View source for Mapping Visual and Verbal Information: Integrated Hints in Geometry (Aleven & Butcher)

== Using Elaborated Explanations to Support Geometry Learning  ==
 ''Vincent Aleven and Kirsten Butcher'' 

=== Summary Table ===
{| border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" style="text-align: left;"
| '''PIs''' || Vincent Aleven & Kirsten R. Butcher
|-
| '''Other Contributers''' || <b>Graduate Students:</b> Carl Angioli (CMU HCII), Michael Nugent (Pitt, Computer Science)<br>
<b>Research Programmers/Associates:</b> Octav Popescu (Research Programmer, CMU HCII), Grace Lee Leonard (Research Associate, CMU HCII), Thomas Bolster (Research Associate, CMU HCII)

|-
| '''Study Start Date''' || Planned Start: April 24, 2007
|-
| '''Study End Date''' || Expected End: June 1, 2007
|-
| '''LearnLab Site''' || Central Westmoreland Career & Technology Center (CWCTC)
|-
| '''LearnLab Course''' || Geometry
|-
| '''Number of Students''' || Expected: 120
|-
| '''Total Participant Hours''' || Expected: 480
|-
| '''DataShop''' || (Study not yet completed. Log data will be provided to the DataShop when available)
|}

<BR>

=== Abstract ===
Does integration of visual and verbal knowledge during learning support deep understanding? Can [[robust learning]] be supported implicitly by representations that link relevant [[knowledge components]] in visual and verbal materials? The overall goal of this project is to gain a better understanding of 1) visual and verbal [[knowledge components]] in a problem-solving environment and, 2) how instructional support to promote connections between visual and verbal [[knowledge components]] can support the development of deep understanding. Ultimately, we are interested in [[coordination]] and [[integration]] processes in learning with visual and verbal [[knowledge components]], and how these processes may support [[robust learning]].

We are using the Geometry Cognitive Tutor as a research vehicle for our project. In geometry, visual information is represented pictorially in a problem diagram and verbal/symbolic information is represented in text that contains given and goal information as well as in conceptual rules/principles of geometry. The goal of the research described here is to determine if [[implicit instruction]]al events that use visual cues to map between text and diagrams can support knowledge [[retention]] and [[transfer]]. These visual cues are instantiated in the Geometry Cognitive Tutor by using colored highlighting to connect textual references of geometric features in instructional hints to the visual depictions of those features in the geometry diagram (screen shots provided below, in the <i>Independent Variables</i> section). This [[in vivo experiment|in vivo study]] will take place April - June, 2007.

=== Background & Significance ===
A central question in theories of learning with [[multimedia sources]], and for the Coordinative Learning research cluster, is how students [[coordination | coordinate]] between multiple representations. Existing theories of multimedia learning (e.g., Mayer, 2001; Schnotz, 2002) assume that successful learning is supported by cognitive processes that operate between separately encoded visual and verbal representations. Laboratory research in learning with scientific diagrams has shown that simplified diagrams support [[retention] and mental model development more than detailed diagrams, and that simplified representations better support integration of textual information (Butcher, 2006). Indeed, other research has found that a multimedia interface that required learners to integrate text labels in a diagram improved knowledge [[Retention|retention]] and [[transfer]] for complex information (Bodemer, Ploetzner, Feuerlein, & Spada, 2004). 

Taken together, these studies raise an important question regarding coordinative learning: Is [[coordination]] best supported by supporting successful [[mapping]] between text and visual information or by the construction of an integrated visual-verbal representation? The current study addresses this question using a 2 (Integrated Hint vs. Standard Hints) X 2 (Contiguous Representation vs. Noncontiguous Representation).

In the current study, successful [[mapping]] is supported with <i>Integrated Hints</i>. Integrated Hints use color-coded highlighting to link diagrammatic features to corresponding textual [[Instructional explanation|instructional explanations]]. In geometry, learners must [[mapping|map]] between relevant text and pictorial representations (e.g., to connect the text "angle ABC" to the visual depiction of this angle in a diagram) as they learn to recognize and apply relevant geometric principles/rules. Thus, one might expect [[mapping]] cues to support [[robust learning]] by helping students to form an [[integration|integrated]] representation of critical [[knowledge components]]. 

The current study supports construction of an [[integration|integrated]] visual-verbal representation with a contiguous problem-solving interface (see [[Contiguous Representations for Robust Learning (Aleven & Butcher). One might expect the [[Contiguous Representation|contiguous representation]] to support [[robust learning]] in geometry because it eases the [[cognitive load]] required to maintain and use the location and value of solved quantities to reason about related features.

=== Glossary ===
See [[:Category:Visual-Verbal Learning (Aleven & Butcher Project)|Visual-Verbal Learning Project Glossary]]

=== Research questions ===
#Does [[mapping]] support in the form of <i>Integrated Hints</i> support students' [[Retention|retention]] and [[transfer]] of [[knowledge components]]?
#Do [[Contiguous Representation|contiguous representations]] in geometry support students' [[Retention|retention]] and [[transfer]] of [[knowledge components]]?
#Are the effects of <i>Integrated Hints</i> or [[Contiguous Representation|contiguous representations]] stronger for [[transfer]] than for [[retention]]?
#Do <i>Integrated Hints</i> and [[Contiguous Representation|contiguous representations]] interact in their support for [[robust learning]], as measured by performance on [[transfer]] items?

=== Independent Variables ===
<b>Hint [[Integration]]:</b> Standard vs. Integrated Hints<br> 
*<b>Standard Hints</b> include plain text in a pop-up window, without highlighting of the hint text or the associated diagram features. 
*<b>Integrated Hints</b> (below) include the same text as the standard hints, but with color-coded highlighting that provides a visual link between relevant text and diagram features.<br>
[[Image:Diagram_IntHints.jpg]]

<br>
<b>[[Contiguity]]:</b> Noncontiguous vs. Contiguous Representation<br>
*The <b>noncontiguous representation</b> supports student interaction with a table that is separate from the diagram. Accepted answers and feedback are displayed in the table, and not in the diagram. 
*The <b>contiguous representation</b> supports student interaction with the diagram itself. Feedback is provided near the relevant diagram feature and accepted answers are displayed in the correct location in the diagram. For more information and screen shots, see [[Contiguous Representations for Robust Learning (Aleven & Butcher)]].

=== Dependent variables ===
*Pretest, [[normal post-test]], and [[transfer]] test measuring student performance on:
**Problem-solving items isomorphic to the practiced problems ([[retention]])
**Problem-solving items unlike those seen during problem practice ([[transfer]])
**Generative items testing [[conceptual knowledge]], not practiced in tutor ([[transfer]])

*Log data collected during tutor use, used to assess:
**[[Learning curve]]s
**Time on task
**Error rates
**Latency of responses

=== Hypotheses ===

We expect both the <i>Integrated Hints</i> and the [[Contiguous Representation|contiguous representations]] to support [[robust learning]], as measured by [[transfer]] items. Further, we expect best performance on [[transfer]] items when students receive both types of support, because optimal coordination between text and diagrams should require both [[mapping]] and [[integration]].

=== Findings (Anticipated) ===
Below, we provide an at-a-glance summary of our anticipated findings:

For [[Procedural|procedural knowledge]] (problem-solving on isomorphic problems):
{| border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" style="text-align: left;"
| Control Group (Standard hints, Noncontiguous Representation)<br>+ ||Integrated Hints Only (Noncontiguous Representation)<br>++
|-
| Contiguous Representation Only (Standard hints)<br>++ || Contiguous Representation & Integrated Hints <br>++

|}
<BR>
For [[transfer]] items measuring [[conceptual knowledge]]:
{| border="1" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="5" style="text-align: left;"
| Control Group (Standard hints, Noncontiguous Representation)<br>= (no change). ||Integrated Hints Only (Noncontiguous Representation)<br>++
|-
| Contiguous Representation Only (Standard hints)<br>++ || Contiguous Representation & Integrated Hints <br>+++

|}
<BR>

=== Explanation ===
From a [[Coordinative Learning|Coordinative Learning Cluster]] perspective, [[coordination]] between visual and verbal information supports foundational skill building, because attending to both representations simultaneously associates [[features]] from both with the learned [[knowledge components]]. This association increases feature validity and promotes [[robust learning]].

===Further Information===

==== Connections ====
<b>Interactive Communication as Support for Visual-Verbal Integration</b>:<br>Our research is investigating multiple methods with which student learning can be supported by interactions with pictorial information during geometry learning (also see our work on [[Contiguous Representation|contiguous representations]] in geometry: [[Contiguous Representations for Robust Learning (Aleven & Butcher)]]. However, our work also includes more a more explicit method for supporting student integration visual and verbal knowledge components. This method involves interactive support for students' [[Elaborated Explanations | elaborated explanations]] during geometry learning. Research investigating this explicit support is part of the Interactive Communication Cluster: [[Using Elaborated Explanations to Support Geometry Learning (Aleven & Butcher)]]

<b>Efforts to Improve Self-Supervised Learning Using Instructional Hints</b>: Our Integrated Hints can be considered a specialized method to improve the instructional quality of hints (based on a [[Coordinative Learning]] perspective). Thus, our work is relevant to other PSLC efforts to improve the quality and usefulness of hints during intelligent tutoring (e.g., [[Help Lite (Aleven, Roll)]]).

<b>Visual Representations for Robust Learning in Other Domains</b>: Our efforts to support students' integration of visual and verbal knowledge are informed by and related to efforts investigating the use of visual representations to support [[robust learning]] in other domains. A closely related PSLC project is [[Visual Representations in Science Learning]], in which researcher are exploring whether coordination between verbal and visual representations can help students refine initially shallow understandings into meaningful chemical concepts.

==== Annotated Bibliography ====
*Poster from PSLC Advisory Board visit, Fall 2005
*Presentation to NSF Site Visitors, Spring 2006 [http://www.learnlab.org/uploads/mypslc/talks/pc_butchercontig_2006sitevisit_final.ppt Link to Powerpoint slides]
*Presentation to the PSLC Advisory Board, Fall 2006 [http://www.learnlab.org/uploads/mypslc/talks/butchercontiguity_ab2006_final_distribute.ppt Link to Powerpoint slides]

==== References ====
*Bodemer, D., Ploetzner, R., Feuerlein, I., & Spada, H. (2004). The active integration of information during learning with dynamic and interactive visualisations. Learning and Instruction, 14, 325-341.
*Butcher, K. R. (2006). Learning From Text With Diagrams: Promoting Mental Model Development and Inference Generation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 182-197.
*Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
*Schnotz, W. (2002). Commentary: Towards an integrated view of learning from text and visual displays. Educational Psychology Review, 14(1), 101-120.

====Future Plans: June 2007 - December 2007====
#(Carnegie Learning): Gather log data and assessment data from classrooms.
#(Carnegie Learning): Anonymize log data and assessments, then provide to DataShop
#Score student performance on assessments
#Analyze log data and learning outcomes
#Prepare manuscript
#Integrate results into final project report for PSLC

[[Category:Study]]