Reconciling Different Theories of Learning with an Agent-based Model of Procedural Learning

Sina Rismanchian, Shayan Doroudi
{"title":"Reconciling Different Theories of Learning with an Agent-based Model of Procedural Learning","authors":"Sina Rismanchian, Shayan Doroudi","doi":"arxiv-2408.13364","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Computational models of human learning can play a significant role in\nenhancing our knowledge about nuances in theoretical and qualitative learning\ntheories and frameworks. There are many existing frameworks in educational\nsettings that have shown to be verified using empirical studies, but at times\nwe find these theories make conflicting claims or recommendations for\ninstruction. In this study, we propose a new computational model of human\nlearning, Procedural ABICAP, that reconciles the ICAP,\nKnowledge-Learning-Instruction (KLI), and cognitive load theory (CLT)\nframeworks for learning procedural knowledge. ICAP assumes that constructive\nlearning generally yields better learning outcomes, while theories such as KLI\nand CLT claim that this is not always true. We suppose that one reason for this\nmay be that ICAP is primarily used for conceptual learning and is\nunderspecified as a framework for thinking about procedural learning. We show\nhow our computational model, both by design and through simulations, can be\nused to reconcile different results in the literature. More generally, we\nposition our computational model as an executable theory of learning that can\nbe used to simulate various educational settings.","PeriodicalId":501112,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - CS - Computers and Society","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - CS - Computers and Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2408.13364","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Computational models of human learning can play a significant role in enhancing our knowledge about nuances in theoretical and qualitative learning theories and frameworks. There are many existing frameworks in educational settings that have shown to be verified using empirical studies, but at times we find these theories make conflicting claims or recommendations for instruction. In this study, we propose a new computational model of human learning, Procedural ABICAP, that reconciles the ICAP, Knowledge-Learning-Instruction (KLI), and cognitive load theory (CLT) frameworks for learning procedural knowledge. ICAP assumes that constructive learning generally yields better learning outcomes, while theories such as KLI and CLT claim that this is not always true. We suppose that one reason for this may be that ICAP is primarily used for conceptual learning and is underspecified as a framework for thinking about procedural learning. We show how our computational model, both by design and through simulations, can be used to reconcile different results in the literature. More generally, we position our computational model as an executable theory of learning that can be used to simulate various educational settings.
用基于代理的程序学习模型调和不同的学习理论
人类学习的计算模型可以在增进我们对理论和定性学习理论与框架的细微差别的了解方面发挥重要作用。在教育环境中,有许多现有的框架已通过实证研究得到验证,但有时我们会发现这些理论提出了相互矛盾的主张或教学建议。在本研究中,我们提出了一个新的人类学习计算模型--程序性 ABICAP,该模型调和了 ICAP、知识-学习-教学(KLI)和认知负荷理论(CLT)框架,用于学习程序性知识。ICAP 假设建构式学习通常能产生更好的学习效果,而 KLI 和 CLT 等理论则认为这并不总是正确的。我们认为,造成这种情况的一个原因可能是,ICAP 主要用于概念学习,而作为程序性学习的思考框架,ICAP 的定义不够明确。我们通过设计和模拟,展示了我们的计算模型如何用于调和文献中的不同结果。更广泛地说,我们将我们的计算模型定位为一种可执行的学习理论,可用于模拟各种教育环境。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信