Matching Items (3)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

150224-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Lots of previous studies have analyzed human tutoring at great depths and have shown expert human tutors to produce effect sizes, which is twice of that produced by an intelligent tutoring system (ITS). However, there has been no consensus on which factor makes them so effective. It is important to

Lots of previous studies have analyzed human tutoring at great depths and have shown expert human tutors to produce effect sizes, which is twice of that produced by an intelligent tutoring system (ITS). However, there has been no consensus on which factor makes them so effective. It is important to know this, so that same phenomena can be replicated in an ITS in order to achieve the same level of proficiency as expert human tutors. Also, to the best of my knowledge no one has looked at student reactions when they are working with a computer based tutor. The answers to both these questions are needed in order to build a highly effective computer-based tutor. My research focuses on the second question. In the first phase of my thesis, I analyzed the behavior of students when they were working with a step-based tutor Andes, using verbal-protocol analysis. The accomplishment of doing this was that I got to know of some ways in which students use a step-based tutor which can pave way for the creation of more effective computer-based tutors. I found from the first phase of the research that students often keep trying to fix errors by guessing repeatedly instead of asking for help by clicking the hint button. This phenomenon is known as hint refusal. Surprisingly, a large portion of the student's foundering was due to hint refusal. The hypothesis tested in the second phase of the research is that hint refusal can be significantly reduced and learning can be significantly increased if Andes uses more unsolicited hints and meta hints. An unsolicited hint is a hint that is given without the student asking for one. A meta-hint is like an unsolicited hint in that it is given without the student asking for it, but it just prompts the student to click on the hint button. Two versions of Andes were compared: the original version and a new version that gave more unsolicited and meta-hints. During a two-hour experiment, there were large, statistically reliable differences in several performance measures suggesting that the new policy was more effective.
ContributorsRanganathan, Rajagopalan (Author) / VanLehn, Kurt (Thesis advisor) / Atkinson, Robert (Committee member) / Burleson, Winslow (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
155689-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Paper assessment remains to be an essential formal assessment method in today's classes. However, it is difficult to track student learning behavior on physical papers. This thesis presents a new educational technology—Web Programming Grading Assistant (WPGA). WPGA not only serves as a grading system but also a feedback delivery tool

Paper assessment remains to be an essential formal assessment method in today's classes. However, it is difficult to track student learning behavior on physical papers. This thesis presents a new educational technology—Web Programming Grading Assistant (WPGA). WPGA not only serves as a grading system but also a feedback delivery tool that connects paper-based assessments to digital space. I designed a classroom study and collected data from ASU computer science classes. I tracked and modeled students' reviewing and reflecting behaviors based on the use of WPGA. I analyzed students' reviewing efforts, in terms of frequency, timing, and the associations with their academic performances. Results showed that students put extra emphasis in reviewing prior to the exams and the efforts demonstrated the desire to review formal assessments regardless of if they were graded for academic performance or for attendance. In addition, all students paid more attention on reviewing quizzes and exams toward the end of semester.
ContributorsHuang, Po-Kai (Author) / Hsiao, I-Han (Thesis advisor) / Nelson, Brian (Committee member) / VanLehn, Kurt (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
149622-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Building computational models of human problem solving has been a longstanding goal in Artificial Intelligence research. The theories of cognitive architectures addressed this issue by embedding models of problem solving within them. This thesis presents an extended account of human problem solving and describes its implementation within one such theory

Building computational models of human problem solving has been a longstanding goal in Artificial Intelligence research. The theories of cognitive architectures addressed this issue by embedding models of problem solving within them. This thesis presents an extended account of human problem solving and describes its implementation within one such theory of cognitive architecture--ICARUS. The document begins by reviewing the standard theory of problem solving, along with how previous versions of ICARUS have incorporated and expanded on it. Next it discusses some limitations of the existing mechanism and proposes four extensions that eliminate these limitations, elaborate the framework along interesting dimensions, and bring it into closer alignment with human problem-solving abilities. After this, it presents evaluations on four domains that establish the benefits of these extensions. The results demonstrate the system's ability to solve problems in various domains and its generality. In closing, it outlines related work and notes promising directions for additional research.
ContributorsTrivedi, Nishant (Author) / Langley, Patrick W (Thesis advisor) / VanLehn, Kurt (Committee member) / Kambhampati, Subbarao (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011