Language teachers’ perceptions and acceptance of educational robotics for classroom integration

Xiaotong Yu; María Ángeles Gutiérrez-García; Roberto Soto-Varela; Melchor Gómez-García

doi:10.30935/cedtech/15637

Xiaotong Yu ¹ ^* , María Ángeles Gutiérrez-García ¹, Roberto Soto-Varela ², Melchor Gómez-García ¹

More Detail

CONT ED TECHNOLOGY, Volume 17, Issue 1, Article No: ep545

https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15637

Submitted: 24 July 2024, Published Online: 21 November 2024

OPEN ACCESS 22 Views 8 Downloads

Download Full Text (PDF)

Abstract

Robotics education and robot-embedded learning have become focal points in recent interdisciplinary and innovative education. Despite the identified opportunities, there are still limitations and considerations before integrating educational robotics into foreign language education on a large scale. This survey investigates foreign language teachers’ perceptions and acceptance of teaching with educational robotics and robot-assisted language learning. To achieve this, the ERPA scale, containing five subscales measuring teachers’ technological, pedagogical, and content knowledge, and the perceived usefulness of robots, was adapted as the data collection instrument. The scale consisted of 19 items based on a 5-point Likert scale. A total of 109 foreign language teachers from Spain participated in the survey. The results suggest a positive relationship between teachers’ basic digital competence, technological knowledge of robot usage, pedagogical knowledge in foreign language teaching, and perceived usefulness of robots. Additionally, the length of service and target language positively affect acceptance. This research contributes to current educational robotics studies by identifying features of robots considered suitable for language teaching, such as animal-like embodiments instead of humanoid forms.

Keywords: attitudes, acceptance, educational robotics, EFL, second language

References

Arís, N., & Orcos, L. (2019). Educational robotics in the stage of secondary education: Empirical study on motivation and STEM skills. Education Sciences, 9(2), Article 73. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9020073
Betancourt-Odio, M. A., Sartor-Harada, A., Ulloa-Guerra, O., & Azevedo-Gomes, J. (2021). Self-perceptions on digital competencies for m-learning and education sustainability: A study with teachers from different countries. Sustainability, 13(1), Article 343. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13010343
Biernacki, P., & Waldorf, D. (1981). Snowball sampling: Problems and techniques of chain referral sampling. Sociological Methods & Research, 10(2), 141–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/004912418101000205
Chin, K., Hong, Z., & Chen, Y. (2014). Impact of using an educational robot-based learning system on students’ motivation in elementary education. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 7(4), 333–345. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2014.2346756
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203224342
Di Battista, S., Pivetti, M., Simaku, B., Beraldo, G., Menegatti, E., & Moro, M. (2021). Educational robotics acceptance by Italian teachers, educators, psychologists and psychotherapists. In Proceedings of the Educational Robotics International Conference (pp. 167–178). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77022-8_15
Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
Eguchi, A., & Uribe, L. (2017). Robotics to promote STEM learning: Educational robotics unit for 4th grade science [Paper presentation]. The 2017 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISECon.2017.7910240
Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11
Fernández-Sánchez, M. R., Garrido-Arroyo, M. D. C., & Porras-Masero, I. (2022). Curricular integration of digital technologies in teaching processes. Frontiers in Education, 7, Article 1005499. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.1005499
Hunutlu, Ş., & Küçük, S. (2022). Examining EFL teachers’ TPACK perceptions, Web 2.0 tools usage, workload, and technostress levels. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.315306
Koehler, M. J., Mishra, P., Kereluik, K., Shin, T. S., & Graham, C. R. (2014). The technological pedagogical content knowledge framework. In J. Spector, M. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. Bishop, M. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 101–111). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3185-5_9
Lai Wah, L., & Hashim, H. (2021). Determining pre-service teachers’ intention of using technology for teaching English as a second language (ESL). Sustainability, 13(14), Article 7568. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147568
Lai, C., Wang, Q., & Huang, X. (2022). The differential interplay of TPACK, teacher beliefs, school culture and professional development with the nature of in-service EFL teachers’ technology adoption. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53(5), 1389–1411. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13200
Latip, A., Andriani, Y., Purnamasari, S., & Abdurrahman, D. (2020). Integration of educational robotic in STEM learning to promote students’ collaborative skill. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1663, Article 012052. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1663/1/012052
Lin, V., Yeh, H., & Chen, N. (2022). A systematic review on oral interactions in robot-assisted language learning. Electronics, 11(2), Article 290. https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11020290
Molnár, G., & Szűts, Z. (2022). Use of artificial intelligence in electronic learning environments [Paper presentation]. The 2022 IEEE 5^th International Conference and Workshop Óbuda on Electrical and Power Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1109/CANDO-EPE57516.2022.10046356
Mouza, C., & Karchmer-Klein, R. (2013). Promoting and assessing pre-service teachers’ technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) in the context of case development. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 48(2), 127–152. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.48.2.b
Negrini, L. (2020). Teachers’ attitudes towards educational robotics in compulsory school. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(1), 77–90. https://doi.org/10.17471/2499-4324/1136
Ong, Q. K. L., & Annamalai, N. (2024). Technological pedagogical content knowledge for twenty-first century learning skills: The game changer for teachers of Industrial Revolution 5.0. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 1939–1980. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11852-z
Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Glazewski, K. D., Newby, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2010). Teacher value beliefs associated with using technology: Addressing professional and student needs. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1321–1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.002
Palacios-Hidalgo, F. J., & Huertas-Abril, C. A. (2022). Developing digital literacy in initial EFL teacher education: A study in a Spanish distance university. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680513.2022.2157709
Park, M., & Son, J. (2022). Pre-service EFL teachers’ readiness in computer-assisted language learning and teaching. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 42(2), 320–334. https://doi.org/10.1080/02188791.2020.1815649
Pei, Z., & Nie, Y. (2018). Educational robots: Classification, characteristics, application areas and problems [Paper presentation]. The 2018 7^th International Conference of Educational Innovation Through Technology. https://doi.org/10.1109/EITT.2018.00020
Rahman, S. M. (2021). Assessing and benchmarking learning outcomes of robotics-enabled stem education. Education Sciences, 11(2), Article 84. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020084
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, 875–888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0308-9
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. Howard, M. Salichs, & H. He (Eds.), Social robotics. ICSR 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 9979 (pp. 671–680). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47437-3_66
Saari, U. A., Tossavainen, A., Kaipainen, K., & Mäkinen, S. J. (2022). Exploring factors influencing the acceptance of social robots among early adopters and mass market representatives. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 151, Article 104033. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2022.104033
Song, C. S., & Kim, Y. (2022). The role of the human-robot interaction in consumers’ acceptance of humanoid retail service robots. Journal of Business Research, 146, 489–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.03.087
Spiteri, M., & Chang Rundgren, S. N. (2020). Literature review on the factors affecting primary teachers’ use of digital technology. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 25, 115–128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9376-x
Teo, T. (2014). Unpacking teachers’ acceptance of technology: Tests of measurement invariance and latent mean differences. Computers & Education, 75, 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.01.014
Tuna, A., & Tuna, G. (2019). The use of humanoid robots with multilingual interaction skills in teaching a foreign language: Opportunities, research challenges and future research directions. CEPS Journal, 9(3), 95–115. https://doi.org/10.26529/cepsj.679
Van den Berghe, R., Verhagen, J., Oudgenoeg-Paz, O., Van der Ven, S., & Leseman, P. (2019). Social robots for language learning: A review. Review of Educational Research, 89(2), 259–295. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654318821286
Wang, X., Li, L., Tan, S. C., Yang, L., & Lei, J. (2023). Preparing for AI-enhanced education: Conceptualizing and empirically examining teachers’ AI readiness. Computers in Human Behavior, 146, Article 107798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107798
Yu, X., Garcia, M. A. G., & Soto-Varela, R. (2023). Are educational robots any good for communicative English learning for primary school students? Texto Livre, 16, Article e41469. https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-3652.2023.41469
Yu, X., Soto-Varela, R., & Gutiérrez-García, M. Á. (2024). How to learn and teach a foreign language through computational thinking: Suggestions based on a systematic review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 52, 101517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2024.101517

Citation

Yu, X., Gutiérrez-García, M. Á., Soto-Varela, R., & Gómez-García, M. (2025). Language teachers’ perceptions and acceptance of educational robotics for classroom integration. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(1), ep545. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15637

Yu, X., Gutiérrez-García, M. Á., Soto-Varela, R., and Gómez-García, M. (2025). Language teachers’ perceptions and acceptance of educational robotics for classroom integration. Contemporary Educational Technology, 17(1), ep545. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15637

Yu X, Gutiérrez-García MÁ, Soto-Varela R, Gómez-García M. Language teachers’ perceptions and acceptance of educational robotics for classroom integration. CONT ED TECHNOLOGY. 2025;17(1), ep545. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15637

Yu, Xiaotong, María Ángeles Gutiérrez-García, Roberto Soto-Varela, and Melchor Gómez-García. "Language teachers’ perceptions and acceptance of educational robotics for classroom integration". Contemporary Educational Technology 2025 17 no. 1 (2025): ep545. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15637

Yu, Xiaotong et al. "Language teachers’ perceptions and acceptance of educational robotics for classroom integration". Contemporary Educational Technology, vol. 17, no. 1, 2025, ep545. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15637

Yu X, Gutiérrez-García MÁ, Soto-Varela R, Gómez-García M. Language teachers’ perceptions and acceptance of educational robotics for classroom integration. CONT ED TECHNOLOGY. 2025;17(1):ep545. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/15637