APPEAL: A multi-agent approach to interactive learning environments

  • J. Masthoff
  • R. van Hoe
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1069)


In this paper an agent-based approach to interactive learning environments (ILE) is proposed. It is argued that current interactive learning systems, especially the intelligent tutoring systems, do not satisfy the minimal requirements of an ILE. A specification is given of an agent-based approach to ILE in which situated agents are associated with different aspects of the teacher's behaviour. It is argued that the interaction between these teacher agents and the student agent results in a highly adaptive and interactive learning system that satisfies the requirements of an ILE.The most promising is perhaps that the behaviour of the teacher seems already fairly complex even with a very limited amount of simple behaviours of the agents.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agre, P.E., & Chapman, D. (1987). Pengi: An implementation of a theory of activity. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference (pp. 268–272). Seattle, Washington.Google Scholar
  2. Van Hoe, R., Masthoff, J., Appelo, L., Harkema, H., De Pijper, J.R., & Rous, J. (1995). APPEAL: a multimedia environment for adaptive learning. In: IPO annual progress report 29.Google Scholar
  3. Appelo, L., Leermakers, M., & Rous, J. (1994). Language exercise generation in an interactive learning environment. IPO Manuscript 1012.Google Scholar
  4. Bouwhuis, D., & Bunt, H. (in press). Interactive instructional systems as dialogue systems. In L. Verhoeven (Ed.), Training for literacy. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  5. Brooks, R. (1986). A robust layered control system for a mobile robot. IEEE Journal on Robotics and Automation, 2, 14–23.Google Scholar
  6. Brooks, R. (1991). Intelligence without representation. Artificial Intelligence, 47, 139–159.Google Scholar
  7. Carbonell, J.R. (1970). Mixed initiative man-computer instructional dialogues. Doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  8. Chapman, D. (1991). Vision, instruction, and action. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Connah, D.M. (1993). The design of interacting agents for use in interfaces. In M.D. Brouwer-Janse & T.L. Harrington (Eds.), Human-machine communication for educational systems design (pp. 197–206). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  10. Green, J.G., Chi, M.T.H., Clancey, W.J., & Elman, J. (Eds.) (1993). Situated Agents [Special issue]. Cognitive Science, 17.Google Scholar
  11. McArthur, D., Statz, C., Hotta, J., Peter, O., & Burdorf, C. (1988). Skill-oriented task-sequencing in an intelligent tutor for basic algebra. Instructional Science, 17, 281–307.Google Scholar
  12. Norman, D.A. (1981). Categorization of Action Slips. Psychological Review, 88, 1–15.Google Scholar
  13. Norman, D.A., & Draper, S.W. (Eds.) (1986). User centered system design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  14. Payne, S., & Squibb, H. (1990). Algebra mal-rules and cognitive accounts of error. Cognitive Science, 14, 445–481.Google Scholar
  15. Roschelle, J. (1990). Designing for conversations. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Education Research Association, Boston.Google Scholar
  16. Self, J.A. (1974). Student models in computer-aided instruction. International Journal of Man-Machine studies, 6, 261–276.Google Scholar
  17. O'Shea, T. (1979). A self-improving quadratic tutor. International Journal of Man-Machine studies, 11, 97–124.Google Scholar
  18. Shoham, Y. (1993). Agent-oriented programming. Artificial Intelligence, 60, 51–92.Google Scholar
  19. Snow, R.E., & Swanson, J. (1992). Instructional psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 583–626.Google Scholar
  20. Suchman, L.A. (1987). Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Steels, L. (1989). Cooperation between distributed agents through self-organisation. Journal on Robotics and Autonomous systems.Google Scholar
  22. Wavish, P.R., & Connah, D.M. (1990). Representing multi-agent worlds in ABLE. Technical Note, Philips Research Laboratories.Google Scholar
  23. Wood, D., Wood, H., & Middleton, D. (1978). An experimental evaluation of four face-to-face teaching strategies. International Journal of behavioral Development, 1, 131–147.Google Scholar
  24. Wenger, E. (1987). Artificial Intelligence and Tutoring Systems. Los Altos, California: Morgan KaufmannGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Masthoff
    • 1
  • R. van Hoe
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Perception Research/IPOMB EindhovenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations