Abstract
AbstractA common goal of Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS) is to provide learning environments that adapt to the varying abilities and characteristics of users. This type of adaptivity is possible only if the ITS has information that characterizes the learning behaviors of its users and can adjust its pedagogy accordingly. This study investigated an intelligent tutoring system with computer agents (AutoTutor) designed to improve comprehension skills in adults with low reading literacy. One goal of this study was to classify adults into different clusters based on their behavioral patterns (accuracy and response time to answer questions) while they interacted with AutoTutor to help them improve their reading comprehension skills. A second goal was to investigate whether adults’ behaviors were associated with different reading components. A third goal was to assess improvements in reading comprehension skills, based on psychometric tests, of different clusters of readers. Performance on AutoTutor was collected in a targeted 100-hour hybrid intervention for adult readers (n = 252) that included both human teachers and the AutoTutor system. The adults’ average accuracy and response time in AutoTutor were used to cluster the adults into four categories: higher performers (comparatively fast and accurate), conscientious readers (slow but accurate), under-engaged readers (fast at the expense of somewhat lower accuracy) and struggling readers (slow and inaccurate). Two psychometric tests of comprehension were used to assess comprehension. Gains in comprehension scores were highest for conscientious readers, lowest for struggling readers, with higher performing readers and under-engaged readers in between. The results provide guidance to enhance the adaptivity of AutoTutor.
Funder
Institute of Education Sciences
National Science Foundation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Computational Theory and Mathematics,Education
Reference59 articles.
1. Baker, L. (1989). Metacognition, comprehension monitoring, and the adult reader. Educational Psychology Review, 1(1), 3–38.
2. Baker, R. S. J. D., Corbett, A. T., Roll, I., & Koedinger, K. R. (2008). Developing a generalizable detector of when students game the system. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 18(3), 287–314.
3. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2014). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R Package Version, 1(7), 1–23.
4. Beck, J. E., & Gong, Y. (2013). Wheel-spinning: Students who fail to master a skill. In H. C. Lane, K. Yacef, J. Mostow, & P. Pavlik (Eds.), Proceedings of the 16th international conference on artificial intelligence in education (pp. 431–440). Springer.
5. Brock, G., Pihur, V., Datta, S., & Datta, S. (2011). clValid, an R package for cluster validation. Journal of Statistical Software, 25(4). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v025.i04.
Cited by
18 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献