Kirsten Butcher

1
Elaborated Explanations for Visual/Verbal Problem
Solving
Kirsten Butcher
Interactive Communication Cluster July 24, 2006
2
Visual Verbal Information in Geometry
Geometry Cognitive Tutor Angles and Circles
Units.
3
Research Goals

• To understand how coordination between
  integration of visual and verbal knowledge
  influences robust learning
• To explore the potential transfer of
  laboratory-identified multimedia principles to
  classroom context
• To inform the design of effective educational
  multimedia for classroom use

4
Relevant Learning Research

• Learning with Multimedia
• Contiguity Effect (e.g., Mayer, 2001)
• Diagrams support inference-generation
  integration of information (Butcher, 2006)
• Self-explanations Cognitive Tutors
• Self-explanations promote learning (e.g., Chi et
  al., 1994)
• Simple (menu-based) self-explanations support
  Geometry Learning (Aleven Koedinger, 2002)

5
Hypotheses Sense-making Scaffolds

• Contiguity
• Work receive feedback in diagram
• Integrated Hints
• Apply verbal hints to visual problem situation
  (diagram)
• Elaborated Explanations
• Visual explanations to justify problem-solving

6
Hypotheses Sense-making Scaffolds

• Contiguity
• Work receive feedback in diagram
• Integrated Hints
• Apply verbal hints to visual problem situation
  (diagram)
• Elaborated Explanations
• Visual explanations to justify problem-solving

7
Connections to PSLC Theory

• Sense-making
• Coordinative Learning Integrate results from
  multiple inputs representations.
• Verbal information
• Visual information
• Scaffolds change the format of the interface to
  promote coordinative learning.
• Contiguous representation reduces mapping
  supports inferences made directly from diagram
• Integrated hints reduce mapping support
  recognition of critical visual elements

8
Hypotheses Sense-making Scaffolds

• Contiguity
• Work receive feedback in diagram
• Integrated Hints
• Apply verbal hints to visual problem situation
  (diagram)
• Elaborated Explanations
• Visual explanations to justify problem-solving

9
Connections to PSLC Theory

• Sense-making
• Interactive Communication Tutor prompts
  explanations
• Students explain geometry principles that
  justify problem-solving steps
• Students receive feedback and hints on
  explanations
• Scaffold Elaborated explanations require student
  to explain the application of geometry
  principles
• Rationale for explanations are visual in nature
• Diagram Condition Visual format for explanation
• Table Condition Verbal format for explanation

10
Existing Tutor Explanations are verbal-only
11
Elaborated Explanations Tutor
12
Elaborated Explanations Tutor
13
Elaborated Explanations Tutor
Demo of the Geometry Cognitive Tutor with
Elaborated Explanations
New Improved! Now with more explanations!
14
Connections to PSLC Theory

• What are the relevant knowledge components?
• (Verbal) Geometry principles.
• E.g., Inscribed Angle Theorem means that the
  measure of the angle is half the measure of the
  intercepted arc.
• (Visual) Geometry elements.
• E.g., Recognizing angles, arcs, and their
  relationships.
• (Integrated) Geometry inferences
• E.g., Recognizing that an arc, which is
  associated with a known (or found) inscribed
  angle, can be found via the Inscribed Angle
  Theorem

15
Knowledge Components vs. Overall Visual Match
16
Knowledge Components vs. Overall Visual Match
17
Mapping Given Information to Elements
18
Integration of Principles and Elements
19
Superficial Strategies of Integration Close
Connected
20
Robust Knowledge Relationships connect Elements
via Principles
21
Difficulty Factors Analysis (DFA) Problem Format
Explanation Type

• 3 Problem Formats
• Diagram
• Quadrant
• Table
• 2 Explanation Types
• Simple Explanations (Reasons Only)
• Elaborated Explanations (Reasons Application)

22
DFA Diagram Problem Format with Simple
Explanations
23
DFA Diagram Problem Format with Elaborated
Explanations
24
DFA Quadrant Problem Format with Elaborated
Explanations
25
DFA Table Problem Format with Elaborated
Explanations
26
DFA Results Given Information
Linear trend for Explanation Type, F (1, 88)
3.8, p .055
27
DFA Results Problem Solving
Linear trend for Explanation Type, F (1, 88)
2.9, p .09
Quadratic effect for Problem Format, F (1, 88)
3.8, p .053 Trend for interaction, F (1, 88)
3.0, p .088
28
Preliminary Results Process

• Observational pilot data
• Longer latency of responses in table condition
  BEFORE entering quantities
• Longer latencies AFTER quantities entered when
  elaborated explanations are required
• Classroom Feedback
• Teachers report student preference for diagram
  tutor
• Students report no perceived differences in the
  amount of work for the elaborated explanations
• Students adapt quickly to the elaborated
  explanations, but performance far from ceiling
  even after successful completion of tutor with
  simple explanations.

29
Next Steps

• Log files??????!!!!
• Think-aloud protocols with elaborated
  explanations
• Summer 2006
• Lab testing of elaborated explanations
• Summer 2006
• In-vivo testing with the elaborated explanations
  contiguous interface (2 X 2)
• Late Fall 2006

30
Research Team

• Vincent Aleven Research Scientist, CMU HCII
• Kirsten Butcher Research Postdoc, Pitt LRDC
• Shelley Evenson Assoc Prof, CMU School of Design
• Octav Popescu Research Programmer, CMU HCII
• Andy Tzou Masters Student CMU HCII Honors
  Program
• Carl Angiolillo Masters Student CMU HCII Honors
  Program
• Grace Leonard Research Associate, CMU HCII
• Thomas Bolster Research Associate, CMU HCII

31
Questions?
32
Extra Slides
33
Existing Tutor Multiple Verbal Inputs
34
Existing Tutor Multiple Visual Inputs
35
Table Condition Noncontiguous
36
Diagram Condition Contiguous
37
Methods Contiguity (Study 1)

• Geometry Cognitive Tutor 2 conditions
• Table (noncontiguous)
• Diagram (contiguous)
• Procedure
• Pretest (in class)
• Training (classroom use of tutor, grade-matched
  pairs randomly assigned to conditions within
  classes)
• Posttest (in class)

38
Assessment 3 types of items
Answers
39
Assessment 3 types of items
40
Assessment 3 types of items
Transfer
41
Preliminary Results Answers
Main effect of test time F (1, 38) 29.5, p lt
.01
42
Preliminary Results Reasons
Main effect of test time F (1, 38) 65.7, p lt
.01
43
Preliminary Results Transfer
3-way interaction Test Time Condition
Ability F (1, 38) 4.3, p lt .05