Agentic Engagement with a Programmable Dialog System

Amanda Buddemeyer, L. Hatley, Angela E. B. Stewart, Jaemarie Solyst, A. Ogan, Erin Walker
{"title":"Agentic Engagement with a Programmable Dialog System","authors":"Amanda Buddemeyer, L. Hatley, Angela E. B. Stewart, Jaemarie Solyst, A. Ogan, Erin Walker","doi":"10.1145/3446871.3469782","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dialog with a social pedagogical robot or agent is a powerful way for kids to learn [1, 5] but may limit the formation of an agentic relationship with the technology [9]. One main purpose of conversational agents is to allow the user to have a natural interaction that reduces the need to learn artificial conventions [6], but dialog systems fall short with respect to failure recovery, vocabulary diversity, remembering conversational history, and other measures [2, 3]. Further, Hill et. al. [4] found that people adapt their model of communication to match a chatbot’s in the same way they do with a child or non-native speaker. Thus, users conversing with a pedagogical agent are implicitly trained to shape their behavior to suit the technology rather than shaping the technology. For young learners, particularly among populations that have been historically excluded from technology fields, this limits agency and reinforces marginalizing power structures [9]. This project combines a conversational agent with ideas of agentic engagement to help middle-school-aged children learn computational thinking. Agentic engagement is defined as students’ constructive contribution into the flow of instruction and includes behaviors such as expressing interests, preferences, and opinions. It has been positively correlated to learning performance and motivation [7, 8]. Combined with a culturally responsive curriculum (CRC), agentic engagement may help to foster an agentic relationship with technology. Our system encourages learners to engage agentically by using programming constructs to change the agent’s vocabulary, recognizing the intent behind a user utterance (an invocation), and defining the action the agent will take to respond to an invocation. Students use computational thinking concepts such as pattern recognition, abstraction, and decomposition to convert ideas into commands for the dialog system and to understand which of their ideas can’t be programmed with the technology as presented. They learn both to personalize the system today and to see the agent as a technosocial construct that they can shape in the future. Programming can be accomplished either using Google’s Blockly visual programming tool (https://developers.google.com/blockly) or through conversation with the agent itself. The agent is embodied as a robot character, so agent actions can be verbal, physical, or both. Through social dialog with the agent, learners reflect on how computational thinking is relevant to themselves and their communities as part of a CRC, building on the work of Stewart et. al. [10]. For example, learners may be asked to reflect on the relationship between greeting behaviors and identity. After designing a greeting interaction, learners program the dialog system to achieve the greeting. Then learners may be asked to imagine how they might hypothetically enhance the dialog system to make it even more capable of implementing their preferences. In parallel to the development of the dialog system and curriculum, we will also adapt Reeve’s agentic engagement instrument [7] for CRC. Our contributions will include this instrument, insights into the relationship between agentic engagement and an agentic relationship with technology, and insights into how a programmable dialog system impacts agentic engagement and learning computational thinking.","PeriodicalId":309835,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on International Computing Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3446871.3469782","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Dialog with a social pedagogical robot or agent is a powerful way for kids to learn [1, 5] but may limit the formation of an agentic relationship with the technology [9]. One main purpose of conversational agents is to allow the user to have a natural interaction that reduces the need to learn artificial conventions [6], but dialog systems fall short with respect to failure recovery, vocabulary diversity, remembering conversational history, and other measures [2, 3]. Further, Hill et. al. [4] found that people adapt their model of communication to match a chatbot’s in the same way they do with a child or non-native speaker. Thus, users conversing with a pedagogical agent are implicitly trained to shape their behavior to suit the technology rather than shaping the technology. For young learners, particularly among populations that have been historically excluded from technology fields, this limits agency and reinforces marginalizing power structures [9]. This project combines a conversational agent with ideas of agentic engagement to help middle-school-aged children learn computational thinking. Agentic engagement is defined as students’ constructive contribution into the flow of instruction and includes behaviors such as expressing interests, preferences, and opinions. It has been positively correlated to learning performance and motivation [7, 8]. Combined with a culturally responsive curriculum (CRC), agentic engagement may help to foster an agentic relationship with technology. Our system encourages learners to engage agentically by using programming constructs to change the agent’s vocabulary, recognizing the intent behind a user utterance (an invocation), and defining the action the agent will take to respond to an invocation. Students use computational thinking concepts such as pattern recognition, abstraction, and decomposition to convert ideas into commands for the dialog system and to understand which of their ideas can’t be programmed with the technology as presented. They learn both to personalize the system today and to see the agent as a technosocial construct that they can shape in the future. Programming can be accomplished either using Google’s Blockly visual programming tool (https://developers.google.com/blockly) or through conversation with the agent itself. The agent is embodied as a robot character, so agent actions can be verbal, physical, or both. Through social dialog with the agent, learners reflect on how computational thinking is relevant to themselves and their communities as part of a CRC, building on the work of Stewart et. al. [10]. For example, learners may be asked to reflect on the relationship between greeting behaviors and identity. After designing a greeting interaction, learners program the dialog system to achieve the greeting. Then learners may be asked to imagine how they might hypothetically enhance the dialog system to make it even more capable of implementing their preferences. In parallel to the development of the dialog system and curriculum, we will also adapt Reeve’s agentic engagement instrument [7] for CRC. Our contributions will include this instrument, insights into the relationship between agentic engagement and an agentic relationship with technology, and insights into how a programmable dialog system impacts agentic engagement and learning computational thinking.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
具有可编程对话系统的代理接触
与社会教育机器人或代理对话是儿童学习的一种强大方式[1,5],但可能会限制与技术bb0形成代理关系。会话代理的一个主要目的是允许用户进行自然交互,从而减少学习人工约定的需要b[6],但是对话系统在故障恢复、词汇多样性、记住会话历史和其他措施方面存在不足[2,3]。此外,希尔等人发现,人们会调整自己的交流模式,以适应聊天机器人的模式,就像他们与孩子或非母语人士交流一样。因此,与教学代理交谈的用户被隐式训练来塑造他们的行为以适应技术,而不是塑造技术。对于年轻的学习者来说,特别是在历史上被排除在技术领域之外的人群中,这限制了他们的能动性,并强化了边缘化的权力结构。这个项目结合了对话代理和代理参与的思想来帮助中学儿童学习计算思维。主观参与被定义为学生对教学流程的建设性贡献,包括表达兴趣、偏好和意见等行为。它与学习绩效和学习动机正相关[7,8]。结合文化响应课程(CRC),代理参与可能有助于促进与技术的代理关系。我们的系统鼓励学习者通过使用编程结构来改变代理的词汇表,识别用户话语(调用)背后的意图,并定义代理将采取的响应调用的动作来参与代理。学生使用计算思维概念,如模式识别、抽象和分解,将想法转化为对话系统的命令,并了解哪些想法不能用所呈现的技术编程。他们学会了在今天将系统个性化,并将代理视为一种未来可以塑造的技术社会结构。编程既可以使用谷歌的block可视化编程工具(https://developers.google.com/blockly),也可以通过与代理本身的对话来完成。代理被具体化为一个机器人角色,所以代理的动作可以是口头的,身体的,或者两者兼而有之。通过与智能体的社会对话,学习者反思计算思维如何与他们自己和他们的社区相关,作为CRC的一部分,以Stewart等人的工作为基础。例如,学习者可能会被要求反思问候行为与身份之间的关系。在设计了问候互动之后,学习者编写对话系统来实现问候。然后,学习者可能会被要求想象他们可能会假设如何增强对话系统,使其更有能力实现他们的偏好。在开发对话系统和课程的同时,我们还将把Reeve的主体参与工具[7]应用于CRC。我们的贡献将包括这个工具,洞察代理参与和与技术的代理关系之间的关系,以及洞察可编程对话系统如何影响代理参与和学习计算思维。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Exploring the Impact of Gender Bias on Pair Programming A Pedagogical Framework for Teaching Computer Programming: A Social Constructivist and Cognitive Load Theory Approach Computing Educational Activities Involving People Rather Than Things Appeal More to Women (Recruitment Perspective) Developing Empathy and Persistence through Professional Development in New to CSA Teachers Promoting Learning Transfer in Computer Science Education by Training Teachers to use Explicit Programming Strategies
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1