Navigating Digital Classrooms As Educators—Are We Ready to Adapt?

Table of Links

Abstract and 1 Introduction

2 Background

3 Methode & Results

4 Discussion

5 Conclusion and References

3 METHODE & RESULTS

The presumption to the given research question (RQ1) is that educators are only able to use the full potential of intelligent tutoring systems if they (1) have access to the information obtained from the learners, (2) are able to understand and interpret this information, (3) and can transform this interpretation into valuable pedagogical and didactical actions. This aligns with the learning analytics process model [31] (see Figure 2), which is applicable to learner or teaching dashboards and authoring interfaces.

Hence, regarding the results from an ongoing systematic literature review, we concluded a revised meta-architecture of intelligent tutoring systems that incorporate the role of educators (Figure 1 black elements). This draws attention to the design of teaching dashboards, allowing views into and interactions with the different models of such systems (compare with Figure 1). Besides static dashboards, a functional entity is needed to support the educators´ reflection process about the effectiveness of their teaching methods. We call this entity educator model.

4 DISCUSSION

With the given summary, the illustrated current systematic overview (Figure 1 gray elements), and a visualized extension proposal (Figure 1 black elements), we would like to point out a major implication for teachers in higher education when introducing intelligent tutoring systems into their educational setting.

If teachers in higher education are using or will start using intelligent tutoring systems, they should reflect on three main questions.

(1) Do I have access to all information incorporated into the different models of intelligent tutoring systems?

(2) I am able to understand and interpret this information?

(3) I am able to transform this interpretation into pedagogical or didactical actions?

5 CONCLUSION

With this contribution, we hope to give higher education teachers some leverage to participate in the discussion of the design of intelligent tutoring systems.

REFERENCES

1. Celik, I., Dindar, M., Muukkonen, H., Järvelä, S. (2022): The Promises and Challenges of Artificial Intelligence for Teachers: a Systematic Review of Research. TechTrends. doi:10.1007/s11528-022-00715-y

2. Ley, T., Tammets, K., Pishtari, G., Chejara, P., Kasepalu, R., Khalil, M., Saar, M., Tuvi, I., Väljataga, T., Wasson, B. (2023): Towards a partnership of teachers and intelligent learning technology: A systematic literature review of model‐based learning analytics. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. doi:10.1111/jcal.12844

3. Pishtari, G., Ley, T., Khalil, M., Kasepalu, R., Tuvi, I. (2023): Model-Based Learning Analytics for a Partnership of Teachers and Intelligent Systems: A Bibliometric Systematic Review. Education Sciences. doi:10.3390/educsci13050498

4. The Glossary of Education Reform (2014): Competency-Based Learning. https://www.edglossary.org/competencybased-learning/. Accessed 14 December 2023

5. Alt, D., Nirit, R. (2018): Lifelong Citizenship. Lifelong Learning as a Lever for Moral and Democratic Values. Moral Development and Citizenship Education, vol. 13. Brill/Sense, Leiden, the Netherlands. doi:10.1163/9789463512398. 978-94-6351- 239-8

6. Alt, D., Naamati-Schneider, L., Weishut, D.J. (2023): Competency-based learning and formative assessment feedback as precursors of college students’ soft skills acquisition. Studies in Higher Education. doi:10.1080/03075079.2023.2217203

7. Levine, E., Patrick, S. (2019): What is competency-based education? An updated definition. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED604019.pdf. Accessed 14 December 2023

8. Ghaicha, A. (2016): Theoretical Framework for Educational Assessment: A Synoptic Review. Journal of Education and Practice 7, 212–231

9. Rust, C. (2002): Purposes and Principles of Assessment. Learning and Teaching Briefing Papers Series

10. Curry, R.A., Gonzalez-DeJesus, N.T. (2010): A Literature Review of Assessment. Journal of Diagnostic Medical Sonography. doi:10.1177/8756479310361374

11. Machin, L. (2016): A complete guide to the level 5 diploma in education and training. Further Education. Critical Publishing Ltd, Northwich. 978-1910391785

12. Schildkamp, K., van der Kleij, F.M., Heitink, M.C., Kippers, W.B., Veldkamp, B.P. (2020): Formative assessment: A systematic review of critical teacher prerequisites for classroom practice. International Journal of Educational Research. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101602

13. Spatioti, A.G., Kazanidis, I., Pange, J. (2022): A Comparative Study of the ADDIE Instructional Design Model in Distance Education. Information. doi:10.3390/info13090402

14. Frerejean, J., van Merriënboer, J.J., Kirschner, P.A., Roex, A., Aertgeerts, B., Marcellis, M. (2019): Designing instruction for complex learning: 4C/ID in higher education. Euro J of Education. doi:10.1111/ejed.12363

15. Mislevy, R.J., Behrens, J.T., Dicerbo, K.E., Levy, R. (eds.) (2012): Design and Discovery in Educational Assessment: Evidence-Centered Design, Psychometrics, and Educational Data Mining 4(1). doi:10.5281/zenodo.3554641

16. Gnadlinger, F., Selmanagić, A., Simbeck, K., Kriglstein, S. (2023): Adapting Is Difficult! Introducing a Generic Adaptive Learning Framework for Learner Modeling and Task Recommendation Based on Dynamic Bayesian Networks. In: Jovanovic, J., Chounta, I.-A., Uhomoibhi, J., McLaren, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education. 15th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, Prague, Czech Republic, 21.04.2023 - 23.04.2023, pp. 272–280. SCITEPRESS. doi:10.5220/0011964700003470

17. Almond, R.G., Mislevy, R.J., Steinberg, L.S., Yan, D., Williamson, D.M. (2015): Bayesian Networks in Educational Assessment. Statistics for Social and Behavioral Sciences. Springer, New York, NY. doi:10.1007/978-1- 4939-2125-6. 9781493921256

18. Shute, V.J., Rahimi, S., Smith, G., Ke, F., Almond, R., Dai, C.-P., Kuba, R., Liu, Z., Yang, X., Sun, C. (2021): Maximizing learning without sacrificing the fun: Stealth assessment, adaptivity and learning supports in educational games. J Comput Assist Learn. doi:10.1111/jcal.12473

19. Bryant, J., Heitz, C., Sanghvi, S., Wagle, D. (2020): How artificial intelligence will impact K–12 teachers. https://www.mckinsey.com/industries/education/our-insights/how-artificialintelligence-will-impact-k-12-teachers#/. Accessed 9 February 2024

20. Hughes, J. (2022): Deskilling of Teaching and the Case for Intelligent Tutoring Systems. J. Eth. Emerg. Tech. doi:10.55613/jeet.v31i2.90

21. Vanbecelaere, S., van den Berghe, K., Cornillie, F., Sasanguie, D., Reynvoet, B., Depaepe, F. (2020): The effectiveness of adaptive versus non‐adaptive learning with digital educational games. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning. doi:10.1111/jcal.12416

22. Talaghzi, J., Bennane, A., Himmi, M.M., Bellafkih, M., Benomar, A. (2020): Online Adaptive Learning. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Intelligent Systems: Theories and Applications. SITA'20: Theories and Applications, Rabat Morocco, 23 09 2020 24 09 2020, pp. 1–6. ACM, New York, NY, USA. doi:10.1145/3419604.3419759

23. Gao, Y. (2023): The Potential of Adaptive Learning Systems to Enhance Learning Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. doi:10.7939/r3-a6xdm403

24. Manouselis, N., Drachsler, H., Vuorikari, R., Hummel, H., Koper, R. (2011): Recommender Systems in Technology Enhanced Learning. In: Ricci, F. (ed.) Recommender systems handbook, pp. 387–415. Springer, New York. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-85820-3_12

25. Ricci, F., Rokach, L., Shapira, B. (eds.) (2015): Recommender Systems Handbook. Springer, New York. doi:10.1007/978-1-4899- 7637-6. 978-1-4899-7636-9

26. Ramadhan, A., Warnars, H.L.H.S., Razak, F.H.A. (2023): Combining intelligent tutoring systems and gamification: a systematic literature review. Educ Inf Technol. doi:10.1007/s10639-023-12092-x

27. Kurni, M. (2023): A Beginner's Guide to Introduce Artificial Intelligence in Teaching and Learning, 1st edn. Springer International Publishing; Springer, Cham. 978-3-031-32653-0

28. Abdelbaset R. Almasri, Adel Ahmed, Naser Al-Masri, Yousef S. Abu Sultan, Ahmed Y. Mahmoud, Ihab Zaqout, Alaa N. Akkila, Samy S. Abu-Naser (2019): Intelligent Tutoring Systems Survey for the Period 2000- 2018. International Journal of Academic Engineering Research (IJAER) vol. 3, 21-37

29. Woolf, B.P. (2010): Building Intelligent Interactive Tutors. Elsevier Science. 978-0-08- 092004-7

30. Dermeval, D., Paiva, R., Bittencourt, I.I., Vassileva, J., Borges, D. (2018): Authoring Tools for Designing Intelligent Tutoring Systems: a Systematic Review of the Literature. Int J Artif Intell Educ. doi:10.1007/s40593- 017-0157-9

31. Verbert, K., Duval, E., Klerkx, J., Govaerts, S., Santos, J.L. (2013): Learning Analytics Dashboard Applications. American Behavioral Scientist. doi:10.1177/0002764213479363