LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
du Boulay, Benedict; Luckin, Rosemary (2001)
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: QA75

Classified by OpenAIRE into

ACM Ref: ComputingMilieux_COMPUTERSANDEDUCATION
One of the promises of ITSs and ILEs is that they will teach and assist learning in an intelligent manner. Historically this has tended to mean concentrating on the interface, on the representation of the domain and on the representation of the student’s knowledge. So systems have attempted to provide students with reifications both of what is to be learned and of the learning process, as well as optimally sequencing and adjusting activities, problems and feedback to best help them learn that domain. We now have embodied (and disembodied) teaching agents and computer-based peers, and the field demonstrates a much greater interest in metacognition and in collaborative activities and tools to support that collaboration. Nevertheless the issue of the teaching competence of ITSs and ILEs is still important, as well as the more specific question as to whether systems can and should mimic human teachers. Indeed increasing interest in embodied agents has thrown the spotlight back on how such agents should behave with respect to learners. In the mid 1980s Ohlsson and others offered critiques of ITSs and ILEs in terms of the limited range and adaptability of their teaching actions as compared to the wealth of tactics and strategies employed by human expert teachers. So are we in any better position in modelling teaching than we were in the 80s? Are these criticisms still as valid today as they were then? This paper reviews progress in understanding certain aspects of human expert teaching and in developing tutoring systems that implement those human teaching strategies and tactics. It concentrates particularly on how systems have dealt with student answers and how they have dealt with motivational issues, referring particularly to work carried out at Sussex: for example, on responding effectively to the student’s motivational state, on contingent and Vygotskian inspired teaching strategies and on the plausibility problem. This latter is concerned with whether tactics that are effectively applied by human teachers can be as effective when embodied in machine teachers.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Akhras, F. N. and Self, J. A. (2000). System intelligence in constructivist learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11. to appear.
    • Aleven, V. and Koedinger, K. R. (2000). Limitations of student control: Do students know when they need help? In Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 5th International Conference, ITS2000, Montreal, number 1839 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 292-303. Springer, Berlin.
    • Anderson, J. R. (1990). The Adaptive Character of Thought. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
    • Anderson, J. R., Boyle, C. F., and Yost, G. (1985). The geometry tutor. In Proceedings of IJCAI'85, Los Angeles, California, pages 1-7.
    • Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., and Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4(2):167-207.
    • Anderson, J. R. and Reiser, B. J. (1985). The LISP tutor. BYTE, 10(4):159-175.
    • Arroyo, I., Beck, J. E., Woolf, B. P., Beal, C. R., and Schultz, K. (2000). Macroadapting animalwatch to gender and cognitive differences with respect to hint interactivity and symbolism. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 5th International Conference, ITS2000, Montreal, number 1839 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 574-583. Springer, Berlin.
    • Beck, J., Stern, M., and Woolf, B. P. (1997). Using the student model to control problem difficulty. In Jameson, A., Paris, C., and Tasso, C., editors, User Modeling: Proceedings of Sixth International Conference, UM97, pages 278-288, New York. Springer Wien.
    • Bliss, J., Askew, M., and Macrae, S. (1996). Effective teaching and learning: Scaffolding revisited. Oxford Review of Education, 22(1):37-61.
    • Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13(6):4-16.
    • Brown, J. S. and Burton, R. R. (1975). Multiple representations of knowledge for tutorial reasoning. In Bobrow, D. G. and Collins, A., editors, Representation and Understanding, pages 311-349. Academic Press, New York.
    • Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A., and Vassileva, J., editors (1998). Adaptive Hypertext and Hypermedia. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
    • Burton, R. R. (1982). Diagnosing bugs in a simple procedural skill. In Sleeman, D. and Brown, J. S., editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pages 157-183. Academic Press.
    • Burton, R. R. and Brown, J. S. (1977). Semantic grammar: A technique for constructing natural language interfaces to instructional systems. Technical Report 3587, Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.
    • Cameron, J. and Pierce, W. D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic motivation: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 64(3):363-423.
    • Carroll, J. and McKendree, J. (1987). Interface design issues for advice-giving expert systems. Communications of the ACM, 30(1):14-31.
    • Chan, T.-W. and Chou, C.-Y. (1997). Exploring the design of computer supports for reciprocal tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8(1):1-29.
    • Chi, M., Bassok, M., Lewis, M., Reimann, P., and Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13:145-182.
    • Clancey, W. J. (1982). Tutoring rules for guiding a case method dialogue. In Sleeman, D. and Brown, J. S., editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pages 201-225. Academic Press.
    • Collins, A. and Brown, J. S. (1988). The computer as a tool for learning through reflection. In Mandl, H. and Lesgold, A., editors, Learning Issues for Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pages 1-18. SpringerVerlag, New York.
    • Collins, A., Neville, P., and Bielaczyc, K. (2000). The role of different media in designing environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11(2):144-162.
    • Collins, A. and Stevens, A. L. (1991). A cognitive theory of inquiry teaching. In Goodyear, P., editor, Teaching Knowledge and Intelligent Tutoring, pages 203-230. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, New Jersey.
    • Collins, A., Warnock, E. H., Aiello, N., and Miller, M. L. (1975). Reasoning from incomplete knowledge. In Bobrow, D. G. and Collins, A., editors, Representation and Understanding, pages 383-415. Academic Press, New York.
    • Corbett, A. T. and Anderson, J. R. (1992). LISP intelligent tutoring system: Research in skill acquisition. In Larkin, J. H. and Chabay, R. W., editors, Computer-Assisted Instruction and Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Shared Goals and Complementary Approaches, pages 73-109. Lawrence Erlbaum.
    • Cronbach, L. J. and Snow, R. E. (1977). Aptitudes and Instructional Methods: A Handbook for Research on Interactions. Irvington, New York.
    • del Soldato, T. (1994). Motivation in tutoring systems. Technical Report CSRP 303, School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences, University of Sussex.
    • del Soldato, T. and du Boulay, B. (1995). Implementation of motivational tactics in tutoring systems. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 6(4):337-378.
    • Douglas, S. A. (1991). Tutoring as interaction: Detecting and repairing tutoring failures. In Goodyear, P., editor, Teaching Knowledge and Intelligent Tutoring, pages 123-147. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, New Jersey.
    • Dreyfus, H. (1979). What Computers Can't Do: The Limits of Artificial Intelligence. Harper and Row, New York, second edition.
    • du Boulay, B. (2000). Can we learn from ITSs? In Gauthier, G., Frasson, C., and VanLehn, K., editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Proceedings of 5th International Conference, ITS 2000, Montreal, number 1839 in Lectures Notes in Computer Science, pages 9-17. Springer-Verlag.
    • du Boulay, B., Luckin, R., and del Soldato, T. (1999). The plausibility problem: Human teaching tactics in the 'hands' of a machine. In Lajoie, S. P. and Vivet, M., editors, Artificial Intelligence in Education: Open Learning Environments: New Computational Technologies to Support Learning, Exploration and Collaboration. Proceedings of the International Conference of the AI-ED Society on Artificial Intelligence and Education, Le Mans France, pages 225-232. IOS Press.
    • Eisenberger, R. (1992). Learned industriousness. Psychological Review, 99(2):248-267.
    • Fox, B. A. (1991). Cognitive and interactional aspects of correction in tutoring. In Goodyear, P., editor, Teaching Knowledge and Intelligent Tutoring, pages 149-172. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, New Jersey.
    • Gegg-Harrison, T. S. (1992). Adapting instruction to the students capabilities. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 3(2):169-181.
    • Graesser, A. C., Person, N., Harter, D., and the Tutoring Research Group (2000). Teaching tactics in autotutor. In Modelling Human Teaching Tactics and Strategies: Workshop W1 at ITS'2000, Montreal.
    • Grandbastien, M. (1999). Teaching expertise is at the core of ITS research. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10(3-4):335-349.
    • Johnson, W. L., Rickel, J. W., and Lester, J. C. (2000). Animated pedagogical agents: Face-to-face interaction in interactive learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11(1):47-78.
    • Johnson, W. L. and Soloway, E. (1987). Proust: an automatic debugger for pascal programs. In Kearsley, G. P., editor, Artificial Intelligence & Instruction: applications and methods. Addison-Wesley Publishing, Reading, Massachusetts.
    • Katz, S., Lesgold, A., Eggan, G., and Gordin, M. (1992). Modelling the student in Sherlock II. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 3(4):495-518.
    • Keller, J. M. (1983). Motivational design of instruction. In Reigeluth, C. M., editor, Instructional-design Theories and Models: An Overview of their Current Status. Lawrence Erlbaum.
    • Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., Hadley, W. H., and Mark, M. A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8(1):30-43.
    • Koedinger, K. R., Corbett, A. T., Ritter, S., and Shapiro, L. J. (2000). Carnegie learning's cognitive tutor: Summary research results. Summary of research results available from CARNEGIElearning, Pittsburgh, www.carnegielearning.com.
    • Lajoie, S. P., Wiseman, J., and Faremo, S. (2000). Tutoring strategies for effective instruction in internal medicine. In Modelling Human Teaching Tactics and Strategies: Workshop W1 at ITS'2000, Montreal.
    • Leinhardt, G. and Greeno, J. G. (1991). The cognitive skill of teaching. In Goodyear, P., editor, Teaching Knowledge and Intelligent Tutoring, pages 233-268. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, New Jersey.
    • Lepper, M., Aspinwall, L., Mumme, D., and Chabay, R. (1991). Self-perception and social perception processes in tutoring: Subtle social control strategies of expert tutors. In Olson, J. and Zanna, M., editors, Self Inference Processes: The Sixth Ontario Symposium in Social Psychology, pages 217-237. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
    • Lepper, M. R. and Chabay, R. (1988). Socializing the intelligent tutor: Bringing empathy to computer tutors. In Mandl, H. and Lesgold, A., editors, Learning Issues for Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pages 242-257. Springer-Verlag, New York.
    • Lepper, M. R., Woolverton, M., Mumme, D. L., and Gurtner, J.-L. (1993). Motivational techniques of expert human tutors: Lessons for the design of computer-based tutors. In Lajoie, S. P. and Derry, S. J., editors, Computers as Cognitive Tools, pages 75-105. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
    • Lesgold, A., Lajoie, S., Bunzo, M., and Eggan, G. (1992). Sherlock: A coached practice environment for an electronics troubleshooting job. In Larkin, J. H. and Chabay, R. W., editors, Computer-Assisted Instruction and Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pages 289-317. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
    • Lester, J. C., Converse, S. A., Stone, B. A., Kahler, S. A., and Barlow, S. T. (1997). Animated pedagogical agents and problem-solving effectiveness: A large-scale empirical evaluation. In du Boulay, B. and Mizoguchi, R., editors, Artificial Intelligence in Education: Knowledge and Media in Learning Systems. Proceedings of the AI-ED 97 World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, volume 50 of Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, pages 23-30, Kobe, Japan. IOS Press.
    • Lester, J. C., Towns, S. G., and Fitzgerald, P. J. (1999). Achieving affective impact: Visual emotive communication in lifelike pedagogical agents. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10(3-4):278-291.
    • Littman, D., Pinto, J., and Soloway, E. (1990). The knowledge required for tutorial planning: An empirical analysis. Interactive Learning Environments, 1(2):124-151.
    • Luckin, R. (1998). 'ECOLAB': Explorations in the Zone of Proximal Development. Technical Report CSRP 386, School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences, University of Sussex.
    • Luckin, R. and du Boulay, B. (1999). Ecolab: The development and evaluation of a Vygotskian design framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10(2):198-220.
    • Major, N., Ainsworth, S., and Wood, D. (1997). REDEEM: Exploiting symbiosis between psychology and authoring environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8(3-4):317- 340.
    • Malone, T. and Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun. In Snow, R. and Farr, M., editors, Aptitude, Learning and Instruction: Conative and Affective Process Analyses. Lawrence Erlbaum.
    • McArthur, D., Stasz, C., and Zmuidzinas, M. (1990). Tutoring techniques in algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 7:197-244.
    • McCalla, G. (2000). Life and learning in the electronic village: The importance of localization for the design of environments to support learning. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 5th International Conference, ITS2000, Montreal, number 1839 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 31-32. Springer, Berlin.
    • Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Beekelaar, R., and Hamid, A. (1992a). Making processes visible: Scaffolding learning with reasoning-congruent representations. In Frasson, C., Gauthier, G., and McCalla, G. I., editors, Intelligent Tutoring Systems: Second International Conference, ITS'92, Montreal, pages 103- 110, New York. Springer Verlag.
    • Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Ranney, M., and Trafton, J. G. (1992b). Effective tutoring techniques: A comparison of human tutors and intelligent tutoring systems. The Journal Of The Learning Sciences, 2(3):277-305.
    • Murray, T. (1999). Authoring intelligent tutoring systems: An analysis of the state of the art. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10(1):98-129.
    • Ohlsson, S. (1987). Some principles of intelligent tutoring. In Lawler, R. W. and Yazdani, M., editors, Learning Environments and Tutoring Systems: Learning Environments and Tutoring Systems, volume 1, pages 203-237. Ablex Publishing, Norwood, New Jersey.
    • Pask, G. and Scott, B. (1975). CASTE: A system for exhibiting learning strategies and regulating uncertainties. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 5:17-52.
    • Peachey, D. and McCalla, G. (1986). Using planning techniques in intelligent tutoring systems. International Journal of Man-machine Studies, 24:77-98.
    • Reiser, B. J., Kimberg, D. Y., Lovett, M. C., and Ranney, M. (1992). Knowledge representation and explanation in GIL, an intelligent tutor for programming. In Larkin, J. H. and Chabay, R. W., editors, Computer-Assisted Instruction and Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pages 112-149. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
    • Ridgway, J. (1988). Of course ICAI is impossible . . . worse though, it might be seditious. In Self, J., editor, Artificial Intelligence and Human Learning, pages 28-48. Chapman and Hall Computing, London.
    • Rutter, M., Maughan, B., Mortimore, P., and Ouston, J. (1979). Fifteen Thousand Hours: Secondary Schools and Their Effects on Children. Paul Chapman Publishing.
    • Schoenfeld, A. H. (1998). Towards a theory of teaching-in-context. Issues in Education, 4(1):1-94. http://www-gre.berkeley.edu/faculty/aschoenfeld.
    • Self, J. (1993). Special issue on evaluation. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 4(2/3).
    • Shute, V. J. (1995). SMART: Student modelling approach for responsive tutoring. User Modelling and User-Adapted Interaction, 5(1):1-44.
    • Sleeman, D., Kelly, A., Martinak, R., Ward, R., and Moore, J. (1989). Studies of diagnosis and remediation with high school algebra students. Cognitive Science, 13(4):551-568.
    • Soller, A. L. (2001). Supporting social interaction in an intelligent collaborative learning system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12(1):40-62.
    • Sternberg, R. J. and Horvath, J. A. (1995). A prototype view of expert teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(6):9-17.
    • VanLehn, K. (1987). Learning one subprocedure per lesson. Artificial Intelligence, 31(1):1-40.
    • VanLehn, K., Ohlsson, S., and Nason, R. (1994). Applications of simulated students. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 5(2):135-175.
    • von Glasersfeld, E. (1984). An introduction to radical constructivism. In Watzlawick, P., editor, The Invented Reality, pages 17-40. W.W. Norton & Company, New York.
    • von Glasersfeld, E. (1987). Learning as a constructive activity. In Janvier, C., editor, Problems of representation in the teaching and learning of mathematics, pages 3-17. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.
    • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: the Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University press, Cambridge, MA.
    • Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and Language. The M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, MA.
    • Wasson, (Brecht), B. (1990). Determining the Focus of Instruction: Content Planning for Intelligent Tutoring Systems. PhD thesis, Department of Computational Science, University of Saskatchewan, Canada.
    • Wertsch, J. (1984). The zone of proximal development: Some conceptual issues. In Rogoff, B. and Wertsch, J., editors, Children's Learning in the “Zone of Proximal Development”, volume 23, pages 7-19. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
    • Wilson, B. (1997). The postmodern paradigm. In Dills, C. and Romiszowski, A., editors, Instructional development paradigms. Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs NJ.
    • Wilson, B. and Cole, P. (1991). A review of cognitive teaching models. Educational Technology Research and Development, 39(4):47-64.
    • Winne, P. H. (1997). Experimenting to bootstrap self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3):397-410.
    • Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S., and Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17:89-100.
    • Wood, D. J. and Middleton, D. J. (1975). A study of assisted problem solving. British Journal of Psychology, 66:181-191.
    • Wood, D. J., Wood, H. A., and Middleton, D. (1978). An experimental evaluation of four face-to-face teaching strategies. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 1:131-147.
    • Woolf, B. P. (1988). Representing complex knowledge in an intelligent machine tutor. In Self, J., editor, Artificial Intelligence and Human Learning, pages 3-27. Chapman and Hall Computing, London.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Download from

Cite this article