CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 183Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningArtificial Intelligence in EducationProblem and Project Based Learning

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 82 of the 82 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Educational chatbots for project-based learning: investigating learning outcomes for a team-based design course

Open access
Kumar, Jeya Amantha·2021·International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
DOI 10.1186/s41239-021-00302-wPMC PMC8670881
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Educational chatbots (ECs) are chatbots designed for pedagogical purposes and are viewed as an Internet of Things (IoT) interface that could revolutionize teaching and learning. These chatbots are strategized to provide personalized learning through the concept of a virtual assistant that replicates humanized conversation. Nevertheless, in the education paradigm, ECs are still novel with challenges in facilitating, deploying, designing, and integrating it as an effective pedagogical tool across multiple fields, and one such area is project-based learning. Therefore, the present study investigates how integrating ECs to facilitate team-based projects for a design course could influence learning outcomes. Based on a mixed-method quasi-experimental approach, ECs were found to improve learning performance and teamwork with a practical impact. Moreover, it was found that ECs facilitated collaboration among team members that indirectly influenced their ability to perform as a team. Nevertheless, affective-motivational learning outcomes such as perception of learning, need for cognition, motivation, and creative self-efficacy were not influenced by ECs. Henceforth, this study aims to add to the current body of knowledge on the design and development of EC by introducing a new collective design strategy and its pedagogical and practical implications.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s41239-021-00302-w

Cites

82 of 82 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 Textit flow diagrams
Fig. 1 Textit flow diagramsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 2 Textit flow diagram for group registration
Fig. 2 Textit flow diagram for group registrationCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 3 Textit flow diagram for peer to peer evaluation
Fig. 3 Textit flow diagram for peer to peer evaluationCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 4 Telegram screenshots of the EC
Fig. 4 Telegram screenshots of the ECCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 5 Study procedure
Fig. 5 Study procedureCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 6 Change in perception pre and post-intervention based on aspects learn from teammates
Fig. 6 Change in perception pre and post-intervention based on aspects learn from teammatesCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 7 Change in perception for the EC group based on aspects learn from teammate
Fig. 7 Change in perception for the EC group based on aspects learn from teammateCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 8 Change in perception pre and post-intervention based on aspects teammates learned from respondents
Fig. 8 Change in perception pre and post-intervention based on aspects teammates learned from respondentsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 9 Graphical representation of issues faced as a team
Fig. 9 Graphical representation of issues faced as a teamCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 10 Change in perception for the EC group based on issues faced as a team
Fig. 10 Change in perception for the EC group based on issues faced as a teamCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 11 Change in perception for the CT group based on issues faced as a team
Fig. 11 Change in perception for the CT group based on issues faced as a teamCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 12 Graphical representation of recommendations pre and post-intervention for both groups
Fig. 12 Graphical representation of recommendations pre and post-intervention for both groupsCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 13 Changes in perception for the EC group based on recommendations for learning improvement as a team
Fig. 13 Changes in perception for the EC group based on recommendations for learning improvement as a teamCC BY · PubMed Central
Fig. 14 Changes in perception for the CT group based on recommendations for learning improvement as a team
Fig. 14 Changes in perception for the CT group based on recommendations for learning improvement as a teamCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 82 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Brockhus, S., van der Kolk, T. E. C., Koeman, B., & Badke-Schaub, P. G. (2014). The influence of ambient green on creative performance. Proceeding of International Design Conference (DESIGN 2014), Croatia, 437–444.
  2. Chan, T. J., Yong, W. K. Y., & Harmizi, A. (2020). Usage of whatsapp and interpersonal communication skills among private university students. Journal of Arts & Social Sciences, 3(January), 15–25.
  3. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research : Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
  4. Haristiani, N., Danuwijaya, A. A., Rifai, M. M., & Sarila, H. (2019). Gengobot: A chatbot-based grammar application on mobile instant messaging as language learning medium. Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, 14(6), 3158–3173.
  5. Khan, A., Ranka, S., Khakare, C., & Karve, S. (2019). NEEV: An education informational chatbot. International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology, 6(4), 492–495.
  6. Lapina, A. (2020). Does exposure to problem-based learning strategies increase postformal thought and need for cognition in higher education students? A quasi-experimental study (Publication No. 28243240) Doctoral dissertation, Texas State University-San Marcos. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
  7. Riel, J. (2020). Essential features and critical issues with educational chatbots: toward personalized learning via digital agents. In: M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Handbook of research on modern educational technologies, applications, and management (pp. 246–262). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218194019400163. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Kumar, J. A.
Affiliations
Universiti Sains Malaysia (MY)
Corresponding author
Kumar, Jeya Amantha
ORCID
Kumar, Jeya Amantha
Venue
International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2021-12
Volume
18
Issue
1
Pages
65-65
ISSN
2365-9440 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1186/s41239-021-00302-w
PMC
PMC8670881
OpenAlex
W4200531362
Cited by
183
References
82
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 59 · 2024: 45 · 2023: 39 · 2022: 13
FWCI
8.54
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Universiti Sains Malaysia (304/PMEDIA/6315219)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Education › Artificial Intelligence in Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
Keywords
educational chatbots, project-based learning, team design, learning outcomes, teamwork, collaboration, need for cognition, creative self-efficacy, virtual assistants, design education

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review