Humanoid Robots in Education: A Short Review

  • Amit Kumar PandeyEmail author
  • Rodolphe Gelin
Reference work entry


Robots are becoming useful parts of the education ecosystem with their various capabilities ranging from the ability to perceive people and their environment to the ability to reason and rationalize situations and emotions of people. These robots are also equipped with multimodal interaction capabilities and, equally important, have a physical presence. Humanoid robots, with their humanlike appearance, add another dimension of humanlike body language and social signaling capabilities: keys for more natural and intuitive human-robot interaction. This chapter presents the applications of humanoid robots in education. The aim of this chapter is not to provide a complete review of all ongoing research works in robot-in-the-loop education but to create awareness about various educationally oriented applications of humanoid robots. The chapter will also discuss the set of the key capabilities such robots should possess, some major R&D challenges, and some ethical and social issues. Therefore, the chapter aims to serve as basis for further investigation for the interested readers.



We would like to acknowledge the EU H2020 L2ToR ( project (grant no. 688014) and EU FP7 DREAM ( project (grant no. 611391).


  1. 1.
    D.P. Miller, I.R. Nourbakhsh, R. Siegwart, Robots for education, in Springer Handbook of Robotics (Springer Berlin/Heidelberg, 2008), pp. 1283-1301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    O. Mubin et al., A review of the applicability of robots in education. J. Technol. Educ. Learn. 1, 209–0015 (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J.K. Westlund et al., A comparison of children learning new words from robots, tablets, & people, in Proceedings of New Friends: The 1st International Conference on Social Robots in Therapy and Education, 2015Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J.-H. Han et al., Comparative study on the educational use of home robots for children. J. Inf. Process. Syst. 4(4), 159–168 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Obaid, W. Barendregt, P. Alves-Oliveira, A. Paiva, M. Fjeld, Designing robotic teaching assistants: interaction design students’ and children’s views, in Social Robotics: 7th International Conference, ICSR 2015, Paris, October 26–30, 2015, Proceedings (Springer International Publishing, 2015), pp. 502–511CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    T. Kanda, M. Shimada, S. Koizumi, Children learning with a social robot, in Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ‘12) (ACM, New York, 2012), pp. 351–358.
  7. 7.
    M. Alemi, A. Meghdari, M. Ghazisaedy, The impact of social robotics on L2 learners’ anxiety and attitude in english vocabulary acquisition. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 7(4), 523–535 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    C.-W. Chang, J.-H. Lee, P.-Y. Chao, C.-Y. Wang, G.-D. Chen, Exploring the possibility of using humanoid robots as instructional tools for teaching a second language in primary school. Educ. Technol. Soc. 13(2), 13–24 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    H. Köse et al., The effect of embodiment in sign language tutoring with assistive humanoid robots. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 7(4), 537–548 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    S. Carpin et al., USARSim: a robot simulator for research and education, in Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Roma, 2007, pp. 1400–1405Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. Tanaka, S. Matsuzoe, Children teach a care-receiving robot to promote their learning: field experiments in a classroom for vocabulary learning. J. Hum.-Robot Interact. 1, 1 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Hood, S. Lemaignan, P. Dillenbourg, When children teach a robot to write: an autonomous teachable humanoid which uses simulated handwriting, in 2015 Human-Robot Interaction Conference, Portand, 2015Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    W. Johal, A. D. Jacq, A. Paiva, P. Dillenbourg, Child-robot spatial arrangement in a learning by teaching activity, in 25th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, New York, 2016Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    T. Kanda, T. Hirano, D. Eaton, H. Ishiguro, Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: a field trial. Hum.-Comput Interact. 19(1), 61–84 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. Kanda, H. Ishiguro, Communication robots for elementary schools, in Proceedings of AISB’05 Symposium Robot Companions: Hard Problems and Open Challenges in Robot-Human Interaction, 12 Apr, 2005Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A.A. Deshmukh, A. Jones, S. Janarthanam et al., Empathic robotic tutors: map guide. HRI (Extended Abstracts), 2 Mar, 2015Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    N. Tazhigaliyeva et al., Learning with or from the robot: exploring robot roles in educational context with children, in International Conference on Social Robotics, 2016.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    J.R. Abildgaard, H. Scharfe, A geminoid as lecturer, in International Conference on Social Robotics (Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, 2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. Pot, J. Monceaux, R. Gelin, B. Maisonnier, Choregraphe: a graphical tool for humanoid robot programming, in RO-MAN 2009 – The 18th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Toyama, 2009, pp. 46–51Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    C. Chase, D.B. Chin, M. Oppezzo, D.L. Schwartz, Teachable agents and the protégé effect: increasing the effort towards learning. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 18(4), 334–352 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alves-Oliveira, Patrícia, Tiago Ribeiro, Sofia Petisca, et al.. An empathic robotic tutor for school classrooms: considering expectation and satisfaction of children as end-users, in Social Robotics: 7th International Conference, ICSR 2015, Paris, October 26–30, 2015, Proceedings (Springer Publishing, 2015), pp. 21–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    J. Han, Robot-Aided Learning and r-learning Services (INTECH Open Access Publisher, Croatia, 2010), p. 288. ISBN:978-953-307-051-3Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    L. A. Williams, et al., PEBBLES: providing education by bringing learning environments to students. Adv. Hum, Factors/Ergon. 115-118 (1997).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    A. Tapus, C. Tapus, M.J. Mataric, The use of socially assistive robots in the design of intelligent cognitive therapies for people with dementia, in 2009 IEEE International Conference on Rehabilitation Robotics, Kyoto International Conference Center (IEEE, 2009), pp. 924–929.
  25. 25.
    B. Robins, K. Dautenhahn, R. Te Boekhorst, A. Billard, Robotic assistants in therapy and education of children with autism: can a small humanoid robot help encourage social interaction skills? Univ. Access Inf. Soc. 4(2), 105–120 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    E.I. Barakova, P. Bajracharya, M. Willemsen, T. Lourens, B. Huskens, Long-term LEGO therapy with humanoid robot for children with ASD. Expert. Syst. 32(6), 698–709 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    B. Huskens, R. Verschuur, J. Gillesen, R. Didden, E. Barakova, Promoting question-asking in school-aged children with autism spectrum disorders: effectiveness of a robot intervention compared to a human-trainer intervention. J Dev. Neurorehabil. 16(5), 345–356 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    A. Taheri, A. Meghdari, M. Alemi, H. Pouretemad, P. Poorgoldooz, M. Roohbakhsh, Social robots and teaching music to autistic children: myth or reality? in Social Robotics: 8th International Conference, ICSR 2016, Kansas City, November 1–3, 2016 Proceedings (2016), pp. 541–550Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    M. Saerbeck, T. Schut, C. Bartneck, M. D. Janse, Expressive robots in education: varying the degree of social supportive behavior of a robotic tutor, in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘10) (ACM, New York, 2010), pp. 1613–1622.
  30. 30.
    A. Jones, S. Bull, G. Castellano, Open learner modelling with a robotic tutor, in Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 2015, pp. 237–238Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    N. Reich-Stiebert, F. Eyssel, (Ir) relevance of Gender?: On the influence of gender stereotypes on learning with a robot, in Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ‘17) (ACM, New York, 2017), pp. 166–176.
  32. 32.
    M. de Haas, A.M. Aroyo, E. Barakova, W. Haselager, I. Smeekens, The effect of a semi-autonomous robot on children, in 2016 IEEE 8th International Conference on Intelligent Systems (IS), Sofia, 2016, pp. 376–381Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    N. Reich-Stiebert, F. Eyssel, Learning with educational companion robots? Toward attitudes on education robots, predictors of attitudes, and application potentials for education robots. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 7(5), 875–888 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    EC Special Eurobarometer 382, Public Attitudes towards robots, 2012,
  35. 35.
    N. Reich-Stiebert, F. Eyssel, Robots in the classroom: what teachers think about teaching and learning with education robots, in Social Robotics: 8th International Conference, ICSR 2016, Kansas City, November 1–3, 2016 Proceedings (Springer International Publishing, 2016), pp. 671–680Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    P. Bihouix, K. Mauvilly, Le désastre de l’école numérique Seuil, Aug 2016, pp. 240, EAN 9782021319187Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    T. Belpaeme, J. Kennedy, P. Baxter, P. Vogt, E. J. Krahmer, S. Kopp, K. Bergmann, P. Leseman, A. C. Küntay, T. Göksun, A. K. Pandey, R. Gelin, P. Koudelkova, T. Deblieck, L2TOR – second language tutoring using social robots, in Proceedings of 1st International Workshop on Educational Robots, ICSR 2015, Paris (2015)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    P.G. Esteban, P. Baxter, T. Belpaeme, E. Billing, H. Cai, H.-L. Cao, M. Coeckelbergh, C. Costescu, D. David, A. De Beir, Y. Fang, Z. Ju, J. Kennedy, H. Liu, A. Mazel, A. Pandey, K. Richardson, E. Senft, S. Thill, G. Van de Perre, B. Vanderborght, D. Vernon, H. Yu, T. Ziemke, How to build a supervised autonomous system for robot-enhanced therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder. Paladyn J. Behav. Robot. 8(1), 18–38 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    H. Ibrahim, M. Elhoushy, B. Zalam, O. Ottar, An interval type-2 fuzzy logic system for assessment of students’ answer scripts under high levels of uncertainty, in Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2016), Vol. 2 pp. 40–48. ISBN:978-989-758-179-3Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    A. Jones, D. Küster, C.A. Basedow et al., Empathic robotic tutors for personalised learning: a multidisciplinary approach, in Social Robotics: 7th International Conference, ICSR 2015, Paris,~October 26–30, 2015, Proceedings (Springer International Publishing, 2015), pp. 285–295Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Innovation DepartmentSoftBank Robotics EuropeParisFrance

Personalised recommendations