Examples and Tutored Problems: How Can Self-Explanation Make a Difference to Learning?

Learning from worked examples has been shown to be superior to unsupported problem solving in numerous studies. Examples reduce the cognitive load on the learner’s working memory, thus helping the student to learn faster or deal with more complex questions. Only recently researchers started investigating the worked example effect in Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITSs). We conducted a study to investigate the effect of using worked examples in combination with supported problem-solving in SQL-Tutor. We had three conditions: Examples Only (EO), Problems Only (PO), and Alternating Examples/Problems (AEP). After completing a problem, students received a self-explanation prompt that focused on the concepts used in the problem, to make sure that students acquire conceptual knowledge. On the other hand, examples were followed by self-explanation prompts that focused on procedural knowledge. The study showed that the AEP and PO conditions outperformed EO in learning gain, while AEP outperformed PO in conceptual knowledge acquisition. Therefore, interleaving examples with supported problems is an optimal choice compared to using examples or supported problems only in SQL-Tutor.

[1]  Antonija Mitrovic,et al.  An Intelligent SQL Tutor on the Web , 2003, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[2]  Tamara van Gog.  Effects of identical example-problem and problem-example pairs on learning , 2011, Comput. Educ..

[3]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Metacognitive Practice Makes Perfect: Improving Students' Self-Assessment Skills with an Intelligent Tutoring System , 2011, AIED.

[4]  M. Chi,et al.  The Content of Physics Self-Explanations , 1991 .

[5]  T. Gog,et al.  Example-Based Learning: Integrating Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Research Perspectives , 2010 .

[6]  M. Chi,et al.  Eliciting Self‐Explanations Improves Understanding , 1994 .

[7]  T. Gog,et al.  Effects of worked examples, example-problem, and problem-example pairs on novices learning , 2011 .

[8]  K. Koedinger,et al.  Exploring the Assistance Dilemma in Experiments with Cognitive Tutors , 2007 .

[9]  Neil T. Heffernan,et al.  Tutored Problem Solving vs. “Pure” Worked Examples , 2009 .

[10]  Richard E. Clark,et al.  Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching , 2006 .

[11]  Carolyn Penstein Rosé,et al.  The Beginning of a Beautiful Friendship? Intelligent Tutoring Systems and MOOCs , 2015, AIED.

[12]  Bruce M. McLaren,et al.  When Is It Best to Learn with All Worked Examples? , 2011, AIED.

[13]  Kurt VanLehn,et al.  The Design of Self-explanation Prompts: The Fit Hypothesis , 2009 .

[14]  John Sweller,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory , 2020, Encyclopedia of Education and Information Technologies.

[15]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  An effective metacognitive strategy: learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based Cognitive Tutor , 2002, Cogn. Sci..

[16]  Antonija Mitrovic,et al.  Revisiting Ill-Definedness and the Consequences for ITSs , 2009, AIED.

[17]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  The worked-example effect: Not an artefact of lousy control conditions , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[18]  Alexander Renkl,et al.  Learning how to use a computer-based concept-mapping tool: Self-explaining examples helps , 2009, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[19]  S. Derry,et al.  Learning from Examples: Instructional Principles from the Worked Examples Research , 2000 .

[20]  Roland Brünken,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory: COGNITIVE LOAD THEORY , 2010 .

[21]  Dirk van Rijn,et al.  Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society , 2003 .