Adaptive Remediation with Multi-modal Content

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11597)


Remediation is an integral part of adaptive instructional systems that provide a supplement to lectures in case the delivered content proves too difficult for a user to fully grasp in a single class session. To extend the delivery of current remediation methods from single type of sources to combinations of different material types, we propose an adaptive remediation system with multi-modal remediation content. The system operates in four main phases: ingesting a library of multi-modal content files into bite-sized chunks, linking them based on topical and contextual relevance, then modeling users’ real-time knowledge state when they interact with the delivered course through the system and determining whether remediation is needed, and finally identifying a set of remediation segments addressing the current knowledge weakness with the relevance links. We conducted two studies to test our developed adaptive remediation system in an advanced engineering course taught at an undergraduate institution in the US and evaluated our system on productivity. Both studies show that our system is effective in increasing the productivity by at least 50%.


  1. 1.
    Blei, D.M., Ng, A.Y., Jordan, M.I.: Latent dirichlet allocation. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 3, 993–1022 (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bra, P.D.: Pros and cons of adaptive hypermedia in web-based education. Cyberpsychology Behav. 3(1), 71–77 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brinton, C.G., Buccapatnam, S., Chiang, M., Poor, H.V.: Mining MOOC clickstreams: video-watching behavior vs. in-video quiz performance. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 64(14), 3677–3692 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brinton, C.G., Rill, R., Ha, S., Chiang, M., Smith, R., Ju, W.: Individualization for education at scale: MIIC design and preliminary evaluation. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 8(1), 136–148 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A., Vassileva, J.: Adaptive Hypertext and Hypermedia. Springer, Dordrecht (1998). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brusilovsky, P., Millán, E.: User models for adaptive hypermedia and adaptive educational systems. In: Brusilovsky, P., Kobsa, A., Nejdl, W. (eds.) The Adaptive Web. LNCS, vol. 4321, pp. 3–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brusilovsky, P., Peylo, C.: Adaptive and intelligent web-based educational systems. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. (IJAIED) 13, 159–172 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brusilovsky, P., et al.: Adaptive and intelligent technologies for web-based eduction. Ki 13(4), 19–25 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chen, W., Joe-Wong, C., Brinton, C.G., Zheng, L., Cao, D.: Principles for assessing adaptive online coursesGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Corbett, A.T., Anderson, J.R.: Knowledge tracing: modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Model. User-Adapted Interact. 4(4), 253–278 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Bra, P., Calvi, L.: AHA: a generic adaptive hypermedia system. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Adaptive Hypertext and Hypermedia, pp. 5–12 (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Froschl, C.: User modeling and user profiling in adaptive e-learning systems. Master Thesis, Graz, Austria (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lan, A.S., Waters, A.E., Studer, C., Baraniuk, R.G.: Sparse factor analysis for learning and content analytics. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15(1), 1959–2008 (2014)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mann, H.B., Whitney, D.R.: On a test of whether one of two random variables is stochastically larger than the other. Ann. Math. Stat. 18, 50–60 (1947)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Melis, E., et al.: ActiveMath: a generic and adaptive web-based learning environment. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. (IJAIED) 12, 385–407 (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paramythis, A., Loidl-Reisinger, S.: Adaptive learning environments and e-learning standards. In: Second European Conference on e-learning, vol. 1, pp. 369–379 (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Park, O.C., Lee, J.: Adaptive instructional systems. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 25, 651–684 (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Park, O.C., Tennyson, R.D.: Computer-based instructional systems for adaptive education: a review. Contemp. Educ. Rev. 2(2), 121–135 (1983)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Reiser, R.A.: Instructional technology: a history. In: Instructional Technology: Foundations, pp. 11–48 (1987)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ross, E.W.: Adapting teaching to individual differences. Soc. Sci. Rec. 26(1), 27–29 (1989)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Shepard, L.A.: The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educ. Res. 29(7), 4–14 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sonwalkar, N.: Adaptive individualization: the next generation of online education. In: EdMedia: World Conference on Educational Media and Technology, pp. 3056–3063. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE) (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tadlaoui, M.A., Aammou, S., Khaldi, M., Carvalho, R.N.: Learner modeling in adaptive educational systems: a comparative study. Int. J. Mod. Educ. Comput. Sci. 8(3), 1 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tobias, S.: When do instructional methods. Educ. Res. 11(4), 4–9 (1982)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yang, T.Y., Brinton, C.G., Joe-Wong, C.: Predicting learner interactions in social learning networks. In: IEEE INFOCOM 2018 IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, pp. 1322–1330. IEEE (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Zoomi, Inc.ChesterbrookUSA
  2. 2.Princeton UniversityPrincetonUSA
  3. 3.University of Massachusetts AmherstAmherstUSA
  4. 4.Purdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA

Personalised recommendations