Making processes visible: Scaffolding learning with reasoning-congruent representations

  • Douglas C. Merrill
  • Brian J. Reiser
  • Ron Beekelaar
  • Adnan Hamid
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 608)


Reasoning-congruent representations help novices learn about the behavior of objects in a domain and provide a more profitable way for students to plan and implement solutions. We describe the use of visual representations in GIL, a tutor for LISP programming, and examine how this system implements the goals of a reasoning-congruent representation.


Solution Process Intelligent Tutoring System Interactive Learning Environment Congruent Representation Pedagogical Benefit 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    J. R. Anderson, C. F. Boyle, and G. Yost. The geometry tutor. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 5:5–19, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    P. Bayman and R. E. Mayer. Instructional manipulation of users' mental models for electronic calculators. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 20:189–199, 1984.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. G. Bonar and R. Cunningham. Bridge: Tutoring the programming process. In J. Psotka, L. D. Massey, and S. A. Mutter, editors, Intelligent tutoring systems: Lessons learned, pages 409–434. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1988.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. S. Brown. Process versus product: A perspective on tools for communal and informal electronic learning. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 1:179–202, 1985.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. T. H. Chi, M. Bassok, M. W. Lewis, P. Reimann, and R. Glaser. Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13:145–182, 1989.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    M. T. H. Chi, P. Feltovich, and R. Glaser. Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5:121–152, 1981.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A. Collins. Cognitive apprenticeship and instructional technology. In B. F. Jones and L. Idol, editors, Dimensions of thinking and cognitive instruction, pages 121–138. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1990.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    B. du Boulay, T. O'Shea, and J. Monk. The black box inside the glass box: Presenting computing concepts to novices. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 14:237–249, 1981.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    E. P. Glinert and S. L. Tanimoto. Pict: An interactive graphical programming environment. Computer, pages 7–25, 1984.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    J. I. Heller and F. Reif. Prescribing effective human problem-solving processes: Problem description in physics. Cognition and Instruction, 1:177–216, 1984.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    J. H. Larkin and H. A. Simon. Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science, 11:65–99, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. McArthur, C. Stasz, and J. Y. Hotta. Learning problem-solving skills in algebra. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 15(3):303–323, 1986.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    B. J. Reiser, R. Beekelaar, A. Tyle, and D. C. Merrill. GIL: Scaffolding learning to program with reasoning-congruent representations. In The International Conference of the Learning Sciences: Proceedings of the 1991 conference, pages 382–388, Evanston, IL, 1991. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    B. J. Reiser, D. Y. Kimberg, M. C. Lovett, and M. Ranney. Knowledge representation and explanation in GIL, an intelligent tutor for programming. In J. H. Larkin and R. W. Chabay, editors, Computer-assisted instruction and intelligent tutoring systems: Shared goals and complementary approaches, pages 111–149. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    J. G. Trafton and B. J. Reiser. Providing natural representations to facilitate novices' understanding in a new domain: Forward and backward reasoning in programming. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pages 923–927, Chicago, IL, 1991.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    B. Y. White and J. R. Frederiksen. Causal model progressions as a foundation for intelligent learning environments. Artificial Intelligence, 42:99–157, 1990.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Yerushalmy and D. Chazan. Overcoming visual obstacles with the aid of the Supposer. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 21:199–219, 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Douglas C. Merrill
    • 1
  • Brian J. Reiser
    • 1
  • Ron Beekelaar
    • 1
  • Adnan Hamid
    • 1
  1. 1.Cognitive Science LaboratoryPrinceton UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations