You are here:

Animated Pedagogical Agent: A Review of Agent Technology Software in Electronic Learning Environment
ARTICLE

, International Languages Teacher Education Institute, Malaysia

Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia Volume 23, Number 2, ISSN 1055-8896 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Abstract

Agent technology has become one of the dynamic and most interesting areas of computer science in recent years. The dynamism of this technology has resulted in computer generated characters, known as pedagogical agent, entering the digital learning environments in increasing numbers. Commonly deployed in implementing tutoring strategies, these characters, through the manifestation of verbal and non-verbal communication behaviors, are able to engage students in meaningful learning experience. Their social affordances and motivational benefits are seen as essential components in e-learning environment that lacks the presence of a social entity, leading to animated characters becoming a milestone in interactive e-learning environment. This paper reviews some of the agent technology software commonly used by developers for creating animated characters in pedagogical role. The review includes a brief explanation on features as well as operational procedures of selected agent software such as MS Agent, Vox Proxy, Noah, Code Baby, Sitepal and Crazy Talk. The conclusion looks into the strength and shortcomings in each software from the perspective of visual and verbal affordances as well as their instructional merits.

Citation

K Govindasamy, M. (2014). Animated Pedagogical Agent: A Review of Agent Technology Software in Electronic Learning Environment. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 23(2), 163-188. Waynesville, NC USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 21, 2019 from .

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Frechette, M.C (2008). Animated pedagogical agents: How the presence and nonverbal communication of a virtual instructor affect perceptions and learning outcomes in a computer-based environment about basic physics concepts. Doctorate dissertation. University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
  2. Johnson, W.L., Rickel, J.W., & Lester, J.C. (2000). Animated pedagogical agents: Faceto-face interaction in interactive learning environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 11, 47-78.
  3. Lester, J., & Stone, B.A. (1997). Increasing Believability in Animated Pedagogical Agents. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Autonomous Agents, pp. 16-21, Marina delRey, California, February 1997. (AA-97)
  4. Mishra, P., & Hershey, K.A. (2004). Etiquette and the design of educational technology. Communications of the ACM, 47(4), 45-49.
  5. Moreno, R. (2005). Multimedia learning with animated pedagogical agents. In R. Mayer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning (pp. 507-524). New York: Cambridge
  6. UniversityMoreno, R., Mayer, R.E., Spires, A.E., & Lester, J.C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177-213.
  7. Towns, S., FitzGerald, P., & Lester, J. (1998). Visual emotive communication in lifelike pedagogical agents. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, San Antonio, 474-483.
  8. Valetsianos, G. (2007) Cognitive and affective benefits of an animated pedagogical agent: Considering contextual relevance and aesthetics. Journal of Educational

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.