Journal article 676 views
Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating?
AI & SOCIETY, Volume: 35, Issue: 4, Pages: 981 - 989
Swansea University Author:
Muneeb Ahmad
Full text not available from this repository: check for access using links below.
DOI (Published version): 10.1007/s00146-020-00954-8
Abstract
One of the open questions in Educational robots is the role a robot should take in the classroom. The current focus in this area is on employing robots as a tool or in an assistive capacity such as the invigilator of an exam. With robots becoming commonplace in the classroom, inquiries will be raise...
Published in: | AI & SOCIETY |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0951-5666 1435-5655 |
Published: |
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
2020
|
Online Access: |
Check full text
|
URI: | https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa57756 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
first_indexed |
2021-10-04T16:28:55Z |
---|---|
last_indexed |
2023-01-11T14:37:52Z |
id |
cronfa57756 |
recordtype |
SURis |
fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2022-07-13T14:18:21.5721445</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>57756</id><entry>2021-09-02</entry><title>Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating?</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>9c42fd947397b1ad2bfa9107457974d5</sid><ORCID>0000-0001-8111-9967</ORCID><firstname>Muneeb</firstname><surname>Ahmad</surname><name>Muneeb Ahmad</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2021-09-02</date><deptcode>SCS</deptcode><abstract>One of the open questions in Educational robots is the role a robot should take in the classroom. The current focus in this area is on employing robots as a tool or in an assistive capacity such as the invigilator of an exam. With robots becoming commonplace in the classroom, inquiries will be raised regarding not only their suitability but also their ability to influence and control the morality and behaviour of the students via their presence. Therefore, as a means to test this cross-section of Educational robots with the underlying issue of morality and ethics we conducted an empirical study where the Nao robot invigilated an exam for a group of students. A between-subjects design (N = 56, 14 groups of 4 students) compared whether Nao was able to deter students from cheating and maintaining their discipline in comparison to a human invigilator or when there was no invigilator present. Our results showed that while explicit cheating rarely took place across all conditions, the students were significantly more talkative when they were invigilated by Nao. In conclusion, we discuss and speculate upon some of the ensuing implications towards not only the application of robots in education but also consequently the wider issue of the preservation of morality and ethics in a classroom in the presence of an agent.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>AI & SOCIETY</journal><volume>35</volume><journalNumber>4</journalNumber><paginationStart>981</paginationStart><paginationEnd>989</paginationEnd><publisher>Springer Science and Business Media LLC</publisher><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>0951-5666</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1435-5655</issnElectronic><keywords/><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>12</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2020</publishedYear><publishedDate>2020-12-01</publishedDate><doi>10.1007/s00146-020-00954-8</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Computer Science</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>SCS</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm>Another institution paid the OA fee</apcterm><funders>UPAR Grant (31H125) from UAE University</funders><projectreference>31H125</projectreference><lastEdited>2022-07-13T14:18:21.5721445</lastEdited><Created>2021-09-02T23:50:39.3724345</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Science and Engineering</level><level id="2">School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Omar</firstname><surname>Mubin</surname><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Massimiliano</firstname><surname>Cappuccio</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>Fady</firstname><surname>Alnajjar</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Muneeb</firstname><surname>Ahmad</surname><orcid>0000-0001-8111-9967</orcid><order>4</order></author><author><firstname>Suleman</firstname><surname>Shahid</surname><order>5</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807> |
spelling |
2022-07-13T14:18:21.5721445 v2 57756 2021-09-02 Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? 9c42fd947397b1ad2bfa9107457974d5 0000-0001-8111-9967 Muneeb Ahmad Muneeb Ahmad true false 2021-09-02 SCS One of the open questions in Educational robots is the role a robot should take in the classroom. The current focus in this area is on employing robots as a tool or in an assistive capacity such as the invigilator of an exam. With robots becoming commonplace in the classroom, inquiries will be raised regarding not only their suitability but also their ability to influence and control the morality and behaviour of the students via their presence. Therefore, as a means to test this cross-section of Educational robots with the underlying issue of morality and ethics we conducted an empirical study where the Nao robot invigilated an exam for a group of students. A between-subjects design (N = 56, 14 groups of 4 students) compared whether Nao was able to deter students from cheating and maintaining their discipline in comparison to a human invigilator or when there was no invigilator present. Our results showed that while explicit cheating rarely took place across all conditions, the students were significantly more talkative when they were invigilated by Nao. In conclusion, we discuss and speculate upon some of the ensuing implications towards not only the application of robots in education but also consequently the wider issue of the preservation of morality and ethics in a classroom in the presence of an agent. Journal Article AI & SOCIETY 35 4 981 989 Springer Science and Business Media LLC 0951-5666 1435-5655 1 12 2020 2020-12-01 10.1007/s00146-020-00954-8 COLLEGE NANME Computer Science COLLEGE CODE SCS Swansea University Another institution paid the OA fee UPAR Grant (31H125) from UAE University 31H125 2022-07-13T14:18:21.5721445 2021-09-02T23:50:39.3724345 Faculty of Science and Engineering School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science Omar Mubin 1 Massimiliano Cappuccio 2 Fady Alnajjar 3 Muneeb Ahmad 0000-0001-8111-9967 4 Suleman Shahid 5 |
title |
Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? |
spellingShingle |
Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? Muneeb Ahmad |
title_short |
Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? |
title_full |
Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? |
title_fullStr |
Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? |
title_sort |
Can a robot invigilator prevent cheating? |
author_id_str_mv |
9c42fd947397b1ad2bfa9107457974d5 |
author_id_fullname_str_mv |
9c42fd947397b1ad2bfa9107457974d5_***_Muneeb Ahmad |
author |
Muneeb Ahmad |
author2 |
Omar Mubin Massimiliano Cappuccio Fady Alnajjar Muneeb Ahmad Suleman Shahid |
format |
Journal article |
container_title |
AI & SOCIETY |
container_volume |
35 |
container_issue |
4 |
container_start_page |
981 |
publishDate |
2020 |
institution |
Swansea University |
issn |
0951-5666 1435-5655 |
doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00146-020-00954-8 |
publisher |
Springer Science and Business Media LLC |
college_str |
Faculty of Science and Engineering |
hierarchytype |
|
hierarchy_top_id |
facultyofscienceandengineering |
hierarchy_top_title |
Faculty of Science and Engineering |
hierarchy_parent_id |
facultyofscienceandengineering |
hierarchy_parent_title |
Faculty of Science and Engineering |
department_str |
School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Science and Engineering{{{_:::_}}}School of Mathematics and Computer Science - Computer Science |
document_store_str |
0 |
active_str |
0 |
description |
One of the open questions in Educational robots is the role a robot should take in the classroom. The current focus in this area is on employing robots as a tool or in an assistive capacity such as the invigilator of an exam. With robots becoming commonplace in the classroom, inquiries will be raised regarding not only their suitability but also their ability to influence and control the morality and behaviour of the students via their presence. Therefore, as a means to test this cross-section of Educational robots with the underlying issue of morality and ethics we conducted an empirical study where the Nao robot invigilated an exam for a group of students. A between-subjects design (N = 56, 14 groups of 4 students) compared whether Nao was able to deter students from cheating and maintaining their discipline in comparison to a human invigilator or when there was no invigilator present. Our results showed that while explicit cheating rarely took place across all conditions, the students were significantly more talkative when they were invigilated by Nao. In conclusion, we discuss and speculate upon some of the ensuing implications towards not only the application of robots in education but also consequently the wider issue of the preservation of morality and ethics in a classroom in the presence of an agent. |
published_date |
2020-12-01T04:13:44Z |
_version_ |
1763753930561421312 |
score |
11.021648 |