AutoTutor's learning gains are virtually equivalent to those of 1-to-1 human tutoring in direct comparisons¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2016 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? In a direct comparison between AutoTutor and 1-to-1 human tutoring with experienced tutors in computer-mediated conversations, learning gains on Newtonian physics were virtually equivalent. → Graesser 2016

Evidence¶

Graesser 2016¶

Graesser, A. C. (2016). Conversations with AutoTutor Help Students Learn. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0086-4

q3 · i? · review · r2

The article reports a direct comparison experiment (cited to VanLehn et al. 2007) in which AutoTutor and experienced human tutors in typed or spoken computer-mediated conversation produced "virtually equivalent" gains on Newtonian physics. No effect size is printed.

"in a direct comparison between AutoTutor and 1-to-1 human tutoring with experienced tutors in computer-mediated conversations (either typed or spoken), the learning gains were virtually equivalent on the topic of Newtonian physics"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The talking head contributes little to AutoTutor's learning gains; the content of the conversation matters — related
• AutoTutor yields average learning gains of 0.3 to 0.8 sigma compared to reading text for an equivalent amount of time — related
• AutoTutor cannot handle most student questions, so student question frequency extinguishes quickly in tutoring sessions — related
• One-to-one human tutoring lifts an ordinary student well beyond the average classroom with an effect of about d = 0.79 (VanLehn, 2011, as reported) — related
• AutoTutor achieved learning gains comparable to human tutors in physics and computer literacy — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Intelligent tutoring systems are reported to improve learning outcomes, especially in structured knowledge domains — a broader claim this one bears on
• Meta-analytic evidence indicates intelligent tutoring systems yield positive learning outcomes compared with non-ITS conditions — a broader claim this one bears on
• ITS significantly outperform large-group human instruction, individual computer-based instruction, and textbooks or workbooks, but not small-group or individual human tutoring — a broader claim this one bears on
• The review reports that AutoTutor improves learning by nearly one letter grade compared with reading a textbook for an equivalent time or with a pretest — related
• ITS substitution: meta-analyses find no significant cognitive learning differences between ITS and human tutoring or small-group instruction — a broader claim this one bears on