You are here:

Modalities of Using Learning Objects for Intelligent Agents in Learning
ARTICLE

, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Canada

IJELLO Volume 4, Number 1, ISSN 1552-2237 Publisher: Informing Science Institute

Full Text

Abstract

This article details some common characteristics of applications using Intelligent Agents as they relate to Learning Objects as software systems in delivering education. Readapting Learning Objects to different categories of learners constitutes a challenge for Intelligent Agents in their effort to provide a large scale of collaboration between different e-learning organizations. In order not only to have efficient access to Learning Objects, but also to offer to learners tutoring and mentoring help, collaborative and cooperative learning strategies, learning advancements, and social interactions, Intelligent Agents have been highly recommended by a number of researchers. This study investigates how these e-learning applications are designed, how students' differences are explored, and how these software systems are able to improve learning and teaching perform- ances.

Citation

Stoilescu, D. (2008). Modalities of Using Learning Objects for Intelligent Agents in Learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects, 4(1), 49-64. Informing Science Institute. Retrieved March 31, 2023 from .

Keywords

References

View References & Citations Map
  1. ADL (2004). Advanced Distributed Learning. Retrieved January 10, 2007 from www.adlnet.org
  2. Atif, Y., Benlamri, R., & Berri, J. (2003). Learning objects based framework for self-adapting learning. Education and Information Technologies, 8(4), 345-368.
  3. StoilescuBaylor, A. (2000). Beyond butlers: Intelligent agents as mentors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(4), 373-382.
  4. Berlanga, A., & García F.J. (2004). Towards adaptive learning designs. In P. De Bra & W. Nejdl (Eds.), Adaptive hypermedia and adaptive web-based systems (pp. 372-375). Springer-Verlag: Berlin.
  5. Bratina, T., Hayes, D., & Blumsack, S. (2002). Preparing teachers to use learning objects. The Technology Source, November/December. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://technologysource.org/?view=article & Id=242
  6. Brusilovsky, P. (1994). Student model centered architecture for intelligent learning environment. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on User Modeling. MITRE, Hyannis, MA, (pp. 31-36).
  7. Brusilovsky, P. (2003) A component-based distributed architecture for adaptive Web-based education. In U. Hoppe, F. Verdejo, & J. Kay (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: Shaping the future of learning through intelligent technologies. Proceedings of AI-ED'2004, Sydney, Australia, July 20-24, (pp. 386-388), Amsterdam: OIS Press.
  8. Buzzetto-More, N., Sweat-Guy, R., & Elobaid, M. (2007). Reading in a digital age: E-books are students ready for this learning object? Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 239250.
  9. Dara-Abrams, B.P. (2002). Applying multi-intelligent, adaptive hypermedia to online learning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Union Institute and University Graduate College, UK. The Dublin Core Initiative [DC]. (2006). The Dublin Core Initiative Standardization. Retrieved June 3, 2006 from http://www.dublincore.org
  10. Felder, R.M., & Spurlin, J.E. (2005). Applications, reliability, and validity of the index of learning styles. International Journal of Engineering Education, 21(1), 103-112.
  11. Friesen, N. (2004). Three objections to learning objects and e-learning standards. In R. McGreal (Ed.), Online education using learning objects (pp. 59-70). London: Routledge.
  12. Gagné, R.M., Brigss, L.J. & Wager, W. (1992). Principles of instructional design. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
  13. Gardner, H. (1993). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. NY: Basic Books.
  14. Gregorc, A.F. (2006). The mind style and delineator style of Gregorc instrument. Retrieved May 14, 2006 from: http://www.gregorc.com/instrume.html
  15. Hawryszkiewycz, I.T. (2007). An engagement model for learning: Providing a framework to identify technology services. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 3, 219-228. Retrieved December 24, 2007 from http://www.ijklo.org/Volume3/IJKLOv3p219-228Hawr366.pdf Hiltz, S.R., & Wellman, B. (1997). Asynchronous learning networks as a virtual classroom. Communications of the ACM, 40(9), 44-49.
  16. Honey, P. (2001). Honey and Mumford learning styles questionnaire. Retrieved April 22, 2006 from the PeterHoney Learning Website: http://www.peterhoney.com/product/learningstyles
  17. Huhns, M., & Mohamed, A. (1999). Benevolent agents. IEEE Internet Computing, 3(2), 96-98. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. [IEEE]. (2002). Standard for Learning Object Metadata (LOM). Retrieved April 23, 2006 from IEEE Website http://ltsc.ieee.org/wg12/files/LOM_1484_12_1_v1_Final_Draft.pdf Ishaya, T. (2005). Ontologies for semantic integration of multimedia e-learning services. Computer systems and applications. Proceedings to the 3rd ACS/IEEE International Conference (pp. 883-888).
  18. Jaques, P., Andrade, A., Jung, J., Bordini, R., & Vicari, R. (2002). Using pedagogical agents to support collaborative distance learning. Proceedings of the CSCL 2002, University of Colorado, Boulder.
  19. Jonassen, D., Davidson, M., Collins, M., Campbell, J. & Haag, B. (1995). Constructivism and computer mediated communication in distance education. American Journal of Distance Education, 9, 7–25.
  20. Karagiannidis, C., & Sampson, D. (2004). Adaptation rules relating learning styles research and learning objects meta-data. Workshop on individual differences in adaptive hypermedia. Proceedings to the 3rd International Conference on Adaptive hypermedia and Adaptive Web-based Systems, August, Eindhoven.
  21. Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  22. Koper, R., & Manderveld, J. (2004). Educational modeling language: Modeling reusable, interoperable, rich and personalized units of learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 537-551.
  23. Lee, Y., & Geller, J. (2002). A component-based architecture for adaptive, collaborative web-based learning. Proceedings from the First International Conference on Web (pp. 203-215).
  24. Lee, Y., Junginger, M., & Geller, J. (2003). High performance publisher/subscriber communication for adaptive, collaborative Web-based learning. Journal of Distributed Education Technology, 1(3), 14-27.
  25. Lin, F., & Holt, P. (2001). Towards agent-based online learning. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference IASTED on Computer and Advanced Technology in Education (CATE). Banff, Canada, June, (pp. 124-129).
  26. Manouselis, N., & Sampson, D. (2002) Dynamic knowledge route selection for personalized learning environments using multiple criteria. Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Applied Informatics (pp. 351–356).
  27. Marin, B.F., & Hunger, A. (2005). Intelligent Agents: A new paradigm to support collaborative learning in distance education systems. Learning Technology Newsletter, 7(2), 18-20.
  28. McGreal, R. (2004). Learning objects: A practical definition. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 1(9), 21-32. Retrieved January 16, 2008 from http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Sep_04/article02.htm
  29. Mohammed, P., & Mohan, P. (2005). Agent based learning objects on the educational semantic web. Proceedings of the Second Conference in Intelligent Interactive Learning Object Repositories. Retrieved June 3, 2006 from http://www.lornet.org/presentation_i2lor_05/papers/i2lor05-14.pdf Mohan, P., & Brooks, C. (2003). Learning objects on the semantic web. Proceedings of ICALT (pp. 195199).
  30. Nkambou, R., Gouardères, G., & Woolf, B.P. (2005). Toward learning grid infrastructures: An overview of research on grid learning services. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 19(9/10), 811-824.
  31. StoilescuOr-Bach, R. (2004). Learning objects and metadata-From instructional design to a cognitive tool. In P. Kommers& G. Richards (Eds.), Proceedings of AACE-World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications (pp. 2260-2263); Chesapeake, VA.
  32. Qin, J., & Finnerman, C. (2002). Ontological representation of learning objects. Proceedings of the Workshop on Document Search Interface Design and Intelligent Access in Large-Scale Collections, JCDL' 02, July, Portland, OR. Retrieved 7 May, 2007 from http://xtasy.slis.indiana.edu/jcdlui/uiws.html
  33. Qin, J., & Godby, J. (2003). Incorporating educational vocabulary in learning object metadata schemes. Proceedings of Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries 7th European Conference, ECDL 2003, Trondheim, Norway, (pp. 52-57).
  34. Quinn, C. & Hobbs, S. (2000). Learning objects and instructional components. Educational Technology and. Society, 3(2). Retrieved January 4, 2005 from http://ifets.ieee.org/periodical/vol_2_2000/discuss_summary_0200.html
  35. Pena, C.I., Marzo, J.L., & De la Rosa, J.L. (2005). Intelligent agents to improve adaptability in a webbased learning environment. In C. Ghaoui, M. Jain, V. Bannore, & L.C. Jain (Eds.), Knowledge-based virtual education; Studies in fuzziness and soft computing, (Vol. 178, pp. 141-170). Springer Berlin:
  36. Retalis, S., & Papasalouros, A. (2004). Yet another approach to support the design process of educational adaptive hypermedia applications. Proceedings to the Third International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems, University of Technology, Eindhoven, (pp. 19-28).
  37. Robson, R. (1999). Object-oriented Instructional Design and Web-based Authoring. Retrieved May 14, 2006 from http://robby.orst.edu/papers/objectoriented.html
  38. Sampson, D., Karagiannidis C., & Kinshuk. (2002). Personalized learning: Educational, technological and standardization perspective. Interactive Educational Multimedia, 4, 24-39.
  39. Santos, O.C., Boticario, J.G., & Barrera, C. (2004). A machine learning multi-agent architecture to provide adaptation in a standard-based learning management system (WSEAS). Transactions on Information Science and Applications, 1(1), 468-473.
  40. Selker, T. (1994). Coach: A teaching agent that learns. Communications of ACM, 37(7), 92-99.
  41. Silveira, A.R., Gomes, R.E., Pinto, H.V., & Vicari, R.M. (2004). Intelligent learning objects: An agent based approach of learning objects. Proceeding of Seventh International Conference in Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Maceio, Algoas, Brazil, (pp. 886-888).
  42. Slotta, J.D., & Aleahmad, T. (2007). Challenges to technology enhanced learning-The case for open source and content communities. Retrieved December 22, 2007 from http://www.telscenter.org/confluence/download/attachments/7/SlottaAleahmadv5.pdf Solomos, K., & Avouris, N. (1999). Learning from multiple collaborating intelligent tutors: An agent-based approach. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 10(3/4), 243-262.
  43. Stojanovic, L., Staab, S., & Studer, R. (2001). ELearning based on the semantic web. Proceedings of the World Conference on WWW and the Internet (WebNet), Orlando, Florida, (pp. 325-334).
  44. Varlamis, I., & Apostolakis, I. (2006). The present and future of standards for e-Learning technologies. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning Objects, 2, 59-76. Retrieved December 22, 2007 from http://ijklo.org/Volume2/v2p059-076Varlamis.pdf Vassileva, J., Greer, J., McCalla, G., Deters, R., Zapata, D., Mudgal, C., et al. (1999). A multi-agent approach to the design of peer-help environments. In: S. Lajoie& M. Vivet (Eds.), Artificial intelligence and education (pp. 38-45). IOS Press: Amsterdam.
  45. Whatley, J., Staniford, G., Beer, M., & Scown, P. (1999). Intelligent agents to support students working in group online. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 10(3/4), 361-373.
  46. Wiley, D. (2003). Learning objects: Difficulties and opportunities. Retrieved May 7, 2007 from http://opencontent.org//docs/lo_do.pdf Winn, W. (2002). Current trends in educational technology research: The study of learning environments. Educational Psychology Review, 14(3), 331-351.
  47. Wooldridge, M., & Jennings, N. (1995). Intelligent agents: Theory and practice. Knowledge Engineering Review, 10(2), 115–152. WorldWide Web Consortium (W3C). (2005). Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language (SMIL 2.1); W3C Final Recommendation 13 December 2005. Retrieved May 14, 2006 from WWW Website: http://www.w3.org/TR/SMIL

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. Signed in users can suggest corrections to these mistakes.

Suggest Corrections to References

Links