The dtg this week was designed for two purposes. First, I was responding to Koedinger & Corbett (2006) and Schwartz, Biswas, Leelawong & Davis (2007). These two book chapters discuss technologies that were modeled in very different but interesting ways on the success of human tutors and interactions, as well as a rich understanding of the content domain. Second, we have been drawing and refining models of how technology can support educational ecosystems in class. This is my attempt to infer a general model from the two readings so that we can discuss the limitations of my inference and the underlying models in class. My goal is that this will serve as the center for an interesting conversation about both the readings and the modeling process in general.

[Update]

Just a quick note to say that from my perspective this class exercise was an absolute success. My choice to be intentionally vague in the model led the students to some really productive discussions about what nuances were missing as they revisited the readings to critique the models.

Koedinger, K. R., & Corbett, A. (2006). Cognitive Tutors: Technology Bringing Learning Sciences to the Classroom. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences (pp. 61-78). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Schwartz, D. L., Biswas, K. P. B. G., Leelawong, K., & Davis, J. (2007). Animations of thought: Interactivity in the teachable agent paradigm. In R. Lowe & W. Schnotz (EDS.), Learning.