The digital tutor in the Tyumen state university: a chat-bot case

Abstract

The article presents a pedagogical model of the digital tutor designed for the purpose of automatization of the teacher/student interaction. The authors seek to justify its demand in higher education institutions due to the 2020–2021 forced distance learning. The study employs the methods of theoretical modeling in digital pedagogy and survey research. The latter identifies the attitude of 3-rd-year bachelors majoring in Linguistics in the University of Tyumen to the introduction of digital technologies and assesses their experience of using a digital tutor in the theoretical course of English lexicology. Automated learning models have come a long way from massive online courses to intelligent assistants. The high cost of their development slowed down their implementation. The model of a digital tutor presented in the article is based on the principles of adaptive education and individual trajectories of students’ development. The model can be implemented in theoretical disciplines. The demand for digital models will definitely increase since conventional learning strategies do not appeal to younger generations of students.

References

1. Akhayan A. A. 2018. A network personality as a pedagogical concept (invitation to think): On one feature of a network personality. Educational dynamics of the network personality: Proceedings of the I International Scientific and Applied Conference, Saint-Petersburg: Rossiyskii gosudarstvennyy pedagogicheskii universitet im. A.I. Gertsena, Institut pedagogiki, pp. 10–15. (In Russ.)

2. Carr R., Palmer S., Hagel P. 2015. Active learning: The importance of developing a comprehensive measure. Active Learning in Higher Education, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 173–186.

3. Cheng C.-I., Liu D.SM., Lin, C.C-H. 2015. A digital tutor for learning fashion design. Multimedia Tools and Applications, vol. 74, no. 21; pp. 9339–9364. DOI.org/10.1007/ s11042-014-2084-1.

4. Corti K., Gillespie A. 2016. Co-constructing intersubjectivity with artificial conversational agents: People are more likely to initiate repairs of misunderstandings with agents represented as human. Computers in Human Behavior, no. 58, pp. 431–442. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.039.

5. Davydova N.A. 2009. Adaptive organization of the learning process based on an automated learning environment). Vestnik YuUrGGPU [South Ural State Humanitarian Pedagogical University Bulletin]. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/adaptivnaya-organizatsiya-protsessa-obucheniya-na-osnove-avtomatizirovannoy-obuchayuschey-sredy (accessed: 18.02.2022). (In Russ.)

6. Farjami F., Aidinlou N.A., Alemi M., Makhdoumi M. 2014. Applications of Robot Assisted Language Learning (RALL) in Language Learning and Teaching. International Journal of Language and Linguistics. Special Issue: Foreign Language Teaching and Learning (Models and Beliefs), vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 12–20. DOI: 10.11648/j. ijll.s.20140203.12.

7. Frumin I.D., Vasiliev K.B. 2005. The modern trends in the policy of informatization of education. Voprosy obrazovaniya [Educational Studies], no. 3, pp. 70–83. (In Russ.)

8. Fryer L.K., Nakao K., Thompson A. 2019. Chatbot learning partners: Connecting learning experiences, interest and competence. Computers in Human Behavior, no. 93, pp. 279–289. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2018.12.023.

9. Go E., Sundar S.S. 2019. Humanizing chatbots: The effects of visual, identity and conversational cues on humanness perceptions. Computers in Human Behavior, no. 97, pp. 304–316. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2019.01.020.

10. Hill J., Ford W.R., Farreras I.G. 2015. Real conversations with artificial intelligence: A comparison between human-human online conversations and human-chatbot conversations. Computers in Human Behavior, no. 49, pp. 245–250. DOI: 10.1016/j. chb.2015.02.026.

11. Kim Y., Baylor A.L. 2006. A social-cognitive framework for pedagogical agents as learning companions. Educational Technology Research and Development, vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 569–596.

12. Kravchenko D. A., Bleskina I. A., Kalyaeva E. N., Zemlyakova E.A., Abbakumov D.F. 2020. Personalization in education: from programmable to adaptive learning. Sovremennaya zarubezhnaya psihologiya [Modern foreign psychology], vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 34–46. (In Russ.)

13. Krechetov I. A., Kruchinin V. V., Romanenko V. V., Gorodovich A. V. 2019. Implementation of adaptive learning: methods and technologies. Otkrytoe i distantsionnoe obrazovanie [Open and distance education], vol. 3, no. 71. DOI: 10.17223/16095944/71/5 (In Russ.)

14. Kuz’minov Ya. I. 2019. How to make education the engine of socio-economic development? Moscow, Izdatel’skiy dom NIU VSHE — HSE University. URL: https://ioe.hse.ru/data/2019/06/21/1488487037/Obrazovanie-text..pdf (accessed: 18.02.2022). (In Russ.)

15. Lodatko E.A. 2014. Typology of pedagogical models. Science Vector of Togliatti State University. Series: Pedagogy, Psychology, vol. 1, no. 16, pp. 126–128. (In Russ.)

16. Maestro-Prieto J.A., Simón-Hurtado A. 2018. The pedagogical model of SIAL: an adaptive and open-ended intelligent tutoring system for first order logic. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education. URL: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3197091.3197100 (accessed: 18.02.2022).

17. Martin F., Chen Y., Moore R.L., Westine C.D. 2020. Systematic review of adaptive learning research designs, context, strategies, and technologies from 2009 to 2018. Educational Technology Research and Development, no. 68, pp. 1903–1929. DOI: org/10.1007/s11423-020-09793-2 (accessed: 18.02.2022).

18. Martin F., Markant D. 2020. Adaptive learning modules. London, The Sage encyclopedia of higher education, pp. 2–4.

19. Mayes T., de Freitas S. 2004. Review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models. London, Joint Information Systems Committee. URL: https://curve.coventry.ac.uk/open/file/8ff033fc-e97d-4cb8-aed3-29be7915e6b0/1/Review+of+e-learning+theories.pdf (accessed: 18.02.2022).

20. Pérez-Soler S., González-Jiménez M., Guerra E., Lara J. 2019. Towards Conversational Syntax for Domain-Specific Languages using Chatbots. Journal of Object Technology, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. 1–21.

21. Randall N. 2020. A Survey of Robot-Assisted Language Learning (RALL). ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 1–36. DOI: 10.1145/3345506 (accessed: 18.02.2022).

22. Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. 2020. Beetham H., Sharpe R. (Eds.). New York, Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9781351252805 (accessed: 18.02.2022).

23. Sergienko E.A., Marcinkovskaya T.D., Izotova E.I. 2019. Sotsial’no-emotsional’noe razvitie detei. Teoreticheskie osnovy [Social and emotional development of children. Theoretical foundations]. Moscow, Drofa. (In Russ.)

24. Serrano J., Gonzalez F., Zalewski J. 2015. CleverNAO: The Intelligent Conversational Humanoid Robot. Proceedings of 2015 IEEE 8th International Conference on Intelligent Data Acquisition and Advanced Computing Systems: Technology and Applications (IDAACS). Warsaw, Poland: Warsaw Univ Technol, pp. 887–892.

25. Tärning B., Silvervarg A., Gulz A., Haake M. 2019. Instructing a Teachable Agent with Low or High Self-Efficacy — Does Similarity Attract? International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 89–121.

26. Tsarev R.Yu., Tynchenko S.V., Gritsenko S.N. 2016. Adaptive learning using information and educational environment resources. Modern problems of science and education, no. 5. URL: http://www.science-education.ru/ru/article/view?id=25227 (accessed: 18.02.2022) (In Russ.)

27. Yakimanskaya I.S. 2000. Tekhnologiya lichnostno-orientirovannogo obucheniya v sovremennoi shkole [Technology of personality-oriented learning in modern schools]. Moscow, Sentyabr’. (In Russ.)

28. Yavorskij V.V., Yurov V.M., Bajdikova N.V. 2015. Modern pedagogical technologies and models in the education system. International journal of experimental education, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 329–332. (In Russ.)

29. Yıldız T. 2019. Human-Computer Interaction Problem in Learning: Could the Key Be Hidden Somewhere Between Social Interaction and Development of Tools? Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, vol. 53, no. 3, pp. 541–557. DOI: 10.1007/s12124-019-09484-5 (accessed: 18.02.2022).