Advertisement

Assessing the Role of Behavioral Markers in Adaptive Learning for Emergency Medical Services

  • Kimberly StowersEmail author
  • Lisa Brady
  • Youjeong Huh
  • Robert E. Wray
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 785)

Abstract

Tools for adaptive learning are on the rise, resulting in the creation and implementation of increasingly intelligent tutoring systems. These systems can be applied in a variety of contexts, including civilian, military, and emergency operations. Such systems may also include the capability to adapt to learner needs based on performance or behavioral input. However, the use of such adaptation may vary in its success depending on the domain it is applied to. This paper examines the potential utility of adaptive tutoring for educating Emergency Medical Service (EMS) workers. We examine two complementary approaches that can be used to drive adaptation: performance-based and behavior-based adaptive learning models in intelligent tutoring. We then discuss implications of implementing such learning models for intelligent tutoring in EMS. Next, we outline ongoing research as a use case for the validation of different adaptive learning models. Finally, we discuss expected impacts of this line of research, including the expansion of adaptive tutoring to other domains related to EMS.

Keywords

Intelligent tutoring Training design Adaptive training 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported, in part, by the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, through the Joint Program Committee-1/Medical Simulation and Information Science Research Program under Award No. W81XWH-16-1-0460. Opinions, interpretations, conclusions and recommendations are those of the authors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Department of Defense. The U.S. Army Medical Research Acquisition Activity, 820 Chandler Street, Fort Detrick MD 21702-5014 is the awarding and administering acquisition office.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Brynjolfsson, E., McAfee, A.: Race Against the Machine: How the Digital Revolution is Accelerating Innovation, Driving Productivity, and Irreversibly Transforming Employment and the Economy. Digital Frontier Press, Lexington (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Woolf, B.P.: Building Intelligent Interactive Tutors: Student-centered Strategies for Revolutionizing e-Learning. Morgan Kaufman, Burlington (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    National Academy of Engineering: Grand Challenges for Engineering. National Academy of Sciences/National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Craig, S.D., Graesser, A.C., Sullins, J., Gholson, B.: Affect and learning: an exploratory look into the role of affect in learning with AutoTutor. J. Educ. Media 29(3), 241–250 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hatano, G., Inagaki, K.: Two Courses of Expertise. In: Stevenson, H., Asuma, H., Hakauta, K. (eds.) Child Development and Education in Japan, pp. 262–272. Freeman, San Francisco (1986)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bransford, J.D., Schwartz, D.L.: Rethinking Transfer: A Simple Proposal With Multiple Implications. In: Iran-Nejad, A., Pearson, P.D. (eds.) Review of Research in Education, vol. 24. American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coultas, C.W., Grossman, R., Salas, E.: Design, delivery, evaluation, and transfer of training systems. In: salvendy, g (ed.) Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 4th edn, pp. 490–533. Wiley, Hoboken (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pan, S.J., Yang, Q.: A survey on transfer learning. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 22(10), 1345–1359 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McGaghie, W.C., Issenberg, S.B., Petrusa, E.R., Scalese, R.J.: A critical review of simulation-based medical education research: 2003-2009. Med. Educ. 44(1), 50–63 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kindley, R. W.: Scenario-based e-Learning: a step beyond traditional e-Learning. Learning Circuits (2002). http://www.learningcircuits.org
  12. 12.
    Lave, J., Wenger, E.: Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1991)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Studnek, J.R., Fernandez, A.R., Shimberg, B., Garifo, M., Correll, M.: The association between emergency medical services field performance assessed by high-fidelity simulation and the cognitive knowledge of practicing paramedics. Acad. Emerg. Med. 18(11), 1177–1185 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vidani, A.C., Chittaro, L., Carchietti, E.: Assessing nurses’ acceptance of a serious game for emergency medical services. In: 2nd IEEE International Symposium on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications (VS-GAMES), pp. 101–108. IEEE Press, New York (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Durlach, P., Spain, R.: Framework for instructional technology. In: Duffy, V.G. (ed.) Advances in Applied Human Modeling and Simulation. CRC Press (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pea, R.D.: The social and technological dimensions of scaffolding and related theoretical concepts for learning, education, and human activity. J. Learn. Sci. 13(3), 423–451 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Murray, T., Arroyo, I.: Toward measuring and maintaining the zone of proximal development in adaptive instructional systems. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vygotsky, L.S.: Mind and Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1978)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Anderson, J.A., Corbett, A.T., Koedinger, K., Pelletier, R.: Cognitive tutors: lessons learned. J. Learn. Sci. 4(2), 167–207 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dillenbourg, P., Self, J.: A framework for learner modeling. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2(2), 111–137 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pardos, Z.A., Heffernan, N.T., Anderson, B., Heffernan, C.L.: Using fine-grained skill models to fit student performance with bayesian networks. In: Christobal, R. (ed.) Handbook of Educational Data Mining, pp. 417–426. CRC Press (2010)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vesin, B., Klašnja-Milićević, A., Ivanović, M., Budimac, Z.: Applying recommender systems and adaptive hypermedia for e-Learning personalization. Comput. Inform. 32(3), 629–659 (2013)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dziuban, C., Moskal, P., Johnson, C., Evans, D.: Adaptive learning: a tale of two contexts. Current Issues in Emerg. e-Learn. 4(1), 3 (2017)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Buckley, R., Caple, J.: The Theory and Practice of Training. Kogan Page Publishers, London (2009)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    United States Department of Transportation, & National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. EMT-Basic: National Standard Curriculum (1996)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sottilare, R.A.: Adaptive Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) Research in Support of the Army Learning Model: Research Outline. US Army Research Laboratory (ARL-SR-0284) (2013)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Duffy, E.: The psychological significance of the concept of “Arousal” or “Activation”. Psychol. Rev. 64(5), 265 (1957)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Berlyne, D.E.: Curiosity and learning. Motiv. Emot. 2(2), 97–175 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cohn, J.V., Kruse, A., Stripling, R.: Investigating the transition from novice to expert in a virtual training environment using neuro-cognitive measures. In: Schmorrow, D. (ed.) Foundations of Augmented Cognition. LEA, Mattawan, NJ (2005)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cohn, J.V., Nicholson, D., Schmorrow, D. (eds.): The PSI Handbook of Virtual Environments for Training and Education, vol. 3. Praeger Security International, Westport, CT (2008)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kirkpatrick, D.L.: Implementing the Four Levels: A Practical Guide for Effective Evaluation of Training Programs. Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco (2007)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Williams, B., Boyle, M., Molloy, A., Brightwell, R., Munro, G.: Undergraduate paramedic students’ attitudes to E-Learning: findings from five university programs. Res. Learn. Technol. 19(2), 89–100 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Freeman, J.B., Ambady, N.: MouseTracker: software for studying real-time mental processing using a computer mouse-tracking method. Behav. Res. Methods 42(1), 226–241 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kawatsu, C., Hubal, R., Marinier, R.: Predicting students’ decisions in a training simulation: a novel application of TrueSkill™. IEEE Trans. Comput. Intell. AI Games, 99 (2016)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Folsom-Kovarik, J.T.: Developing a pattern recognition structure to tailor mid-lesson feedback. In: Sottilare, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the 5th Annual Generalized Intelligent Framework for Tutoring (GIFT) Users Symposium (GIFTSym5), self published (2017)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wearne, A., Wray, R. E.: Exploration of Behavior Markers to Support Adaptive Learning Lecture Notes in Computer Science. In: Proceedings of the 2018 Human Computer Interaction International (HCII) Conference, Las Vegas (2018)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wray, R.E., Stowers, K.: Interactions between learner assessment and content requirements: a verification approach. In: Andre, T. (ed.) Advances in Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences, pp. 36–45. Springer, Cham, Switzerland (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shute, V.J.: Focus on formative feedback. Rev. Educ. Res. 78(1), 153–189 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kimberly Stowers
    • 1
    Email author
  • Lisa Brady
    • 1
  • Youjeong Huh
    • 1
  • Robert E. Wray
    • 2
  1. 1.The University of AlabamaTuscaloosaUSA
  2. 2.Soar Technology, Inc.Ann ArborUSA

Personalised recommendations