Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Roboter in kollaborativen Lehr-Lernkontexten. Theoretische Reflexionen interaktiver Lehr-Lernformen mit sozialen Robotern

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Künstliche Intelligenz in der Bildung

  • 6422 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Soziale Roboter als neue Lerntechnologie und ihr Einsatz in kollaborativen Lehr-Lernkontexten rücken zunehmend in den Fokus, da sie kollaboratives Lernen fördern und Interaktionen zwischen Lernenden initiieren und unterstützen können. Bisherige Arbeiten zu ihrer Anwendbarkeit konzentrieren sich jedoch primär auf die Technologie und vernachlässigen lerntheoretische Aspekte für eine effektive Integration. Die vorliegende Arbeit reflektiert theoretisch-methodische Überlegungen zur Umsetzbarkeit interaktiver Lehr-Lernformen mit sozialen Robotern sowie potenzielle Konsequenzen des Einsatzes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 74.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Literatur

  • Alimisis, D. (2012). Robotics in education and education in robotics: Shifting focus from technology to pedagogy. In 3rd international conference on robotics in education (S. 7–14). Charles University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alnajjar, F., Bartneck, C., Baxter, P., Belpaeme, T., Cappuccio, M. L., Dio, C., Eyssel, F., Handke, J., Mubin, O., Obaid, M., & Reich-Stiebert, N. (2021). Roboter in der Bildung. Wie Robotik das Lernen im digitalen Zeitalter bereichern kann. Hanser.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alves-Oliveira, P., Sequeira, P., Melo, F. S., Castellano, G., & Paiva, A. (2019). Empathic robot for group learning: A field study. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 8(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1145/3300188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumgartner, P., Brandhofer, G., Ebner, M., Gradinger, P., & Korte, M. (2016). Medienkompetenz fördern – Lehren und Lernen im digitalen Zeitalter. In M. Bruneforth, F. Eder, K. Krainer, C. Schreiner, A. Seel, & C. Spiel (Hrsg.), Nationaler Bildungsbericht Österreich 2015: Fokussierte Analysen bildungspolitischer Schwerpunktthemen (S. 95–113). Leykam. https://www.iqs.gv.at/downloads/bildungsberichterstattung/nationaler-bildungsbericht-2015. Zugegriffen: 27. Aug. 2021.

  • Belpaeme, T., Kennedy, J., Ramachandran, A., Scassellati, B., & Tanaka, F. (2018). Social robots for education: A review. Science Robotics, 3(21), eaat5954. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aat5954.

  • Breazeal, C. L. (2002). Designing sociable robots. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breiter, A., Stolpmann, B. E., & Zeising, A. (2015). Szenarien lernförderlicher IT-Infrastrukturen in Schulen. Betriebskonzepte, Ressourcenbedarf und Handlungsempfehlungen. Bertelsmann Stiftung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calo, M. R. (2011). Robots and privacy. In P. Lin, K. Abney, & G. A. Bekey (Hrsg.), Robot ethics: The ethical and social implications of robotics (S. 187–201). MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conti, D., Di Nuovo, A., Cirasa, C., & Di Nuovo, S. (2017). A comparison of kindergarten storytelling by human and humanoid robot with different social behavior. In Proceedings of the companion of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (S. 97–98). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3029798.3038359.

  • De Carolis, B., Palestra, G., Della Penna, C., Cianciotta, M., & Cervelione, A. (2019). Social robots supporting the inclusion of unaccompanied migrant children: Teaching the meaning of culture-related gestures. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 15(2), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duffy, B. R. (2003). Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 42(3–4), 177–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0921-8890(02)00374-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 114(4), 864–886. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.114.4.864.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eyssel, F., & Kuchenbrandt, D. (2011). Manipulating anthropomorphic inferences about NAO: The role of situational and dispositional aspects of effectance motivation. In 20th International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (S. 467–472). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2011.6005233.

  • Eyssel, F., & Reich, N. (2013). Loneliness makes the heart grow fonder (of robots): On the effects of loneliness on psychological anthropomorphism. In 8th international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI) (S. 121–122). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2013.6483531.

  • Fink, J. (2012). Anthropomorphism and human likeness in the design of robots and human-robot interaction. In S. S. Ge, O. Khatib, J.-J. Cabibihan, R. Simmons, & M.-A. Williams (Hrsg.), Social robotics (S. 199–208). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-34103-8_20.

  • Fischer, F., Kollar, I., Mandl, H., & Haake, J. M. (Hrsg.). (2007). Scripting computer-supported collaborative learning: Cognitive, computational and educational perspectives. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-36949-5.

  • Fischer, K. (2019). Why collaborative robots must be social (and even emotional) actors. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 23(3), 270–289. https://doi.org/10.5840/techne20191120104.

  • Fosch-Villaronga, E., Lutz, C., & Tamò-Larrieux, A. (2020). Gathering expert opinions for social robots’ ethical, legal, and societal concerns: Findings from four international workshops. International Journal of Social Robotics, 12(2), 441–458. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-019-00605-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, I. W. (2001). At the intersection of technology and pedagogy: Considering styles of learning and teaching. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(1–2), 37–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/14759390100200102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grunwald, A. (2019). Der unterlegene Mensch: Die Zukunft der Menschheit im Angesicht von Algorithmen, künstlicher Intelligenz und Robotern. Riva Premium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haag, L. (2004). Tutorielles Lernen. In G. W. Lauth, M. Grünke, & J. C. Brunstein (Hrsg.), Interventionen bei Lernstörungen. Förderung, Training und Therapie in der Praxis (S. 402–410). Hogrefe.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hascher, T. (2014). Forschung zur Wirksamkeit der Lehrbildung. In E. Terhart, H. Bennewitz, & M. Rothland (Hrsg.), Handbuch der Forschung zum Lehrberuf (S. 542–571). Waxmann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hattie, J. (2010). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinen, R., & Kerres, M. (2015). Individuelle Förderung mit digitalen Medien. Handlungsfelder für die systematische, lernförderliche Integration digitaler Medien in Schule und Unterricht. Bertelsmann Stiftung.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofree, G., Ruvolo, P., Bartlett, M. S., & Winkielman, P. (2014). Bridging the mechanical and the human mind: Spontaneous mimicry of a physically present android. PLoS ONE, 9(7), e99934. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099934.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holz, T., Dragone, M., & O’Hare, G. M. P. (2009). Where robots and virtual agents meet: A survey of social interaction research across Milgram’s reality-virtuality continuum. International Journal of Social Robotics, 1(1), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-008-0002-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horstmann, A. C., & Krämer, N. C. (2019). Great expectations? Relation of previous experiences with social robots in real life or in the media and expectancies based on qualitative and quantitative assessment. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 939. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, A., Weiss, A., & Rauhala, M. (2016). The ethical risk of attachment how to identify, investigate and predict potential ethical risks in the development of social companion robots. In 11th international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI), (S. 367–374). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451774.

  • Istenič Starčič, A. (2019). Human learning and learning analytics in the age of artificial intelligence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 2974–2976. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jamet, F., Masson, O., Jacquet, B., Stilgenbauer, J.-L., & Baratgin, J. (2018). Learning by teaching with humanoid robot: A new powerful experimental tool to improve children’s learning ability. Journal of Robotics, 2018(2), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/4578762.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, J., Lemaignan, S., Montassier, C., Lavalade, P., Irfan, B., Papadopoulos, F., Senft, E., & Belpaeme, T. (2017). Child speech recognition in human-robot interaction: Evaluations and recommendations. In 12th international conference on human-robot interaction (S. 82–90). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020229.

  • Kerres, M. (2001). Multimediale und telemediale Lernumgebungen: Konzeption und Entwicklung. Oldenbourg. https://doi.org/10.1524/9783486593815.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kersting, C. (2019). Humanoide Unterstützung an der Schule. Roboter im Klassenzimmer. Deutschlandfunk. https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/humanoide-unterstuetzung-an-der-schule-roboter-im.680.de.html?dram:Article_id=453439. Zugegriffen: 27. Aug. 2021.

  • Kiesler, S., Powers, A., Fussell, S. R., & Torrey, C. (2008). Anthropomorphic interactions with a robot and robot-like agent. Social Cognition, 26(2), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klovert, H. (2017). Roboter im Hörsaal: Pepper eröffnet Veranstaltung für Anglisten. Der Spiegel, 19.10.2017. https://www.spiegel.de/lebenundlernen/uni/roboter-im-hoersaal-pepper-eroeffnet-veranstaltung-fuer-anglisten-a-1173713.html. Zugegriffen: 27. Aug. 2021.

  • Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. W. (2006). Collaboration scripts – A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18(2), 159–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-006-9007-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konijn, E. A., & Hoorn, J. F. (2020). Robot tutor and pupils’ educational ability: Teaching the times tables. Computers & Education, 157, 103970. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103970.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehmann, H., & Rossi, P. G. (2019). Social robots in educational contexts: Developing an application in enactive didactics. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, 15(2), 27–41. https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1633.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lemaignan, S., Jacq, A., Hood, D., Garcia, F., Paiva, A., & Dillenbourg, P. (2016). Learning by teaching a robot: The case of handwriting. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 23(2), 56–66. https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2016.2546700.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lohan, K. S., Sheppard, E., Little, G., & Rajendran, G. (2018). Toward improved child-robot interaction by understanding eye movements. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems, 10(4), 983–992. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCDS.2018.2838342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz, C., Schöttler, M., & Hoffmann, C. P. (2019). The privacy implications of social robots: Scoping review and expert interviews. Mobile Media & Communication, 7(3), 412–434. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157919843961.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malle, B. F., & Scheutz, M. (2019). Learning how to behave: Moral competence for social robots. In O. Bendel (Hrsg.), Handbuch Maschinenethik (S. 1–24). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-17484-2_17-1.

  • Mann, J. A., MacDonald, B. A., Kuo, I.-H., Li, X., & Broadbent, E. (2015). People respond better to robots than computer tablets delivering healthcare instructions. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 112–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J.-P., & Kelchner, R. (1998). Lernen durch Lehren. In J.-P. Timm (Hrsg.), Englisch lernen und lehren. Didaktik des Englischunterrichts (S. 211–219). Cornelsen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Menne, I. M. (2017). Yes, of course? An investigation on obedience and feelings of shame towards a robot. In A. Kheddar, E. Yoshida, S. S. Ge, K. Suzuki, J.-J. Cabibihan, F. Eyssel, & H. He (Hrsg.), Social robotics (S. 365–374). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70022-9_36.

  • Mietzel, G. (2017). Pädagogische Psychologie des Lernens und Lehrens (9. Aufl.). Hogrefe.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. P., & Nourbakhsh, I. (2016). Robotics for education. In B. Siciliano & O. Khatib (Hrsg.), Springer handbook of robotics (S. 2115–2134). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32552-1_79.

  • Mubin, O., Wadibhasme, K., Jordan, P., & Obaid, M. (2019). Reflecting on the presence of science fiction robots in computing literature. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 8(1), 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1145/3303706.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nass, C., & Moon, Y. (2000). Machines and mindlessness: Social responses to computers. Journal of Social Issues, 56(1), 81–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nass, C., Moon, Y., & Carney, P. (1999). Are people polite to computers? Responses to computer-based interviewing systems. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 29(5), 1093–1109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.1999.tb00142.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Donnell, A. M. (2006). The role of peers and group learning. In P. A. Alexander & P. H. Winne (Hrsg.), Handbook of educational psychology (S. 781–802). Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Özgür, A., Johal, W., Mondada, F., & Dillenbourg, P. (2017). Windfield: Learning wind meteorology with handheld haptic robots. In 12th international conference on human-robot interaction (S. 156–165). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909824.3020231.

  • Prensky, N. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816.

  • Rath, M. (2020). Kritische Medienkompetenz. Zur ethischen Überforderung einer allein pädagogischen Medienbildung. Communicatio Socialis, 53(2), 148–157. https://doi.org/10.5771/0010-3497-2020-2-148.

  • Reeves, B., & Nass, C. I. (1998). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich, K. (2005). Konstruktivistische Didaktik. Beispiele für eine veränderte Unterrichtspraxis. Schulmagazin 5 bis 10, 73(3), 5–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reich-Stiebert, N., & Eyssel, F. (2015). Learning with educational companion robots? Toward attitudes on education robots, predictors of attitudes, and application potentials for education robots. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(5), 875–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0308-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reich-Stiebert, N., & Eyssel, F. (2016). Robots in the classroom: What teachers think about teaching and learning with education robots. In A. Agah, J.-J. Cabibihan, A. M. Howard, M. A. Salichs, & H. He (Hrsg.), Social Robotics (Bd. 9979, S. 671–680). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47437-3_66.

  • Reinmann-Rothmeier, G., & Mandl, H. (2001). Unterrichten und Lernumgebungen gestalten. In A. Krapp & B. Weidenmann (Hrsg.), Pädagogische Psychologie (S. 601–646). Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resing, W. C. M., Bakker, M., Elliott, J. G., & Vogelaar, B. (2019). Dynamic testing: Can a robot as tutor be of help in assessing children’s potential for learning? Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 35(4), 540–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saerbeck, M., Schut, T., Bartneck, C., & Janse, M. D. (2010). Expressive robots in education: Varying the degree of social supportive behavior of a robotic tutor. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on human factors in computing systems – CHI ’10, 1613, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, ACM Press. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753567.

  • Scassellati, B., Boccanfuso, L., Huang, C.-M., Mademtzi, M., Qin, M., Salomons, N., Ventola, P., & Shic, F. (2018). Improving social skills in children with ASD using a long-term, in-home social robot. Science Robotics, 3(21), eaat7544. https://doi.org/10.1126/scirobotics.aat7544.

  • Schneider, S., & Kummert, F. (2018). Comparing the effects of social robots and virtual agents on exercising motivation. In S. S. Ge, J.-J. Cabibihan, M. A. Salichs, E. Broadbent, H. He, A. R. Wagner, & Á. Castro-González (Hrsg.), Social robotics (S. 451–461). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05204-1_44.

  • Sharkey, A. (2016). Should we welcome robot teachers? Ethics and Information Technology, 18(4), 283–297. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10676-016-9387-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharkey, N., & Sharkey, A. (2007). Artificial intelligence and natural magic. Artificial Intelligence Review, 25(1–2), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-007-9048-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smakman, M., & Konijn, E. A. (2020). Robot tutors: Welcome or ethically questionable? In M. Merdan, W. Lepuschitz, G. Koppensteiner, R. Balogh, & D. Obdržálek (Hrsg.), Robotics in education (S. 376–386). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26945-6_34.

  • Smith, E. E., Kahlke, R., & Judd, T. (2020). Not just digital natives: Integrating technologies in professional education contexts. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 36, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.5689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Subramanian, R. (2017). Emergent AI, social robots and the law: Security, privacy and policy issues. Journal of International, Technology and Information Management, 26(3), 81–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, P. (2013). The digital natives as learners: Technology use patterns and approaches to learning. Computers & Education, 65, 12–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.12.022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. J., & Ehly, S. W. (2001). Peer assisted learning: A framework for consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(2), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1207/S1532768XJEPC1202_03.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotskij, L. S., Metraux, A., Lompscher, J., & Rückriem, G. (2017). Denken und Sprechen: Psychologische Untersuchungen (3. Aufl.). Beltz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijnen, F. M., Davison, D. P., Reidsma, D., Meij, J. V. D., Charisi, V., & Evers, V. (2020). Now we’re talking: Learning by explaining your reasoning to a social robot. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, 9(1), 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1145/3345508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wildfeuer, W. (2006). Kommunikation – Moderation – Mediation: Ein Trainingsprogramm für Schüler und Lehrer. Juventa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zaga, C., Lohse, M., Truong, K. P., & Evers, V. (2015). The effect of a robot’s social character on children’s task engagement: Peer versus tutor. In A. Tapus, E. André, J.-C. Martin, F. Ferland, & M. Ammi (Hrsg.), Social robotics (704–713). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25554-5_70.

  • Złotowski, J., Proudfoot, D., Yogeeswaran, K., & Bartneck, C. (2015). Anthropomorphism: Opportunities and challenges in human–robot interaction. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7(3), 347–360. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0267-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. FernUniversität in Hagen, CATALPA, Hagen, Deutschland

    Natalia Reich-Stiebert

Authors
  1. Natalia Reich-Stiebert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natalia Reich-Stiebert .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Bildungswissenschaft und Medienforschung, Fern Universität in Hagen, Hagen, Deutschland

    Claudia de Witt

  2. Universität Bremen, Bremen, Deutschland

    Christina Gloerfeld

  3. Institut für Bildungswissenschaft und Medienforschung, Fern Universität in Hagen, Hagen, Deutschland

    Silke Elisabeth Wrede

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Reich-Stiebert, N. (2023). Roboter in kollaborativen Lehr-Lernkontexten. Theoretische Reflexionen interaktiver Lehr-Lernformen mit sozialen Robotern. In: de Witt, C., Gloerfeld, C., Wrede, S.E. (eds) Künstliche Intelligenz in der Bildung. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40079-8_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-40079-8_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer VS, Wiesbaden

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-658-40078-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-658-40079-8

  • eBook Packages: Education and Social Work (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation