 Human–Robot Co-Facilitation in Collaborative Learning: A Comparative Study of the Effects of Human and Robot Facilitation on Learning Experience and Learning OutcomesIlona Buchem (),
Stefano Sostak and
Lewe Christiansen
J, 2024, vol. 7, issue 3, 1-28 Abstract: Collaborative learning has been widely studied in higher education and beyond, suggesting that collaboration in small groups can be effective for promoting deeper learning, enhancing engagement and motivation, and improving a range of cognitive and social outcomes. The study presented in this paper compared different forms of human and robot facilitation in the game of planning poker, designed as a collaborative activity in the undergraduate course on agile project management. Planning poker is a consensus-based game for relative estimation in teams. Team members collaboratively estimate effort for a set of project tasks. In our study, student teams played the game of planning poker to estimate the effort required for project tasks by comparing task effort relative to one another. In this within- and between-subjects study, forty-nine students in eight teams participated in two out of four conditions. The four conditions differed in respect to the form of human and/or robot facilitation. Teams 1–4 participated in conditions C1 human online and C3 unsupervised robot, while teams 5–8 participated in conditions C2 human face to face and C4 supervised robot co-facilitation. While planning poker was facilitated by a human teacher in conditions C1 and C2, the NAO robot facilitated the game-play in conditions C3 and C4. In C4, the robot facilitation was supervised by a human teacher. The study compared these four forms of facilitation and explored the effects of the type of facilitation on the facilitator’s competence (FC), learning experience (LX), and learning outcomes (LO). The results based on the data from an online survey indicated a number of significant differences across conditions. While the facilitator’s competence and learning outcomes were rated higher in human (C1, C2) compared to robot (C3, C4) conditions, participants in the supervised robot condition (C4) experienced higher levels of focus, motivation, and relevance and a greater sense of control and sense of success, and rated their cognitive learning outcomes and the willingness to apply what was learned higher than in other conditions. These results indicate that human supervision during robot-led facilitation in collaborative learning (e.g., providing hints and situational information on demand) can be beneficial for learning experience and outcomes as it allows synergies to be created between human expertise and flexibility and the consistency of the robotic assistance. Keywords: collaborative learning (CL); computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL); human–robot co-facilitation; social robots; NAO robot; learning experience; agile estimation; planning poker (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jjopen:v:7:y:2024:i:3:p:14-263:d:1435067 Access Statistics for this article J is currently edited by Ms. Angelia Su More articles in J from MDPI |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.