Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

The pedagogical agent enhances mathematics learning in ADHD students

  • Published:
Education and Information Technologies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Gaining the attention is the first key step to enhance learning. In Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) as the most prevalent deficit in school age, the learners face some impairment in attention that requires appropriate intervention. An environment that embedded Pedagogical Agent in computer-assisted instruction (CAI) has been designed to support learning through gaining and guiding attention to relevant information for these students. This study investigated how much the presence of pedagogical agent can improve learning in ADHD students. The learning environment was integrated with a pedagogical agent, named Koosha, as a tutor and motivator. This study employed a pretest and posttest experimental design with a control group. The statistical population was 30 boy students with ADHD in primary school from the North of Iran. The participants were randomly assigned to work with either an agent presenting a multimedia program or without an agent in mathematics. The results (Analysis of covariance -ANCOVA) suggested that experimental and control groups show a significant difference in mathematics achievement. According to this research, using the pedagogical agent can enhance the learning of ADHD students; so it can be considered as a valid school-base intervention for these students.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders—Fourth edition, text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Arcia, E., Frank, R., Sanchez-LaCay, A., & Fernandez, M. C. (2000). Teacher understanding of ADHD as reflected in attributions and classroom strategies. Journal of Attention Disorder, 4 (2), 91-101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (1988). Organizational Application of Social cognitive theory. Australian Journal of management., 13(2), 275–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentive perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barkley, R. A., Murphy, K. R., & Fischer, M. (2008). Adult ADHD: What the science says. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baylor, A. L., & Kim, Y. (2005). Simulating Instructional Roles through Pedagogical Agents. instructional roles through pedagogical agents. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15, 95–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biederman, J., Faraone, S. V., Spencer, T., Mick, E., Monuteaux, M., & Aleardi, M. (2006). Functional impairments in adults with self-reports of diagnosed ADHD: A controlled study of 1001 adults in the community. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 67(4), 524–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brodin, J. (2012). Remedial education for children with ADHD in Sweden. Chapter of contemporary trend in ADHD research. Edited by Jill M. Norvilitis.Us: INTECH. Available on: www.intechopen.com.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatzara, K., Karagiannidis, C., & Stamatis, D. (2010). Student’s attitude and learning effectiveness of emotional agents. Proceedings of the 10th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies, Sousse, Tunisia, IEEE Computer Society's Conference Publishing Services.

  • Chou, C. Y., Chan, T. W., & Lin, C. J. (2003). Redefining the learning companion: the past, present and future of educational agents. Journal of. Computers & Education, 40, 255–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. E., & Choi, S. (2005). Five design principles for experiments on the effects of animated pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 32(3), 209–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark, R. C., & Mayer, E. R. (2008). eLearning and the Science of Instruction (Proven Guidelines for Consumers and Designers of Multimedia learning) (2th ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, P., O’Regan, F. (2001). Educating children with AD/HD: A teacher's manual kindle edition (1 st Ed). London: Routledge.

  • Daley, D., & Birchwood, J. (2011). ADHD and academic performance: why does ADHD impact on academic performance and what can be done to support ADHD children in the classroom? Child: Care, Health and Development, 36(4), 455–464.

    Google Scholar 

  • Domagk, S. (2010). Do pedagogical agents facilitate learner motivation and learning outcomes? The role of the appeal of agent’s appearance and voice. Journal of Media Psychology: Theories, Methods, and Applications, 22(2), 84–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DuPaul, G. J. (2007). School-based Intervention for Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Current status and future directions. School psychology Review, 36, 183–194.

    Google Scholar 

  • DuPaul, G. J., & Weyandt, L. L. (2006). School-based Intervention for Children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder: Effects on academic, social, and behavioral functioning. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 53(2), 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabio, R. A. (2017). The study of automatic and controlled processes in ADHD: a reread and a new proposal. Mediterranean. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 5(1), 2–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fabio, R. A., & Antonietti, A. (2012). Effects of hypermedia instruction on declarative, conditional and procedural knowledge in ADHD students. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 33, 2028–2039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabio, R. A., & Caprì, T. (2015). Autobiographical Memory in ADHD Subtypes. Journal of Developmental and Intellectual Disability, 6, 26–36. https://doi.org/10.3109/13668250.2014.983057.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Farrace-Di Zinno, A. M., Douglas, G., Houghton, S., Lawrence, V., West, J., & Whiting, K. (2001). Body movements of boys with Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) during computer video game play. British Journal of Educational Technology, 32, 607–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geissler, J., & Lesch, K. P. (2011). A lifetime of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: diagnostic challenges, treatment and neurobiological mechanisms. Expert Review of Neurotherapeutics, 11(10), 1467–1484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gulz, A. (2005). Social enrichment by virtual characters: Differential benefits. Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 21, 405–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heidig, S., & Clarebout, G. (2011). Educational Research Review, 6.27-54. Do pedagogical agents make a difference to student motivation and learning? Educational Research Review, 6, 27–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hong, Y. (2008). Teachers’ perceptions of young children with ADHD in Korea. Early Child Development and Care, 178, 399-414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D. B. (2008). Phenomenological study: What are pre-kindergarten teachers’ lived experiences with children identified with conduct disorder, oppositional defiance disorder, and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder in the southeastern United States? Doctor of Philosophy thesis. The University of Alabama ,Birmingham.

  • Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. L. (2006). A social-cognitive framework for pedagogical agents as learning companions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 54(3), 223–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., & Baylor, A. L. (2007). Pedagogical agents as social models to influence learner attitudes. Educational Technology, 47(1), 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., & Wei, Q. (2011). The impact of user attributes and user choice in an agent-based environment. Computers & Education, 56, 505–514.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y., Baylor, A. L., & PALS Group. (2006). Pedagogical Agents as Learning Companions: The Role of Agent Competency and Type of Interaction Educational Technology. Research Development, 54(3), 223–243.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinnebrew, J., Biswas, G., Sulcer, B., & Taylor, R. (2013). Investigating Self-Regulated Learning in Teachable Agent Environments. In R. Azevedo & V. Aleven (Eds.), International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies, Springer International Handbooks of Education (Vol. 26, pp. 451–470). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kumperscak, H. G. (2012).ADHD through different developmental stages. chapter of book "Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder in Children and Adolescents", edited by Somnath Banerjee. INTECH.

  • Lauth, G. W., Heubeck, B. G., & Mackowiak, K. (2006). Observation of children with attention-deficit hyperactivity (ADHD) problems in three natural classroom contexts. Educational Psychology, 76(2), 385–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lester, J. C., Callaway, C. B., Gregoire, J. P., Stelling, G. D., Towns, S. G., & Zettlemoyer, L. S. (2001). Animated pedagogical agents in knowledge-based learning environments. In K. D. Forbus & P. J. Feltovich (Eds.), Smart machines in education (pp. 269–298). Menlo Park: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lillie, D. L., Hannun, W. H. & Stuck, G. B. (1989). Computers and effective instruction. New York: Longman.

  • Ljusberg, A. (2011). Children’s views on attending a remedial class – because of concentration difficulties. Child Care Health, 37(3), 440–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lusk, M. M., & Atkinson, R. K. (2007). Animated pedagogical agents: does their degree of embodiment impact learning from static or animated worked examples? Cognitive Psychology, 21(6), 747–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, R. E. (2014). Principles based on social cues: Personalization, voice, image, and embodiment principles. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammadhasani, N., Fabio, R. A., Fardanesh, H., & Hatami, J. (2015). The link between visual attention and memory in ADHD and normally developing students: seeing is remembering? Italian journal of cognitive science, 1(2), 89–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. A., Richardson, M., Gwernan-Jones, R., Thompson-coon, J., Stein, K., Rogers, M., Garside, R., Logan, S., Ford, T. J. (2015). Non-pharmacological interventions for ADHD in school settings: An overarching synthesis of systematic reviews. Journal of Attention Disorders.

  • Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated pedagogical agents. Cognition and Instruction, 19(2), 177–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moundridou, M., & Virvou, M. (2002). Evaluating the persona effect of an interface agent in an intelligent tutoring system. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18, 253–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, S. (2001). Classroom strategies used by teachers of students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 20(4), 25-44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nass, C., & Brave, S. (2005). Wired for speech: How voice activates and advances the human-computer relationship. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Payr, S. (2003). The virtual university’s faculty: An overview of educational agents. Applied Artificial Intelligence: An International Journal, 17(1), 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rafalovich, A. (2004). Framing ADHD children: A critical examination of the history, discourse, and everyday experience of attention deficit. Oxford, UK: Lexington Books.

  • Schroeder, N. L., & Adesope, O. O. (2012). A case for the use of pedagogical agents in online learning environments. Journal of Teaching and Learning with Technology, 1(2), 43–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, N. L., & Adesope, O. O. (2013). How does a contextually-relevant peer pedagogical agent in a learner-attenuated system-paced learning environment affect cognitive and affective outcomes? Journal of Teaching and learning with. technology, 2(2), 114–133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schunk, D.H. (2012). Learning theory: An instructional perspective, (6th ed). Boston: Pearson.

  • Shaw, R., Grayson, A., & Lewis, V. (2005). Inhibition, ADHD, and computer games: the inhibitory performance of children with ADHD on computerized tasks and game. Journal of Attention Disorder, 8(4), 160–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sher, B., & Butler, R. (2006). Attention Games: 101 Fun, Easy Games That Help Kids Learn To Focus. Us: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2003). Evolution of human cognitive architecture. In B. Ross (Ed.), the psychology of learning and motivation, vol. 43 (pp. 215–266). San Diego: Academic PRESS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2011). Human cognitive architecture: Why some instructional procedures work and others do not. In K. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), APA Educational Psychology Handbook. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Torgesen, J. K. & Young, K. (1983) Priorities for the use of microcomputers with learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 234–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor Wilcoxson, J. L. (2006). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and creative potential of children: A multiple case study. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B. The Sciences and Engineering, 66(8-B), 4502.

  • van der Meij, H., van der Meij, J., & Harmsen, R. (2015). Animated pedagogical agents effects on enhancing student motivation and learning in a science inquiry learning environment. Education Tech Research Dev, 63, 381–403.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veletsianos, G., & Russell, G. (2014). Pedagogical Agents. In M. Spector, D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, 4th Edition (pp. 759–769) Springer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Woo, H. L. (2008). Designing multimedia learning environments using animated pedagogical agents: Factors and issues. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 25, 203–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yung, H. I., & Pass, F. (2015). Effects of Cueing by a Pedagogical Agent in an Instructional Animation: A Cognitive Load Approach. Educational Technology & Society, 18(3), 153–160.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nasrin Mohammadhasani.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mohammadhasani, N., Fardanesh, H., Hatami, J. et al. The pedagogical agent enhances mathematics learning in ADHD students. Educ Inf Technol 23, 2299–2308 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9710-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-018-9710-x

Keywords

Profiles

  1. Naser Mozayani
  2. Rosa Angela Fabio