Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Teaching How to Teach Promotes Learning by Teaching

  • Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When students learn skills to solve problems by teaching others, they often need to receive scaffolding to benefit from learning by teaching. To facilitate learning by teaching (aka tutor learning), two types of scaffolding have been commonly studied—the scaffolding on how to teach (to induce appropriate teaching activities) and the one on how to solve problems (to ensure correctness of solutions taught). The comparison between these two types of scaffolding and the adaptive control among them, however, has been left unresearched. The primary goal of the current study is to understand how to best control the scaffolding for learning by teaching. A technique for exhaustive differential pattern mining was used to correlate a behavioral pattern of learning by teaching with tutor learning. The results showed that only the scaffolding on how to teach facilitated tutor learning. Students who received the scaffolding on how to teach typically interleaved teaching and assessing their peers’ competency more often than those who received the scaffolding on how to solve problems. The results imply an importance of implementing adaptive scaffolding on how to teach to better facilitate learning by teaching.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aleven, V., Stahl, E., Schworm, S., Fischer, F., & Wallace, R. (2003). Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Review of Educational Research, 73(3), 277–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, J. R., Boyle, C. F., Corbett, A. T., & Lewis, M. W. (1990). Cognitive modeling and intelligent tutoring. Artificial Intelligence, 42(1), 7–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Azevedo, R., Martin, S. A., Taub, M., Mudrick, N. V., Millar, G. C., & Grafsgaard, J. F. (2016). Are Pedagogical Agents’ External Regulation Effective in Fostering Learning with Intelligent Tutoring Systems? In A. Micarelli, J. Stamper & K. Panourgia (Eds.), Intelligent Tutoring Systems: 13th International Conference, ITS 2016, Zagreb, Croatia, June 7–10, 2016. Proceedings (pp. 197–207). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

  • Baker, R., Corbett, A. T., Roll, I., & Koedinger, K. R. (2008). Developing a generalizable detector of when students game the system. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 18(3), 287–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A., & Schul, Y. (1980). On the cognitive benefits of teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(5), 593–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.72.5.593

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biswas, G., Segedy, J. R., & Bunchongchit, K. (2016). From Design to Implementation to Practice a Learning by Teaching System: Betty’s Brain. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26(1), 350–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-015-0057-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biswas, G., Jeong, H., Kinnebrew, J. S., Sulcer, B., & Roscoe, R. D. (2010). Measuring Self-Regulated Learning Skills through Social Interactions in a teachable Agent Environment. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 123–152.

  • Blair, K., Schwartz, D., Biswas, G., & Leelawong, K. (2006). Pedagogical agents for learning by teaching: Teachable agents. Educational Technology & Society, Special Issue on Pedagogical Agents, 56-61.

  • Brophy, S., Biswas, G., Katzlberger, T., Bransford, J. D., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Teachable agents: Combining insights from learning theory and computer science. In S. P. Lajoie & M. Vivet (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial intelligence in education (pp. 21–28). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: IOS Press.

  • Byrd, D. E. (1990). Peer tutoring with the learning disabled: A critical review. Journal of Educational Research, 84(2), 115–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardenas, J. A., Harris, R., del Refugio Robledo, M., & Supik, J. D. (1991). Valued Youth Program Dropout Prevention Strategies for At-Risk Students. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, Chicago, IL.

  • Chan, T.-W., & Chou, C.-Y. (1997). Exploring the design of computer supports for reciprocal tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8, 1–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. G. (1994). Restructuring the classroom: Conditions for productive small groups. Review of Educational Research, 64(1), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170744

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, P. A., Kulik, J. A., & ClC, Kulik. (1982). Education outcomes of tutoring: A meta-analysis of findings. American Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 237–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig, S. D., Sullins, J., Witherspoon, A., & Gholson, B. (2006). The deep-level-reasoning-question effect: The role of dialogue and deep-level-reasoning questions during vicarious learning. Cognition and Instruction, 24(4), 565–591. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci2404_4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman-Hill, E. (2003). Jess in Action: Java Rule-based Systems. Greenwich: Manning.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodlad, S., & Hirst, B. (1989). Peer Tutoring: A Guide to Learning by Teaching. Kogan Page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, C. R., Delquadri, J. C., & Hall, R. V. (1989). Longitudinal effects of classwide peer tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 371–383. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.3.371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jun, Y. (2003). Facilitating mathematical learning with a peer tutoring system: Lessons learned. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 22(1), 75–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kinnebrew, J. S., Loretz, K. M., & Biswas, G. (2013). A Contextualized, differential sequence mining method to derive students’ learning behavior patterns. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 5(1), 190–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leelawong, K., Viswanath, K., Davis, J., Biswas, G., Vye, N., Belynne, K., & Bransford, J. (2003). Teachable agents: Learning by teaching environments for science domains Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence (pp. 109–116). Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.

  • Li, N., Matsuda, N., Cohen, W. W., & Koedinger, K. R. (2015). Integrating representation learning and skill learning in a human-like intelligent agent. Artificial Intelligence, 219, 67–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2014.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuda, N. (2022). Teachable agent as an interactive tool for cognitive task analysis: A case study for authoring an expert model. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 32, 48–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-021-00265-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuda, N., Yarzebinski, E., Keiser, V., Raizada, R., William, W. C., Stylianides, G. J., & Koedinge, K. R. (2013). Cognitive anatomy of tutor learning: Lessons learned with SimStudent. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(4), 1152–1163. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031955

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuda, N., Cohen, W. W., & Koedinger, K. R. (2015). Teaching the teacher: Tutoring SimStudent leads to more effective cognitive tutor authoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 25, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-014-0020-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuda, N., Weng, W., & Wall, N. (2020). The effect of metacognitive scaffolding for learning by teaching a teachable agent. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 30(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsuda, N., Yarzebinski, E., Keiser, V., Raizada, R., Stylianides, G. J., Cohen, W. W., & Koedinger, K. R. (2011). Learning by Teaching SimStudent – An Initial Classroom Baseline Study comparing with Cognitive Tutor. In G. Biswas & S. Bull (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 213–221). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

  • Matsuda, N., Cohen, W. W., Koedinger, K. R., Keiser, V., Raizada, R., Yarzebinski, E., . . . Stylianides, G. J. (2012a). Studying the Effect of Tutor Learning using a Teachable Agent that asks the Student Tutor for Explanations. In M. Sugimoto, V. Aleven, Y. S. Chee & B. F. Manjon (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Digital Game and Intelligent Toy Enhanced Learning (DIGITEL 2012a) (pp. 25–32). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.

  • Matsuda, N., Yarzebinski, E., Keiser, V., Raizada, R., Cohen, W. W., Stylianides, G. J., & Koedinge, K. R. (2012b). Shallow learning as a pathway for successful learning both for tutors and tutees. In N. Miyake, D. Peebles & R. P. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 731–736). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.

  • Matsuda, N., Yarzebinski, E., Keiser, V., Raizada, R., Stylianides, G. J., & Koedinger, K. R. (2012c). Motivational factors for learning by teaching: The effect of a competitive game show in a virtual peer-learning environment. In S. Cerri & W. Clancey (Eds.), Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 101–111). Heidelberg, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

  • Matsuda, N., Griger, C. L., Barbalios, N., Stylianides, G., Cohen, W. W., & Koedinger, K. R. (2014). Investigating the Effect of Meta-Cognitive Scaffolding for Learning by Teaching. In S. Trausen-Matu, K. Boyer, M. Crosby & K. Panourgia (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 104–113). Switzerland: Springer.

  • Matsuda, N., Barbalios, N., Zhao, J., Ramamurthy, A., Stylianides, G., & Koedinger, K. R. (2016). Tell me how to teach, I’ll learn how to solve problems. In A. Micarelli, J. Stamper & K. Panourgia (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 111–121). Switzerland: Springer.

  • Michie, D., Paterson, A., & Hayes, J. E. (1989). Learning by teaching Proc. of Second Scandinavian Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 413–436). Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS.

  • Muldner, K., Girotto, V., Lozano, C., Burleson, W., & Walker, E. (2014). The impact of a social robot’s attributions for success and failure in a teachable agent framework. Proceedings of International Conference of the Learning Sciences, ICLS, 1(January), 278–285.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, D. (1994). Issues in designing learning by teaching systems. In P. Brusilovsky, S. Dikareva, J. Greer & V. Petrushin (Eds.), Proceedings of East-West Conference on Computer Technologies in Education.

  • Okita, S. Y., Bailenson, J., & Schwartz, D. L. (2007). The mere belief of social interaction improves learning. In D. S. McNamara & J. G. Trafton (Eds.), The Proceedings of the 29th Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1355–1360). Nashville.

  • Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–175. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532690xci0102_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pareto, L. (2014). A teachable agent game engaging primary school children to learn arithmetic concepts and reasoning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24(3), 251–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-014-0018-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Renkl, A. (1995). Learning for later teaching: An exploration of mediational links between teaching expectancy and learning results. Learning and Instruction, 5(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4752(94)00015-h

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritter, S., Anderson, J. R., Koedinger, K. R., & Corbett, A. (2007). Cognitive tutor: Applied research in mathematics education. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14(2), 249–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D., Schofield, J., & Steers-Wentzell, K. (2005). Peer and cross-age tutoring in math: Outcomes and their design implications. Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 327–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. T. H. (2007). Understanding tutor learning: Knowledge-building and knowledge-telling in peer tutors’ explanations and questions. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 534–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roscoe, R. D., & Chi, M. (2008). Tutor learning: The role of explaining and responding to questions. Instructional Science, 36(4), 321–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roscoe, R. D., Segedy, J. R., Sulcer, B., Jeong, H., & Biswas, G. (2013). Shallow strategy development in a teachable agent environment designed to support self-regulated learning. Computers and Education, 62, 286–297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.008

  • Schwartz, D., Blair, K. P., Biswas, G., & Leelawong, K. (2007). Animations of Thought: Interactivity in the Teachable Agent Paradigm. In R. Lowe & W. Schnotz (Eds.), Learning with Animation: Research and Implications for Design (pp. 114–140). Cambrige University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silvervarg, A., Kirkegaard, C., Nirme, J., Haake, M., & Gulz, A. (2014). Steps towards a Challenging Teachable Agent, Cham.

  • Tan, J., Biswas, G., & Schwartz, D. (2006). Feedback for Metacognitive Support in Learning by Teaching Environments. In R. Sun & N. Miyake (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 828–833). Vancouver, Canada.

  • Tärning, B., Silvervarg, A., Gulz, A., & Haake, M. (2019). Instructing a teachable agent with low or high self-efficacy—Does similarity attract? International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 29(1), 89–121. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-018-0167-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ternblad, E.-M., & Tärning, B. (2020). Far from Success – Far from Feedback Acceptance? The Influence of Game Performance on Young Students’ Willingness to Accept Critical Constructive Feedback During Play. Paper presented at the Artificial Intelligence in Education, Cham.

  • Wagster, J., Tan, J., Wu, Y., Biswas, G., & Schwartz, D. L. (2007). Do learning-by-teaching environments with metacognitive support help students develop better learning behaviors? In D. S. McNamara & J. G. Trafton (Eds.), Proceeding from the 29th meeting of the Cognitive Science Society. Nashville, TN: Cognitive Science Society.

  • Yarzebinski, E., Ogan, A., Rodrigo, M. M. T., & Matsuda, N. (2015). Understanding Students’ Use of Code-switching in a Learning by Teaching Technology. In C. Conati & N. Heffernan (Eds.), Proceedings of the international conference on artificial intelligence in education (pp. 504–516).

  • Zhao, G., Ailiya, & Shen, Z. (2012). Learning-by-Teaching: Designing teachable agents with instructional motivation. Educational Technology and Society, 15, 62–74.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research reported here was supported by the National Science Foundation (Award No. 1643185) and the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education (Grant R305A180319) to North Carolina State University. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. North Carolina State University, 890 Oval Dr., Raleigh, NC, 27695-8206, USA

    Noboru Matsuda & Guoguo Zheng

  2. Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 4232 TAMU, 77843, USA

    Dan Lv

Authors
  1. Noboru Matsuda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dan Lv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Guoguo Zheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Noboru Matsuda.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

None.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Matsuda, N., Lv, D. & Zheng, G. Teaching How to Teach Promotes Learning by Teaching. Int J Artif Intell Educ 33, 720–751 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00306-1

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-022-00306-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation