Pursue research yielding conditions and parameters for when to use information giving versus information withholding interactions¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 6 studies (2 causal, 2 review, 1 quant-synthesis, 1 qualitative), q2–q4 · 0 of 6 report an effect size · 1 claim rests on one study

Description¶

The article's forward-looking recommendation is a research strategy: treat Cognitive Tutor experiments comparing forms of interactivity as partial answers to the assistance dilemma, and "emphasize the need for further science to yield specific conditions and parameters that indicate when and to what extent to use information giving versus information withholding forms of interaction." Designers and researchers should seek these conditions rather than assume one interaction form is universally best.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Experimental studies comparing forms of interactivity within tutoring platforms

Constraints¶

• The article states the balance question "remains a fundamental open problem in instructional science"

Target Learners¶

• Students in intelligent-tutoring-based instruction across subject-matter areas

Target Learning Goals¶

• Determining optimal balance of assistance to maximize student learning

Claims¶

• Learning benefits of Cognitive Tutor interactivity are supported to varying extents by a growing body of experimental studies [+W]
• Contingent scaffolding improves learning more than fixed or absent support. [+M]

Related Strategies¶

• Calibrate assistant support forms to preserve users' cognitive participation rather than making every interaction tutor-like

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Kenneth R. Koedinger, Vincent Aleven. (2007). Exploring the Assistance Dilemma in Experiments with Cognitive Tutors. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-007-9049-0