A Comparative Analysis of Cognitive Tutoring and Constraint-Based Modeling

Numerous approaches to student modeling have been proposed since the inception of the field more than three decades ago. hat the field is lacking completely is comparative analyses of different student modeling approaches. Such analyses are sorely needed, as they can identify the most promising approaches and provide guidelines for future research. In this paper we compare Cognitive Tutoring to Constraint-Based Modeling (CBM). We present our experiences in implementing a database design tutor using both methodologies and highlight their strengths and weaknesses. We compare their characteristics and argue the differences are often more apparent than real. For specific domains, one approach may be favoured over the other, making them viable complementary methods for supporting learning

Evaluating the Effectiveness of tutorial dialogue instruction in a Explotary learning context

[Proceedings of] ITS 2006, 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 26-30 June 2006, Jhongli, Taoyuan County, TaiwanIn this paper we evaluate the instructional effectiveness of tutorial dialogue agents in an exploratory learning setting. We hypothesize that the creative nature of an exploratory learning environment creates an opportunity for the benefits of tutorial dialogue to be more clearly evidenced than in previously published studies. In a previous study we showed an advantage for tutorial dialogue support in an exploratory learning environment where that support was administered by human tutors [9]. Here, using a similar experimental setup and materials, we evaluate the effectiveness of tutorial dialogue agents modeled after the human tutors from that study. The results from this study provide evidence of a significant learning benefit of the dialogue agentsThis project is supported by ONR Cognitive and Neural Sciences Division, Grant number N000140410107proceedingPublicad

A contingency analysis of LeActiveMath's learner model

We analyse how a learner modelling engine that uses belief functions for evidence and belief representation, called xLM, reacts to different input information about the learner in terms of changes in the state of its beliefs and the decisions that it derives from them. The paper covers xLM induction of evidence with different strengths from the qualitative and quantitative properties of the input, the amount of indirect evidence derived from direct evidence, and differences in beliefs and decisions that result from interpreting different sequences of events simulating learners evolving in different directions. The results here presented substantiate our vision of xLM is a proof of existence for a generic and potentially comprehensive learner modelling subsystem that explicitly represents uncertainty, conflict and ignorance in beliefs. These are key properties of learner modelling engines in the bizarre world of open Web-based learning environments that rely on the content+metadata paradigm

Motivational Social Visualizations for Personalized E-Learning

A large number of educational resources is now available on the Web to support both regular classroom learning and online learning. However, the abundance of available content produces at least two problems: how to help students find the most appropriate resources, and how to engage them into using these resources and benefiting from them. Personalized and social learning have been suggested as potential methods for addressing these problems. Our work presented in this paper attempts to combine the ideas of personalized and social learning. We introduce Progressor + , an innovative Web-based interface that helps students find the most relevant resources in a large collection of self-assessment questions and programming examples. We also present the results of a classroom study of the Progressor +  in an undergraduate class. The data revealed the motivational impact of the personalized social guidance provided by the system in the target context. The interface encouraged students to explore more educational resources and motivated them to do some work ahead of the course schedule. The increase in diversity of explored content resulted in improving students’ problem solving success. A deeper analysis of the social guidance mechanism revealed that it is based on the leading behavior of the strong students, who discovered the most relevant resources and created trails for weaker students to follow. The study results also demonstrate that students were more engaged with the system: they spent more time in working with self-assessment questions and annotated examples, attempted more questions, and achieved higher success rates in answering them