Can Adaptive Pedagogical Agents’ Prompting Strategies Improve Students’ Learning and Self-Regulation?

  • François Bouchet
  • Jason M. Harley
  • Roger Azevedo
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9684)

Abstract

This study examines whether an ITS that fosters the use of metacognitive strategies can benefit from variations in its prompts based on learners’ self-regulatory behaviors. We use log files and questionnaire data from 116 participants who interacted with MetaTutor, an advanced multi-agent learning environment that helps learners to develop their self-regulated learning (SRL) skills, in 3 conditions: one without adaptive prompting (NP), one with fading prompts based on learners’ deployment SRL processes (FP), and one where prompts can also increase if learners fail to deploy SRL processes adequately (FQP). Results indicated that an initially more frequent but progressively fading prompting strategy is beneficial to learners’ deployment of SRL processes once the scaffolding is faded, and has no negative impact on learners’ perception of the system’s usefulness. We also found that increasing the frequency of prompting was not sufficient to have a positive impact on the use of SRL processes, when compared to FP. These results provide insights on parameters relevant to prompting adaptation strategies to ensure transfer of metacognitive skills beyond the learning session.

Keywords

Adaptivity Pedagogical agents Self-regulated learning Metacognition User perception 

References

  1. 1.
    Azevedo, R., Aleven, V. (eds.): International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies. Springer, New York (2013)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bannert, M., Mengelkamp, C.: Scaffolding hypermedia learning through metacognitive prompts. In: Azevedo, R., Aleven, V. (eds.) International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies, pp. 171–186. Springer, New York (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B.M., Koedinger, K.R.: Improving students’ help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system. Learn. Instr. 21, 267–280 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Land, S.M.: Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 48, 61–78 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kinnebrew, J.S., Gauch, B.C., Segedy, J.R., Biswas, G.: Studying student use of self-regulated learning tools in an open-ended learning environment. In: Conati, C., Heffernan, N., Mitrovic, A., Verdejo, M. (eds.) AIED 2015. LNCS, vol. 9112, pp. 185–194. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Azevedo, R., et al.: The effectiveness of pedagogical agents’ prompting and feedback in facilitating co-adapted learning with MetaTutor. In: Cerri, S.A., Clancey, W.J., Papadourakis, G., Panourgia, K. (eds.) ITS 2012. LNCS, vol. 7315, pp. 212–221. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Harley, J.M., Carter, C.K., Papaioannou, N., Bouchet, F., Landis, R.S., Azevedo, R., Karabachian, L.: Examining the potential of personality traits and trait emotions to create emotionally-adaptive intelligent tutoring systems. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 26, 1–43 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bouchet, F., Harley, J.M., Azevedo, R.: Impact of different pedagogical agents’ adaptive self-regulated prompting strategies on learning with MetaTutor. In: Lane, H., Yacef, K., Mostow, J., Pavlik, P. (eds.) AIED 2013. LNCS, vol. 7926, pp. 815–819. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Azevedo, R.: Issues in dealing with sequential and temporal characteristics of self- and socially-regulated learning. Metacogn. Learn. 9, 217–228 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    VanLehn, K., Graesser, A.C., Jackson, G.T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., Rosé, C.P.: When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cogn. Sci. 31, 3–62 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • François Bouchet
    • 1
  • Jason M. Harley
    • 2
  • Roger Azevedo
    • 3
  1. 1.Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS, LIP6 UMR 7606ParisFrance
  2. 2.Department of Educational PsychologyUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  3. 3.Department of PsychologyNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA

Personalised recommendations