This content will become publicly available on July 3, 2024
Title: A spatiotemporal analysis of teacher practices in supporting student learning and engagement in an AI-enabled classroom
Research indicates that teachers play an active and important role in classrooms with AI tutors. Yet, our scientific understanding of the way teacher practices around AI tutors mediate student learning is far from complete. In this paper, we investigate spatiotemporal factors of student-teacher interactions by analyzing student engagement and learning with an AI tutor ahead of teacher visits (defined as episodes of a teacher being in close physical proximity to a student) and immediately following teacher visits. To conduct such integrated, temporal analysis around the moments when teachers visit students, we collect fine-grained, time-synchronized data on teacher positions in the physical classroom and student interactions with the AI tutor. Our case study in a K12 math classroom with a veteran math teacher provides some indications on factors that might affect a teacher’s decision to allocate their limited classroom time to their students and what effects these interactions have on students. For instance, teacher visits were associated more with students’ in-the-moment behavioral indicators (e.g., idleness) than a broader, static measure of student needs such as low prior knowledge. While teacher visits were often associated with positive changes in student behavior afterward (e.g., decreased idleness), there could be a potential mismatch between students visited by the teacher and who may have needed it more at that time (e.g., students who were disengaged for much longer). Overall, our findings indicate that teacher visits may yield immediate benefits for students but also that it is challenging for teachers to meet all needs - suggesting the need for better tool support. more »« less
Viberg, O.; Jivet, I.; Muñoz-Merino, P.; Perifanou, M.; Papathoma, T.
(Ed.)
Past research shows that teachers benefit immensely from reflecting on their classroom practices. At the same time, adaptive and artificially intelligent (AI) tutors are shown to be highly effective for students, especially when teachers are involved in supporting students’ learning. Yet, there is little research on how to support teachers to reflect on their practices around AI tutors. We posit that
analytics built on multimodal data from the classroom (e.g., teacher position, student-AI interaction) would be beneficial in providing effective scaffolding and evidence for teachers’ collaborative reflection on human-AI hybrid teaching. To better understand the design opportunities and constraints of a future tool for teacher reflection, we conducted storyboarding sessions with seven in-service teachers. Our analysis revealed that certain modalities (e.g., position v. video) might be more beneficial and less constrained than others in identifying reflection-worthy moments and trends. We discuss teachers’ needs for reflection in classrooms with AI tutors and their boundaries in using multimodal analytics.
Orchestration tools may support K-12 teachers in facilitating student learning, especially when designed to address classroom stakeholders’ needs. Our previous work revealed a need for human-AI shared control when dynamically pairing students for collaborative learning in the classroom, but offered limited guidance on the role each agent should take. In this study, we designed storyboards for scenarios where teachers, students and AI co-orchestrate dynamic pairing when using AI-based adaptive math software for individual and collaborative learning. We surveyed 54 math teachers on their co-orchestration preferences. We found that teachers would like to share control with the AI to lessen their orchestration load. As well, they would like to have the AI propose student pairs with explanations, and identify risky proposed pairings. However, teachers are hesitant to let the AI auto-pair students even if they are busy, and are less inclined to let AI override teacher-proposed pairing. Our study contributes to teachers’ needs, preference, and boundaries for how they want to share the task and control of student pairing with the AI and students, and design implications in human-AI co-orchestration tools.
Karumbaiah, S.; Borchers, C.; Falhs, A.; Holstein, K.; Rummel, N.; Aleven, V.(
, International Society of the Learning Sciences)
Blikstein, P.; Van Aalst, J.; Kizito, R.; Brennan, K.
(Ed.)
Past research shows that teacher noticing matters for student learning, but little is known about the effects of AI-based tools designed to augment teachers’ attention and sensemaking. In this paper, we investigate three multimodal measures of teacher noticing (i.e., gaze, deep dive into learning analytics in a teacher tool, and visits to individual students), gleaned from a mixed reality teacher awareness tool across ten classrooms. Our analysis suggests that of the three noticing measures, deep dive exhibited the largest association with learning gains when adjusting for students’ prior knowledge and tutor interactions. This finding may indicate that teachers identified students most in need based on the deep dive analytics and offered them support. We discuss how these multimodal measures can make the constraints and effects of teacher noticing in human-AI partnered classrooms visible.
Clippinger, D.; Pflueger, R. C.; Nozaki, S.; Bodenhamer, J.(
, American Society for Engineering Education)
In an earlier work, the authors compared the writing style of Mechanical Engineering Technology (MET) students in an “untutored” state to the writing style of “tutored” students, where the tutoring was provided by “generic” writing center tutors. The results of this study showed that aside from changes in the diction of the students’ work, there was little measurable improvement in the quality of student writing as measured by both the AAC&U VALUE Rubric and by the authors’ voice-development-style-diction method. The current work builds on the results of the previous work by providing training on a just-in-time basis for the writing center tutors. As with previous years, the students participating in the study were MET students in a last-semester capstone industrial design course. This course is organized around a series of open-ended industry-sponsored projects for which the students are expected to develop a solution to a mechanical engineering problem. The students work on the projects in teams of three or four students and complete the work over a two-semester sequence offered annually on a fall-spring basis. The assignment in the study was identical to that of previous years: an “analysis” report in which students are expected to apply content from previous courses to one aspect of the industry-sponsored design project. The present study will compare the results from three iterations of the study: the work of “untutored” students, i.e. those who did not received any writing center assistance whatsoever, those who tutored by “generic” writing center tutors, and lastly, the works of those tutored by tutors specifically trained in support of the specific intervention. In the two cases where tutor interaction occurred, it was required as a component of the course to ensure participation by the entire student cohort. In general, the interactions with the specially-trained tutors produced works with a more mature writing style on the part of the student as compared to those works produced by students who had interacted with the untrained tutors or no tutors at all. The work will also discuss survey data collected on the “generic” and specially-trained tutoring sessions and discuss the differences in the results. Preliminary results show that the specially-trained tutors reported pronounced levels of engagement in the tutoring session, as measured by student note-taking, student questions, student receptiveness to suggestions, and student desire to understand the reasoning behind the tutors’ suggestions. Specially-trained tutors also reported significantly higher levels of student interest suggestions about grammar, style, content, format, and citations. Overall, it is concluded that specific training for the tutors was most associated with increased levels of interaction between tutor and student. As the students in the final group (“trained tutors”) were told prior to the tutoring session that the tutors were “specially trained,” it remains to be determined if the increased interaction was due to better tutor preparation or a higher estimation of the value of the tutoring session on the part of the students receiving the tutoring. This is proposed as an extension to the current work.
Clippinger, D.(
, 2023 ASEE Annual Conference, Baltimore, MD, USA)
In an earlier work, the authors compared the writing style of Mechanical Engineering Technology (MET) students in an “untutored” state to the writing style of “tutored” students, where the tutoring was provided by “generic” writing center tutors. The results of this study showed that aside from changes in the diction of the students’ work, there was little measurable improvement in the quality of student writing as measured by both the AAC&U VALUE Rubric and by the authors’ voice-development-style-diction method. The current work builds on the results of the previous work by providing training on a just-in-time basis for the writing center tutors. As with previous years, the students participating in the study were MET students in a last-semester capstone industrial design course. This course is organized around a series of open-ended industry-sponsored projects for which the students are expected to develop a solution to a mechanical engineering problem. The students work on the projects in teams of three or four students and complete the work over a two-semester sequence offered annually on a fall-spring basis. The assignment in the study was identical to that of previous years: an “analysis” report in which students are expected to apply content from previous courses to one aspect of the industry-sponsored design project. The present study will compare the results from three iterations of the study: the work of “untutored” students, i.e. those who did not received any writing center assistance whatsoever, those who tutored by “generic” writing center tutors, and lastly, the works of those tutored by tutors specifically trained in support of the specific intervention. In the two cases where tutor interaction occurred, it was required as a component of the course to ensure participation by the entire student cohort. In general, the interactions with the specially-trained tutors produced works with a more mature writing style on the part of the student as compared to those works produced by students who had interacted with the untrained tutors or no tutors at all. The work will also discuss survey data collected on the “generic” and specially-trained tutoring sessions and discuss the differences in the results. Preliminary results show that the specially-trained tutors reported pronounced levels of engagement in the tutoring session, as measured by student note-taking, student questions, student receptiveness to suggestions, and student desire to understand the reasoning behind the tutors’ suggestions. Specially-trained tutors also reported significantly higher levels of student interest suggestions about grammar, style, content, format, and citations. Overall, it is concluded that specific training for the tutors was most associated with increased levels of interaction between tutor and student. As the students in the final group (“trained tutors”) were told prior to the tutoring session that the tutors were “specially trained,” it remains to be determined if the increased interaction was due to better tutor preparation or a higher estimation of the value of the tutoring session on the part of the students receiving the tutoring. This is proposed as an extension to the current work.
Karumbaiah, S., Borchers, C., Falhs, A. C., Holstein, K., Rummel, N., and Aleven, V. A spatiotemporal analysis of teacher practices in supporting student learning and engagement in an AI-enabled classroom. Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10470772.
Karumbaiah, S., Borchers, C., Falhs, A. C., Holstein, K., Rummel, N., & Aleven, V. A spatiotemporal analysis of teacher practices in supporting student learning and engagement in an AI-enabled classroom. Retrieved from https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10470772.
Karumbaiah, S., Borchers, C., Falhs, A. C., Holstein, K., Rummel, N., and Aleven, V.
"A spatiotemporal analysis of teacher practices in supporting student learning and engagement in an AI-enabled classroom". Country unknown/Code not available: Springer. https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10470772.
@article{osti_10470772,
place = {Country unknown/Code not available},
title = {A spatiotemporal analysis of teacher practices in supporting student learning and engagement in an AI-enabled classroom},
url = {https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10470772},
abstractNote = {Research indicates that teachers play an active and important role in classrooms with AI tutors. Yet, our scientific understanding of the way teacher practices around AI tutors mediate student learning is far from complete. In this paper, we investigate spatiotemporal factors of student-teacher interactions by analyzing student engagement and learning with an AI tutor ahead of teacher visits (defined as episodes of a teacher being in close physical proximity to a student) and immediately following teacher visits. To conduct such integrated, temporal analysis around the moments when teachers visit students, we collect fine-grained, time-synchronized data on teacher positions in the physical classroom and student interactions with the AI tutor. Our case study in a K12 math classroom with a veteran math teacher provides some indications on factors that might affect a teacher’s decision to allocate their limited classroom time to their students and what effects these interactions have on students. For instance, teacher visits were associated more with students’ in-the-moment behavioral indicators (e.g., idleness) than a broader, static measure of student needs such as low prior knowledge. While teacher visits were often associated with positive changes in student behavior afterward (e.g., decreased idleness), there could be a potential mismatch between students visited by the teacher and who may have needed it more at that time (e.g., students who were disengaged for much longer). Overall, our findings indicate that teacher visits may yield immediate benefits for students but also that it is challenging for teachers to meet all needs - suggesting the need for better tool support.},
journal = {},
publisher = {Springer},
author = {Karumbaiah, S. and Borchers, C. and Falhs, A. C. and Holstein, K. and Rummel, N. and Aleven, V.},
editor = {Wang, N. and Rebolledo-Mendez, G. and Matsuda, N. and Santos, O.C. and Dimitrova, V.}
}
Warning: Leaving National Science Foundation Website
You are now leaving the National Science Foundation website to go to a non-government website.
Website:
NSF takes no responsibility for and exercises no control over the views expressed or the accuracy of
the information contained on this site. Also be aware that NSF's privacy policy does not apply to this site.
