An Empirical Assessment of Comprehension Fostering Features in an Intelligent Tutoring System

This paper describes the design and evaluation of two features in an Intelligent Tutoring System designed to facilitate a deeper conceptual understanding of domain principles in conjunction with the development of procedural skills. The first feature described here relates to the timing of feedback. Some researchers have argued that immediate corrective feedback, as embodied in many cognitive tutors, can block the exercise of activities that may enable students to gain a deeper conceptual understanding of a domain. These include self-monitoring, error detection, and error correction skills. We compare an immediate feedback tutor with a tutor that allows students to reflect on problem solving outcomes, and engage in error detection and correction activities. The other feature reported here is a component of declarative instruction. We assess the use of Example Walkthroughs as a comprehension-fostering tool. Prior to procedural practice, Example Walkthroughs step students through the study of example problems and guide them to reflect on the reasoning involved in going from a problem statement to a solution. An evaluation has shown that the best learning outcomes were associated with a combination of immediate feedback and Example Walkthroughs. There are indications that a combination of lower cognitive load during procedural practice and a robust and accurate encoding of declarative concepts contributed to the observed outcomes.

[1]  Alexander Renkl,et al.  From Studying Examples to Solving Problem: Fading Worked-Out Solution Steps Helps Learning , 2000 .

[2]  Randolph M. Jones,et al.  Cascade Explains and Informs the Utility of Fading Examples to Problems , 2001 .

[3]  Matthew W. Lewis,et al.  Self-Explonations: How Students Study and Use Examples in Learning to Solve Problems , 1989, Cogn. Sci..

[4]  Susan E. Newman,et al.  Cognitive Apprenticeship: Teaching the Craft of Reading, Writing, and Mathematics. Technical Report No. 403. , 1987 .

[5]  Adrienne Y. Lee Using tutoring systems to study learning: An application of HyperCard , 1992 .

[6]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  A small matter of programming , 1993 .

[7]  R. Schmidt,et al.  New Conceptualizations of Practice: Common Principles in Three Paradigms Suggest New Concepts for Training , 1992 .

[8]  David G. Hendry,et al.  Creating, comprehending and explaining spreadsheets: a cognitive interpretation of what discretionary users think of the spreadsheet model , 1994, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[9]  Bonnie A. Nardi,et al.  A Small Matter of Programming: Perspectives on End User Computing , 1993 .

[10]  W. D. Gray,et al.  Transfer of Cognitive Skills , 1987 .

[11]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Locus of feedback control in computer-based tutoring: impact on learning rate, achievement and attitudes , 2001, CHI.

[12]  P. Chandler,et al.  Cognitive Load Theory and the Format of Instruction , 1991 .

[13]  D. C. Merrill,et al.  Tutoring: Guided Learning by Doing , 1995 .

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

[15]  Frederick Reif,et al.  Cognition for Interpreting Scientific Concepts: A Study of Acceleration , 1992 .

[16]  D. C. Shapiro,et al.  Summary knowledge of results for skill acquisition: support for the guidance hypothesis. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[17]  John R. Anderson,et al.  The Transfer of Cognitive Skill , 1989 .

[18]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Reciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities , 1984 .

[19]  L. R Gleitman,et al.  Proceedings of the twenty-second annual conference of the cognitive science society , 2000 .