Abstract
A large part of the population in developing countries is technologically ignorant. Pedagogical interface agents are pieces of educational software with human characteristics that facilitate social learning. The aim of this research was an attempt to evaluate the extent to which a variety of pedagogical educational agents could assist adult learners in acquiring basic computer skills. This was done by conducting a usability test in the context of South African adult computer literacy training. A hundred and three participants were randomly assigned to either a control group or a test group, where after all participants received Microsoft Office Word training (pre-test). Only test group participants were introduced to pedagogical agents (experimental treatment). During the usability test both groups were given tasks to perform. Findings showed that computer illiterate adult users could perform better during literacy training with the assistance of educational agents when compared to only being taught through traditional teaching methods. This could open the doors to more effective ways of reaching and teaching a larger group of previously educationally disadvantaged adults in order to give them a better chance at securing employment in the labour market.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Continental Corporation: ABET Against illiteracy in South Africa. http://www.contionline.com/generator/www/com/en/continental/csr/themes/society/education_science/abet_en.html
Lincicum, S.: Introduction to interface agents. http://www.ous.edu/onlinenw/2003/executive/LincicumExecSumm.pdf
Potgieter, L.: Creating different virtual character representations (interface agents) in a simulated MS-WORD environment. BSc Honors Project. University of the Free State, South Africa (2010)
ISO 9241-11: Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals. Beuth, Berlin (1998)
Rudowsky, I.: Intelligent agents. In: Proceedings of the Americas Conference on Information Systems, NY (2004)
Giraffa, L.M.M., Viccari, R.M.: The use of agents techniques on intelligent tutoring systems. http://lsm.dei.uc.pt/ribie/docfiles/txt200342413856156.PDF (1998)
Bartneck, C., Croft, E., Kulic, D.: Measuring the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence and perceived safety of robots. In: Proceedings of the Metrics for Human-Robot Interaction Workshop in affiliation. The 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI 2008), Technical Report 471, University of Hertfordshire, pp. 37–44. Amsterdam (2008)
Angeli, A.D.: Ethical implications of verbal disinhibition with conversational agents. PsychNology J 7(1), 49–57 (2009)
Wonisch, D., Cooper, G.: Interface agents: preferred appearance characteristics based upon context. http://www.vhml.org/workshops/HF2002/papers/wonisch/wonisch.pdf (2002)
Chou, C.Y., Chan, T.W., Lin, C.J.: Redefining the learning companion: the past, present, and future of educational agents. http://chan.lst.ncu.edu.tw/publications/2003-Chou-rtl.pdf (2003)
Landowska, A.: The role and construction of educational agents in distance learning environments. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Information Technology. Gdansk 19–21 May 2008, pp. 321–324 (2008)
Technological Fluency Institute: Computer Literacy: What is computer Literacy & Why is it important. http://www.techfluency.org/computer-literacy.htm
Githens, R.P.: Older adults and e-learning. http://www.rodgithens.com/papers/older_adults_elearning_2007.pdf
Nielsen, J.: Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox. Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html
Usability.gov: usability basics. http://www.usability.gov/basics/index.html
Peacock, M.: The what, why and how of usability testing. http://www.cmswire.com/cms/web-engagement/the-what-why-and-how-of-usability-testing-007152.php
Adebesin, T.F., De Villiers, M.R., Semugabi, S.: Usability testing of e-learning: an approach incorporating co-discovery and think-aloud. http://researchspace.csir.co.za (2009)
Catrambone, R., Stasko, J., Xiao, J.: Anthropomorphic agents as user interface paradigm: experimental findings and a framework for research. In: Cognitive Science Society. The 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2004, pp. 166–171 (2004)
Prendiger, H., Mori, J., Ishizuka, M.: Using human physiology to evaluate subtle expressivity of a virtual quizmaster in a mathematical game. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 62(2), 231–245 (2004)
Bickmore, T., Cassel, J.: Social dialogue with embodied conversational agents. In: van Kuppevelt, J., Bernesen, N.O. (eds.) Advances in natural, multimodal dialogue systems. Kluwer, NY (2005)
Sahimi, S.M., Zain, F.M., Kamar, N.A.N., Samar, N., Rahman, Z.A., Majid, O., Atan, H., Fook, F.S., Luan, W.S.: The pedagogical agent in online learning: effects of the degree of realism on achievement in terms of gender. Contemp. Educ. Technol. 1(2), 175–185 (2010)
Li, I., Forlizzi, J., Dey, A., Kiesler, S.: My agent as myself or another: effects on credibility and listening to advice. In: DPPI’07: Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and Interfaces, pp. 194–208. NY (2007)
Ratan, R., Bailenson, J.N.: Similarity and persuasion in immersive virtual reality. Panel presentation to the Communication and Technology Commission of ICA (2007)
White, M., Foster, M. E., Oberlander, J., Brown, A.: Using facial feedback to enhance turn-taking in a multimodal dialogue system. In: Proceedings of HCI International 2005 Thematic Session on Universal Access in Human–Computer Interaction (2005)
Kim, Y., Wei, Q.: The impact of learner attributes and learner choice in an agent-based environment. Comput. Educ. 56(2011), 505–514 (2010)
Carmody, K., Berge, Z.: Pedagogical agents in online learning. http://ww.cogimedia.com/110revised.pdf (2008)
Steve in action. http://www.isi.edu/isd/VET/vet-body.html
Johnson, W.L.: Socially intelligent agent research at CARTE. http://www.aaai.org/Papers/Symposia/Fall/2000/FS-00-04/FS00-04-015.pdf (2000)
Sabot, A., Aini, Z.I., Lew, T.T.: Computer virus courseware using animated pedagogical agent. http://elib.unirazak.edu.my/staff-publications/iznora/computer%20virus.pdf (2005)
Bertrand, J., Babu, S.V., Polgreen, P., Segre, A.: Virtual agents based simulation for training healthcare workers in hand hygiene procedures. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6356, pp. 125–131 (2010)
Foo, K.K.: Effects of pedagogical agents’ instructional roles on learners with different cognitive styles in terms of achievement and motivation. Dissertation, University Sains Malaysia, Penang (2010)
Johnson, B., Christensen, L.: Educational research: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches. SAGE, London (2012)
Department of Labour: Speech by Minister of labour, M. Mdladlana. http://www.info.gov.za/speeches/2004/04102015451003.htm
Investorwords. http://www.investorwords.com/3738/population.html
Kendra cherry: What is informed consent? http://psychology.about.com/od/iindex/g/def_informedcon.htm
Tullis, T., Albert, B.: Measuring the user experience: collecting, analyzing, and presenting usability metrics. Morgan Kaufmann, MA (2008)
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the Telkom Centre of Excellence at the Department of Computer Science and Informatics, University of the Free State, for partially funding this research. Thanks to Mr. Casper Wessels from the Department of Information Technology, Central University of Technology, Free State for providing computers that were used to carry out this research. Our thanks also go to the adult learners from MUCCP for their willingness to participate in this research. Mrs. Suezette Opperman is also thanked for the language editing, and Dr. Melody Mentz for assisting with data analysis.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Appendices
Appendix A
Post-test Questionnaire (without agents)
The purpose of this questionnaire is to elicit your personal opinions of the Microsoft Office environment you had worked with while carrying out different tasks for evaluation purposes. Please answer all the questions.
For question 1 to question 23 indicate rate your opinion on a scale of 1–5, place a circle around the appropriate number, where: 1 = “Strongly disagree”, 2 = “Disagree”, 3 = “Not sure”, 4 = “Agree”, 5 = “Strongly agree” | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No. | SD | D | NS | A | SA | |
Learning contents provided by the microsoft office | ||||||
1. | Microsoft office had functionalities I expected it to have | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2. | Microsoft office environment was easy to use | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Effectiveness of the microsoft office help function | ||||||
3. | I found the microsoft office help function to be useful | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
4. | Microsoft office help function provided me with all the necessary information | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
5. | Microsoft office help function helped me to quickly learn how to perform a particular task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
6. | Microsoft office help function helped me to recall the different steps involved for a particular task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
7. | Microsoft office help function helped me to complete my tasks quicker | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
8. | Microsoft office help function was very practical | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
9. | Microsoft office help function assisted me to identify my mistakes when performing a task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
10. | With microsoft office help function, it was quicker and easier for me to recover from a mistake | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
11. | I was able to understand the concepts better with the microsoft office help function than I would have without them | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
12. | With the help of microsoft office help function I have managed to develop new abilities | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
13. | Microsoft office help function helped me to feel more confident about my computer skills | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
14. | I trusted the hint from microsoft office help function | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Satisfaction levels about the microsoft office | ||||||
15. | The interactions with microsoft office were easy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
16. | I was able to use microsoft office successfully | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
17. | I felt frustrated working with microsoft office | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
18. | I felt nervous when working with microsoft office | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
19. | I really had to concentrate to work with microsoft office | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
20. | It was exciting working with microsoft office | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
21. | Working with microsoft office made me change my attitude towards computers | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
22. | My experience with microsoft office encouraged me to learn about other computer programs | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
23. | Based on my experience with microsoft office, I can encourage my friends to learn about new concepts | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
24. What was the most difficult part when you worked with Microsoft Office? (You may tick more than one option)
Microsoft office environment was distracting | |
Microsoft office help function instructions were too difficult to follow | |
I understood very little from the microsoft office help function | |
Other, please specify: |
25. What was the best part when you worked with Microsoft Office? (You may tick more than one option)
Easier to get information needed from microsoft office help function | |
Easy to understand and follow microsoft office help function instruction | |
Microsoft office help function instructions were straightforward | |
With Microsoft office help function it was easier to figure out how to perform a particular task | |
Other, please specify: |
26. Did you enjoy being part of this study?
27. Provide reasons for your answer in question 26.
____________________________________________________________________________
28. How much did you learn from the study overall?
A lot | sufficient | Average | Poor | Nothing |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
29. Any general comments or suggestions:
___________________________________________________________________________________
30. I would like to participate in a similar research project in future.
31. If you answered ‘YES’ in question 30, please provide your cell phone number:_________________
Thank you very much for your input in this research.
Appendix B
Post-test Questionnaire (with agents)
The purpose of this questionnaire is to elicit your personal opinions of the agents you had worked with while carrying out different tasks for evaluation purposes. Please answer all the questions.
For question 1 to question 25 rate your opinion on a scale of 1-5, circling the appropriate number, where: 1 = “Strongly disagree”, 2 = “Disagree”, 3 = “Not sure”, 4 = “Agree”, 5 = “Strongly agree” | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No. | SD | D | NS | A | SA | |
Learning contents provided by the agents | ||||||
1. | The agents had functions and capabilities I expected | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
2. | The agents used a language that was familiar to me | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
3. | The agents’ hints provided all the necessary information | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Effectiveness of the agents | ||||||
4. | The agents’ hints helped me to quickly learn how to perform a particular task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
5. | The agents’ hints helped to recall the different steps involved for a particular task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
6. | The agents’ hints helped me to complete my tasks quicker | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
7. | The agents’ hints were very practical | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
8. | The agents’ hints assisted me to identify my mistakes when performing a task | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
9. | With the agents, it was quicker and easier for me to recover from a mistake | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
10. | I was able to understand the concepts better with the agents than I would have without them | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
11. | With the help of the agents I have managed to develop new abilities | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
Satisfaction levels about the agents | ||||||
12. | The interactions with the agents were easy | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
13. | I was able to use the agents successfully | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
14. | I trusted the advice from the agents | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
15. | I found the agents to be intelligent | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
16. | I found the agents to be friendly | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
17. | I felt frustrated working with the agents | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
18. | I felt nervous when working with the agents | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
19. | I really had to concentrate to work with the agents | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
20. | It was exciting working with the agents | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
21. | The agents’ hints helped me to feel more confident about my computer skills | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
22. | Working with the agents made me change my attitude towards computers | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
23. | My experience with these agents encouraged me to find out more about them | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
24. | Based on my experience with the agents, I can encourage my friends to use them when learning about new concepts | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
25. | I would like to consider using agents when learning other concepts in real life | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
For question 26 to question 29 select whether the statement is true of false in terms of your preference | |||
---|---|---|---|
26. | I prefer a male agent to a female agent | True | False |
27. | I prefer a cartoon agent to a realistic agent | True | False |
28. | I prefer a dog agent to a human agent | True | False |
29. | I prefer a text agent to a text and audio agent | True | False |
For question 30 to question 32 select the one agent that you liked the most based on the criteria listed below | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No. | Liking levels of the agents’ temperament | ||||||||||
Male text | Female text | Male Text and audio | Female Text and audio | Male cartoon dog | Female cartoon dog | Male cartoon human | Female cartoon human | Male realistic dog | Female realistic dog | ||
30. | Appearance | ||||||||||
31. | Voice | ||||||||||
32. | Movement |
33. For each of these agents, indicate whether you enjoyed working with them or not. Please provide suggestions for improvement.
Enjoyable | Frustrating | Suggestions | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
33.1 | Male text agent | |||
33.2 | Female text agent | |||
33.3 | Male text and audio agent | |||
33.4 | Female text and audio agent | |||
33.5 | Male cartoon dog agent | |||
33.6 | Female cartoon dog agent | |||
33.7 | Male cartoon human agent | |||
33.8 | Female cartoon human agent | |||
33.9 | Male realistic dog agent | |||
33.10 | Female realistic dog agent |
34. Select your first choice of agent in terms of your overall preference and indicate it with an ‘X’ (select only one)
34.1 | Male text agent | |
34.2 | Female text agent | |
34.3 | Male text and audio agent | |
34.4 | Female text and audio agent | |
34.5 | Male cartoon dog agent | |
34.6 | Female cartoon dog agent | |
34.7 | Male cartoon human agent | |
34.8 | Female cartoon human agent | |
34.9 | Male realistic dog agent | |
34.10 | Female realistic dog agent |
35. Please give a brief reason for your 1st choice rating in question 34 (e.g. 1st choice agent was friendly, intelligent, attractive, etc.).
1st _______________________________________________________________________________
36. What was the most difficult part when you worked with agents? (You may tick more than one option)
Agents were distracting | |
Agents were speaking too fast | |
I understood very little of what the agents said | |
Agents were saying the same things over and over again | |
Other, please specify: |
37. What was the best part when you worked with agents? (You may tick more than one option)
Easier to get information needed | |
Easy to understand what the agents said | |
Agents’ help and hints were straightforward | |
Easier to figure out how to perform a particular task | |
Other, please specify: |
38. Did you enjoy being part of this study?
39. Provide reasons for your answer in question 38.
_________________________________________________________________________________
40. How much did you learn from the study overall?
A lot | sufficient | Average | Poor | Nothing |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |
41. Any general comments or suggestions:
___________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________
42. I would like to participate in a similar research project in future.
43. If you answered ‘YES’ in question 42, please provide your cell phone number: _____________________
Thank you very much for your input in this research.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mabanza, N., de Wet, L. (2014). Determining the Usability Effect of Pedagogical Interface Agents on Adult Computer Literacy Training. In: Ivanović, M., Jain, L. (eds) E-Learning Paradigms and Applications. Studies in Computational Intelligence, vol 528. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41965-2_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-41965-2_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-41964-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-41965-2
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)