What School Teachers Expect from Conversational Pedagogic Agents?
Abstract Conversational Pedagogical Agents are interactive systems that teach students by assuming the role of teacher, student or companion through a natural language dialogue. If has been investigated a lot on the domains in which the agents can be used, the results in terms of educational effectiveness and level of satisfaction and motivation of the students. However, in the literature, there are not many examples of studies that reveal the opinion of school teachers on this type of educational technology. In this paper, we provide the results of a survey of 82 teachers to know what they expect from the agents. The following research questions will be answered: Q1) Do you know this educational technology? Q2) If so, are teachers used to integrate this type of technology in the classroom? and, P3) If teachers could design the agent, what characteristics do they consider to be the most appropriate? How should the agent react to different situations? From the results gathered, it is expected to provide information to all researchers, designers and teachers who want to integrate this type of educational technology in their classroom..
- Referencias
- Cómo citar
- Del mismo autor
- Métricas
Baylor, A & Ebbers, S. (2003). Evidence that Multiple Agents Facilitate Greater Learning. International Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED) Conference, Sydney, Australia.
Biswas, G., Roscoe, R., Jeong, H., & Sulcer, B. (2009). Promoting self-regulated learning skills in agent-based learning environments. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on computers in education (pp. 67-74).
Chase, C., Chin, D., Oppezzo, M., & Schwartz, D. (2009). Teachable agents and the protégé effect: Increasing the effort towards learning, Journal of Science Education and Technology 18, 334-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9180-4
Clark, A., Fox, C., & Lappin, S. (Eds.). (2013). The handbook of computational linguistics and natural language processing. John Wiley & Sons.
D'mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2012). AutoTutor and affective AutoTutor: Learning by talking with cognitively and emotionally intelligent computers that talk back. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS), 2(4), 23. https://doi.org/10.1145/2395123.2395128
Domínguez, J. (2011). "Dise-o de un asistente virtual". Dto de sistemas de computación. Instituto Tecnológico CD. Madero, Tamaulipas.
Graesser, A., Person, N., & Harter, D. (2001). Teaching tactics and dialog in AutoTutor, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 12(3), 23-29.
Hays, M., Lane, C., Auerbach, D., Core, M., Gomboc, D. & Rosenberg, M. (2009). Feedback Specificity and the Learning of Intercultural Communication Skills, AIED.
Johnson, W., Rickel, J., & Lester, J. (2000). Animated Pedagogical Agents: Face-to-Face Interaction in Interactive Learning Environments, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 11, 47-78.
Khosrow-Pour, M. (Ed.). (2008). Encyclopedia of information science and technology (Vol. 1). IGI Global.
Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. (2006). A social cognitive framework for designing pedagogical agents as learning companions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(6), 569-596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-0637-3
Kuz, A., & Falco, M. (2015). Agent SocialMetric: herramienta de asistencia al docente para determinar el clima social y la estructura del aula. IE Comunicaciones: Revista Iberoamericana de Informática Educativa, (22), 16-29.
Leelawong, K. and Biswas, G. (2008) Designing Learning by Teaching Systems: The Betty's Brain System. In International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.
Lester, J., Converse, S., Kahler, S., Barlow, S., Stone, B. & Bhogal, R. (1997). The persona effect: affective impact of animated pedagogical agents, SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems.
Mas, A. (2005). Agentes software y sistemas multiagente: conceptos, arquitecturas y aplicaciones. Prentice Hall.
Morales-Rodríguez, M., & Domínguez-Martínez, J. (2011). Agentes Conversacionales como un Sistema de Diálogo. Memorias del V Encuentro de Investigadores del ITCM.
Nanne, M. (2015) "Classification Criteria for Pedagogical Agents". Dept. Mathmatics and Computer Science, University of Sciences Technology and Medicine, Nouakchott – Mauritania. ISSN: 0976-8491 ISSN: 2229-4333 (Print) IJCST Vol. 6, Issue 3, July - Sept 2015.
Paulus, T. M., Horvitz, B., & Shi, M. (2006). 'Isn't it just like our situation?' Engagement and learning in an online story-based environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(4), 355-385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9604-2
Pérez-Marín, D. (2010). Uso de agentes conversacionales pedagógicos en sistemas de aprendizaje híbrido (b-learning).
Pérez-Marín, D. & Pascual-Nieto, I. (2011). Conversational Agents and Natural Language Interaction: Techniques and Effective Practices. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-617-6
Person, N. K., & Graesser, A. C. (2000). Designing AutoTutor to be an effective conversational partner.
Reategui, E. B., & Moraes, M. C. (2006). Agentes pedagógicos animados. Novas Tecnologias na Educação, 4(2), 1-10.
Reategui, E., Polonia, E., & Roland, L. (2007). The role of animated pedagogical agents in scenario-based language e-learning: a case-study. In Conference ICL2007, September 26-28, 2007 (pp. 7-pages). Kassel University Press.
Ryu, J. & Baylor, A. (2005). The Psychometric Structure of Pedagogical Agent Persona. Technology, Instruction, Cognition & Learning (TICL).
Ryokai, K., Vaucelle, C., & Cassell, J. (2003). Virtual peers as partners in storytelling and literacy learning, Journal of computer assisted learning, 19(2), 195-208. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00020.x
Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R. B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(1), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.1.a
Smith, T., Affleck, G., Lees, B., & Branki, C. (1999). Implementing a generic framework for a web-based pedagogical agent. In Annual Australassian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Conference, Brisbane, Queesland.
Tamayo-Moreno (2012). Propuesta de Desarrollo Centrado en el Usuario de un Agente Conversacional Pedagógico para la Comprensión Lectora de Ejercicios de Matemáticas a nivel escolar. Máster Universitario en Investigación en Sistemas Hardware y Software Avanzados de la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Informática de la Universidad Rey Juan Carlos.
Tamayo-Moreno (2017). "Propuesta de Metodología para el Dise-o e Integración en el Aula de un Agente Conversacional Pedagógico desde Educación Secundaria hasta Educación Infantil" Tesis Doctoral. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Móstoles, Madrid, Espa-a.
Tatar, D., Sacarea, C. and Kapetanios, E. (2013). Natural Language Processing: Semantic Aspects. November 14, 2013 by CRC Press ISBN 9781466584969
VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rosé, C. P. (2007). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive science, 31(1), 3-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/03640210709336984
Van Vuuren, S. (2007). Technologies that empower pedagogical agents and visions for the future. Educational Technology, 47(1), 4-10.
Veletsianos, G., Miller, C. & Doerin, A. (2009). "Enali: A Research and Design Framework for Virtual Characters and Pedagogical Agents" Journal of Educational Computing Research. Vol 41, Issue 2, pp. 171 – 194, October-06.
Yee, N., & Bailenson, J. (2007). The Proteus effect: The effect of transformed self-representation on behavior, Human Communication Research 33, 3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00299.x
Ziegahn, L. 'Talk' about culture online: The potential for transformation. Distance Education, v. 22, n.1, pp. 144-150, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791010220109
Biswas, G., Roscoe, R., Jeong, H., & Sulcer, B. (2009). Promoting self-regulated learning skills in agent-based learning environments. In Proceedings of the 17th international conference on computers in education (pp. 67-74).
Chase, C., Chin, D., Oppezzo, M., & Schwartz, D. (2009). Teachable agents and the protégé effect: Increasing the effort towards learning, Journal of Science Education and Technology 18, 334-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-009-9180-4
Clark, A., Fox, C., & Lappin, S. (Eds.). (2013). The handbook of computational linguistics and natural language processing. John Wiley & Sons.
D'mello, S., & Graesser, A. (2012). AutoTutor and affective AutoTutor: Learning by talking with cognitively and emotionally intelligent computers that talk back. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS), 2(4), 23. https://doi.org/10.1145/2395123.2395128
Domínguez, J. (2011). "Dise-o de un asistente virtual". Dto de sistemas de computación. Instituto Tecnológico CD. Madero, Tamaulipas.
Graesser, A., Person, N., & Harter, D. (2001). Teaching tactics and dialog in AutoTutor, International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 12(3), 23-29.
Hays, M., Lane, C., Auerbach, D., Core, M., Gomboc, D. & Rosenberg, M. (2009). Feedback Specificity and the Learning of Intercultural Communication Skills, AIED.
Johnson, W., Rickel, J., & Lester, J. (2000). Animated Pedagogical Agents: Face-to-Face Interaction in Interactive Learning Environments, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 11, 47-78.
Khosrow-Pour, M. (Ed.). (2008). Encyclopedia of information science and technology (Vol. 1). IGI Global.
Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. (2006). A social cognitive framework for designing pedagogical agents as learning companions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(6), 569-596. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-0637-3
Kuz, A., & Falco, M. (2015). Agent SocialMetric: herramienta de asistencia al docente para determinar el clima social y la estructura del aula. IE Comunicaciones: Revista Iberoamericana de Informática Educativa, (22), 16-29.
Leelawong, K. and Biswas, G. (2008) Designing Learning by Teaching Systems: The Betty's Brain System. In International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.
Lester, J., Converse, S., Kahler, S., Barlow, S., Stone, B. & Bhogal, R. (1997). The persona effect: affective impact of animated pedagogical agents, SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems.
Mas, A. (2005). Agentes software y sistemas multiagente: conceptos, arquitecturas y aplicaciones. Prentice Hall.
Morales-Rodríguez, M., & Domínguez-Martínez, J. (2011). Agentes Conversacionales como un Sistema de Diálogo. Memorias del V Encuentro de Investigadores del ITCM.
Nanne, M. (2015) "Classification Criteria for Pedagogical Agents". Dept. Mathmatics and Computer Science, University of Sciences Technology and Medicine, Nouakchott – Mauritania. ISSN: 0976-8491 ISSN: 2229-4333 (Print) IJCST Vol. 6, Issue 3, July - Sept 2015.
Paulus, T. M., Horvitz, B., & Shi, M. (2006). 'Isn't it just like our situation?' Engagement and learning in an online story-based environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(4), 355-385. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-006-9604-2
Pérez-Marín, D. (2010). Uso de agentes conversacionales pedagógicos en sistemas de aprendizaje híbrido (b-learning).
Pérez-Marín, D. & Pascual-Nieto, I. (2011). Conversational Agents and Natural Language Interaction: Techniques and Effective Practices. IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-617-6
Person, N. K., & Graesser, A. C. (2000). Designing AutoTutor to be an effective conversational partner.
Reategui, E. B., & Moraes, M. C. (2006). Agentes pedagógicos animados. Novas Tecnologias na Educação, 4(2), 1-10.
Reategui, E., Polonia, E., & Roland, L. (2007). The role of animated pedagogical agents in scenario-based language e-learning: a case-study. In Conference ICL2007, September 26-28, 2007 (pp. 7-pages). Kassel University Press.
Ryu, J. & Baylor, A. (2005). The Psychometric Structure of Pedagogical Agent Persona. Technology, Instruction, Cognition & Learning (TICL).
Ryokai, K., Vaucelle, C., & Cassell, J. (2003). Virtual peers as partners in storytelling and literacy learning, Journal of computer assisted learning, 19(2), 195-208. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0266-4909.2003.00020.x
Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R. B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49(1), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.1.a
Smith, T., Affleck, G., Lees, B., & Branki, C. (1999). Implementing a generic framework for a web-based pedagogical agent. In Annual Australassian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education Conference, Brisbane, Queesland.
Tamayo-Moreno (2012). Propuesta de Desarrollo Centrado en el Usuario de un Agente Conversacional Pedagógico para la Comprensión Lectora de Ejercicios de Matemáticas a nivel escolar. Máster Universitario en Investigación en Sistemas Hardware y Software Avanzados de la Escuela Técnica Superior de Ingeniería Informática de la Universidad Rey Juan Carlos.
Tamayo-Moreno (2017). "Propuesta de Metodología para el Dise-o e Integración en el Aula de un Agente Conversacional Pedagógico desde Educación Secundaria hasta Educación Infantil" Tesis Doctoral. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, Móstoles, Madrid, Espa-a.
Tatar, D., Sacarea, C. and Kapetanios, E. (2013). Natural Language Processing: Semantic Aspects. November 14, 2013 by CRC Press ISBN 9781466584969
VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rosé, C. P. (2007). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive science, 31(1), 3-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/03640210709336984
Van Vuuren, S. (2007). Technologies that empower pedagogical agents and visions for the future. Educational Technology, 47(1), 4-10.
Veletsianos, G., Miller, C. & Doerin, A. (2009). "Enali: A Research and Design Framework for Virtual Characters and Pedagogical Agents" Journal of Educational Computing Research. Vol 41, Issue 2, pp. 171 – 194, October-06.
Yee, N., & Bailenson, J. (2007). The Proteus effect: The effect of transformed self-representation on behavior, Human Communication Research 33, 3. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2007.00299.x
Ziegahn, L. 'Talk' about culture online: The potential for transformation. Distance Education, v. 22, n.1, pp. 144-150, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158791010220109
Tamayo, S., & Pérez-Marin, D. (2017). What School Teachers Expect from Conversational Pedagogic Agents?. Education in The Knowledge Society, 18(3), 59–85. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks20171835985
Most read articles by the same author(s)
- Iago Cruz-García, Juan Antonio Martín-García, Diana Pérez-Marin, Celeste Pizarro, A Proposal of Programming Didactics in Primary Education following a Gamified Approach with Educational Videogames , Education in The Knowledge Society: Vol. 22 (2021)
- Marta Gómez-Gómez, Raquel Hijón-Neira, Liliana Santacruz-Valencia, Diana Pérez-Marín, Impact of the emergency remote teaching and learning process on digital competence and mood in teacher training , Education in The Knowledge Society: Vol. 23 (2022)
- Hernán Montes-León, Raquel Hijón- Neira, Diana Pérez-Marín, Sergio Raúl Montes-León, Improving Computational Thinking in Secondary Students with Unplugged Tasks , Education in The Knowledge Society: Vol. 21 (2020)
- Silvia Tamayo, Diana Pérez-Marín, Analysis of the experience of using a pedagogic conversational agent for reading comprehension in the school , Education in The Knowledge Society: Vol. 14 No. 2 (2013)
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
Publication Facts
Metric
This article
Other articles
Peer reviewers
2
2.4
Reviewer profiles N/A
Author statements
Author statements
This article
Other articles
Data availability
N/A
16%
External funding
N/A
32%
Competing interests
N/A
11%
Metric
This journal
Other journals
Articles accepted
22%
33%
Days to publication
71
145
Indexed in
-
—
- Editor & editorial board
- profiles
- Academic society
- N/A
- Publisher
- Ediciones Universidad de Salamanca
To learn about these publication facts, click 
PF is maintained by the Public Knowledge Project
+
−