Analysis of Studies in the Literature on Educational Robotics


  • Murat Auyelbek
  • Kalibek Ybyraimzhanov
  • Erlan Andasbayev
  • Elmira Abdykerimova
  • Asset Turkmenbayev


academic discourse, pedagogy, educational robotics, module, student training


Based on the consistent development of technologization, robotics has become widely used in many fields of activity as a tool and an educational resource. This article presents some arguments about insufficiency, as well as the importance of further academic
discourse, which can serve as a starting point for similar studies and the development of this dynamic direction. The purpose of this study is to reveal the direction of the most current studies on the educational robotics topic, published in some important databases.
In order to detect the most common concepts of educational robotics research of the literature, a thematic analysis (descriptive content analysis) is done on the key concepts of educational robotics topic. The articles analyzed in this stud were only used sources from the Web of Science, Scopus and MDPI databases. The search in the database search engine was carried out by keywords: “Educational robotics”, “Teaching educational robotics”, “Integration of robotics”, “Robotics in education" and “Education robotics”.
The data gathered from the reviewed articles are analyzed using descriptive statistical methods. In the findings obtained from the study, the keywords "integration of robotics" and "robotics in education" can be used most when searching for educational robotics. It
has been concluded that the studies on educational robotics have increased gradually since 2018. At this point, the importance of studies on educational robotics is increasing day by day.


Download data is not yet available.


. Jung, S., & Won, E. – S. (2018). Systematic review of research trends in robotics education for young children. Sustainability, 10(4), 905.

. Papert, S. Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas; Basic Books, Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 2020

. Miller, D.P.; Nourbakhsh, I. Robotics for Education. In Springer Handbook of Robotics; Siciliano, B., Khatib, O., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 2115–2134

. Jesús López-Belmonte, Adrián Segura-Robles, Antonio-José Moreno-Guerrero and María-Elena Parra-González. Robotics in Education: A Scientific Mapping of the Literature in Web of Science. 2021, 10, 291.

. Despoina Schina, Cristina Val Bautista, Anna Borrull Riera, Mireia Usart and Vanessa Esteve González. An associational study: preschool teachers’ acceptance and self‑efcacy towards Educational Robotics in a pre‑service teacher training program. Int J Educ Technol High Educ (2021) 18:28.

. Tsai, M. J., Wang, C. Y., Wu, A. H., & Hsiao, C. Y. (2021). The development and validation of the robotics learning self‑efficacy scale (RLSES). Journal of Educational Computing Research.

. Giang, C., Piatti, A., Mondada, F. (2019). Heuristics for the development and evaluation of educational robotics systems. IEEE Transactionson Education, p. 1–10.

. Giang, C. (2020). Towards the alignment of educational robotics learning systems with classroom activities. page 176. Backup Publisher: IBI-STIPlace: Lausanne Publisher: EPFL

. El-Hamamsy, L., Chessel-Lazzarotto, F., Bruno, B., Roy, D., Cahlikova, T., Chevalier, M., Parriaux, G., Pellet, J.-P., Lanarès, J., Zufferey, J. D., & Mondada, F. (2020). A computer science and robotics integration model for primary school: evaluation of a large-scale in-service K-4 teacher-training program. Education and Information Technologies.

. Kelly C. Margot and Todd Kettler. Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. International Journal of STEM Education. 2019

. Al Salami, M. K., Makela, C. J., & de Miranda M. A. (2017). Assessing changes inteachers’ attitudes toward interdisciplinary STEM teaching.InternationalJournal of Technology and Design Education, 27,63–88.

. Danielle Herro, Cassie Quigley, Jessica Andrews and Girlie Delacruz. Co-Measure: developing an assessment for student collaboration in STEAM activities. International Journal of STEM Education (2017) 4:26.

. El-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., Alzaghibi, M. & Alhammad, K. (2017). Context ofSTEM integration in schools: views from in-service science teachers. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education, 13(6), 2459–2484.

. Maguth B.M. Social Studies Research & Practice, 7(2) (2012), pp. 65-90 In defense of the social studies: social studies programs in STEM education.

. Hamner, E., Cross, J., Zito, L., Bernstein, D., & Mutch-Jones, K. (2016). Training teachers to integrate engineering into non-technical middle school curriculum. In 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), pages 1–9

. Miller, D. P., & Nourbakhsh, I. (2016). Robotics for Education. In B. Siciliano & O. Khatib (Eds.), Springer Handbook of Robotics, Springer Handbooks (pp. 2115–2134). Springer International Publishing.

. Daniela, L., & Lytras, M. D. (2019). Educational robotics for inclusive education. Technology, Knowledge and Learning, 24(2), 219–225

. Greka Du franc, I. M., Garcia Terceno, E. M., Friedberg, M., Cronquist, B., & Redfors, A. (2020). Robotics and early-years STEM education: The bottom framework and activities. European Journal of STEM Education, 5(1), 01

. Laila El‑Hamamsy, Barbara Bruno, Frédérique Chessel‑Lazzarotto, Morgane Chevalier, Didier Roy, Jessica Dehler Zuferey, Francesco Mondada. The symbiotic relationship between educational robotics and computer science informal education. Education and Information Technologies (2021) 26:5077–5107.

. Forbes, C.T.; Davis, E.A. Curriculum design for inquiry. Pre-service elementary teachers’ mobilization and adaptation of sciencecurriculum materials.J. Res. Sci. Teach.2010,47, 820–839.

. Lucero, M.; Valcke, M.; Schellens, T. Teachers’ beliefs and self-reported use of inquiry in Science Education in Public PrimarySchools.Int. J. Sci. Educ.2013,35, 1407–1423

. Kim, C., Kim, D., Yuan, J., Hill, R. B., Doshi, P., & Thai, C. N. (2015). Robotics to promote elemen-tary education pre-service teachers’ STEM engagement, learning, and teaching. Computers & Education, 91, 14–31.

. Magnenat, S., Shin, J., Riedo, F., Siegwart, R., & Ben-Ari, M. (2014). Teaching a core CS concept through robotics. In Proceedings of the 2014 conference on innovation & technology in computer science education - ITiCSE ’14 (pages 315–320). ACM Press.

. Balanskat, A., & Engelhardt, K. (2015). Computer programming and coding priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe. Technical report, European Schoolnet

. Eguchi, A. (2014). Robotics as a learning tool for educational transformation. In Proceeding of 4th international workshop teaching robotics, teaching with robotics & 5th international conference robotics in education Padova (Italy).

. Benitti, F. B. V., & Spolaôr, N. (2017). How have robots supported STEM teaching? In M. S. Khine (Ed.), Robotics in STEM Education (pp. 103–129). Springer.

. Negrini, L. (2020). Teachers’ attitudes towards educational robotics in compulsory school. Italian Journal of Educational Technology, 28(1), 77–90

. Wallace, M.L.; Freitas, W.M. Resources for Underwater Robotics Education. J. Ext. 2016, 54, 1–3

. Mester, G. Massive open online courses in education of robotics. Interdiscip. Descr. Complex Syst. 2016, 14, 182–187.

. Núñez, A.J. Robotics Education Done Right: Robotics Expansion (TM), A STEAM Based Curricula. Contemp. Trends Issues Sci. Educ. 2016, 44, 169–185.

. Sánchez, E.; Cózar, R.; González-Calero, J.A. Robotics in the teaching of knowledge and interaction with the environment. A formative study in Early Childhood Education. RIFOP 2019, 94, 11–28.

. Riek, L. D., & Howard, D. (2014). A code of ethics for the human-robot interaction profession. In We robot conference (pp. 1–10).

. Sullins, J. P. (2015). Applied professional ethics for the reluctant roboticist. In The emerging policy and ethics of human-robot interaction workshop.

. Zawieska, K. (2020). Roboethics as a research puzzle. In 2019 14th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI), (731726) (pp. 612–613).

. Laura Malinverni, Cristina Valero, Marie Monique Schaper, Isabel Garcia de la Cruz. Educational Robotics as a boundary object: Towards a research agenda. 2021. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction. journal homepage:

. Gorjup, G.; Liarokapis, M. A Low-Cost, Open-Source, Robotic Airship for Education and Research. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 70713–70721.

. Caballero-González, Y.A.; García-Valcarcel, A. Learning with Robotics in Primary Education? A Means of Stimulating Computational Thinking. Educ. Knowl. Soc. 2020, 21, 1–10.

. Zhong, B.C.; Li, T.T. Can Pair Learning Improve Students’ Troubleshooting Performance in Robotics Education? J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2020, 58, 220–249.

. López-Belmonte, J.; Segura-Roubles, A.; Moreno-Guerrero, A.-J.; Parra-González, M.-E. Robotics in Education: A Scientific Mapping of the Literature in Web of Science. Electronics 2021, 10, 291.

. Kelly C. Margot and Todd Kettler. Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review. Margot and Kettler International Journal of STEM Education (2019) 6:2,

. Asghar, A., Ellington, R., Rice, E., Johnson, F., & Prime, G. M. (2012). Supporting STEM education in secondary science contexts. The Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 6(2), 85–125.

. VanTassel-Baska, J., & Little, C. A. (2011). Content-based curriculum for high-ability learners. Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

. McMullin, K., & Reeve, E. (2014). Identifying perceptions that contribute to the development of successful project lead the way pre-engineering programs in Utah. Journal of Technology Education, 26(1), 22–46. 21061/jte.v26i1.a.2.

. Stohlmann, M., Moore, T. J., & Roehrig, G. H. (2012). Considerations for teaching integrated STEM education. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 2(1), Article 4.

. Bruce-Davis, M. N., Gubbins, E. J., Gilson, C. M., Villanueva, M., Foreman, J. L., & Rubenstein, L. D. (2014). STEM high school administrators’, teachers’, and students’ perceptions of curricular and instructional strategies and practices. Journal of Advanced Academics, 25(3), 272–306.

. Lesseig, K., Slavit, D., Nelson, T. H., & Seidel, R. A. (2016). Supporting middle school teachers’ implementation of STEM design challenges. School Science and Mathematics, 116(4), 177–188.

. Van Haneghan, J. P., Pruet, S. A., Neal-Waltman, R., & Harlan, J. M. (2015). Teacher beliefs about motivating and teaching students to carry out engineering design challenges: some initial data. Journal of Pre-College Engineering Education Research, 5(2), 1–9.

. El-Deghaidy, H., Mansour, N., Alzaghibi, M. & Alhammad, K. (2017). Context of STEM integration in schools: views from in-service science teachers. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education, 13(6), 2459–2484.

. Lehman, J. D., Kim, W., & Harris, C. (2014). Collaborations in a community of practice working to integrate engineering design in elementary science education. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research, 15(3), 21–28. Retrieved from

. Sun, L., Tang, Y., & Zuo, W. (2020). Coronavirus pushes education online. Nature Materials, 19, 687.

. Anna Erika Forsström. Role of teachers in students' mathematics learning processes based on robotics integration. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction. 21 (2019) 378–389. Journal homepage:

. Balanskat A. & Engelhardt K. (2015). Computing our future: Computer programming and coding-priorities, school curricula and initiatives across Europe, Brussel European Schoolnet.

. Fabiane Barreto Vavassori Benitti. Exploring the educational potential of robotics in schools: A systematic review. Computers & Education. Volume 58, Issue 3, April 2012, Pages 978-988.

. Elena Ospennikova, Michael Ershov, Ivan Iljin (2015).Educational Robotics as an Inovative Educational Technology.Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences,Pages 18-26,

. Barak, M., & Assal, M. (2018). Robotics and STEM learning: students' achievements in assignments according to the P3 task taxonomy—Practice, problem solving, and projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 121–144.

. Park, M., Dimitrov, D. M., Patterson, L. G., & Park, D. (2017). Early childhood teachers’ beliefs about readiness for teaching science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15, 275–291.

. Chamberlin, S. A., & Pereira, N. (2017). Differentiating engineering activities for use in a mathematics setting. In D. Dailey & A. Cotabish (Eds.), Engineering Instruction for High-Ability Learners in K-8 Classrooms (pp. 45–55). Waco, TX: Prufrock Press.

. Mizuho Shibata , Member, Kosei Demura , Member, IEEE, Shinichi Hirai , Senior Member, IEEE and Akihiro Matsumoto, Member, IEEE. Comparative Study of Robotics Curricula. IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON EDUCATION, VOL. 64, NO. 3, AUGUST 2021.

. Andreas Birk and Dora Simunovic.Robotics Labs and Other Hands-On Teaching During COVID-19: Change Is Here to Stay?. IEEE ROBOTICS & AUTOMATION MAGAZINE 2021, pages 92-102.

. H. A. Younis, A. S. A. Mohamed, R. Jamaludin and M. N. A. Wahab, "Survey of robotics in education, taxonomy, applications, and platforms during covid-19," Computers, Materials & Continua, vol. 67, no.1, pp. 687–707, 2021.

. Salomi Evripidou, Kyriakoula Georgiou, Lefteris Doitsidis, Angelos A. Amanatiadis, Zinon Zinonos and Savvas A. Chatzichristofis. Educational Robotics: Platforms, Competitions and Expected Learning Outcomes. IEEE ACCESS. 2020 pages 219534-219562.