waterloo: Engineering researchers at the University of Waterloo are successfully using a robot to help keep children with learning disabilities focused on their work.
This was one of the key results in a new study that also found that both young people and their instructors valued the positive contributions of the robot in the classroom.
“There is definitely great potential for the use of robots in the public education system,” said Dr. Kerstin Dautenhahn, professor of electrical engineering and computer science. “Overall, the findings imply that the robot has a positive effect on students.”
dautenhahn has been working on robotics in the disability context for many years and incorporates principles of equity, inclusion and diversity into research projects.
Students with learning disabilities may benefit from additional learning support, such as individual instruction and the use of smartphones and tablets.
In recent years, educators have explored the use of social robots to help students learn, but more often than not, their research has focused on children with autism spectrum disorder. As a result, little work has been done on the use of welfare robots for students with learning disabilities.
Along with two other Waterloo engineering researchers and three experts from the Learning Disabilities Society In Vancouver, Dautenhahn decided to change this, running a series of tests with a small humanoid robot called QT.
Dautenhahn, the Canada 150 Research Chair in Intelligent Robotics, said the robot’s ability to perform head and hand gestures, along with speech and facial features, makes it well-suited for use with children with learning disabilities. .
Building on promising previous research, the researchers divided 16 students with learning disabilities into two groups. In one group, students worked one on one with only one instructor. In the other group, the students worked one-on-one with an instructor and a QT robot. In the latter group, the instructor used a tablet to direct the robot, which then performed various activities autonomously using the tablet’s speech and gestures.
While the instructor controlled the sessions, the robot took over at certain times, activated by the instructor, to guide the student.
In addition to presenting the session, the robot set goals and provided self-regulation strategies, if necessary. If the learning process was getting off track, the robot used strategies such as games, riddles, jokes, breathing exercises, and physical movements to redirect the learner back to the task.
The students who worked with the robot, Dautenhahn said, “generally were more engaged with their tasks and were able to complete them at a higher rate compared” to students who were not assisted by a robot. Further studies using the robot are planned.
A paper on the study, User Assessment of Social Robots as a Tool in One-to-One Instruction Settings for Students with Learning Disabilities, was recently presented at the International Conference on Social Robotics in Florence, Italy. (ME TOO)
