Pre-service teachers’ concerns about social robots in the classroom: A model for development

Abstract

Social robots are being tested in the educational arena with current thinking in two main directions. One is arguing for the benefits of robots in affective and efficient instruction and is more teachercentered. Within the second, more student-centered oriented, proponents of human uniqueness are raising long-term concerns. Teacher-centeredness and student-centeredness form pedagogical beliefs underpinning teachers’ attitudes guiding technology integration. Limited research has explored teachers’ underlying beliefs and attitudes to social robots, with some presenting mixed feelings identifying some concerns with some identifying more positive attitudes. Preservice education is critical in forming beliefs, and this paper presents a qualitative study of Slovene preservice pre-primary school and primary classroom pre-service teachers’ attitudes and underlying beliefs. Students were asked to reflect on their perception of social robotic educational technology in which they would highlight at their own discretion the positive, neutral and negative aspects. Students’ reflections predominantly expressed concerns. The research model was designed in part, drawing from participants reflections and on related studies. Previous studies indicated the concerns teachers hold about robotic technology, but lacked a more holistic model. We built a threefold model distinguishing instructional, social-emotional, and legal concerns. Our findings differ from related studies because they identified participants’ negative attitudes and a clear rejection of robot technology with a human-like appearance and social skills in the classroom. Previous studentcentered studies reported on single groups of concerns within specific contexts without developing a holistic view relating diverse concerns in one picture. Related teacher-centered studies were arguing for refinements anticipating robot’s social intelligence affordance in the classroom. The participants in our study are not rejecting social robots as such, but in their view, the robot is not granted the status of a social entity capable of engaging in student-centered teaching and taking care of child wellbeing and development. The findings of our study call for action and informed robot development, taking into consideration teachers as co-designers.

Emotional Intelligence in the School Context: The Case of Greece for Teachers’ Attitudes and the Role of Mobiles and ICTs

“…[52,53]. Istenic et al (2021) identified participants' negative attitudes and a clear rejection of humanoid robot technology and social skills in the classroom [54]. Participants in the study do not reject social robots as such, but in their point of view, robots do not have the status of a social entity capable of engaging in student-centered teaching and caring for the child's well-being and development.…”

Reluctance to Authenticity-Imbued Social Robots as Child-Interaction Partners

“…Teachers do not have a clear idea of what social robots could be used for [17]. Hrastinski et al [18] and Istenič et al [19] add that it is not clear to education professionals why social robots should be used in the classroom and why they should have the appearance of a human being.…”

Comparing the effectiveness of robot-based to human-based intervention in improving joint attention in autistic children

“…In the past decades, researchers and clinicians have raised concerns on the ethical and legal issues related to the robot-based intervention and the data collection associated with this (e.g., [34][35][36]. One of the ethical issues concerns privacy.…”