Articles/Books Citation
1. Lajorie & Derry (1993). Computers as Cognitive Tools.

---

Chapter 5
This chapter focuses on how pedagogical theory can be applied to tutoring systems in which the previous chapters did not cover as extensively. Intelligent tutoring systems are helpful for procedural tasks, but in complex problems and situations, it is very difficult or nearly impossible to find all of the solutions for that problem. Also, many people feel that a tutoring systems should facilitate and allow students to construct their own knowledge, instead of actually forcing them down a solution path and diagnosing student’s problem for them (ex: ITS).

The author notes that tutoring systems should include research on both cognitive psychology and instructional theory. He then presents eight principles to abide by in order for building a computer-based tutoring system in which will include both these researches (cognitive psychology and instructional theory). I think these principles really give students more self-control of their own environment while providing them with support and collaborative learning. I thought HERON (a computer-assisted learning system) is a great tool for students to learn difficult and complex math problems. The visual (tree-like) representation provides a very thorough breakdown of the word problem. As I was reading one of the example math word problems, I found it very difficult to solve. But as I got a chance to look at the complete problem in a visual tree-like structure (solution trees), it started to make more sense and I eventually understood how the problem was solved. Without it, it would be much more difficult to solve. I think this software can be very helpful for young kids to see how the problem is broken down, because it allows them to actually visualize all the pieces to the problem. Although HERON is not an intelligent tutoring system, it does provide feedback and detailed task analysis. It is also able to monitor student activity by planning and creating a solution tree. By allowing students to work on teams, this system can work very effectively.

Chapter 6
This chapter focuses on pedagogic computer tools, specifically Writing Partner. The author proposes that “no tool is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ in and of itself; the quality of the tool is a result from and contributes to the whole Gestalt of events, functions, and factors in the context of which it is being used”. I think he makes a really good point. For example, let’s say a person is preparing for a big race. Since the race was going to be held on a flat surface road, he decided to buy the best running shoes for flat surfaces. But on the day of the race, he found out that the race involved a lot of hiking and tough terrains. Although the shoe is very good for flat surfaces, it does not work as effectively in tough and heavy terrains. So, in essence, the whole Gestalt of events (the big race), functions (running shoes but for hiking purposes), and factors in the context of which is being used has a big impact on the quality of the tool (in this case, the shoes).

The author also proposes that useful computers tools for educational purposes should stimulate higher order thinking and allow learners to think more freely and independently. It seems as though the author opposes intelligent tutoring systems (ITS), because it diagnoses the problem for the learner and doesn’t allow them to think and explore solutions on their own. He wants a system in which will help the learner if he/she gets stuck but does not implicitly tell them what to do. It will also act as a partner in which both will share different tasks. The computer tool will usually do the lower level tasks such as computational operations, while the learner will generate ideas and draw conclusions to the situation or problem. I think this is a great way for learners to think more critically and obtain the knowledge more in-dept and also be able to retrieve that knowledge much conclusively than having the computer provide them with the solution to the problem (ex: ITS).

The computer tool, Writing Partner, acts as a partner and helps the learner through the process of writing. It goes through several processes such as planning their stories, brainstorming, and outlining. The partner is basically there to help the learner when they are stuck. The tool does not necessary teach the learners to write or corrects their errors. The learner does most of the thinking and the partner (tool) is there to provide them with guidance. I think this tool is very effective for its purposes. But the only negative side is the learner’s capabilities to generate ideas on their own. Some learners find it very difficult to generate ideas on their own, so it might not be as effective on some learners. But I think it also depends on how the tool is used in that particular environment. If the tool is to be effectively implemented in classrooms, then the classroom learning environment must change. The tool does not work as effectively if the teachers are still teaching the same way as if the tool wasn’t implemented.

Chapter 7
This chapter discusses about knowledge design and how hypermedia compositions can teach students instructional design and also allow for a deep understanding of a certain topic (in this case, the Civil War). The author considers knowledge as a process of design (also as a metaphor of design as well) and his methods of using this approach are very interesting. The framework for hypercomposition-based design is very similar to that of the instructional design process. In his study, he used 10 students and divided them up into two different groups. One group was the overachievers (A students) and the other group was the underachiever (C or below students). Both group were required to do research about the Civil War and eventually present it to the entire class when they are finished. The results showed that both groups showed teamwork, collaboration, and had a much deeper understanding of the Civil War than the other students that were not involved in the study. I find this study to be very interesting. This type of activity gives students much more control of their own learning, which allows them to decide what goes where, who should do what, how much information should be covered, how it should be presented, and in what order to present it in. I also think that students learn more as well, because they know that they have to present the information and are given a deadline, so they will try to work harder and also try to find as much information as possible on the topic.

Chapter 8
This chapter discusses collaboration and focuses on qualitative modeling to enable learners to gain deep knowledge on a particular topic. For this research, they focused on learning velocity and acceleration. Basically, they used two male students (15 years old) and ask them to work together in solving problems on a computer screen. Without knowing that the topic is related to velocity and acceleration, the students must try to figure out how to solve the problems that are given to them. This is a very interesting study. It really shows how much collaboration can help solve abstract and difficult problems. The students discussed issues among one another and really tried to solve the problems by working as a team. I think complex problem solving tasks is very difficult without having any outside help. This brings me to a interesting question. Does collaboration only happen in a synchronous environment or can it happen with asynchronous environment? I can see how collaboration can occur face-to-face, phone, video conference, or chat rooms. But what about user-forums or emails? I can see how collaboration can occur during email replies and replying on user forums. For example, let’s say I email a problem to an associate of mine. He replies back with some of his thoughts and ideas on tackling the problem. So, then I reply back with him with my ideas on solving the problem. This happens back and forth several times. In the end, both of us shared our concepts and different views on the problem. Wouldn’t that be considered collaboration or not?