Neither tutoring mode nor human tutor access affects learners' use of conceptual help tools¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3
Currency · newest study 2006 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Average activations of the conceptual help tool were very close across all four tutoring conditions (between 0.50 and 0.56), with no significant effects. → Bruno De Lièvre 2006

Evidence¶

Bruno De Lièvre 2006¶

Bruno De Lièvre, Christian Depover & Pierre Dillenbourg. (2006). The relationship between tutoring mode and learners' use of help tools in distance education. Instructional Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-005-6076-4

q3 · i? · causal · r?

ANOVA on conceptual help activations in the 120-learner four-condition experiment. "None of the variables under consideration has an effect on the use of the conceptual tool"; means ranged only from 0.50 to 0.56 across conditions.

"None of the variables under consideration has an effect on the use of the conceptual tool as confirmed by the analysis of variance (Table 12)."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Learners use navigational help less when a human tutor is accessible, contradicting the expected direction — related
• Proactive tutoring increases learners' use of lexical help tools compared with reactive tutoring — related
• Learners heed proactive promptings more systematically when a human tutor is accessible than when it is not — related
• Proactive tutoring increases learners' use of metacognitive help tools compared with reactive tutoring — related
• Tutor promptings and information items explain only a limited share of variance in help tool use — related