Learning gain differences between ChatGPT and human tutor generated algebra hints

Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, are quickly advancing AI to the frontiers of practical consumer use and leading industries to re-evaluate how they allocate resources for content production. Authoring of open educational resources and hint content within adaptive tutoring systems is labor intensive. Should LLMs like ChatGPT produce educational content on par with human-authored content, the implications would be significant for further scaling of computer tutoring system approaches. In this paper, we conduct the first learning gain evaluation of ChatGPT by comparing the efficacy of its hints with hints authored by human tutors with 77 participants across two algebra topic areas, Elementary Algebra and Intermediate Algebra. We find that 70% of hints produced by ChatGPT passed our manual quality checks and that both human and ChatGPT conditions produced positive learning gains. However, gains were only statistically significant for human tutor created hints. Learning gains from human-created hints were substantially and statistically significantly higher than ChatGPT hints in both topic areas, though ChatGPT participants in the Intermediate Algebra experiment were near ceiling and not even with the control at pre-test. We discuss the limitations of our study and suggest several future directions for the field. Problem and hint content used in the experiment is provided for replicability

Towards an Intelligent Tutor for Mathematical Proofs

Computer-supported learning is an increasingly important form of study since it allows for independent learning and individualized instruction. In this paper, we discuss a novel approach to developing an intelligent tutoring system for teaching textbook-style mathematical proofs. We characterize the particularities of the domain and discuss common ITS design models. Our approach is motivated by phenomena found in a corpus of tutorial dialogs that were collected in a Wizard-of-Oz experiment. We show how an intelligent tutor for textbook-style mathematical proofs can be built on top of an adapted assertion-level proof assistant by reusing representations and proof search strategies originally developed for automated and interactive theorem proving. The resulting prototype was successfully evaluated on a corpus of tutorial dialogs and yields good results.Comment: In Proceedings THedu'11, arXiv:1202.453

Modelling human teaching tactics and strategies for tutoring systems

One of the promises of ITSs and ILEs is that they will teach and assist learning in an intelligent manner. Historically this has tended to mean concentrating on the interface, on the representation of the domain and on the representation of the student’s knowledge. So systems have attempted to provide students with reifications both of what is to be learned and of the learning process, as well as optimally sequencing and adjusting activities, problems and feedback to best help them learn that domain. We now have embodied (and disembodied) teaching agents and computer-based peers, and the field demonstrates a much greater interest in metacognition and in collaborative activities and tools to support that collaboration. Nevertheless the issue of the teaching competence of ITSs and ILEs is still important, as well as the more specific question as to whether systems can and should mimic human teachers. Indeed increasing interest in embodied agents has thrown the spotlight back on how such agents should behave with respect to learners. In the mid 1980s Ohlsson and others offered critiques of ITSs and ILEs in terms of the limited range and adaptability of their teaching actions as compared to the wealth of tactics and strategies employed by human expert teachers. So are we in any better position in modelling teaching than we were in the 80s? Are these criticisms still as valid today as they were then? This paper reviews progress in understanding certain aspects of human expert teaching and in developing tutoring systems that implement those human teaching strategies and tactics. It concentrates particularly on how systems have dealt with student answers and how they have dealt with motivational issues, referring particularly to work carried out at Sussex: for example, on responding effectively to the student’s motivational state, on contingent and Vygotskian inspired teaching strategies and on the plausibility problem. This latter is concerned with whether tactics that are effectively applied by human teachers can be as effective when embodied in machine teachers

DeepEval: An Integrated Framework for the Evaluation of Student Responses in Dialogue Based Intelligent Tutoring Systems

The automatic assessment of student answers is one of the critical components of an Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) because accurate assessment of student input is needed in order to provide effective feedback that leads to learning. But this is a very challenging task because it requires natural language understanding capabilities. The process requires various components, concepts identification, co-reference resolution, ellipsis handling etc. As part of this thesis, we thoroughly analyzed a set of student responses obtained from an experiment with the intelligent tutoring system DeepTutor in which college students interacted with the tutor to solve conceptual physics problems, designed an automatic answer assessment framework (DeepEval), and evaluated the framework after implementing several important components. To evaluate our system, we annotated 618 responses from 41 students for correctness. Our system performs better as compared to the typical similarity calculation method. We also discuss various issues in automatic answer evaluation

Supporting Constructive Learning with a Feedback Planner

A promising approach to constructing more effective computer tutors is implementing tutorial strategies that extend over multiple turns. This means that computer tutors must deal with (1) failure, (2) interruptions, (3) the need to revise their tactics, and (4) basic dialogue phenomena such as acknowledgment. To deal with these issues, we need to combine ITS technology with advances from robotics and computational linguistics. We can use reactive planning techniques from robotics to allow us to modify tutorial plans, adapting them to student input. Computational linguistics will give us guidance in handling communication management as well as building a reusable architecture for tutorial dialogue systems. A modular and reusable architecture is critical given the difficulty in constructing tutorial dialogue systems and the many domains to which we would like to apply them. In this paper, we propose such an architecture and discuss how a reactive planner in the context of this architecture can implement multi-turn tutorial strategies

A Formative Evaluation Research Study to Guide the Design of the Categorization Step Practice Utility (MS-CPU) as an Integral Part of Preparation for the GED Mathematics Test Using the Ms. Stephens Algebra Story Problem-solving Tutor (MSASPT)

abstract: The mathematics test is the most difficult test in the GED (General Education Development) Test battery, largely due to the presence of story problems. Raising performance levels of story problem-solving would have a significant effect on GED Test passage rates. The subject of this formative research study is Ms. Stephens’ Categorization Practice Utility (MS-CPU), an example-tracing intelligent tutoring system that serves as practice for the first step (problem categorization) in a larger comprehensive story problem-solving pedagogy that purports to raise the level of story problem-solving performance. During the analysis phase of this project, knowledge components and particular competencies that enable learning (schema building) were identified. During the development phase, a tutoring system was designed and implemented that algorithmically teaches these competencies to the student with graphical, interactive, and animated utilities. Because the tutoring system provides a much more concrete rather than conceptual, learning environment, it should foster a much greater apprehension of a story problem-solving process. With this experience, the student should begin to recognize the generalizability of concrete operations that accomplish particular story problem-solving goals and begin to build conceptual knowledge and a more conceptual approach to the task. During the formative evaluation phase, qualitative methods were used to identify obstacles in the MS-CPU user interface and disconnections in the pedagogy that impede learning story problem categorization and solution preparation. The study was conducted over two iterations where identification of obstacles and change plans (mitigations) produced a qualitative data table used to modify the first version systems (MS-CPU 1.1). Mitigation corrections produced the second version of the MS-CPU 1.2, and the next iteration of the study was conducted producing a second set of obstacle/mitigation tables. Pre-posttests were conducted in each iteration to provide corroboration for the effectiveness of the mitigations that were performed. The study resulted in the identification of a number of learning obstacles in the first version of the MS-CPU 1.1. Their mitigation produced a second version of the MS-CPU 1.2 whose identified obstacles were much less than the first version. It was determined that an additional iteration is needed before more quantitative research is conducted.Dissertation/ThesisDoctoral Dissertation Educational Technology 201

Tutorial Dialog in an Equation Solving Intelligent Tutoring System

This thesis makes a contribution to Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) architectures. A new intelligent tutoring system is presented for the domain of solving linear equations. This system is novel, because it is the first intelligent equation-solving tutor that combines a cognitive model of the domain with a model of dialog-based tutoring. The tutorial model is novel because it is based on the observation of an experienced human tutor and captures tutorial strategies specific to the domain of equation-solving. In this context, a tutorial dialog is the equivalent of breaking down problems into simpler steps and then asking new questions to the student before proceeding to the next navigational step. The resulting system, named E-tutor, was compared, via a randomized controlled experiment, to an algebra ITS similar to the“Cognitive Tutor by Carnegie Learning, Inc®. The Cognitive Tutor can provide traditional model-tracing feedback and buggy messages to students, but does not engage students in dialog. Preliminary results using a very small sample size, i.e., teaching equation solving to 15 high school students, showed that E-Tutor with dialog capabilities performed better than E-tutor without dialog. This result showed an effect size of 0.4 standard deviations for overall learning by condition. This set of preliminary results, though not statistically significant, shows promising opportunities to improve learning performance by adding tutorial dialog capabilities to ITSs. However, significant further validation is required, specifically, adding greater numbers and variations of the work to our sample size, before this approach can be deemed successful. The system is available at www.wpi.edu/~leenar/E-tutor

8. Issues in Intelligent Computer-Assisted Instruction: Eval uation and Measurement

In this chapter we plan to explore two issues in the field of intelligent computer assisted instruction (ICAI) that we feel offer opportunities to advance the state of the art. These issues are evaluation of ICAI systems and the use of the underlying technology in ICAI systems to develop tests. For each issue we will provide a theoretical context, discuss key constructs, provide a brief window to the appropriate literature, suggest methodological solutions and conclude with a concrete example of the feasibility of the solution from our own research. INTELLIGENT COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION (ICAI) ICAI is the application of artificial intelligence to computer-assisted instruction. Artificial intelligence, a branch of computer science, is making computers smart in order to (a) make them more useful and (b) understand intelligence (Winston, 1977). Topic areas in artificial intelligence have included natural language processing (Schank, 1980), vision (Winston, 1975), knowledge representation (Woods, 1983), spoken language (Lea, 1980), planning (Hayes-Roth, 1980), and expert systems (Buchanan, 1981). The field of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has matured in both hardware and software. The most commonly used language in the field is LISP (List Processing). A major development in the hardware area is that personal LISP machines are now available at a relatively low cost (20-50K) with the power of prior mainframes. In the software area two advances stand out: (a) programming support environments such as LOOPS (Bobrow & Stefik, 1983) and (b) expert system tools. These latter tools are now running on powerful micros. The application of expert systems technology to a host of real-world problems has demonstrated the utility of artificial intelligence techniques in a very dramatic style. Expert system technology is the branch of artificial intelligence at this point most relevant to ICAI. Expert Systems Knowledge-based systems or expert systems are a collection of problem-solving computer programs containing both factual and experiential knowledge and data in a particular domain. When the knowledge embodied in the program is a result of a human expert elicitation, these systems are called expert systems. A typical expert system consists of a knowledge base, a reasoning mechanism popularly called an inference engine and a friendly user interface. The knowledge base consists of facts, concepts, and numerical data (declarative knowledge), procedures based on experience or rules of thumb (heuristics), and causal or conditional relationships (procedural knowledge). The inference engine searches or reasons with or about the knowledge base to arrive at intermediate conclusions or final results during the course of problem solving. It effectively decides when and what knowledge should be applied, applies the knowledge and determines when an acceptable solution has been found. The inference engine employs several problem-solving strategies in arriving at conclusions. Two of the popular schemes involve starting with a good description or desired solution and working backwards to the known facts or current situation (backward chaining), and starting with the current situation or known facts and working toward a goal or desired solution (forward chaining). The user interface may give the user choices (typically menu-driven) or allow the user to participate in the control of the process (mixed initiative). The interface allows the user: to describe a problem, input knowledge or data, browse through the knowledge base, pose question, review the reasoning process of the system, intervene as necessary, and control overall system operation. Successful expert systems have been developed in fields as diverse as mineral exploration (Duda & Gaschnig, 1981) and medical diagnosis (Clancy, 1981). ICAI Systems ICAI systems use approaches artificial intelligence and cognitive science to teach a range of subject matters. Representative types of subjects include: (a) collection of facts, for example, South American geography in SCHOLAR (Carbonell & Collins, 1973); (b) complete system models, for example, a ship propulsion system in STEAMER (Stevens & Steinberg, 1981) and a power supply in SOPHIE (Brown, Burton, & de Kleer, 1982); (c) completely described procedural rules, for example, strategy learning, WEST (Brown, Burton, & de Kleer, 1982), or arithmetic in BUGGY (Brown & Burton, 1978); (d) partly described procedural rules, for example, computer programming in PROUST (Johnson & Soloway, 1983); LISP Tutor (Anderson, Boyle, & Reiser, 1985); rules in ALGEBRA (McArthur, Stasz, & Hotta, 1987); diagnosis of infectious diseases in GUIDON (Clancey, 1979); and an imperfectly understood complex domain, causes of rainfall in WHY (Stevens, Collins, & Goldin, 1978). Excellent reviews by Barr and Feigenbaum (1982) and Wenger (1987) document many of these ICAI systems. Representative research in ICAI is described by O\u27Neil, Anderson, and Freeman (1986) and Wenger (1987). Although suggestive evidence has been provided by Anderson et al. (1985), few of these ICAI projects have been evaluated in any rigorous fashion. In a sense they have all been toy systems for research and demonstration. Yet, they have raised a good deal of excitement and enthusiasm about their likelihood of being effective instructional environments. With respect to cognitive science, progress has been made in the following areas: identification and analysis of misconceptions or bugs (Clement, Lockhead, & Soloway, 1980), the use of learning strategies (O\u27Neil & Spielberger, 1979; Weinstein & Mayer, 1986), expert versus novice distinction (Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982), the role of mental models in learning (Kieras & Bovair, 1983), and the role of self-explanations in problem solving (Chi, Bassok, Lewis, Reimann, & Glaser, 1987). The key components of an ICAI system consist of a knowledge base: that is, (a) what the student is to learn; (b) a student model, either where the student is now with respect to subject matter or how student characteristics interact with subject matters, and (c) a tutor, that is, instructional techniques for teaching the declarative or procedural knowledge. These components are described in more detail by Fletcher (1985)