Akalın, S. (2014). Özel gereksinimli bireylerin eğitiminde robot teknolojilerinin kullanımı (Yüksek lisans tezi). Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Eskişehir.

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

Çakmak Ekici, T. (2023). Otizm spektrum bozukluğu olan çocuklarda nesneleri sayma becerisinin öğretiminde insansı robot aracılı öğretim uygulamalarının geliştirilmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Fırat Üniversitesi

Ceha, J., Law, E., Kulić, D. et al. (2022). Identifying Functions and Behaviours of Social Robots for In-Class Learning Activities: Teachers’ Perspective. Int J of Soc 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 Instructional Tools for Teaching a Second Language in Primary School. Educational Technology & Society, 13 (2), 13–24

Çınar S. (Ekim 2018). Fen Bilgisi Öğretmen Adaylarının Robota Karşı Tutumu, II. Internatıonal Teacher Educatıon Andaccredıtatıon Congress, Rize, Türkiye

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

Ermağan, B. (2024). Özel eğitim ortamlarında sosyal robot kullanımına yönelik öğretmen görüşlerinin incelenmesi (Yüksek lisans tezi). Marmara Üniversitesi, Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, İstanbul

Ertmer, P., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher Technology Change: HowKnowledge, Confidence, Beliefs and Culture Intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42, 255-284. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2010.10782551

Gardenghi C., & Gherardi L. (2024). Teaching With the Nao Robot: Teacher - Users’ Attitudes, Italian Journal of Sociology of Education, 16(1), 71-86. DOI: 10.14658/PUPJ-IJSE-2024-1-4

Gökmen, C. (2025). Otizmli çocuklarda sosyal etkileşim ve iletişim becerilerinin geliştirilmesinde sosyal robotların rolü: bir betimsel inceleme. Uluslararası Güncel Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 4(1), 37-44.

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. 10.3745/JIPS.2008.4.4.159

Heerink, M., Kröse, B., Evers, V. et al. Assessing Acceptance of Assistive Social Agent Technology by Older Adults: the Almere Model. Int J of Soc 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. Education Tech Research Dev 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). 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, Mayıs). Joining-in-type humanoid robot assisted language learning system. Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'16) (ss. 245-249)

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., Baxter, P., Senft, E., & Belpaeme, T. (2016). Heart vs hard drive: Children learn more from a human tutor than a social robot. In 11th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 451–452). IEEE Computer Society. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2016.7451801

Kennedy, J., Lemaignan, S., & Belpaeme, T. (2016). The cautious attitude of teachers towards social robots in schools. .In Robots 4 Learning Workshop at IEEE RO-MAN 2016,

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).

Köksalan B., Akpınar B. ve Akyıldız T.Y. (2024).Eğitimde İnsansı Robot Kullanımının Avantaj Ve Dezavantajlarına (Frankeştayn Sendromu) Dair Öğretmen Görüşlerinin Analizi”, Elektronik Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2024;23(92):1394-1415. Https://Doi.Org/10.17755/Esosder.1483914

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

Millî Eğitim Bakanlığı. (2025, 1 Ekim). 2024–2025 Örgün Eğitim İstatistikleri Açıklandı. https://www.meb.gov.tr/2024-2025-orgun-egitim-istatistikleri-aciklandi/haber/38473/tr

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 International 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. 10.2316/Journal.209.2013.1.209-0015

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

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). Students’ attitudes towards the possible future of social robots in education. In Proceedings of the 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, Workshop on Philosophical Perspectives of HRI, RO-MAN

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

Sievers, T., & Russwinkel, N. (2024). Project Report: Requirements for a Social Robot as an Information Provider in the Public Sector. Künstl Intell 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., ... ve Matarić, M. J. (2017, August). Understanding social interactions with socially assistive robotics in intergenerational family groups. In 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN) (236-241). IEEE.

Shiomi, M., Kanda, T., Howley, I. et al. Can a Social Robot Stimulate Science Curiosity in Classrooms?. Int J of Soc Robotics 7, 641–652 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-015-0303-1

Şen, N. (2021). Özel Eğitimde İnsansı Robotlar. Avrupa Bilim ve Teknoloji Dergisi(32), 832-842. https://doi.org/10.31590/ejosat.1047564

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

Tuna, G., Tuna, A., Ahmetoglu, E., & Kuscu, H. (2019). A survey on the use of humanoid robots in primaryeducation: Prospects, research challenges, and future research directions. Cypriot Journal of Educational Science, 14(3), 361–373

Türkalp, M. (2023). Otizm spektrum bozukluğu olan çocuklarda duyguyu ifade etme becerisinin öğretiminde insansı robot aracılı öğretim uygulamalarının geliştirilmesi. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi). Fırat

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

Van Ewijk, G., Smakman, M., Konijn, E.A. (June 2020). Teachers’ perspectives on social robots in education. In Proceedings of the Interaction Design and Children Conference, London, UK, 17–24; pp. 273–280. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3392063.3394397

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., & Şişman, B. (2019). Robot Assistants In Education of Children with Autism: Interaction Between The Robot and The Child. Erzincan Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 21(1), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.17556/erziefd.472009

Yildirim, N., & Sad, S.N. (2019). Öğretmenlerin Eğitimde İnsansı Robot Teknolojisini Kabul Düzeyleri.Akdeniz Eğitim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 13(30), 367-397. https://doi.org/10.29329/mjer.2019.218.21