MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588012797

Help-seeking with a computer coach in problem-based learning: Its interaction with the knowledge structure of the learning domain and the tasks’ cognitive demands

2004· article· en· W2588012797 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julien Mercier, Carl H. Frederiksen

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)CognitionTUTORComputer scienceDomain (mathematical analysis)PsychologyCognitive scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematics education
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Help-seeking with a computer coach in problem-based learning : Its interaction with the knowledge structure of the learning domain and the tasks’ cognitive demands Julien Mercier (jmercier@cgocable.ca) Applied Cognitive Science Laboratory, McGill University 3700 McTavish St., Montreal, Canada, H3A 1Y2 Carl H. Frederiksen (carl.frederiksen@mcgill.ca) Applied Cognitive Science Laboratory, McGill University 3700 McTavish St., Montreal, Canada, H3A 1Y2 process were elaborated. Statistical analyses were also performed.. The Problem and its Context Research on tutoring has shown that the student’s interaction with the tutor heavily determines the learning outcomes. In human tutoring, the responsibility of the interaction is shared between the tutor and the student (Chi, 2001). In the case of a computer coach such as the McGill Statistics Tutor, the control of the interaction is put entirely in the hands of the learners. Learners’ ability to interact with the system productively therefore represents a critical aspect affecting the learning outcomes. This ability of help seeking (Nelson-LeGall, 1981) has not been well researched from a cognitive science point of view in the context of computer- supported learning (Aleven et al., 2003). The aims of the present work are to elaborate a cognitive model of help seeking and to examine its interaction with critical aspects of the learning situation. Two studies using discourse analysis methodology are conducted using a formal model of the learning domain. Results and Discussion Results show that a help seeking model based on information processing theory is reflected in the data. The components of the model are (1) recognize an impasse, (2) diagnose the impasse, (3) establish a specific need for help, (4) find appropriate help, (5) comprehend help, and (6) evaluate help. Help seeking interacts with the performance of the task and with the structure of the domain knowledge. Help seeking is intertwined with problem solving ; help is sought to fill gaps in students’ knowledge in order to solve the problem. However, student’s use of the computer coach is not optimal since they tend to select help at higher levels in the hierarchical knowledge structure while they tend to problem solve at lower levels. Conclusion These results have implications for the design of computer coaches and instructional situations. These results help characterize the contribution of the learners to the emergence of more or less contingent tutorial interactions. In addition, identifying key skills that students use in problem-based learning situations is a first step in training and assessing those skills. Methodology First-level Participants are 20 graduate students from a faculty of Education of a Canadian university. The seven- hour experiment involves working in pairs to solve a very challenging statistics problem (a two-way analysis of variance) for which students don’t have sufficient background. A computer coach based on human tutoring, the McGill Statistics Tutor, is available to provide help with every aspect of the task. Data consist of three complementary sources. The dialogue between the pair of participants as they work on the statistics problem using the computer coach. The interaction with the computer coach is also recorded, in two forms. First, the display of the computer is recorded using a special device. Second, the computer coach keeps a log of some characteristics of every help request made by the students. The students solutions to the problem are also integrated in the database. Data analysis consists of complementary strategies. Trace analyses of the task performance and the help seeking References Aleven, V., Stahl, E., Schworm, S., Fisher, F., & Wallace, R. (2003). Help Seeking and Help Design in Interactive Learning Environments. Review of Educational Research Chi, M.T.H., Siler, S.A., Jeong, H., Yamauchi, T., & Hausmann, R.G. (2001). Learning from Human Tutoring. Cognitive Science, 25, 471-533. Nelson – Le gall, S. (1981). Help seeking : An understudied problem-solving skill in children. Developmental Review,

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.370
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.198 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)Same topicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningFrench-language works237,207