Review Article

Educational robotics in mathematics education: A systematic review

Marcelo Ibáñez-Carrasco 1 , Carolina Henríquez-Rivas 1 *
More Detail
1 Facultad de Ciencias Básicas, Universidad Católica del Maule, Talca, CHILE* Corresponding Author
European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(2), April 2026, 222-240, https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/18086
Published: 12 March 2026
OPEN ACCESS   101 Views   62 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

The implementation of technology in mathematics education signifies an interactive and dynamic learning experience, and educational robotics (ER) in particular has the potential to improve teaching and learning environments in mathematics education. The objective of the present study is to provide a current overview of the literature on robotics in mathematics education and, in turn, to identify the less explored aspects of this area along with emerging directions and ideas, with the aim of defining future research perspectives in robot-assisted mathematics teaching. Forty-four articles were selected from the Web of Science and Scopus databases through keyword searches and the preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analyses method, with all works published since 2020. The results indicate that ER plays a positive role in different aspects of mathematics education, both for students at all educational levels and for pre-service and practicing teachers. However, contradictions exist in certain results obtained in the studies reviewed. Ultimately, future research perspectives and challenges for the use of ER in mathematics education are analyzed.
Keywords: educational robotics, mathematics education, systematic review, educational technology

CITATION (APA)

Ibáñez-Carrasco, M., & Henríquez-Rivas, C. (2026). Educational robotics in mathematics education: A systematic review. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 14(2), 222-240. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/18086

REFERENCES

  1. Al-Nawaiseh, S. J., Tabieh, A. A. S., Maqableh, W. F., Altawalbeh, M., & Ahmad, F. B. (2024). The effectiveness of using educational robots in enhancing engineering mathematics skills among students in basic school. International Journal of Education and Practice, 12(3), 906-921. https://doi.org/10.18488/61.v12i3.3768
  2. Amador-Terrón, S., Carvalho, J. L., & Melo, L. (2022). Teaching mathematics with the support of robotics: The opinion of future primary school teachers. Prisma Social, 38, 114-136.
  3. Arshad, N. I., Hashim, A. S., Mohd Ariffin, M., Mohd Aszemi, N., Low, H. M., & Norman, A. A. (2020). Robots as assistive technology tools to enhance cognitive abilities and Foster valuable learning experiences among young children with autism spectrum disorder. IEEE Access, 8, 116279-116291. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3001629
  4. Aslan, D., Dağaynası, S., & Ceylan, M. (2024). Technology and geometry: Fostering young children’s geometrical concepts through a research-based robotic coding program. Education and Information Technologies, 29(17), 22699-22721. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12747-3
  5. Athanasiou, L., Mikropoulos, T. A., & Mavridis, D. (2019). Robotics interventions for improving educational outcomes–A meta-analysis. In M. Tsitouridou, J. Diniz, & T. Mikropoulos (Eds.), Technology and innovation in learning, teaching and education (pp. 91-102). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-20954-4_7
  6. Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education. Springer.
  7. Bento-Miguens, A. L., Nunes Piedade, J. M., dos Santos, R. J. B., & Oliva, T. L. (2024). Meaningful learning in mathematics: A study on motivation for learning and development of computational thinking using educational robotics. Educational Media International, 61(1-2), 4-15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09523987.2024.2357472
  8. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
  9. Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. In Proceedings of the American Educational Research Association Meeting.
  10. Bulut, M., & Borromeo Ferri, R. (2023). A systematic literature review on augmented reality in mathematics education. European Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 11(3), 556-572. https://doi.org/10.30935/scimath/13124
  11. Carreira, S., & Jacinto, H. (2019). A model of mathematical problem solving with technology: The case of Marco solving-and-expressing two geometry problems. In P. Liljedahl, & M. Santos-Trigo (Eds.), Mathematical problem solving. ICME-13 monographs (pp. 41-62). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10472-6_3
  12. Cascales, A., Carrillo, M. E., & Redondo, A. M. (2017). ABP y tecnología en educación infantil [PBL and technology in early childhood education]. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, 50, 201-210. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.2017.i50.14
  13. Casler-Failing, S. (2021). Learning to teach mathematics with robots: Developing the ‘T’ in technological pedagogical content knowledge. Research in Learning Technology, 29. https://doi.org/10.25304/rlt.v29.2555
  14. Casler-Failing, S., & Collins, R. M. (2022). Learning with robots: Teaching and supporting productive struggle in a math methods course. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 29(1), 49-58. https://doi.org/10.1564/tme_v29.1.05
  15. Castañeda-Miranda, V. H., Luque-Vega, L. F., Lopez-Neri, E., Nava-Pintor, J. A., Guerrero-Osuna, H. A., & Ornelas-Vargas, G. (2021). Two-dimensional cartesian coordinate system educational toolkit: 2D-CACSET. Sensors, 21(18), Article 6304. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21186304
  16. Castro, A., Medina, J., Aguilera, C. A., Ramirez, M., & Aguilera, C. (2023). Robotics education in STEM units: Breaking down barriers in rural multigrade schools. Sensors, 23(1), Article 387. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23010387
  17. Ceylan, M., & Aslan, D. (2024). The effect of learning trajectories-based coding education program on preschoolers’ mathematical measurement skills. Education and Information Technologies, 29(7), 7737-7757. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-12107-7
  18. Clements, D. H., & Meredith, J. S. (1992). Research on logo: Effects and efficacy. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 4, 263-290.
  19. Coad, L. (2016). The M in STEM what is it really? The Australian Mathematics Teacher, 72(2), 3-6.
  20. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method approaches (5th ed.). SAGE.
  21. da Silva, M. P., & da Costa Barbosa, F. (2021). Matemática e física em experiências de robótica livre: Explorando o sensor ultrassônico [Mathematics and physics in free robotics experiments: Exploring the ultrasonic sensor.]. Texto Livre, 14(3), Article e29629. https://doi.org/10.35699/1983-3652.2021.29629
  22. da Silveira Guimarães, D., da Silva, É. A., & da Costa Barbosa, F. (2021). Explorando a matemática e a física com o robô seguidor de linha na perspectiva da robótica livre [Exploring mathematics and physics with the line-following robot from the perspective of free robotics.]. Texto Livre, 14(1), Article e24895. https://doi.org/10.35699/1983-3652.2021.24895
  23. Daher, W. (2022). Students’ motivation to learn mathematics in the robotics environment. Computers in the Schools, 39(3), 230-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380569.2022.2071227
  24. Davide, H. (2021). Pensamento computacional dos alunos no final do 1º ciclo do ensino básico [Computational thinking of students at the end of the first cycle of basic education] [Master’s thesis, Universidade de Lisboa].
  25. De la Hoz Serrano, A., Melo Niño, L. V., Álvarez Murillo, A., Martín Tardío, M. Á., Cañada Cañada, F., & Cubero Juánez, J. (2024). Analysis of gender issues in computational thinking approach in science and mathematics learning in higher education. European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 14(11), 2865-2882. https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe14110188
  26. De la Hoz, A., Melo, L., Cañada, F., & Cubero, J. (2024). Educational robotics for science and mathematics teaching: Analysis of pre-service teachers’ perceptions and self-confidence. Heliyon, 10(21), Article e40032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e40032
  27. Dong, W., Li, Y., Sun, L., & Yiran, L. (2023) Developing pre-service teachers’ computational thinking: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 34, 191-227. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09811-3
  28. Eguchi, A. (2014). Robotics as a learning tool for educational transformation. In D. Alimisis, G. Granosik, & M. Moro (Eds.), Proceedings of 4th International Workshop Teaching Robotics, Teaching with Robotics & 5th International Conference Robotics in Education (pp. 27–34). Academic Press.
  29. European Commission. (2022). Guidelines for teachers and educators on tackling disinformation and promoting digital literacy through education and training. European Union. https://education.ec.europa.eu/node/2263
  30. Evripidou, S., Georgiou, K., Doitsidis, L., Amanatiadis, A. A., Zinonos, Z., & Chatzichristofis, S. A. (2020). Educational robotics: Platforms, competitions and expected learning outcomes. IEEE Access, 8, 219534-219562. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3042555
  31. Feurzeig, W., & Papert, S. A. (2011). Programming-languages as a conceptual framework for teaching mathematics. Interactive Learning Environments, 19(5), 487-501. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820903520040
  32. Fuchs, K., & Caba, H. (2016). Algorithmic/solution-oriented thinking: A core strategy in practical computer science in schools. Schule Aktiv, (Special issue of the BMB), 6-8.
  33. Godino, J. D., Batanero, C., & Font, V. (2007). The onto-semiotic approach to research in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education, 39, 127-135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-006-0004-1
  34. Gomes, C., Gomes, H., Figueiredo, M., Lucas, A., & Menezes, L. (2023). MindMaths: Learning mathematics in the early years through computational thinking and robotics. IE Comunicaciones: Revista Iberoamericana de Informática Educativa, 37, 14-22.
  35. González-Calero, J., Cózar, R., Villena, R., & Merino, J. (2019). The development of mental rotation abilities through robotics-based instruction: An experience mediated by gender. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(6), 3198-3213. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12726
  36. Goos, M., Carreira, S., & Namukasa, I. K. (2023). Mathematics and interdisciplinary STEM education: Recent developments and future directions. ZDM Mathematics Education, 55, 1199-1217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-023-01533-z
  37. Hsu, Y.-C., Irie, N., & Ching, Y. H. (2019). Computational thinking educational policy initiatives (CTEPI) across the globe. TechTrends, 63, 260-270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11528-019-00384-4
  38. Kim, Y. R., Park, M. S., & Tjoe, H. (2021). Discovering concepts of geometry through robotics coding activities. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 9(3), 406-425. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.1205
  39. Körei, A., & Szilágyi, S. (2024). Discovering epitrochoid curves with STEAM-based learning methods. Annales Mathematicae et Informaticae, 60, 205-217. https://doi.org/10.33039/ami.2024.04.001
  40. Kuckartz, U., & Rädiker, S. (2023). Qualitative content analysis: Methods, practice and software. SAGE.
  41. Lai, C., Wang, Q., & Huang, X. (2023). The evolution of the association between teacher technology integration and its influencing factors over time. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 55(4), 727-747. https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2022.2030266
  42. Lee, J., Joswick, C., & Pole, K. (2023). Classroom play and activities to support computational thinking development in early childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal, 51(3), 457-468. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-022-01319-0
  43. Lengua-Cantero, C., de Jesús Acosta Meza, D., Angelica Garcia Medina, M., & Ruiz Escorcia, R. R. (2022). Pensamiento computacional: Programación y robótica para disminuir la dyscalculia [Computational thinking: Programming and robotics to reduce dyscalculia]. RISTI: Revista Ibérica de Sistemas e Tecnologias de Informação, 50, 282-295.
  44. Lopez-Caudana, E., Ramirez-Montoya, M. S., Martínez-Pérez, S., & Rodríguez-Abitia, G. (2020). Using robotics to enhance active learning in mathematics: A multi-scenario study. Mathematics, 8(12), Article 2163. https://doi.org/10.3390/math8122163
  45. Lye, S. Y., & Koh, J. H. L. (2014). Review on teaching and learning of computational thinking through programming: What is next for K-12? Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 51-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.09.012
  46. Miller, J. (2019). STEM education in the primary years to support mathematical thinking: Using coding to identify mathematical structures and patterns. ZDM Mathematics Education, 51, 915-927. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11858-019-01096-y
  47. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2006.00684.x
  48. Muñoz, L., Villarreal, V., Morales, I., Gonzalez, J., & Nielsen, M. (2020). Developing an interactive environment through the teaching of mathematics with small robots. Sensors, 20(7), Article 1935. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20071935
  49. OECD. (2022). Mending the education divide. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/92b75874-en
  50. Ortega, G. C., Téllez, A. F., Guarnizo, J. G., & Camacho, É. C. (2021). Educational environment for primary school using commercial robotic system. Electrical and Electronic Engineering, 26(1), 41-61. https://doi.org/10.14483/23448393.16721
  51. Ortiz, I. R. (2023). La robótica en el área de matemáticas en educación primaria. Una revisión sistemática [Robotics in the area of mathematics in primary education. A systematic review]. Edutec. Revista Electrónica de Tecnología Educativa, 84, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.21556/edutec.2023.84.2889
  52. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, Article n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  53. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books Inc.
  54. Plangg, S., & Fuchs, K. J. (2022). A gender-related analysis of a robots’ math class. International Journal for Technology in Mathematics Education, 29(3), 143-163. https://doi.org/10.1564/tme_v29.3.03
  55. Rahman, S. M. M. (2021). Assessing and benchmarking learning outcomes of robotics-enabled STEM education. Education Sciences, 11(2), Article 84. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11020084
  56. Reyes, G. E. B., López, E., Ponce, P., & Mazón, N. (2021). Role assignment analysis of an assistive robotic platform in a high school mathematics class, through a gamification and usability evaluation. International Journal of Social Robotics, 13(5), 1063-1078. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00698-x
  57. Sáez-López, J.-M., & Buceta-Otero, D. R. (2023). The M bot robot for learning Cartesian coordinates in secondary education. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educacion, 66, 271-301. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.95617
  58. Sala-Sebastià, G., Breda, A., Seckel, M. J., Farsani, D., & Alsina, À. (2023). Didactic-mathematical-computational knowledge of future teachers when solving and designing robotics problems. Axioms, 12(2), Article 119. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12020119
  59. Scaradozzi, D., Screpanti, L., & Cesaretti, L. (2019). Towards a definition of educational robotics: A classification of tools, experiences and assessments. In L. Daniela (Ed.), Smart learning with educational robotics (pp. 63-92). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-19913-5_3
  60. Seckel, M. J., Breda, A., Font, V., & Vásquez, C. (2021). Primary school teachers’ conceptions about the use of robotics in mathematics. Mathematics, 9(24), Article 3186. https://doi.org/10.3390/math9243186
  61. Seckel, M. J., Salinas, C., Font, V., & Sala-Sebastià, G. (2023). Guidelines to develop computational thinking using the Bee-bot robot from the literature. Education and Information Technologies, 28(12), 16127-16151. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11843-0
  62. Shankar, R., Ploger, D., Nemeth, A., & Hecht, S. A. (2013). Robotics: Enhancing pre-college mathematics learning with real-world examples. In Proceedings of the 20th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--22435
  63. Silva, R., Costa, C., Freitas, Y., Martins, F., & Cebrián-De-La-Serna, M. (2024). Educational robotics and primary school mathematics teaching: An analysis of pre-service teachers didactic-mathematical knowledge. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 20(10), Article em2515. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmste/15199
  64. Soto-Ardila, L. M., Carrasco, A. C., Niño, L. M., & González, R. L. (2020). Opiniones de los futuros maestros de primaria sobre el uso de la robótica educativa para la enseñanza de las matemáticas [Opinions of future primary school teachers on the use of educational robotics for teaching mathematics]. New Trends in Qualitative Research, 2, 675-686. https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.2.2020.675-686
  65. Soto-Ardila, L. M., Niño, L. M., & Carrasco, A. C. (2021). Robótica educativa para enseñar matemáticas: Opiniones de los estudiantes del grado en educación primaria [Educational robotics for teaching mathematics: Opinions of students in the primary education degree]. New Trends in Qualitative Research, 7, 211-219. https://doi.org/10.36367/ntqr.7.2021.211-219
  66. Sung, W., Ahn, J., & Black, J.B. (2017). Introducing computational thinking to Young learners: Practicing computational perspectives through embodiment in mathematics education. Tech Know Learn, 22, 443-463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-017-9328-x
  67. Szilágyi, S., Körei, A., & Vaičiulyté, I. (2024). An innovative STEAM-based method for teaching cycloidal curves in engineering higher education. Education Sciences, 14(10), Article 1087. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14101087
  68. Tzagkaraki, E., Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2021). Exploring the use of educational robotics in primary school and its possible place in the curricula. In M. Malvezzi, D. Alimisis, & M. Moro (Eds.), Education in & with robotics to foster 21st-century skills (pp. 216-229). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77022-8_19
  69. Varaman, P., Kumar, J. A., Rabu, S. N. A., & Osman, S. (2024). The effect of educational robots on primary schools’ mathematics learning achievement, interest, and attitude. Journal of Educators Online, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.9743/JEO.2024.21.2.17
  70. Vitale, A., & Iacono, U. D. (2024). Using social robots as inclusive educational technology for mathematics learning through storytelling. European Public & Social Innovation Review, 9, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.31637/epsir-2024-672
  71. Voogt, J., Fisser, P., Good, J., Mishra, P., & Yadav, A. (2015). Computational thinking in compulsory education: Towards an agenda for research and practice. Education and Information Technologies, 20(4), 715-728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-015-9412-6
  72. Wei, C. W., & Hung, L. L. (2011). A joyful classroom learning system with robot learning companion for children to learn mathematics multiplication. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10, 11-23.
  73. Wing, J. (2006). Computational thinking. Communications of the ACM, 49(3), 33-35. https://doi.org/10.1145/1118178.1118215
  74. Ybarra, L. A. C., & Soares, M. (2022). A robótica e o pensamento computacional na educação: Uma proposta de avaliação da aprendizagem baseada em projetos [Robotics and computational thinking in education: A proposal for project-based learning assessment]. Dialogia, 40, Article e21524. https://doi.org/10.5585/40.2022.21524
  75. You, H. S., Chacko, S. M., & Kapila, V. (2021). Examining the effectiveness of a professional development program: Integration of educational robotics into science and mathematics curricula. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 30(4), 567-581. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09903-6
  76. Zhang, L., & Nouri, J. (2019). A systematic review of learning computational thinking through scratch in K-9. Computers & Education, 141, Article 103607. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103607