The Community for Technology Leaders
RSS Icon
Issue No.03 - July-Sept. (2013 vol.6)
pp: 240-247
Gregory Dyke , Université de Lyon, Lyon
David Adamson , Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh
Iris Howley , Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh
Carolyn Penstein Rose , Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh
This paper investigates the use of conversational agents to scaffold online collaborative learning discussions through an approach called academically productive talk (APT). In contrast to past work on dynamic support for collaborative learning, which has involved using agents to elevate the conceptual depth of collaborative discussion by leading students in groups through directed lines of reasoning, this APT-based approach lets students follow their own lines of reasoning and promotes productive practices such as explanation of reasoning and refinement of ideas. Two forms of support are contrasted, namely, Revoicing support and Feedback support. The study provides evidence that Revoicing support resulted in significantly more intensive reasoning exchange between students in the chat and significantly more learning during the chat than when that form of support was absent. Another form of support, namely, Feedback support increased expression of reasoning while marginally decreasing the intensity of the interaction between students and did not affect learning.
psychology, Collaborative learning, intelligent agents,
Gregory Dyke, David Adamson, Iris Howley, Carolyn Penstein Rose, "Enhancing Scientific Reasoning and Discussion with Conversational Agents", IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, vol.6, no. 3, pp. 240-247, July-Sept. 2013, doi:10.1109/TLT.2013.25
[1] P. Adey and M. Shayer, "An Exploration of Long-Term Far-Transfer Effects Following an Extended Intervention Program in the High School Science Curriculum," Cognition and Instruction, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1-29, 1993.
[2] H. Ai, R. Kumar, D. Nguyen, A. Nagasunder, and C.P. Rosé, Exploring the Effectiveness of Social Capabilities and Goal Alignment in Computer Supported Collaborative Learning," Proc. 10th Int'l Conf. Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 2010.
[3] M. Azmitia and R. Montgomery, "Friendship, Transactive Dialogues, and the Development of Scientific Reasoning," Social Development, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 202-221, 1993.
[4] N. Baghaei, A. Mitrovic, and W. Irwin, "Supporting Collaborative Learning and Problem Solving in a Constraint Based CSCL Environment for UML Class Diagrams," Int'l J. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 159-190, 2007.
[5] M. Berkowitz and J. Gibbs, "Measuring the Developmental Features of Moral Discussion," Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, vol. 29, pp. 399-410, 1983.
[6] P. Dillenbourg, "Over-Scripting CSCL: The Risks of Blending Collaborative Learning with Instructional Design," Three Worlds of CSCL: Can We Support CSCL, pp. 61-91, 2002.
[7] P. Dillenbourg and F. Hong, "The Mechanics of CSCL Macro Scripts," The Int'l J. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 5-23, 2008.
[8] D. Diziol, E. Walker, N. Rummel, and K.R. Koedinger, "Using Intelligent Tutor Technology to Implement Adaptive Support for Student Collaboration," Educational Psychology Rev., vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 89-102, 2010.
[9] S. Fernando and M. Stevenson, "A Semantic Similarity Approach to Paraphrase Detection," Proc. 11th Ann. Research Colloquium Computational Linguistics UK (CLUK '08), 2008.
[10] L. Kobbe, A. Weinberger, P. Dillenbourg, A. Harrer, R. Hämäläinen, P. Häkkinen, and F. Fischer, "Specifying Computer-Supported Collaboration Scripts," The Int'l J. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, vol. 2, nos. 2/3, pp. 211-224, 2007.
[11] I. Kollar, F. Fischer, and F.W. Hesse, "Collaborative Scripts - A Conceptual Analysis," Educational Psychology Rev., vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 159-185, 2006.
[12] R. Kumar, G. Gweon, M. Joshi, Y. Cui, and C.P. Rosé, "Supporting Students Working Together on Math with Social Dialogue," Proc. SLaTE Workshop Speech and Language Technology in Education, 2007.
[13] R. Kumar, C.P. Rosé, Y.C. Wang, M. Joshi, and A. Robinson, "Tutorial Dialogue as Adaptive Collaborative Learning Support," Proc. Conf. Artificial Intelligence in Education, 2007.
[14] R. Kumar, H. Ai, J. Beuth, and C.P. Rosé, "Socially-Capable Conversational Tutors Can be Effective in Collaborative Learning Situations," Proc. 10th Int'l Conf. Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 2010.
[15] R. Kumar and C.P. Rosé, "Architecture for Building Conversational Agents that Support Collaborative Learning," IEEE Trans. Learning Technologies, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 21-34, Jan. 2011.
[16] P. Lison, "Multi-Policy Dialogue Management," Proc. Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue Conf. (SIGDIAL '11), pp. 294-300, 2011.
[17] S. Michaels, C. O'Connor, and L.B. Resnick, "Deliberative Discourse Idealized and Realized: Accountable Talk in the Classroom and in Civic Life," Studies in Philosophy and Education, vol. 27, pp. 283-297, 2007.
[18] S. Rabe-Hesketh, A. Skrondal, and A. Pickles, GLLAMM Manual, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Division of Biostatistics Working Paper Series, p. 160, 2004.
[19] C.P. Rosé, P. Jordan, M. Ringenberg, S. Siler, K. VanLehn, and A. Weinstein, "Interactive Conceptual Tutoring in Atlas-Andes," Proc. Conf. AI in Education, 2001.
[20] C.P. Rosé, Y.C. Wang, Y. Cui, J. Arguello, K. Stegmann, A. Weinberger, F. Fischer, "Analyzing Collaborative Learning Processes Automatically: Exploiting the Advances of Computational Linguistics in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning," The Int'l J. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 237-271, 2008.
[21] C. Wecker, F. Fischer, "Fading Scripts in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning: The Role of Distributed Monitoring," Proc. Eighth Int'l Conf. Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, pp. 764-772, 2007.
[22] A. Weinberger, K. Stegmann, and F. Fischer, "Scripting Argumentative Knowledge Construction: Effects on Individual and Collaborative Learning," Proc. Mice, Minds, and Soc.: Int'l Conf. Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (CSCL '07), C. Chinn, G. Erkens, and S. Puntambekar, eds., pp. 37-39, 2007.
63 ms
(Ver 2.0)

Marketing Automation Platform Marketing Automation Tool