MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106157574

Identifying Students' Characteristic Learning Behaviors in an Intelligent Tutoring System Fostering Self-Regulated Learning

2012· article· en· W2106157574 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEducational Data Mining · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicIntelligent Tutoring Systems and Adaptive Learning
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSession (web analytics)Relevance (law)Reading (process)Adaptation (eye)Test (biology)TRACE (psycholinguistics)Intelligent tutoring systemCluster analysisArtificial intelligenceMathematics educationPsychologyWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Identification of student learning behaviors, especially those that characterize or distinguish students, can yield important insights for the design of adaptation and feedback mechanisms in Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS). In this paper, we analyze trace data to identify distinguishing patterns of behavior in a study of 51 college students learning about a complex science topic with an agent-based ITS that fosters self-regulated learning (SRL). Preliminary analysis with an Expectation-Maximization clustering algorithm revealed the existence of three distinct groups of students, distinguished by their test and quiz scores (low for the first group, medium for the second group, and high for the third group), their learning gains (low, medium, high), the frequency of their note-taking (rare, frequent, rare) and note-checking (rare, rare, frequent), the proportion of sub-goals attempted (low, low, high), and the time spent reading (high, high, low). In this paper, we extend this analysis to identify characteristic learning behaviors and strategies that distinguish these three groups of students. We employ a differential sequence mining technique to identify differentially frequent activity patterns between the student groups and interpret these patterns in terms of relevant learning behaviors. The results of this analysis reveal that high-performing students tend to be better at quickly identifying the relevance of a page to their subgoal, are more methodical in their exploration of the pedagogical content, rely on system prompts to take notes and summarize, and are more strategic in their preparation for the post-test (e.g., using the end of their session to briefly review pages). These results provide a first step in identifying the group to which a student belongs during the learning session, thus making possible a real-time adaptation of the system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.100
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it