Using Stanovich and Stanovich's (2003) Framework for Evidence-Based Practice in Education, Compare and Contrast the Theoretical and Evidence Base for Using Wordle and Memory Tutor (Based on Fact)
Based on Stanovich and Stanovich’s (2003) framework for evidence-based practice in education, Memory
Tutor and Wordle have markedly different evidence bases linked directly to their relative effectiveness, as well as the strength of the theoretical foundations upon which the techniques are based. The three factors upon which a teacher should found their evaluations of an educational practice can be reduced to the following: publication of findings in peer-reviewed, refereed journals; replication of results by other reputable investigators and; consensus on the research within the community (Stanovich & Stanovich, 2003, pp. 7-9). It can be seen, through examination of these bases, that Memory Tutor has a greater strength of converging evidence than does Wordle a result of the lack of sufficient research to ascertain its efficacy in education.
A theory is defined by Stanovich as “a causal model of the effects [this educational method] has” (Stanovich
& Stanovich, 2003, p. 28); comparing the theoretical bases of both Wordle and Memory Tutor, we can identify some interesting, contrasting features.
The theoretical base for using Wordle in education seems to be lacking; indeed, there seem to be little, if any, strong evidence that confirms that the underlying principles of word clouds are valid, or effective as teaching aids. While it can be used as an advance organizer, which have been shown to be effective by meta-analyses
(Petty, 2009, pp. 197-198), it is flawed in its principle; “the frequency of a word does not necessarily denote its importance in a given text” (Berson & Berson, 2009).
Memory Tutor, which is based on the Fact and Concept Training (FaCT) System, is said to be based on a system that is said to optimize “practice schedules according to model-based predictions” (Pavlik Jr., Presson,
Dozzi, Wu, MacWhinney, & Koedinger, 2007). The Adaptive Control of Thought-Rational Theory (ACT-R) is the model upon which the predictive capabilities of
Tutor and Wordle have markedly different evidence bases linked directly to their relative effectiveness, as well as the strength of the theoretical foundations upon which the techniques are based. The three factors upon which a teacher should found their evaluations of an educational practice can be reduced to the following: publication of findings in peer-reviewed, refereed journals; replication of results by other reputable investigators and; consensus on the research within the community (Stanovich & Stanovich, 2003, pp. 7-9). It can be seen, through examination of these bases, that Memory Tutor has a greater strength of converging evidence than does Wordle a result of the lack of sufficient research to ascertain its efficacy in education.
A theory is defined by Stanovich as “a causal model of the effects [this educational method] has” (Stanovich
& Stanovich, 2003, p. 28); comparing the theoretical bases of both Wordle and Memory Tutor, we can identify some interesting, contrasting features.
The theoretical base for using Wordle in education seems to be lacking; indeed, there seem to be little, if any, strong evidence that confirms that the underlying principles of word clouds are valid, or effective as teaching aids. While it can be used as an advance organizer, which have been shown to be effective by meta-analyses
(Petty, 2009, pp. 197-198), it is flawed in its principle; “the frequency of a word does not necessarily denote its importance in a given text” (Berson & Berson, 2009).
Memory Tutor, which is based on the Fact and Concept Training (FaCT) System, is said to be based on a system that is said to optimize “practice schedules according to model-based predictions” (Pavlik Jr., Presson,
Dozzi, Wu, MacWhinney, & Koedinger, 2007). The Adaptive Control of Thought-Rational Theory (ACT-R) is the model upon which the predictive capabilities of
Cited: Berson, I. R., & Berson, M. J. (2009). Making Sense of Social Studies with Visualization Tools. Social Education , 73 (3), 124-126. Hayes, S. (2008). Wordle student words. Voices from the Middle , 66-68. Pavlik Jr., P. I., Presson, N., Dozzi, G., Wu, S.-M., MacWhinney, B., & Koedinger, K. (2007). The FaCT (Fact and Concept) system: A new tool linking cognitive science with educators Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1379-1384). Nashville, TN, USA: Pittsburgh Science of Leanring Center. Petty, G. (2009). Evidence-Based Teaching: A Practical Approach (2nd Edition ed.). Cheltenham: Nelson Thornes. Stanovich, P. J., & Stanovich, K. E. (2003). Using Research and Reason in Education: How Teachers Can Use Scientifically Based Research To Make Curricular & Instructional Decisions Taasoobshirazi, G., & Glynn, S. M. (2009). College students solving chemistry problems: A theoretical model of expertise