Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Scaffolding vs. Hints in the Assistment System

  • Conference paper
Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS 2006)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 4053))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 3777 Accesses

Abstract

Razzaq et al, 2005 reported that the Assistment system was causing students to learn at the computer but we were not sure if that was simply due to students getting practice or more due to the "intelligent tutoring" that we created and force students to do if they get an item wrong. Our survey indicated that some students found being forced to do scaffolding sometimes frustrating. We were not sure if all of the time we invested into these "fancy" scaffolding questions was worth it. We conducted a simple experiment to see if students learned on a set of 4 items, if they were given the scaffolds compared with just being given hints that tried to TELL them the same information that the scaffolding questions tried to ASK from them. Our results show that students that were given the scaffolds performed better although the results were not always statistically significant.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Baker, R.S., Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K.R.: Detecting student misuse of intelligent tutoring systems. In: Lester, J.C., Vicari, R.M., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3220, pp. 531–540. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Bloom, B.S.: The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-one Tutoring. Educational Researcher 13, 4–16 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Collins, A., Brown, J.S., Holum, A.: Cognitive Apprenticeship: Making Thinking Visible. American Educator 6(11), 38–46 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Feng, M., Heffernan, N.T., Koedinger, K.R.: Predicting state test scores better with intelligent tutoring systems: Developing metrics to measure assistance required. In: Ikeda, M., Ashley, K.D., Chan, T.-W. (eds.) ITS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4053, pp. 31–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2006), http://nth.wpi.edu/pubs_and_grants/ITS2006/Submissons/Ming/feng.doc

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Graesser, A.C., Person, N., Magliano, J.: Collaborative Dialog Patterns in Naturalistic One-on-One Tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology 9, 359–387 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Koedinger, K.R., Anderson, J.R., Hadley, W.H., Mark, M.A.: Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. In: Proceedings of the 7th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, pp. 421–428. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, Charlottesville (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Merrill, D., Reiser, B., Ranney, M., Trafton, J.: Effective Tutoring Techniques: A Comparison of Human Tutors and Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences 2(3), 277–305 (1992)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Nuzzo-Jones, G., Walonoski, J.A., Heffernan, N.T., Livak, T.: The eXtensible Tutor Architecture: A New Foundation for ITS. In: Looi, C.K., McCalla, G., Bredeweg, B., Breuker, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 12th Artificial Intelligence In Education, pp. 902–904. ISO Press, Amsterdam (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Razzaq, L., Feng, M., Nuzzo-Jones, G., Heffernan, N.T., Koedinger, K.R., Junker, B., Ritter, S., Knight, A., Aniszczyk, C., Choksey, S., Livak, T., Mercado, E., Turner, T.E., Upalekar, R., Walonoski, J.A., Macasek, M.A., Rasmussen, K.P.: The Assistment Project: Blending Assessment and Assisting. In: Looi, C.K., McCalla, G., Bredeweg, B., Breuker, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 12th Artificial Intelligence In Education, pp. 555–562. ISO Press, Amsterdam (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  10. VanLehn, K., Graesser, A.C., Jackson, G.T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., Rose, C.P.: When is reading just as effective as one-on-one interactive human tutoring? In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 2259–2264. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Van Lehn, K., Siler, S., Murray, C.: What Makes a Tutorial Event Effective? In: Proceedings of the Twenty-first Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (1998)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science Department, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, 100 Institute Road, Worcester, MA, 01602

    Leena Razzaq & Neil T. Heffernan

Authors
  1. Leena Razzaq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Neil T. Heffernan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. JAIST, 1-1, Asahi-dai, Nomi, 923-1292, Ishikawa, Japan

    Mitsuru Ikeda

  2. Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Kevin D. Ashley

  3. Graduate Institute of Network Learning Technology, National Central University, 300, Jhongda Rd., 32001, Jhongli City,Taoyuan County, Taiwan

    Tak-Wai Chan

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Razzaq, L., Heffernan, N.T. (2006). Scaffolding vs. Hints in the Assistment System. In: Ikeda, M., Ashley, K.D., Chan, TW. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4053. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11774303_63

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11774303_63

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-35159-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-35160-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation