Trialog: How peer collaboration helps remediate errors in an ITS

Proceedings of the 21th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference, FLAIRS-21

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 415-420

  Hausmann, Robert G M ^a   Van De Sande, Brett ^a   VanLehn, Kurt ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS; INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEMS; NATURAL LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDINGS; PEER COLLABORATIONS; PRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES;

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; STUDENTS;

INTELLIGENT VEHICLE HIGHWAY SYSTEMS;

EID: 55849104812     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207.
2. Baker, R. S. J. d., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., Evenson, E., Roll, I., Wagner, A. Z., et al. (2006). Adapting to when students game an intelligent tutoring system. In M. Ikeda, K. D. Ashley & T.-W. Chan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 392-401). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
3. Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.
4. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S. A., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25(4), 471-533.
5. Coleman, E. B. (1998). Using explanatory knowledge during collaborative problem solving in science. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 387-427.
6. Craig, S. D., Sullins, J., Witherspoon, A., & Gholson, B. (2006). The deep-level reasoning questions effect: The role of dialog and deep-level reasoning questions during vicarious learning. Cognition and Instruction, 24(4), 565-591.
7. Hausmann, R. G. M. (2006). Why do elaborative dialogs lead to effective problem solving and deep learning? In R. Sun & N. Miyake (Eds.), 28th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1465-1469). Vancouver, B.C.: Sheridan Printing.
8. Hausmann, R. G. M., & VanLehn, K. (2007). Explaining self-explaining: A contrast between content and generation. In R. Luckin, K. R. Koedinger & J. Greer (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: Building technology rich learning contexts that work (Vol. 158, pp. 417-424). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
9. Hill, G. W. (1982). Group versus individual performance: Are N + 1 heads better than one? Psychological Bulletin, 97(3), 517-539.
10. Katz, S., & O'Donnell, G. (1999). The cognitive skill of coaching collaboration. In C. M. Hoadley & J. Roschelle (Eds.), Proceedings of the 1999 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning (pp. 291-299). Stanford, CA.
11. Lesgold, A., Katz, S., Greenberg, L., Hughes, E., & Eggan, G. (1992). Extensions of intelligent tutoring paradigms instructional models in computer-based learning environments. In S. Dijkstra, H. Krammer & J. van Merrienboer (Eds.), Instructional Models in Computer-Based Learning Environments, (pp. 291-311). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
12. Ploetzner, R., Dillenbourg, P., Praier, M., & Traum, D. (1999). Learning by explaining to oneself and to others. In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative learning: Cognitive and computational approaches (pp. 103-121). Oxford: Elsevier.
13. Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M., & Koedinger, K. R. (2007). Can help seeking be tutored? Searching for the secret sauce of metacognitive tutoring. In R. Luckin, K. R. Koedinger & J. Greer (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: Building technology rich learning contexts that work (Vol. 158, pp. 203-210). Amsterdam: IOS Press.
14. Rovick, A. A., & Michael, J. A. (1992). The predictions table: A tool for assessing students' knowledge. American Journal of Physiology, 263(6), S33-S36.
15. Rummel, N., & Spada, H. (2005). Learning to collaborate: An instructional approach to promoting collaborative problem solving in computer-mediated settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 14(2), 201-241.
16. Siegler, R. S., & Crowley, K. (1991). The microgenetic method: A direct means for studying cognitive development. American Psychologist, 46, 606-620.
17. Soller, A. (2004). Computational modeling and analysis of knowledge sharing in collaborative distance learning. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 14, 351-381.
18. Stahl, G. (2004). Building collaborative knowing: Elements of a social theory of learning. In J.-W. Strijbos, P. A. Kirschner & R. Martens (Eds.), What we know about CSCL in higher education (pp. 53-85 ). Amsterdam, NL: Kluwer.
19. VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C. P. (2007). When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive Science, 31(1), 3-62.
20. Walker, E., Koedinger, K., McLaren, B., & Rummel, N. (2006). Cognitive tutors as research platforms: Extending an established tutoring system for collaborative and metacognitive experimentation. In M. Ikeda, K. D. Ashley & T.-W. Chan (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 207-216). Berlin: Springer.