An official website of the United States government
Student perceptions of programming can impact their experiences in introductory computer science (CS) courses. For example, some students negatively assess their own ability in response to moments that are natural parts of expert practice, such as using online resources or getting syntax errors. Systems that automatically detect these moments from interaction log data could help us study these moments and intervene when the occur. However, while researchers have analyzed programming log data, few systems detect pre-defined moments, particularly those based on student perceptions. We contribute a new approach and system for detecting programming moments that students perceive as important from interaction log data. We conducted retrospective interviews with 41 CS students in which they identified moments that can prompt negative self-assessments. Then we created a qualitative codebook of the behavioral patterns indicative of each moment, and used this knowledge to build an expert system. We evaluated our system with log data collected from an additional 33 CS students. Our results are promising, with F1 scores ranging from 66% to 98%. We believe that this approach can be applied in many domains to understand and detect student perceptions of learning experiences.
more »
« less
Combining adaptivity with progression ordering for intelligent tutoring systems
Learning at scale (LAS) systems like Massive Open Online Classes (MOOCs) have hugely expanded access to high quality educational materials however, such materials are frequently time and resource expensive to create. In this work we propose a new approach for automatically and adaptively sequencing practice activities for a particular learner and explore its application for foreign language learning. We evaluate our system through simulation and are in the process of running an experiment. Our simulation results suggest that such an approach may be significantly better than an expert system when there is high variability in the rate of learning among the students and if mastering prerequisites before advancing is important. They also suggest it is likely to be no worse than an expert system if our generated curriculum approximately describes the necessary structure of learning in students.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1657176
- PAR ID:
- 10067110
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Work in Progress, Learning at Scale 2018
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
The emphasis on conceptual learning and the development of adaptive instructional design are both emerging areas in science and engineering education. Instructors are writing their own conceptual questions to promote active learning during class and utilizing pools of these questions in assessments. For adaptive assessment strategies, these questions need to be rated based on difficulty level (DL). Historically DL has been determined from the performance of a suitable number of students. The research study reported here investigates whether instructors can save time by predicting DL of newly made conceptual questions without the need for student data. In this paper, we report on the development of one component in an adaptive learning module for materials science – specifically on the topic of crystallography. The summative assessment element consists of five DL scales and 15 conceptual questions This adaptive assessment directs students based on their previous performances and the DL of the questions. Our five expert participants are faculty members who have taught the introductory Materials Science course multiple times. They provided predictions for how many students would answer each question correctly during a two-step process. First, predictions were made individually without an answer key. Second, experts had the opportunity to revise their predictions after being provided an answer key in a group discussion. We compared expert predictions with actual student performance using results from over 400 students spanning multiple courses and terms. We found no clear correlation between expert predictions of the DL and the measured DL from students. Some evidence shows that discussion during the second step made expert predictions closer to student performance. We suggest that, in determining the DL for conceptual questions, using predictions of the DL by experts who have taught the course is not a valid route. The findings in this paper can be applied to assessments in both in-person, hybrid, and online settings and is applicable to subject matter beyond materials science.more » « less
-
As large language models (LLMs) show great promise in generating a wide spectrum of educational materials, robust yet cost-effective assessment of the quality and effectiveness of such materials becomes an important challenge. Traditional approaches, including expert-based quality assessment and student-centered evaluation, are resource-consuming, and do not scale efficiently. In this work, we explored the use of pre-existing student learning data as a promising approach to evaluate LLM-generated learning materials. Specifically, we used a dataset where students were completing the program construction challenges by picking the correct answers among human-authored distractors to evaluate the quality of LLM-generated distractors for the same challenges. The dataset included responses from 1,071 students across 22 classes taught from Fall 2017 to Spring 2023. We evaluated five prominent LLMs (OpenAI-o1, GPT-4, GPT-4o, GPT-4o-mini, and Llama-3.1-8b) across three different prompts to see which combinations result in more effective distractors, i.e., those that are plausible (often picked by students), and potentially based on common misconceptions. Our results suggest that GPT-4o was the most effective model, matching close to 50% of the functional distractors originally authored by humans. At the same time, all of the evaluated LLMs generated many novel distractors, i.e., those that did not match the pre-existing human-authored ones. Our preliminary analysis shows that those appear to be promising. Establishing their effectiveness in real-world classroom settings is left for future work.more » « less
-
Relevance to proposal: This project evaluates the generalizability of real and synthetic training datasets which can be used to train model-free techniques for multi-agent applications. We evaluate different methods of generating training corpora and machine learning techniques including Behavior Cloning and Generative Adversarial Imitation Learning. Our results indicate that the utility-guided selection of representative scenarios to generate synthetic data can have significant improvements on model performance. Paper abstract: Crowd simulation, the study of the movement of multiple agents in complex environments, presents a unique application domain for machine learning. One challenge in crowd simulation is to imitate the movement of expert agents in highly dense crowds. An imitation model could substitute an expert agent if the model behaves as good as the expert. This will bring many exciting applications. However, we believe no prior studies have considered the critical question of how training data and training methods affect imitators when these models are applied to novel scenarios. In this work, a general imitation model is represented by applying either the Behavior Cloning (BC) training method or a more sophisticated Generative Adversarial Imitation Learning (GAIL) method, on three typical types of data domains: standard benchmarks for evaluating crowd models, random sampling of state-action pairs, and egocentric scenarios that capture local interactions. Simulated results suggest that (i) simpler training methods are overall better than more complex training methods, (ii) training samples with diverse agent-agent and agent-obstacle interactions are beneficial for reducing collisions when the trained models are applied to new scenarios. We additionally evaluated our models in their ability to imitate real world crowd trajectories observed from surveillance videos. Our findings indicate that models trained on representative scenarios generalize to new, unseen situations observed in real human crowds.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)In recent years, Reinforcement learning (RL), especially Deep RL (DRL), has shown outstanding performance in video games from Atari, Mario, to StarCraft. However, little evidence has shown that DRL can be successfully applied to real-life human-centric tasks such as education or healthcare. Different from classic game-playing where the RL goal is to make an agent smart, in human-centric tasks the ultimate RL goal is to make the human-agent interactions productive and fruitful. Additionally, in many real-life human-centric tasks, data can be noisy and limited. As a sub-field of RL, batch RL is designed for handling situations where data is limited yet noisy, and building simulations is challenging. In two consecutive classroom studies, we investigated applying batch DRL to the task of pedagogical policy induction for an Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS), and empirically evaluated the effectiveness of induced pedagogical policies. In Fall 2018 (F18), the DRL policy is compared against an expert-designed baseline policy and in Spring 2019 (S19), we examined the impact of explaining the batch DRL-induced policy with student decisions and the expert baseline policy. Our results showed that 1) while no significant difference was found between the batch RL-induced policy and the expert policy in F18, the batch RL-induced policy with simple explanations significantly improved students’ learning performance more than the expert policy alone in S19; and 2) no significant differences were found between the student decision making and the expert policy. Overall, our results suggest that pairing simple explanations with induced RL policies can be an important and effective technique for applying RL to real-life human-centric tasks.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- https://doi.org/10.1145/3231644.3231672
