Author(s)

Yang Yang ¹, Qiao Meng ¹

Affiliation(s)

¹ Guangzhou College of Commerce, Guangzhou, China

Corresponding Author

Yang Yang

ABSTRACT

Digital-human teachers offer new ways to strengthen interaction in smart classrooms, yet current designs are often scripted, one-way, and weakly grounded in pedagogy. This study integrates constructivist theory, social presence theory, and Long's (1996) Interaction Hypothesis to derive actionable principles and a design framework for high-quality interaction. Four principles are specified: learner agency and constructive engagement, social presence enhancement, meaningful interaction through negotiation and feedback, and contextual adaptability to classroom constraints. Based on these principles, a three-dimension framework is proposed, comprising knowledge-construction interaction (inquiry questioning, scaffolding, misconception diagnosis, collaborative facilitation), affective resonance interaction (personalized motivation and multimodal socio-emotional cues), and contextual adaptability interaction (phase-, subject-, and school-stage adaptation). The framework translates theory into operational elements that guide how digital-human teachers elicit, guide, respond, and reflect across instructional phases, aiming to improve engagement, reduce interactional distance, and support deeper learning in technology-mediated classrooms.

KEYWORDS

Smart Classrooms; Digital-Human Teachers; Interaction Design; Social Presence; Constructivism

CITE THIS PAPER

Yang Yang, Qiao Meng. Research on Interactive Design of Digital-Human Teachers in Smart Classroom Contexts. Advances in Educational Technology and Psychology (2026) Vol. 10: 37-44. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.23977/aetp.2026.100105.

REFERENCES

[1] Chen, S., Yang, L., Zhang, Y., Zhang, M., Xie, Y., Zhu, Z., & Li, J. (2025). Digital human technology in E-learning: Custom content solutions. Applied Sciences, 15(7), 3807. https://doi.org/10.3390/app15073807
[2] de Jong, T., Lazonder, A. W., Chinn, C. A., Fischer, F., Gobert, J., Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Koedinger, K. R., Krajcik, J. S., Kyza, E. A., Linn, M. C., Pedaste, M., Scheiter, K., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2023). Let’s talk evidence – the case for combining inquiry-based and direct instruction. Educational Research Review, 39, 100536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2023.100536
[3] Gass, S. M., & Mackey, A. (2006). Input, interaction and output: An overview. AILA Review, 19(1), 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.19.03gas
[4] Guo, P., Zhang, Q., Tian, C., Xue, W., & Feng, X. (2024). Digital human techniques for education reform. Proceedings of the 2024 7th International Conference on Educational Technology Management, 173–178. https://doi.org/10.1145/3711403.3711428
[5] Kaur, A., Bhatia, M., & Stea, G. (2022). A survey of smart classroom literature. Education Sciences, 12(2), 86–116. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12020086
[6] Liew, T. W., Zin, N. A. M., Sahari, N., & Tan, S.-M. (2016). The effects of a pedagogical agent's smiling expression on the learner’s emotions and motivation in a virtual learning environment. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 17(5), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v17i5.2350
[7] Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 413–468). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012589042-7/50015-3
[8] Richardson, J. C., Maeda, Y., Lv, J., & Caskurlu, S. (2017). Social presence in relation to students' satisfaction and learning in the online environment: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 402–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.001
[9] Shabani, K., Khatib, M., & Ebadi, S. (2010). Vygotsky's zone of proximal development: Instructional implications and teachers' professional development. English Language Teaching, 3(4), p237. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n4p237
[10] Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1130282268777950720   
[11] Swai, C. T. (2025). A systematic review of classroom technologies supporting student centered teaching. Discover Education, 4(1), 564. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-025-00932-6
[12] Tuo, P., Bicakci, M., Ziegler, A., & Zhang, B. (2025). Measuring personalized learning in the smart classroom learning environment: Development and validation of an instrument. Education Sciences, 15(5), 620. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci15050620
[13] Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard university press. 
[14] Yang, J., Pan, H., Zhou, W., & Huang, R. (2018). Evaluation of smart classroom from the perspective of infusing technology into pedagogy. Smart Learning Environments, 5(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-018-0070-1
[15] Zhan, Z., Wu, Q., Lin, Z., & Cai, J. (2021). Smart classroom environments affect teacher-student interaction: Evidence from a behavioural sequence analysis. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37(2), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.6523

Sponsors, Associates, and Links

---

• Curriculum and Teaching Methodology
  
  
• Transactions on Comparative Education
  
  
• Applied & Educational Psychology
  
  
• Advances in Vocational and Technical Education
  
  
• Adult and Higher Education