Augmenting Teachers with Data Science Powers: Joining Human and Artificial Intelligence to Assist Students
Resumo
Technology has the potential to influence the processes and outcomes of teaching and learning. Researchers notice a high demand for online education, but these environments generate educational data in high quantity, diversity, and velocity, which requires the use of technology. However, putting too much emphasis on artificial intelligence is not bringing the expected results. It is time to position teachers as the principal decision-makers in the "classroom" and use AI as an assistant. Our proposal is a tool (called T-Partner) to help online teachers: (1) search for relevant patterns in the educational data; (2) create visualizations to present the results in a more teacher-friendly way; (3) recommend study plans, based on students' needs. For that, we applied data science techniques on these data and processed the results, making it easier for teachers to understand them. We evaluated the tool, asking participants to use it to complete some tasks that simulate a teacher analyzing data to make pedagogical decisions. We evaluated time, correctness, number of doubts, and the participants' perceptions. The results show that most participants were able to complete the tasks in an appropriate amount of time and considered the T-Partner useful and easy to use in an online learning context.
Referências
Arntzen, E., Halstadtro, L.-B., and Halstadtro, M. (2009). The “silent dog” method: Analyzing the impact of self-generated rules when teaching different computer chains to boys with autism. The Analysis of verbal behavior, 25(1):51–66.
Baker, R. S. (2016). Stupid tutoring systems, intelligent humans. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(2):600–614.
Boettcher, J. V. and Conrad, R.-M. (2016). The online teaching survival guide: Simple and practical pedagogical tips. John Wiley & Sons.
Burden, P; Fuller, A. (2014). The teacher as a decision maker. In Methods for Effective Teaching Meeting the Needs of All Students.
Chou, C.-Y., Huang, B.-H., and Lin, C.-J. (2011). Complementary machine intelligence and human intelligence in virtual teaching assistant for tutoring program tracing. Computers & Education, 57(4):2303–2312.
Da?, F., Durdu, L., and Gerdan, S. (2014). Evaluation of educational authoring tools for teachers stressing of perceived usability features. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 116:888–901.
Hayes, S. C., White, D., and Bissett, R. T. (1998). Protocol analysis and the “silent dog” method of analyzing the impact of self-generated rules. The Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 15(1):57–63.
Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers’ perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education, 59(4):1109–1121.
Li, C.-S. and Irby, B. (2008). An overview of online education: Attractiveness, benefits, challenges, concerns and recommendations. College Student Journal, 42(2).
Mandinach, E. B. and Jackson, S. S. (2012). Transforming teaching and learning through data-driven decision making. Corwin Press.
Mouza, C. (2018). The role of teachers in teaching and learning with technology. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 18(3):491–493.
Paiva, R., Barbosa, A., Batista, E., Pimentel, D., and Bittencourt, I. I. (2015a). Badges and xp: An observational study about learning. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2015. 32614 2015. IEEE, pages 1–8. IEEE.
Paiva, R. and Bittencourt, I. I. (2017a). The authoring of pedagogical decisions informed by data, on the perspective of a mooc. In Anais dos Workshops do Congresso Brasileiro de Informática na Educação, volume 6, page 15.
Paiva, R. and Bittencourt, I. I. (2017b). The authoring of pedagogical decisions informed by data, on the perspective of a mooc. In Anais dos Workshops do Congresso Brasileiro de Informática na Educação, volume 6, page 15.
Paiva, R. and Bittencourt, I. I. (2017c). Helping mooc teachers do their job. In Researcher Links Workshop: Higher Education for All, pages 52–67. Springer.
Paiva, R. O. A., Bittencourt, I. I., da Silva, A. P., Isotani, S., and Jaques, P. (2015b). Improving pedagogical recommendations by classifying students according to their interactional behavior in a gamified learning environment. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, pages 233–238. ACM.
Rossi, D., Beer, C., Janse van Rensburg, H., Harreveld, R., Danaher, P. A., and Singh, M. (2011). Learning interactions: A cross-institutional multi-disciplinary analysis of learner-learner and learner-teacher and learner-content interactions in online learning contexts.
Seaman, J. E., Allen, I. E., and Seaman, J. (2018). Grade increase: Tracking distance education in the united states. Babson Survey Research Group.
Sivaldo J. de Santana, Ranilson Paiva, I. I. B. e. a. (2016). Evaluating the impact of mars and venus effect on the use of an adaptive learning technology for portuguese and mathematics. The 16th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies - ICALT2016.
Stephenson, J. (2020). Teaching & learning online: new pedagogies for new technologies. Routledge.
