The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems, and other tutoring systems

Educational Psychologist

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 197-221

  vanLehn, Kurt ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 82755170505     PISSN: 00461520     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00461520.2011.611369     Document Type: Review

References (140)

1. Aleven, V., Ogan, A., Popescu, O., Torrey, C., & Koedinger, K. R. (2004). Evaluating the effectiveness of a tutorial dialogue system for selfexplanation. In J. Lester, R. M. Vicari & F. Paraguaca (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: Seventh International Conference, ITS 2004 (pp. 443-454). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
2. Anania, J. (1981). The effects of quality of instruction on the cognitive and affective learning of students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
3. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 167-207.
4. Arnott, E., Hastings, P., & Allbritton, D. (2008). Research methods tutor: Evaluation of a dialogue-based tutoring system in the classroom. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 672-694.
5. Azevedo, R., Greene, J. A., & Moos, D. C. (2007). The effect of a human agent's external regulation upon college students' hypermedia learning. Metacognition and Learning, 2, 67-87.
6. Azevedo, R., Moos, D. C., Greene, J. A., Winters, F. I., & Cromley, J. G. (2008). Why is externally-facilitated regulated learning more effective than self-regulated learning with hypermedia? Educational Technology Research and Development, 56, 45-72.
7. Baker, R. S. J. d. (2009). Differences between intelligent tutor lessons, and the choice to go off-task. In Proceedings for the 2nd International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 11-20). Cóordoba, Spain: Universidad de Cóordoba.
8. Baker, R. S. J. d., de Carvalho, A. M. J. A., Raspat, J., Corbett, A., & Koedinger, K. R. (2009). Educational software features that encourage or discourage "gaming the system." Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 475-482). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS.
9. Bausell, R. B., Moody, W. B., & Walzl, F. H. (1972). A factorial study of tutoring versus classroom instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 9, 591-597.
10. Bloom, B. S. (1984). The 2 sigma problem: The search formethods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher, 13, 4-16.
11. Boyer, K. E., Phillips, R., Wallis, M., Vouk, M., & Lester, J. C. (2008). Balancing cognitive and motivational scaffolding in tutorial dialogue. In B. P. Woolf, E. Aimeur, R. Nkambou, & S. P. Lajoie (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 9th International Conference, ITS2008 (pp. 239-249). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
12. Burke, A. J. (1983). Student's potential for learning contrasted under tutorial and group approaches to instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL.
13. Cabalo, J. V., Jaciw, A., & Vu, M.-T. (2007). Comparative effectiveness of Carnegie Learning's Cognitive Tutor Algebra I curriculum: A report of a randomized experiment in the Maui School District. Palo Alto, CA: Empirical Education.
14. Cade, W. L., Copeland, J. L., Person, N., & D'Mello, S. K. (2008). Dialogue modes in expert tutoring. In B. P.Woolf, E. Aimeur, R. Nkambou, & S. P. Lajoie (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 9th International Conference, ITS2008 (pp. 470-479). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
15. Campuzano, L., Dynarski, M., Agodini, R., & Rall, K. (2009). Effectiveness of reading and mathematics software products: Findings from two student cohorts.Washington, DC: Institute of Educational Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
16. Carnegie Learning. (2010). Cognitive tutor effectiveness. Retrieved from http://www.carnegielearning.com/static/webdocs/2010CognitiveTutorEffectiveness.pdf
17. Chae, H. M., Kim, J. H., & Glass, M. S. (2005, May). Effective behaviors in a comparison between novice and expert algebra tutors. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Sixteenth Midwest Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science (MAICS-2005) Conference, Dayton, OH.
18. Chi, M., VanLehn, K., Litman, D., & Jordan, P. (2011). Empirically evaluating the application of reinforcement learning to the induction of effective and adaptive pedagogical strategies. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 21, 99-135.
19. Chi, M., VanLehn, K., Litman, D., & Jordan, P. (in press). An evaluation of pedagogical tutorial tactics for a natural language tutoring systems: A reinforcement learning approach. International Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence.
20. Chi, M. T. H. (1996). Constructing self-explanations and scaffolded explanations in tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 10, S33-S49.
21. Chi, M. T. H. (2009). Active-Constructive-Interactive: A conceptual framework for differentiating learning activities. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1, 73-105.
22. Chi, M. T. H. (2011). The ICAPModule: Guidelines for teachers to increase students' engagement with learning. Unpublished funded proposal to IES, Arizona State University, Tempe.
23. Chi, M. T. H., Roy, M., & Hausmann, R. G. M. (2008). Observing tutorial dialogues collaboratively: Insights about human tutoring effectiveness from vicarious learning. Cognitive Science, 32, 301-342.
24. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S., & Jeong, H. (2004). Can tutors monitor students' understanding accurately? Cognition and Instruction, 22, 363-387.
25. Chi, M. T. H., Siler, S., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R. G. (2001). Learning from human tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471-533.
26. Cho, B.-I., Michael, J. A., Rovick, A. A., & Evens, M.W. (2000). An analysis of multiple tutoring protocols. In G. Gauthier, C. Frasson, & K. Van-Lehn (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 5th International Conference (pp. 212-221). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
27. Christmann, E., & Badgett, J. (1997). Progressive comparison of the effects of computer-assisted on the academic achievement of secondary students. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 29, 325-338.
28. Clark, C. M., Snow, R. E., & Shavelson, R. J. (1976). Three experiments on learning to teach. Journal of Teacher Education, 17, 174-180.
29. Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C.-L. C. (1982). Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 237-248.
30. Collins, A., & Stevens, A. (1982). Goals and strategies for inquiry teachers. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology, Vol. 2 (pp. 65-119). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Cooper, H. M., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
32. Corbett, A. (2001). Cognitive computer tutors: Solving the two-sigma problem. In User modeling: Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference (pp. 137-147). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
33. Corbett, A., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Locus of feedback control in computer-based tutoring: Impact on learning rate, achievement and attitudes. In J. Jacko, A. Sears, M. Beaudouin-Lafon, & R. Jacob (Eds.), Proceedings of ACM CHI 2001 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 245-252). New York, NY: ACM Press.
34. Corbett, A., Wagner, A. Z., Lesgold, S., Ulrich, H., & Stevens, S.M. (2006). The impact of learning of generating vs. selecting descriptions in analyzing algebra example solutions. In S. A. Barab, K. E. Hay, & D. T. Hickey (Eds.), The 7th International Conference of the Learning Sciences (pp. 99-105). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
35. Cordova, D. I., & Lepper, M. R. (1996). Intrinsic motivation and the process of learning: Beneficial effects of contextualization, personalization, and choice. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 715-730.
36. Core, M. G., Moore, J. D., & Zinn, C. (2003). The role of initiative in tutorial dialogue. Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL) (pp. 67-74). Morristown, NJ: Association of Computational Linguistics.
37. Core, M. G., Traum, D. R., Lane, H. C., Swartout, W., Gratch, J., van Lent, M., & Marsella, S. (2006). Teaching negotiation skills through practice and reflection with virtual humans. Simulation, 82, 685-702.
38. Craig, S. D., Driscoll, D. M., & Gholson, B. (2004). Constructing knowledge from dialog in an intelligent tutoring system: Interactive learning, vicarious learning and pedagogical agents. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13, 163-183.
39. Craig, S. D., Sullins, J., Witherspoon, A., & Gholson, B. (2006). The deeplevel reasoning questions effect: The role of dialog and deep-level reasoning questions during vicarious learning. Cognition and Instruction, 24, 563-589.
40. Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2005). What do reading tutors do? A naturalistic study of more and less experienced tutors in reading. Discourse Processes, 40, 83-113.
41. di Eugenio, B., Kershaw, T., Lu, X., Corrigan-Halpern, A., & Ohlsson, S. (2006, May). Toward a computational model of expert tutoring: A first report. Paper presented at the 19th International FLAIRS conference, Melbourne Beach, FL.
42. D'Mello, S. K., King, B., Stolarski, M., Chipman, P., & Graesser, A. C. (2007, October). The effects of speech recognition errors on learner's contributions, knowledge, emotions, and interaction experience. Paper presented at the SLATE, Farmington, PA.
43. Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47, 273-305.
44. Evens, M., & Michael, J. (2006). One-on-one tutoring by humans and machines. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
45. Fletcher, J. D. (2003). Evidence for learning from technology-assisted instruction. In H. F. O'Neil & R. Perez (Eds.), Technology applications in education: A learning view (pp. 79-99). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
46. Fletcher-Flinn, C. M., & Gravatt, B. (1995). The efficacy of computerassisted instruction (CAI): Ameta-analysis. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12, 219-241.
47. Forbes-Riley, K., & Litman, D. (2008). Dependencies between student certainness states and tutor responses in a spoken dialogue corpus. In L. Dybkjaer & W. Minker (Eds.), Recent trends in discourse and dialogue (vol 39, pp. 275-304). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
48. Fossati, D. (2008, June). The role of positive feedback in intelligent tutoring systems. Paper presented at the 46th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Student Research Workshop, Columbus, OH.
49. Fossati, D., Di Eugenio, B., Brown, C., & Ohlsson, S. (2008). Learning linked lists: Experiments with the iList system. In B. P.Woolf, E. Aimeur, R. Nkambou, & S. P. Lajoie (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 9th International Conference, ITS 2008 (pp. 80-89). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
50. Fossati, D., Di Eugenio, B., Ohlsson, S., Brown, C., Chen, L., & Cosejo, D. (2009, July). I learn from you, you learn from me: How to make iList learn from students. Paper presented at the AIED 2009: The 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Brighton, UK.
51. Fox, B. A. (1991). Cognitive and interactional aspects of correction in tutoring. In P. Goodyear (Ed.), Teaching knowledge and intelligent tutoring (pp. 149-172). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
52. Fox, B. A. (1993). The Human Tutorial Dialogue Project: Issues in the design of instructional systems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
53. Frederiksen, N., Donin, J., & Roy, M. (2000, June). Human tutoring as a model for computer tutors: Studying human tutoring from a cognitive perspective. Paper presented at the Modeling Human Teaching Tactics and Strategies: Workshop W1 of ITS2000, Montreal, Canada.
54. Gholson, B., Witherspoon, A., Morgan, B., Brittingham, J. K., Coles, R., Graesser, A. C. Craig, S. D. (2009). Exploring the deep-level reasoning questions effect during vicarious learning among eighth to eleventh graders in the domains of computer literacy and Newtonian physics. Instructional Science, 37, 487-493.
55. Glass, M. S., Kim, J. H., Evens, M., Michael, J., & Rovick, A. (1999, April). Novice vs. expert tutors: A comparison of style. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Midwest Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science Society, Bloomington, IN.
56. Gott, S. P., Lesgold, A., & Kane, R. S. (1996). Tutoring for transfer of technical competence. In B. G. Wilson (Ed.), Constructivist learning environments (pp. 33-48). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Educational Technology.
57. Graesser, A. C., Lu, S., Jackson, G. T., Mitchell, H. H., Ventura, M., Olney, A.,&Louwerse,M.M. (2004).AutoTutor:Atutorwith dialogue in natural language. Behavioral ResearchMethods, Instruments and Computers, 36, 180-193.
58. Graesser, A. C., Person, N., & Magliano, J. (1995). Collaborative dialog patterns in naturalistic one-on-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 9, 359-387.
59. Graesser, A. C., VanLehn, K., Rose, C. P., Jordan, P., & Harter, D. (2001). Intelligent tutoring systems with conversational dialogue. AI Magazine, 22(4), 39-41.
60. Hastings, P., Arnott-Hill, E., & Allbritton, D. (2010). Squeezing out gaming behavior in a dialog-based ITS. In V. Aleven, H. Kay, & J. Mostow (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems 2010 (pp. 204-213).Berlin,Germany: Springer-Verlag.
61. Heffernan, N. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Razzaq, L. (2008). Expanding the Model-Tracing Architecture: A 3rd generation intelligent tutor for algebra symbolization. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 18, 153-178.
62. Heller, J. I., & Reif, F. (1984). Prescribing effective human problem-solving processes: Problem descriptions in physics. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 177-216.
63. Henderlong, J., & Lepper, M. R. (2002). The effects of praise on children's intrinsic motivation: A review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 774-795.
64. Herrmann, T. (1982, August). Effective tutoring in a PSI course: Person vs. computer. Paper presented at the annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
65. Hume, G., Michael, J., Rovick, A., & Evens, M. (1996). Hinting as a tactic in one-on-one tutoring. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(1), 23-49.
66. Jeong, H., Siler, S., & Chi, M. T. H. (1997). Can tutors diagnose students' understanding? In M. G. Shafto & P. Langley (Eds.), Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (p. 959). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
67. Johnson, B. G., Phillips, F., & Chase, L. G. (2009). An intelligent tutoring system for the accounting cycle: Enhancing textbook homework with artificial intelligence. Journal of Accounting Education, 27, 30-39.
68. Johnson, H., & Johnson, P. (1992, January). Different explanatory dialogue styles and their effects on knowledge acquisition by novices. Paper presented at the Procceedings of the Twenty-fifth Hawaii International Conference on System Science, Kauai, HI.
69. Johnson, S. D., Flesher, J. W., Ferej, A., & Jehn, J.-C. (1992). Application of cognitive theory to the design, development, and implementation of a computer-based troubleshooting tutor. Berkeley, CA: National Center for Research in Vocational Education.
70. Johnson, S. D., Flesher, J. W., Jehng, J.-C., & Ferej, A. (1993). Enhancing electrical troubleshooting skills in a computer-coached practice environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 3, 199-214.
71. Katz, S., Allbritton, D., & Connelly, J. (2003). Going beyond the problem given: Howhuman tutors use post-solution discussions to support transfer. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13, 79-116.
72. Katz, S., Connelly, J., & Wilson, C. (2007). Out of the lab and into the classroom: An evaluation of reflective dialogue in Andes. In R. Luckin & K. R. Koedinger (Eds.), Proceedings of AI in Education, 2007 (pp. 425-432). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS.
73. Kluger, A. N., & DeNisi, A. (1996). The effects of feedback intervention on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 254-284.
74. Koedinger, K. R., & Anderson, J. R. (1993). Effective use of intelligent software in high school math classrooms. In P. Brna, S. Ohlsson, & H. Pain (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: Proceedings of the World Conference on AI in Education. Charlottesville, VA: AACE.
75. Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., Hadley, W. H., & Mark, M. A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8(1), 30-43.
76. Kulik, C., & Kulik, J. (1991). Effectiveness of computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 7, 75-91.
77. Kulik, J. A. (1994). Meta-analytic studies of findings on computer-based instruction: An updated analysis. In E. L. Baker & H. F. O'Neil (Eds.), Technology assessment in education and training (pp. 9-33). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
78. Kulik, J. A., Bangert, R. L., & Williams, G.W. (1983). Effects of computerbased teaching on secondary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 19-26.
79. Kulik, J., Kulik, C., & Bangert-Drowns, R. (1985). Effectiveness of computer-based education in elementary schools. Computer in Human Behavior, 1, 59-74.
80. Kulik, J., Kulik, C., & Cohen, P. A. (1980). Effectiveness of computer-based college teaching: A meta-analysis of findings. Review of Educational Research, 50, 524-544.
81. Lane, H. C., & VanLehn, K. (2005). Teaching the tacit knowledge of programming to novices with natural language tutoring. Computer Science Education, 15, 183-201.
82. Lepper, M. R., & Woolverton, M. (2002). The wisdom of practice: Lessons learned from the study of highly effective tutors. In J. Aronson (Ed.), Improving academic achievement: Impact of psychological factors on education (pp. 135-158). New York, NY: Academic.
83. Lepper, M. R., Woolverton, M., Mumme, D. L., & Gurtner, J.-L. (1993). Motivational techniques of expert human tutors: Lessons for the design of computer-based tutors. In S. P. Lajoie & S. J. Derry (Eds.), Computers as cognitive tools (pp. 75-105). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
84. Litman, D., Rose, C. P., Forbes-Riley, K., VanLehn, K., Bhembe, D., & Silliman, S. (2006). Spoken versus typed human and computer dialogue tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, 16, 145-170.
85. Mark, M. A., & Greer, J. E. (1995). The VCR tutor: Effective instruction for device operation. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 209-246.
86. McArthur, D., Stasz, C., & Zmuidzinas, M. (1990). Tutoring techniques in algebra. Cognition and Instruction, 7, 197-244.
87. Mendicino, M., & Heffernan, N. T. (2007). Comparing the learning from intelligent tutoring systems, non-intelligent computer-based versions and traditional classroom instruction. Manuscript submitted for publication.
88. Mendicino, M., Razzaq, L., & Heffernan, N. T. (2009). A comparison of traditional homework to computer-supported homework. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 41, 331-358.
89. Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Merrill, S. K., & Landes, S. (1995). Tutoring: Guided learning by doing. Cognition and Instruction, 13, 315-372.
90. Merrill, D. C., Reiser, B. J., Ranney, M., & Trafton, J. G. (1992). Effective tutoring techniques:Acomparison of human tutors and intelligent tutoring systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 277-306.
91. Moreno, R., Mayer, R. E., Spires, H. A., & Lester, J. C. (2001). The case for social agency in computer-based teaching: Do students learn more deeply when they interact with animated agents? Cognition and Instruction, 19, 177-213.
92. Murray, R. C., & VanLehn, K. (2006). A comparison of decision-theoretic, fixed-policy and random tutorial action selection. In M. Ikeda, K. Ashley, & T.-W. Chan (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 8th International Conference ITS 2006 (pp. 114-123). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
93. Ohlsson, S., Di Eugenio, B., Chow, B., Fossati, D., Lu, X., & Kershaw, T. C. (2007). Beyond the code-and-count analysis of tutoring dialogues. In Artificial intelligence in education (pp. 349-356). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS.
94. Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 117-175.
95. Parvez, S. M. (2007). A pedagogical framework for integrating individual learning style into an intelligent tutoring system Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Lehigh University, Lehigh, PA.
96. Pon-Barry, H., Schultz, K., Bratt, E. O., Clark, B., & Peters, S. (2006). Responding to student uncertainty in spoken tutorial dialogue systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, 16, 171-194.
97. Putnam, R. T. (1987). Structuring and adjusting content for students: A study of live and simulated tutoring of addition. American Educational Research Journal, 24(1), 13-48.
98. Razzaq, L., Mendicino, M., & Heffernan, N. T. (2008). Comparing classroom problem-solving with no feedback to Web-based homework assistance. In B. P. Woolf, E. Aimeur, R. Nkambou, & S. P. Lajoie (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 9th International Conference, ITS2008 (pp. 426-437). Berlin, Germany: Springer.
99. Reif, F., & Scott, L. A. (1999). Teaching scientific thinking skills: Students and computers coaching each other. American Journal of Physics, 67, 819-831.
100. Ritter, F., & Feurzeig, W. (1988). Teaching real-time tactical thinking. In J. Psotka, L. D.Massey, & S. A.Mutter (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: Lessons Learned (pp. 285-301). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
101. Ritter, G. W., Barnett, J. H., Denny, G. S., & Albin, G. R. (2009). The effectiveness of volunteer tutoring programs for elementary and middle school students: Ameta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 3-38.
102. Ritter, S., Kulikowich, J., Lei, P., McGuire, C. L., & Morgan, P. (2007). What evidence matters? A randomized field trial of Cognitive Tutor AlgebraI. In T. Hirashima, U. Hoppe, & S. S. Young (Eds.), Supporting learning flow through integrative technologies (pp. 12-20). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.
103. Roberts, B. (2001, November). COVE--A shiphandling trainer with an attitude. Paper presented at the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference, Orlando, FL.
104. Rose, C. P., Aleven, V., Carey, R., & Robinson, A. (2005). A first evaluation of the instructional value of negotiable problem solving goals on the exploratory learning continuum. In G. I. Mcalla & C.-K. Looi (Eds.), Proceedings of the Artificial Intelligence in Education Conference (pp. 563-570). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.
105. Rose, C. P., Moore, J. D., VanLehn, K., & Allbritton, D. (2001). A comparative evaluation of Socratic versus didactic tutoring. In J. D. Moore & K. Stenning (Eds.), Proceedings of the Twenty-Third Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 897-902). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
106. Schofield, J. W. (1995). Computers, classroom culture and change. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
107. Scott, L. A., & Reif, F. (1999). Teaching scientific thinking skills: Students and computers coaching each other. In S. P. Lajoie & M. Vivet (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education (pp. 285-293). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.
108. Scruggs, T. E., & Richter, L. (1985). Tutoring learning disabled students: A critical review. Learning Disabled Quarterly, 8, 286-298.
109. Shah, F., Evens, M., Michael, J., & Rovick, A. (2002). Classifying student initiatives and tutor responses in human keyboard-to-keyboard tutoring sessions. Discourse Processes, 33(1), 23-52.
110. Shneyderman, A. (2001). Evaluation of the Cognitive Tutor Algebra I program. Miami-Dade County Public Schools, Office of Evaluation and Research, Miami, Florida.
111. Shute, V. J. (1993). A macroadaptive approach to tutoring. Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 4(1), 61-93.
112. Shute, V. J., & Glaser, R. (1990). A large-scale evaluation of an intelligent discovery world. Interactive Learning Environments, 1, 51-76.
113. Siler, S. (2004). Does tutors' use of their knowledge of their students enhance one-to-one tutoring? University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA.
114. Siler, S., Rose, C. P., Frost, T., VanLehn, K., & Koehler, P. (2002, June). Evaluating knowledge construction dialogues (KCDs) versus minilesson within Andes2 and alone. Paper presented at the Workshop on Dialogue-Based Tutoring at ITS 2002, Biaritz, France.
115. Siler, S., & VanLehn, K. (2009). Learning, interactional, and motivational outcomes in one-to-one synchronous computer-mediate versus face-toface tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, 19, 73-102.
116. Sleeman, D., Kelly, A. E., Martinak, R., Ward, R. D., & Moore, J. L. (1989). Studies of diagnosis and remediation with high school algebra students. Cognitive Science, 13, 551-568.
117. Smith, J. E. (2001). The effect of the Carnegie Algebra Tutor on student achievement and attitude in introductory high school algebra. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
118. Smith, S. G., & Sherwood, B. A. (1976). Educational uses of the PLATO computer system. Science, 192, 344-352.
119. Stankov, S., Rosic, M., Zitko, B., & Grubisic, A. (2008). TEx-Sys model for building intelligent tutoring systems. Computer and Education, 51, 1017-1036.
120. Steuck, K., & Miller, T. M. (1997, March). Evaluation of an authentic learning environment for teaching scientific inquiry skills. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
121. Stottler, R., & Panichas, S. (2006, December). A new generation of tactical action officer intelligent tutoring system (ITS). Paper presented at the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conferece (I/ITSEC), Orlando, FL.
122. Suraweera, P., & Mitrovic, A. (2002). Kermit: A constraint-based tutor for database modeling. In S. A. Cerri, G. Gouarderes & F. Paraguacu (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems: 6th International Conference, ITS 2002 (pp. 377-387). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
123. Swanson, J. H. (1992, April). What does it take to adapt instruction to the individual? A case study of one-to-one tutoring. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
124. Timms, M. J. (2007). Using Item Response Theory (IRT) to select hints in an ITS. In R. Luckin, K. R. Koedinger, & J. Greer (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education (pp. 213-221). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS.
125. VanLehn, K. (1988). Student modeling. In M. Polson&J. Richardson (Eds.), Foundations of intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 55-78). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
126. VanLehn, K. (1999). Rule learning events in the acquisition of a complex skill: An evaluation of Cascade. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 179-221.
127. VanLehn, K. (2006). The behavior of tutoring systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, 16, 227-265.
128. VanLehn, K. (2008a). Intelligent tutoring systems for continuous, embedded assessment. In C. A. Dwyer (Ed.), The future of assessment: Shaping teaching and learning (pp. 113-138). New York, NY: Erlbaum.
129. VanLehn, K. (2008b). The Interaction Plateau: Answer-based tutoring < step-based tutoring = natural tutoring (abstract only). In B. P. Woolf, E. Aimeur, R. Nkambou, & S. P. Lajoie (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems 2008 (p. 7). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
130. 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.
131. VanLehn, K., Lynch, C., Schultz, K., Shapiro, J. A., Shelby, R. H., Taylor, L., Wintersgill, M. (2005). The Andes physics tutoring system: Lessons learned. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, 15, 147-204.
132. VanLehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C., Yamauchi, T., & Baggett, W. B. (2003). Human tutoring: Why do only some events cause learning? Cognition and Instruction, 21, 209-249.
133. Wasik, B. A. (1998). Volunteer tutoring programs in reading: A review. Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 266-291.
134. Weerasinghe, A., & Mitrovic, A. (2006). Facilitating deep learning through self-explanation in an open-ended domain. International Journal of Knowledge-based and Intelligent Engineering Systems, 10, 3-19.
135. What Works Clearinghouse. (2009). WWC intervention report: Cognitive Tutor Algebra I. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwccogtutorapp072809.pdf
136. What Works Clearinghouse (2010). WWC intervention report: Carnegie learning curricula and cognitive tutor software. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/wwccogtutorapp083110.pdf
137. Wittwer, J., Nuckles, M., Landmann, N., & Renkl, A. (2010). Can tutors be supported in giving effective explanations? Journal of Educational Psychology, 102(1), 74-89.
138. Wood, D. J., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17, 89-100.
139. Woolf, B. P. (2009). Building intelligent interactive tutors. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufman.
140. Zachary, W., Cannon-Bowers, J., Bilazarian, P., Krecker, D., Lardieri, P., & Burns, J. (1999). The Advanced Embedded Training System (AETS): An intelligent embedded tutoring system for tactical team training. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 257-277.