The Q-matrix method: Mining student response data for knowledge

AAAI Workshop - Technical Report

Volumn WS-05-02, Issue , 2005, Pages 39-46

  Barnes, Tiffany ^a  

^a University of North Carolina at Charlotte   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE SCIENCE; COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTIONS; INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEMS; Q-MATRIX METHOD;

FEEDBACK; INTELLIGENT AGENTS; KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION; LEARNING SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; STUDENTS;

DATA MINING;

EID: 33646031770     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Ainsworth, S.E., Major, N., Grimshaw, S.K., Hayes. M., Underwood, J.D., Will'iams, B. & Wood, D.J. 2003. REDEEM: Simple Intelligent Tutoring Systems From Usable Tools, in T. Murray, S. Blessing & S.E. Ainsworth (eds). Advanced Tools for Advanced Technology Learning Environments, pp. 205-232. Amsterdam: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2. Baffes, P. & R.J. Mooney. 1996. A Novel Application of Theory Refinement to Student Modeling. Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-96), pp. 403-408, Portland, OR, August 1996.
3. Barnes, T. & Bitzer, D. 2002. Fault Tolerant Teaching and Automated Knowledge Assessment. Proceedings of the ACM Southeast Conference (ACMSE 2002), Raleigh NC, April 2002.
4. Barnes, T., D. Bitzer, & M. Vouk. 2005. Experimental analysis of the q-matrix method in knowledge discovery. To appear in International Symposium on Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, Saratoga Springs, MY, May 2005.
5. Birenbaum, M., Kelly, A., & Tatsuoka, K. 1993. Diagnosing knowledge states in algebra using the rule-space model. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 24(5), 442-459.
6. Brown, J.S. & Burton, R. 1978. Diagnostic models for procedural bugs in basic mathematical skills. Cognitive Science, 2, 155-191.
7. Conati, C., A.S. Gertner, & K. VanLehn. 2002. Using Bayesian Networks to Manage Uncertainty in Student Modeling. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 12(4): 371-417.
8. Hefteman, N.T. & K.R. Koedinger. 2002. An Intelligent Tutoring System Incorporating a Model of an Experienced Human Tutor. Intelligent Tutoring Systems, p. 596-608.
9. Hubal, R. 1992. Retro-adaptive testing and evaluation system. Computer Science Masters Thesis. North Carolina State University.
10. Murray, Tom. 1999. Authoring Intelligent Tutoring Systems: An analysis of the state of the art. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education (1999), 10: 98-129.
11. NovaNET educational network. Online. http://www.pearsondigital.com/novanet/
12. Sellers, J. 1998. An empirical evaluation of a fault-tolerant approach to computer-assisted teaching of binary relations. Computer Science Masters Thesis, North Carolina State University.
13. Tatsuoka, K. 1983. Rule space: An approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 20(4), 345-354.
14. VanLehn, K., & Martin, J. 1998. Evaluation of an assessment system based on Bayesian student modeling. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, 8(2), 179-221.