GenAI as a Prototype Design Tool for Arduino: A Comparative Study at the ULC-BUAP Preparatory School

This article presents an action-research study with a mixed quasi-experimental design that evaluates the academic impact of integrating Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) (ChatGPT) into Arduino prototype design for the course known as Autonomous Devices at the Lázaro Cárdenas del Río Preparatory School of the BUAP Bachillerato, applied to 90 students. The point of comparison is an integrative project consisting of developing a temperature and humidity indicator system using a DHT11 sensor and an LCD. The experimental group (n = 45) incorporated AI to generate the JSON file for the Wokwi simulator and the source code, compared with the control group (n = 45), which used TinkerCAD without GenAI assistance. The theoretical framework draws on Papert's constructionism, Project-Based Learning (PBL), and Jonassen's Constructivist Learning Environments (CLE), as well as recent literature on active methodologies and AI in STEM education. The evaluation triangulates an analytic rubric, a 15-item Likert survey, and a pre-test/post-test, yielding results showing that 95% of the experimental portfolios reached an adequate or excellent level (vs. 91% in the control group); likewise, the survey recorded a mean of 4.60/5 (90% favorable), and the Hake gain index was g = 0.64 versus g = 0.47 for the control group. It is concluded that AI as a digital construction material amplifies the impact of PBL on computational thinking, technological motivation, and students' digital culture.

generative artificial intelligence, Arduino, Wokwi, computational thinking

1. Bastani, H., Bastani, O., Sungu, A., Ge, H., Kabakcı, Ö., & Mariman, R. (2024). Generative AI can harm learning. The Wharton School Research Paper. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4895486 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Hake, R. R. (1998). Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics, 66(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1119/1.18809 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Hartley, K., Hayak, M., & Ko, U. H. (2024). Artificial intelligence supporting independent student learning: An evaluative case study of ChatGPT and learning to code. Education Sciences, 14(2), 120. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14020120 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Jonassen, D. H. (1999). Designing constructivist learning environments. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. 2, pp. 215–239). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Kasneci, E., Seßler, K., Küchemann, S., Bannert, M., Dementieva, D., Fischer, F., Gasser, U., Groh, G., Günnemann, S., Hüllermeier, E., Krusche, S., Kutyniok, G., Michaeli, T., Nerdel, C., Pfeffer, J., Poquet, O., Sailer, M., Schmidt, A., Seidel, T., … Kasneci, G. (2023). ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learning and Individual Differences, 103, 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2023.102274 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Konstantinov, N., & Semenov, A. (2025). Smart learning in the 21st century: Advancing constructionism across three digital epochs. Education Sciences, 15(1), 45. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15010045 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Krajcik, J. S., & Shin, N. (2014). Project-based learning. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (2nd ed., pp. 275–297). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Lodi, M., & Martini, S. (2021). Computational thinking, between Papert and Wing. Science & Education, 30(4), 883–908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-021-00202-5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Markula, A., & Aksela, M. (2022). The key characteristics of project-based learning: How teachers implement projects in K-12 science education. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 4(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-021-00042-x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Maspul, K. A. (2024). Enhancing STEM education through project-based learning: A strategy to engaging secondary school students. Journal of Education and Learning, 18(2), 312–320. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Morales-Morgado, E. M., Ruiz-Torres, S., Rodero-Cilleros, S., Morales-Romo, B., & Campos-Ortuño, R. A. (2023). Metodologías activas en educación superior, mediadas por tecnologías en diversas disciplinas. Aula: Revista de Pedagogía de la Universidad de Salamanca, 29, 67–85. https://doi.org/10.14201/aula202329 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Papert, S., & Harel, I. (1991). Situating constructionism. In I. Harel & S. Papert (Eds.), Constructionism (pp. 1–11). Ablex Publishing Corporation. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Rehman, A., Bhuttah, T. M., & You, X. (2023). Mapping the global research on project-based learning: A bibliometric and network analysis (2014–2024). Frontiers in Education, 10, 1522694. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1522694 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Rubin DM, Keene PAC, Richards XL and George A (2026) Can computational modeling in medical education support a constructionist educational framework? Insights from the seminal literature in Papertian constructionism and system dynamics. Front. Educ. 11:1743544. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2026.1743544 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Silva, M., Correa, R., & Mc-Guire, P. (2024). Metodologías activas con inteligencia artificial y su relación con la enseñanza de la matemática en la educación superior en Chile: Estado del arte. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. https://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/168188 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Benemérita Universidad Autónoma de Puebla. (2009). Modelo Universitario Minerva. BUAP. https://www.minerva.buap.mx [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Secretaría de Educación Pública. (2023). Marco curricular y Plan de estudios 2022 de la Educación Básica Mexicana: Nueva Escuela Mexicana. SEP. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Wokwi. (2024). Wokwi — Simulador de Arduino y ESP32 en línea. https://wokwi.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study