A review of recent advances in learner and skill modeling in intelligent learning environments

  • Michel C. DesmaraisEmail author
  • Ryan S. J. d. Baker
Original paper


In recent years, learner models have emerged from the research laboratory and research classrooms into the wider world. Learner models are now embedded in real world applications which can claim to have thousands, or even hundreds of thousands, of users. Probabilistic models for skill assessment are playing a key role in these advanced learning environments. In this paper, we review the learner models that have played the largest roles in the success of these learning environments, and also the latest advances in the modeling and assessment of learner skills. We conclude by discussing related advancements in modeling other key constructs such as learner motivation, emotional and attentional state, meta-cognition and self-regulated learning, group learning, and the recent movement towards open and shared learner models.


Student models Learner models Probabilistic models Bayesian Networks IRT Model tracing POKS Bayesian Knowledge Tracing Intelligent Tutoring System Learning environments Cognitive modeling 


  1. Aleven V., McLaren B.M., Roll I., Koedinger K.R. (2006) Toward meta-cognitive tutoring: a model of help seeking with a cognitive tutor. I. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 16(2): 101–128Google Scholar
  2. Almond R.G., Mislevy R.J. (1999) Graphical models and computerized adaptive testing. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 23(3): 223–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Almond, R.G., Dibello, L., Jenkins F., Senturk, D., Mislevy, R., Steinberg, L., Yan, D.: Models for conditional probability tables in educational assessment. In: Proceedings of the 2001 Conference on AI and Statistics, Key West, FL, 3–6 January 2001Google Scholar
  4. Almond R.G., DiBello L.V., Moulder B., Zapata-Rivera J.-D. (2007) Modeling diagnostic assessments with Bayesian Networks. J. Educ. Meas. 44: 341–359. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2007.00043.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Alrifai, M., Dolog, P., Nejdl, W.: Learner Profile Management for Collaborative Adaptive eLearning Application. In: APS’2006: Joint International Workshop on Adaptivity, Personalisation and the Semantic Web at the 17th ACM Hypertext’06 Conference, Odense, Denmark, 22–25 August 2006Google Scholar
  6. Aroyo L., Dolog P., Houben G.-J., Kravcik M., Naeve A., Nilsson M., Wild F. (2006) Interoperability in personalized adaptive learning. Educ. Technol. Soc. 9(2): 4–18Google Scholar
  7. Arroyo, I., Ferguson, K., Johns, J., Dragon, T., Meheranian, H., Fisher, D., Barto, A.G., Mahadevan, S., Woolf, B.P.: Repairing disengagement with non-invasive interventions. In: Luckin, R., Koedinger, K.R., Greer, J.E. (eds.) Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, AIED 2007, Los Angeles, CA, USA, pp. 195–202, 9–13 July 2007Google Scholar
  8. Arroyo, I., Cooper, D.G., Burleson, W., Woolf, B.P., Muldner, K., Christopherson, R.: Emotion sensors go to school. In: Dimitrova, V., Mizoguchi, R., du Boulay, B., Graesser, A.C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, AIED 2009, Brighton, UK, pp. 17–24, 6–10 July 2009Google Scholar
  9. Augustin T., Hockemeyer C., Kickmeier-Rust M., Albert D. (2011) Individualized skill assessment in educational games: basic definitions and mathematical formalism. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 4: 138–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Baker, R.S.J.: Modeling and understanding students’ off-task behavior in intelligent tutoring systems. In: Rosson, M.B., Gilmore, D.J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 2007 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2007, San Jose, CA, USA, pp. 1059–1068, 28 April–3 May 2007Google Scholar
  11. Baker, R., Corbett, A.: More accurate student modeling through contextual estimation of slip and guess probabilities in Bayesian Knowledge Tracing. In: Proceedings of Ninth Intelligent Tutoring System Conference (ITS2008), pp. 406–415, Montreal, Canada, 24–27 June 2008. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-69132-7_44
  12. Baker, R.S.J., de Carvalho, A.M.J.B.: Labeling student behavior faster and more precisely with text replays. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Educational Data Mining, EDM 2008, pp. 38–47, Montreal, Canada, 20–21 June 2008Google Scholar
  13. Baker F.B., Kim S.-H. (2004) Item Response Theory, Parameter Estimation Techniques, 2nd edn. Marcel Dekker Inc, New York, NYzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Baker, R.S., Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K.R., Wagner, A.Z.: ‘Off-Task Behavior in the Cognitive Tutor Classroom: When Students “Game The System”’. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI 2004: Computer–Human Interaction, pp. 383–390, Vienna, Austria, 24–29 April 2004Google Scholar
  15. Baker, R.S.J., 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: Ikeda, M., Ashley, K.D., Chan, T.-W. (eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 8th International Conference, ITS 2006, Jhongli, Taiwan, 26–30 June 2006, Proceedings, Vol. 4053 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 392–401. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  16. Baker, R.S.J., Corbett, A.T., Aleven, V.: Improving contextual models of guessing and slipping with a truncated training set. In: Baker, R.S.J., Barnes, T., Beck, J.E. (eds.) Proceedings of EDM 2008, The 1st International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 67–76 (2008a)Google Scholar
  17. Baker R.S.J., Corbett A.T., Roll I., Koedinger K.R. (2008b) Developing a generalizable detector of when students game the system. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 18(3): 287–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Baker, R.S.J., Mitrovic, A., Mathews, M.: Detecting gaming the system in constraint-based tutors. In: User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization, 18th International Conference, UMAP 2010, Big Island, HI, USA, 20–24 June 2010, Proceedings, pp. 267–278 (2010)Google Scholar
  19. Beal, C.R., Qu, L., Lee, H.: Classifying learner engagement through integration of multiple data sources. In: Proceedings of AAAI06, Boston, MA, 16–20 July 2006Google Scholar
  20. Beck, J.E.: Engagement tracing: using response times to model student disengagement. In: Looi, C.-K., McCalla, G.I., Bredeweg, B., Breuker, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, AIED 2005, 18–22 July 2005, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 88–95 (2005)Google Scholar
  21. Beck, J.E., Chang, K.-m., Mostow, J., Corbett, A.T.: Does help help? Introducing the Bayesian evaluation and assessment methodology. In: Proceedings of Intelligent Tutoring Systems, ITS 2008, Montreal, Canada, pp. 383–394, 23–27 June 2008Google Scholar
  22. Biswas G., Jeong H., Kinnebrew J., Sulcer B., Roscoe R. (2010) Measuring self-regulated learning skills through social interactions in a teachable agent environment. Res. Pract. Technology-Enhanced Learn. 5(2): 123–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Bloom B.S. (1984) The 2 sigma problem: the search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educ. Res. 13(4): 4–16Google Scholar
  24. Briggs D.C., Wilson M. (2003) An introduction to multidimensional measurement using Rasch models. J. Appl. Meas. 4: 87–100Google Scholar
  25. Brusilovsky P. (2001) Adaptive hypermedia. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 11(1–2): 87–110zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Brusilovsky P. (2003) Adaptive and intelligent web-based educational systems. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 13: 156–169Google Scholar
  27. Brusilovsky P., Vassileva J. (2003) Course sequencing techniques for large-scale webbased education. Int. J. Cont. Eng. Lifelong Learn. 13: 75–94Google Scholar
  28. Brusilovsky, P., Sosnovsky, S., Yudelson, M.: Ontology-based framework for user model interoperability in distributed learning environments. In: World Conference on E-Learning, E-Learn 2005, pp. 2851–2855, Vancouver, Canada (2005)Google Scholar
  29. Bull, S., Broady, E.: Spontaneous peer tutoring from sharing student models. In: Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED97), pp. 143–150, Kobe, Japan, 19–23 August 1997Google Scholar
  30. Bull S., Kay J. (2007) Student models that invite the learner. In: The SMILI open learner modelling framework. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 17(2): 89–120Google Scholar
  31. Bull S., Kay J. (2010) Open learner models. In: Nkambou R., Bourdeau R., Mizoguchi J. (eds) Advances in Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer, Berlin, pp 301–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Bull S., Pain H. (1995) Did I say what I think I said, and do you agree with me?: inspecting and questioning the student model. In: Greer J. (eds) Proceedings of World Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Education. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education, Charlottesville, pp 501–508Google Scholar
  33. Carmona, C., Millán, E., de-la Cruz, J.-L.P., Trella, M., Conejo, R.: Introducing prerequisite relations in a multi-layered Bayesian student model. In: Ardissono, L., Brna, P., Mitrovic, A. (eds.) User Modeling 2005, 10th International Conference, UM 2005, pp. 347–356. Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, 24–29 July 2005Google Scholar
  34. Cen, H., Koedinger, K.R., Junker, B.: Learning factors analysis—a general method for cognitive model evaluation and improvement. In: Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 8th International Conference, ITS 2006, Jhongli, Taiwan, Proceedings, pp. 164–175, 26–30 June 2006Google Scholar
  35. Cetintas, S., Si, L., Xin, Y.P., Hord, C., Zhang, D.: Learning to identify students’ off-task behavior in intelligent tutoring systems. In: Dimitrova, V., Mizoguchi, R., du Boulay, B., Graesser, A.C. (eds.) Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, AIED 2009, Brighton, UK, pp. 701–703, 6–10 July 2009Google Scholar
  36. Chaouachi, M., Frasson, C.: Exploring the relationship between learner EEG mental engagement and affect. In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 10th International Conference, ITS 2010, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, Proceedings, Part II. pp. 291–293, 14–18 June 2010Google Scholar
  37. Cohen J.A. (1960) A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 20(1): 37–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Cohen P.A., Kulik J.A., Kulik C.L.C. (1982) Educational outcomes of tutoring: a meta-analysis of findings. Am. Educ. Res. J. 19: 237–248Google Scholar
  39. Cole D.A. (1987) Utility of confirmatory factor analysis in test validation research. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 55(4): 584–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Conati C., Maclaren H. (2009) Empirically building and evaluating a probabilistic model of user affect. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 19(3): 267–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Conati C., Gertner A., VanLehn K. (2002) Using Bayesian Networks to manage uncertainty in student modeling. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 12(4): 371–417zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Conati, C., Chabbal, R., Maclaren, H.: A study on using biometric sensors for detecting user emotions in educational games. In: Proceedings of the Workshop “Assessing and Adapting to UserAttitude and Affects: Why, When and How? In Conjunction with User Modeling (UM-03), Pittsburg, PA”, 22–26 June 2003Google Scholar
  43. Conejo R., Guzman E., Millán E., Trella M., Pérez-de-la Cruz J.L., Rios A. (2004) SIETTE: a web-based tool for adaptive teaching. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 14: 29–61Google Scholar
  44. Corbett A.T., Anderson J.R. (1995) Knowledge tracing: modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 4(4): 253–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Cumming G., Mcdougall A. (2000) Mainstreaming AIED into education?.   Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. (IJAIED) 11: 197–207Google Scholar
  46. de Vicente A., Pain H. (2002) Informing the detection of the students’ motivational state: an empirical study. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 2363: 933–943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Desmarais, M.C.: Performance comparison of item-to-item skills models with the IRT single latent trait model. In: User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization, UMAP 2011, pp. 75–86, Gerona, Spain, 11–15 July 2011Google Scholar
  48. Desmarais M.C., Maluf A., Liu J. (1996) User-expertise modeling with empirically derived probabilistic implication networks. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 5(3–4): 283–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Desmarais M.C., Meshkinfam P., Gagnon M. (2006) Learned student models with item to item knowledge structures. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 16(5): 403–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. DiEugenio B., Glass M. (2004) The Kappa statistic: a second look. Comput. Linguist. 30(1): 95–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Dimitrova V. (2003) StyLE-OLM: interactive open learner modelling. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 13(1): 35–78Google Scholar
  52. D’Mello, S.K., Taylor, R.S., Graesser, A.: Affective Trajectories during Complex Learning. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Austin, TX, pp. 203–208 (2007)Google Scholar
  53. D’Mello S.K., Craig S.D., Witherspoon A.M., McDaniel B., Graesser A.C. (2008) Automatic detection of learner’s affect from conversational cues. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 18(1–2): 45–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Doignon J.-P., Falmagne J.-C. (1985) Spaces for the assessment of knowledge. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 23: 175–196zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Doignon J.-P., Falmagne J.-C. (1999) Knowledge Spaces. Springer, BerlinzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Dolog, P., Schäfer, M.: A framework for browsing, manipulating and maintaining interoperable learner profiles. In: Proceedings of UM’2005, pp. 397–401, Edinburgh, Scotland, 2005Google Scholar
  57. Dütsch I., Gediga G. (1995) Skills and knowledge structures. Br. J. Math. Stat. Psychol. 48: 9–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Efrong B., Gong G. (1983) A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation. Am. Stat. 37: 36–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Ekman P., Friesen W.V., O’Sullivan M., Chan A., Diacoyanni-Tarlatzi I., Heider K., Krause R., Lecompte W.A., Pitcairn T., Picci-Bitti P.E., Sherer K., Tomita M., Tzavaras A. (1987) Universal and cultural differences in the judgment of facial expression and emotion. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 53: 712–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Falmagne J.-C., Cosyn E., Doignon J.-P., Thiéry N. (2006) The assessment of knowledge, in theory and in practice. In: Missaoui R., Schmid J. (eds) ICFCA, Vol. 3874 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, pp 61–79Google Scholar
  61. Feng, M., Heffernan, N.T., Koedinger, K.R.: Addressing the testing challenge with a web-based e-assessment system that tutors as it assesses. In: Carr, L., Roure, D.D., Iyengar, A., Goble, C.A., Dahlin, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 15th international conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2006, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, pp. 307–316, 23–26 May 2006Google Scholar
  62. Fogarty, J., Baker, R.S., Hudson, S.E.: Case studies in the use of ROC curve analysis for sensor-based estimates in human computer interaction. In: Inkpen, K., van de Panne, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Graphics Interface 2005 Conference, Victoria, BC, Canada, pp. 129–136, 9–11 May 2005Google Scholar
  63. Forbes-Riley, K., Litman, D.J.: Predicting emotion in spoken dialogue from multiple knowledge sources. In: HLT-NAACL, pp. 201–208, Boston, MA, 2–7 May 2004Google Scholar
  64. Friesen N. (2005) Interoperability and learning objects: an overview of e-learning standardization. Interdiscip. J. Knowl. Learn. Objects 1: 23–31Google Scholar
  65. Gong, Y., Beck, J.E., Heffernan, N.T.: Using multiple Dirichlet distributions to improve parameter plausibility. In: Baker, R.S.J.d., Merceron, A.M., Pavlik, P.I., Jr. (eds.) Educational Data Mining 2010 (EDM2010), pp. 61–70, Pittsburgh, PA, 11–13 June 2010Google Scholar
  66. Greer, J.E., McCalla, G.I.: A computational framework for granularity and its application to educational diagnosis. In: IJCAI, pp. 477–482, Detroit, MI (1989)Google Scholar
  67. Guzmán E., Conejo R., Pérez-de-la Cruz J.-L. (2007) Adaptive testing for hierarchical student models. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 17: 119–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Hacker D.J. (1999) Definitions and empirical foundations. In: Hacker D.J., Dunlosky J., Graesser A.C. (eds) Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, pp 1–24Google Scholar
  69. Haertel E.H. (1989) Using restricted latent class models to map the skill structure of achievement items. J. Educ. Meas. 26: 301–321. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1989.tb00336.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Hanley J.A., McNeil B.J. (1982) The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 143: 29–36Google Scholar
  71. Hastie T., Tibshirani R., Friedman J.H. (2001) The elements of statistical learning. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  72. Hatala, M., Richards, G., Eap, T., Willms, J.: Interoperability of learning object repositories and services: standards, implementations and lessons learned. In: The Proceedings of the 13th World Wide Web Conference, New York, NY (2004)Google Scholar
  73. Heller J., Steiner C., Hockemeyer C., Albert D. (2006) Competence-based knowledge structures for personalised learning. Int. J. E-Learn. 5(1): 75–88Google Scholar
  74. Hockemeyer, C., Held, T., Albert, D.: RATH—a relational adaptive tutoring hypertext WWW–environment based on knowledge space theory. In: Alvegård (ed.) Proceedings of 4th International Conference on Computer Aided Learning and Instruction in Science and Engineering, Proceedings of the CALISCE’98, pp. 417–423, Göteborg, Sweden (1997)Google Scholar
  75. Jameson A. (1995) Numerical uncertainty management in user and student modeling: an overview of systems and issues. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 5(3–4): 193–251Google Scholar
  76. Johns, J., Woolf, B.P.: A dynamic mixture model to detect student motivation and proficiency. In: Proceedings of AAAI2006, Boston, MA (2006)Google Scholar
  77. Junker B., Sijtsma K. (2001) Cognitive assessment models with few assumptions, and connections with nonparametric item response theory. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 25(3): 258–272MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Kay J., Maisonneuve N., Yacef K., Reimann P. (2006) The big five and visualisations of team work activity. In: Ikeda M., Ashley K., Chan T.-W. (eds) Proceedings of Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS06). Springer, Berlin, pp 197–206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Khalid, M.N.: IRT model fit from different perspectives. Ph.D. thesis, University of Twente (2009)Google Scholar
  80. Koedinger K.R., Anderson J.R., Hadley W.H., Mark M.A. (1997) Intelligent tutoring goes to school in the big city. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 8: 30–43Google Scholar
  81. Koedinger, K.R., Corbett, A.T., Perfetti, C.: The Knowledge–Learning–Instruction (KLI) framework: toward bridging the science-practice chasm to enhance robust student learning. Technical report, Carnegie-Mellon University, Human Computer Interaction Institute, Pittsburgh (2011)Google Scholar
  82. Koper E.J.R., Giesbers B., Van Rosmalen P., Sloep P., Van Bruggen J., Tattersall C., Vogten H., Brouns F. (2005) A design model for lifelong learning networks. Interact. Learn. Environ. 1–2: 71–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Kumar, R., Rosé, C.P., Wang, Y.C., Joshi, M., Robinson, A.: Tutorial dialogue as adaptive collaborative learning support. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2007), Marina Del Rey, CA, 9–13 July 2007Google Scholar
  84. Lajoie S. (2005) Extending the scaffolding metaphor. Instr. Sci. 33: 541–557CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Lepper, M.R., Woolverton, M., Mumme, D.L., Gurtner, J.L.: Motivational techniques of expert human tutors: lessons for the design of computer-based tutors. In: Lajoie, S.P., Derry, S.J. (eds). Computers as Cognitive tools. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1991)Google Scholar
  86. Ley T., Kump B., Albert D. (2010) A methodology for eliciting, modelling, and evaluating expert knowledge for an adaptive work-integrated learning system. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 68(4): 185–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Liu C.-L. (2009) . Behaviormetrikasimulation-based experience in learning structures of Bayesian networks to represent how students learn composite concepts 36(1): 1–25MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Mabbott, A., Bull, S.: Student preferences for editing, persuading and negotiating the open learner model. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS 2006), pp. 481–490, Jhongli, Taiwan, 26–30 June 2006Google Scholar
  89. Mayo M., Mitrovic A. (2001) Optimising ITS behaviour with Bayesian Networks and decision theory. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 12: 124–153Google Scholar
  90. McCalla G. (2004) The ecological approach to the design of e-learning environments: purpose-based capture and use of information about learners. J. Interact. Media Educ. 7: 1–23Google Scholar
  91. McCalla, G.I., Peachey, D.R., Ward, B.: An architecture for the design of large-scale intelligent teaching systems. In: Cercone, N., McCalla, G. (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th National Conference of the CSCSI, pp. 85–91 (1982)Google Scholar
  92. McCalla G., Greer J., Barrie B., Pospisil P. (1992) Granularity hierarchies. Comput. Math. Appl. 23(2–5): 363–375zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Mierswa, I., Wurst, M., Klinkenberg, R., Scholz, M., Euler, T.: YALE: rapid prototyping for complex data mining tasks. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD 2006), pp. 935–940, Philadelphia, PA, 20–23 August 2006Google Scholar
  94. Millán E., Pérez-de-la-Cruz J.L. (2002) A Bayesian diagnostic algorithm for student modeling and its evaluation. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 12(2–3): 281–330zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Mislevy R.J., Gitomer D. (1995) The role of probability-based inference in an intelligent tutoring system. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 42(5): 253–282Google Scholar
  96. Mislevy, R.J., Almond, R.G., Yan, D., Steinberg L.S.: Bayes nets in educational assessment: where the numbers come from. In: Laskey, K.B., Prade, H. (eds.) Proceedings of the 15th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (UAI-99). San Francisco, CA, pp. 437–446, 30 July– 1 Aug 1999Google Scholar
  97. Mitrovic, A.: Fifteen years of constraint-based tutors: what we have achived and where we are going. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 22 (this issue, 2012)Google Scholar
  98. Mitrovic, A., Koedinger, K.R., Martin, B.: A comparative analysis of cognitive tutoring and constraint-based modeling. In: User Modeling 2003, 9th International Conference, UM 2003, Johnstown, PA, USA, pp. 313–322, 22–26 June 2003Google Scholar
  99. Montalvo, O., Baker, R.S.J., Sao Pedro, M.A., Nakama, A., Gobert, J.D.: Identifying student’ inquiry planning using machine learning. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 141–150, Pittsburgh, PA, 11–13 June 2010Google Scholar
  100. Mota, S., Picard, R.: Automated posture analysis for detecting learner’s interest level. In: Workshop Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition for Human Computer Interaction, in Conjunction with CVPR 2003, Madison, WI, June 2003Google Scholar
  101. Muldner, K., Burleson, W., van de Sande, B., VanLehn, K.: An analysis of gaming behaviors in an intelligent tutoring system. In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 10th International Conference, ITS 2010, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 14–18 June 2010, Proceedings, Part I, Vol. 6094 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 184–193. Springer, Berlin (2010)Google Scholar
  102. Neapolitan R.E. (2004) Learning Bayesian Networks. Prentice Hall, New JerseyGoogle Scholar
  103. Nkambou, R., Bourdeau, J., Mizoguchi, R. (eds) (2010) Advances in Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  104. Ortony A., Clore G.L., Collins A. (1988) The Cognitive Structure of Emotions. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Pardos, Z.A., Heffernan, N.: Navigation the parameter space of Bayesian Knowledge Tracing models: visualizations of the convergence of the expectation maximization algorithm. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Educational Data Mining Conference 2010, pp. 161–170, Pittsburgh, PA, 11–13 June 2010aGoogle Scholar
  106. Pardos Z.A., Heffernan N.T.: Modeling individualization in a Bayesian networks implementation of knowledge tracing. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on User Modeling Adaptation and Personalization, Big Island of Hawai, USA, 20–24 June 2010bGoogle Scholar
  107. Pardos, Z., Heffernan, N.: KT-IDEM: Introducing item difficulty to the knowledge tracing model. In: User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization, 19th International Conference, UMAP 2011, Gerona, Spain, pp. 243–254, 11–15 July 2011Google Scholar
  108. Pavlik, P.I., Cen, H., Koedinger, K.R.: Learning factors transfer analysis: using learning curve analysis to automatically generate domain models. In: Barnes, T., Desmarais, M.C., Romero, C., Ventura, S. (eds.) 2nd International Conference on Educational Data Mining—EDM2009, pp. 121–130, Cordoba, Spain, 1–3 July 2009aGoogle Scholar
  109. Pavlik, P.I., Cen, H., Koedinger, K.R.: Performance factors analysis—a new alternative to knowledge tracing. In: Proceeding of the 2009 conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 531–538 (2009b)Google Scholar
  110. Peachey D.R., McCalla G.I. (1986) Using planning techniques in intelligent tutoring systems. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 24(1): 77–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Perera D., Kay J., Koprinska I., Yacef K., Zaïane O.R. (2009) Clustering and sequential pattern mining of online collaborative learning data. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 21(6): 759–772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Prata, D.N., Baker, R.S.J.d., Costa, E., Rosé, C.P., Cui, Y., de Carvalho, A.M.J.B.: Detecting and understanding the impact of cognitive and interpersonal conflict in computer supported collaborative learning environments. In: Proceedings of 2nd International Conference on Educational Data Mining—EDM2009, pp. 131–140, Cordoba, Spain, 1–3 July 2009Google Scholar
  113. Raftery A.E. (1995) Bayesian model selection in social research (with discussion). Sociol. Methodol. 25: 111–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Rebolledo-Mendez, G., du Boulay, B., Luckin, R.: Motivating the learner: an empirical evaluation. In: 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS2006), pp. 545–554, Jhongli, Taiwan, 26–30 June 2006Google Scholar
  115. Reckase M.D., McKinley R.L. (1991) The discriminating power of items that measure more than one dimension. Appl. Psychol. Meas. 15(4): 361–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Reye J. (2004) Student modelling based on belief networks. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 14: 63–96Google Scholar
  117. Roll, I., Aleven, V., Mclaren, B.M., Koedinger, K.R.: Can help seeking be tutored? Searching for the secret sauce of metacognitive tutoring. In: Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2007), pp. 203–210 (2009)Google Scholar
  118. Roussos L.A., Templin J.L., Henson R.A. (2007) Skills diagnosis using IRT-based latent class models. J. Educ. Meas. 44: 293–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Self, J.: Bypassing the intractable problem of student modelling. In: Proceedings of Intelligent Tutoring Systems, ITS’88, pp. 18–24, Montreal, Canada (1988)Google Scholar
  120. Shih, B., Koedinger, K.R., Scheines, R.: A response time model for bottom-out hints as worked examples. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Educational Data Mining, EDM2008, pp. 117–126, Montreal, Canada, 20–21 June 2008Google Scholar
  121. Stout W. (2007) Skills diagnosis using IRT-based continuous latent trait models. J. Educ. Meas. 44: 313–324. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2007.00041.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Tatsuoka K.K. (1983) Rule space: an approach for dealing with misconceptions based on item response theory. J. Educ. Meas. 20: 345–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Thai-Nghe, N., Horváth, T., Schmidt-Thieme, L.: Factorization Models for forecasting student performance. In: Conati, C., Ventura, S., Pechenizkiy, M., Calders, T. (eds.) Proceedings of EDM 2011, The 4th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 11–20, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 6–8 July 2011Google Scholar
  124. VanLehn, K., Niu, Z., Siler, S., Gertner, A.S.: Student modeling from conventional test data: a Bayesian approach without priors. In: ITS’98: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, London, UK, pp. 434–443 (1998)Google Scholar
  125. Vanlehn K., Lynch C., Schulze K., Shapiro J.A., Shelby R., Taylor L., Treacy D., Weinstein A., Wintersgill M. (2005) The Andes physics tutoring system: lessons learned. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 15(3): 147–204Google Scholar
  126. Vassileva, J.: Dynamic courseware generation: at the cross point of CAL, ITS and authoring. In: Proceedings International Conference on Computers in Education (ICCE’95), pp. 290–297, Singapore (1995)Google Scholar
  127. Vassileva J., McCalla G., Greer J. (2003) Multi-agent multi-user modeling in I-help. User Model. User-Adapt. Interact. 13: 179–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Villano, M.: Probabilistic student models: Bayesian belief networks and knowledge space theory. In: Frasson, C. e. a. (ed.) Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 492–498, Montréal, Canada, 10–12 June 1992Google Scholar
  129. Vomlel J. (2004) Bayesian networks in educational testing. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst. 12: 83–100zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. Vygotsky L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  131. Walker, E., Walker, S., Rummel, N., Koedinger, K.: Using problem-solving context to assess help quality in computer-mediated peer tutoring. In: 10th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS2010), Pittsburgh, PA, 14–18 June 2010Google Scholar
  132. Walonoski, J.A., Heffernan, N.T.: Detection and analysis of off-task gaming behavior in intelligent tutoring systems. In: Ikeda, M., Ashley, K.D., Chan, T.-W. (eds.) Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 8th International Conference, ITS 2006, Jhongli, Taiwan, Proceedings, , 26–30 June 2006, Vol. 4053 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 382–391. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  133. Woolf B.P. (2009) Building Intelligent Interactive Tutors Student-Centered Strategies for Revolutionizing e-Learning. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  134. Xu, Y., Mostow J.: Using logistic regression to trace multiple subskills in a dynamic Bayes Net. In: Conati, C., Ventura, S., Pechenizkiy, M., Calders, T. (eds.) Proceedings of EDM 2011, The 4th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 241–246, Eindhoven, Netherlands, 6–8 July 2011Google Scholar
  135. Yudelson, M., Pavlik, P.I., Koedinger, K.R.: User modeling—a notoriously black art. In: User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization, 19th International Conference, UMAP 2011, Gerona, Spain, pp. 317–328, 11–15 July 2011Google Scholar
  136. Zapata-Rivera J.-D., Greer J. (2004) Inspectable Bayesian student modeling servers in multi-agent tutoring systems. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 61(4): 535–563CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Polytechnique MontréalMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Worcester Polytechnic InstituteWorcesterUSA

Personalised recommendations