The use of pedagogic misrepresentation in tutorial dialogue

  • Carl GutwinEmail author
  • Gordon McCalla
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 608)


This research considers techniques and strategies used to misrepresent knowledge for pedagogic purposes, and models pedagogic misrepresentation from a computational perspective. The idea of misrepresentation in education challenges assumptions about the sanctity of an intelligent tutoring system's domain representation, suggests that truth is subject to context, and provides implicit support for a measure of tutor control within the learning situation. Regardless of the philosophical issues raised, however, the techniques of misrepresentation show potential for increasing the abilities intelligent tutorial dialogue systems.


Domain Concept Tutoring System Domain Representation Intelligent Tutoring System Revelation Condition 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Brecht 1990]
    Brecht (Wasson), B. Determining the Focus of Instruction, Ph.D. thesis, University of Saskatchewan, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. [Brown 1991]
    Brown, J. S. “Toward a New Epistemology for Learning” in Intelligent Tutoring Systems. C. Frasson and G. Gauthier, eds. Norwood, N.J.: Ablex, 1990, pp. 266–282.Google Scholar
  3. [Frederiksen & White 1988]
    Frederiksen, J.R., and White, B. Intelligent Learning Environments for Science Education, in Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Montreal 1988, pp. 250–257.Google Scholar
  4. [Greer and McCalla 1989]
    Greer, J., and McCalla, G. “A computational framework for granularity and its application to educational diagnosis” in Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit MI, 1989, pp. 477–482.Google Scholar
  5. [Gutwin 1991]
    Gutwin, C. How to Get Ahead by Lying: Using Pedagogically Motivated Misrepresentation in Tutorial Dialogue. M.Sc. Thesis, University of Saskatchewan, 1991.Google Scholar
  6. [Gutwin 1992]
    Gutwin, C. Would I Lie To You?, to appear in Proceedings of the 30th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Newark, Delaware, 1992.Google Scholar
  7. [Lesgold et al 1987]
    Lesgold, A., Bonar, J., Ivil, J, and Bowen, A. An intelligent tutoring system for electronics troubleshooting: DC-circuit understanding, in Knowing and Learning: Issues for the Cognitive Psychology of Instruction, L. Resnick ed., Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  8. [McKeown et al 1985]
    McKeown, K., Wish, M., Matthews, K. “Tailoring Explanations for the User” in Proceedings on the 5th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles, August 1985, pp.794–798.Google Scholar
  9. [Moore and Swartout 1989]
    Moore, J., and Swartout, W. R. “A reactive approach to explanation,” in Proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit, 1989 pp.Google Scholar
  10. [Moyse 1989]
    Moyse, R. “Knowledge Negotiation Implies Multiple Viewpoints.” in Proceedings of AI&Ed'89, Amsterdam, 1989, pp. 140–149.Google Scholar
  11. [Paris 1989]
    Paris, Cecile. “The use of explicit user models in a generation system for tailoring answers to the user's level of expertise” in User Models in Dialog Systems, A. Kobsa and W. Wahlster, eds. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1989, pp. 200–232.Google Scholar
  12. [Shortliffe 1976]
    Shortliffe, E.H. Computer-Based Medical Consultation: MYCIN. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  13. [Shute & Bonar 1986]
    Shute, V., and Bonar, J.G. “An intelligent tutoring system for scientific inquiry skills.” in Proceedings of the Eighth Cognitive Science Society Conference, Amherst MA, pp.353–370.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Alberta Research CouncilCalgary
  2. 2.ARIES LaboratoryUniversity of SaskatchewanSaskatoon
  3. 3.Learning Research & Development CentreUniv. of PittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations