An official website of the United States government
With increasing interest in computer‐assisted educa‐ tion, AI‐integrated systems become highly applicable with their ability to adapt based on user interactions. In this context, this paper focuses on understanding and analysing first‐year undergraduate student responses to an intelligent educational system that applies multi‐agent reinforcement learning as an AI tutor. With human–computer interaction at the centre, we discuss principles of interface design and educational gamification in the context of multiple years of student observations, student feedback surveys and focus group interviews. We show positive feedback from the design methodology we discuss as well as the overall process of providing automated tutoring in a gamified virtual environment. We also discuss students' thinking in the context of gamified educational systems, as well as unexpected issues that may arise when implementing such systems. Ultimately, our design iterations and analysis both offer new insights for practical implementation of computer‐assisted educational systems, focusing on how AI can augment, rather than replace, human intelligence in the classroom. Practitioner notesWhat is already known about this topicAI‐integrated systems show promise for personalizing learning and improving student education.Existing research has shown the value of personalized learner feedback.Engaged students learn more effectively.What this paper addsStudent opinions of and responses to an HCI‐based personalized educational system.New insights for practical implementation of AI‐integrated educational systems informed by years of student observations and system improvements.Qualitative insights into system design to improve human–computer interaction in educational systems.Implications for practice and/or policyActionable design principles for computer‐assisted tutoring systems derived from first‐hand student feedback and observations.Encourage new directions for human–computer interaction in educational systems.
more »
« less
Machine learning for the educational sciences
Abstract Machine learning (ML) provides a powerful framework for the analysis of high‐dimensional datasets by modelling complex relationships, often encountered in modern data with many variables, cases and potentially non‐linear effects. The impact of ML methods on research and practical applications in the educational sciences is still limited, but continuously grows, as larger and more complex datasets become available through massive open online courses (MOOCs) and large‐scale investigations. The educational sciences are at a crucial pivot point, because of the anticipated impact ML methods hold for the field. To provide educational researchers with an elaborate introduction to the topic, we provide an instructional summary of the opportunities and challenges of ML for the educational sciences, show how a look at related disciplines can help learning from their experiences, and argue for a philosophical shift in model evaluation. We demonstrate how the overall quality of data analysis in educational research can benefit from these methods and show how ML can play a decisive role in the validation of empirical models. Specifically, we (1) provide an overview of the types of data suitable for ML and (2) give practical advice for the application of ML methods. In each section, we provide analytical examples and reproducible R code. Also, we provide an extensive Appendix on ML‐based applications for education. This instructional summary will help educational scientists and practitioners to prepare for the promises and threats that come with the shift towards digitisation and large‐scale assessment in education. Context and implicationsRationale for this studyIn 2020, the worldwide SARS‐COV‐2 pandemic forced the educational sciences to perform a rapid paradigm shift with classrooms going online around the world—a hardly novel but now strongly catalysed development. In the context of data‐driven education, this paper demonstrates that the widespread adoption of machine learning techniques is central for the educational sciences and shows how these methods will become crucial tools in the collection and analysis of data and in concrete educational applications. Helping to leverage the opportunities and to avoid the common pitfalls of machine learning, this paper provides educators with the theoretical, conceptual and practical essentials.Why the new findings matterThe process of teaching and learning is complex, multifaceted and dynamic. This paper contributes a seminal resource to highlight the digitisation of the educational sciences by demonstrating how new machine learning methods can be effectively and reliably used in research, education and practical application.Implications for educational researchers and policy makersThe progressing digitisation of societies around the globe and the impact of the SARS‐COV‐2 pandemic have highlighted the vulnerabilities and shortcomings of educational systems. These developments have shown the necessity to provide effective educational processes that can support sometimes overwhelmed teachers to digitally impart knowledge on the plan of many governments and policy makers. Educational scientists, corporate partners and stakeholders can make use of machine learning techniques to develop advanced, scalable educational processes that account for individual needs of learners and that can complement and support existing learning infrastructure. The proper use of machine learning methods can contribute essential applications to the educational sciences, such as (semi‐)automated assessments, algorithmic‐grading, personalised feedback and adaptive learning approaches. However, these promises are strongly tied to an at least basic understanding of the concepts of machine learning and a degree of data literacy, which has to become the standard in education and the educational sciences.Demonstrating both the promises and the challenges that are inherent to the collection and the analysis of large educational data with machine learning, this paper covers the essential topics that their application requires and provides easy‐to‐follow resources and code to facilitate the process of adoption.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1758835
- PAR ID:
- 10447005
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Review of Education
- Volume:
- 9
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 2049-6613
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Machine learning (ML) has become commonplace in educational research and science education research, especially to support assessment efforts. Such applications of machine learning have shown their promise in replicating and scaling human‐driven codes of students' work. Despite this promise, we and other scholars argue that machine learning has not yet achieved its transformational potential. We argue that this is because our field is currently lacking frameworks for supporting creative, principled, and critical endeavors to use machine learning in science education research. To offer considerations for science education researchers' use of ML, we present a framework, Distributing Epistemic Functions and Tasks (DEFT), that highlights the functions and tasks that pertain to generating knowledge that can be carried out by either trained researchers or machine learning algorithms. Such considerations are critical decisions that should occur alongside those about, for instance, the type of data or algorithm used. We apply this framework to two cases, one that exemplifies the cutting‐edge use of machine learning in science education research and another that offers a wholly different means of using machine learning and human‐driven inquiry together. We conclude with strategies for researchers to adopt machine learning and call for the field to rethink how we prepare science education researchers in an era of great advances in computational power and access to machine learning methods.more » « less
-
IntroductionThe objective of this study is to develop predictive models for rocking-induced permanent settlement in shallow foundations during earthquake loading using stacking, bagging and boosting ensemble machine learning (ML) and artificial neural network (ANN) models. MethodsThe ML models are developed using supervised learning technique and results obtained from rocking foundation experiments conducted on shaking tables and centrifuges. The overall performance of ML models are evaluated using k-fold cross validation tests and mean absolute percentage error (MAPE) and mean absolute error (MAE) in their predictions. ResultsThe performances of all six nonlinear ML models developed in this study are relatively consistent in terms of prediction accuracy with their average MAPE varying between 0.64 and 0.86 in final k-fold cross validation tests. DiscussionThe overall average MAE in predictions of all nonlinear ML models are smaller than 0.006, implying that the ML models developed in this study have the potential to predict permanent settlement of rocking foundations with reasonable accuracy in practical applications.more » « less
-
Abstract With increasing interest in explaining machine learning (ML) models, this paper synthesizes many topics related to ML explainability. We distinguish explainability from interpretability, local from global explainability, and feature importance versus feature relevance. We demonstrate and visualize different explanation methods, how to interpret them, and provide a complete Python package (scikit-explain) to allow future researchers and model developers to explore these explainability methods. The explainability methods include Shapley additive explanations (SHAP), Shapley additive global explanation (SAGE), and accumulated local effects (ALE). Our focus is primarily on Shapley-based techniques, which serve as a unifying framework for various existing methods to enhance model explainability. For example, SHAP unifies methods like local interpretable model-agnostic explanations (LIME) and tree interpreter for local explainability, while SAGE unifies the different variations of permutation importance for global explainability. We provide a short tutorial for explaining ML models using three disparate datasets: a convection-allowing model dataset for severe weather prediction, a nowcasting dataset for subfreezing road surface prediction, and satellite-based data for lightning prediction. In addition, we showcase the adverse effects that correlated features can have on the explainability of a model. Finally, we demonstrate the notion of evaluating model impacts of feature groups instead of individual features. Evaluating the feature groups mitigates the impacts of feature correlations and can provide a more holistic understanding of the model. All code, models, and data used in this study are freely available to accelerate the adoption of machine learning explainability in the atmospheric and other environmental sciences.more » « less
-
Abstract BackgroundOver the past decade, there has been a shift in science, technology, engineering and math education, especially in engineering, towards a competency‐based pedagogy. Competency‐based learning (CBL) is an outcome‐based, student‐centered form of instruction where students progress to more advanced work upon mastering the necessary prerequisite content and skills. Many articles have been published on the implementation of CBL in engineering higher education; however, the literature lacks a systematic review that summarizes prior work to inform both future research and practice. PurposeThe purpose of this review is to integrate previous literature as well as identify gaps in competency‐based engineering higher education research. It summarizes the different approaches for implementing CBL, the effects of the pedagogy on student outcomes, tools to enhance its effectiveness, and assessment strategies. In addition, suggestions and recommendations for future research are provided. MethodEngineering education articles were obtained from several EBSCO educational databases. The search was limited to articles published from 2005‐2015, and inclusion criteria consisted of peer‐reviewed journal articles that address the use of CBL in engineering higher education. Articles were then classified into several categories, summarized, and evaluated. ConclusionsTheoretical and applied perspectives are provided that address both the theoretical basis for the effectiveness of CBL and practical aspects of implementing successful CBL instruction in engineering education. There are gaps in the literature regarding how CBL programs should be structured and assessed. Future research directions include empirical quantitative evaluation of CBL's pedagogical effectiveness and the use of CBL for teaching professional skills.more » « less
