A moving-average assessment over the past five actions set the Surveillance Tutor's feedback window, sized from pilot testing showing participants received more feedback than they could process¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · designr2·q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · checked against its sources 2026-10-27 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · 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.
q2 i? Pilot testing with eye-tracking and post-task interviews showed per-action feedback exceeded what participants could process, so feedback was given only after at least five actions using a moving-average performance state. → Gilbert 2017
Evidence¶
Gilbert 2017¶
Gilbert, S. B., Slavina, A., Dorneich, M. C., Sinatra, A. M., Bonner, D., Johnston, J., Holub, J., MacAllister, A., & Winer, E. (2017). Creating a Team Tutor Using GIFT. Int J Artif Intell Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-017-0151-2
q2 · i? · design · r2
Pilot observational testing of the Surveillance Scenario Tutor during development. Based on "gaze movement, as well as discussions with the participants," the number of actions required for feedback was set at five; no effect size or inferential statistic is printed.
"To determine the window size of five actions, feedback was initially given after every action and the tutor was tested on pilot participants. Using eye-tracking and post-task interviews, it was confirmed that participants received much more feedback than they could process."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- In an initial eye-tracking study, time on action predicted self-explanation (16-second threshold) and gaze shifts were most reliable at detecting its absence — related
- Leave-one-out cross-validation over 36 students confirms significant accuracy and stability gains from eye-tracking in both self-explanation and exploration assessment — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
moving-average-five-action-feedback-window |
title |
A moving-average assessment over the past five actions set the Surveillance Tutor's feedback window, sized from pilot testing showing participants received more feedback than they could process |
description |
A moving-average assessment over the past five actions set the Surveillance Tutor's feedback window, sized from pilot testing showing participants received more feedback than they could process |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
weak |
newest_evidence |
2017 |
source_checked |
2026-10-27 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
1 — gilbert-2017 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.