Complementary Effects of Sense-Making and Fluency-Building Support for Connection Making: A Matter of Sequence?

Multiple graphical representations can significantly improve students’ learning. To acquire robust knowledge of the domain, students need to make connections between the different graphical representations. In doing so, students need to engage in two crucial learning processes: sense-making processes to build up conceptual understanding of the connections, and fluency-building processes to fast and effortlessly make use of perceptual properties in making connections. We present an experimental study which contrasts two hypotheses on how these learning processes interact. Does understanding facilitate fluency-building processes, or does fluency enhance sense-making processes? And consequently, which learning process should intelligent tutoring systems support first? Our results based on test data and tutor logs show an advantage for providing support for sense-making processes before fluency-building processes. To enhance students’ robust learning of domain knowledge, ITSs should ensure that students have adequate conceptual understanding of connections between graphical representations before providing fluency-building support for connection making.

[1]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Sense Making Alone Doesn't Do It: Fluency Matters Too! ITS Support for Robust Learning with Multiple Representations , 2012, ITS.

[2]  Anna Ertelt,et al.  Fostering the Translation Between External Representations: Does it Enhance Learning with an Intelligent Tutoring Program? , 2008 .

[3]  Mykola Pechenizkiy,et al.  Handbook of Educational Data Mining , 2010 .

[4]  Alexander Renkl,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning: The Worked-Out Examples Principle in Multimedia Learning , 2005 .

[5]  Charalambos Y. Charalambous,et al.  Drawing on a Theoretical Model to Study Students’ Understandings of Fractions , 2007 .

[6]  Jacob Cohen Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[7]  Richard Mayer,et al.  Multimedia Learning , 2001, Visible Learning Guide to Student Achievement.

[8]  Tina Seufert Supporting Coherence Formation in Learning from Multiple Representations , 2003 .

[9]  F. Paas,et al.  Instructional Efficiency: Revisiting the Original Construct in Educational Research , 2008 .

[10]  A. Renkl The worked-out-example principle in multimedia learning , 2005 .

[11]  S. Ainsworth DeFT: A Conceptual Framework for Considering Learning with Multiple Representations. , 2006 .

[12]  Kenneth R. Koedinger Toward Evidence for Instructional Design Principles: Examples from Cognitive Tutor Math 6 , 2002 .

[13]  Philip J. Kellman,et al.  Perceptual Learning and the Technology of Expertise: Studies in Fraction Learning and Algebra. , 2008 .

[14]  Richard S. Newman,et al.  Adaptive and Nonadaptive Help Seeking With Peer Harassment: An Integrative Perspective of Coping and Self-Regulation , 2008 .

[15]  Kenneth R. Koedinger,et al.  A Data Repository for the EDM Community: The PSLC DataShop , 2010 .

[16]  Beverly Park Woolf,et al.  Using an Intelligent Tutor and Math Fluency Training to Improve Math Performance , 2011, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[17]  Hans Spada,et al.  The Active Integration of Information during Learning with Dynamic and Interactive Visualisations , 2004 .

[18]  Albert T. Corbett,et al.  The Knowledge-Learning-Instruction Framework: Bridging the Science-Practice Chasm to Enhance Robust Student Learning , 2012, Cogn. Sci..

[19]  Tina Seufert,et al.  Beyond knowledge: The legacy of competence , 2008 .