A Systematic Review of Exploring the Potential of Teachable Agents in English Learning

Divya Baranwal

doi:10.29333/pr/11553

Full Text (PDF)

Divya Baranwal ¹ ^*

More Detail

¹ PhD Scholar, National Dong Hwa University, TAIWAN
^* Corresponding Author

Abstract

Language learning has dramatically influenced the extensiveness of web-based learning, AI applications, smart content, personalized tutoring systems, virtual facilitators. This paper aims to review the empirical evidence on the application of intelligent agents in English learning to define the future research perspectives of Teachable Agents-assisted English education. After a systematic online data search, the investigator analyzed nine empirical studies on how Teachable agents have potential English teaching and learning benefits. The results indicate that (1) most studies conducted with large sample size at university level followed by elementary level, (2) instructional design were in dialogue and image form, (3) emerged two categories- Interaction and integration, (4) most of them used experimental research in different settings. This study suggests that TAs substantially play a supportive role, enhance their involvement, scaffold their learning, and become self-regulated learners. Hence, we prospect the need for a future-oriented vision regarding AI and intelligent technologies- assisted language learning for non-native speakers.

Keywords

language
English learning
teachable agents
self-regulation learning
instructional design

License

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Article Type: Review Article

https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11553

PEDAGOGICAL RES, 2022 - Volume 7 Issue 1, Article No: em0117

Publication date: 14 Jan 2022

Article Views: 114

Article Downloads: 30

Open Access References How to cite this article

References

Aarts, K. (2007). Parsimonious methodology. Methodological Innovations Online, 2(1), 2-10. https://doi.org/10.4256/mio.2007.0002
Abykanova, B., Nugumanova, S., Yelezhanova, S., Kabylkhamit, Z., & Sabirovaa, Z. (2016). The use of interactive learning technology in institutions of higher learning. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education, 11(18), 12528-12539. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1124626.pdf
Ahmadi, M. R. (2017). The impact of motivation on reading comprehension. International Journal of Research in English Education, 2(1), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.18869/acadpub.ijree.2.1.1
Ahmadi, M. R. (2018). The use of technology in English language learning: A review literature. International Journal of Research in English Education, 3(2), 115-125. https://doi.org/10.29252/ijree.3.2.115
Alhabbash, M. I., Mahdi, A. O., & Abu-Naser, S. S. (2016). An intelligent tutoring system for teaching grammar English tenses. European Academic Research, 4(9), 1-15.
Asmali, M. (2018). Integrating technology into ESP classes: Use of student response system in English for specific purposes instruction. Teaching English with Technology, 18(3), 86-10. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1186385.pdf
Atkinson, R. K. (2002). Optimizing learning from examples using animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(2), 416–427. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.2.416
Atkinson, R. K., Mayer, R. E., & Merrill, M. M. (2005). Fostering social agency in multimedia learning: Examining the impact of an animated agent’s voice. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30(1), 117-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.07.001
Barber, L. K., Bagsby, P. G., Grawitch, M. J., & Buerck, J. P. (2011). Facilitating self-regulated learning with technology: Evidence for student motivation and exam improvement. Teaching of Psychology, 38(4), 303-308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628311421337
Barreto, A. M. R. (2018). Motivating English language use by using the benefits of technology. Gist Education and Learning Research Journal, 16, 117-140. https://doi.org/10.26817/16925777.428
Biswas, G., Jeong, H., Kinnebrew, J., Sulcer, B., & Roscoe, R. (2010). Measuring self-regulated learning skills through social interactions in a teachable agent environment. Research and Practice in Technology-Enhanced Learning, 5, 123-152. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793206810000839
Biswas, G., Leelawong, K., Schwartz, D., Vye, N., & TAG-V. (2005). Learning by teaching: A new agent paradigm for educational software. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19(3-4), 363-392. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839510590910200
Blair, K., Schwartz, D., Biswas, G., & Leelawong, K. (2006). Pedagogical agents for learning by teaching: Teachable agents. Educational Technology & Society, 47.
Chen, Z. H. (2012). We care about you: Incorporating pet characteristics with educational agents through a reciprocal caring approach. Computers & Education, 59, 1081-1088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.05.015
Choi, S., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Cognitive and affective beneﬁts of animated pedagogical agents for learning a second language. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 34(4), 441–466. https://doi.org/10.2190/A064-U776-4208-N145
Cumming, A., Yang, L., Qiu, C., Zhang, L., Ji, X., Wang, J., Wang, Y., Zhan, J., Zhang, F., Xu, C., Cao, R., Yu, L., Chu, M., Liu, M., Cao, M., & La, C. (2018). Students’ practices and abilities for writing from sources in English at universities in China. Journal of Second Language Writing, 39, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2017.11.001
DeKeyser, R. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 125-151). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524780.007
DeKeyser, R. (2007a). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten, & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 97-114). Lawrence Erlbaum.
DeKeyser, R. (2017). Knowledge and skill in ISLA. In S. Loewen, & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 15-32). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315676968-2
Desselle, S. P. (2019). Native English speakers and English as a foreign language (EFL) students’ performance and notetaking in a doctor of pharmacy health systems course. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 15(9), 1154-1159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sapharm.2018.09.023
Elen, J. (2016). Reflections on the future of instructional design research. In J. Spector, D. Ifenthaler, D. Sampson, & P. Isaias (Eds.), Competencies in teaching, learning and educational leadership in the digital age. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30295-9_1
Fantuzzo, J. W., King, J. A., & Heller, L. R. (1992). Effects of reciprocal peer tutoring on mathematics and school adjustment: A component analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 331-339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.3.331
Gerard, F., Greene, M., & Widener, J. (1999). Using SMART board in foreign language classes. Reports (142). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED432278.pdf
Ginns, P., Martin, A. J., & Marsh, H. W. (2013). Designing instructional text in a conversational style: A meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 25(4), 445-472. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9228-0.
Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews. SAGE.
Grabe, W., & Stoller, F. L. (2002). Teaching and researching reading. Pearson Education. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833743
Gurgenidze, M. (2018). Technology assisted English language learning and its possible benefits in Georgia. International Journal of Technology in Education and Science, 2(1), 31-34. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1227073
Heidig, S., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Do pedagogical agents make a difference to student motivation and learning? Educational Research Review, 6(1), 27-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2010.07.004
Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Pergamon. (First published 1979, Council of Europe).
Hwang, W.-Y., Huang, Y.-M., Shadiev, R., Wu, S.-Y., & Chen, S.-L. (2014). Effects of using mobile devices on English listening diversity and speaking for EFL elementary students. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 30(5), 503-516. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.237
Kannan, J., & Munday, P. (2018). New trends in second language learning and teaching through the lens of ICT, networked learning, and artificial intelligence. Circle of Linguistics Applied to Communication, 76, 13-30. https://doi.org/10.5209/CLAC.62495
Khan, N. (2010). Improving the speaking ability in English: The students’ perspective. Elsevier: Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3575-3579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.554
Kim, J. Y., & Lim, K. Y. (2019). Promoting learning in online, ill-structured problem solving: The effects of scaffolding type and metacognition level. Computers & Education, 138, 116-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.001
Kim, M. C., & Hannaﬁn, M. J. (2011). Scaﬀolding problem solving in technology-enhanced learning environments (TELEs): Bridging research and theory with practice. Computers & Education, 56(2), 403-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.024
Lan, P.-S., Liu, M.-C., & Baranwal, D. (2020). Applying contracts and online communities to promote student’s self-regulation in English learning at the primary-school level. Interactive Learning Environments. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2020.1789674
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques and principles in language teaching. OUP.
Lee, D., & Swales, J. (2006). A corpus-based EAP course for NNS doctoral students: Moving from available specialized corpora to self-compiled corpora. English for Specific Purposes, 25(1), 56-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.010
Li, H., Cheng, C., Yu, Q., & Graesser A. C. (2015). The role of peer agent’s learning competency in trialogue-based reading intelligent systems. In C. Conati, N. Heffernan, A. Mitrovic, & M. F. Verdejo (Eds.), Proceedings of 17th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, 694-697. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-19773-9_94
Lin, L., Ginns, P., Wang, T., & Zhang, P. (2020). Using a pedagogical agent to deliver conversational style instruction: What beneﬁts can you obtain? Computers & Education, 143, 103658. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103658
Louwerse, M. M., Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., & Mitchell, H. H. (2005). Social cues in animated conversational agents. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(6), 693-704. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1117
Mayer, R. E. (2014). Principles based on social cues in multimedia learning: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 345-368). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.017
McCarty, S., Obari, H. S., & Sato, T. (2017). Implementing mobile language learning technologies in Japan. SpringerBriefs in Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2451-1_1
McDonough, K., & Sato, M. (2019). Promoting EFL students’ accuracy and fluency through interactive practice activities. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 379-395. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2019.9.2.6
Mohammadzadeh, A., & Sarkhosh, M. (2018). The effects of self-regulatory learning through computer-assisted intelligent tutoring system on the improvement of EFL learner’ speaking ability. International Journal of Instruction, 11(2), 167-184. https://doi.org/10.12973/iji.2018.11212a
Ngo, H., & Eichelberger, A. (2019). College students’ attitudes toward ICT Use for English learning. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 15(1), 14. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1214377
Nguyen, T. T., & Nguyen, T. K. T. (2016). Oral English communication strategies among Vietnamese non-majors of English at intermediate level. American Journal of Educational Research, 4(3), 283-287. https://doi.org/10.5746/LEiA/16/V7/I1/A02/Nguyen
Nova, M. (2018). Utilizing grammarly in evaluating academic writing: A narrative research on EFL students’ experience. Premise Journal, 7(1), 80-96. https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v7i1.1332
Pan, W. F. (2017). The effects of using the Kinect motion-sensing interactive system to enhance English learning for elementary students. Educational Technology & Society, 20(2), 188-200. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1137513
Park, S. (2015). The effects of social cue principles on cognitive load, situational interest, motivation, and achievement in pedagogical agent multimedia learning. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 18(4), 211-229. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.18.4.211
Pigott, T. D. (2019). Missing data in meta-analysis. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.7758/9781610448864.20
Polanin, J. R., & Terzian, M. (2019). A data-sharing agreement helps to increase researchers’ willingness to share primary data: Results from a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 106, 60-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.10.006
Pourhossein Gilakjani, A. (2017). A review of the literature on the integration of technology into the learning and teaching of English language skills. International Journal of English Linguistics, 7(5), 95-106. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v7n5p95
Reinders, H., & Pegrum, M. (2016). Supporting language learning on the move: An evaluative framework for mobile language learning resources. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), SLA research and materials development for language learning. Routledge.
Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007). Understanding tutor learning: Knowledge-building and knowledge-telling in peer tutors’ explanations and questions. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 534-574. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307309920
Schroeder, N. L., Adesope, O. O., & Gilbert, R. B. (2013). How effective are pedagogical agents for learning? A meta-analytic review. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 49 (1), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.2190/EC.49.1.a
Sert, N., & Boynuegri, E. (2017). Digital technology use by the students and English teachers and self-directed language learning. World Journal on Educational Technology: Current Issues, 9(1), 24-34. https://doi.org/10.18844/wjet.v9i1.993
Sinclair, A., McCurdy, K., Lopez, A., Lucas, C., & Gasevic, D. (2019). Tutorbot corpus: Evidence of human-agent verbal aignment in second language learner dialogues. In C. F. Lynch, A. Merceron, M. Desmarais, & R. Nkambou (Eds.), Proceedings of The 12th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 414-419).
Solanki, D., & Shyamlee1, M. P. (2012). Use of technology in English language teaching and learning: An analysis. International Conference on Language, Medias and Culture. IACSIT Press, Singapore. 150-156.
Susikaran, R. S. A. (2013). The use of multimedia in English language teaching. Journal of Technology for ELT, 1(1), 29-38.
Tavakoli, P., Campbell, C., & McCormack, J. (2016). Development of speech fluency over a short period of time: Effects of pedagogic intervention. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 447-471. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.244
Tazhibayeva, E. R. (2015). Multimedia tools for developing creativity in the English classroom. https://articlekz.com/en/article/14591
Tokoz, F. (2014). Speaking problems of 9th grade high school Turkish learners of L2 English and possible reasons for those problems: Exploring the teachers and students’ perspectives. Elsevier: Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116, 1875-1879. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.01.487
Ulicheva, A. (2018). Skilled readers’ sensitivity to meaningful regularities in English writing. Cognition, 185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.09.013
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89-100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x
Wu, J. G., & Zhang, D. (2019). Why did you suggest voice messages but never use it anyway? Obstacles of promoting English language speaking in a mobile instant messaging community. The 18th World Conference on Mobile and Contextual Learning. Deflt, Netherlands.
Wu, Y. (2019). Non-English mjor students’ perception of factors influencing English proficiency in China. English Language Teaching, 12(4), 157. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt. v12n4p157
Yoon, H. (2008). More than a linguistic reference: The influence of corpus technology on L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 12(2), 31-48. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ805512
Zimmerman, B. J. (2008). Investigating self-regulation and motivation: Historical background, methodological developments, and future prospects. American Educational Research Journal,45(1), 166-183. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831207312909

How to cite this article

APA

Baranwal, D. (2022). A Systematic Review of Exploring the Potential of Teachable Agents in English Learning. Pedagogical Research, 7(1), em0117. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11553

Vancouver

Baranwal D. A Systematic Review of Exploring the Potential of Teachable Agents in English Learning. PEDAGOGICAL RES. 2022;7(1):em0117. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11553

AMA

Baranwal D. A Systematic Review of Exploring the Potential of Teachable Agents in English Learning. PEDAGOGICAL RES. 2022;7(1), em0117. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11553

Chicago

Baranwal, Divya. "A Systematic Review of Exploring the Potential of Teachable Agents in English Learning". Pedagogical Research 2022 7 no. 1 (2022): em0117. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11553

Harvard

Baranwal, D. (2022). A Systematic Review of Exploring the Potential of Teachable Agents in English Learning. Pedagogical Research, 7(1), em0117. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11553

MLA

Baranwal, Divya "A Systematic Review of Exploring the Potential of Teachable Agents in English Learning". Pedagogical Research, vol. 7, no. 1, 2022, em0117. https://doi.org/10.29333/pr/11553