Akalin, N. (2014). Assistant humanoid robots for sign language tutoring (Thesis No. 384829) [Master’s thesis: Istanbul Technical University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi

Akın Robotix. (2025, 5 October). Mini Ada (Ada-7) social robot: AI-supported interaction in education. https://www.akinrobotics.com/sosyal-robot-ada-7

Baxter, P., Ashurst, E., Read, R., Kennedy, J., & Belpaeme, T. (2017). Robot education peers in a situated primary school study: Personalisation promotes child learning. PLoS ONE, 12(5), 1-23, e0178126. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178126

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

Cakmak Ekici, T. (2023). Development of a humanoid robot assisted instruction application for teaching counting objects in children with autism spectrum disorder. (Thesis No. 831841) [Master’s thesis: Fırat University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi

Ceha, J., Law, E., Kulić, D. et al. (2022). Identifying functions and behaviours of social robots for ın-class learning activities: teachers’ perspective. International Journal of Social Robotics, 14, 747–761 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-021-00820-7

Chang, C.-W., Lee, J.-H., Chao, P.-Y., Wang, C.-Y., & Chen, G.-D. (2010). Exploring the possibility of using umanoid robots as ınstructional tools for teaching a second language in primary school. Educational Technology & Society, 13(2), 13–24

Cinar, S. (2018, 27-29 October). Pre-service science teachers’ attitudes toward robots [Conference presentation abstract]. Paper presented at the II. International Teacher Education and Accreditation Congress, Recep Tayyip Erdogan University, Rize, https://iteac.epdad.org.tr/data/genel/ITEAC%202018%20Program.pdf

Edwards, A., Edwards, C., Spence, P. R., Harris, C., & Gambino, A. (2016). Robots in the classroom: Differences in students’ perceptions of credibility and learning between “teacher as robot” and “robot as teacher”. Computers in Human Behavior, 65, 627–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.005

Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: how knowledge, confidence, beliefs and culture ıntersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42, 255-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551

Ewijk, G., Smakman, M., & Konijn, E.A. (2020). Teachers’ perspectives on social robots in education: an exploratory case study. In: Proceedings of the Interaction Design and Children Conference IDC’ 20 (pp. 273–28), Association for Computing Machinery, New York. https://doi.org/10.1145/3392063.3394397

Gardenghi C., & Gherardi L. (2024). Teaching with the Nao Robot: Teacher - users’ attitudes, Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 16(1), 71-86. https://doi.org/10.14658/PUPJ-IJSE-2024-1-4

Han, J., Jo, M., Jones, V., & Jo, J. (2008). Comparative study on the educational use of home robots for children. Journal of Information Processing Systems, 4(4), 159–168. https://doi.org/10.3745/JIPS.2008.4.4.159

Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V. et al. (2010). Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: The Almere Model. International Journal of Social Robotics, 2, 361–375 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-010-0068-5

Hew, K.F., & Brush, T.(2007). Integrating technology into K-12 teaching and learning: current knowledge gaps and recommendations for future research. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55, 223–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9022-5

Holeva, V.A., Nikopoulou, V., Lytridis, C., Bazinas, C., Kechayas, P., Sidiropoulos, G., … & Kaburlasos, V. G. (2022). Effectiveness of a robot-assisted psychological intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 54(2), 577–593. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-022-05796-5

Istenič, A., Podpečan, V., Rosanda, V., & Zhai, X. (2025). Social robot radical innovation: capacities and status attributed to the NAO robot by 11 to 12-year-old students and preservice teachers’ perceptions. Cogent Education, 12(1), 1-22, https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2489820

Johnston, S.K. (2023). Privacy considerations of using social robots in education: Policy recommendations for learning environments. United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs, Sustainable Development

Khalifa, A., Kato, T., & Yamamoto, S. (2016, May). Joining-in-type humanoid robot-assisted language learning system. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’16). Portorož, Slovenia. https://aclanthology.org/L16-1037/

Kanda, T., Hirano, T., Eaton, D., & Ishiguro, H. (2004). Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: A field trial. Human-Computer Interaction, 19(1), 61–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2004.9667340

Kennedy, J., Lemaignan, S., & Belpaeme, T. (2016, August). The cautious attitude of teachers towards social robots in schools. In Proceedings of the Robots 4 Learning Workshop at the IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN 2016). New York https://www.tc.columbia.edu/conferences/roman2016/

Komatsubara, T., Shiomi, M., Kanda, T., Ishiguro, H., & Hagita, N. (2014). Can a social robot help children’s understanding of science in classrooms?. In Proceedings of the second international conference on Human-agent interaction (pp. 83–90). https://doi.org/10.1145/2658861.2

Kory Westlund, J., & Breazeal, C. (2015). The Interplay of Robot Language Level with Children's Language Learning during Storytelling. In J. A. Adams, W. Smart, B. Mutlu, & L. Takayama (Eds.), Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction: Extended abstracts (pp. 65-66). https://dblp.dagstuhl.de/db/conf/hri/hri2015ea.html

Koksalan, B., Akpinar, B., & Akyildiz, T.Y. (2024). Analysis of teacher views on the advantages and disadvantages (frankenstein syndrome) of using humanoid robots in education, Electronic Journal of Social Sciences, 23(92), 1394-1415. https://Doi.Org/10.17755/Esosder.1483914

Kucuk, A. (2022). Which is more effective in teaching energy transformations: Technology-based or inquiry-based science teaching? Shanlax International Journal of Education, 10(4), 88–100. https://doi.org/10.34293/education.v10i4.4760

Leite, I., Martinho, C., & Palva, A. (2013). Social robots for long-terminteraction: A survey. International Journal of Social Robots, 5, 291–308

LeTendre, G. K., & Gray, R. (2024). Social robots in a project-based learning environment: Adolescent understanding of robot–human interactions. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 40(1), 192–204. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12872204

Lampropoulos, G. (2025). Social Robots in Education: Current Trends and Future Perspectives. Information, 16(1), 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/info16010029

Majgaard, G. (2015). Humanoid robots in the classroom. IADIS International Journal on WWW/Internet, 13(1), 72-86. http://www.iadisportal.org/ijwi/papers/2015131106.pdf

Michaelis, J. E. & Mutlu, B. (2021). "That was mindblowing”: How reading with a social robot enhances science learning experiences. In de Vries, E., Hod, Y., & Ahn, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th ınternational conference of the learning sciences - ICLS 2021. (pp. 267-274). Bochum, Germany: International Society of the Learning Sciences.

Mubin, O., Stevens, C. J., Shahid, S. Mahmud, A. A., & Dong J.J. (2013). A review of the applicability of robots in education. Technology for Education and Learning, 1, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.2316/Journal.209.2013.1.209-0015.

Ministry of National Education [MoNE] (2025, 1 October). Formal education statistics for 2024–2025 announced. https://www.meb.gov.tr/2024-2025-orgun-egitim-istatistikleri-aciklandi/haber/38473/tr

Namdar, B., & Kucuk, A. (2018). A descriptive content analysis of research on technology integration in science education: The case of Turkey. Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Journal of Education Faculty, 48, 355 – 383. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/maeuefd

Neumann, M. M. (2023). Bringing social robots to preschool: Transformation or Disruption? Childhood Education, 99(4), 62–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2023.2232283

Nomura, T., Kanda, T., Suzuki, T., & Kato, K. (2008). Prediction of human behavior in human–robot interaction using psychological scales for anxiety and negative attitudes toward robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 24(2), 442–451. https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2007.914004

Nomura, T. A. (2020). Possibility of inappropriate use of gender studies in human-robot Interaction. AI & Society, 35(3), 751–754. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-019-00913-y

OECD (2021). Digital Education Outlook 2021: Pushing the frontiers with artificial intelligence, blockchain and robots. OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-digital-education-outlook-2021_589b283f-en.html

Rosanda, V., Bratko, I., Gačnik, M., Podpečan, V., & Istenič, A. (2025). Robot NAO integrated lesson vs. traditional lesson: Measuring learningoutcomes on the topic of “societal change” and the mediating effect of students'attitudes. British Journal of Educational Technology, 56, 435–450. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13501

Rosanda, V., & Starčič, A. (2023). Robot-supported lesson. In A. Istenič, M. Gačnik, B. Horvat, M. Kukanja Gabrijelčič, V. R. Kiswarday, M. Lebeničnik, M. Mezgec, M. Volk (Eds.), Upbringing and education between the past and the future (pp. 101–121). Založba Univerze na Primorskem

Sagdic, Z. A. (2024). Comparison of robot-delivered and teacher-delivered script fading instruction in teaching conversational skills to children with autism spectrum disorder: Mix method research (Thesis No. 875583) [Phd thesis: Anadolu University), Council of Higher Education Thesis Center. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi

Selcuklu Autism Individuals Education Foundation [SOBE] (2025, 11 February). Robot-assisted educational practices at SOBE. https://www.sobe.org.tr/

Sen, N. (2021). Humanoid robots in special education. European Journal of Science and Technology, 32, 832-842. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.1047564

Serholt, S. (2018). Breakdowns in children’s interactions with a robotic tutor: A longitudinal study. Computers in Human Behavior, 81, 250–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.12.030

Serholt, S., & Barendregt, W. (2014). Teachers' views on the use of empathic robotic tutors in the classroom. In Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Workshop on Philosophical Perspectives of HRI, (pp. 955-960). Edinburgh https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=6926220

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

Sievers, T., & Russwinkel, N. (2024). Project report: Requirements for a social robot as an ınformation provider in the public sector. KI - Künstliche Intelligenz, 38, 145–149 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13218-024-00840-1

Smakman, M. H. J., Konijn, E. A., Vogt, P., & Pankowska, P. (2021). Attitudes towards social robots in education: Enthusiast, practical, troubled, sceptic, and mindfully positive. Robotics, 10(1), 24. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics10010024

Short, E. S., Swift-Spong, K., Shim, H., Wisniewski, K. M., Zak, D. K., Wu, S., ... & Matarić, M. J. (2017, August). Understanding social interactions with socially assistive robotics in intergenerational family groups. In 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 236-241).

Shiomi, M., Kanda, T., Howley, I. et al. (2015). Can a social robot stimulate science curiosity in classrooms?. International Journal of Social Robotics, 7, 641–652 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0303-1

Tondeur, J., van Braak, J., Ertmer, P.A. et al. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: a systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65, 555–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9481-2

Trinquet C., Mishra D., & Pande A. (2025). The future of libraries: Integrating pepper andcomputer vision for smart assistance Array, 27, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.array.2025.100469

Turkalp, M. (2023). The effect of teaching activities using a humanoid robot on the social skills of children with autism (Thesis No. 811058) [Master’s thesis: Fırat University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center. https://tez.yok.gov.tr/UlusalTezMerkezi

UNESCO. (2025). Guidance for generative AI in education and research. UNESCO. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/guidance-generative-ai-education-and-research

Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478. https://doi.org/10.2307/30036540

Wangdi, T., Dhendup, S., & Gyelmo, T. (2023). Factors influencing teachers’ intention to use technology: Role of TPACK and facilitating conditions. International Journal of Instruction, 16(2), 1017-1036. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2023.16254a

Woo, H. G., LeTendre, K., Pham-Shouse, T., & Xiong, Y. (2021). The use of social robots in classrooms: A review of field-based studies, Educational Research Review, 33, 100388. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100388

Yaman, Y., & Sisman, B. (2019). Robot assistants ın education of children with autism: Interaction between the robot and the child. Erzincan University Journal of Education Faculty, 21(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.472009

Yildirim, N., & Sad, S.N. (2019). Teachers' acceptance levels of humanoid robot technology in education, Mediterranean Journal of Educational Research, 13(30), 367-397. https://doi.org/10.29329/mjer.2019.218.21

Yildirim, N., Ayas, A., & Kucuk, M (2013). A comparison of effectiveness of analogy-based and laboratory-based instructions on students' achievement in chemical equilibrium, Scholarly Journal of Education, 2(6), 63-76. https://www.scholarly-journals.org/sje/

Yildirim, N., Kucuk, M., & Ayas, A. (2014). Teaching chemical equilibrium by analogy-based worksheets. Turkish Journal of Teacher Education, 3(2), 64-77. https://tujted.com/