Abstract
Recent research has emphasized the importance of reflection for students in an intelligent learning environment. But, researchers have not reached a consensus on the most effective ways to design scaffolding to prompt reflection, nor have they accepted a common mechanism that can explain the effects of scaffolding on reflection. Two types of agent prompts to foster reflection are contrasted in this chapter, both from the perspective of a tutee, differing in their specificity. Generic prompts are content-independent tutee questions, aiming at fostering students’ reflection on metacognitive strategies and beliefs regarding their learning-by-teaching activities. Specific prompts, on the other hand, are content-dependent tutee questions that encourage students’ reflection on domain-related and task-specific skills, and articulation of their explanatory responses. This chapter describes the design and effect of these two types of agent prompts, adapted to students’ learning-by-teaching activities, on the learning outcomes, the elicited levels of reflection, and the self-efficacy of the secondary school students.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download to read the full chapter text
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
References
Aleven, V., Koedinger, K.R.: An effective metacognitive strategy: learning by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. Cognitive Science 26, 147–179 (2002)
Aleven, V., Pinkwart, N., Ashley, K., Lynch, C.: Supporting self-explanation of argument transcripts: specific v. generic prompts. In: Proceedings of ITS Workshop of Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Ill-Defined Domains, pp. 47–55 (2006)
Amulya, J.: What is Reflective Practice? (2004), http://www.itslifejimbutnotasweknowit.org.uk/files/whatisreflectivepractice.pdf (accessed April 18, 2009)
Argyris, C., Schön, D.: Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice. FT Press, Mass (1996)
Azevedo, R., Hadwin, A.F.: Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition-Implications for the design of computer-based scaffolds. Instructional Science 33, 367–379 (2005)
Biswas, G., Schwartz, D., Bransford, J.(TAG-V): Technology support for complex problem solving: From SAD Environments to AI. In: Feltovich, F. (ed.) Smart Machines in Education, pp. 71–98. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2001)
Brockbank, A., McGill, I.: Facilitating reflective learning in higher education. Society for Research into Higher Education. Open University Press, Buckingham (1998)
Chang, K.-E., Sung, Y.-T., Chang, R.-B., Lin, S.-C.: A new assessment for computer-based concept mapping. Educational Technology & Society 8(3), 138–148 (2005)
Chen, N.S., Kinshuk, Wei, C.W., Liu, C.C.: Effects of matching teaching strategy to thinking style on learner’s quality of reflection in an online learning environment. Computers & Education 56(1), 53–64 (2011)
Chen, N.S., Wei, C.W., Wu, K.T., Uden, L.: Effects of high level prompts and peer assessment on online learners’ reflection levels. Computers & Education 52(2), 283–291 (2009)
Chen, S.W., Lin, S.C., Chang, K.E.: Attributed concept maps: fuzzy integration and fuzzy matching. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, And Cybernetics 31(5) (2001)
Chi, M.T.H., de Leeuw, N., Chiu, M., LaVancher, C.: Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science 18, 39–477 (1994)
Cohen, J.: Theoretical considerations of peer tutoring. Psychology in the Schools 23, 175–186 (1986)
Cohen, P.A., Kulik, J.A., Kulik, C.C.: Educational outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal 19(2), 237–248 (1982)
Coleman, E.B., Brown, A.L., Rivkin, I.D.: The effect of instructional explanations on formal learning from scientific texts. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 6(4), 347–365 (1997)
Cornford, I.R.: Learning-to-learn strategies as a basis for effective lifelong learning. International Journal of Lifelong Education 21, 57–368 (2002)
Csikszentmihalyi, M.: Intrinsic rewards and emergent motivation. In: Lepper, M.R., Greene, D. (eds.) The Hidden Costs of Reward. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1978)
Davis, E.A.: Scaffolding students’ reflection for science learning. PhD Thesis. University of California, Berkeley, CA (1998)
Davis, E.A.: Prompting middle school science students for productive reflection: Generic and directed Prompts. The Journal of The Learning Sciences 12(1), 91–142 (2003)
Davis, E.A., Linn, M.: Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education 22(8), 819–837 (2000)
Gama, C.: Metacognition in Interactive Learning Environments: The Reflection Assistant Model. In: Lester, J.C., Vicari, R.M., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3220, pp. 668–677. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Gartner, A., Kohler, M., Riessman, F.: Children teach children: Learning by teaching. Harper & Row, New York (1971)
Ge, X., Land, S.M.: A conceptual framework of scaffolding ill-structured problem solving processes using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development 52(2), 5–27 (2004)
Gouli, E., Gogoulou, A., Papanikolaou, K.A., Grigoriadou, M.: An adaptive feedback framework to support reflection, guiding and tutoring. In: Magoulas, G., Chen, S. (eds.) Advances in Web-based Education: Personalized Learning Environments, pp. 178–202. Information Science Publishing, New York (2005)
Graesser, A.C., Person, N.K., Magliano, J.P.: Collaborative dialogue patterns in naturalistic one-to-one Tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology 9, 495–522 (1995)
Graesser, A.C., VanLehn, K., Rose, C., Jordan, P., Harter, D.: Intelligent tutoring systems with conversational dialogue. AI Magazine 22, 39–51 (2001)
Hmelo, C., Day, R.: Contextualized questioning to scaffold learning from simulations. Computers & Education 32, 151–164 (1999)
Katz, S., O’Donnell, G., Kay, H.: An approach to analyzing the role and structure of reflective dialogue. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education 11, 320–333 (2000)
Katzlberger, T.: Learning by teaching agents. PhD Thesis, Vanderbilt University (2005)
King, A., Staffieri, A., Adelgais, A.: Mutual peer tutoring: Effects of structuring tutorial interaction to scaffold peer learning. Journal of Educational Psychology 90(1), 134–152 (1998)
Kornilakis, H., Grigoriadou, M., Papanikolaou, K.A., Gouli, E.: Using WordNet to support interactive concept map construction. In: ICALT (2004)
Kuhn, D., Udell, W.: The development of argument skills. Child Development 74(5), 1245–1260 (2003)
Leelawong, K.: Using the learning-by-teaching paradigm to design intelligent learning environments. PhD Thesis, Vanderbilt University (2005)
Mason, B., Bruning, R.: Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: What the research tells us (2003), http://dwb.unl.edu/Edit/MB/MasonBruning.html
Moon, J.: A Handbook of reflective and experiential learning. Routledge, London (2004)
Moore, J., Whitfield, V.F.: Musing: A way to inform and inpire pedagogy throught self-reflection. The Reading Teacher 61(7), 586–588 (2008)
Mory, E.: Feedback research. In: Jonassen, D.H. (ed.) Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, pp. 919–956. Simon & Schuster Maxmillan, New York (1996)
Ortiz, J.: Reflective practice and student learning in the introductory interpersonal communication course. Technical report, Maricopa Institute for Learning (2006)
Peverly, S.T., Wood, R.: The effects of adjunct questions and feedback on improving the reading comprehension skills of learning-disabled adolescents. Contemporary Educational Psychology 26(1), 25–43 (2001)
Pintrich, P.A., Smith, D.A.F., Garcia, T., McKeachie, W.J.: A manual for the use of the motivated strategies for learning questionnaire. Technical report, The University of Michigan (1993)
Roscoe, R.D., Chi, M.T.H.: The influence of the tutee in learning by peer tutoring. In: Forbus, K., Gentner, D., Regier, T. (eds.) Proceedings of AMCSS, Chicago, pp. 1179–1184 (2004)
Roscoe, R.D., Chi, M.T.H.: Understanding tutor learning: Knowledge-building and knowledge-telling in peer tutors’ explanations and questions. Review of Educational Research 77(4), 534–574 (2007)
Rothkopf, E.: Learning from written instructive materials: An exploration of the control of inspection by test-like events. American Educational Research Journal 3, 241–249 (1966)
Sandoval, W.: Conceptual and epistemic aspects of students´ scientific explanations. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 12(1), 5–51 (2003)
Schön, D.A.: Teaching artistry through reflection-in-action. Educating the Reflective Practitioner. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco (1987)
Schraw, G.: Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science 26, 113–125 (1998)
Surbeck, E., Han, E.P., Moyer, J.E.: Assessing reflective responses in journals. Educational Leadership 48(6), 25–27 (1991)
VanLehn, K., Jones, R.M., Chi, M.T.H.: A model of the self- explanation effect. Journal of the Learning Sciences 2(1), 1–60 (1992)
Weinstein, C.E., Meyer, D.K.: Cognitive learning strategies and college teaching. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 45, 15–26 (1991)
Xie, K., Bradshaw, A.C.: Using question prompts to support ill-structured problem solving in online peer collaborations. International Journal of Technology in Teaching and Learning 4(2), 148–165 (2008)
Zimmerman, B.J.: Self-Efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary Educational Psychology 25(1), 82–91 (2000)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wu, L., Looi, CK. (2013). Incorporation of Agent Prompts as Scaffolding of Reflection in an Intelligent Learning Environment. In: Peña-Ayala, A. (eds) Intelligent and Adaptive Educational-Learning Systems. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, vol 17. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30171-1_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30171-1_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-30170-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-30171-1
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)