Recent advances in conversational intelligent tutoring systems

AI Magazine

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 42-54

  Rus, Vasile ^a   D'Mello, Sidney ^b   Hu, Xiangen ^a   Graesser, Arthur C ^a  

^a University of Memphis   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; EDUCATION COMPUTING; LEARNING SYSTEMS; SCAFFOLDS;

INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEM; KEY FEATURE; LEARNING PROGRESSIONS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 84896282504     PISSN: 07384602     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1609/aimag.v34i3.2485     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Alonzo, A. C., and Steedle, J. T. 2009. Developing and Assessing a Force and Motion Learning Progression. Science Education 93(3):389-421.
2. Bao, L., and Redish, E. F. 2006. Model Analysis: Assessing the Dynamics of Student Learning. Physical Review Special Topics Physics Education Research 2 (1).
3. Battista, M. T. 2011. Conceptualizations and Issues Related to Learning Progressions, Learning Trajectories, and Levels of Sophistication. The Mathematics Enthusiast 8(3):507-569.
4. Blei, D. M.; Ng, A. Y.; and Jordan, M. I. 2003. Latent Dirichlet Allocation. The Journal of Machine Learning Research 3:993-1022.
5. Bloom, B. 1984. The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring. Educational Researcher 13(6):4-16.
6. Chi, M. T. H.; Siler, S. A.; and Jeong, H. 2004. Can Tutors Monitor Students' Understanding Accurately? Cognition and Instruction 22(3):363-387. (Pubitemid 39203189)
7. Corcoran, T.; Mosher, F. A.; and Rogat, A. 2009. Learning Progressions in Science: An Evidence-Based Approach to Reform. Consortium for Policy Research in Education Report #Rr-63. Philadelphia, PA: Consortium for Policy Research in Education.
8. D'Mello, S.; Lehman, B.; Sullins, J.; Daigle, R.; Combs, R.; Vogt, K.; Perkins, L.; and Graesser, A. 2010. A Time for Emoting: When Affect-Sensitivity Is and Isn't Effective at Promoting Deep Learning. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, ed. J. Kay and V. Aleven, 245-254. Berlin: Springer.
9. D'Mello, S.; Olney, A.; Williams, C.; and Hays, P. 2012. Gaze Tutor: A Gaze-Reactive Intelligent Tutoring System. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 70(5):377-398.
10. D'Mello, S., Lehman, S., Pekrun, R., and Graesser, A. 2013. Confusion Can Be Beneficial for Learning. Learning and Instruction.
11. Dolan, W. B.; Quirk, C.; and Brockett, C. 2004. Unsupervised Construction of Large Paraphrase Corpora: Exploiting Massively Parallel News Sources. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Geneva, Switzerland.
12. Dynarski, M.; Agodini, R.; Heaviside, S.; Novak, T.; Carey, N.; Campuzano, L. 2007. Effectiveness of Reading and Mathematics Software Products: Findings from the First Student Cohort. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U. S. Department of Education.
13. Evens, M., and Michael, J. 2005. One-on-One Tutoring by Humans and Machines. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
14. Forbes-Riley, K., and Litman, D. J. 2011. Benefits and Challenges of Real-Time Uncertainty Detection and Adaptation in a Spoken Dialogue Computer Tutor. Speech Communication 53 (9-10) 1115-1136.
15. Graesser, A. C.; D'Mello, S.; and Person, N. K. 2009. Meta Knowledge in Tutoring. In Handbook of Metacognition in Education, ed. D. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, and A. C. Graesser. Mahwah, NJ: Taylor and Francis.
16. Graesser, A.; Moreno, K.; Marineau, J.; Adcock, A.; Olney, A.; and Person, N. 2003. AutoTutor Improves Deep Learning of Computer Literacy: Is It the Dialog or the Talking Head? In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, ed. U. Hoppe, F. Verdejo, and J. Kay, 7-54. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
17. Graesser, A. C.; Person, N. K.; and Magliano, J. P. 1995. Collaborative Dialogue Patterns in Naturalistic One-to-One Tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology 9(6):495-522.
18. Graesser, A. C.; Rus., V.; D'Mello, S.; and Jackson, G. T. 2008. AutoTutor: Learning Through Natural Language Dialogue That Adapts to the Cognitive and Affective States of the Learner. In Current Perspectives on Cognition, Learning, and Instruction: Recent Innovations in Educational Technology That Facilitate Student Learning, ed. D. H. Robinson and G. Schraw, 95-125. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
19. Graesser, A. C.; Van Lehn, K.; Rose, C. P.; Jordan, P.; and Harter, D. 2001. Intelligent Tutoring Systems with Conversational Dialogue. AI Magazine 22(4):39-41.
20. Halpern, D. F.; Millis, K.; Graesser, A. C.; Butler, H.; Forsyth, C.; and Cai, Z. 2012. Operation ARA: A Computerized Learning Game That Teaches Critical Thinking and Scientific Reasoning. Thinking Skills and Creativity 7 (93-100).
21. Koopmans, T. C., and Beckmann, M. 1957. Assignment Problems and the Location of Economic Activities. Econometrica 25(1):53-76.
22. Landauer, T.; McNamara, D. S.; Dennis, S.; and Kintsch, W., eds. 2007. Handbook on Latent Semantic Analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Lehman, B.; D'Mello, S.; and Graesser, A. Unpublished. False Feedback, Confusion, and Learning.
24. Mohan, L.; Chen, J.; and Anderson, W. A. 2009. Developing a Multi-Year Learning Progression for Carbon Cycling in Socioecological Systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 46(6):675-698.
25. National Research Council. 2001. Knowing What Students Know: The Science and Design of Educational Assessment, ed. J. W. Pellegrino, N. Chudowsky, and R. Glaser. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
26. Niraula, N.; Banjade, R.; Stefanescu, D.; and Rus, V. 2013. Experiments with Semantic Similarity Measures Based on LDA and LSA. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Statistical Language and Speech Processing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 7978. Berlin: Springer.
27. Olney, A.; D'Mello, S.; Person, N.; Cade, W.; Hays, P.; Williams, C.; Lehman, B.; and Graesser, A. C. 2012. Guru: A Computer Tutor That Models Expert Human Tutors. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, ed. S. Cerri, W. Clancey, G. Papadourakis, and K. Panourgia, 256-261. Berlin: Springer.
28. Renkl, A. 2002. Worked-Out Examples: Instructional Explanations Support Learning by Self-Explanations. Learning and Instruction 12(5):529-556.
29. Rus, V., and Graesser, A. C. 2006. Deeper Natural Language Processing for Evaluating Student Answers in Intelligent Tutoring Systems. In Proceedings of the 21st AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI.
30. Rus, V., and Lintean, M. 2012. A Comparison of Greedy and Optimal Assessment of Natural Language Student Input Using Word-to-Word Similarity Metrics. Paper presented at the Seventh Workshop on Innovative Use of Natural Language Processing for Building Educational Applications, Montreal, Canada, June 7-8.
31. Rus, V.; Lintean, M.; Banjade, R.; Niraula, N.; and Stefanescu, D. 2013. SEMILAR: The Semantic Similarity Toolkit. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Stroudsburg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
32. Rus, V.; Lintean, M.; Moldovan, C.; Baggett, W.; Niraula, N.; Morgan, B. 2012a. The Similar Corpus: A Resource to Foster the Qualitative Understanding of Semantic Similarity of Texts. In Semantic Relations II: Enhancing Resources and Applications, Proceedings of the 8th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference. Paris: European Language Resources Association.
33. Rus, V.; Moldovan, C.; Graesser, A.; and Niraula, N. 2012b. Automatic Discovery of Speech Act Categories in Educational Games. Paper presented at the 5th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, Chania, Greece 19-21 June.
34. Van Lehn, K. 2006. The Behavior of Tutoring Systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. 16(3):227-265.
35. Van Lehn, K.; Graesser, A. C.; Jackson, G. T.; Jordan, P.; Olney, A.; and Rose, C. P. 2007. When Are Tutorial Dialogues More Effective Than Reading? Cognitive Science 31(1):3-62.
36. Van Lehn, K. 2011. The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems. Educational Psychologist 46(4):197-221. Settings