Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do cases teach themselves? A comparison of case library prompts in supporting problem-solving during argumentation

  • Published:
Journal of Computing in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Theorists have argued instructional strategies that emphasize ill-structured problem solving are an effective means to support higher order learning skills such as argumentation. However, argumentation is often difficult because novices lack the expertise or experience needed to solve contextualized problems. One way to supplement this lack of experience is through case-library learning environments that provide detailed stories of expert problem solving. In the current study, participants were provided three different variations of case libraries when solving an argumentation task: case library with no prompts, case library with retain prompt (focused on understanding an individual case), and case library with retrieval/reuse prompt (focused on understanding similarities with others cases in the case library). This study found that the no prompt and case library with retain prompts outperformaed the case library with retrieval/reuse prompts. The finding was found on measurements of counterclaim and overall holistic scores on the transfer task. The findings suggest the design of the cases within the library impacts how the participants adopted the case as a vicarious experience and transferred the experience to solve problems.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aamodt, A., & Plaza, E. (1994). Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and systems approaches. Artificial Intelligence Communications, 7(1), 39–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Abercrombie, S. (2013). Transfer effects of adding seductive details to case-based instruction. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 38(2), 149–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barrows, H. S. (1996). Problem-based learning in medicine and beyond: A brief overview. In L. Wilkerson & W. H. Gijselaers (Eds.), New directions for teaching and learning (Vol. 68, pp. 3–11). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belland, B. (2014). Scaffolding: Definition, current debates, and future directions. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., pp. 401–412). New York, NY: Spring.

    Google Scholar 

  • Belland, B., & Drake, J. (2013). Toward a framework on how affordances and motives can drive different uses of scaffolds: Theory, evidence, and design implications. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(6), 903–925. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9313-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, S. (2010). Investigating strategies for using related cases to support design problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 58(4), 459–480. doi:10.1007/s11423-009-9144-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boshuizen, H. P. A., Wiel, M. W. J., & Schmidt, H. G. (2012). What and how advanced medical students learn from reasoning through multiple cases. Instructional Science, 40(5), 755–768. doi:10.1007/s11251-012-9211-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brush, T., & Saye, J. (2002). A summary of research exploring hard and soft scaffolding for teachers and students using a multimedia supported learning environment. Journal of Interactive Online Learning, 1(2), 1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cho, K.-L., & Jonassen, D. (2002). The effects of argumentation scaffolds on argumentation and problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dabbagh, N., & Dass, S. (2013). Case problems for problem-based pedagogical approaches: A comparative analysis. Computers and Education, 64, 161–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dillenbourg, P. (2002). Over-scripting CSCL: The risks of blending collaborative learning with instructional design. In P. A. Kirschner (Ed.), Three worlds of CSCL. Can we support CSCL? (pp. 61–91). Heerlen: Open Universiteit Nederland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eseryel, D., Ifenthaler, D., & Ge, X. (2013). Validation study of a method for assessing complex ill structured problem solving by using causal representations. Educational Technology Research and Development, 61(3), 443–463. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9297-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitzgerald, G., Mitchem, K., Hollingsead, C., Miller, K., Koury, K., & Tsai, H.-H. (2011). Exploring the bridge from multimedia cases to classrooms: Evidence of transfer. Journal of Special Education Technology, 26(2), 23–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ge, X., & Land, S. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51(1), 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. (1983). Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology, 15(1), 1–38. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(83)90002-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez-Serrano, J., & Jonassen, D. H. (2003). The effects of case libraries on problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 19(1), 103–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hmelo-Silver, C. E., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42(2), 99–107. doi:10.1080/00461520701263368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hung, W. (2011). Theory to reality: A few issues in implementing problem-based learning. Educational Technology Research and Development. doi:10.1007/s11423-011-9198-1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jeong, A. C., & Lee, J. (2008). The effects of active versus reflective learning style on the processes of critical discourse in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. British Journal of Educational Technology: Journal of the Council for Educational Technology, 39(4), 651–665.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, J. F., Bagdasarov, Z., Devenport, L., Mumford, M., & Thiel, C. (2012). Case-based ethics education: The impact of cause complexity and outcome favorability on ethicality. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 7(3), 63–77. doi:10.1525/jer.2012.7.3.63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H. (2011). Supporting problem solving in PBL. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem Based Learning. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonassen, D. H., & Cho, Y. (2011). Fostering argumentation while solving engineering ethics problems. Journal of Engineering Education, 100(4), 680–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karacapilidis, N., & Papadias, D. (2001). Computer supported argumentation and collaborative decision making: The HERMES system. Information Systems, 26(4), 259–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Hannafin, M. J. (2009). Web-enhanced case-based activity in teacher education: A case study. Instructional Science, 37(2), 151–170. doi:10.1007/s11251-007-9040-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Hannafin, M. J. (2011). Developing situated knowledge about teaching with technology via a web enhanced case-based activity. Computers & Education, 57(1), 1378–1388. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.01.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, P., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. (1991). Improving human decision making through case-based decision aiding. AI Magazine, 12(2), 52–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolodner, J. L., Owensby, J. N., & Guzdial, M. (2004). Case-based learning aids. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed., pp. 829–861). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D., & Crowell, A. (2011). Dialogic argumentation as a vehicle for developing young adolescents’ thinking. Psychological Science, 22(4), 545–552. doi:10.1177/0956797611402512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, D., & Udell, W. (2007). Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking & Reasoning, 13(2), 90–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, K. J., Boukrina, O., & Gentner, D. (2013). Comparison promotes learning and transfer of relational categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39(4), 1303–1310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtz, K. J., & Gentner, D. (2013). Detecting anomalous features in complex stimuli: The role of structured comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 19(3), 219–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lytinen, S. L. (1992). Conceptual dependency and its descendants. Computers & Mathematics with Applications, 23(2–5), 51–73. doi:10.1016/0898-1221(92)90136-6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McSherry, D., & Stretch, C. (2011). Learning more from experience in case-based reasoning. In A. Ram & N. Wiratunga (Eds.), Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development (pp. 151–165). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ngu, B. H., & Yeung, A. S. (2012). Fostering analogical transfer: The multiple components approach to algebra word problem solving in a chemistry context. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 37(1), 14–32. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2011.09.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noroozi, O., Weinberger, A., Biemans, H. J. A., Mulder, M., & Chizari, M. (2013). Facilitating argumentative knowledge construction through a transactive discussion script in CSCL. Computers & Education, 61, 59–76. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.08.013.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M. (2008). Collaborative discourse, argumentation, and learning: Preface and literature review. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 33(3), 345–359. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2008.06.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nussbaum, M., & Schraw, G. (2007). Promoting argument-counterargument integration in students’ writing. Journal of Experimental Education, 76(1), 59–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oh, S., & Jonassen, D. H. (2007). Scaffolding online argumentation during problem solving. Journal of Computer Assisted learning, 23(2), 95–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D., Farady, M., & Bushey, B. (1991). Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. In J. Voss, D. Perskins, & J. Segal (Eds.), Informal reasoning and education (pp. 83–106). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rourke, L., & Kanuka, H. (2007). Barriers to online critical discourse. International Journal of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, 2(1), 105–126. doi:10.1007/s11412-007-9007-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saye, J. W., & Brush, T. (2002). Scaffolding critical reasoning about history and social issues in multimedia-supported learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 50(3), 77–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schank, R. (1999). Dynamic memory revisited (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strobel, J., & van Barneveld, A. (2009). When is PBL more effective? A meta-synthesis of meta analyses comparing PBL to conventional classrooms. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem Based Learning. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1046.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tawfik, A. A., & Jonassen, D. H. (2013). The effects of successful versus failure-based cases on argumentation while solving decision-making problems. Educational Technology Research & Development, 61(3), 385–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tawfik, A. A., & Kolodner, J. L. (2016). Systematizing scaffolding for problem-based learning: A view from case-based reasoning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valentine, K. D., & Kopcha, T. J. (2016). The embodiment of cases as alternative perspective in a mathematics hypermedia learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 64(6), 1183–1206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development (M. LopezMorillas, Trans.). In M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (pp. 79–91). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  • Walker, A., & Leary, H. (2009). A problem based learning meta analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem Based Learning, 3(1), 12–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wecker, C., & Fischer, F. (2014). Where is the evidence? A meta-analysis on the role of argumentation for the acquisition of domain-specific knowledge in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers and Education, 75, 218–228. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2014.02.016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, A., Ertl, B., Fischer, F., & Mandl, H. (2005). Epistemic and social scripts in computer–supported collaborative learning. Instructional Science, 33(1), 1–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weinberger, A., Stegmann, K., & Fischer, F. (2010). Learning to argue online: Scripted groups surpass individuals (unscripted groups do not). Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 506–515. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.08.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xiong, N. (2011). Learning fuzzy rules for similarity assessment in case-based reasoning. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(9), 10780–10786. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2011.01.151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the reviewers and editors for their insight and feedback. We would also like to thank Jonathan Davison and Dr. Cindy York for their helpful comments during the review of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Educational Technology, Research and Assessment, Northern Illinois University, Gabel Hall (Office: 101G), DeKalb, IL, 60115, USA

    Andrew A. Tawfik

Authors
  1. Andrew A. Tawfik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew A. Tawfik.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest is present with this study.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Tawfik, A.A. Do cases teach themselves? A comparison of case library prompts in supporting problem-solving during argumentation. J Comput High Educ 29, 267–285 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9136-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12528-017-9136-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation