real-time guidance is provided to children when they are writing code. Real-time guidance is provided to children when they are writing code (technical feature). For example, when an else statement is omitted, a prompt "The green light is OK, but what about the yellow light?" is given to correct logical loopholes in real time to avoid code collapse caused by initial misunderstanding.
[0030] In step 4, analyze the causes of code errors with the children, and analyze the causes of code errors (technical characteristics) with the children. For example, reversely trace the boundary value errors of condition judgments by comparing with the running results (such as a score of 100 is not judged as "excellent"), and cultivate problem location and debugging capabilities.
[0031] In step five, the basic case is expanded to increase the programming complexity, and the complexity (technical features) is dynamically increased on the basic case, such as expanding from single-time performance assessment (basic) to batch processing (advanced). In the same scenario, a loop structure is naturally introduced to achieve smooth advancement of capabilities and avoid gaps.
[0032] The expansion of traffic light control includes adding yellow light status judgment logic, adding yellow light status judgment logic (technical features), forcing students to insert new branches into the original conditional structure (red and green lights), mastering the practical ability of multiple conditional nesting, and strengthening the in-depth application of conditional branches.
[0033] The expansion of grade assessment includes introducing a loop structure to realize batch grade processing, introducing a loop structure to process grades in batches (technical features), upgrading isolated conditional judgments to comprehensive tasks of nested loops and conditions (such as traversing the grades of 50 students and classifying and grading them), and training the comprehensive processing capabilities of complex scenarios.
[0034] Programming knowledge points include at least one of conditional judgment, loop structure or conditional nesting. The knowledge points are limited to conditional judgment, loop, and conditional nesting (technical features), avoiding the traditional teaching of piling up unpopular grammar (such as bit operations), focusing on high-frequency application scenarios, and accurately covering children's core programming capabilities.
[0035] Example 2:
[0036] See also Figure 1-Figure 3 In this embodiment, the staff used the method disclosed in the present invention to teach the conditional judgment module to 20 students aged 9-10 in the spring class of a children's programming institution in Hangzhou.
[0037] Traffic light control is selected as a real-life case. In step one, the teacher shows a real-life video of an intersection and guides students to summarize the rule of "stop at red light and go at green light"; in step two, design a programming task - use Scratch to simulate the switching of traffic lights, and integrate the knowledge points of conditional judgment. The core task is "the car stops when the red light is on and goes forward when the green light is on"; in step three, the logic is decomposed through dynamic PPT: 1. Detect the color of the traffic light (event trigger), 2. Judge the color attribute (conditional branch), 3. Execute the car action (result output). During the coding process, the teacher patrols in real time and raises the question when he finds that student Xiao Wang has omitted the yellow light processing logic. The teacher asked: "What should the car do when the yellow light comes on?", and guided the students to supplement the conditional branches; in step 4, during the operation and debugging phase, student Xiao Li's car braked suddenly at the end of the green light. The teacher led the students to analyze the code and found a conditional boundary error (no 0.5-second transition period was set), and they jointly corrected it to "when the green light time is greater than 3 seconds, move forward at a constant speed, and slow down when it is ≤3 seconds"; in step 5, expand the complexity: add a countdown function for the flashing of the yellow light, require the insertion of nested conditions (such as "when the yellow light is on and the countdown is greater than 3 seconds, the flashing frequency = 1 time / second, when it is ≤3 seconds = 2 times / second"), and introduce a loop structure to realize the automatic cyclic switching of traffic lights (red, green, yellow, red).
[0038] The teaching effectiveness was verified. The traditional abstract teaching group took an average of 45 minutes to complete the basic tasks, with an error rate of 62%. The group using this method completed the basic and extended tasks in 32 minutes, with an error rate of 18%. 90% of the participants were able to independently transfer the logic to new scenarios (for example, implementing an "automatic window closing on rainy days" program using the same conditional structure). Key teaching aids included the Scratch visual programming platform, a traffic light physical model (with Arduino integration for demonstration), and a dynamic logic transformation animation (created in PowerPoint).
[0039] Example 3:
[0040] See also Figure 1-Figure 3 This embodiment provides the following technical solutions: In the cross-age programming education practice (covering 12-year-old teenagers to adult learners, including teenagers, college students, and adults), this method is used to carry out smart home control system development courses, using "home lighting automation" as the core life case, and integrating programming knowledge points in stages:
[0041] Youth Group (12-15 years old):
[0042] Basic Task (Sequential Structure + Conditional Judgment): Simulate single-room lighting control. Case binding: "Turn on the lights when someone enters the room, and off when someone leaves." Guide students in writing sequential code (detecting the door magnetic sensor → triggering the light action) and incorporating conditional judgments (e.g., "If there is sufficient light, turn off the lights"). During real-time coding, the teacher uses a physical sandbox to demonstrate the sensor-light interaction. If students miss the light condition, they are prompted with the question, "Do I need to turn on the lights when entering during the day?"
[0043] Expanded nesting: Added multi-room control logic. Case update: "When the master bedroom is occupied and the living room is unoccupied, only turn on the master bedroom light." Introducing nested conditions (if-else if structure). During debugging, students discovered a false triggering issue in the secondary bedroom. Together, they analyzed the boundary condition error (not checking the "all rooms are unoccupied" state) and corrected it by "turning off the lights after traversing all room states."
[0044] College students (18-22 years old):
[0045] Loop structure application: Batch device management. Case study: "Check the lighting status of 10 rooms daily from 7:00 PM to 11:00 PM." Design a loop task (a for loop iterating through a list of rooms) and embed conditional checks (time range + occupancy status). Provide real-time guidance in handling array out-of-bounds exceptions (e.g., room ID out of index) during coding.
[0046] Nested Upgrade: Energy Saving Mode Optimization. Case Study: "If a room is unoccupied for more than 30 minutes, turn off the air conditioner in that room; if all air conditioners are off, activate Power Saving Mode." This approach combines nested loops (a for loop that iterates through the rooms and embeds a countdown while loop within it) with multi-conditional judgments. During verification, a student discovered that Power Saving Mode was mistakenly activated. Through log backtracking, they located the issue of delayed air conditioner status updates and added a status caching mechanism.
[0047] Adult professional group (25-40 years old):
[0048] Comprehensive scenario arrangement: Intelligent scenario engine. Case binding: "Away mode turns off all appliances with one click and starts the robot vacuum according to the weather forecast (cleaning the balcony on sunny days and only cleaning the interior on rainy days)." Integrated knowledge points:
[0049] Sequence structure (executes a sequence of instructions away from home)
[0050] Condition nesting (weather judgment → cleaning area selection)
[0051] Loop structure (traverse the list of home appliances to perform shutdown operations)
[0052] Debugging and Optimization: During operation, we discovered a conflict in the robot vacuum's commands. We jointly analyzed the cause and found that it was accidentally triggering a cleaning interrupt while looping through the appliances. Solution: We introduced a task queue (with priority determination embedded in the loop) and set the cleaning task to the highest priority.
[0053] Finally, it should be noted that the above descriptions are merely preferred embodiments of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. Although the present invention has been described in detail with reference to the aforementioned embodiments, those skilled in the art will be able to modify the technical solutions described in the aforementioned embodiments or substitute equivalents for some of the technical features. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, and improvements made within the spirit and principles of the present invention shall be included within the scope of protection of the present invention.
Claims
1. A children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases, characterized by: The following steps are involved: Step 1: Select cases from children’s daily life scenes; Step 2: Design programming tasks based on the case and incorporate programming knowledge points into the tasks; Step 3: Based on the programming task, guide the children to write code to implement the case function; Step 4: Run the code and verify the functionality, then modify the code based on the verification results.
2. The children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases according to claim 1 is characterized by: The case is selected from at least one of traffic light control, weather condition judgment and performance evaluation.
3. The children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases according to claim 1 is characterized by: In the step three, multimedia tools are used to demonstrate the relationship between real-life cases and programming tasks.
4. The children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases according to claim 1 is characterized by: The step three includes a detailed explanation of the task objectives and the logical transformation process.
5. The method for teaching children programming based on real-life cases according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step three, real-time guidance is provided when the children are writing code.
6. The method for teaching children programming based on real-life cases according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step 4, analyze the cause of the code error with the children.
7. The method for teaching children programming based on real-life cases according to claim 1, characterized in that: It also includes step five: expanding the basic case and increasing the programming complexity.
8. The children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases according to claims 2 and 7 is characterized by: The expansion of the traffic light control includes adding yellow light status judgment logic.
9. The children's programming teaching method based on real-life cases according to claims 2 and 7 is characterized by: The expansion of the performance evaluation includes introducing a loop structure to realize batch performance processing.
10. The method for teaching children programming based on real-life cases according to claim 1, characterized in that: The programming knowledge points include at least one of conditional judgment, loop structure or conditional nesting.