The way in which programming is currently taught in primary schools is through the use of a small, robotic buggy, which is able to take commands, in the form of Logo, and convert these into movements. Logo is a very basic programming language, which uses simple commands such as "Forward 60" and "Right 90". This can be taught using computers, but being able to see what the children have done takes a long time.

This is why the robotic buggy, currently used, is such a good idea. Or is it? The problem with existing products is the necessity to wait for the children to actually write the program on the device itself. This takes up valuable time with children having to program and watch the program, using the same device.

I proposed the idea of having the programming and viewing as completely separate devices. There is a separate programmer, used with software designed for use with a PC, and a separate buggy. The only thing linking the two devices is a cartridge. The cartridge contains the program, written by the children on the PC. The cartridge can then be plugged into the buggy, and the program run.

The software was designed for a PC, because I already had experience with writing programs, and found this a lot easier than for use with an Apple Mac, or BBC Micro. The interface was designed to be as user-friendly as possible. The keyboard is virtually unused. The mouse, instead, is used. This is due to children finding it easier to use the mouse than the keyboard. And, instead of moving in ridiculously small or large distances, the distances and rotations were standardised into steps of 10cm and 15 degrees, respectively. The maximum allowed per operation was limited to 100cm and 90 degrees. From experimentation, the maximum number of operations was limited to 50, ample for any program.

From testing at a local primary school, I found that the children learnt how to use the software very quickly, and were actually able to teach each other how to use it.