You are here:

Designing Agents for Feedback Using the Documents Produced in Learning
Article

, , Computer Science and Engineering, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia

International Journal on E-Learning, in Norfolk, VA ISSN 1537-2456 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Waynesville, NC USA

Full Text

Abstract

This article reports on research which is based on the premise that the main aim of teaching is to provide appropriate feedback to students as they learn. Humans tutors make this process easier by asking students what they are thinking about a topic, then relate the answer to this stage or context of their learning. Hence the first Computer Supported Learning systems were based on a tutorial question-answer format. Since then research has branched out into Learner Modelling and Intelligent Agents to support learning in more open systems. This article looks at computers emulating mentors who analyse the student's documented activities to provide feedback. The activities are analysed using a methodology that looks at the Human-Computer-Human Interface, and a pattern structure is developed which is based on an ontology of group learning. Agents are designed and implemented using this structure to analyse synchronous and asynchronous group learning processes and to provide feedback. The ontology used in this research is based on the structure provided by Activity Theory where technology plays the role of mediator in the context of student actions.

Citation

Kutay, C. & Ho, P. (2005). Designing Agents for Feedback Using the Documents Produced in Learning. International Journal on E-Learning, 4(1), 21-38. Norfolk, VA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved August 10, 2024 from .

© 2005 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. Akhras, F.N., & Self, J.A. (1997). Modelling learning as a process. Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AI-ED'97), Kobe, Japan.
  2. Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., & Silverstein, M. (1977). A Pattern Language, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Barros, B., Verdejo, M. F., Read, T., & Mizoguchi, R. (2002). Applications of a collaborative learning ontology. Proceedings of MICAI’2002 Mexican International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, LNAI, (pp. 301-310). New York: Springer-Verlag.
  3. Bayle, E., Bellamy, R., Casady, G., Erickson, T., Finicher, S., Grinter, B., Gross, B., Lehder, D., Marmolin, H., Moore, B., Potts, C., Skousen, G., & Thomas, J. (1998). Putting it all together: Towards a pattern language for interaction design. A CHI'97 Workshop. SIGCHI Bulletin, 30(1) 17-23. Booth, S. (1992). Learning to program: A phenomenographical perspective. Göteborg Studies in Educational Sciences, ‘89, Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
  4. Constantino-González, M., & Suthers, D.D. (2000). A coached collaborative learning environment for entity-relationship modelling. In G. Gauthier, C. Frasson, & K. Van Lehn, (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference (ITS 2000), (pp. 325333). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
  5. Dillenbourg, P., Baker, M., Blaye, A., & O'Malley, C. (1996). The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In E. Spadia & P. Reman (Eds.), Learning in human and machine: Towards an interdisciplinary learning science, (pp. 189-211). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
  6. Kay, J., Halin, Z., Ottomann, T., & Razak, Z. (1997). Learner know thyself: Student models to give learner control and responsibility. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE'97)
  7. Kutay, C. (2003a). Intertac. Software architecture, technical Report No. 0318. Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales. Retrieved from http://www.cse.unsw.edu .au/~ckutay/Intertac/IntertacArchitecture.pdf, 2003
  8. Kutay, C. (2003b). Implementation patterns for supporting learning and group interactions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of New South Wales, Sydney.
  9. Kutay, C., & Ho, P. (2003). Assisting students by analysing their interactions and learning, submitted to AIED'03 Workshop on Learner Modelling for Reflection, Sydney University. McManus, M.M., & Aiken, R.M.
  10. Martin, D., Rodden, T., Rouncefield, M., Sommerville, I., & Viller, S. (2001). Finding patterns in the fieldwork. Proceedings of ECSCW 2001, (pp. 39-58), Bonn, Germany.
  11. Mühlenbrock, M., Tewissen, F., & Hoppe, H.U. (1998). A framework system for intelligent support in open distributed environments. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 9, 256-274.
  12. Nardi, B. A. (Ed.) (1996). Context and consciousness. Activity theory and human-computer interactions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  13. Papatheodorou, C., Vassiliou, A., & Simon, B. (2002). Discovery of ontologies for learning resources using word-based clustering. Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (ED-MEDIA 2002), (pp. 1523-1528), Denver. Pask, G. (1975). Conversation, cognition, and learning. New York: Elsevier.
  14. Savery, J.R., & Duffy, T.M. (1995). Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework. Educational Technology, 35(5), 31-7.
  15. Schümmer, T. (2002). PATORG. Retrieved from http://www.groupware-patterns.org
  16. Simone, C. (1994). Supporting collaborative dialogues in distance learning. In M. F. Verdejo & S.A. Cerri (Eds.), Collaborative dialogue technologies in distance learning. NATO ASI Series, F133 (pp. 156-169). New York: Springer-Verlag.
  17. Wood, D. (2001). Scaffolding, contingent tutoring and computer supported learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 280-292.
  18. 1See Booth (1992) for similar research into learning needs for students learning programming. 2Similar work has been done in single-user Intelligent Learning Environment by Akhras and Self (1997). 3See Barros, Verdejo, Read, & Mizoguchi (2002) for extended learning ontology.
  19. 7Compare to the work of McManus and Aiken (1995).

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Also Read

Pages You've Visited

Abstracts