The review finds empirical evidence that ITS authoring tools benefit non-programmer authors mainly in effectiveness, efficiency, quality of authored artifacts, and usability¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · reviewr3·q3
Currency · newest study 2018 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i? The review reports empirical evidence of benefits of ITS authoring tools for non-programmer authors, especially for authoring learning content and for model-tracing/cognitive and example-tracing tutors. → Diego Dermeval 2018
Evidence¶
Diego Dermeval 2018¶
Diego Dermeval, Ranilson Paiva, Ig Ibert Bittencourt, Julita Vassileva, Daniel Borges. (2018). Authoring Tools for Designing Intelligent Tutoring Systems: a Systematic Review of the Literature. Int J Artif Intell Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0157-9
q3 · i? · review · r3
The review's synthesis of the 33 included studies, which examined evidence of benefits including empirical and non-empirical evaluation. It reports "empirical evidence of the benefits" of authoring tools, especially for authoring learning content and supporting model-tracing/cognitive and example-tracing tutors.
"there is empirical evidence of the benefits (i.e., mainly in terms of effectiveness, efficiency, quality of authored artifacts, and usability) of using ITS authoring tools for non-programmer authors"
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Well-designed courseware enhances efficiency, supports independent student navigation, and lets faculty focus on teaching rather than technical challenges — related
- Model-tracing/cognitive tutors and example-tracing tutors are the predominant ITS types designed with authoring tools, together accounting for almost 40% of included studies — related
- A systematic literature review published from 2009 to June 2016 identified 33 primary studies on ITS authoring tools for non-programmer authors out of 4622 retrieved papers — related
- Apprentice learner models support efficient tutor authoring, more efficient than Example-Tracing with mass production — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
empirical-benefits-its-authoring-tools-nonprogrammers |
title |
The review finds empirical evidence that ITS authoring tools benefit non-programmer authors mainly in effectiveness, efficiency, quality of authored artifacts, and usability |
description |
The review finds empirical evidence that ITS authoring tools benefit non-programmer authors mainly in effectiveness, efficiency, quality of authored artifacts, and usability |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2018 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — diego-dermeval-2018 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.