"Oh, dear Stacy!" Social interaction, elaboration, and learning with teachable agents

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 39-48

  Ogan, Amy ^a   Finkelstein, Samantha ^a   Mayfield, Elijah ^a   D'Adamo, Claudia ^b   Matsuda, Noboru ^a   Cassell, Justine ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b WHEATON COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

ECA; Impoliteness; Peer tutoring; Rapport; Teachable agents

Indexed keywords

ECA; IMPOLITENESS; PEER TUTORING; RAPPORT; TEACHABLE AGENTS;

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; EDUCATION COMPUTING; EMBEDDED SYSTEMS; HUMAN ENGINEERING; SOCIAL SCIENCES; STUDENTS;

TEACHING;

EID: 84862093939     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2207676.2207684     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. Ardington, A. Playfully negotiated activity in girls' talk, J. of Pragmatics, 38(1) (2006), 73-95.
2. Bargh, H., Schul, Y. On the cognitive benefits of teaching. J. of Educ. Psych, 72(5) (1980), 593-604.
3. Biswas, G., Leelawong, K., Schwartz, D., Vye, N., and TAG-V. Learning By Teaching: A New Agent Paradigm for Educational Software. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19, (2005), 363-392.
4. Brown, P., and Levinson, S. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1987.
5. Cassell, J. Towards a Model of Technology and Literacy Development: Story Listening Systems. J. of Applied Developmental Psych, 25(1) (2004), 75-105.
6. Cassell, J., Gill, A. and Tepper, P. Coordination in Conversation and Rapport. In Proc. EmbodiedNLP 2007. 41-50.
7. Chase, C., Chin, D., Oppezzo, M., Schwartz, D. Teachable Agents and the Protégé Effect: Increasing the Effort Towards Learning. J. Sci. Educ. Tech., 18 (2009), 334-352.
8. Cohen, J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. and Psych Measurement, 20(1) (1960). 37-46.
9. Cohen, P., Kulik, J., Kulik, C. Educational Outcomes of Tutoring: A Meta-analysis of Findings. J. of Educational Research. 19(2) (1982), 237-248.
10. Coleman, E., Brown, A., Rivkin, A. The effect of instructional explanations on learning from science texts. J. of the Learning Science, 6(4) (1997), pp. 347-365.
11. Fantuzzo, J. W., King, J., Heller, L.R. Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring on mathematics and school adjustment: A component analysis. J. of Educ. Psych, 84(3) (1992), 331-339.
12. Gulz, A., Haake, M. and Silvervarg, A. Extending a Teachable Agent with a Social Conversation Module - Effects on Student Experiences and Learning. In Proc. AIED 2011. 106-114.
13. Matsuda, N., Yarzebinski, E., Keiser, V., Raizada, R., Stylianides, G., Cohen, W. W. Learning by Teaching SimStudent - An Initial Classroom Baseline Study comparing with Cognitive Tutor. In Proc AIED 2011, Springer, 213-221.
14. Mayfield, E. and Rosé, C.P. An interactive tool for supporting error analysis for text mining. In Demo Session NAACL 2010.
15. Okita, S., Bailenson, J., and Schwartz, D.L. Mere belief in social action improves complex learning. In Proc. ICLS 2008. 132-139.
16. Reeves, B., and Nass, C. The Media Equation: how people treat computers, televisions and new media like real people and places. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
17. Reif, F. and Scott, L.A. Teaching scientific thinking skills: Students and computers coaching each other. Amer. J. Physics. 67(9), 1999, 819-831.
18. Rohrbeck, C. A., Ginsburg-Block, M. D., Fantuzzo, J. W., and Miller, T. R. Peer-assisted learning interventions with elementary school students: A meta-analytic review. J. of Educ. Society. 95(2), (2003), 240-257.
19. Roscoe, R.D., and Chi, M. Understanding Tutor Learning: Knowledge-Building and Knowledge-Telling in Peer Tutors' Explanations and Questions. Review of Educ. Research. 77(4), (2007), 534-574.
20. Rosé, C.P., Bhembe, D., Siler, S., Srivastava, R., and VanLehn, K. The Role of Why Questions in Effective Human Tutoring. In Proc. AIED 2003, IOS Press. 55-62.
21. Rosé, C.P., Jordan, P., Ringenberg, M., Siler, S., VanLehn, K., and Weinstein, A. Interactive conceptual tutoring in Atlas-Andes. In Proc AIED 2001. IOS Press, 256-266.
22. Rosé, C. P., and Torrey, C. Interactivity versus Expectation: Eliciting Learning Oriented Behavior with Tutorial Dialogue Systems, In Proc. Interact 2005. 323-336.
23. Sharpley, A., Irvine, J., and Sharpley, C. An Examination of the Effectiveness of a Cross-age Tutoring Program in Mathematics for Elementary School Children. Amer. Educ. Research J. 20(1), (1983), 103-111.
24. Slavin, R. E. Research on cooperative learning and achievement: What we know, what we need to know. Contemporary Educ. Psych, 21, (1996), 43-69.
25. Straehle, C. A. '"Samuel?" "Yes dear?" Teasing and conversational rapport', Framing in Discourse. New York: Open University Press. (1993). 210-229.
26. Tickle-Degnen, L., and Rosenthal, R. The nature of rapport and its nonverbal correlates. Psych. Inquiry, 1, (1990), 285-293.
27. VanLehn, K. The behavior of tutoring systems. Internatl. J. of Artificial Intelligence in Educ. 16(3), (2006), 227-265.
28. Walker, E., Rummel, N., and Koedinger, K. R. Integrating collaboration and intelligent tutoring data in the evaluation of a reciprocal peer tutoring environment. Research and Practice in Tech. Enhanced Learning, 4(3), (2009), 221-251.
29. Webb, N. M. Peer interaction and learning in small groups. J. of Educ. Psych. 13(1), (1989), 21-39.