Group items tagged

Situated cognition theory

I like this website; it gives the connection between situated learning and current educational necessities like modeling, scaffolding. In the class, these are expected from us and it really helps students visualize the target point. Thank you for sharing it with us.

There are many theories in this page that we should be interested in in this page as learning sciences students. An example of two groundbreaking research results in learning sciences is (1) Entwistle's Phenomenography theory This conceptual framework focuses on the experience of learning from the student's perspective and is based upon a phenomenological approach to research. Entwistle explains: "Our task is thus to describe more clearly how learning takes place in higher education and to point out how teaching and assessment affect the quality of learning. From these descriptions teachers should be able to draw their own lessons about how to facilitate their students' learning" (Marton, Hounsell & Entwistle, 1984, p.1). (2) Festinger's Cognitive Dissonance Theory According to cognitive dissonance theory, there is a tendency for individuals to seek consistency among their cognitions (i.e., beliefs, opinions). When there is an inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors (dissonance), something must change to eliminate the dissonance. In the case of a discrepancy between attitudes and behavior, it is most likely that the attitude will change to accommodate the behavior.

A center for cognitive tutor program. The definition from the website: "Our research focuses on the development of Cognitive Tutors -- instructional systems that support guided learning-by-doing. Drawing from the disciplines of artificial intelligence, cognitive psychology and human computer interaction, we develop systems that provide individualized assistance to students as they work on challenging real-world problems in complex domains such as computer programming, algebra and geometry. Individualized guidance is made possible using detailed computational models of skills and misconceptions underlying a learning domain."

Dr Kalyuga is a Professor at the School of Education, the University of New South Wales, where he has worked since 1995. His research interests are in cognitive processes in learning, cognitive load theory, and evidence-based instructional design principles. His specific contributions include detailed experimental studies of the role of learner prior knowledge in learning (expertise reversal effect); the redundancy effect in multimedia learning; the development of rapid online diagnostic assessment methods; and studies of the effectiveness of different adaptive procedures for tailoring instruction to levels of learner expertise

Pınar, I think Carnegie Learning "Success Stories" page does not provide the information whether the research group uses the tutoring system as additional or supportive on top of the control group's traditional lesson content. So if the research group only used the tutoring system then it is a significant result.

I think it was a supportive program because in the report it was stated that the Cognitive Tutor Algebra I curriculum consisted of classroom instruction, software sessions, and text. However, the information provided in the report is not sufficient to make an evaluation of the program, other variables might have influenced the results.

Naturally, there are some disadvantages of cognitive intelligent tutroring systems.

Thank you İbrahim, I think the con about distraction is very important (It requires more discipline, Your child would have to keep his focus on the screen without getting distracted by emails, IM's or Facebook.) Any ideas to prevent getting distracted?

For me it is important to be aware of that in foreign language instruction, the movement of your mouth can be really important in getting pronunciation right. That's harder to teach online. If the subject or homework assignment specifically requires the child to write on paper, it's much harder for an online tutor to read along with the student. So it works better for some subjects

Investing heavily in school computers and classroom technology does not improve pupils' performance, says a global study from the OECD. The think tank says frequent use of computers in schools is more likely to be associated with lower results. The OECD's education director Andreas Schleicher says school technology had raised "too many false hopes". These results worth to be disscussed. Shall we go back to traditional classrooms or continue with technology? If so, how should we use it in the classroom?

It is an important an overwhelming issue about how we integrate technology into education. A well-balanced implementation is required for successful instruction between the use of technology and traditional methods like paper-pencil activities (Hitt, 2011). We should not force technology and traditional instruments like paper-pencil and blackboards fight against themselves. We may play the role of negotiator between the technology and traditional methods.

Perhaps, we need to focus more on the pedagogy rather than the technology.

They say "No one else does what we do" while mentioning their interdisciplinary approach. They say that "The learning sciences field emerged more than two decades ago after researchers found that what worked in a laboratory simply did not hold up with real children, teachers, classrooms and workplaces. They saw that learning technologies, which held great promise for solving education's problems, were not being transferred to classrooms and schools. Cognitive scientists, educational and instructional psychologists, and computer scientists worked together to put their ideas and knowledge to use to improve the learning outcomes for a diverse group." The institute basically do two things: 1 - They identify the critical challenges in education, literacy, mathematics, science and the social sciences. 2- They work to find solutions. Their main aim is to create learning systems for 21st century classrooms thanks to interdisciplinary research in teaching and learning. They believe that learning is a complex process and so they get benefit from different disciplines (e.g. anthropology, computer science, education, linguistics, psychology and sociology) to share knowledge and best practices on education. At their another webpage, they define learning science as a science which "focuses on how to create new, improved and equitable learning environments for 21st century learners.". In order accomplish this, they focus on four questions: 1- How do people learn? 2- What do we want them to know and be able to do? 3- How can we design learning environments that help them learn? 4- How can we monitor what they are learning? They offer a Ph.D. program to raise future learning scientists.

I've watched the video twice and in the end I've felt some concerns about the results of the studies. In the "how people learn" part, researchers were testing the storage and connection system of the brain through some high-tech tools. However, does neuropsychology provide enough evidence on the functioning of the brains? Can we generalize the results to all people from all cultures? I am not the one who is against neuropsychology, but for me one discipline may not give an appropriate answer to such a deep question. My second concern is about the integration of computer programs into the curriculum as a major learning tool. We see a program where "Betty" is speaking and giving feedback on the video. The program seems user friendly, but what about the negative aspects and limitations of the integration of technology into learning? Ok, I agree that we have to adapt to the rapid technological changes in the society. However, is technology the key to all learning processes? Plus, the program is designed on the mapping of the concepts. Does concept mapping make a curriculum compelling all the time? I am not sure about all characteristics of the program, but if it hasn't been designed in a challenging style and if all students come up with the same products, then how will they develop their knowledge and reasoning abilities? I couldn't find an answer to that. As for the part "effective teaching", I am in the same opinion with the researchers that there should be a connection between the real world and the subject taught. Moreover, I think the integration of the disciplines is difficult but a very good way of giving meaning to life. Besides, in the video we see teachers as a guide, as a facilitator and there is no doubt that providing individual support to the students helps students feel more involved.

Firstly, even if it is designed by utilizing modern technology and different understanding, which makes it a more developed and complicated one, the program used in the video reminded me the teaching machines of old times. It gives the priority to the cognitive aspect of learning. This seems to be a one-dimensional approach which underestimates the social aspect of learning. I think the value of classroom interaction for effective learning cannot be replaced by any kind of computer programs. Research on brain is really important and it provides very useful insights for learning and instructional activities. However, it should be supported by the findings of research by social psychologists as well. The very same individual may perform at varying levels when he is taught with the same methods in different environments. I personally experienced many times that even the absence of one individual in my classes affected the teaching an learning processes in a negative or positive way depending upon the classroom dinamics.

The article shows the connection between cognitive neuroscience and mathematics education with experiments.

Sinem this is really a good reading for math educators and have direct applicability to math instruction.

Here is a video showing how a tutor works

Ok, thank you :) I thought if a teacher is using this tool for example, s/he can enter some skills beforehand.

Thank you Halil, it's a very good example. And Canan mentioned a good point but I have a question: If we use these kind of systems, do we need empty tools for teachers which they can fill for their own instructional purposes or do we need a complete environment which teachers will just use?

In human-interaction, 55% of affective information is carried by the body whilst 38% by the voice tone and volume, and only 7% person by the words spoken [1]. Ekman [2] further suggests that non-verbal behaviours are the primary vehicles for expressing emotion. With the availability of computational power, and great advances in the fields of computer vision and speech recognition, it is now possible to create systems that can detect facial expressions, gestures and body postures from video and audio feed. Furthermore, systems that can integrate different modalities can offer powerful and much more pleasant computer experiences as they would be embracing users' natural behaviour.

In the paper it says "According to Wolcott teachers rely on nonverbal means such as eye contact, facial expressions and body language to determine the cognitive states of students, which indicate the degree of success in the instructional transaction". I really wonder what is your opinion about it and would it be succesful to implement affect recognition (after voice-recognition) in intelligent tutoring systems.