DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Study on the Virtual Remote Input-Output Model for IoT Simulation Learning

IoT 시뮬레이션 학습을 위한 가상 리모트 입출력 모델에 관한 연구

  • Seo, Hyeon-Ho (Dept. of Computer Engineering, Kongju National University) ;
  • Kim, Jae-Woong (Dept. of Computer Science & Engineering, Kongju National University) ;
  • Kim, Dong-Hyun (Dept. of IT Artificial Intelligence, Korea Nazarene University) ;
  • Park, Seong-Hyun (Dept. of Computer Engineering, Kongju National University)
  • 서현호 (공주대학교 컴퓨터공학과) ;
  • 김재웅 (공주대학교 컴퓨터공학부) ;
  • 김동현 (나사렛대학교 IT인공지능학부) ;
  • 박성현 (공주대학교 컴퓨터공학과)
  • Received : 2021.09.06
  • Accepted : 2021.10.20
  • Published : 2021.10.28

Abstract

In our technology-driven world, various methods for teaching in an educational venue or in a simulated environment have been suggested especially for computer and coding education. In particular, IoT related education has been made possible owing to the industrial developments that have occurred in various fields since the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The proposed model allows various IoT systems to be indirectly built; it provides an inexpensive learning method by applying a simulation system in a 3D environment. The model is implemented on Virtual Remote IO based on the Arduino platform, thereby reducing the cost of building an education system. In addition various education-related content can be provided to learners through such an indirectly developed system. Test code was written to check the consistency of an operation between the real system and the virtual system.

교육 장소에서 실제 수업하거나, 시뮬레이션 환경에서 교육하는 방법에 대한 방향이 제시되고 있다. 4차 산업혁명 이후에 다양한 분야의 산업 발전이 이루어지고 있고, 특히 IoT와 관련된 교육이 실행되고 있는 실정이다. 제안 모델은 3D 환경에서의 시뮬레이션 시스템을 응용하여 큰 비용 없이 다양한 IoT 시스템을 간접적으로 구축하여 교육할 수 있는 모델로서, 아두이노 플랫폼을 기반으로 가상 리모트 IO를 구현하였으며, 이를 통하여 교육을 위한 시스템 구축비용의 경감과 시스템을 간접적으로 구축하여 학습할 수 있는 모델이다. 또한 교육과 관련된 콘텐츠들을 다양하게 실습할 수 있다. 테스트 코드를 작성하여 실제 시스템과 가상의 시스템과의 동작 일치성을 확인하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. L. Gil, E. Blanco, & J. M. Auli. (2000). The virtual laboratory concept applied to strain measurements. European Journal of Engineering Education, 25(3), 243-251. DOI : 10.1080/030437900438676
  2. J. V. Nickerson, J. E. Corter, S. K. Esche & C. Chassapis. (2007). A model for evaluating the effectiveness of remote engineering laboratories and simulations in education. Computers & Education, 49(3), 708-725. DOI : 10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.019
  3. T. J. McGill & V. J. Hobbs. (2008). How students and instructors using a virtual learning environment perceive the fit between technology and task. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(3), 191-202. DOI : 10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00253.x
  4. W. J. Shyr. (2010). Enhancement of PLC programming learning based on a virtual laboratory. World Transactions on Engineering and Technology Education, 8(2), 196-202.
  5. P. J. Rich, N. Bly & K. R. Leatham. (2014). Beyond cognitive increase: Investigating the influence of computer programming on perception and application of mathematical skills. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 33(1), 103-128.
  6. P. J. Rich, K. R. Leatham & G. A. Wright. (2013). Convergent cognition. Instructional Science, 41(2), 431-453. DOI : 10.1007/s11251-012-9240-7
  7. S. Y. Lye & J. H. L. Koh. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12?. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51-61. DOI : 10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012
  8. B. S. Xia & E. Liitiainen. (2017). Student performance in computing education: an empirical analysis of online learning in programming education environments. European Journal of Engineering Education, 42(6), 1025-1037. DOI : 10.1080/03043797.2016.1250066
  9. P. E. Robinson & J. Carroll. (2017, April). An online learning platform for teaching, learning, and assessment of programming. In 2017 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), 547-556. DOI : 10.1109/EDUCON.2017.7942900
  10. N. Shariat Zadeh, T. Lundholm, L. Lindberg & G. ranzen Sivard. 2016). Integration of digital factory with smart factory based on Internet of Things. In 26th CIRP Design Conference, 2016, KTH Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm, Sweden, 15 June 2016 through 17 June 2016, Elsevier, 50, 512-517. DOI 10.1016/j.procir.2016.05.050
  11. K. J. Singh & D. S. Kapoor. (2017). Create Your Own Internet of Things: A survey of IoT platforms. IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, 6(2), 57-68. DOI : 10.1109/MCE.2016.2640718
  12. H. Ning & S. Hu. (2012). Technology classification, industry, and education for Future Internet of Things. International Journal of Communication Systems, 25(9), 1230-1241. DOI : 10.1002/dac.2373
  13. M. Banzi. (2009). Getting Started with Arduino: Make. O'Reilly Media, Inc.
  14. Y. A. Badamasi. (2014, September). The working principle of an Arduino. In 2014 11th international conference on electronics, computer and computation (ICECCO), IEEE, 1-4. DOI : 10.1109/ICECCO.2014.6997578
  15. D. O'Sullivan & T. Igoe. (2004). Physical computing: sensing and controlling the physical world with computers. Course Technology Press.
  16. P. Blikstein. (2013, June). Gears of our childhood: constructionist toolkits, robotics, and physicalcomputing, past and future. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on interaction design and children, 173-182. DOI : 10.1145/2485760.2485786
  17. M. Przybylla & R. Romeike. (2014). Physical Computing and Its Scope--Towards a Constructionist Computer Science Curriculum with Physical Computing. Informatics in Education, 13(2), 241-254.
  18. M. Rizvi, T. Humphries, D. Major, M. Jones & H. Lauzun. (2011). A CS0 course using Scratch. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 26(3), 19-27.
  19. A. Vasilchenko, M. Venn Wycherley, M. Dyson & F. R. Abegao. (2020, January). Engaging Science and Engineering Students in Computing Education through Learner-Created Videos and Physical Computing Tools. In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on Computing Education Practice, 2020, 1-4. DOI : 10.1145/3372356.3372372