Abstract
This study explores the impact of conversational agent language (formal vs. informal) on student language in an intelligent tutoring system (ITS). Unlike previous studies that analyzed language features in isolation, we utilized the epistemic network analysis (ENA) approach to investigate the structure of language connections in five dimensions, including non-narrativity, word abstractness, syntactic complexity, referential cohesion, and deep cohesion, in summaries written before and after the intervention. Visualizations of the ENA networks revealed differences in language connection structures between pretest and posttest in both formal and informal groups. Specifically, in the informal group, the connection between non-narrativity and word abstractness was stronger in the posttest network. In the formal group, the connection between non-narrativity and referential cohesion was stronger in the posttest network. Additionally, the connection between deep cohesion and syntactic complexity shifted from significant on pretest networks to insignificant on posttest networks. This study has implications for the design of conversational agent language and sheds light on the potential of combining ENA and Coh-Metrix components to analyze the differences in the structure of language connections, rather than individual language features in isolation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Common Core State Standards Initiative: Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/ (2010). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1965026
Fillmore, L.W., Snow, C.E.: What teachers need to know about language. In: Adger, C.A., Snow, C.E., Christian, D. (eds.) What Teachers Need to Know about Language, pp. 7–54. CAL (2003). https://doi.org/10.21832/adger0186
Galloway, E.P., Uccelli, P.: Modeling the relationship between lexico-grammatical and discourse organization skills in middle grade writers: insights into later productive language skills that support academic writing. Read. Writ. 28(6), 797–828 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015-9550-7
Galloway, E.P., Uccelli, P.: Beyond reading comprehension: exploring the additional contribution of core academic language skills to early adolescents’ written summaries. Read. Writ. 32, 729–759 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9880-3
Gámez, P.B., Lesaux, N.K.: The relation between exposure to sophisticated and complex language and early-adolescent English-only and language minority learners’ vocabulary. Child Dev. 83(4), 1316–1331 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01776.x
Gámez, P.B., Lesaux, N.K.: Early-adolescents’ reading comprehension and the stability of the middle school classroom-language environment. Dev. Psychol. 51(4), 447–458 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1037/a0038868
Graesser, A.C., Li, H., Forsyth, C.: Learning by communicating in natural language with conversational agents. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 23(5), 374–380 (2014)
Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S.: Computational analyses of multilevel discourse comprehension. Top. Cogn. Sci. 3, 371 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01081.x
Graesser, A.C., McNamara, D.S., Cai, Z., Conley, M., Li, H., Pennebaker, J.: Coh-metrix measures text characteristics at multiple levels of language and discourse. Elementary Sch. J. 115(2), 210–229 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1086/678293
Graham, S.: Strategy instruction and the teaching of writing: a meta-analysis. In: MacArthur, C.A., Graham, S., Fitzgerald, J. (eds.) Handbook of Writing Research, pp. 187–207. Guilford, New York, NY (2006). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-873x.2008.00423.x
Graham, S., Harris, K.R.: Common core state standards and writing: introduction to the special issue. Elem. Sch. J. 115(4), 457–463 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1086/681963
Graham, S., Harris, K.R.: Reading and writing connections: how writing can build better readers (and vice versa). In: Ng, C., Bartlett, B. (eds.) Improving Reading and Reading Engagement in the 21st Century, pp. 333–350. Springer, Singapore (2017)
Kim, Y.S.G., Schatschneider, C.: Expanding the developmental models of writing: a direct and indirect effects model of developmental writing (DIEW). J. Educ. Psychol. 109(1), 35–50 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000129
Kintsch, W.: Text comprehension, memory, and learning. Am. Psychol. 49(4), 294–303 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.49.4.294
Li, H., Graesser, A.C.: Impact of conversational formality on the quality and formality of written summaries. In: Bittencourt, I., Cukurova, M., Muldner, K., Luckin, R., Millán, E. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Education: 21st International Conference, AIED 2020, Ifrane, Morocco, July 6–10, 2020, Proceedings, Part I, pp. 321–332. Springer International Publishing, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_26
Li, H., Graesser, A.C.: The impact of conversational agents’ language on summary writing. J. Res. Technol. Educ. 53(1), 44–66 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52237-7_26
Lucero, A.: Teachers’ use of linguistic scaffolding to support the academic language development of firstgrade emergent bilingual students. J. Early Child. Lit. 14(4), 534–561 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1177/1468798413512848
Marquart, C.L., Zachar, S., Collier, W., Eagan, B., Woodward, R., Shaffer, D.W.: rENA: Epistemic Network Analysis. https://cran.rproject.org/web/packages/rENA/index.html (2018)
Meneses, A., Uccelli, P., Valeri, L.: Teacher talk and literacy gains in chilean elementary students: teacher participation, lexical diversity, and instructional non-present talk. Linguistics Educ. 73, 101145 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2022.101145
NAEP: 2015 Reading Assessment [Data file]: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/stt2015/pdf/2016008AZ4.pdf (2015)
Nagy, W., Townsend, D.: Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language acquisition. Read. Res. Q. 47(1), 91–108 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.011
Rivard, L.P., Gueye, N.R.: Syntactic complexity and connector use in the summary writing of L1 and L2 Canadian students. J. Fr. Lang. Stud. 33(2), 197–226 (2023)
Shaffer, D.W., Collier, W., Ruis, A.R.: A tutorial on epistemic network analysis: analyzing the structure of connections in cognitive, social, and interaction data. J. Learn. Anal. 3(3), 9–45 (2016). https://doi.org/10.18608/jla.2016.33.3
Snow, C.E., Uccelli, P.: The challenge of academic language. In: Olson, D.R., Torrance, N. (eds.) The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy, vol. 121, pp. 112–133. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609664.008
Sun, H., Verspoor, M.: Mandarin vocabulary growth, teacher qualifications and teacher talk in child heritage language learners. Int. J. Biling. Educ. Biling. 25(6), 1976–1991 (2022)
Van Dijk, T.A., Kintsch, W.: Strategies of discourse comprehension, pp. 11–12. Academic Press, New York (1983). https://doi.org/10.2307/415483
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by IES Grant #R305C120001.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Li, H., Cai, Z., Wang, G., Cheng, F., Marquart, C. (2023). Impact of Agent Language on Student Language in the Structures of Language Connections. In: Arastoopour Irgens, G., Knight, S. (eds) Advances in Quantitative Ethnography. ICQE 2023. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 1895. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47014-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47014-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-47013-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-47014-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)