Cited by 237Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsVisual and Cognitive Learning Processes

Limitations of Student Control: Do Students Know when They Need Help?

Aleven, Vincent, Koedinger, Kenneth R.·2000·Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/3-540-45108-0_33

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Some students tend to immediately request bottom-out hints, resulting in less learning.

    “While hints are generally effective, some students tend to immediately request bottom-out hints, resulting in less learning (Mathews et al., 2008; Aleven and Koedinger, 2000).”

    From Assessing the Impact and Underlying Pathways of Sequenced AI feedback on Student Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Aleven and Koedinger, 2000

  • The standard hints design principle in ITS consists of three levels of increasing specificity: pointing hint, teaching hint, bottom-out hint.

    “According to the standard hints design principle in ITS (VanLehn, 2006), the hint sequence consists of three levels of increasing specificity: 1) Pointing Hint: Directs the student's attention to a specific error or location without revealing the solution (Hume et al., 1996). 2) Teaching Hint: Provides the domain principle or rule required to solve the step (Hume et al., 1996). 3) Bottom-Out Hint:”

    From Assessing the Impact and Underlying Pathways of Sequenced AI feedback on Student Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Aleven and Koedinger, 2000

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 14 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Conati, C., and K. VanLehn, 1999. Teaching Meta-Cognitive Skills: Implementation and Evaluation of a Tutoring System to Guide Self-Explanation While Learning from Examples. In Artificial Intelligence in Education, Proceedings of AIED-99, edited by S. P. Lajoie and M. Vivet, 297–304. Amsterdam: IOS Press.
  2. Ritter, S., 1997. Communication, Cooperation and Competition among Multiple Tutor Agents. In Artificial Intelligence in Education, Proceedings of AI-ED 97 World Conference, edited by B. du Boulay and R. Mizoguchi, 31–38. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Aleven, V., & Koedinger, K. R.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
Lecture Notes in Computer Science
Published
2000
Pages
292-303
ISSN
0302-9743 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2139891935
Cited by
236
References
14
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 10
FWCI
3.31
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Lecture notes in computer science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Keywords
intelligent tutoring systems, learner control, metacognition, help-seeking strategies, cognitive tutors, production rules, metacognitive feedback

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review