It is often assumed that engaging in a one-on-one dialogue with a tutor is more effective than listening to a lecture or reading a text. Although earlier experiments have not always supported this hypothesis, this may be due in part to allowing the tutors to cover different content than the noninteractive instruction. In 7 experiments, we tested the interaction hypothesis under the constraint that (a) all students covered the same content during instruction, (b) the task domain was qualitative physics, (c) the instruction was in natural language as opposed to mathematical or other formal languages, and (d) the instruction conformed with a widely observed pattern in human tutoring: Graesser, Person, and Magliano's 5-step frame. In the experiments, we compared 2 kinds of human tutoring (spoken and computer mediated) with 2 kinds of natural-language-based computer tutoring (Why2-Atlas and Why2-AutoTutor) and 3 control conditions that involved studying texts. The results depended on whether the students' preparation matched the content of the instruction. When novices (students who had not taken college physics) studied content that was written for intermediates (students who had taken college physics), then tutorial dialogue was reliably more beneficial than less interactive instruction, with large effect sizes. When novices studied material written for novices or intermediates studied material written for intermediates, then tutorial dialogue was not reliably more effective than the text-based control conditions.
We developed an Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) that aims to promote engagement and learning by dynamically detecting and responding to students' boredom and disengagement. The tutor uses a commercial eye tracker to monitor a student's gaze patterns and identify when the student is bored, disengaged, and has zoned out. The tutor then attempts to reengage the student with dialogue moves that direct the student to reorient his or her attentional patterns towards the animated pedagogical agent embodying the tutor. We evaluated the efficacy of the gaze-reactive tutor in promoting learning, motivation, and engagement in a controlled experiment where 48 students were tutored on four biology topics with both gaze-reactive and non gaze-reactive (control condition) versions of the tutor. The results indicated that: (a) gaze-sensitive dialogues were successful in dynamically reorienting students' attentional patterns to the important areas of the interface, (b) gaze-reactivity was effective in promoting learning gains for questions that required deep reasoning, (c) gaze-reactivity had minimal impact on students' state motivation and on self-reported engagement, and (d) individual differences in scholastic aptitude moderated the impact of gaze-reactivity on overall learning gains. We discuss the implications of our findings, limitations, future work, and consider the possibility of using gaze-reactive ITSs in classrooms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.