Learning what works in its from non-traditional randomized controlled trial data

International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education

Volumn 21, Issue 1-2, 2011, Pages 47-63

  Pardos, Zachary A ^a   Dailey, Matthew D ^a   Heffernan, Neil T ^a  

^a WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

bayesian networks; data mining; hypothesis testing; item effect model; Knowledge tracing; randomized controlled trials

Indexed keywords

EID: 84855661484     PISSN: 15604292     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3233/JAI-2011-017     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Aist, G., & Mostow, J. (2000). Using Automated Within-Subject Invisible Experiments to Test the Effectiveness of Automated Vocabulary Assistance. In Joseph Beck (Ed.), Proceedings of ITS'2000 Workshop on Applying Machine Learning to ITS Design/Construction, (pp. 4-8). Fifth International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Montreal, Canada.
2. Arroyo, I., Beck, J.,Woolf, B., Beal, C., & Schultz, K. (2000). Macroadapting Animalwatch to gender and cognitive differences with respect to hint interactivity and symbolism, In: Gauthier, G.,VanLehn, K., & Frasson, C. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, (pp. 574-583).
3. Baker, R. S. J. d., Corbett, A. T., & Aleven, V. (2008). More Accurate Student Modeling Through Contextual Estimation of Slip and Guess Probabilities in Bayesian Knowledge Tracing. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 406-415.
4. Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (1995). Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 4(4), 253-278.
5. Corbett, A. T. (2009). Cognitive computer tutors: Solving the two-sigma problem. In M. Bauer, P. Gmytrasiewicz, & J. Vassileva (Eds.) User Modeling 2001. LNCS, vol. 2109, pp. 137-147. Springer Berlin, Heidelberg (2001)
6. Feng, M., Heffernan, N. T., & Koedinger, K. R. (2009). Addressing the assessment challenge in an Intelligent Tutoring System that tutors as it assesses. The Journal of User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, Vol 19, pp. 243-266.
7. Gong, Y., Beck, J. E., & Heffernan, N. T. (In Press) How to Construct More Accurate Student Models: Comparing and Optimizing Knowledge Tracing and Performance Factor Analysis. To be published in the International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education.
8. Kim, R., Weitz, R., Heffernan, N., & Krach, N. (2009). Tutored Problem Solving vs. "Pure": Worked Examples In Taatgen, N. A., & van Rijn, H. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society, pp. 1876-1881.
9. Koedinger, K. R., Anderson, J. R., Hadley, W. H., & Mark, M. A. (1997). Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 8, 30-43.
10. Ioannidis, J. P. (2005) Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2, e124.
11. Pardos, Z., & Heffernan, N. (2011) KT-IDEM: Introducing Item Difficulty to the Knowledge Tracing Model. In Konstant et al. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization (UMAP 2011). (pp. 243-254).
12. Pardos, Z. A., & Heffernan, N. T. (2010). Modeling Individualization in a Bayesian Networks Implementation of Knowledge Tracing. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization. (pp. 255-266). Big Island, Hawaii.
13. Pardos, Z. A., & Heffernan, N. T. (2009a). Detecting the Learning Value of Items in a Randomized Problem Set. In Dimitrova, Mizoguchi, du Boulay & Graesser (Eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. IOS Press. (pp. 499-506).
14. Pardos, Z. A., & Heffernan, N. T. (2009b). Determining the Significance of Item Order in Randomized Problem Sets, In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Educational Data Mining. Cordoba, Spain, pp. 111-120.
15. Razzaq, L., Feng, M., Nuzzo-Jones, G., Heffernan, N. T., Koedinger, K. R., Junker, B., Ritter, S., Knight, A., Aniszczyk, C., Choksey, S., Livak, T., Mercado, E., Turner, T. E., Upalekar. R, Walonoski, J. A., Macasek, M. A., & Rasmussen, K. P. (2005). The Assistment project: Blending assessment and assisting, In Looi, C.K., McCalla, G., Bredeweg, B., & Breuker, J. (Eds.) Proceedings of the 12th Artificial Intelligence in Education, Amsterdam: ISO Press. (pp. 555-562).
16. Razzaq, L., & Heffernan, N. T. (2006). Scaffolding vs. hints in the Assistment system. In: Ikeda, Ashley, & Chan (Eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. LNCS, vol. 4053, pp. 635-644. Berlin, Heidelberg. (Pubitemid 44117635)
17. Razzaq, L., & Heffernan, N. T. (2009). To Tutor or Not to Tutor: That is the Question. In Dimitrova, Mizoguchi, du Boulay & Graesser (Eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. IOS Press. (pp. 457-464).
18. Rye, J. (2004). Student modeling based on belief networks. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education,14, 63-96.
19. VanLehn, K., Graesser, A. C., Jackson, G. T., Jordan, P., Olney, A., & Rose, C. P. (2005). When is reading just as effective as one-on-one interactive human tutoring? In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, (pp. 2259-2264). Mahwah: Erlbaum.