DynaLearn - Engaging and informed tools for learning conceptual system knowledge

AAAI Fall Symposium - Technical Report

Volumn FS-09-02, Issue , 2009, Pages 46-51

  Bredeweg, Bert ^a   Gómez Pérez, Asunción ^b   André, Elisabeth ^c   Salles, Paulo ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF AUGSBURG   (Germany)

^d UNIVERSITY OF BRASILIA   (Brazil)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADDED VALUES; COGNITIVE TOOL; CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE; CONCEPTUAL SYSTEMS; DIAGRAMMATIC REPRESENTATIONS; ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE; KEY TOPICS; LEARNING OPPORTUNITY; ONTOLOGY MAPPING; SCIENCE EDUCATION; TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT; VIRTUAL CHARACTER;

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; CURRICULA; ONTOLOGY; TECHNOLOGICAL FORECASTING;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 77954224278     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (47)

1. André, E. (2008). Design and evaluation of embodied conversational agents for educational and advisory software. In R. Luppicini (ed.), The Handbook of Conversation Design for Instructional Applications, IGI Publishing Information Science Publishing, IRM Press.
2. Billsus, D., Brunk, C.A., Evans, C., Gladish, B. and Pazzani, M. (2002). Adaptive interfaces for ubiquitous web access, Communications of the ACM, 45(5): 34-38. (Pubitemid 135702539)
3. Biswas, G., Schwartz, D., Bransford, J. and The Teachable Agents Group at Vanderbilt. (2001). Technology Support for Complex Problem Solving: From SAD Environments to AI. Smart Machines in Education. K. Forbus and P. Feltovich (eds.), AAAI Press/MIT Press, Menlo Park California, USA.
4. Blair, K., Schwartz, D., Biswas, G. and Leelawong, K. (2006). Pedagogical Agents for Learning by Teaching: Teachable Agents, Technical report, School of Education, Stanford University, USA.
5. Blauvelt, R. G. (2001). A design environment for automata: supporting children's construction of mechanical reasoning and spatial cognition. Doctoral dissertation, University of Colorado at Boulder, USA.
6. Brazil (2005). Instituto Nacional de Estudos e Pesquisas Educacionais Anísio Teixeira. Exame Nacional do Ensino Médio (ENEM): Fundamentação teóricometodológica. Brasília, Brazil, INEP/MEC, 122 pages.
7. th International Workshop on Qualitative Reasoning, C. Bailey-Kellogg and B. Kuipers (eds.), pages 21-28, Hanover, New Hampshire, USA.
8. Bredeweg, B. and Struss, P. (2003). Current topics in Qualitative Reasoning, AI Magazine (special issue), 24(4): 13-130.
9. Craig, S., Gholson, B., Garzon, M., Hu, X., Marks, W., Wiemer-Hastings, P. and Lu, Z. (1999). Auto tutor and otto tudor. AIED workshop on Animated and Personified Pedagogical Agents, Le Mans, France.
10. Donnelly, J. (2001). Contested terrain or unified project? 'The nature of science' in the National Curriculum for England and Wales. International Journal of Science Education, 23(2): 181-195.
11. Elio, R. and Sharf, P.B. (1990). Modeling novice-to-expert shifts in problem solving and knowledge organization. Cognitive Science, 14:579-639.
12. Eurab (2004). European Union Research Advisory Board - Interdisciplinarity in research. EURAB 04.009-FINAL (http://ec.europa.eu/ research/eurab).
13. Eurydice (2006). Science Teaching in Schools in Europe - Policies and Research. Eurydice, the information network on education in Europe (http://www.eurydice.org).
14. Euzenat, J. and Shvaiko P. (2007). Ontology matching. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 341 pages.
15. Forbus, K.D. (1984). Qualitative process theory. Artificial Intelligence, 24: 85-168.
16. Forbus, K.D. and Feltovich, P.J. (2001). Smart Machines in Education, AAAI Press / MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts
17. th International Workshop on Qualitative Reasoning, San Antonio, Texas, 17-18 May.
18. Forbus, K.D. (2008), Qualitative Modeling. In F. v. Harmelen, V. Lifschitz and B. Porter (eds), Handbook of Knowledge Representation (Volume 3), pages 361-393.
19. Frederiksen, J.R. and White, B.Y. (2002). Conceptualizing and constructing linked models: creating coherence in complex knowledge systems. In P. Brna, M. Baker, K. Stenning, and A. Tiberghien, editors, The Role of Communication in Learning to Model, pages 69-96. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London.
20. Gartner, A., Conway Kohler, M. and Riessman, F. (1971). Children teach children. Learning by teaching. Harper & Row, New York, USA.
21. th International workshop on Qualitative Reasoning, P. Salles and B. Bredeweg (eds), pages 87-94, Brasilia, Brazil, August 20-22.
22. Hucke, L. and Fischer, H.E. (2002). The link of theory and practice in traditional and in computer-based university laboratory experiments. In D. Psillos and H. Niedderer (Eds.), Teaching and learning in the science laboratory, pages 205-218. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
23. Jackson, S.L., Krajcik, J. and Soloway, E. (1998). The design of guided learner-adaptable scaffolding in interactive learning environments. Proceedings of ACM CHI'98, pages 187-194. ACM Press, 1998.
24. Jong, de T. (2006). Technological advances in inquiry learning. Science, 312: 532-533.
25. Kalfoglou, Y. and Schorlemmer, M. (2003). Ontology Mapping: The State of the Art. The Knowledge Engineering Review, 18(1): 1-31.
26. Kleer, de J.H. and Brown, J.S. (1984). A qualitative physics based on confluences. Artificial Intelligence, 24: 7-83.
27. Leelawong, K. and Biswas, G. (in press). Designing Learning by Teaching Environments: The Betty's Brain System, International Journal of AI and Education.
28. Lester, J.C., Converse, S.A., Kahler, S.E., Barlow, S.T., Stone, B.A. and Bhogal, R.S. (1997). The persona effect: affective impact of animated pedagogical agents. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, New York, NY, USA, pages 359-366, ACM Press.
29. Machado, N.J. (1995). Epistemologia e didática: as concepções de conhecimento e inteligência e a prática docente. São Paulo, Brazil: Cortez Editora.
30. rd Cognitive Science Society, Mahwah, NY, USA, pages 294-599, Lawrence Erlbaum.
31. Mettes, C.T.C.W. and Roossink, H.J. (1981). Linking factual and procedural knowledge in solving science problems: A case study in a thermodynamics course. Instructional Science, 10:333-361.
32. Mulken, S.V., André, E., and Müller, J. (1998). The persona effect: How substantial is it? Proceedings of HCI on People and Computers XIII, London, UK, pages 53-66, Springer-Verlag.
33. Niedderer, H., Aufschnaiter, S., Tiberghien, A., Buty, C., Haller, K., Hucke, L., Seter, F. and Fischer, H. (2002). Talking physics in labwork contexts - A category based analysis of videotapes. In D. Psillos and H. Niedderer (Eds.), Teaching and learning in the science laboratory, pages 31-40. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
34. Norman, D.A. (1993). Things that make us Smart, Perseus Books, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
35. Osborne, J., Simon, S. and Collins, S. (2003). Attitudes towards science: a review of the literature and its implications. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9): 1049-1079. (Pubitemid 37496912)
36. Otero, V., Johnson, A. and Goldberg, F. (1999). How Does the Computer Facilitate the Development of Physics Knowledge Among Prospective Elementary Teachers? Journal of Education, 181(2): 57-89.
37. Paiva, A., Dias, J., Sobral, D., Aylett, R., Sobreperez, P., Woods, S., Zoll, C. and Hall, L.E. (2004). Caring for Agents and Agents that Care: Building Empathic Relations with Synthetic Agents. Proceedings of the 3rd International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 19-23 August, pages 194-201, ACM-Press.
38. Papert, S. (1980). Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. NY: Basic Books.
39. Renkl, A. (2006). Lernen durch Lehren. In: D. Rost, Handwörterbuch Pädagogische Psychologie. 3.Aufl. Weinheim: Beltz Verlag, pages 416-420.
40. Resnick, M. (1994). Changing the centralized mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
41. Richmond, G. and Peterson, S. (1992). STELLA II: An Introduction to Systems Thinking, High Performance Systems, Hanover, N.H.
42. Rickel, J. and Johnson, W.L. (1999). Animated agents for procedural training in virtual reality: Perception, cognition, and motor control. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 13: 343-382.
43. Ploetzner, R. and Spada, H. (1998). Constructing quantitative problem representations on the basis of qualitative reasoning. Interactive Learning Environments, 5:95-108.
44. Schumacher, R.M. and Gentner, D. (1988). Transfer of training as analogical mapping. IEEE Transactions of Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 18: 592-600.
45. Schwarz, C.V. and White, B.Y. (2005). Metamodeling Knowledge: Developing Students' Understanding of Scientific Modeling, Cognition and Instruction, 23(2): 165-205.
46. Shvaiko, P. and Euzenat, J. (2005). A Survey of Schema-based Matching Approaches. Journal on Data Semantics, 4:146-171.
47. Winkels, R. and Bredeweg, B. (eds). (1998). Qualitative Models in Interactive Learning Environments, Interactive Learning Environment (special issue), 5(1-2): 1-134.