More Like this

1. Revisions in scientific explanations using automated feedback

   Cang, Xuesong; Gnesdilow, Dana; & Puntambekar, Sadhana (July 2023, Proceedings of the International Conference of Computer-Supported Learning)

   Writing and revising scientific explanations helps students integrate disparate scientific ideas into a cohesive understanding of science. Natural language processing technologies can help assess students’ writing and give corresponding feedback, which supports their writing and revision of their scientific ideas. However, the feedback is not always helpful to students. Our study investigated 241 middle school students’ a) use of feedback, b) how it affected their revisions, and c) how these factors affected students’ writing improvement. We found that students made more content-related revisions when they used feedback. Making content-related revisions also assisted students in improving their writing. But students still found it difficult to make integrated revisions and did not use feedback often. Additional support to assist students to understand and use feedback, especially for students with limited science knowledge, is needed. 

   more » « less
2. User Preferences for Interdependent Privacy Preservation Strategies in Social Media

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3610062  

   Necaise, Aaron; Tanni, Tangila Islam; Williams, Aneka; Solihin, Yan; Kapadia, Apu; Amon, Mary Jean (September 2023, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction)

   Interdependent privacy (IDP) violations occur when users share personal information about others without permission, resulting in potential embarrassment, reputation loss, or harassment. There are several strategies that can be applied to protect IDP, but little is known regarding how social media users perceive IDP threats or how they prefer to respond to them. We utilized a mixed-method approach with a replication study to examine user beliefs about various government-, platform-, and user-level strategies for managing IDP violations. Participants reported that IDP represented a 'serious' online threat, and identified themselves as primarily responsible for responding to violations. IDP strategies that felt more familiar and provided greater perceived control over violations (e.g., flagging, blocking, unfriending) were rated as more effective than platform or government driven interventions. Furthermore, we found users were more willing to share on social media if they perceived their interactions as protected. Findings are discussed in relation to control paradox theory. 

   more » « less
3. Factors influencing students' perceptions of automated feedback and their impact on revision.

   Dey, I; Gnesdilow, D; Kim, C; Passonneau, R J; Puntambekar, S (June 2025, Proceedings)

   Automated feedback can provide students with timely information about their writing, but students' willingness to engage meaningfully with the feedback to revise their writing may be influenced by their perceptions of its usefulness. We explored the factors that may have influenced 339, 8th-grade students’ perceptions of receiving automated feedback on their writing and whether their perceptions impacted their revisions and writing improvement. Using HLM and logistic regression analyses, we found that: 1) students with more positive perceptions of the automated feedback made revisions that resulted in significant improvements in their writing, and 2) students who received feedback indicating they included more important ideas in their essays had significantly higher perceptions of the usefulness of the feedback, but were significantly less likely to engage in substantive revisions. Implications and the importance of helping students evaluate and reflect on the feedback to make substantive revisions, no matter their initial feedback, are discussed 

   more » « less
4. Providing the Option to Skip Feedback – A Reproducibility Study

   Kumar, Amruth N. (May 2019, Intelligent Tutoring Systems)

   Would providing choice lead to improved learning with a tutor? We had conducted and reported a controlled study earlier, wherein, introductory programing students were given the choice of skipping the line-by-line feedback provided after each incorrect answer in a tutor on if/if-else statements. Contrary to expectations, the study found that the choice to skip feedback did not lead to greater learning. We tried to reproduce these results using two tutors on if/if-else and switch statements, and with a larger subject pool. We found that whereas choice did not lead to greater learning on if/if-else tutor in this reproducibility study either, it resulted in decreased learning on switch tutor. We hypothesize that skipping feedback is indeed detrimental to learning. But, inter-relationships among the concepts covered by a tutor and the transfer of learning facilitated by these relationships compensate for the negative effect of skipping line-by-line feedback. We also found contradictory results between the two studies which highlight the need for reproducibility studies in empirical research. 

   more » « less
5. Long Term Retention of Programming Concepts Learned Using Software Tutors

   Kumar, Amruth N. (June 2020, Intelligent Tutoring Systems 2020)

   Do students retain the programming concepts they have learned using software tutors over the long term? In order to answer this question, we analyzed the data collected by a software tutor on selection statements. We used the data of the students who used the tutor more than once to see whether they had retained for the second session what they had learned during the first session. We found that students retained over 71% of selection concepts that they had learned during the first session. The more problems students solved during the first session, the greater the percentage of retention. Even when students already knew a concept and did not benefit from using the tutor, a small percentage of concepts were for-gotten from the first session to the next, corresponding to transience of learning. Transience of learning varied with concepts. We list confounding factors of the study. 

   more » « less