Why interactive learning environments can have it all: Resolving design conflicts between competing goals

Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 109-118

  Rau, Martina A ^a   Aleven, Vincent ^a   Rummel, Nikol ^b   Rohrbach, Stacie ^a  

^a CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b RUHR UNIVERSITY BOCHUM   (Germany)

Author keywords

Cognitive tutors; Design conflicts; Instructional design; Interactive learning environments

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE TUTORS; EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS; INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNS; INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEM; INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT; ITERATIVE DEVELOPMENT; MULTIPLE DISCIPLINES; MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDERS;

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; HUMAN ENGINEERING; ITERATIVE METHODS; LEARNING SYSTEMS; TEACHING;

DESIGN;

EID: 84877982188     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1145/2470654.2470670     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (33)

1. Soloway, E., Jackson, S. L., Klein, J., Quintana, C., Reed, J., Spitulnik, J., Stratford, S. J., Studer, S., Eng, J. and Scala, N. Learning theory in practice: Case studies of learner-centered design. In Proc. CHI '96, ACM Press, (1996).
2. Design-based research collective. An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educational Researcher, 32, 1 (2003), 5-8.
3. Bereiter, C. and Scardamalia, M. Learning to work creatively with knowledge. In E. de Corte (Ed.), Powerful learning environment, (2003).
4. Jackson, S., Krajcik, J. S. and Soloway, E. The design of guided learner-adaptable scaffolding in interactive learning environments. In Proc. CHI '98, ACM Press, (1998).
5. Koedinger, K. R. Toward evidence for instructional design principles: Examples from Cognitive Tutor Math 6. In Proc. PME/NA XXXII (2002).
6. Mayer, R. E. The promise of multimedia learning: Using the same instructional design methods across different media. Learning and Instruction, 13, 2 (2003), 125-139.
7. van Merrienboer, J. J. G., Clark, R. E. and de Croock, M.B.M. Blueprints for complex learning: The 4C/ID-model. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50, 2 (2002), 39-64.
8. Koedinger, K. and Corbett, A. Cognitive Tutors: Technology bringing learning science to the classroom. Cambridge University Press, 2006.
9. Corbett, A. and Anderson, J. Locus of feedback control in computer-based tutoring: Impact on learning rate, achievement and attitudes. In Proc CHI 2001, ACM Press, (2001).
10. Corbett, A. and Trask, H. Instructional interventions in computer-based tutoring: Differential impact on learning time and accuracy. In Proc CHI 2000, ACM Press, (2000).
11. Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. and Hadley, W. S. Cognitive tutors: From the research classroom to all classrooms. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2001.
12. VanLehn, K. The relative effectiveness of human tutoring, intelligent tutoring systems and other tutoring systems. Educational Psychologist, 46, 4 (2011), 197-221.
13. Corbett, A., Koedinger, K. R. and Anderson, J. R. Intelligent tutoring systems. Elsevier Science Publishers, 1997.
14. Rau, M. A., Aleven, V., Rummel, N., Rohrbach, S. Sense Making Alone Doesn't Do It: Fluency Matters Too! ITS Support for Robust Learning with Multiple Representations. In Proc ITS 2012, Springer, (2012).
15. Ogan, A., Aleven, V. and Jones, C. Pause, predict, and ponder: Use of narrative videos to improve cultural discussion and learning. In Proc CHI 2008, ACM Press,(2008).
16. Corbett, A., Kauffman, L., MacLaren, B., Wagner, A. and Jones, E. A cognitive tutor for genetics problem solving: Learning gains and student modeling. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 42, 2 (2010), 219-239.
17. Ritter, S., Anderson, J. R., Koedinger, K. R. and Corbett, A. T. Cognitive Tutor: Applied research in mathematics education. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 2 (2007), 249-255.
18. Siegler, R. S., Carpenter, T., Fennell, F., Geary, D., Lewis, J., Okamoto, Y., Thompson, L. and Wray, J. Developing effective fractions instruction: A practice guide. U.S. Department of Education, 2010.
19. NMAP. Foundations for Success: Report of the National Mathematics Advisory Board Panel. U.S. Government Printing Office, 2008.
20. NCTM Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 2000.
21. Schraagen, J. M., Chipman, S. F. and Shalin, V. L. Cognitive Task Analysis. Erlbaum Associates, 2000.
22. Baker, R. S. J. d., Corbett, A. T. and Koedinger, K. R. The difficulty factors approach to the design of lessons in intelligent tutor curricula. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 17, 4 (2007), 341-369.
23. Aleven, V., McLaren, B. M., Sewall, J., & Koedinger, K.R. Example-tracing tutors: A new paradigm for intelligent tutoring systems. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 19, 2, (2009), 105-154.
24. Charalambous, C. Y. and Pitta-Pantazi, D. Drawing on a Theoretical Model to Study Students' Understandings of Fractions. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 64, 3 (2007), 293-316.
25. Beyer, H., & Holtzblatt, K. Contextual Design: Defining Customer-Centered Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.
26. Große, C. S. and Renkl, A. Effects of multiple solution methods in mathematics learning. Learning and Instruction,16 (2006), 122-138.
27. Yang, D.-C. and Reys, R. E. One fraction problem, many solution paths. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 7, 3 (2001), 164-166.
28. Reed, J. A structure-mapping model for word problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory ,and Cognition, 13 (1987), 124-139.
29. Thußbas, C. Beeinflussen Cover Stories mathematischer Texaufgaben analogen Transfer in der Mathematik? Zeitschrift für Experimentelle Psychologie, 48, 4 (2001), 272-289.
30. Catrambone, R. and Holyoak, K. J. Learning and subgoals and methods for solving probability problems. Memory & Cognition, 18 (1998), 593-603.
31. Thorndike, E. L. The psychology of arithmetic. Macmillan,1922.
32. Pett, D. and Wilson, T. Color research and its application to the design of instructional materials. Educational Technology Research and Development, 44, 3 (1996), 19-35.
33. Jakobsdottir, S., Krey, C. L. and Sales, G. C. Computer graphics: Preferences by gender in grades 2, 4, and 6. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 2 (1994), 91-100