Instructional environments for simulations

Jos J.A. van Berkum, Ton de Jong
{"title":"Instructional environments for simulations","authors":"Jos J.A. van Berkum,&nbsp;Ton de Jong","doi":"10.1016/0167-9287(91)80006-J","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The use of computer simulations in education and training can have substantial advantages over other approaches. In comparison with alternatives such as textbooks, lectures, and tutorial courseware, a simulation-based approach offers the opportunity to learn in a relatively realistic problem-solving context, to practise task performance without stress, to systematically explore both realistic and hypothetical situations, to change the time-scale of events, and to interact with simplified versions of the process or system being simulated.</p><p>However, learners are often unable to cope with the freedom offered by, and the complexity of, a simulation. As a result many of them resort to an unsystematic, unproductive mode of exploration. There is evidence that simulation-based learning can be improved if the learner is supported while working with the simulation. Constructing such an instructional environment around simulations seems to run counter to the freedom the learner is allowed to in ‘stand alone’ simulations. The present article explores instructional measures that allow for an optimal freedom for the learner.</p><p>An extensive discussion of learning goals brings two main types of learning goals to the fore: conceptual knowledge and operational knowledge. A third type of learning goal refers to the knowledge acquisition (exploratory learning) process.</p><p>Cognitive theory has implications for the design of instructional environments around simulations. Most of these implications are quite general, but they can also be related to the three types of learning goals. For conceptual knowledge the sequence and choice of models and problems is important, as is providing the learner with explanations and minimization of error. For operational knowledge cognitive theory recommends learning to take place in a problem solving context, the explicit tracing of the behaviour of the learner, providing immediate feedback and minimization of working memory load. For knowledge acquisition goals, it is recommended that the tutor takes the role of a model and coach, and that learning takes place together with a companion.</p><p>A second source of inspiration for designing instructional environments can be found in Instructional Design Theories. Reviewing these shows that interacting with a simulation can be a part of a more comprehensive instructional strategy, in which for example also prerequisite knowledge is taught. Moreover, information present in a simulation can also be represented in a more structural or static way and these two forms of presentation provoked to perform specific learning processes and learner activities by tutor controlled variations in the simulation, and by tutor initiated prodding techniques. And finally, instructional design theories showed that complex models and procedures can be taught by starting with central and simple elements of these models and procedures and subsequently presenting more complex models and procedures.</p><p>Most of the recent simulation-based intelligent tutoring systems involve troubleshooting of complex technical systems. Learners are supposed to acquire knowledge of particular system principles, of troubleshooting procedures, or of both. Commonly encountered instructional features include (a) the sequencing of increasingly complex problems to be solved, (b) the availability of a range of help information on request, (c) the presence of an expert troubleshooting module which can step in to provide criticism on learner performance, hints on the problem nature, or suggestions on how to proceed, (d) the option of having the expert module demonstrate optimal performance afterwards, and (e) the use of different ways of depicting the simulated system.</p><p>A selection of findings is summarized by placing them under the four themes we think to be characteristic of learning with computer simulations (see de Jong, this volume).</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100393,"journal":{"name":"Education and Computing","volume":"6 3","pages":"Pages 305-358"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1991-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/0167-9287(91)80006-J","citationCount":"65","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Education and Computing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016792879180006J","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 65

Abstract

The use of computer simulations in education and training can have substantial advantages over other approaches. In comparison with alternatives such as textbooks, lectures, and tutorial courseware, a simulation-based approach offers the opportunity to learn in a relatively realistic problem-solving context, to practise task performance without stress, to systematically explore both realistic and hypothetical situations, to change the time-scale of events, and to interact with simplified versions of the process or system being simulated.

However, learners are often unable to cope with the freedom offered by, and the complexity of, a simulation. As a result many of them resort to an unsystematic, unproductive mode of exploration. There is evidence that simulation-based learning can be improved if the learner is supported while working with the simulation. Constructing such an instructional environment around simulations seems to run counter to the freedom the learner is allowed to in ‘stand alone’ simulations. The present article explores instructional measures that allow for an optimal freedom for the learner.

An extensive discussion of learning goals brings two main types of learning goals to the fore: conceptual knowledge and operational knowledge. A third type of learning goal refers to the knowledge acquisition (exploratory learning) process.

Cognitive theory has implications for the design of instructional environments around simulations. Most of these implications are quite general, but they can also be related to the three types of learning goals. For conceptual knowledge the sequence and choice of models and problems is important, as is providing the learner with explanations and minimization of error. For operational knowledge cognitive theory recommends learning to take place in a problem solving context, the explicit tracing of the behaviour of the learner, providing immediate feedback and minimization of working memory load. For knowledge acquisition goals, it is recommended that the tutor takes the role of a model and coach, and that learning takes place together with a companion.

A second source of inspiration for designing instructional environments can be found in Instructional Design Theories. Reviewing these shows that interacting with a simulation can be a part of a more comprehensive instructional strategy, in which for example also prerequisite knowledge is taught. Moreover, information present in a simulation can also be represented in a more structural or static way and these two forms of presentation provoked to perform specific learning processes and learner activities by tutor controlled variations in the simulation, and by tutor initiated prodding techniques. And finally, instructional design theories showed that complex models and procedures can be taught by starting with central and simple elements of these models and procedures and subsequently presenting more complex models and procedures.

Most of the recent simulation-based intelligent tutoring systems involve troubleshooting of complex technical systems. Learners are supposed to acquire knowledge of particular system principles, of troubleshooting procedures, or of both. Commonly encountered instructional features include (a) the sequencing of increasingly complex problems to be solved, (b) the availability of a range of help information on request, (c) the presence of an expert troubleshooting module which can step in to provide criticism on learner performance, hints on the problem nature, or suggestions on how to proceed, (d) the option of having the expert module demonstrate optimal performance afterwards, and (e) the use of different ways of depicting the simulated system.

A selection of findings is summarized by placing them under the four themes we think to be characteristic of learning with computer simulations (see de Jong, this volume).

模拟教学环境
在教育和培训中使用计算机模拟比其他方法具有实质性的优势。与教科书、讲座和教程课件等替代方法相比,基于模拟的方法提供了在相对现实的问题解决环境中学习的机会,在没有压力的情况下练习任务表现,系统地探索现实和假设的情况,改变事件的时间尺度,并与被模拟的过程或系统的简化版本进行交互。然而,学习者往往无法应付模拟所提供的自由和复杂性。因此,他们中的许多人求助于一种非系统的、非生产性的勘探模式。有证据表明,如果学习者在使用模拟时得到支持,基于模拟的学习可以得到改善。围绕模拟构建这样的教学环境似乎与学习者在“独立”模拟中被允许的自由背道而驰。本文探讨了允许学习者获得最佳自由的教学措施。对学习目标的广泛讨论使两种主要类型的学习目标突出:概念知识和操作知识。第三种学习目标是指知识获取(探索性学习)过程。认知理论对模拟教学环境的设计具有启示意义。大多数这些含义都是相当普遍的,但它们也可以与三种类型的学习目标有关。对于概念性知识,模型和问题的顺序和选择是重要的,为学习者提供解释和最小化错误也是重要的。对于操作性知识,认知理论建议在解决问题的环境中进行学习,明确跟踪学习者的行为,提供即时反馈,并将工作记忆负荷降至最低。对于知识获取目标,建议导师扮演榜样和教练的角色,并与同伴一起进行学习。设计教学环境的第二个灵感来源可以在教学设计理论中找到。回顾这些表明,与模拟互动可以成为更全面的教学策略的一部分,例如,也可以教授先决知识。此外,模拟中的信息也可以以更结构化或静态的方式表示,这两种形式的表示通过导师控制的模拟变化和导师发起的刺激技术来激发执行特定的学习过程和学习者活动。最后,教学设计理论表明,复杂的模型和程序可以通过从这些模型和程序的中心和简单元素开始,然后呈现更复杂的模型和程序来教授。目前基于仿真的智能辅导系统大多涉及复杂技术系统的故障排除。学习者应该获得特定系统原理的知识,或故障排除程序,或两者兼而有之。通常遇到的教学特征包括(a)要解决的日益复杂的问题的顺序,(b)根据要求提供一系列帮助信息,(c)存在专家故障排除模块,可以介入对学习者的表现提出批评,提示问题的性质,或建议如何进行,(d)选择让专家模块在之后展示最佳性能。(e)使用不同的方式描绘模拟系统。通过将它们置于我们认为具有计算机模拟学习特征的四个主题下(见de Jong,本卷),总结了一系列发现。
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信