1 / 14

Quincy Brown

An Experiment Using CTAT to Explore the Role of Self-Regulation in the Robust Learning of Middle School Math. Research Questions & Hypotheses Theoretical Assumptions: Good, Bad & Ugly Using CTAT to test hypotheses The Interface Beneath the Interface: Models & Behavior Graphs

kaoru
Download Presentation

Quincy Brown

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. An ExperimentUsing CTAT to Explore the Role of Self-Regulation in the Robust Learning of Middle School Math • Research Questions & Hypotheses • Theoretical Assumptions: Good, Bad & Ugly • Using CTAT to test hypotheses • The Interface • Beneath the Interface: Models & Behavior Graphs • Lessons Learned • Extensions to the CTAT Interface Tools • Future work Quincy Brown Kallen Tsikalas

  2. Research Questions & Hypotheses • Effect of providing a self-regulatory goal. What is the effect of giving students an explicit self-regulatory goal [to be “error detectives”] on their robust learning and the accuracy of their self-efficacy ratings? • Effect of providing self-regulatory feedback and practice opportunities. What is the effect of providing students with feedback on and practice with a self-regulatory skill [error detection and correction] on their robust learning and the accuracy of their self-efficacy ratings? • Predictive power of accurate self-efficacy ratings. To what extent does the accuracy of students’ self-efficacy ratings effect their learning curve and help-seeking behavior? • Outcome Variables • Accuracy of self-efficacy ratings • Learning curves from CTAT data • Pre-, post-, and delayed post-test scores How sure are you that you can solve this problem? Likert scale (1-10)

  3. Theoretical Assumptions • Interventions that target students’ self-regulatory processes can lead to improved cycles of learning and improved academic and non-academic outcomes. • Examples of self-regulatory interventions are training and/or feedback on motivational beliefs, goal-setting, monitoring, self-judgments, etc. • Providing feedback on self-regulatory skills effects students’ • Ability to create internal feedback and self-assess • Attributions about success or failure • Proficiency at help-seeking • Willingness to invest effort in dealing with feedback information • Cognitive load theory may suggest that attending to errors introduces extraneous load which may diminish robust learning.

  4. Using CTAT to Test Hypotheses • 2x2 factorial design • Control condition = Cognitive Tutor with no self-regulation enhancements’ • Opportunities for assisted practice of cognitive skills • Multiple versions of Cognitive Tutor Error ID Feedback

  5. The Interface Two Versions • Example-Tracing Tutor • Executed in Flash • Steps on separate screens • Dynamic feedback: Students have opportunity to interact with feedback screens • Full Cognitive Tutor • Executive in Flash • Interface represents deep mathematical structure

  6. The CTAT Example-Tracing Interface • Executed in Flash • Steps on separate screens (Flash frames) • Dynamic feedback: Students have opportunity to interact with error feedback on screens (through Flash movies)

  7. The CTAT Cognitive Tutor Interface • Executed in Flash • Streamlined format representing deep structure of mathematics

  8. The CTAT Full Cognitive Tutor Behavior Graph Working Memory Conflict Tree Cognitive Model

  9. The CTAT Full Cognitive TutorProduction Rules • All production rules functioning

  10. The CTAT Example-Tracing Behavior Graph for the CogTutor Interface

  11. Lessons Learned • How to use the CTAT tools • Importance of think-alouds for building example-tracing and production rules • To create correct branching structure • To optimize the number of rules – not more than needed • Potential threats to the efficacy of our intervention: Ken’s talk on design principles • Ideas about new types of learning outcomes (learning curves, help requests that lead to greater learning)

  12. Extensions to CTAT Interface Tools • Multiple screens for one tutor • Navigation between screens that communicates with CTAT • Via ActionScript • Intratutor communication • Separate functions (e.g., visible and invisible Flash movies) for displaying feedback • Adjustments to Flash Widgets • Widgets just to log student actions/ideas rather than to tutor • Debugging of Flash tutorials

  13. Future Work • Extension to mobile devices • Use of student characteristics (e.g., self-efficacy ratings) to guide specific tutoring actions • Use of student characteristics (e.g., accuracy of self-efficacy ratings) to predict learning curves

  14. Special Thanks to… Everyone who helped us figure out what’s going on! • John and Brett for assistance with Flash widgets and communication between Example-Tracing functions and Flash interface • Jonathan and Vincent for assistance with full cognitive tutor development and production • Noboru for assistance with SimStudent • The PLSC Summer School students and staff for their good humor and great ideas!

More Related