Aditi Ramachandran
Chien-Ming Huang
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Personalized learning environments have the potential to improve learning outcomes for children in a variety of educational domains, as they can tailor instruction based on the unique learning needs of individuals. Robot tutoring systems can further engage users by leveraging their potential for embodied social interaction and take into account crucial aspects of a learner, such as a student’s motivation in learning. In this article, we demonstrate that motivation in young learners corresponds to observable behaviors when interacting with a robot tutoring system, which, in turn, impact learning outcomes. We first detail a user study involving children interacting one on one with a robot tutoring system over multiple sessions. Based on empirical data, we show that academic motivation stemming from one’s own values or goals as assessed by the Academic Self-Regulation Questionnaire (SRQ-A) correlates to observed suboptimal help-seeking behavior during the initial tutoring session. We then show how an interactive robot that responds intelligently to these observed behaviors in subsequent tutoring sessions can positively impact both student behavior and learning outcomes over time. These results provide empirical evidence for the link between internal motivation, observable behavior, and learning outcomes in the context of robot--child tutoring. We also identified an additional suboptimal behavioral feature within our tutoring environment and demonstrated its relationship to internal factors of motivation, suggesting further opportunities to design robot intervention to enhance learning. We provide insights on the design of robot tutoring systems aimed to deliver effective behavioral intervention during learning interactions for children and present a discussion on the broader challenges currently faced by robot--child tutoring systems.
- Vincent Aleven, Bruce McLaren, Ido Roll, and Kenneth Koedinger. 2004. Toward tutoring help seeking. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer, 227--239.Google Scholar
- Vincent Aleven, Ido Roll, Bruce M. McLaren, and Kenneth R. Koedinger. 2010. Automated, unobtrusive, action-by-action assessment of self-regulation during learning with an intelligent tutoring system. Educational Psychologist 45, 4 (2010), 224--233.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Vincent Aleven, Elmar Stahl, Silke Schworm, Frank Fischer, and Raven Wallace. 2003. Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Review of Educational Research 73, 3 (2003), 277--320.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ivon Arroyo, David G. Cooper, Winslow Burleson, Beverly Park Woolf, Kasia Muldner, and Robert Christopherson. 2009. Emotion sensors go to school. In Artificial Intelligence in Education, Vol. 200. IOS Press, 17--24. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Roger Azevedo. 2007. Understanding the complex nature of self-regulatory processes in learning with computer-based learning environments: An introduction. Metacognition and Learning 2, 2--3 (2007), 57--65.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Wilma A. Bainbridge, Justin Hart, Elizabeth S. Kim, and Brian Scassellati. 2008. The effect of presence on human-robot interaction. In 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN’08). IEEE, 701--706.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ryan S. J. Baker, Albert T. Corbett, and Vincent Aleven. 2008. More accurate student modeling through contextual estimation of slip and guess probabilities in Bayesian knowledge tracing. In International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer, 406--415. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ryan S. J. Baker, Albert T. Corbett, Kenneth R. Koedinger, Shelley Evenson, Ido Roll, Angela Z. Wagner, Meghan Naim, Jay Raspat, Daniel J. Baker, and Joseph E. Beck. 2006. Adapting to when students game an intelligent tutoring system. In International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer, 392--401. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ryan Shaun Baker, Albert T. Corbett, Kenneth R. Koedinger, and Angela Z. Wagner. 2004. Off-task behavior in the cognitive tutor classroom: When students game the system. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 383--390. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ryan S. J. Baker, Albert T. Corbett, Ido Roll, and Kenneth R. Koedinger. 2008. Developing a generalizable detector of when students game the system. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 18, 3 (2008), 287--314. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carole R. Beal, Lei Qu, and Hyokyeong Lee. 2006. Classifying learner engagement through integration of multiple data sources. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 21. Menlo Park, CA; Cambridge, MA, MIT Press; London, AAAI Press; 1999, 151. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Joseph E. Beck. 2005. Engagement tracing: Using response times to model student disengagement. In Proceedings of the 2005 Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education: Supporting Learning Through Intelligent and Socially Informed Technology. IOS Press, 88--95. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tony Belpaeme, James Kennedy, Aditi Ramachandran, Brian Scassellati, and Fumihide Tanaka. 2018. Social robots for education: A review. Science Robotics 3, 21 (2018), eaat5954.Google Scholar
- Peter Brusilovsky and Christoph Peylo. 2003. Adaptive and intelligent web-based educational systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 13, 2--4 (2003), 159--172. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Min Chi and Kurt VanLehn. 2010. Meta-cognitive strategy instruction in intelligent tutoring systems: How, when, and why. Educational Technology 8 Society 13, 1 (2010), 25--39.Google Scholar
- Benjamin Clement, Didier Roy, Pierre-Yves Oudeyer, and Manuel Lopes. 2015. Multi-armed bandits for intelligent tutoring systems. Journal of Educational Data Mining 7, 2 (2015), 20--48.Google Scholar
- Cristina Conati and Heather Maclaren. 2009. Empirically building and evaluating a probabilistic model of user affect. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 19, 3 (2009), 267--303. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Albert T. Corbett and John R. Anderson. 1994. Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Modeling and User-adapted Interaction 4, 4 (1994), 253--278.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Diana I. Cordova and Mark R. Lepper. 1996. Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology 88, 4 (1996), 715.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Angel De Vicente and Helen Pain. 2002. Informing the detection of the students’ motivational state: An empirical study. In International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer, 933--943. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. E. Deci and R. M. Ryan. 1985. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. Plenum Press (1985).Google Scholar
- Edward L. Deci, Robert J. Vallerand, Luc G. Pelletier, and Richard M. Ryan. 1991. Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist 26, 3--4 (1991), 325--346.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Michel C. Desmarais and Ryan S. Baker. 2012. A review of recent advances in learner and skill modeling in intelligent learning environments. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 22, 1--2 (2012), 9--38. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sidney K. D’Mello, Scotty D. Craig, Amy Witherspoon, Bethany Mcdaniel, and Arthur Graesser. 2008. Automatic detection of learner’s affect from conversational cues. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 18, 1--2 (2008), 45--80. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Carol S. Dweck. 1986. Motivational processes affecting learning. American Psychologist 41, 10 (1986), 1040.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Elaine S. Elliott and Carol S. Dweck. 1988. Goals: An approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54, 1 (1988), 5.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sharon Nelson-Le Gall. 1985. Help-seeking behavior in learning. Review of Research in Education 12, 1 (1985), 55--90.Google Scholar
- Goren Gordon, Samuel Spaulding, Jacqueline Kory Westlund, Jin Joo Lee, Luke Plummer, Marayna Martinez, Madhurima Das, and Cynthia Breazeal. 2016. Affective personalization of a social robot tutor for children’s second language skills. In Proceedings of the 30th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press, 3951--3957. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Adele Eskeles Gottfried. 1985. Academic intrinsic motivation in elementary and junior high school students. Journal of Educational Psychology 77, 6 (1985), 631--45.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jeffrey Alan Greene and Roger Azevedo. 2007. Adolescents’ use of self-regulatory processes and their relation to qualitative mental model shifts while using hypermedia. Journal of Educational Computing Research 36, 2 (2007), 125--148.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Allyson F. Hadwin, John C. Nesbit, Dianne Jamieson-Noel, Jillianne Code, and Philip H. Winne. 2007. Examining trace data to explore self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning 2, 2--3 (2007), 107--124.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Susan Harter. 1981. A new self-report scale of intrinsic versus extrinsic orientation in the classroom: Motivational and informational components. Developmental Psychology 17, 3 (1981), 300.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Iris Howley, Takayuki Kanda, Kotaro Hayashi, and Carolyn Rosé. 2014. Effects of social presence and social role on help-seeking and learning. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 415--422. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Tanner Jackson and Danielle S. McNamara. 2013. Motivation and performance in a game-based intelligent tutoring system. Journal of Educational Psychology 105, 4 (2013), 1036.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Aidan Jones, Susan Bull, and Ginevra Castellano. 2018. “I know that now, I’m going to learn this next” promoting self-regulated learning with a robotic tutor. International Journal of Social Robotics 10, 4 (2018), 439--454.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Aidan Jones and Ginevra Castellano. 2018. Adaptive robotic tutors that support self-regulated learning: A longer-term investigation with primary school children. International Journal of Social Robotics 10, 3 (2018), 357--370.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Takayuki Kanda, Takayuki Hirano, Daniel Eaton, and Hiroshi Ishiguro. 2004. Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: A field trial. Human-computer Interaction 19, 1 (2004), 61--84. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Takayuki Kanda, Michihiro Shimada, and Satoshi Koizumi. 2012. Children learning with a social robot. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 351--358. Google ScholarDigital Library
- James Kennedy, Paul Baxter, Emmanuel Senft, and Tony Belpaeme. 2015. Higher nonverbal immediacy leads to greater learning gains in child-robot tutoring interactions. In International Conference on Social Robotics. Springer, 327--336.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Krittaya Leelawong and Gautam Biswas. 2008. Designing learning by teaching agents: The Betty’s brain system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 18, 3 (2008), 181--208. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Iolanda Leite, Ginevra Castellano, André Pereira, Carlos Martinho, and Ana Paiva. 2012. Modelling empathic behaviour in a robotic game companion for children: An ethnographic study in real-world settings. In Proceedings of the 7th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 367--374. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Séverin Lemaignan, Fernando Garcia, Alexis Jacq, and Pierre Dillenbourg. 2016. From real-time attention assessment to with-me-ness in human-robot interaction. In 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction. IEEE Press, 157--164. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Daniel Leyzberg, Samuel Spaulding, and Brian Scassellati. 2014. Personalizing robot tutors to individuals’ learning differences. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 423--430. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas W. Malone. 1981. Toward a theory of intrinsically motivating instruction. Cognitive Science 5, 4 (1981), 333--369.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Joseph E. Michaelis and Bilge Mutlu. 2017. Someone to read with: Design of and experiences with an in-home learning companion robot for reading. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 301--312. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Anahita Mohseni-Kabir, Charles Rich, Sonia Chernova, Candace L. Sidner, and Daniel Miller. 2015. Interactive hierarchical task learning from a single demonstration. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 205--212. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Richard S. Newman. 1990. Children’s help-seeking in the classroom: The role of motivational factors and attitudes. Journal of Educational Psychology 82, 1 (1990), 71.Google ScholarCross Ref
- National Academy of Engineering. 2008. Grand Challenges for Engineering. Technical Report. National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC. Retrieved March 28, 2017 from http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/File.aspx?id=115748v=ba24e2ed.Google Scholar
- John F. Pane, Elizabeth D. Steiner, Matthew D. Baird, and Laura S. Hamilton. 2015. Continued Progress: Promising Evidence on Personalized Learning. Technical Report. RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, CA. Retrieved March 28, 2017 from http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1300/RR1365/RAND_RR1365.pdf.Google Scholar
- Zachary A. Pardos and Neil T. Heffernan. 2010. Modeling individualization in a Bayesian networks implementation of knowledge tracing. In International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization. Springer, 255--266. Google ScholarDigital Library
- André Pereira, Carlos Martinho, Iolanda Leite, and Ana Paiva. 2008. iCat, the chess player: The influence of embodiment in the enjoyment of a game. In Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems-Volume 3. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 1253--1256. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Paul R. Pintrich. 2000. The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In Handbook of Self-Regulation. Academic Press, San Diego, 451--502.Google Scholar
- Paul R. Pintrich and Elisabeth V. De Groot. 1990. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology 82, 1 (1990), 33.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Aaron Powers, Sara Kiesler, Susan Fussell, and Cristen Torrey. 2007. Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot. In 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI’07). IEEE, 145--152. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aditi Ramachandran, Chien-Ming Huang, Edward Gartland, and Brian Scassellati. 2018. Thinking aloud with a tutoring robot to enhance learning. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 59--68. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aditi Ramachandran, Chien-Ming Huang, and Brian Scassellati. 2017. Give me a break!: Personalized timing strategies to promote learning in robot-child tutoring. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. ACM, 146--155. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Aditi Ramachandran, Alexandru Litoiu, and Brian Scassellati. 2016. Shaping productive help-seeking behavior during robot-child tutoring interactions. In 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. IEEE Press, 247--254. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ido Roll, Vincent Aleven, Bruce M. McLaren, and Kenneth R. Koedinger. 2011. Improving students’ help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system. Learning and Instruction 21, 2 (2011), 267--280.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Allison M. Ryan and Paul R. Pintrich. 1997. “Should I ask for help?” The role of motivation and attitudes in adolescents’ help seeking in math class. Journal of Educational Psychology 89, 2 (1997), 329.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Allison M. Ryan and Huiyoung Shin. 2011. Help-seeking tendencies during early adolescence: An examination of motivational correlates and consequences for achievement. Learning and Instruction 21, 2 (2011), 247--256.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard M. Ryan and James P. Connell. 1989. Perceived locus of causality and internalization: Examining reasons for acting in two domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 57, 5 (1989), 749.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard M. Ryan and Edward L. Deci. 2000. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 1 (2000), 54--67.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Cyril J. Sadowski and Helen R. Woodward. 1981. Relationship between origin climate, perceived responsibility, and grades. Perceptual and Motor Skills 53, 1 (1981), 259--261.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Martin Saerbeck, Tom Schut, Christoph Bartneck, and Maddy D. Janse. 2010. Expressive robots in education: Varying the degree of social supportive behavior of a robotic tutor. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 1613--1622. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. R. Schadenberg, M. A. Neerincx, F. Cnossen, and R. Looije. 2017. Personalising game difficulty to keep children motivated to play with a social robot: A Bayesian approach. Cognitive Systems Research 43 (2017), 222--231. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bernhard Schmitz and Bettina S. Wiese. 2006. New perspectives for the evaluation of training sessions in self-regulated learning: Time-series analyses of diary data. Contemporary Educational Psychology 31, 1 (2006), 64--96.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Elaine Short, Katelyn Swift-Spong, Jillian Greczek, Aditi Ramachandran, Alexandru Litoiu, Elena Corina Grigore, David Feil-Seifer, Samuel Shuster, Jin Joo Lee, Shaobo Huang, et al. 2014. How to train your dragonbot: Socially assistive robots for teaching children about nutrition through play. In 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN’14). IEEE, 924--929.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel Solomon and Arthur J. Kendall. 1976. Individual characteristics and children’s performance in open and traditional classroom settings. Journal of Educational Psychology 68, 5 (1976), 613.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Victor J. Strecher, Brenda McEvoy DeVellis, Marshall H. Becker, and Irwin M. Rosenstock. 1986. The role of self-efficacy in achieving health behavior change. Health Education Quarterly 13, 1 (1986), 73--92.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Daniel Szafir and Bilge Mutlu. 2012. Pay attention!: Designing adaptive agents that monitor and improve user engagement. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, 11--20. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kurt VanLehn. 2006. The behavior of tutoring systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 16, 3 (2006), 227--265. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kurt VanLehn. 2011. The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist 46, 4 (2011), 197--221.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kurt VanLehn, Winslow Burleson, Maria-Elena Chavez Echeagaray, Robert Christopherson, Javier Gonzalez Sanchez, Jenny Hastings, Yoalli Hidalgo Pontet, and Lishan Zhang. 2011. The affective meta-tutoring project: How to motivate students to use effective meta-cognitive strategies. In 19th International Conference on Computers in Education, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education (APSCE), 128--130.Google Scholar
- Joshua Wainer, David J. Feil-Seifer, Dylan A. Shell, and Maja J. Mataric. 2007. Embodiment and human-robot interaction: A task-based perspective. In 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human interactive Communication (RO-MAN’07). IEEE, 872--877.Google Scholar
- Jacqueline Kory Westlund and Cynthia Breazeal. 2015. The interplay of robot language level with children’s language learning during storytelling. In Proceedings of the 10th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction Extended Abstracts. ACM, 65--66. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Philip H. Winne, John C. Nesbit, Vive Kumar, Allyson F. Hadwin, Susanne P. Lajoie, Roger Azevedo, and Nancy E. Perry. 2006. Supporting self-regulated learning with gStudy software: The learning kit project. Technology Instruction Cognition and Learning 3, 1/2 (2006), 105.Google Scholar
- Christopher A. Wolters, L. Yu Shirley, and Paul R. Pintrich. 1996. The relation between goal orientation and students’ motivational beliefs and self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences 8, 3 (1996), 211--238.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Barry J. Zimmerman. 1990. Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist 25, 1 (1990), 3--17.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Barry J. Zimmerman. 2008. Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal 45, 1 (2008), 166--183.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Barry J. Zimmerman and Manuel Martinez-Pons. 1988. Construct validation of a strategy model of student self-regulated learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 80, 3 (1988), 284.Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Toward Effective Robot--Child Tutoring: Internal Motivation, Behavioral Intervention, and Learning Outcomes
Recommendations
Thinking Aloud with a Tutoring Robot to Enhance Learning
HRI '18: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot InteractionThinking aloud, while requiring extra mental effort, is a metacognitive technique that helps students navigate through complex problem-solving tasks. Social robots, bearing embodied immediacy that fosters engaging and compliant interactions, are a ...
The Effect of Personalization in Longer-Term Robot Tutoring
The benefits of personalized social robots must be evaluated in real-world educational contexts over periods of time longer than a single session to understand their full potential to impact learning outcomes. In this work, we describe a personalization ...
Fostering Learning Gains Through Personalized Robot-Child Tutoring Interactions
HRI'15 Extended Abstracts: Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction Extended AbstractsSocial robots can be used to tutor children in one-on-one interactions. It would be most beneficial for these robots to adapt their behavior to suit the individual learning needs of children. Each child is different; they learn at their own pace and ...
Comments