This study assessed the impact of utilization of an artificially intelligent geometry proof tutor on classroom social processes. Both teachers' and students' behaviors changed. Teachers devoted more time to their slower students, treated students in a more collegial fashion, and increased their emphasis on effort in grading students. Students showed a marked increase in task-related effort and involvement. This change appeared to be due to an increase both in the students' enjoyment of the class and in the level of peer competition. Keywords artificial intelligence, classroom social behavior, teachers' roles, competition, grading, teacher authority, embarrassment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, J.R. (1984). Proposal to the Carnegie Corporation to support demonstration and development of a geometry tutor. Unpublished proposal, Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
2.
Anderson, J.R., Boyle, C.F., & Yost, G. (1985). The geometry tutor. Proceedings of the 9th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 1-7), Los Angeles.
3.
Anderson, J.R., Boyle, C.F., & Yost, G. (1986). The geometry tutor. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 5, 5-19.
4.
Becker, H.J. (1986). Instructional uses of school computers. Reports from the 1985 National Survey, Issue i, Center for Social Organization of Schools, The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.
5.
Becker, H.S., & Greer, B. (1960). Participant observations: Analysis of qualitative data. In R. N. Adams & J. J. Preiss (Eds.), Human organization research (pp. 267-289). Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.
6.
Bogdan, R.C., & Biklen, S.K. (1982). Qualitative research for education An introduction to theory and methods. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
7.
Bogdan, R.C., & Taylor, S.J. (1975). Introduction to qualitative research methods. A phenomenological approach to the social sciencesNew York: Wiley.
8.
Bossert, S.T. (1979). Tasks and social relationships in the classroom . New York: Cambridge University Press.
9.
Buckley, W.M. (1988). Computers failing as teaching aids: Heralded revolution falls short due to lack of machines, training. Wall Street Journal, p. 17.
10.
Goetz, J.P., & LeCompte, M.D. (1984). Ethnography and qualitative design in educational research. New York: Academic Press.
11.
Hativa, N., Swisa, S., & Lesgold, A. (1989, March). Competition in traditional CAI: Motivational, sociological and instructional-design issues. In Andrea di Sessa (Chair), Computers and classroom social processes Symposium conducted at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
12.
Hawkins, J., & Sheingold, K. (1986). The beginning of a story: Computers and the organization of learning in classrooms. In J. A. Culbertson & L. L Cunningham (Eds.), Microcomputers and education. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
13.
Kirk, J., & Miller, M.K. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research . Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
14.
Lepper, M.R., & Gurtner, J.L. (1989). Children and computers: Approaching the twenty-first century. Amencan Psychologist, 44, 170-178.
15.
Lesgold, A.M., & Lesgold, S.B. (1984). Classroom computers and state curriculum policy . Unpublished manuscript, University of Pittsburgh.
16.
Malone, T.W., & Lepper, M.R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivation for learning. In R. E. Snow & M C. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude, learning, and instruction III Conative and affective process analysesHillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
17.
Miles, M.B., & Huberman, A.M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis A sourcebook of new methodsBeverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
18.
Olson, S. (1976). Ideas and data Process and practice of social researchHomewood, IL: The Dorsey Press.
19.
Quality Education Data (1984, January). Microcomputer data Unpublished raw data presented to the Naval Materials Council , Dallas, TX.
20.
Schofield, J.W. (in press) Generalizability in qualitative research. In E. Eisner & A. Peskin (Eds.) (in press). Qualitative inquiry in educationNew York: Teachers' College Press.
21.
Schofield, J.W., & Anderson, K.A. (1987). Combining quantitative and qualitative components of research on ethnic identity and intergroup relations . In J. S. Phmney & M. J. Rotheram (Eds.), Children's ethnic socialization Pluralism and development (pp. 252-273). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
22.
Schofield, J.W., & Verban, D. (1988). Computer usage in the teaching of mathematics: Issues which need answers. In D. Grouws & T. Cooney (Eds.), Effective mathematics teaching (pp. 169-193) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23.
Schofield, J.W. (1989, March). Computers and classroom social processesPaper presented at the conference on Intelligent Computer-Assisted Instruction, Orlando.
24.
Sheingold, K., Kane, J., & Endreweit, M. (1983). Microcomputer use in schools: Developing a research agenda. Harvard Educational Review, 53, 412-432.
25.
Sheingold, K., Martin, M.W., & Endreweit, M.E. (1987). Preparing urban teachers for the technological future. In R. D. Pea & K. Sheingold (Eds.), Mirrors of minds Patterns of experience in educational computing (pp. 67-85). Norwood, NJ. Ablex.
26.
Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Wertheimer, R. (in press). The geometry proof tutor: An "intelligent" computer-based tutor in the classroomThe Mathematics Teacher.
