Systems Perspective of Educational

Technology 4

Chapter Outline
• Introduction to systems
• Education systems
• Educational technology systems
• Intelligent computer-assisted instruction
• Intelligent tutoring systems.

By the End of This Chapter, You Should Be Able To

• Describe the concept of a system, the conditions for the formation of a system,
and three basic principles of systems
• Describe the general structure of an education system
• Describe the general components of an educational technology system
• Elaborate the four basic elements of educational technology system and how
they interact.

Main Learning Activities

1. Discuss with your peers the conditions that form a system. What are the char-
acteristics and components of that system? Use a specific example to illustrate
your ideas.
2. Identify an education system with which you have interacted and list the ele-
ments of that system and typical interactions among those elements along with
some inputs to and outputs from that system.
3. Think about how to view a classroom as a system? What are the typical ele-
ments? How do they typically interact and influence each other? Is the
arrangement of desks and chairs a factor that affect interactions? What are the
typical inputs to and outputs from a classroom system?

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 65

R. Huang et al., Educational Technology, Lecture Notes in Educational Technology,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6643-7_4
66 4 Systems Perspective of Educational Technology
4. Create a concept map depicting an educational technology system that involves
designing, developing, and deploying a system to support secondary school
teachers in creating interactive games for specific learning goals in various
science subjects. You can assume others are responsible for the design and
development. Your task is to depict the larger context in which such a system
is likely to be used. Be sure to indicate the major components of the system and
the dynamic interactions likely to occur over time. The concept map should be
contained on one page and include annotations to indicate the components and
their interactions.

4.1 Introduction to Systems

Austrian biologist Ludwig Von Bertalanffy (1901–1972) is known as one of the

founders of general system theory that was published in 1968. According to Ber-
talanffy, a system is defined as a set of elements standing in interrelation among
themselves and within an environment (Bertalanffy, 1968). Peter Michael Senge
(born 1947) is an American system scientist and the founder of the Society for
Organizational Learning. Senge is known as the author of the book The Fifth
Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, which focuses on
group problem solving using the system-thinking methods in order to convert
companies into learning organizations.
Systems are pervasive in the natural world (e.g., the solar system, the nervous
system, various ecological systems, etc.) as well as in things created by people
(e.g., a governmental system, a school system, a library system, etc.). In short, we
live in and interact with systems every day in many different ways. The focus of
this chapter is on systems involving education and technology, of which there are
many and likely to be many more in the future.
A system is a combination of more than two interacting and interconnected
elements which function as an organic or integrated or coordinated whole. There
are three main aspects of a system (Huang, Sha, & Peng, 2006):

(1) A system consists of two or more elements. Systems are pervasive. Many
objects and processes involve systems.
(2) A system is more than a collection of elements and includes how the
elements are connected and how they interact over time. Systems change
over time. Change and development of each system occurs in the exchange of
material, energy, and information, which can benefit the dynamic stability
and openness of these systems simultaneously.
(3) A system is a kind of bounded whole that is situated in a particular envi-
ronment or context, with input coming from the environment and outputs
going back to the environment. Systems exist in an environment. Each
system
4.1 Introduction to Systems 67
accompanied by its surrounding can generate a larger/broader system, and
those parts contained in the original system can be regarded as the subsystem
of the new one.

Elements of a System
A system can be described in terms of five basic elements (Fig. 4.1): (1) the
various components comprising a system (A, B, C, D in Fig. 4.1); (2) interactions
among the components of a system; (3) the environment in which the system
exists;
(4) inputs from the environment to the system; (5) outputs from the system to the
environment (Mangal & Mangal, 2009).
In general system theory, a system is any collection of interrelated parts that
together constitute a larger whole. These component parts or elements of the
system are intimately linked with one another, either directly or indirectly, and any
change in one or more elements may affect the overall performance of the system,
either beneficially or adversely.
Examples of a System
Solar system and the human body system are the typical examples of a system.
(1) The solar system is made up of the sun and eight planets (Mercury, Venus,
Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) along with smaller planetary
objects; the solar system includes the mutual interactions among these elements
(e.g., gravitational influence), their orbits, as well as influences from the milky
way galaxy which is the environment in which the solar system exists.
(2) The human body is comprised of several systems, including the nervous
system, the skeletal system, the endocrine system, the exocrine system, the blood
circulatory system, the respiratory system, the digestive system, the urinary
system, and the reproductive system. These systems coordinate with each other to
carry out their different physiological functions. The human body exists in an
environment

Intetactions Output from

Input to B system between system into
C
components or another
Sub-systems system

Fig. 4.1 A typical system. Adapted from the Robert Gordon University curriculum;
see http://www2.rgu.ac.uk/celt/pgcerttlt/systems/sys3.htm
68 4 Systems Perspective of Educational Technology

that provides oxygen, water, and nourishment (inputs necessary for life), and there
are outputs from the human body to the environment as well.

4.2 Education Systems

Roger Kaufman (1972) was one of the first to apply a systems approach to edu-
cation. An education system is a man-made system and can be considered as a
subsystem of the society in which it exists. One might think of an education
system as taking inputs from the society (e.g., students) and providing outputs to
society (e.g., graduates). Moreover, an education system could be conceptualized
as a collection of subsystems, such as a school system, a curricular system, a
grading system, and so on.
Elements of an Education System
According to the characteristics of the system, the education system can be cate-
gorized to different levels: (1) macro-level: state, social education system;
(2) meso-level: community and school education system; (3) micro-level: teaching
process, learning process, media development, and other education system. The
school system may be treated as a subsystem of the education system or a system
complete in itself (Mangal & Mangal, 2009). In this chapter, we mainly focus on
the school education system at the meso-level, and the structure of the education
system is shown in Fig. 4.2.
An education system includes four kinds of elements: (1) inputs: pupils,
administration, teachers, material for formal or informal education; (2) processes:
formal or informal education process; (3) outputs: people who have attained
educational objectives, such as grades and abilities; (4) and an environment:
formal learning venues (e.g., schools) and informal learning venues (e.g., home,
café, etc.). In addition, the system consists of interactions among these elements.
An instructional system is a subsystem within an education system, although
one can describe elements and interactions relevant to an instructional system
(e.g., resources, assessments, instructors, students, scaffolding, etc.). One can
also

Environment
Input
Pupils Process Output
Environment

Administration
Environment

Teachers Material Formal or Attainment of

For Formal Or informal Educational
Informal Education Education Objectives
Process

Environment

Fig. 4.2 Structure of an education system. Adapted from Mangal and Mangal (2009)
4.2 Education Systems 69

consider a curriculum as a subsystem within the larger instructional system. In

short, one can elaborate an education system in terms of subsystems.
Principles for an Education System
(1) Overall principle
A system should be effective in fulfilling its purpose. An instructional system
should have integrity, in the sense of being reliably effective; this is the essential
characteristic of a system and the core of system theory. A system is composed of
elements within an environment and should interact in a way that fulfills the
purpose of the system. The overall principle of an education system requires
coordinating the relationships among teachers, learners, and resources.
(2) Feedback principle
A system should be stable. From a system dynamics point of view, there are
two kinds of feedback mechanisms within a system—positive or reinforcing
feedback and negative or balancing feedback (Spector, 2015). As an example, the
moon is orbiting the earth at a speed of more than 3600 km an hour. At that speed,
it would keep going into outer space and not return each day; in this case, one can
say that gravitational attraction of the earth on the moon serves as a balancing
mechanism or a kind of negative feedback control that keeps the system stable and
the moon in orbit around the earth.
The feedback principle tells us that an instructional system also has feedback
mechanisms. One can think of assessments as a kind of balancing mechanism that
helps to keep an instructional system stable. If all students simply attended and
then left without any kind of assessment (neither formative nor summative), the
system would become unstable and unable to attain its intended purpose of
helping stu- dents develop knowledge and master skills. If all that matter in an
instructional system are the number of participants without any consideration of
learning, then the system is unlikely to fulfill its instructional purpose. Some have
criticized early massive open online courses (MOOCs) for this very reason.
(3) Order principle
Order refers to the nature and structural functions of a system. Systems can be
categorized along a simple-to-complex scale. Systems can also be categorized
along a disordered-to-ordered scale. Given the prior mention of thinking about an
edu- cation system as a collection of subsystems, one can then categorize the
subsystems as progressing along these two scales (simple-to-complex, and
disordered- to-ordered).
Typically, an education system will have complex but ordered subsystems. One
might argue that if one thinks in terms of grade-level educational subsystems, they
do progress from simple and relatively disordered at an elementary level to a more
complex and more ordered level as one proceeds to a secondary and tertiary level.
70 4 Systems Perspective of Educational Technology

4.3 Educational Technology from a System’s Perspective

Educational technology is an area that uses systematic methods to analyze educa-

tional problems, design and develop instructional systems to support learning.
A system’s perspective views the various elements and interactions in a systemic
manner, functioning in a well-ordered manner just as a healthy human body with
its various subsystems functioning in a well-ordered manner. In addition to that
sys- temic perspective, instructional designers and educational technologists
typically employ systematic methods and processes to ensure that stable
instructional systems result. This systemic view and the associated systematic
methods and processes have evolved over time, as indicated in the brief overview
of recent educational tech- nology history (see Spector & Ren, 2015, for a more
comprehensive treatment).

4.3.1 Five Stages of Educational Technology

Educational technologies have evolved from simple texts to highly complex and
interactive digital systems. Table 4.1 depicts a simplified view of that
development. The important point here is that education systems have become
very complex, which results in the increasing challenges in designing, developing,
implementing, and supporting these systems.

4.3.2 Typical Educational Technology Systems

With the use of technology in education system, the educational technology sys-
tems are changing rapidly. The typical educational technology systems developed

Table 4.1 Historical stages of educational technology development

Development phase Components Examples
Intuitive instruction teachers, students, textbooks with text and pictures,
(seventeenth and eighteenth textbooks along with physical objects and
centuries) models
Visual instruction the previous components slides, silent movies
(nineteenth and twentieth plus visual artifacts
centuries)
Audiovisual instruction more complex media enter educational television
(1920s–1950s) into consideration
Audiovisual early networked system PLATO
communication begin to appear
(1950s–1970s)
Information and digital media, large media interactive computing systems,
communication repositories, changing augmented and virtual realities, social
technologies (1970s to technologies networking, etc.
present)
4.3 Educational Technology from a System’s Perspective 71
from CAI, ICAI to ITS, with personalized and adaptive learning are more and
more emphasized.

4.3.2.1 Computer-Assisted Instruction (CAI)

The formation of CAI is influenced by machine teaching and program teaching. It
was first used in education and training during the 1950s, such as PLATO (Pro-
grammed Logic for Automated Teaching Operations; see https://chip.web.ischool.
illinois.edu/people/projects/timeline/1960won.html). Early work was done at IBM
and other mainframe computer companies and by Gordon Pask, O.M. Moore, and
others, but CAI grew rapidly in the 1960s when federal funding for research and
development in education and industrial laboratories was implemented. (See
http:// cehdclass.gmu.edu/ndabbagh/Resources/IDKB/models.htm)
CAI is a method of instruction in which there is a purposeful interaction
between a learner and the computer device (having useful instructional material as
software) for helping the individual learner achieve the desired instructional
objectives with his own pace and abilities at his command (Mangal & Mangal,
2009). It stands for the type of instruction aided or carried out with the help of a
computer as a teaching machine.
CAI is characterized as one-to-one interaction between a computer system and
a student; the system elicits responses from a student and provides feedback, and
allowing students to proceed at their own pace. (See https://www.britannica.com/
topic/computer-assisted-instruction). Yet, CAI also has some limitations and
drawbacks: (1) simple man-machine conversation; (2) passive acceptance of
knowledge; (3) single learning style; (4) the stable studying procedure.

Extended Reading
TICCIT (Time-Shared Interactive Computer Controlled Information Televi-
sion) is another major CAI system developed at the University of Texas and
Brigham Young University and funded by a grant from the National Science
Foundation in 1977.
In December, 1971, the National Science Foundation (NSF)
Technological Innovations Group granted a contract to MITRE to further
develop the TICCIT system as a computer-assisted instruction (CAI) system
for com- munity colleges. MITRE subcontracted with the CAI Laboratory at
the University of Texas at Austin and also with the Department of
Instructional Research, Development, and Evaluation of Brigham Young
University to refine the user interface and create the massive amounts of
courseware needed to teach a complete college-level English and algebra
course. A trial imple- mentation of the English and algebra courseware took
place through the 1975–77 school years, and was evaluated by the
Educational Testing Service (ETS).
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TICCIT
72 4 Systems Perspective of Educational Technology

4.3.2.2 Intelligent Computer-Assisted Instruction

In the traditional CAI, the computer is only used as the disseminator of
knowledge, but it does not understand the knowledge that it teaches; moreover, it
does not understand the students beyond a simple parsing of text-based responses.
With the development and maturation of artificial intelligence, AI technology is
used in more sophisticated CAI system so that the CAI system can understand
what to teach, how to teach, and how a student is progressing, which leads to the
emergence of the intelligent computer-assisted instruction (ICAI). ICAI is a kind
of application mode of CAI, which is based on artificial intelligence, cognitive
science, and thinking sciences. ICAI constructs a simple cognitive model of
learners using established characteristics and processes of human thinking.
Through an ICAI system, students can acquire knowledge through individualized
adaptive learning.
ICAI changes the traditional teaching mode. The students get feedback infor-
mation in real time through human–computer interaction, adjusting the learning
pace actively. The whole teaching process is shifted from teacher-centered to
student-centered. In 1970, the first influential ICAI system was the scholar system
that taught South American geography, creating a precedent for ICAI research.
An ICAI system has a computer program that uses artificial intelligence tech-
niques (e.g., a production model, backward chaining, and other means) for repre-
senting knowledge and performing an interaction with a student to stimulate and
control his learning in a given field. In an intelligent instructional system, the
student is actively engaged with the educational environment and his interests and
misunderstandings drive the tutorial dialogue (Bottino & Molfino, 1985).
It must be pointed out, however, that from an educational point of view, ICAI
systems are not only expert systems, but they must also embody suitable models
both for the student’s behavior and for the teaching methodology (Bottino &
Molfino, 1985).

Extended Reading
One of the earliest ICAI systems was SCHOLAR, which is a system
designed to teach South American geography. The program uses a network
of faces and concepts as well as an extensive data base. The original system
allowed the student to conduct a “mixed initiative” dialogue. Allowing
SCHOLAR to ask the student questions and then, with a limited natural
language interface. Permitting the student to ask questions of the system.
This kind of interaction highlights SCHOLAR’s most advanced qualities:
the tutoring component and a limited communication module. These two
features enable the student to interact with SCHOLAR.
See Woodward, J. P., & Carnine, D. W. (1988). Antecedent knowledge
and intelligent computer assisted instruction. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 21(3), 131.
4.3 Educational Technology from a System’s Perspective 73

4.3.2.3 Intelligent Tutoring System

The innovative feature of ICAI was to support individualized learning for
students. Intelligent tutoring system (ITS) is a typical instance of an ICAI system.
ICAI and ITS are often used interchangeably.
An ITS is a computer system that aims to provide immediate and customized
instruction or feedback to learners (Psotka, Massey, & Mutter, 1988), usually
without requiring intervention from a human teacher. It can assist students in
studying a variety of subjects by posing questions, parsing responses, and offering
customized instruction and feedback. During the rapid expansion of the web
boom, new computer-aided instruction paradigms, such as e-learning and
distributed learning, provided an excellent platform for ITS ideas.
The ITS is the typical educational technology system, including four
technology components: (1) domain model, (2) learner model, (3) pedagogical
model, and
(4) interaction model. Figure 4.3 presents a typical ITS architecture.
(1) Domain Model
The term “domain” means a specific field or scope of knowledge, such as algebra,
critical thinking, and psychology. People who have a deep understanding of a
domain are called domain experts. A domain model represents domain experts’
ideas, skills, and the way that they solve domain problems. A good domain model
provides a structure to minimize domain experts’ authoring time and maximize the
quality of the content (Robert et al., 2013).
The domain model contains the set of skills, knowledge, and strategies of the
topic being tutored. It normally contains the ideal expert knowledge and also the
bugs, mal-rules, and misconceptions that students periodically exhibit (Robert et
al., 2013). The domain model consists of the concepts, facts, rules, and problem-
solving strategies of the domain in context. It serves as a source of expert
knowledge, a standard for evaluation of the student’s performance and diagnosis
of errors (Ahuja & Sille, 2013).
(2) Learner Model
We simply need to record, represent, and track characteristics of the learner
before, during, and after learning. The practical problem is that it is expensive to
identify, track, store, update, and later retrieve the ever-growing universal set of
variables.

Domain model Learner model

Pedagogical model

Interface model

Student

Fig. 4.3 Typical architecture of an ITS. Adapted from Ahuja and Sille (2013)
74 4 Systems Perspective of Educational Technology

The mapping problem is that the alignment between the theoretical variables and
computer code is often vague, incomplete, or incompatible.
Learner modeling is the cornerstone of personalized learning. The learner
model is a representation of the system’s assessment of an individual learner’s
current knowledge, including misconceptions, learning styles, personality traits,
and affective states. The system infers this information from interactions between
the system and the learner (Spector, 2015).
The learner model consists of the cognitive, affective, motivational, and other
psychological states that evolves during the course of learning. The learner model
is often viewed as an overlay of the domain model, which changes over the course
of tutoring. For example, knowledge tracing tracks the learner’s progress from
problem to problem and builds a profile of strengths and weaknesses relative to the
domain model (Robert et al., 2013).
(3) Pedagogical Model
The pedagogical model selects appropriate strategies and activities to promote
successful learning given the progress of a particular learner and the associated
information stored in the learner model (Spector, 2015).
The pedagogical model accepts information from the domain models and
student models and devices tutoring strategies with actions. This model regulates
instruc- tional interactions with students. Pedagogical model is closely linked to
the student model, which makes use of knowledge about the student and its own
tutorial goal structure, to devise the pedagogic activity to be presented. It tracks
the learner’s progress, builds a profile of strengths and weaknesses relative to the
production rules (Ahuja & Sille, 2013).
The pedagogical model takes the domain models and learner models as input
and select tutoring strategies, steps, and actions on what the tutor should do next in
the exchange, in mixed-initiative systems, the learners may also take actions, ask
questions, or request help (Aleven et al., 2006). The pedagogical model always
needs to be ready to decide “what to do next” at any point and this is determined
by a pedagogical model that captures the researcher’s pedagogical theories.
(4) Interface Model
The interface model decides how to interpret user input and then how to give
appropriate responses. This requires both specific domain knowledge and some
commonsense knowledge about the world. The learner and system interaction is
traditionally expressed by typed or spoken texts, and recently by multimodal
interactions through mouse clicks, screen touches, facial expressions, eye move-
ments, and gestures (Spector, 2015).
User interface model is the interacting front end of the ITS. It integrates all
types of information needed to interact with learner, through graphics, text,
multimedia, keyboard, mouse-driven menus, etc. Prime factors for user acceptance
are user-friendliness and presentation (Ahuja & Sille, 2013).
The user interface interprets the learner’s contribution through various input
media (speech, typing, clicking) and produces output in different media (text,
diagrams, animations, agents). In addition to the conventional human–computer
4.3 Educational Technology from a System’s Perspective 75

interface features, some recent systems have incorporated natural language inter-
action, speech recognition, and the sensing of learner emotions (Robert et al.,
2013).

Extended Reading
Here is an example of an interaction model involving Microsoft products
that most have probably used. In Microsoft Word, the interaction model
supports the conceptual model of users’ putting a piece of paper into a
typewriter and typing. It also happens to have a lot of features that enable
users to format a page and content in almost any way they can imagine. But
that interaction model sits at its core. With Microsoft Excel, the interaction
model reflects the conceptual model of accountants’ working with accounts
in ledgers that contain rows of entries and columns of numbers and show a
balance. Excel has additional features that make it a much richer experience
than creating a spreadsheet on paper. But at its core is an interaction model
that all users can internalize quickly. The interaction model for Microsoft
PowerPoint reflects the conceptual model of users’ writing on a sheet of
transparent plastic, then placing it on an overhead projector—for those of us
who are old enough to have actually seen this! The interaction model for
each of these products is very different, yet each, in itself, is very clear.

The Typical Example of ITS

AutoTutor is an intelligent tutoring system developed by researchers at the
Institute for Intelligent Systems at the University of Memphis in 1997. The goal
was to help students learn physics, computer literacy, and critical thinking using
an intelligent tutorial (Graesser, Chipman, Haynes, & Olney, 2005).
AutoTutor is a computer tutor that helps students learn by holding a
conversation in natural language (AutoTutor, 2018). It has produced learning
gains across multiple domains (e.g., computer literacy, physics, critical thinking).
Three main research areas of AutoTutor are: human-inspired tutoring strategies,
pedagogical agents, and technology that supports natural language tutoring.
Key Points in This Chapter

(1) A system is defined as a set of elements standing in interrelation among

themselves and within an environment.
(2) A system can be described in terms of five basic elements: the various com-
ponents comprising a system; interactions among the components of a
system; the environment in which the system exists; inputs from the
environment to the system; outputs from the system to the environment.
(3) An education system includes four elements of inputs, process, output, and
environment.
76 4 Systems Perspective of Educational Technology
(4) The educational technology has gone through five stages: intuitive instruction, visual instruction,
audiovisual instruction, audiovisual communication, and information and communication
technologies.
(5) The typical educational technology systems include CAI, ICAI, and ITS.

Learning Resources

• System Dynamics and K-12 Teachers, see https://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan- school-of-

management/15-988-system-dynamics-self-study-fall-1998-spring- 1999/readings/teachers.pdf
• Using System Dynamics to Model and Analyze a Distance Education Program, see
http://www.it.iitb.ac.in/*sri/papers/sysdyn-cdeep-ictd10.pdf.

References
Ahuja, N. J., & Sille, R. (2013). A critical review of development of intelligent tutoring systems: Retrospect, present and
prospect. International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 10(4), 39–48.
Aleven, V., McLaren, B., Roll, I., & Koedinger, K. (2006). Toward meta-cognitive tutoring: A
model of help seeking with a cognitive tutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 16, 101–
128.
AutoTutor. (2018). Retrieved from http://ace.autotutor.org/IISAutotutor/index.html.
Bertalanffy, L. V. (1968). General system theory: foundation, development, applications. IEEE Transactions on Systems
Man & Cybernetics- smc, 4(6), 592.
Bottino, R. M., & Molfino, M. T. (1985). From CAI to ICAI: an educational technical evolution.
Education & Computing, 1(4), 229–233.
Graesser, A. C., Chipman, P., Haynes, B. C., & Olney, A. (2005). AutoTutor: An intelligent tutoring system with mixed-
initiative dialogue. IEEE Transactions in Education, 48, 612–618. Huang, R. H., Sha, J. R., & Peng, S. D. (2006).
Introduction to educational technology. Beijing:
Higher Education Press.
Mangal, S. K., & Mangal, U. (2009). Essentials of educational technology. New Delhi: Asoke K. Ghosh.
Psotka, J., Massey, L. D., & Mutter, S. A. (1988). Intelligent tutoring systems: lessons learned.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Robert, S., Arthur, G., Hu, X., & Heather, H. (2013). Design Recommendations for Intelligence Tutoring System (Vol. 1).
American: The USArmy Research Laboratory.
Spector, J. M. (2015). System dynamics modeling. In J. M. Spector (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of educational
technology (pp. 693–697). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Spector, J. M., & Ren, Y. (2015). History of educational technology. In J. M. Spector (Ed.), The
SAGE Encyclopedia of educational technology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.