Educators' views on using humanoid robots with autistic learners in special education settings in England

Alcorn, A., Ainger, E., Charisi, V., Mantionioti, S., Pertovic, S., Shcadenberg, B., Tavassoli, T. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7898-2994 and Pellicano, E. (2019) Educators' views on using humanoid robots with autistic learners in special education settings in England. Frontiers in Robotics and AI, 6. 107. ISSN 2296-9144 doi: 10.3389/frobt.2019.00107

Abstract/Summary

Researchers, industry, and practitioners are increasingly interested in the potential of social robots in education for learners on the autism spectrum. In this study, we conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with educators in England to gain their perspectives on the potential use of humanoid robots with autistic pupils, eliciting ideas and specific examples of potential use. Understanding educator views is essential, because they are key “gatekeepers” for the potential adoption of robots, who would directly facilitate future use with pupils. Educators were provided with several example images (e.g., NAO, KASPAR, Milo), but did not directly interact with robots or receive information on current technical capabilities. The goal was for educators to respond to the general concept of humanoid robots as an educational tool, rather than to focus on the existing uses or behaviour of a particular robot. Thirty-one autism education staff participated, representing a range of special education settings and age groups as well as multiple professional roles (e.g., teachers, teaching assistants, speech and language therapists). Thematic analysis of the interview transcripts identified four themes: Engagingness of robots, Predictability and consistency, Roles of robots in autism education, and Need for children to interact with people, not robots. Almost all interviewees were receptive toward using humanoid robots in the classroom. They perceived future robot use as likely posing a series of complex cost-benefit trade-offs over time. For example, a highly motivating, predictable social robot might increase children’s readiness to learn in the classroom, but it might also prevent children from engaging fully with other people or activities. Educator views also assumed that skills learned with a robot would generalise, and that robots’ predictability is beneficial for autistic children – claims that need further supporting evidence. These interview results offer many points of guidance to the HRI research community about how humanoid robots could meet the needs of autistic learners, as well as identifying issues that will need to be resolved for robots to be both acceptable and successfully deployed in special education contexts.

Item Type	Article
URI	https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/86662
Identification Number/DOI	10.3389/frobt.2019.00107
Refereed	Yes
Divisions	Interdisciplinary Research Centres (IDRCs) > Centre for Integrative Neuroscience and Neurodynamics (CINN) Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Department of Psychology
Publisher	Frontiers Media
Download/View statistics	View download statistics for this item