The power of feedback.

Please provide a short abstract of 100 to 250 words. The abstract should not contain any undefined abbreviations or unspecified references. Work planned but not completed should not appear in the abstract.

User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction

According to various international reports, Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIEd) is one of the currently emerging fields in educational technology. Whilst it has been around for about 30 years, it is still unclear for educators how to make pedagogical advantage of it on a broader scale, and how it can actually impact meaningfully on teaching and learning in higher education. This paper seeks to provide an overview of research on AI applications in higher education through a systematic review. Out of 2656 initially identified publications for the period between 2007 and 2018, 146 articles were included for final synthesis, according to explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria. The descriptive results show that most of the disciplines involved in AIEd papers come from Computer Science and STEM, and that quantitative methods were the most frequently used in empirical studies. The synthesis of results presents four areas of AIEd applications in academic support services, and institutional and administrative services: 1. profiling and prediction, 2. assessment and evaluation, 3. adaptive systems and personalisation, and 4. intelligent tutoring systems. The conclusions reflect on the almost lack of critical reflection of challenges and risks of AIEd, the weak connection to theoretical pedagogical perspectives, and the need for further exploration of ethical and educational approaches in the application of AIEd in higher education.

/pdf/systematic-review-of-research-on-artificial-intelligence-23m8k74d6q.pdf

Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education – where are the educators?

The Victorian Department of Education and Early Childhood Development [DEECD], Symantec, Cyber Safe Kids and Common Sense Media are currently conducting a pilot collaborative project in which 10 selected schools are trialing a digital citizenship curriculum. This digital citizenship curriculum has been aligned with local/national and international curriculum achievement standards, learning areas, competencies/capabilities. Participating schools will also trial the use of an Incident Response Tool.

Growing up digital.

User modeling and user adapted interaction

This paper on artificial intelligence in education (AIEd) has two aims. The first: to explain to a non-specialist, interested, reader what AIEd is: its goals, how it is built, and how it works. The second: to set out the argument for what AIEd can offer teaching and learning, both now and in the future, with an eye towards improving learning and life outcomes for all. Computer systems that are artificially intelligent interact with the world using capabilities (such as speech recognition) and intelligent behaviours (such as using available information to take the most sensible actions toward a stated goal) that we would think of as essentially human. At the heart of artificial intelligence in education is the scientific goal to make knowledge, which is often left implicit, computationally precise and explicit. In other words, in addition to being the engine behind much ‘smart’ ed tech, AIEd is also designed to be a powerful tool to open up what is sometimes called the ‘black box of learning,’ giving us more fine-grained understandings of how learning actually happens. Although some might find the concept of AIEd alienating, the algorithms and models that underpin ed tech powered by AIEd form the basis of an essentially human endeavor. Using AIEd, teachers will be able to offer learners educational experiences that are more personalised, flexible, inclusive and engaging. Crucially, we do not see a future in which AIEd replaces teachers. What we do see is a future in which the extraordinary expertise of teachers is better leveraged and augmented through the thoughtful deployment of well designed AIEd. We have available, right now, AIEd tools that could support student learning at a scale previously unimaginable by providing one-on-one tutoring to every student, in every subject. Existing technologies also have the capacity to provide intelligent support to learners working in a group, and to create authentic virtual learning environments where students have the right support, at the right time, to tackle real-life problems and puzzles. In the near future, we expect that teaching and learning will increasingly be supported by the thoughtful application of AIEd tools. For example, by lifelong learning companions powered by AI that can accompany and support individual learners throughout their studies - in and beyond school - and new forms of assessment that measure learning while it is taking place, shaping the learning experience in real time. If we are ultimately successful, we predict that AIEd will help us address some of the most intractable problems in education, including achievement gaps and teacher retention. AIEd will also help us respond to the most significant social challenge that AI has already brought - the steady replacement of jobs and occupations with clever algorithms and robots. It is our view that this provides a new innovation imperative in education, which can be expressed simply: as humans live and work alongside increasingly smart machines, our education systems will need to achieve at levels that none have managed to date. True progress will require the development of an AIEd infrastructure. This will not, however, be a single monolithic AIEd system. Instead, it will resemble the marketplace that has developed for smartphone apps: hundreds and then thousands of individual AIEd components, developed in collaboration with educators, conformed to uniform international data standards, and shared with researchers and developers worldwide. These standards will also enable system-level data collation and analysis that will help us to learn much more about learning itself – and how to improve it. Moving forward, we will need to pay close attention to three powerful forces as we map the future of artificial intelligence in education, namely pedagogy, technology, and system change. Paying attention to the pedagogy will mean that the design of new edtech should always start with what we know about learning. It also means that the system for funding this work must be simultaneously opened up and refocused, moving away from isolated pockets of R&D and toward collaborative enterprises that prioritise areas known to make a real difference to teaching and learning. Paying attention to the technology will mean creating smarter demand for commercial grade AIEd products that work. It also means the development of a robust, component-based AIEd infrastructure, similar to the smartphone app marketplace, where researchers and developers can access standardised components that have been developed in collaboration with educators. Paying attention to system change will mean involving teachers, students, and parents in co-designing new tools, so that AIEd will appropriately address the inherent “messiness” of real classroom, university, and workplace learning environments. It also means the development of data standards that promote the safe and ethical use of data. Said succinctly, we need intelligent technologies that embody what we know about great teaching and learning, embodied in enticing consumer grade products, which are then used effectively in real-life settings that combine the best of human and machine. We do not underestimate the new-thinking, inevitable wrong-turns, and effort required to realise these recommendations. However, if we are to properly unleash the intelligence of AIEd, we must do things differently - via new collaborations, sensible funding, and (always) a keen eye on the pedagogy. The potential prize is too great to act otherwise.

Intelligence Unleashed: An argument for AI in Education

While Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED) research has at its core the desire to support student learning, experience from other AI domains suggest that such ethical intentions are not by themselves sufficient. There is also the need to consider explicitly issues such as fairness, accountability, transparency, bias, autonomy, agency, and inclusion. At a more general level, there is also a need to differentiate between doing ethical things and doing things ethically, to understand and to make pedagogical choices that are ethical, and to account for the ever-present possibility of unintended consequences. However, addressing these and related questions is far from trivial. As a first step towards addressing this critical gap, we invited 60 of the AIED community’s leading researchers to respond to a survey of questions about ethics and the application of AI in educational contexts. In this paper, we first introduce issues around the ethics of AI in education. Next, we summarise the contributions of the 17 respondents, and discuss the complex issues that they raised. Specific outcomes include the recognition that most AIED researchers are not trained to tackle the emerging ethical questions. A well-designed framework for engaging with ethics of AIED that combined a multidisciplinary approach and a set of robust guidelines seems vital in this context.

/pdf/ethics-of-ai-in-education-towards-a-community-wide-framework-zvqwtqtnxp.pdf

Ethics of AI in Education: Towards a Community-Wide Framework

Artificial Intelligence In Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning

Taking a process-orientated, social constructivist lens, we examine the case of a digital game called Words Matter. The game was designed for children with dyslexia and was informed by principles from casual games and evidence-based practice from special education. Focusing on the game play of two groups of children, we employ a systematic thematic analytic approach on videos of children's verbal and non-verbal interaction triangulated with their game logs, concentrating on the nature of student-student as well as student-tutor social interactions. Our findings show that children spontaneously engage in game talk regarding game performance, content, actions and experiences. While this game talk facilitates a strong sense of social engagement and playfulness, it also caters to a variety of new opportunities for learning by sparking tutor and student-initiated interventions. Alongside its social theoretical lens on digital games-based learning, the paper analyses game-based social interactions in tandem with game design decisions enabling additional implications to be drawn for pedagogical practice and game design. Group game play of drill and practice games is driven by social engagement.Social engagement is expressed through game talk.Game talk can strengthen the self-esteem of children with dyslexia.Game talk can reveal learning processes offering intervention opportunities.A sense of ownership of personalised games can inhibit collaboration.

/pdf/digital-games-based-learning-for-children-with-dyslexia-1wun5yhk91.pdf

Digital games-based learning for children with dyslexia

This paper describes the design and ecologically valid evaluation of a learner model that lies at the heart of an intelligent learning environment called iTalk2Learn. A core objective of the learner model is to adapt formative feedback based on students' affective states. Types of adaptation include what type of formative feedback should be provided and how it should be presented. Two Bayesian networks trained with data gathered in a series of Wizard-of-Oz studies are used for the adaptation process. This paper reports results from a quasi-experimental evaluation, in authentic classroom settings, which compared a version of iTalk2Learn that adapted feedback based on students' affective states as they were talking aloud with the system (the affect condition) with one that provided feedback based only on the students' performance (the non-affect condition). Our results suggest that affect-aware support contributes to reducing boredom and off-task behavior, and may have an effect on learning. We discuss the internal and ecological validity of the study, in light of pedagogical considerations that informed the design of the two conditions. Overall, the results of the study have implications both for the design of educational technology and for classroom approaches to teaching, because they highlight the important role that affect-aware modelling plays in the adaptive delivery of formative feedback to support learning.

/pdf/affective-learning-improving-engagement-and-enhancing-1k75qhfmqx.pdf

Wayne Holmes

Papers

Intelligence Unleashed: An argument for AI in Education

Ethics of AI in Education: Towards a Community-Wide Framework

Artificial Intelligence In Education: Promises and Implications for Teaching and Learning

Digital games-based learning for children with dyslexia

Affective learning: improving engagement and enhancing learning with affect-aware feedback