Factors influencing the performance of Dynamic Decision Network for INQPRO

Computers and Education

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2009, Pages 762-780

  Ting, Choo Yee ^a   Phon Amnuaisuk, Somnuk ^a  

^a MULTIMEDIA UNIVERSITY   (Malaysia)

Author keywords

Dynamic Decision Networks; Intelligent Tutoring Systems; Interactive Learning Environment; Learner modeling; Simulations

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER AIDED INSTRUCTION; E-LEARNING; EDUCATION; GRAPHICAL USER INTERFACES; INTERNET PROTOCOLS; NETWORK PERFORMANCE; PHASE INTERFACES;

DYNAMIC DECISION NETWORKS; INTELLIGENT TUTORING SYSTEMS; INTERACTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT; LEARNER MODELING; SIMULATIONS;

DYNAMIC MODELS;

EID: 60449109903     PISSN: 03601315     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2008.12.003     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Alonzo, A.C., & Aschbacher, P.R. (2004). Value-added? Long assessment of students' scientific inquiry skills. In Assessment for reform-based science teaching and learning, a symposium at the annual meeting of the AERA, San Diego.
2. Ausubel D. The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology 51 (1960) 267-272
3. Baker, R. S., Corbett, A. T., Koedinger, K. R, & Roll, I. (2005). Detecting when students game the system, across tutor subjects and classroom cohorts. In Proceedings of user modeling 2005, Berlin.
4. Beck, J. (2005). Engagement tracing: Using response times to model student disengagement. In C.-K. Looi et al. (Eds.), Artificial intelligence in education: Supporting learning through intelligent and socially informed technology 2005, Amsterdam.
5. Beal, C. R., Qu, L., & Lee, H. (2006). Classifying learner engagement through integration of multiple data sources. In Proceedings of AAAI06, Boston, MA.
6. Blake, C., & Merz, C. (1998). UCI Repository of Machine Learning Databases, http://www.ics.uci.edu/~mlearn/MLRepository.html.
7. Bunt A., and Conati C. Probabilistic student modelling to improve exploratory behaviour. Journal of User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 13 (2003) 269-309
8. Conati, C., Gertner, A., VanLehn, K., & Druzdzel, M. (1997). On-line student modeling for coached problem solving using Bayesian networks. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on user modeling, Sardinia, Italy.
9. Conati, C. (2002). Probabilistic assessment of user's emotiones in educational games. Journal of Applied Artificial Intelligence: Special issue on Merging Cognition and Affect in HCI, 16, 555-575.
10. Conati C., Gertner A., and VanLehn K. Using Bayesian networks to manage uncertainty in student modeling. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 12 4 (2002) 371-417
11. Chi M., and Roscoe R. The processes and challenges of conceptual change. In: Limon M., and Mason L. (Eds). Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (2002), Kluwer, Netherlands
12. Dragon T., Woolf B., Marshall D., and Murray T. Coaching within a domain independent inquiry environment. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4053 (2006) 144-153
13. Horvitz E., Kadie C., Peak T., and Hovel D. Models of attention in computing and communications: from principles to applications. Communications of the ACM 46 (2003) 52-59
14. Howard R.A., and Matheson J. Readings on the principles and applications of decision analysis (1981), Strategic Decisions Group, Menlo Park
15. Jameson A. Numerical uncertainty management in user and student modeling: An overview of systems and issues. User Modeling and User-adapted Interaction 5 3-4 (1996) 103-251
16. Jensen F.V. Bayesian networks and decision graphs (2002), Springer, New York
17. de Jong T., and van Joolingen W. Scientific discovery learning with computer simulations of conceptual domains. Review of Educational Research 68 2 (1998) 179-201
18. van Joolingen W. Cognitive tools for discovery learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education 10 (1999) 385-397
19. van Jollingen W., and de Jong T. Supporting hypothesis generation by learners exploring an interactive computer simulation. Instructional Science 20 (1991) 389-404
20. Karasavvidis I., Pieters J.M., and Plomp T. Exploring the mechanisms through which computers contribute to learning. Journal of Computing Assisted Learning 19 1 (2003) 115-128
21. Kjaerulff U., and Madsen A. Bayesian networks and influence diagrams: A guide to construction and analysis (2008), Springer, New York
22. Korb K.B., and Nicholson A.E. Bayesian artificial intelligence (2004), Chapman and Hall
23. Liao W., Zhang W., Zhu Z., Ji Q., and Gray W.D. Toward a decision-theoretic framework for affect recognition and user assistance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 64 (2006) 847-873
24. Li X., and Ji Q. Active affective state detection and user assistance with dynamic Bayesian networks. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans 35 1 (2004) 2252-2261
25. Linn M.C. Designing the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science Education 22 (2000) 781-796
26. Millán E., and Pérez-de-la-Cruz J.L. A Bayesian diagnostic algorithm for student modeling and its evaluation. User Model. User-Adapt Interact 12 (2002) 281-330
27. Murray R.C., VanLehn K., and Mostow J. Looking ahead to select tutorial actions: A decision-theoretic approach. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 14 (2004) 235-278
28. Murray C., and Vanlehn K. A comparison of decision-theoretic, fixed-policy and random tutorial action selection. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4053 (2006) 114-123
29. Njoo M., and de Jong T. Exploratory learning with a computer simulation for control theory: Learning processes and instructional support. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30 (1993) 821-844
30. Paolucci, M., Suthers, D., & Weiner, A. (1996). Automated advice giving strategies for scientific inquiry. In C. Frasson, G. Gauthier & A. Lesgold (Eds.). In Proceedings of the third international conference on intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 372-381).
31. Pearl J. Probabilistic reasoning in intelligent systems: Networks of plausible inference (1988), Morgan Kaufman Publishers, San Mateo, CA
32. Pek P., and Poh K. Making decisions in an intelligent tutoring system. International Journal of Information Technology and Decision Making 4 (2005) 207-233
33. Pryor, A., & Soloway, E. (1997) Foundation of science: Using technology to support authentic science learning. .
34. Phon-Amnuaisuk, S., & Chee, K. S. (2005). Interactivities in music intelligent tutoring system. In Proceedings of fifth IEEE international conference on advanced learning technology (pp. 519-520), Taiwan.
35. Recker, M., & Pirolli, P. (1992). Student strategies for learning programming from a computational environment'. In Proceedings of the second international conference on intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 382-394), Canada.
36. Reiser, B., Copen, W., Ranney, M., Hamid, A., & Kimberg. D. (1994). Cognitive and motivational consequences of tutoring and discovery learning. Technical report, The Institute for the Learning Sciences.
37. In: Reiser B.J., Tabak I., Sandoval W.A., Smith B., Steinmuller F., Leone T.J., et al. (Eds). Cognition and instruction: Twenty five years of progress (2001), Erlbaum, Mahvah, NJ
38. Reye, J. (1998). Two-phase updating of student models based on dynamic belief networks. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems 1998 (pp. 274-283).
39. Reye J. Student modeling based on belief networks. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 14 (2004) 1-33
40. Schafer, R., & Weyrath, T. (1997). Assessing temporally variable user properties with dynamic Bayesian networks. In A. Jameson, C. Paris, & C. Tasso (Eds.), User modeling. In Proceedings of the user modeling 1997, New York.
41. Shute V.J., and Glaser R. A large-scale evaluation of an intelligent discovery world: Smithtown. Interactive Learning Environments 1 (1990) 51-77
42. Shute V. A comparison of learning environments: All that glitters. In: Lajoie S.P., and Derry S.J. (Eds). Computers as cognitive tools (1993), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ 47-74
43. Ting C.Y., and Arshad M.Y. Penggunaan simulasi komputer bagi merealisasikan fenomena tidak salih: Satu alternatif mewujudkan konflik kognitif dalam pembelajaran sains. Journal of Education University of Teknology Malaysia 6 1 (2000) 1-21
44. Ting C.Y., Beik Zadeh M.-R., and Chong Y.K. A decision-theoretic approach to scientific inquiry exploratory learning environment. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 4053 (2006) 85-94
45. Ting, C. Y., & Phon-Amnuaisuk, S. (in press). Log data approach to acquisition of optimal Bayesian learner model. American Journal of Applied Sciences.
46. Tselios N., Stoica A., Maragoudakis M., Avouris N., and Komis V. Enhancing user support in open problem solving environments through Bayesian Network inference techniques. Educational Technology & Society 9 (2006) 150-165
47. Veermans K., and van Joolingen W.R. Combining heuristics and formal methods in a tool for supporting simulation-based discovery learning. Intelligent Tutoring Systems'06 (2004) 217-226
48. Vosniadou S. On the nature of naive physics. In: Limon M., and Mason L. (Eds). Reconsidering conceptual change: Issues in theory and practice (2002), Kluwer, Dordrecht