Abstract
So far, most of the applications of robotic technology to education have mainly focused on supporting the teaching of subjects that are closely related to the Robotics field, such as robot programming, robot construction, or mechatronics. Moreover, most of the applications have used the robot as an end or a passive tool of the learning activity, where the robot has been constructed or programmed. In this paper, we present a novel application of robotic technologies to education, where we use the real world situatedness of a robot to teach non-robotic related subjects, such as math and physics. Furthermore, we also provide the robot with a suitable degree of autonomy to actively guide and mediate in the development of the educational activity. We present our approach as an educational framework based on a collaborative and constructivist learning environment, where the robot is able to act as an interaction mediator capable of managing the interactions occurring among the working students. We illustrate the use of this framework by a 4-step methodology that is used to implement two educational activities. These activities were tested at local schools with encouraging results. Accordingly, the main contributions of this work are: i) A novel use of a mobile robot to illustrate and teach relevant concepts and properties of the real world; ii) A novel use of robots as mediators that autonomously guide an educational activity using a collaborative and constructivist learning approach; iii) The implementation and testing of these ideas in a real scenario, working with students at local schools.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Ahlgren, D., & Verner, I. (2002). An international view of robotics as an educational medium. In Int. conf. on engineering education.
Arons, A. B. (1990). A guide to introductory physics teaching. New York: Wiley.
Avanzato, R. (2002). Mobile robot navigation contest for undergraduate design and k-12 outreach. In Proc. of conf. of American society for engineering education (ASEE).
Beichner, R. J. (1994). Testing student interpretation of kinematics graphs. American Journal of Physics, 62(8), 750–762.
Burgard, W., Cremers, A. B., Fox, D., Hahnel, D., Lakemeyer, G., Schulz, D., Steiner, W., & Thrun, S. (1999). Experiences with an interactive museum tour-guide robot. Artificial Intelligence, 114(1–2), 3–55.
Carbonell, J. R. (1970). AI in CAI: An artificial-intelligence approach to computer-assisted instruction. IEEE Transactions on Man-Machine Systems, 11(4), 190–202.
Clements, D. H. (1999). Teaching length measurement: Research challenges. School Science and Mathematics, 99(1), 5–11.
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). Collaborative learning: cognitive and computational approaches. Oxford: Pergamon.
Fong, T., Nourbakhsh, I., & Dautenhahn, K. (2003). A survey of socially interactive robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3), 143–166.
Gockley, R., Bruce, A., Forlizzi, J., Michalowski, M. P., Mundell, A., Rosenthal, S., Sellner, B. P., Simmons, R., Snipes, K., Schultz, A., & Wang, J. (2005). Designing robots for long-term social interaction. In Proc. of IEEE/RSJ int. conf. on intelligent robots and systems (IROS) (pp. 2199–2204).
Harakiewicz, J. M., Barron, K. E., Tauer, J. M., Carter, S. M., & Elliot, A. J. (2000). Short-term and long-term consequences of achievement goals in college: Predicting continued interest and performance over time. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 316–330.
Hartley, J., & Sleeman, D. H. (1973). Towards more intelligent teaching systems. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 5, 215–236.
Hidi, S. (2000). An interest researcher’s perspective on the effects of extrinsic and intrinsic factors on motivation. In Intrinsic motivation: controversies and new directions (pp. 309–339).
Ihlenfeldt, W. D. (1997). Virtual reality in chemistry. Journal of Molecular Modeling, 3(9), 386–402.
Jansen, M., Oelinger, M., Hoeksema, K., & Hoppe, U. (2004). An interactive maze scenario with physical robots and other smart devices. In Proc. of 2nd IEEE int. workshop on wireless and mobile technologies in education (WMTE’04).
Jermann, P., Soller, A., & Muehlenbrock, M. (2001). From mirroring to guiding: A review of the state of the art technology for supporting collaborative learning. In European perspectives on computer-supported collaborative learning, EuroCSCL (pp. 324–331).
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. (1999). Learning together and alone: cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.
Klassner, F., & Andreson, S. (2003). Lego mindstorms: not just for k-12 anymore. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 10(2), 12–18.
Lalonde, J., Bartley, C., & Nourbakhsh, I. (2006). Mobile robot programming in education. In IEEE int. conf. on robotics and automation (ICRA).
Leinhardt, G., Zaslavsky, O., & Stein, M. K. (1990). Functions, graphs, and graphing: Task, learning, and teaching. Review of Educational Research, 60(1), 1–64.
Linn, M. C., Layman, J. W., & Nachmias, R. (1987). Cognitive consequences of microcomputer-based laboratories: graphing skills development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 12(3), 244–253.
McDermott, L. C. (1984). Research on conceptual understanding in mechanics. Physics Today, 37(7), 24–32.
McDermott, L. C. (1991). Millikan lecture 1990: What we teach and what is learned—closing the gap. American Journal of Physics, 59(4), 301–315.
McDermott, L. C., Rosenquist, M. L., & Van Zee, E. H. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics. American Journal of Physics, 55(6), 503–513.
Mikropoulos, T., Katsikis, A., Nikolow, E., & Tsakalis, P. (2003). Virtual environments in biology teaching. Journal of Biological Education, 37(4), 176–181.
Mitnik, R. (2008). The robot as an autonomous mediator of the learning experience and the social interactions. PhD thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile.
Mitnik, R., Nussbaum, M., & Soto, A. (2004). Mobile robotic supported collaborative learning (MRSCL). In Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Vol. 3315, p. 912–921). Berlin: Springer.
Murphy, R. (2001). Competing for a robotics education. IEEE Robotics & Automation Society Magazine, June, 44–55.
Murray, T. (1999). Authoring intelligent tutoring systems: An analysis of the state of the art. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 98–129.
Nourbakhsh, I., Bobenage, J., Grange, S., Lutz, R., Meyer, R., & Soto, A. (1999). An affective mobile educator with a full-time job. Artificial Intelligence, 114(1–2), 95–124.
Nourbakhsh, I., Kunz, C., & Willeke, T. (2003). The mobot museum robot installations: A five year experiment. In Proc. of IEEE/RSJ int. conf. on intelligent robots and systems (IROS) (pp. 3636–3641).
Nourbakhsh, I., Hammer, E., Crowley, K., & Wilkinson, K. (2004). Formal measures of learning in a secondary school mobile robotics contest. In IEEE int. conf. on robotics and automation (ICRA).
Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. New York: Basic Books.
Petre, M., & Price, B. (2004). Using robotics to motivate ‘back door’ learning. Education and Information Technologies, 9(2), 147–158.
Piaget, J., Brown, T. A., Kaegi, C. E., & Rosenzweig, M. R. (1981). Intelligence and affectivity. Their relationship during child development (Annual reviews monograph).
Pineau, J., Montemerlo, M., Pollack, M., Roy, N., & Thrun, S. (2003). Towards robotic assistants in nursing homes: Challenges and results. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3–4), 271–281.
Rosenblatt, M., & Choset, H. (2000). Designing and implementing hands-on robotics labs. IEEE Intelligent Systems and their Applications, 15(6), 32–39.
Rourk, W. (2000). Virtual biochemistry—a case study. Future Generation Computer Systems, 17, 7–14.
Schroeder, D. V., & Moore, T. A. (1993). A computer-simulated Stern-Gerlach laboratory. American Journal of Physics, 61, 798–805.
Soto, A., Espinace, P., & Mitnik, R. (2006). A mobile robotics course for undergraduate students in computer science. In Proc. of IEEE Latin American robotics symposium (LARS) (pp. 187–192).
Stein, C. (2002). Botball—Autonomous students engineering autonomous robots. In Proc. of conf. of American society for engineering education (ASEE).
Tao, P. K. (1997). Confronting students alternative conceptions in mechanics with the force and motion microworld. Computers in Physics, 11(2), 199–207.
Thrun, S., Bennewitz, M., Burgard, W., Cremers, A. B., Dellaert, F., Fox, D., Haehnel, D., Rosenberg, C., Roy, N., Schulte, J., & Schulz, D. (1999). Minerva: A second generation mobile tour-guide robot. In Proc. of the IEEE int. conf. on robotics and automation (ICRA) (pp. 1999–2005).
Trowbridge, D. E., & McDermott, L. C. (1980). Investigation of student understanding of the concept of velocity in one dimension. American Journal of Physics, 48(12), 1020–1028.
Wang, E., & Wang, R. (2001). Using legos and robolab (LabVIEW) with elementary school children. In 31st conf. on frontiers in education (Vol. 1, pp. T2E–T11).
Weinberg, J., Engel, G., Gu, K., Karacal, C., Smith, S., White, W., & Yu, X. (2001). A multidisciplinary model for using robotics in engineering education. In Proc. of conf. of American society for engineering education (ASEE).
Zurita, G., & Nussbaum, M. (2004). Computer supported collaborative learning using wirelessly interconnected handheld computers. Computers & Education, 42(3), 289–314.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Mitnik, R., Nussbaum, M. & Soto, A. An autonomous educational mobile robot mediator. Auton Robot 25, 367–382 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-008-9101-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10514-008-9101-z