Cited by 74Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive LearningVisual and Cognitive Learning ProcessesInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Worked Examples and Tutored Problem Solving: Redundant or Synergistic Forms of Support?

Open access
Salden, Ron J. C. M., Aleven, Vincent A. W. M. M., Renkl, Alexander, Schwonke, Rolf·2009·Topics in Cognitive Science

Abstract

The current research investigates a combination of two instructional approaches, tutored problem solving and worked examples. Tutored problem solving with automated tutors has proven to be an effective instructional method. Worked‐out examples have been shown to be an effective complement to untutored problem solving, but it is largely unknown whether they are an effective complement to tutored problem solving. Further, while computer‐based learning environments offer the possibility of adaptively transitioning from examples to problems while tailoring to an individual learner, the effectiveness of such machine‐adapted example fading is largely unstudied. To address these research questions, one lab and one classroom experiment were conducted. Both studies compared a standard Cognitive Tutor with two example‐enhanced Cognitive Tutors, in which the fading of worked‐out examples occurred either in a fixed way or adaptively. Results indicate that the adaptive fading of worked‐out examples leads to higher transfer performance on delayed posttests than the other two methods.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01011.x

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Salden, R. J. C. M., Aleven, V. A. W. M. M., Renkl, A., & Schwonke, R.
Affiliations
  • University of Freiburg (DE)
  • Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
Salden, Ron J. C. M.
Venue
Topics in Cognitive Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-01
Volume
1
Issue
1
Pages
203-213
ISSN
  • 1756-8757 (ISSN-L)
  • 1756-8765
OpenAlex
W2054487443
Cited by
74
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 7
FWCI
8.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Topics in Cognitive Science (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • KiltHub Repository (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • KiltHub Repository
  • Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society
Funders
National Science Foundation (0354420)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Intelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
worked examples, automated tutoring, cognitive tutors, transfer of learning, computer-based learning environments, mathematics education
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Humans, Learning, Problem Solving, Random Allocation, Teaching

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