Developing a Prototyping Method for Involving Children in the Design of Classroom Robots

Obaid, Mohammad; Baykal, Gökçe Elif; Yantaç, Asım Evren; Barendregt, Wolmet

doi:10.1007/s12369-017-0450-7

Cited by 18 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their primary products are geared toward combating loneliness and social isolation, especially for children and older adults (No Isolation 2019). The classroom as an arena for robot-human interaction and co-production, is not new (Obaid et al 2018), but it is important to keep in mind that the primary user of AV1 is only at the school through teleoperation while physically being in their own home or at the hospital.…”

Section: The School Robot Av1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Children’s perceptions of social robots: a study of the robots Pepper, AV1 and Tessa at Norwegian research fairs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article studies perceptual differences of three social robots by elementary school children of ages 6–13 years (n = 107) at research fairs. The autonomous humanoid robot Pepper, an advanced social robot primarily designed as a personal assistant with movement and mobility, is compared to the teleoperated AV1 robot—designed to help elementary school children who cannot attend school to have a telepresence through the robot—and the flowerpot robot Tessa, used in the eWare system as an avatar for a home sensor system and dedicated to people with dementia living alone. These three robots were shown at the Norwegian national research fair, held in every major Norwegian city annually, where children were able to interact with the robots. Our analysis is based on quantitative survey data of the school children concerning the robots and qualitative discussions with them. By comparing three different types of social robots, we found that presence can be differently understood and conceptualized with different robots, especially relating to their function and “aliveness.” Additionally, we found a strong difference when relating robots to personal relations to one’s own grandparents versus older adults in general. We found children’s perceptions of robots to be relatively positive, curious and exploratory and that they were quite reflective on their own grandparent having a robot.

show abstract

Section: The School Robot Av1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Children’s perceptions of social robots: a study of the robots Pepper, AV1 and Tessa at Norwegian research fairs

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While interaction designers envisioned a small or child-sized non-gendered animal-or cartoon-like robot, with clear facial features to express emotions and social cues, children envisioned a bigger humanmachine robot. Based on this first study, they developed a design toolbox (Robo2Box) [15] that included the most common design elements found in both the drawings and the focus group discussions (from both children and interaction designers), in addition to several design elements identified by Woods [16]. Their intention with the Robo2Box was to support children's involvement in the co-design of a classroom robot by removing the need to rely on drawing skills, and by offering children inspiration from other children, the literature, and interaction designers.…”

Section: Co-design Of (Educational) Robots With Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

Demystifying Robots in the Co-Design of a Tutee Robot with Primary School Children

Barendregt¹,

Ekström²,

Kiesewetter³

et al. 2020

IxD&A

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

his paper contributes to the existing body of knowledge on the co-design of novel technologies with children. As part of a three year research project aiming to design and develop a robot tutee for use in mathematics education, we present the initial phases of our design approach with children, in which we draw on principles of Participatory Design and Co-design. As part of the early stages of this process, we included a demystifying phase (I), and a gradual introduction to the robot’s capabilities (II), in order to foster reasonable expectations in children and gather feasible design input. Drawing on the Time-Space-Structure framework, two primary schools were involved in the co-design process, where children in grades 2 and 4 participated in a set of workshops. We discuss the benefits and tensions of our approach, and reflect on its implications for mutual learning, hoping to inspire further exploration in this field.

show abstract

“…A promising solution appears to be the involvement of various stakeholders, and end-users of the SAR in particular, to define their requirements. Indeed, there is evidence for stakeholders' involvement in the participatory design of SARs for educational purposes [6][7][8][9][10]. However, these participatory design approaches are scattered and bewildering.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, these participatory design approaches are scattered and bewildering. They usually focus on one aspect of SAR such as the social role [7] or the embodiment of the robot [6,[8][9][10], omitting other features such as the sophistication of interaction, which refers to interactive modalities employed in SAR such as speech or gestures. Hence, the existing evidence allows the developers to build a SAR for educational purposes considering the stakeholders' requirements only for a few design features.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing a Socially Assistive Robot for Education Through a Participatory Design Approach: Pivotal Principles for the Developers

Pnevmatikos

Fachantidis

2021

Int J of Soc Robotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Designing socially assistive robots (SARs) for educational purposes can be a challenging task for developers. Developers need to identify the combination of a particular set of features to include in the design of a SAR. Participatory design approaches can be a promising solution since stakeholders can suggest, through their involvement, the requirements that could meet their needs and expectations. Still, such approaches for designing a SAR for education are scattered and bewildering, focusing on aspects of the robot such as the role or the appearance. The current study aimed to map stakeholders' requirements regarding the design of a SAR exploited for educational purposes as well as to provide a set of guiding design principles for developers. A qualitative focus group discussion took place, and the participants were 127 (65 were female) stakeholders from five European countries, representing various affiliations in the field of education. A deductive qualitative content analysis approach revealed 121 themes of analysis, which fitted into 11 theory-driven categories regarding the use of the SARs in the class settings, their appearance, and their voice commands. Additionally, 46 themes of analysis were classified under five new categories following an inductive approach. The results of the deductive and inductive content analysis were further exploited in two Two-Step Cluster Analyses. The analyses revealed five tentative combinations of the dimensions exploited for the design of a SAR sketched by education stakeholders. The findings of the current study are discussed, providing pivotal guiding principles for the developers of SARs for education.

show abstract

Developing a Prototyping Method for Involving Children in the Design of Classroom Robots

Cited by 18 publications

References 19 publications

Children’s perceptions of social robots: a study of the robots Pepper, AV1 and Tessa at Norwegian research fairs

Children’s perceptions of social robots: a study of the robots Pepper, AV1 and Tessa at Norwegian research fairs

Demystifying Robots in the Co-Design of a Tutee Robot with Primary School Children

Designing a Socially Assistive Robot for Education Through a Participatory Design Approach: Pivotal Principles for the Developers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About