Intelligent Tutoring Systems and the Future of Problem-Solving Education: An Opinionated Synthesis

Dwi Sulisworo; Aysel Arslan

doi:10.56741/IISTR.jgi.001802

Authors

Dwi Sulisworo
sulisworo@gmail.com
Universitas Ahmad Dahlan https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7625-8505
Aysel Arslan Sivas Cumhuriyet University https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8775-1119

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56741/IISTR.jgi.001802

Keywords:

Adaptive Learning, Cognitive Mechanisms, Educational Technology, Personalized Learning, Problem Solving

Abstract

The rapid evolution of Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) has transformed contemporary educational discourse, particularly regarding how automated systems can enhance students’ problem-solving abilities in STEM fields. Although empirical studies consistently show that ITS can outperform traditional instruction, the mechanisms driving these gains remain insufficiently emphasized in policy and pedagogical narratives. This article argues that ITS effectiveness stems from a synergy of seven cognitive mechanisms: adaptive scaffolding, immediate and elaborated feedback, model-tracing and knowledge-tracing, metacognitive prompting, productive practice, error-driven learning, and cognitive load regulation. An opinion-based synthesis supported by extensive literature is presented to advocate for the strategic integration of ITS within national instructional reforms. The conceptual framework includes a visual diagram representing the mechanisms and their interactions. Results and discussion are organized into three subsections The article concludes with recommendations for adopting ITS in large-scale educational systems to improve learners' higher-order problem-solving.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Dwi Sulisworo, Universitas Ahmad Dahlan

is a lecturer in the Education Study Program at Universitas Ahmad Dahlan, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. He holds undergraduate degrees in Mechanical Engineering and Industrial Engineering from Institut Teknologi Bandung and a Doctorate in Instructional Technology from Universitas Negeri Malang. His research focuses on technology-enhanced learning, digital pedagogy, and innovative instructional strategies. He has published extensively in reputable journals and remains active in academic collaboration and community engagement. (email: dwi.sulisworo@uad.ac.id).

Aysel Arslan, Sivas Cumhuriyet University

completed her primary education in Sivas and finished middle and high school through an open education program. She earned her Bachelor’s degree in Turkish Language Teaching from Sivas Cumhuriyet University (2010–2014), her Master’s degree in Curriculum and Instruction from the same university (2014–2017), and her Ph.D. in Curriculum and Instruction from Atatürk University (2017–2021). She has published numerous articles, conference papers, and book chapters. Her main research interests include cooperative learning, self-efficacy, digital addiction, values education, lifelong learning, and motivation. (email: ayselarslan@cumhuriyet.edu.tr).

References

N. Tryfona, ‘Teaching and Learning STEM Online: Challenges, Achievements, and Benefits’, Innov. Teach. Learn. Conf. Proc., vol. 7, no. 1, Sept. 2015, doi: 10.13021/g8hk51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13021/G8HK51

K. VanLEHN, ‘The Relative Effectiveness of Human Tutoring, Intelligent Tutoring Systems, and Other Tutoring Systems’, Educ. Psychol., vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 197–221, Oct. 2011, doi: 10.1080/00461520.2011.611369. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2011.611369

L. Ganesan and D. Devi S., ‘Use of Natural Language Processing in Cognitive Tutoring’, Adv. Comput. Intell. Robot., pp. 359–390, Nov. 2025, doi: 10.4018/979-8-3373-4217-7.ch014. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3373-4217-7.ch014

M. Guid, M. Pavlič, and M. Možina, ‘Automated Feedback Generation for Argument-Based Intelligent Tutoring Systems’, presented at the Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, SCITEPRESS - Science and Technology Publications, 2019, pp. 70–77. doi: 10.5220/0007717600700077. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5220/0007717600700077

S. Feng, A. J. Magana, and D. Kao, ‘A systematic review of literature on the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems in STEM’, presented at the 2021 IEEE frontiers in education conference (fie), IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE49875.2021.9637240

R. S. Baker and P. S. Inventado, ‘Educational Data Mining and Learning Analytics’, Learn. Anal., pp. 61–75, 2014, doi: 10.1007/978-1-4614-3305-7_4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3305-7_4

O. Ipinnaiye and A. Risquez, ‘Exploring adaptive learning, learner-content interaction and student performance in undergraduate economics classes’, Comput. Educ., vol. 215, p. 105047, July 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105047. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2024.105047

D. J. Lemay, C. Baek, and T. Doleck, ‘Comparison of learning analytics and educational data mining: A topic modeling approach’, Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell., vol. 2, p. 100016, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100016

J. Sweller, ‘The Role of Evolutionary Psychology in Our Understanding of Human Cognition: Consequences for Cognitive Load Theory and Instructional Procedures’, Educ. Psychol. Rev., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 2229–2241, Nov. 2021, doi: 10.1007/s10648-021-09647-0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09647-0

W. Mualla and K. J. Mualla, ‘Digital Transformation in Higher Education: Challenges and Opportunities for Developing Countries’, High. Educ. Arab World, pp. 211–231, 2024, doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-70779-7_9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-70779-7_9

B. S. Bloom, ‘The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring’, Educ. Res., vol. 13, no. 6, p. 4, June 1984, doi: 10.2307/1175554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1175554

D. Dermeval et al., ‘Amplifying Teachers Intelligence in the Design of Gamified Intelligent Tutoring Systems’, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci., pp. 68–73, 2018, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-93846-2_13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93846-2_13

H. A. Alrakhawi, N. Jamiat, and S. S. Abu-Naser, ‘Intelligent tutoring systems in education: a systematic review of usage, tools, effects and evaluation’, J. Theor. Appl. Inf. Technol., vol. 101, no. 4, pp. 1205–1226, 2023.

D. Laurillard, ‘Learning number sense through digital games with intrinsic feedback’, Australas. J. Educ. Technol., vol. 32, no. 6, Dec. 2016, doi: 10.14742/ajet.3116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.3116

S. Elkington and A. Irons, ‘Formative assessment and feedback in post-digital higher education’, Form. Assess. Feedback Post-Digit. Learn. Environ., pp. 9–28, Feb. 2025, doi: 10.4324/9781003360254-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003360254-2

Y. Anwar, A. Widodo, Z. Al fatih, D. Kartika, M. Ariska, and N. Yusliani, ‘Education for Sustainable Development Based on Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge in Biology Education: Assessing Teachers’ Readiness’, J. Pendidik. IPA Indones., vol. 14, no. 3, Sept. 2025, doi: 10.15294/jpii.v14i3.22908. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15294/jpii.v14i3.22908

C. Schumacher, D. Klasen, and D. Ifenthaler, ‘Implementation of a Learning Analytics System in a Productive Higher Education Environment’, Emerg. Trends Learn. Anal., pp. 177–199, Apr. 2019, doi: 10.1163/9789004399273_010. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004399273_010

T. E. Panggabean, N. Jalinus, W. Simatupang, D. Noviandri, U. Verawardina, and D. Nofriansyah, ‘Practical Model Intelligence Computer Assisted Instruction project-based learning-oriented High Order Thinking Skill’, Turk. J. Comput. Math. Educ. TURCOMAT, vol. 12, no. 11, pp. 780–790, May 2021, doi: 10.17762/turcomat.v12i11.5963. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i11.5963

R. E. Mayer, ‘Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning’, Camb. Handb. Multimed. Learn., pp. 43–71, July 2014, doi: 10.1017/cbo9781139547369.005. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139547369.005

F. Paas, A. Renkl, and J. Sweller, ‘Cognitive Load Theory: Instructional Implications of the Interaction between Information Structures and Cognitive Architecture’, Instr. Sci., vol. 32, no. 1–2, pp. 1–8, Jan. 2004, doi: 10.1023/b:truc.0000021806.17516.d0. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021806.17516.d0

J. A. Greene and R. Azevedo, ‘The Measurement of Learners’ Self-Regulated Cognitive and Metacognitive Processes While Using Computer-Based Learning Environments’, Educ. Psychol., vol. 45, no. 4, pp. 203–209, Oct. 2010, doi: 10.1080/00461520.2010.515935. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2010.515935

N. P. Pitterson, S. Brown, J. Pascoe, and K. Q. Fisher, ‘Measuring cognitive engagement through interactive, constructive, active and passive learning activities’, presented at the 2016 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), IEEE, Oct. 2016, pp. 1–6. doi: 10.1109/fie.2016.7757733. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2016.7757733

Y. Wu and C. D. Schunn, ‘Passive, active, and constructive engagement with peer feedback: A revised model of learning from peer feedback’, Contemp. Educ. Psychol., vol. 73, p. 102160, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2023.102160

C. Tofel-Grehl, ‘“Making” Science Meaningful and Equitable’, Evid.-Based Inq. Ethno-STEM Res., pp. 361–375, Oct. 2020, doi: 10.1108/978-1-64802-117-620251020. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-64802-117-620251020

J. A. Corrigan, ‘The implementation of e-tutoring in secondary schools: A diffusion study’, Comput. Educ., vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 925–936, Nov. 2012, doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.013. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.013

F. Gutierrez and J. Atkinson, ‘Adaptive feedback selection for intelligent tutoring systems’, Expert Syst. Appl., vol. 38, no. 5, pp. 6146–6152, 2011. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2010.11.058

U. Maier and C. Klotz, ‘Personalized feedback in digital learning environments: Classification framework and literature review’, Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell., vol. 3, p. 100080, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100080