Advertisement

Analysing High-Level Help-Seeking Behaviour in ITSs

  • Moffat Mathews
  • Tanja Mitrović
  • David Thomson
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5149)

Abstract

In this paper, we look at initial results of data mining students’ help-seeking behaviour in two ITSs: SQL-Tutor and EER-Tutor. We categorised help given by these tutors into high-level (HLH) and low-level help (LLH), depending on the amount of help given. Each student was grouped into one of ten groups based on the frequency with which they used HLH. Learning curves were then plotted for each group. We asked the question, ”Does a student’s help-seeking behaviour (especially the frequency with which they use HLH) affect learning?” We noticed similarities between results for both tutors. Students who were very frequent users of HLH showed the lowest learning, both in learning rates and depth of knowledge. Students who were low to medium users of HLH showed the highest learning rates. Least frequent users of HLH had lower learning rates but showed higher depth of knowledge and a lower initial error rate, suggesting higher initial expertise. These initial results could suggest favouring pedagogical strategies that provide low to medium HLH to certain students.

Keywords

Learning Rate Pedagogical Strategy Medium User Frequent User Intelligent Tutor System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Gall, S.N.: Help-Seeking Behaviour in Learning. Review of Research in Education 12, 55–90 (1985)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baker, R., Corbett, A., Koedinger, K., Roll, I.: Detecting When Students Game the System, Across Tutor Subjects and Classroom Cohorts. In: Ardissono, L., Brna, P., Mitrović, A. (eds.) UM 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3538, pp. 220–224. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aleven, V., Koedinger, K.: Limitations of Student Control: Do Students Know when They Need Help? In: Gauthier, G., VanLehn, K., Frasson, C. (eds.) ITS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1839, pp. 292–303. Springer, Berlin (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mitrović, T.: An Intelligent SQL Tutor on the Web. IJAIED 13, 173–197 (2003)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Suraweera, P., Mitrović, T.: An Intelligent Tutoring System for Entity Relationship Modelling. JIJAIED 14, 375–417 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Moffat Mathews
    • 1
  • Tanja Mitrović
    • 1
  • David Thomson
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science & Software EngineeringUniversity of CanterburyNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations