Deconstructionist student models in the computer-based learning of science

  • John Self
Invited Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1108)


Student models are controversial components of computer-based learning systems. The aim of this paper is to review various issues concerned with student modelling and their place within the design process from the point of view of four themes of contemporary thinking: rational, pragmatic, critical and radical. It is seen than many of the recent trends in student modelling research can be related to postmodern ideas about the role of technology.


Critical Thinking Intelligent Tutor System Student Model Pragmatic View Critical Thinker 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Akhras, F. and Self, J.A. (1996). A process-sensitive learning environment architecture, Proc. ITS 96, Montreal.Google Scholar
  2. Brna, P. (1991). Promoting creative confrontations, Journal of Computer-Assisted Learning, 7, 114–122.Google Scholar
  3. Brooks, R.A. (1991). Intelligence without representation, Artificial Intelligence, 47, 139–159.Google Scholar
  4. Chi, M.T.H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M.W., Reimann, P. and Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: how students study and use examples in learning to solve problems, Cognitive Science, 13, 145–182.Google Scholar
  5. Clancey, W.J. (1992). Representations of knowing — in defense of cognitive apprenticeship, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 3, 139–168.Google Scholar
  6. Collins, A. and Stevens, A.L. (1982). Goal and strategies for inquiry teachers, in R. Glaser (ed.), Advances in Instructional Psychology II, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  7. Coyne, R. (1995). Designing Information Technology in the Postmodern Age, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Derrida, J. (1981). Positions, trans. Alan Bass, London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  9. Dillenbourg, P. (1996). Some technical implications of distributed cognition on the design of interactive learning environments, to appear in Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.Google Scholar
  10. Dillenbourg, P. and Self, J.A. (1992). A computational approach to socially distributed cognition, European Journal of Psychology and Education, 7, 353–372.Google Scholar
  11. Dillenbourg, P., Traum, D.R. and Schneider, D. (1996). Grounding in multi-modal task-oriented collaboration, to appear in Proc. EuroAIED, Lisbon.Google Scholar
  12. Dreyfus, H.L. (1992). What Computers Still Can't Do: A Critique of Artificial Reason, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Hoppe, H.U. (1995). The use of multiple student modeling to parameterize group learning, Proc. of the World Conference on Artficial Intelligence in Education, Washington, DC: AACE.Google Scholar
  14. Kay, A. (1991). Computers, networks and education, Scientific American, Sept., 100–107.Google Scholar
  15. Lajoie, S.P. and Derry, S.J., eds. (1993). Computers as Cognitive Tools, Hillsdale: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  16. Lanier, J. (1995). Agents of alienation, Interactions, 11, 3, 66–72.Google Scholar
  17. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  18. Murray, T. (1993). Formative qualitative evaluation for ‘exploratory’ ITS research, Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 4, 179–208.Google Scholar
  19. Paiva, A.M. and Self, J.A. (1995). TAGUS: a user and learner modeling workbench, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 4, 197–226.Google Scholar
  20. Paiva, A.M., Self, J.A. and Hartley, J.R. (1995). Externalising learner models, Proc. AIED 95, 509–516.Google Scholar
  21. Ravenscroft, A., Hartley, J.R. and Mallen, C.L. (1996). The role of qualitative reasoning techniques in intelligent tutoring systems, Proc. ITS96 workshop, Montreal.Google Scholar
  22. Ridgway, J. (1988). Of course ICAI is impossible. worse though, it might be seditious, in J.A. Self (ed.), Artificial Intelligence and Human Learning, London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  23. Searle, J.R. (1980). Minds, brains and programs, The Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 417–457.Google Scholar
  24. Self, J.A. (1988) Student models — what use are they?, in P. Ercoli and R.E. Lewis (eds.), Artificial Intelligence Tools in Education, Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  25. Self, J.A. (1990). Bypassing the intractable problem of student modelling, in C. Frasson and G. Gauthier (eds)., Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.Google Scholar
  26. Self, J.A. (1992). Computational mathetics: the missing link in intelligent tutoring systems research?, in E. Costa (ed.), New Directions for Intelligent Tutoring Systems Research, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  27. Self, J.A. (1994). Formal approaches to student modelling, in J.E. Greer and G.I. McCalla (eds.), Student Modelling: the Key to Individualized Knowledge-Based Instruction, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 295–352.Google Scholar
  28. Self, J.A. (1995a). Dormorbile: a vehicle for metacognition, in T.-W. Chan and J.A. Self (eds.), Emerging Computer Technologies in Education, Charlottesville: AACE.Google Scholar
  29. Self, J.A. (1995b). The ebb and flow of student modelling, Proc. 4th Int. Conf. on Computers in Education, Singapore.Google Scholar
  30. Self, J.A. (1996). Computational Mathetics: the Science of Learning Systems Design, CBLU Report, University of Leeds.Google Scholar
  31. Simon, H.A. (1969). The Sciences of the Artificial, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  32. Talbott, S.L. (1995). The Future Does Not Compute, Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly.Google Scholar
  33. Weizenbaum, J. (1976). Computer Power and Human Reason, San Francisco: Freeman.Google Scholar
  34. Winograd, T. and Flores, F. (1986). Understanding Computers and Cognition: A New Foundation for Design, Reading, Mass.: Addison-WesleyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Self
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Based Learning UnitUniversity of LeedsLeedsEngland

Personalised recommendations