Skip to main content
Fachgebiete
Automobil + Motoren Bauwesen + Immobilien Business IT + Informatik Elektrotechnik + Elektronik Energie + Nachhaltigkeit Finance + Banking Management + Führung Marketing + Vertrieb Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe Versicherung + Risiko
DE
EN
Themenseiten
Organisationspsychologie Projektmanagement Marketing Smart Manufacturing
Bücher
Zeitschriften
Weitere Formate
Podcasts Webinare Technik Webinare Wirtschaft Kongresse Veranstaltungskalender Awards
Jetzt Einzelzugang starten
Zugang für Unternehmen
Referenzkunden
MTZ-Fachkongress

Antriebe und Energiesysteme von morgen


Austausch von Automobil- und Energiewirtschaft

Am 14./15. Mai geht es in Chemnitz um die Mobilitätswende durch Elektro- und Wasserstofffahrzeuge.
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Universal Access in the Information Society
Erschienen in: Universal Access in the Information Society 2/2022

03.09.2021 | Long Paper

Exploring acceptance of intelligent tutoring system with pedagogical agent among high school students

verfasst von: Hanjing Huang, Youjie Chen, Pei-Luen Patrick Rau

Erschienen in: Universal Access in the Information Society | Ausgabe 2/2022

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

An intelligent tutoring system (ITS) provides universal access to education, which is an emerging paradigm of modern education. ITS is an educational tool that provides learners with adaptive and real-time instructional content, wherever they happen to be. Learner acceptance is a critical factor for the success of an ITS. Thus, this study investigated learner acceptance of ITS based on the technology acceptance model. Additionally, this study further investigated the effects of pedagogical agents on learners’ acceptance of ITSs. A total of 102 high school students were recruited to use an ITS that was incorporated as a pedagogical agent in their educational process to learn mathematics over a nine-day period. The results reveal that students’ perceived usefulness had the largest effect on their intentions to use the ITS. Furthermore, the social presence of the pedagogical agent has a significant effect on students’ perceived usefulness. Additionally, interpersonal attraction of the agent has a significant effect on its perceived ease of use. This study’s empirical findings provide implications for both theoretical research and the practical development of ITSs that will help education professionals make full use of ITSs and pedagogical agents.
Vorheriger Artikel Mind the gap: smoothing the transition to higher education fostering time management skills
Nächster Artikel Universal access: user needs for immersive captioning

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Literatur
1.
Keles, A., Ocak, R., Keles, A., Guelcue, A.: ZOSMAT: web-based intelligent tutoring system for teaching–learning process. Expert Syst. Appl. 36(2), 1229–1239 (2009)CrossRef
2.
Bourdeau, J., Grandbastien, M.: Modeling Tutoring Knowledge. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg (2010)CrossRef
3.
E. Mousavinasab, N. Zarifsanaiey, R. N. K. Sharareh, M. Rakhshan, L. Keikha, and M. Ghazi Saeedi, “Intelligent tutoring systems: a systematic review of characteristics, applications, and evaluation methods,” Interact. Learn. Environ. 1–22, 2018
4.
U. Kose and A. Arslan, Optimization of self-learning in Computer Engineering courses: An intelligent software system supported by Artificial Neural Network and Vortex Optimization Algorithm. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2017
5.
B. Grawemeyer, M. Mavrikis, W. Holmes, S. Gutierrez-Santos, and N. Rummel, “Affecting Off-Task Behaviour: How Affect-aware Feedback Can Improve Student Learning,” 2016
6.
D. P. Vinchurkar and M. Sasikumar, “Intelligent Tutoring System for Voice Conversion in English,” 2015
7.
L. Razzaq et al., “The Assistment Project: Blending Assessment and Assisting,” 2005
8.
Q. Brown, F. Lee, D. Salvucci, and V. Aleven, “The Design of a Mobile Intelligent Tutoring System,” 2009
9.
Motiwalla, L.F.: Mobile learning: a framework and evaluation. Comput. Educ. 49(3), 581–596 (2007)CrossRef
10.
Al-Emran, M., Mezhuyev, V., Kamaludin, A.: Technology acceptance model in M-learning context: a systematic review. Comput. Educ. 125, 389–412 (2018)CrossRef
11.
Imtiaz, M.A., Maarop, N.: A review of technology acceptance studies in the field of education. J. Teknol. 69, 2 (2014)
12.
A. Corbett, K. Koedinger, and W. Hadley, “Cognitive Tutors: From the Research Classroom to All Classrooms,” Technol. Enhanc. Learn. Oppor. Change, 2001
13.
14.
Koedinger, K., Anderson, J., Hadley, W., Mark, M.: Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 8, 30–43 (1997)
15.
Abdullah, Fazil, Ward, Rupert, Ahmed, and Ejaz, “Investigating the influence of the most commonly used external variables of TAM on students’ Perceived Ease of Use (PEOU) and Perceived Usefulness (PU) of e-portfolios,” Comput. Hum. Behav., 2016
16.
S. Weerasinghe Mrs and M. Hindagolla Dr, “Technology Acceptance Model in the Domains of LIS and Education: A Review of Selected Literature,” Libr. Philos. Pract., vol. 2017, 2017
17.
18.
19.
Vaidehi, R., Girija, T.: Factors influencing diffusion and continuance of massive open online course (MOOC). Asian J. Manag. 8(3), 731–733 (2017)CrossRef
20.
Y. M. Huang, “Exploring students’ acceptance of team messaging services: The roles of social presence and motivation,” Br. J. Educ. Technol., 2017
21.
Smith, J.A., Sivo, S.A.: Predicting continued use of online teacher professional development and the influence of social presence and sociability. Br. J. Educ. Technol 43, 871–882 (2012)CrossRef
22.
Y. Song and S. C. Kong, “Investigating students’ acceptance of a statistics learning platform using technology acceptance model,” J. Educ. Comput. Res. 073563311668832, 2017
23.
Sanchez, R.P., Bartel, C.M., Brown, E., Derosier, M.: The acceptability and efficacy of an intelligent social tutoring system. Comput. Educ 78, 321–332 (2014)CrossRef
24.
Karac, A., Piri, Z.: Halil brahim Akyüz, and Gksal Bilgici, “student perceptions of an intelligent tutoring system: a technology acceptance model perspective.” Int. J. Comput. Appl. 182(22), 31–36 (2018)
25.
Lane, H.C.: Chapter 3 - Pedagogical Agents and Affect: Molding Positive Learning Interactions. In: Tettegah, S.Y., Gartmeier, M. (eds.) Emotions, Technology, Design, and Learning, pp. 47–62. Academic Press, San Diego (2016)CrossRef
26.
27.
Davis, F.: Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user accep. MIS Q. 13, 319 (1989)CrossRef
28.
M. Fishbein and I. Ajzen, Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. 1975
29.
Andrina Granić and Nikola Marangunić, “Technology acceptance model in educational context: A systematic literature review,” Br. J. Educ. Technol. 4, 2019
30.
31.
Setyohadi, D.B., Aristian, M., Sinaga, B.L.: Nor Aziati, and Abdul Hamid, “social critical factors affecting intentions and behaviours to use e-learning: an empirical investigation using technology acceptance model.” Asian J. Sci. Res. 10, 4 (2016)
32.
33.
34.
J. Lester, S. Converse, S. Kahler, S. Barlow, B. Stone, and R. Bhogal, The Persona Effect: Affective Impact of Animated Pedagogical Agents. 1997
35.
36.
Amy L. Baylor, “The design of motivational agents and avatars,” Educ. Technol. Res. Dev., 2011
37.
Romine et al., “Measuring pedagogical agent persona and the influence of agent persona on learning,” Comput. Educ., 2017
38.
Steffi and Domagk, “Do Pedagogical Agents Facilitate Learner Motivation and Learning Outcomes?,” J. Media Psychol. Theor. Methods Appl., 2010.
39.
40.
A. S. D. Martha and H. Santoso, “The Design and Impact of the Pedagogical Agent: A Systematic Literature Review,” J. Educ. Online, vol. 16, no. 1, 2019.
41.
A. M. S. A, K. A. P. B, B. T. F. B, A. H. O. C. D, M. E. B, and P. K. B, “Social fidelity in virtual agents: Impacts on presence and learning,” Comput. Hum. Behav., vol. 114, 2020
42.
Frymier, A.B., Houser, M.L.: The teacher:student relationship as an interpersonal relationship. Commun. Educ. 49(3), 207–219 (2000)CrossRef
43.
Heyes and C., “Born Pupils? Natural Pedagogy and Cultural Pedagogy,” Perspect. Psychol. Sci., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 280–295, 2016.
44.
Guo, Y.R., Goh, D.H.-L.: Affect in Embodied Pedagogical Agents: Meta-Analytic Review. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 53(1), 124–149 (2015)CrossRef
45.
46.
Adalgeirsson and Breazeal, “MeBot: A robotic platform for socially embodied telepresence,” 2010
47.
P. Lowenthal, “The Evolution and Influence of Social Presence Theory on Online Learning,” 2009, pp. 124–139
48.
Dikkers, A.G., Whiteside, A.L., Lewis, S.: Virtual high school teacher and student reactions to the social presence model. J. Interact. Online Learn. 12(3), 156–170 (2013)
49.
André Tiago Pereira, R. Prada, and A. Paiva, “Improving social presence in human-agent interaction,” 2014
50.
Boston, W., Diaz, S.R., Gibson, A.M., Ice, P., Richardson, J., Swan, K.: An Exploration of the relationship between Indicators of the community of inquiry framework and retention in online programs. J. Asynchronous Learn. Netw. 13(3), 67–83 (2010)
51.
L. Shih and K. Swan, “Fostering social presence in asynchronous online class discussions.,” 2005
52.
Joksimovic, S., Gasevic, D., Kovanovic, V., Riecke, B.E., Hatala, M.: It is the quality not quantity that matters: Social presence in online discussions as a process predictor of academic performance. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 31(6), 638–654 (2015)CrossRef
53.
Swan, K., Day, S.L., Bogle, L.R., Matthews, D.B.: A collaborative, design-based approach to improving an online program. Internet High. Educ. 21, 74–81 (2014)CrossRef
54.
Rockinson-Szapkiw, A., Wendt, J., Whighting, M., Nisbet, D.: The predictive relationship among the community of inquiry framework, perceived learning and online, and graduate students’ course grades in online synchronous and asynchronous courses. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 17, 3 (2016)
55.
Mayer, R.E., Dapra, C.S.: An embodiment effect in computer-based learning with animated pedagogical agents. J Exp Psychol Appl 18(3), 239–252 (2012)CrossRef
56.
57.
Byrne, D.M., Griffitt, W.: Interpersonal attraction. Encycl. Appl. Psychol. 24(1), 379–385 (2004)
58.
Mccroskey, J.C., Hamilton, P.R., Weiner, A.N.: The effect of interaction behavior on source credibility, homophily, and interpersonal attraction. Hum. Commun. Res. 1(1), 42–52 (2010)CrossRef
59.
Davies, A.P.C., Goetz, A.T., Shackelford, T.K.: Exploiting the beauty in the eye of the beholder: The use of physical attractiveness as a persuasive tactic. Personal. Individ. Differ. 45(4), 302–306 (2008)CrossRef
60.
Myers, S.A., Huebner, A.D.: The relationship between students’ motives to communicate with their instructors and perceived instructor credibility, attractiveness, and homophily. Coll. Stud. J. 45(1), 84–91 (2011)
61.
A. P. D. F. Ü. ÇOLAK, “Determining interpersonal attraction in educational environment and the relation with motivation,” Int. J. New Trends Educ. Their Implic. January Febr., vol. 2, pp. 47–56, 2011.
62.
Liu, J., Tomasi, S.D.: The effect of professor’s attractiveness on distance learning students. J. Educ. Online 12, 142–165 (2015)
63.
A. H. Ghapanchi, A. Purarjomandlangrudi, A. Mcandrew, and Y. Miao, “Investigating the impact of space design, visual attractiveness and perceived instructor presence on student adoption of learning management systems,” Educ. Inf. Technol., no. 1, 2020.
64.
Davis, F.D., Bagozzi, R.P., Warshaw, P.R.: User acceptance of computer technology: a comparison of two theoretical models. Manag. Sci. 35(8), 982–1003 (1989)CrossRef
65.
W. Chin and P. A. Todd, “On the use, usefulness, and ease of use of structural equation modeling in MIS research,” Mis Q., 1995.
66.
67.
Chang, C.T., Hajiyev, J., Su, C.R.: Examining the students’ behavioral intention to use e-learning in Azerbaijan? the general extended technology acceptance model for E-learning approach. Comput. Educ. 111, 128–143 (2017)CrossRef
68.
69.
L. Briz-Ponce, J. A. Juanes-Méndez, F. J. García-Pe?alvo, and A. Pereira, “Effects of mobile learning in medical education: a counterfactual evaluation,” J. Med. Syst. 40 6 1–6, 2016
70.
Short, J., Williams, E., Christie, B.: Communication modes and task performance. Morgan-Kaufman Publishers, Moutain View, CA (1976)
71.
J. Dunlap and P. Lowenthal, “The Power of Presence: Our Quest for the Right Mix of Social Presence in Online Courses,” 2014
72.
A. Baylor and A. Plant, Pedagogical agents as social models for engineering: The influence of agent appearance on female choice. 2005
73.
Hostetter, C., Busch, M.: Community matters: social presence and learning outcomes. J. Scholarsh. Teach. Learn. 13(1), 77–86 (2013)
74.
Skrypnyk, O., Joksimovic, S., Kovanovic, V., Gasevic, D., Dawson, S.: Roles of course facilitators, learners, and technology in the flow of information of a cMOOC. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distance Learn. 16(3), 188–217 (2014)
75.
76.
E. Berscheid and W. Graziano, “2–The Initiation of Social Relationships and Interpersonal Attraction 1,” Soc. Exch. Dev. Relatsh., pp. 31–60, 1979
77.
78.
79.
E. Park, K. J. Kim, A. P. del Pobil, The effects of a robot instructor’s positive vs. negative feedbacks on attraction and acceptance towards the robot in classroom. 2011
80.
K. Kumar Bhagat, M. T. Rodrigo, and C.-Y. Chang, “Chapter 36 Current States, Challenges, and Opportunities of the Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) in Developing Countries in Asianull,” Taylor & Francis, 2018
81.
82.
Lee, K.M., Peng, W., Jin, S.-A., Yan, C.: Can robots manifest personality?: An empirical test of personality recognition, social responses, and social presence in human–robot interaction. J. Commun. 56(4), 754–772 (2006)CrossRef
83.
D. Byrne, R. W. Byrne, and J. Byrne, The attraction paradigm. Academic Press, 1971
84.
C. Ringle, S. Wende, and J.-M. Becker, SmartPLS 3. 2015
85.
Wynne W. Chin and G. Marcoulides, “The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modeling,” Adv. Hosp. Leis. 8 2, 1998
86.
Bentler, P.M., Chou, C.P.: Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociol. Methods Res. 16(1), 78–117 (1987)CrossRef
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M.: PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. J. Mark. Theory Pract. 19(2), 139–152 (2011)CrossRef
92.
93.
94.
J. Abramson, M. Dawson, and J. Stevens, “An Examination of the Prior Use of E-Learning Within an Extended Technology Acceptance Model and the Factors That influence the behavioral intention of users to use M-Learning,” Sage Open. 5 4. 5/4/2158244015621114, 2015
95.
I. Esteban-Millat, F. J. Martinez-Lopez, M. Pujol-Jover, J. Carlos Gazquez-Abad, and A. Alegret, “An extension of the technology acceptance model for online learning environments,” Interact. Learn. Environ. 26. 5–8. 895–910, 2018
96.
Mohamed and Yeou: An investigation of students’ acceptance of moodle in a blended learning setting using technology acceptance model. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 44(3), 300–318 (2016)CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Exploring acceptance of intelligent tutoring system with pedagogical agent among high school students
verfasst von
Hanjing Huang
Youjie Chen
Pei-Luen Patrick Rau
Publikationsdatum
03.09.2021
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Universal Access in the Information Society / Ausgabe 2/2022
Print ISSN: 1615-5289
Elektronische ISSN: 1615-5297
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10209-021-00835-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2022

Universal Access in the Information Society 2/2022 Zur Ausgabe

Review Paper

AnAbEL: towards empowering people living with dementia in ambient assisted living

Long Paper

Improving accessibility of CMS-based websites using automated methods

Long Paper

Universal access: user needs for immersive captioning

Editorial

Universal access in the information Society (2001–2021): knowledge, experience, challenges and new perspectives

Long Paper

A model for assisting in the treatment of anxiety disorder

Long Paper

Mind the gap: smoothing the transition to higher education fostering time management skills

Premium Partner

    Bildnachweise