Activity sequence modelling and dynamic clustering for personalized e-learning

  • Mirjam KöckEmail author
  • Alexandros Paramythis
Original Paper


Monitoring and interpreting sequential learner activities has the potential to improve adaptivity and personalization within educational environments. We present an approach based on the modeling of learners’ problem solving activity sequences, and on the use of the models in targeted, and ultimately automated clustering, resulting in the discovery of new, semantically meaningful information about the learners. The approach is applicable at different levels: to detect pre-defined, well-established problem solving styles, to identify problem solving styles by analyzing learner behaviour along known learning dimensions, and to semi-automatically discover learning dimensions and concrete problem solving patterns. This article describes the approach itself, demonstrates the feasibility of applying it on real-world data, and discusses aspects of the approach that can be adjusted for different learning contexts. Finally, we address the incorporation of the proposed approach in the adaptation cycle, from data acquisition to adaptive system interventions in the interaction process.


Adaptivity User modeling E-learning Data mining Clustering Unsupervised learning 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aleven V., Stahl E., Schworm S., Fischer F., Wallace R.: Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Rev. Educ. Res. 73(3), 277–320 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aleven V., McLaren B., Roll I., Koedinger K.: Toward meta-cognitive tutoring: a model of help seeking with a cognitive tutor. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 16(2), 101–128 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. Alfonseca E., Carro R.M., Martín E., Ortigosa A., Paredes P.: The impact of learning styles on student grouping for collaborative learning: a case Study. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 16(3–4), 377–401 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amershi S., Conati C.: Automatic recognition of learner groups in exploratory learning environments. In: Ikeda, M., Ashley, K., Chan, T.-W. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems, vol. 4053 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 463–472. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  5. Amershi S., Conati C.: Combining Unsupervised and Supervised Classification to Build User Models for Exploratory Learning Environments. J. Educ. Data Min. 1(1), 18–71 (2009)Google Scholar
  6. Anaya, A.R., Boticario, J.G.: Clustering learners according to their collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 2009 13th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design, pp. 540–545, (2009a)Google Scholar
  7. Anaya, A.R., Boticario, J.G.: A data mining approach to reveal representative collaboration indicators in open collaboration frameworks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM09), pp. 210–219, (2009b)Google Scholar
  8. Anaya, A.R., Boticario, J.G.: Content-free collaborative learning modeling using data mining. Int. J. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. Special Issue on Data Min. Person. Educ. Syst. (this issue) (2011)Google Scholar
  9. Anderson S., Messick S.: Social competency in young children. Dev. Psychol. 10(2), 282–293 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Baker R.S.: Data mining for education. In: McGaw, B., Baker, E., Peterson, P. (eds) International Encyclopedia of Education, vol. 7, 3rd edn, pp. 112–118. Elsevier, Oxford (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Baker R.S., Yacef K.: The state of educational data mining in 2009: a review and future visions. J. Educ. Data Min. 1(1), 3–17 (2009)Google Scholar
  12. Baker, R.S., Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K.R., Evenson, S., Roll, I., Wagner, A.Z., Naim, M., Raspat, J., Baker, D.J., Beck, J.E.: Adapting to when students game an intelligent tutoring system. In: Intelligent Tutoring Systems, vol. 4953/2006 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 392–401. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  13. Baker R.S., Corbett A.T., Roll I., Koedinger K.R.: Developing a generalizable detector of when students game the system. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 18(3), 287–314 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bakiri G., Dietterich T.G.: Constructing high-accuracy letter-to-phoneme rules with machine learning. In: Damper, R. (eds) Data-Driven Techniques in Speech Synthesis, pp. 27–44. Kluwer, Boston (2001)Google Scholar
  15. Ballone L.M., Czerniak C.M.: Teachers’ beliefs about accommodating students’ learning styles in science classes. Electron. J. Sci. Educ. 6(2), 1–40 (2001)Google Scholar
  16. Beal, C., Qu, L., Lee, H.: Classifying learner engagement through integration of multiple data sources. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 151–156, (2006)Google Scholar
  17. Beal, C., Mitra, S., Cohen, P.: Modeling learning patterns of students with a tutoring system using hidden Markov models. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED), pp. 238–245, (2007)Google Scholar
  18. Ben-Ari M.: Constructivism in computer science education. ACM SIGCSE Bull. 30(1), 257–261 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bengio Y., Frasconi P.: Input–output HMMs for sequence processing. IEEE Trans. Neural Netw. 7(5), 1231–1249 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Black, P.E.: “Euclidean Distance” in Dictionary of Algorithms and Data Structures. U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (2004). . Accessed Feb 2010
  21. Borek, A., McLaren, B.M., Karabinos, M., Yaron, D.: How much assistance is helpful to students in discovery learning?. In: Learning in the Synergy of Multiple Disciplines, vol. 5794/2009 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 391–404, (2009)Google Scholar
  22. Bottou, L., LeCun, Y.: Graph transformer networks for image recognition. In: Bulletin of the 55th Biennial Session of the International Statistical Institute (ISI), (2005).
  23. Bottou, L., Bengio, Y., Le Cun, Y.: Global training of document processing systems using graph transformer networks. In: Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 489–494, (1997)Google Scholar
  24. Brown, E., Fisher, T., Brailsford, T.: Real users, real results: examining the limitations of learning styles within AEH. In: Proceedings of the 18th Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, pp. 57–66, (2007)Google Scholar
  25. Brusilovsky, P., Chavan, G., Farzan, R.: Social adaptive navigation support for open corpus electronic textbooks. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems, pp. 24–33, (2004)Google Scholar
  26. Butler T.J., Pinto-Zipp G.: Students’ learning styles and their preferences for online instructional methods. J. Educ. Technol. Syst. 34(2), 199–221 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Carro R., Ortigosa A., Schlichter J.: Adaptive collaborative web-based courses. In: Lovelle, J., Rodrguez, B., Gayo, J., del Puerto Paule Ruiz, M., Aguilar, L. (eds) Web Engineering, vol. 2722 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 130–133. Springer, Berlin (2003a)Google Scholar
  28. Carro R.M., Ortigosa A., Martn E., Schlichter J.: Dynamic Generation of Adaptive Web-Based Collaborative Courses, vol. 2806 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 191–198. Springer, Berlin (2003b)Google Scholar
  29. Cassidy S.: Learning styles: an overview of theories, models and measures. Educ. Psychol. 24(4), 419–444 (2004)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. Choi, H., Kang, M.: Analyzing learner behaviours, conflicting and facilitating factors of online collaborative learning using activity system. In: Proceedings of the 2008 International Conference on Learning Sciences, (2008).
  31. Dewar T., Whittington D.: Online learners and their learning strategies. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 23(4), 385–403 (2000)Google Scholar
  32. Dietterich, T.G.: Machine learning for sequential data: a review. In: Structural, Syntactic, and Statistical Pattern Recognition, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 227–246. Springer, Berlin (2009)Google Scholar
  33. Dillenbourg P., Baker M., Blaye A., O’Malley C.: The evolution of research on collaborative learning. In: Spada, E., Reiman, P. (eds) Learning in Humans and Machine: Towards an Interdisciplinary Learning Science, pp. 189–211. Elsevier, Oxford (1996)Google Scholar
  34. Fawcett T., Provost F.: Adaptive Fraud detection. Data Min. Knowl. Discov. 1(3), 291–316 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Felder R.M., Brent R.: Understanding student differences. J. Eng. Educ. 94(1), 57–72 (2005)Google Scholar
  36. Felder R.M., Silverman L.K.: Learning and teaching styles in engineering education. J. Eng. Educ. 78(7), 674–681 (1988)Google Scholar
  37. Hall M., Eibe F., Holmes G., Pfahringer B., Reutemann P., Witten I.H.: The WEKA data mining software: an update. SIGKDD Explor. 11(1), 10–18 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hämäläinen, W., Suhonen, J., Sutinen, E., Toivonen, H.: Data mining in personalizing distance education courses. In: Proceedings of the 21st ICDE World Conference on Open Learning and Distance Education, pp. 18–21, (2004)Google Scholar
  39. Jain A., Murty M., Flynn P.: Data clustering: a review. ACM Comput. Surv. 31(3), 264–323 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Jarvis M.: The Psychology of Effective Learning and Teaching. Nelson Thornes, Cheltenham (2005)Google Scholar
  41. Jeong, H., Biswas, G.: Mining student behaviour models in learning-by-teaching environments. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 127–136, (2008)Google Scholar
  42. Kanninen, E.: Learning styles and e-learning. Master’s thesis, Tampere University of Technology (2008)Google Scholar
  43. Köck, M.: Towards intelligent adaptive e-learning systems—machine learning for learner activity classification. In: Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on Adaptivity and User Modeling in Interactive Systems (ABIS 09), pp. 26–31, (2009)Google Scholar
  44. Koedinger K.R., Aleven V.: Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 19(3), 239–264 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Koedinger, K., Cunningham, K., Skogsholm, A., Leber, B.: An open repository and analysis tool for fine-grained, longitudinal learner data. In: Proceedings of Educational Data Mining 2008: 1st International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 157–166, (2008)Google Scholar
  46. Koedinger K., Baker R., Cunningham K., Skogsholm A., Leber B., Stamper J.: A data repository for the EDM community: the PSLC datashop. In: Romero, C., Ventura, S., Pechenizkiy, M., Baker, R.S. (eds) Handbook of Educational Data Mining, CRC Press, Boca Raton (2010)Google Scholar
  47. Kolb D.A.: Experiential Learning. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1984)Google Scholar
  48. Lafferty, J.D., McCallum, A., Pereira, F.C.: Conditional random fields: probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. In: Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 282–289, (2001)Google Scholar
  49. Lefrancois G.R.: Psychologie des Lernens, vol. 4. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)Google Scholar
  50. Li, C., Yoo, J.: Modeling student online learning using clustering. In: ACM-SE 44: Proceedings of the 44th Annual Southeast Regional Conference, pp. 186–191. ACM, Melbourne (2006)Google Scholar
  51. Li J., Zaïane, O.R.: Combining usage, content, and structure data to improve web site recommendation. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Electronic Commerce and Web Technologies (EC-Web), pp. 305–315, (2004)Google Scholar
  52. Lichtenwalter, R., Lichtenwalter, K., Chawla, N.V.: Applying learning algorithms to music generation. In: Proceedings of the 4th Indian International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IICAI 2009), pp. 483–502, (2009)Google Scholar
  53. Liu, Y., Dean, G.: Cognitive styles and distance education. J. Distance Learn. Admin. 2(3), (1999).
  54. Liu, S., Joy, M., Griffiths, N.: Incorporating learning styles in a computer-supported collaborative learning model. In: Proceedings of the International Workshop on Cognitive Aspects in Intelligent Adaptive Web-Based Education Systems (CIAWES 2008), pp. 3–10, (2008)Google Scholar
  55. LRN: LRN, 2010.
  56. Martínez A.M., Kak A.C.: PCA versus LDA. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 23(2), 228–233 (2001)Google Scholar
  57. McCallum, A., Freitag, D., Pereira, F.C.: Maximum entropy Markov models for information extraction and segmentation. In: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 591–598, (2000)Google Scholar
  58. Moodle: Open-source community-based tools for learning, (2010).
  59. Muldner, K., Burleson, W., Van e Sande, B., VanLehn, K.: An analysis of studentsć6 gaming behaviors in an intelligent tutoring system: predictors and impacts. Int. J. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. Special Issue on Data Min. Person. Educ. Syst. (this issue) (2011)Google Scholar
  60. Nelson-Le Gall S.: Help-seeking: an understudied problem-solving skill in children. Dev. Rev. 1(3), 224–246 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Nelson-Le Gall S.: Help Seeking behaviour in learning. Rev. Res. Educ. 12(1), 55–90 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Newman R.: Adaptive help seeking: a strategy of self-regulated learning. In: Schunk, D., Zimmermann, B. (eds) Self-Regulation of Learning and Performance: Issues and Educational Applications, pp. 283–301. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NY (1994)Google Scholar
  63. Paramythis, A.: Adaptive support for collaborative learning with ims learning design: are we there yet? In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Adaptive Collaboration Support, in Conjunction with the 5th International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-Based Systems (AH’08), pp.~17–29, (2008)Google Scholar
  64. Perera D., Kay J., Koprinska I., Yacef K., Zaïne O.R.: Clustering and sequential pattern mining of online collaborative learning data. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 21(6), 759–772 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Piaget J.: The Construction of Reality in the Child. Basic Books, New York (1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Qian N., Sejnowski T.J.: Predicting the secondary structure of globular proteins using neural network models. J. Mol. Biol. 202(4), 865–884 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Quignard, M., Baker, M.: Favouring modellable computer-mediated argumentative dialogue in collaborative problem-solving situtations. In: Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, pp. 129–136, (1999)Google Scholar
  68. Rabiner L.R.: A tutorial on hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. In: Waibel, A., Lee, K.-F. (eds) Readings in Speech Recognition, pp. 267–296. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc, San Francisco (1990)Google Scholar
  69. Razzaq, L.M., Heffernan, N.T.: To tutor or not to tutor: that is the question. In: Proceedings of the 2009 Artificial Intelligence in Education Conference, pp. 457–464, (2009)Google Scholar
  70. Richmond A.S., Cummings R.: Implementing Kolb’s learning styles into online distance education. Int. J. Technol. Teach. Learn. 1(1), 45–54 (2005)Google Scholar
  71. Romero, C., Ventura, S. (eds): Data Mining in E-Learning, vol. 4 of Advances in Management Information., Wessex (2006)Google Scholar
  72. Romero C., Ventura S.: Educational data mining: a review of the state-of-the-art. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybernet. C Appl. Rev. 40(6), 601–618 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Romero C., Ventura S., García E.: Data mining in course management systems: moodle case study and tutorial. Comput. Educ. 51(1), 368–384 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Romero, C., Ventura, S., Espejo, P.G., Hervás, C.: Data mining algorithms to classify students. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM08), pp. 8–17, (2008)Google Scholar
  75. Rummel N., Krämer N.: Computer-supported instructional communication: a multidisciplinary account of relevant factors. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 22(1), 1–7 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Ryan A., Pintrich P., Midgley C.: Avoiding seeking help in the classroom: who and why?. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 13(2), 93–114 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Salas E., Sims D.E., Burke C.: Is there a “Big Five” in teamwork?. Small Group Res. 36(5), 555–599 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Schaller, D.T., Borun, M., Allison-Bunnell, S., Chambers, M.: One size does not fit all: learning style, play, and on-line interactives. In: Proceedings of Museums and the Web 2007—the International Conference for Culture and Heritage On-Line, (2007).
  79. Sejnowski T.J., Rosenberg C.R.: Parallel networks that learn to pronounce English text. J. Complex Syst. 1(1), 145–168 (1987)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  80. Seymore, K., McCallum, A., Rosenfeld, R.: Learning hidden Markov model structure for information extraction. In: Proceedings of the AAAI 99 Workshop on Machine Learning for Information Extraction pp. 37–42, (1999)Google Scholar
  81. Shannon, C.E.: A mathematical theory of communication. In: Slepian, D. (ed.) Key Papers in the Development of Information Theory. IEEE Press, New York (1974).
  82. Simon, S.J.: The relationship of learning style and training method to end-user computer satisfaction and computer use: a structural equation model. Inf. Technol. Learn. Perform. J. 18(1) (2000).
  83. Soller A.: Adaptive support for distributed collaboration. In: Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A., Nejdl, W. (eds) The Adaptive Web, vol. 4321 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 573–595. Springer, Berlin (2007)Google Scholar
  84. Soller A., Lesgold A.: Modeling the process of collaborative learning. In: Dillenbourg, P., Hoppe, H., Ogata, H., Soller, A. (eds) The Role of Technology in CSCL, vol. 9 of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, pp. 63–86. Springer, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  85. Soller A., Martínez A., Jermann P., Muehlenbrock M.: From mirroring to guiding: a review of state of the art technology for supporting collaborative learning. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 15(4), 261–290 (2005)Google Scholar
  86. Srivastava J., Cooley R., Deshpande M., Tan P.-N.: Web usage mining: discovery and applications of usage patterns from web data. SIGKDD Explor. 1(2), 12–23 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Su, J.-M., Tseng, S.-S., Chen, C.-H., Lin, H.-Y.: A personalized learning content adaption mechanism to meet diverse user needs in mobile learning environments. Int. J. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. Special Issue on Data Min. Person. Educ. Syst. (this issue) (2011)Google Scholar
  88. Terrell, S.R.: Supporting different learning styles in an online learning environment: does it really matter in the long run? J. Distance Learn. Admin. 8(2) (2005).
  89. Thorndike E.L.: Educational Psychology. Kessinger Publishing, Whitefish (1903)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Vail, D.L., Veloso, M.M., Lafferty, J.D.: Conditional random fields for activity recognition. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, pp. 1–8, (2007)Google Scholar
  91. VanLehn K., Lynch C., Schulze K., Shapiro J.A., Shelby R.H., Taylor L., Treacy D., Weinstein A., Wintersgill M.: The Andes physics tutoring system: lessons learned. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 15(3), 147–204 (2005)Google Scholar
  92. Vialardi, C., Bravo, J., Shafti, L., Ortigosa, A.: Recommendations in higher education using data mining techniques. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM09), pp. 190–199, (2009)Google Scholar
  93. Walker E., Rummel N., Koedinger K.R.: CTRL: a research framework for providing adaptive collaborative learning support. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 19(5), 387–431 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Wayang Outpost: Wayang Outpost (2010).
  95. Yoo, J., Li, C., Pettey, C.: Adaptive teaching strategy for online learning. In: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces (IUI ’05), pp. 266–268. ACM, New York (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Information Processing and Microprocessor TechnologyJohannes Kepler UniversityLinzAustria

Personalised recommendations