ABSTRACT-In this article, we review research on childrobot interaction (CRI) to discuss how social robots can be used to scaffold language learning in young children. First we provide reasons why robots can be useful for teaching first and second languages to children. Then we review studies on CRI that used robots to help children learn vocabulary and produce language. The studies vary in first and second languages and demographics of the learners (typically developing children and children with hearing and communication impairments). We conclude that, although social robots are useful for teaching language to children, evidence suggests that robots are not as effective as human teachers. However, this conclusion is not definitive because robots that tutor students in language have not been evaluated rigorously and technology is advancing rapidly. We suggest that CRI offers an opportunity for research and list possible directions for that work. KEYWORDS-child-robotinteraction; social robots; language learning Using technology in early education has gained considerable attention as digital devices (e.g., smartphones and tablets) have developed and been integrated into children's lives (1). In this article, we spotlight one of the newest additions to the list of devices-social robots-and discuss whether research on child-robot interaction (CRI) can help children learn first and second languages.A social robot is "an autonomous or semiautonomous robot that interacts and communicates with humans by following the behavioral norms expected by the people with whom the robot is intended to interact" (2, p. 592). Social robots have been used to teach scientific knowledge, mathematics, social skills, computer programming, and language (3, 4). However, research on CRI has not been readily accessible to all those interested because the studies appear primarily in conference proceedings and journals dedicated to the field of robotics. Furthermore, these studies often focus on technical features of robots rather than educational concerns, such as whether and how robots can help young language learners.In this article, we summarize findings on CRI and evaluate them critically. First we discuss briefly why a robot may be useful for teaching language to children. Then we evaluate whether children enjoy learning language with a robot. In the main section of the article, we ask whether children can learn language from a robot. We analyze learning outcomes at three levels: whether robots are at all successful teaching language to children, whether they are more successful teaching language than other digital devices, and whether robots can teach language as effectively as human teachers. Although social robots have potential as a language teaching tool, evidence suggests that robots are not as effective as human teachers. However, we argue that researchers must continue exploring this issue because the educational benefits of robots have not been evaluated thoroughly and technology in robotics is advancing quickly. In the last sec...
In recent years, it has been suggested that social robots have potential as tutors and educators for both children and adults. While robots have been shown to be effective in teaching knowledge and skill-based topics, we wish to explore how social robots can be used to tutor a second language to young children. As language learning relies on situated, grounded and social learning, in which interaction and repeated practice are central, social robots hold promise as educational tools for supporting second language learning. This paper surveys the developmental psychology of second language learning and suggests an agenda to study how core concepts of second language learning can be taught by a social robot. It suggests guidelines for designing robot tutors based on observations of second language learning in human-human scenarios, various technical aspects and early studies regarding the effectiveness of social robots as second language tutors.
This study investigated how Turkish-speaking children and adults interpret negative sentences with disjunction (English or) and ones with conjunction (English and). The goal was to see whether Turkish-speaking children and adults assigned the same interpretation to both kinds of sentences and, if not, to determine the source of the differences. Turkish-speaking children and adults were found to assign different interpretations to negative sentences with disjunction just in case the nouns in the disjunction phrase were marked with accusative case. For children, negation took scope over disjunction regardless of case marking, whereas, for adults, disjunction took scope over negation if the disjunctive phrases were case marked. Both groups assigned the same interpretation to negative sentences with conjunction; both case-marked and non-case-marked conjunction phrases took scope over negation. The findings are taken as evidence for a 'subset' principle of language learnability that dictates children's initial scope assignments.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.