Predicting Learning from Student Affective Response to Tutor Questions

  • Alexandria K. Vail
  • Joseph F. Grafsgaard
  • Kristy Elizabeth Boyer
  • Eric N. Wiebe
  • James C. Lester
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9684)

Abstract

Modeling student learning during tutorial interaction is a central problem in intelligent tutoring systems. While many modeling techniques have been developed to address this problem, most of them focus on cognitive models in conjunction with often-complex domain models. This paper presents an analysis suggesting that observing students’ multimodal behaviors may provide deep insight into student learning at critical moments in a tutorial session. In particular, this work examines student facial expression, electrodermal activity, posture, and gesture immediately following inference questions posed by human tutors. The findings show that for human-human task-oriented tutorial dialogue, facial expression and skin conductance response following tutor inference questions are highly predictive of student learning gains. These findings suggest that with multimodal behavior data, intelligent tutoring systems can make more informed adaptive decisions to support students effectively.

References

  1. 1.
    Hartley, D., Mitrović, A.: Supporting learning by opening the student model. In: Cerri, S.A., Gouardéres, G., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2363, pp. 453–462. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gluga, R.: Long term student learner modeling and curriculum mapping. In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds.) ITS 2010, Part II. LNCS, vol. 6095, pp. 227–229. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Corbett, A.T., Anderson, J.R.: Student modeling and mastery learning in a computer-based programming tutor. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 413–420 (1992)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stevens, R., Soller, A., Cooper, M., Sprang, M.: Modeling the development of problem solving skills in chemistry with a web-based tutor. In: Lester, J.C., Vicari, R.M., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3220, pp. 580–591. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Corbett, A.T., Anderson, J.R.: Knowledge tracing: modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Model. User-Adap. Inter. 4, 253–278 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pavlik Jr., P.I., Cen, H., Koedinger, K.R.: Performance factors analysis - a new alternative to knowledge tracing. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, pp. 531–538 (2009)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grafsgaard, J.F., Wiggins, J.B., Boyer, K.E., Wiebe, E.N., Lester, J.C.: Automatically recognizing facial expression: predicting engagement and frustration. In: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Educational Data Mining, pp. 43–50 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Grafsgaard, J.F., Wiggins, J.B., Boyer, K.E., Wiebe, E.N., Lester, J.C.: Automatically recognizing facial indicators of frustration: a learning-centric analysis. In: Proceedings of the Humane Association Conference on Affective Computing and Intelligent Interaction, pp. 159–165 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Scherer, S., Weibel, N., Morency, L.P., Oviatt, S.: Multimodal prediction of expertise and leadership in learning groups. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Multimodal Learning Analytics (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Biel, J.I., Teijeiro-Mosquera, L., Gatica-Perez, D.: FaceTube: predicting personality from facial expressions of emotion in online conversational video. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, pp. 53–56 (2012)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Oviatt, S., Cohen, A.: Written and multimodal representations as predictors of expertise and problem-solving success in mathematics. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction, pp. 599–606 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D’Mello, S.K., Graesser, A.C.: Multimodal semi-automated affect detection from conversational cues, gross body language, and facial features. User Model. User-Adap. Inter. 20, 147–187 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Arroyo, I., Cooper, D.G., Burleson, W., Woolf, B.P., Muldner, K., Christopherson, R.: Emotion sensors go to school. In: Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, pp. 17–24 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stein, N.L., Levine, L.J.: Making sense out of emotion: the representation and use of goal-structured knowledge. In: Psychological and Biological Approaches to Emotion, pp. 45–73 (1990)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Piaget, J.: The Origins of Intelligence. International University Press, New York (1952)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hardy, M., Wiebe, E.N., Grafsgaard, J.F., Boyer, K.E., Lester, J.C.: Physiological responses to events during training: Use of skin conductance to inform future adaptive learning systems. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, pp. 2101–2105 (2013)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ha, E.Y., Grafsgaard, J.F., Mitchell, C.M., Boyer, K.E., Lester, J.C.: Combining verbal and nonverbal features to overcome the ‘Information Gap’ in task-oriented dialogue. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual SIGDIAL Meeting on Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 247–256 (2012)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mitchell, C.M., Ha, E.Y., Boyer, K.E., Lester, J.C.: Learner characteristics and dialogue: recognising effective and student-adaptive tutorial strategies. Int. J. Learn. Technol. 8(4), 382–403 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vail, A.K., Boyer, K.E.: Adapting to personality over time: examining the effectiveness of dialogue policy progressions in task-oriented interaction. In: Proceedings of the 15th Annual SIGDIAL Meeting on Discourse and Dialogue, pp. 41–50 (2014)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Vail, A.K., Boyer, K.E.: Identifying effective moves in tutorial dialogue: on the refinement of speech act annotation schemes. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems, pp. 199–209 (2014)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Graesser, A.C., Olde, B.A.: How does one know whether a person understands a device? The quality of the questions the person asks when the device breaks down. J. Educ. Psychol. 95(3), 524–536 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Littlewort, G., Whitehill, J., Wu, T., Fasel, I., Frank, M., Javier, M., Bartlett, M.: The computer expression recognition toolbox (CERT). In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Automatic Face & Gesture Recognition and Workshops, pp. 298–305 (2011)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lepper, M.R., Woolverton, M.: The wisdom of practice: Lessons learned from the study of highly effective tutors. Impact of Psychological Factors on Education, Improving Academic Achievement, pp. 135–158 (2002)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boucsein, W.: Electrodermal Activity. Springer Science & Business Media, NewYork (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Benedek, M., Kaernbach, C.: A continuous measure of phasic electrodermal activity. J. Neurosci. Methods 190, 80–91 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vural, E., Cetin, M., Ercil, A., Littlewort, G., Bartlett, M., Movellan, J.: Drowsy driver detection through facial movement analysis. In: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, pp. 6–18 (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mortillaro, M., Mehu, M., Scherer, K.R.: Subtly different positive emotions can be distinguished by their facial expressions. Soc. Psychol. Pers. Sci. 2(3), 262–271 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Goldin, I.M., Carlson, R.: Learner differences and hint content. In: Lane, H.C., Yacef, K., Mostow, J., Pavlik, P. (eds.) AIED 2013. LNCS, vol. 7926, pp. 522–531. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    San Pedro, M.O.Z., Baker, R.S.J., Gowda, S.M., Heffernan, N.T.: Towards an understanding of affect and knowledge from student interaction with an intelligent tutoring system. In: Lane, H.C., Yacef, K., Mostow, J., Pavlik, P. (eds.) AIED 2013. LNCS, vol. 7926, pp. 41–50. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    D’Mello, S., Lehman, B., Pekrun, R., Graesser, A.: Confusion can be beneficial for learning. Learn. Instr. 29, 153–170 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alexandria K. Vail
    • 1
  • Joseph F. Grafsgaard
    • 2
  • Kristy Elizabeth Boyer
    • 4
  • Eric N. Wiebe
    • 3
  • James C. Lester
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  3. 3.Department of STEM EducationNorth Carolina State UniversityRaleighUSA
  4. 4.Department of Computer and Information Science and EngineeringUniversity of FloridaGainesvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations