Natural Language Communication with a Teachable Agent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conversational teachable agents offer a promising platform to support learning, both in the classroom and in remote settings. In this context, the agent takes the role of the novice, while the student takes on the role of teacher. This framing is significant for its ability to elicit the Protégé effect in the student-teacher, a pedagogical phenomenon known to increase engagement in the teaching task, and also improve cognitive outcomes. In prior work, teachable agents often take a passive role in the learning interaction, and there are few studies in which the agent and student engage in natural language dialogue during the teaching task. This work investigates the effect of teaching modality when interacting with a virtual agent, via the web-based teaching platform, the Curiosity Notebook. A method of teaching the agent by selecting sentences from source material is compared to a method paraphrasing the source material and typing text input to teach. A user study has been conducted to measure the effect teaching modality on the learning outcomes and engagement of the participants. The results indicate that teaching via paraphrasing and text input has a positive effect on learning outcomes for the material covered, and also on aspects of affective engagement. Furthermore, increased paraphrasing effort, as measured by the similarity between the source material and the material the teacher conveyed to the robot, improves learning outcomes for participants.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".