What are the implications of ACT-R in education?
Anderson, J. R., Schunn, C. D. (2000). Implications of the ACT-R learning theory: No magic bullets. In R. Glaser (Ed.), Advances in instructional psychology: Educational design and cognitive science, 5 (1-33). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Anderson, J. R., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R., & Pelletier, R. (1995). Cognitive tutors: Lessons learned. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4 (2), 167-207. Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., Hadley, W. H., & Mark, M. A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8, 30-43. And a couple more that address the issue of the “perceptual chunking” phenomenon that deGroot chess results famously illustrate: Servan-Schreiber, E. & Anderson, J. R. (1990). Learning artificial grammars with competitive chunking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 592-608. Koedinger, K. R. & Anderson, J. R. (1990). Abstract planning and perceptual chunks: Elements