Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An Adaptive Coach for Invention Activities

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2017)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 10331))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

A focus in recent AIED research is to create adaptive support for learners in inquiry learning environments. However, only few examples of such support have been demonstrated. Our work focuses on Invention activities, inquiry activities in which students generate representations that explain data presented as contrasting cases. To help teachers implement these activities in their classrooms, we have created and pilot-tested a dedicated adaptive computer coach (the Invention Coach) and are currently evaluating it in a classroom study. The Coach’s pedagogical strategy balances structuring and problematizing, unlike many ITSs, which favor structuring. The Coach is implemented in CTAT as a model-tracing tutor, with a rule-based model that captures its pedagogical coaching strategy, designed in part based on data from human tutors. We describe the Invention Coach and its pedagogical model. We present evidence from our pilot tests that illustrate the tutor’s versatility and provide preliminary evidence of its effectiveness. The contributions of the work are: identifying an adaptive coaching strategy for Invention tasks that balances structuring and problematizing, and an automated coach for a successful instructional method (Invention) for which few tutors have been built.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 79.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 99.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Aleven, V.: Rule-based cognitive modeling for intelligent tutoring systems. In: Nkambou, R., Bourdeau, J., Mizoguchi, R. (eds.) Advances in Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 33–62. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg (2010)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Aleven, V., McLaren, B.M., Sewall, J., van Velsen, M., et al.: Example-tracing tutors: intelligent tutor development for non-programmers. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 26, 224–269 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Anderson, J.R., Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K.R., Pelletier, R.: Cognitive tutors: lessons learned. J. Learn. Sci. 4, 167–207 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bransford, J.D., Franks, J.J., Vye, N.J., Sherwood, R.D.: New approaches to instruction: because wisdom can’t be told. In: Vosniadou, S., Ortony, A. (eds.) Similarity and Analogical Reasoning, pp. 470–497. Cambridge University Press, New York (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chase, C., Marks, J., Bernett, D., Aleven, V.: The design of an exploratory learning environment to support invention. In: Proceedings, Workshop on Intelligent Support in Exploratory and Open-Ended Learning Environments, held during AIED 2015 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chase, C.C., Marks, J., Bernett, D., Bradley, M., Aleven, V.: Towards the development of the invention coach: a naturalistic study of teacher guidance for an exploratory learning task. In: Conati, C., Heffernan, N., Mitrovic, A., Verdejo, M. (eds.) AIED 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9112, pp. 558–561. Springer, Cham (2015). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-19773-9_61

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Chi, M.T.H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., LaVancher, C.: Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognit. Sci. 18, 439–477 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  8. de Jong, T., van Joolingen, W.R.: Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Rev. Educ. Res. 68, 179–201 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Donnelly, D.F., Linn, M.C., Ludvigsen, S.: Impacts and characteristics of computer-based science inquiry learning environments for precollege students. Rev. Educ. Res. 84, 572–608 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Dragon, T., Arroyo, I., Woolf, B.P., Burleson, W., Kaliouby, R., Eydgahi, H.: Viewing student affect and learning through classroom observation and physical sensors. In: Woolf, B.P., Aïmeur, E., Nkambou, R., Lajoie, S. (eds.) ITS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5091, pp. 29–39. Springer, Heidelberg (2008). doi:10.1007/978-3-540-69132-7_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Gobert, J.D., Sao Pedro, M., Raziuddin, J., Baker, R.S.: From log files to assessment metrics: measuring students’ science inquiry skills using educational data mining. J. Learn. Sci. 22, 521–563 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Heffernan, N.T., Koedinger, K.R., Razzaq, L.: Expanding the model-tracing architecture: a 3rd generation intelligent tutor for Algebra symbolization. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 18, 153–178 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hmelo-Silver, C.E., Duncan, R.G., Chinn, C.A.: Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: a response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educ. Psychol. 42, 99–107 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kapur, M., Bielaczyc, K.: Designing for productive failure. J. Learn. Sci. 21, 45–83 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., Clark, R.E.: Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: an analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educ. Psychol. 41, 75–86 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Koedinger, K.R., Aleven, V.: Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 19, 239–264 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kuhn, D., Crowell, A.: Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents’ thinking. Psychol. Sci. 22, 545–552 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Loibl, K., Roll, I., Rummel, N.: Towards a theory of when and how problem solving followed by instruction supports learning. Educ. Psychol. Rev., 1–23 (2016). https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-016-9379-x

  19. Loibl, K., Rummel, N.: Knowing what you don’t know makes failure productive. Learn. Instruct. 34, 74–85 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Marks, J., Bernett, D., Chase, C.C.: The invention coach: integrating data and theory in the design of an exploratory learning environment. Int. J. Des. Learn. 7, 74–92 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Mayer, R.E.: Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? Am. Psychol. 59, 14–19 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Mitrovic, A.: Fifteen years of constraint-based tutors: what we have achieved and where we are going. User Model. User Adapt. Interact. 22, 39–72 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Papert S.: Mindstorms: Children, Computers, and Powerful Ideas. Basic Books, Inc., New York (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pea, R.D.: The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. J. Learn. Sci. 13, 423–451 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Poitras, E.G., Lajoie, S.P.: Developing an agent-based adaptive system for scaffolding self-regulated inquiry learning in history education. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 62, 335–366 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Puntambekar, S., Hubscher, R.: Tools for scaffolding students in a complex learning environment: what have we gained and what have we missed? Educ. Psychol. 40, 1–12 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Quintana, C., Reiser, B.J., Davis, E.A., Krajcik, J., et al.: A scaffolding design framework for software to support science inquiry. J. Learn. Sci. 13, 337–386 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Reiser, B.J.: Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J. Learn. Sci. 13(3), 273–304 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Roll, I., Aleven, V., Koedinger, K.R.: Helping students know ‘further’—increasing the flexibility of students’ knowledge using symbolic invention tasks. In: Taatgen, N.A., van Rijn H. (eds.), Proceedings (CogSci 2009), pp. 1169–1174. Cognitive Science Society, Austin (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Roll, I., Aleven, V., Koedinger, K.R.: The invention lab: using a hybrid of model tracing and constraint-based modeling to offer intelligent support in inquiry environments. In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds.) ITS 2010. LNCS, vol. 6094, pp. 115–124. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi:10.1007/978-3-642-13388-6_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Roll, I., Holmes, N.G., Day, J., Bonn, D.: Evaluating metacognitive scaffolding in guided invention activities. Instruct. Sci. 40, 1–20 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Shemwell, J.T., Chase, C.C., Schwartz, D.L.: Seeking the general explanation: a test of inductive activities for learning and transfer. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 52, 58–83 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Shute, V.J., Glaser, R.: A large-scale evaluation of an intelligent discovery world: smithtown. Interact. Learn. Environ. 1, 51–77 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Schwartz, D.L., Martin, T.: Inventing to prepare for future learning: the hidden efficiency of encouraging original student production in statistics instruction. Cognit. Instruct. 22, 129–184 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Schwartz, D.L., Chase, C.C., Oppezzo, M.A., Chin, D.B.: Practicing versus inventing with contrasting cases: the effects of telling first on learning and transfer. J. Educ. Psychol. 103, 759–775 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. VanLehn, K., Lynch, C., Schulze, K., Shapiro, J.A., et al.: The Andes physics tutoring system: lessons learned. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 15, 147–204 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Xun, G.E., Land, S.M.: A conceptual framework for scaffolding III-structured problem-solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 52, 5–22 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research is supported by NSF grant 1361062.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Vincent Aleven & Octav Popescu

  2. Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

    Helena Connolly, Jenna Marks, Marianna Lamnina & Catherine Chase

Authors
  1. Vincent Aleven
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Helena Connolly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Octav Popescu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jenna Marks
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marianna Lamnina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Catherine Chase
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vincent Aleven .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Human-Centered Multimedia, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany

    Elisabeth André

  2. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA

    Ryan Baker

  3. Department of Psychology, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee, USA

    Xiangen Hu

  4. Ateneo de Manila University, Quezon City, Philippines

    Ma. Mercedes T. Rodrigo

  5. University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom

    Benedict du Boulay

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Aleven, V., Connolly, H., Popescu, O., Marks, J., Lamnina, M., Chase, C. (2017). An Adaptive Coach for Invention Activities. In: André, E., Baker, R., Hu, X., Rodrigo, M., du Boulay, B. (eds) Artificial Intelligence in Education. AIED 2017. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10331. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61425-0_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-61425-0_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-61424-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-61425-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation