Expertise, models of learning and computer-based tutoring

In a wide and diverse range of contexts, from academic disciplines through to games and sports, analyses of what it takes to be judged an expert have established a number of common claims. In this paper, we identify and discuss the theoretical significance of this research in relation to a formal, computational theory of expertise (EPAM). The main thrust of our paper is the argument that the theory both helps to identify and explain theoretical limitations on some influential approaches to computer-based tutoring, and oAers a means of overcoming some of these. We argue that, without ‘knowledge-based’ models of the learning process, attempts to develop eAective, computer-based tutoring systems have achieved limited progress towards the goal of helping learners to construct links between their procedural knowledge and conceptual understanding. Current knowledge-based approaches to learner modelling need to be developed in two main directions to reach this goal. First, they will have to integrate a theoretically sound account of the relation between perception and memory (such as that developed within the EPAM approach) in order to build upon what has already been achieved to date in relating processes of learning, memory and problem solving. Second they need an extended theory of declarative (or conceptual) knowledge and its relation to procedural skills. We illustrate how the EPAM model of expertise can be exploited towards these ends, and draw out a number of implications for the design and current limitations of computer-based tutoring systems. # 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

[1]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Cognitive Tutors: Lessons Learned , 1995 .

[2]  A. Newell.  Unified Theories of Cognition , 1990 .

[3]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  EPAM-like Models of Recognition and Learning , 1984, Cogn. Sci..

[4]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987, Cogn. Sci..

[5]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Long-term working memory. , 1995, Psychological review.

[6]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Goals, Representations, and Strategies in a Concept Attainment Task: the EPAM Model , 1997 .

[7]  H B Richman,et al.  Simulation of expert memory using EPAM IV. , 1995, Psychological review.

[8]  Robert Glaser,et al.  Investigating the Cognitive Complexity of Science Assessments , 1998 .

[9]  C. Lebiere,et al.  The Atomic Components of Thought , 1998 .

[10]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Templates in Chess Memory: A Mechanism for Recalling Several Boards , 1996, Cognitive Psychology.

[11]  Robert J. Crutcher,et al.  The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. , 1993 .

[12]  F. Gobet.  SIMULATIONS OF STAGEWISE DEVELOPMENT WITH A SYMBOLIC ARCHITECTURE , 1999 .

[13]  H. Simon,et al.  The mind's eye in chess. , 1973 .

[14]  Alexander Renkl,et al.  Learning from Worked-Out-Examples: A Study on Individual Differences , 1997, Cogn. Sci..

[15]  David Wood,et al.  Vygotsky, Tutoring and Learning. , 1996 .

[16]  B Alexander,et al.  The road to excellence. , 1995, RDH.

[17]  H. Gruber,et al.  Zum Einfluß von Expertise auf Gedächtnisleistungen sowie deren Selbsteinschätzung bei Kindern und Erwachsenen , 1990 .

[18]  Michelene T. H. Chi,et al.  Eliciting Self-Explanations Improves Understanding , 1994, Cogn. Sci..

[19]  D. Wood.  How Children Think and Learn , 1988 .

[20]  F. Gobet.  Expert memory: a comparison of four theories , 1998, Cognition.

[21]  W. Chase,et al.  Visual information processing. , 1974 .

[22]  Paul J. Feltovich,et al.  Categorization and Representation of Physics Problems by Experts and Novices , 1981, Cogn. Sci..

[23]  A. Lam.  Aims of education. , 1978, The Australian nurses' journal. Royal Australian Nursing Federation.

[24]  A. Reber.  Implicit learning and tacit knowledge , 1993 .

[25]  M. Chi.  Knowledge structures and memory development. , 1978 .

[26]  Julian M. Pine,et al.  Modelling the acquisition of syntactic categories , 1997 .

[27]  Annemarie Hauf,et al.  Computers in education , 1983 .

[28]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Rules of the Mind , 1993 .

[29]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Five seconds or sixty? Presentation time in expert memory , 2000, Cogn. Sci..

[30]  M. Day,et al.  The road to excellence [human resource management] , 1999 .

[31]  Patrick Suppes,et al.  Foundations of Probability with Applications: Selected Papers 1974-1995 , 1959 .

[32]  H. Simon,et al.  A simulation of memory for chess positions. , 1973 .

[33]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a Diagram is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words , 1987 .

[34]  Fernand Gobet.  Discrimination nets, production systems and semantic networks: elements of a unified framework , 1996 .

[35]  T. Landauer,et al.  A Solution to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction, and Representation of Knowledge. , 1997 .

[36]  Anthony E. Kelly,et al.  Studies of Diagnosis and Remediation with High School Algebra Students , 1989, Cogn. Sci..

[37]  Paul van Geert.  The Development of Perception, Cognition, and Language: A Theoretical Approach , 1983 .

[38]  H A Simon,et al.  Cue recognition and cue elaboration in learning from examples. , 1996, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[39]  K. A. Ericsson,et al.  Skill and Working Memory , 1982 .

[40]  A. D. D. Groot.  Thought and Choice in Chess , 1978 .

[41]  R. Siegler.  Children's Thinking : What Develops? , 1978 .

[42]  D. A. Grant,et al.  Testing the null hypothesis and the strategy and tactics of investigating theoretical models. , 1962, Psychological review.

[43]  Dorothea P. Simon,et al.  Individual Differences in Solving Physics Problems (1978) , 1978 .

[44]  Douglas A. Grouws,et al.  Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning , 1992 .

[45]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Production systems, learning, and tutoring , 1987 .

[46]  T. P. Carpenter,et al.  Learning and teaching with understanding. , 1992 .