MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2954460532 · doi:10.1080/10494820.2019.1636084

Automatic modeling learner’s personality using learning analytics approach in an intelligent Moodle learning platform

2019· article· en· W2954460532 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Tlili, Mouna Denden, Fathi Essalmi, Mohamed Jemni, Maiga Chang, Kinshuk Kinshuk, Nian‐Shing Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInteractive Learning Environments · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicOnline Learning and Analytics
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgreeablenessPersonalityPersonality psychologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceExtraversion and introversionLearning analyticsBig Five personality traitsMachine learningOpenness to experiencePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ability of automatically modeling learners’ personalities is an important step in building adaptive learning environments. Several studies showed that knowing the personality of each learner can make the learning interaction with the provided learning contents and activities within learning systems more effective. However, the traditional method of modeling personality is using self-reports, such as questionnaire, which is subjective and with several limitations. Therefore, this study presents a new unobtrusive method to model the learners’ personalities in an intelligent Moodle (iMoodle) using Learning Analytic (LA) approach with Bayesian network. To evaluate the accuracy of the proposed approach, an experiment was conducted with one hundred thirty-nine learners in a public university. Results showed that recall, precision, F-measure and accuracy values are in acceptance range for three personality dimensions including extraversion, openness, and neuroticism. Moreover, the results showed that the LA approach has a fair agreement with the Big Five Inventory (BFI) in modeling these three personality dimensions. Finally, this study provides several recommendations which can help researchers and practitioners develop effective smart learning environments for both learning and modeling. For example, it is needed to help identify more features of the hardest personality traits, such as agreeableness, using gamification courses.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations62
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInteractive Learning EnvironmentsSame topicOnline Learning and AnalyticsFrench-language works237,207