Advertisement

Coaching Within a Domain Independent Inquiry Environment

  • Toby Dragon
  • Beverly Park Woolf
  • David Marshall
  • Tom Murray
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4053)

Abstract

We describe a portable coaching environment used within a domain-independent inquiry-learning infrastructure. This coach reasons about a student’s knowledge and offers pertinent, domain-specific feedback. It promotes good inquiry behavior by critiquing the student’s hypotheses and supporting data and relationships among propositions. Four inquiry tutors in separate disciplines have been developed that use embedded expert knowledge bases and reusable domain-independent rules. We describe the functionality of the coach within an art history domain, discuss the implementation of the coach, and elaborate on the options given to domain authors for customization.

Keywords

Importance Rating Intelligent Tutor System Computer Support Collaborative Learn Argument Construction Student Argument 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Woolf, B.P., Marshall, D., Mattingly, M., Lewis, J., Wright, S., Jellison, M., Murray, T.: Tracking student propositions in an inquiry system. In: Hoppe, U., Berdeho, F., Kay, J. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Education, Proceedings of AIED 2003, World Conference, pp. 21–28. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Woolf, B.P., Reid, J.K., Stillings, N., Bruno, M., Murray, D., Reese, P., Peterfreund, A., Rath, K.: A General Platform for Inquiry Learning. In: Cerri, S.A., Gouardéres, G., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2363, pp. 681–697. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Murray, T., Park Woolf, B., Marshall, D.: Lessons Learned from Authoring for Inquiry Learning: A Tale of Authoring Tool Evolution. In: Lester, J.C., Vicari, R.M., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3220, pp. 197–206. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruno, M.: Student-active learning in a large classroom. Presented at Project Kaleidoscope 2000 Summer Institute. Keystone, Colorado (2000), http://carbon.hampshire.edu/~mbruno/PKAL2000.html
  5. 5.
    Bruno, M.S., Jarvis, C.D.: It’s Fun, But Is It Science? Goals and Strategies in a Problem-Based Learning Course. The Journal of Mathematics and Science: Collaborative Explorations 4(1), 25–42 (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aleven, V., Ashley, K.D.: Teaching Case-Based Argumentation Through a Model and Examples: Empirical Evaluation of an Intelligent Learning Environment. In: du Boulay, B., Mizoguchi, R. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence in Education, Proceedings of AI-ED 97 World Conference, pp. 87–94. IOS Press, Amsterdam (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Krajcik, J., Blumfeld, P., Marx, R., Bass, K., Fredricks, J., Soloway, E.: Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: Initial attempts by middle school students. The Journal of the Learning Sciences 7(3&4), 313–350 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    White, B., Shimoda, T., Frederiksen, J.: Enabling students to construct theories of collaborative inquiry and reflective learning: computer support for metacognitive development. International J. of Artificial Intelligence in Education 10, 151–182 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Suthers, D., Toth, E., Weiner, A.: An integrated approach to implementing collaborative inquiry in the classroom. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Int’l. Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Alloway, G., Bos, N., Hamel, K., Hammerman, T., Klann, E., Krakcik, J., Lyons, D., Madden, T., Margerum-Leys, J., Reed, J., Scala, N., Soloway, E., Vekiri, I., Wallace, R.: Creating an Inquiry-Learning Environment Using the World Wide Web. In: Proceedings of the Int’l. Conference of Learning Sciences (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murray, T., et al.: Evaluating Inquiry Learning through Recognition Based Tasks. In: International Conference on AIED, Amsterdam (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Aleven, V., Koedinger, K.R., Popescu, O.: A Tutorial Dialog System to Support Self-Explanation: Evaluation and Open Questions. In: Hoppe, U., Verdejo, F., Kay, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on AIED, AI-ED 2003, pp. 39–46. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    White, B., Frederickson, J.: Developing Metacognitive Knowledge and Processes: The Key to Making Scientific Inquiry and Modeling Accessible to All Students. An Overview of the ThinkerTools Inquiry Project (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Suebnukarn, S., Haddawy, P.: A Collaborative Intelligent Tutoring System for Medical Problem-Based Learning. In: International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, January 3-16 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Paolucci, M., Suthers, D., Weiner, A.: Automated Advice-Giving Strategies for Scientific Inquiry. In: Lesgold, A.M., Frasson, C., Gauthier, G. (eds.) ITS 1996. LNCS, vol. 1086, pp. 372–381. Springer, Heidelberg (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shute, V., Glaser, R.: A large-Scale Evaluation of an Intelligent Discovery World: Smithtown. Interactive Learning Environments 1, 51–57 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Toby Dragon
    • 1
  • Beverly Park Woolf
    • 1
  • David Marshall
    • 1
  • Tom Murray
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Massachusetts, AmherstAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations