Computer-generated QIS tutorial feedback is valued by students, but does not replicate in-class collaboration
TL;DR
While the computer-generated feedback was broadly considered useful by students, student engagement patterns were markedly different in the solo setting, with students demonstrating reluctance to use the interface's built-in help features and tending to internalize failure in unproductive ways counter to the intention of a formative learning environment.
Abstract
PER has consistently demonstrated the effectiveness of small-group tutorials in helping students develop conceptual understanding and fluency, but instructor uptake is limited by resource constraints. To test the effectiveness of out-of-class tutorials using computer-generated feedback as an instructor-friendly alternative, we conducted think-aloud interviews with students in a quantum computing course who were randomly assigned to either a traditional validated small-group, pencil-and-paper tutorial on tensor products, or a solo computerized adaptation thereof. We found that while the computer-generated feedback was broadly considered useful by students, student engagement patterns were markedly different in the solo setting, with students demonstrating reluctance to use the interface's built-in help features and tending to internalize failure in unproductive ways counter to our intention of a formative learning environment. We discuss implications for curriculum design and directions for future research that may help to answer the longstanding question in PER of why tutorials work so well.