Abstract
Implicit in the approaches being taken by current efforts to create intelligent computer-based instruction is the notion that curriculum is almost an epiphenomenon of knowledge-driven instruction. Early computer-based instruction had little control structure other than an absolutely rigid curriculum and was insensitive to the subtleties of different students’ partial knowledge. As a result there was a reaction in the direction of representing the students’ knowledge as a subset of the target or goal knowledge to be taught and simply deciding de novo after each piece of instruction what piece of missing knowledge to teach the student. I am convinced that goal knowledge is as important to intelligent machine activity as it is to human activity and that it also must be well understood and explicitly represented in an instructional system if that system is to be successful in fostering learning.1 This chapter presents an architecture for representing curriculum or goal knowledge in intelligent tutors and is thus a first step toward a theory of curriculum that can inform the design of such systems. To illustrate one way in which such a theory can sharpen our ideas about learning and instruction, the later part of the chapter focuses on the concept of prerequisite that is the basis for existing computer-assisted instruction and shows how that concept has been inadequate in the past.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Anderson, J. R., Boyle, C. F., Farrell, R., & Reiser, B. J. (1984). Cognitive principles in the design of computer tutors (Report No. ONR-84–1). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie-Mellon University, Advanced Computer Tutoring Project.
Bonar, J. (1985). Bite-sized intelligent tutoring. Technical Report. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center, University of Pittsburgh.
Brown, J. S., & Burton, R. R. (1978). Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic mathematical skills. Cognitive Science, 2, 155–192.
Brown, J. S., & VanLehn, K. (1980). Repair theory: A generative theory of bugs in procedural skills. Cognitive Science, 4, 379–426.
Burton, R. R., & Brown, J. S. (1982). An investigation of computer coaching for informal learning activities. In D. Sleeman & J. S. Brown (Eds.), Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 79–98). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Carey, S. (1985). Are children fundamentally different kinds of thinkers and learners than adults? In S. F. Chipman, J. W. Segal, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Vol. 2. Research and open questions. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
Chase, W. G., & Simon, H. A. (1973). Perception in chess. Cognitive Psychology, 4, 55–81.
Chi, M. T. H., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121–152.
Gagné, R. M. (1962). The acquisition of knowledge. Psychological Review, 69, 355–365.
Gagné, R. M. (1971). Conditions of learning. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston.
Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93–104.
Glaser, R., Lesgold, A., & Lajoie, S. (in press). Toward a cognitive theory for the measurement of achievement. In R. R. Ronning, J. Glover, J. C. Conoley, & Witt, J. C. (Eds.), The influence of cognitive psychology on testing. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.
Goldberg, A., & Robson, D. (1983). Smalltalk-80: The language and its implementation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Goldstein, L, & Carr, B. (1977, October). The computer as coach: An athletic paradigm for intellectual education. Proceedings of the 1977 Annual Conference (pp. 227–233). Seattle, WA: Association for Computing Machinery.
de Groot, A. D. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague: Mouton.
Larkin, J. H., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P., & Simon, H. A. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. Science, 208, 1335–1342.
Lesgold, A. M., Lajoie, S., Eastman, R., Eggan, G., Gitomer, D., Glaser, R., Greenberg, L., Logan, D., Magone, M., Weiner, A., Wolf, R., & Yengo, L. (1986, April). Cognitive task analysis to enhance technical skills training and assessment. Technical Report. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center.
Shaughnessy, M. (1977). Errors and expectations. New York: Oxford.
Stefik, M., & Bobrow, D. (1986). Object-oriented programming: Themes and variations. AI Magazine, 6, 40–62.
VanLehn, K. (1983). On the representation of procedures in repair theory. In H. P. Ginsburg (Ed.), The development of mathematical thinking (pp. 197–252). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Young, R. M. & O’Shea, T. (1981). Errors in children’s subtraction. Cognitive Science, 5 152–177.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1988 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lesgold, A. (1988). Toward a Theory of Curriculum for Use in Designing Intelligent Instructional Systems. In: Mandl, H., Lesgold, A. (eds) Learning Issues for Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Cognitive Science. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-6350-7_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-6350-7_6
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-96616-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-6350-7
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive