1. Simulating instructional roles through pedagogical agents 報 告 人：張純瑋 Baylor, A. L. & Kim, Y. (2005). Simulating instructional roles through pedagogical agents. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15(1), 95-115.

2. INTRODUCTION expertise personality  Beishuizen and colleagues (2001) found that both students and teachers evaluated the characteristics of good human teachers in terms of expertise (knowledge and experience in a domain) and personality (e.g., friendliness, kindness, and enthusiasm). Three possible functional roles for pedagogical agents: knowledgeablesupportive both knowledgeable and supportive  agent as expert (knowledgeable), agent as motivator (supportive), and agent as mentor (both knowledgeable and supportive).  The resulting question is can these human instructional roles (Expert, Motivator, Mentor) be effectively simulated through pedagogical agents? investigated the learner’s perceptions of agent functionality as represented by its role, as well as the actual impact of the agent role on motivation and learning.

3. METHODS (1)  Operationalization of Pedagogical Agent Roles

4. METHODS (2)  Example Scripts for Each agent in the Assessment Stage within MIMIC

5. METHODS (3)  Agent Development Three 3D animated pedagogical agents were created in Poser to represent three different instructional roles within the MIMIC (Multiple Intelligent Mentors Instructional Collaboratively).  Experimental Studies_ Samples and Interventions in Two Experiments

6. EXPERIMENT 1 –ROLE PERCEOTION  Two Planned Contrasts, Experiment 1  Results- Means and standard deviations, Experiment 1

7. Discussion_ Exp 1

8. EXPERIMENT 2-ROLE PERCEOTION AND ROLE IMOPACT (1)  Additional Planned Contrast for Experiment II  Role impact  Role impact was examined by the effect of the agent on learner motivation and learning.

9. EXPERIMENT 2-ROLE PERCEOTION AND ROLE IMOPACT (2)  Results- Means and standard deviations, Experiment II

10. Discussion_ Exp 2

11. DISCUSSION (1) motivational agents human-like self-efficacy  The motivational agents (Motivator, Mentor) were perceived as more human-like and led to improved learner self-efficacy. (not sufficient for to facilitate learning). agents with expertise facilitating learningmore credible  the agents with expertise (Expert and Mentor) led to improved learning outcomes and were also perceived as such (as facilitating learning and as more credible). Mentormore engaging self-efficacy the Mentor was perceived to be more engaging and also led to improved self-efficacy, thus having the overall best impact on learning and motivation.

12. DISCUSSION (2)  The generic agent roles employed in these studies could serve within different content domains. Expertintroduce new content demonstrate a procedure The Expert would be appropriate to introduce new content or demonstrate a procedure within a well-defined subject area.  e.g., Steve teaching how to operate a piece of equipment in Navy ships, or Adele in medical simulations, (Johnson, 2001). Motivatorill-structured domains constructivist learning environments The Motivator may be more appropriate in ill-structured domains or constructivist learning environments  the Motivator may work more effectively with low achieving students (Bandura, 1997; Hietala & Niemirepo, 1998). Mentor learningmotivation The Mentor could serve effectively in many types of learning situations where both learning and motivation are key outcomes.

13. End Thank you