Using a Cognitive/Metacognitive Task Model to Analyze Students Learning Behaviors
Adapting to learners’ needs and providing useful, individualized feedback to help them succeed has been a hallmark of most intelligent tutoring systems. More recently, to promote deep learning and critical thinking skills in STEM disciplines, researchers have begun developing open-ended learning environments that present learners with complex problems and a set of tools for learning and problem solving. To be successful in such environments, learners must employ a variety of cognitive skills and metacognitive strategies. This paper discusses a framework that combines a theory-driven, top-down approach with a bottom-up, pattern-discovery approach for analyzing learning activity data in these environments. Combining these approaches allows for more complex qualitative and quantitative interpretation of a student’s cognitive and metacognitive abilities. The results of this analysis provide a foundation for developing performance- and behavior-based learner models in conjunction with adaptive scaffolding mechanisms to promote effective, personalized learning experiences.
Keywordsmetacognition theory-driven top-down analysis pattern-driven bottom-up analysis effectiveness measures pattern mining adaptivity tutoring
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., Cocking, R.R. (eds.): How people learn. National Academy Press, Washington, DC (2000)Google Scholar
- 2.Brown, A., Bransford, J.D., Ferrara, R.A., Campione, J.C.: Learning, remembering, and understanding. In: Mussen, P. (ed.) Handbook of Child Psychology. John Wiley, Hoboken (1983)Google Scholar
- 4.Ho, J., Lukov, L., Chawla, S.: Sequential pattern mining with constraints on large protein databases. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Management of Data (COMAD), pp. 89–100 (2005)Google Scholar
- 5.Kinnebrew, J.S., Segedy, J.R., Biswas, G.: Analyzing the Temporal Evolution of Students’ Behaviors in Open-Ended Learning Environments. In: Metacognition and Learning (to appear, 2014)Google Scholar
- 6.Kinnebrew, J.S., Biswas, G.: Identifying learning behaviors by contextualizing differential sequence mining with action features and performance evolution. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM 2012), Chania, Greece (June 2012)Google Scholar
- 7.Kinnebrew, J.S., Loretz, K.M., Biswas, G.: A contextualized, differential sequence mining method to derive students’ learning behavior patterns. Journal of Educational Data Mining 5(1), 190–219 (2013)Google Scholar
- 9.Leelawong, K., Biswas, G.: Designing learning by teaching agents: The Betty’s Brain system. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 18(3), 181–208 (2008)Google Scholar
- 10.Luckin, R., du Boulay, B.: Ecolab: The development and evaluation of a Vygotskian design framework. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 10(2), 198–220 (1999)Google Scholar
- 12.Park, O.C., Lee, J.: Adaptive instructional systems. Educational Technology Research and Development 25, 651–684 (2003)Google Scholar
- 15.Segedy, J.R., Biswas, G., Sulcer, B.: A model-based behavior analysis approach for open-ended environments. Journal of Educational Technology & Society 17(1), 272–282 (2014)Google Scholar
- 19.Winne, P.H., Hadwin, A.F.: Studying as self-regulated learning. In: Hacker, D.J., Dunlosky, J., Graesser, A. (eds.) Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice, pp. 277–304. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers (1998)Google Scholar
- 20.Winne, P.H., Hadwin, A.F.: The weave of motivation and self-regulated learning. In: Schunk, D., Zimmerman, B. (eds.) Motivation and Self-regulated Learning: Theory, Research, and Applications, pp. 297–314. Taylor & Francis, NY (2008)Google Scholar