Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Ill-Defined Domains - Philippe ...
Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Ill-Defined Domains - Philippe ...
Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Ill-Defined Domains - Philippe ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Two Approaches <strong>for</strong> Providing Adaptive Support 6<br />
support scenario, after students created a post on the discussion board, they submitted<br />
it to the system. The support system ran the analysis module to determine where the<br />
post fell along each of the three dimensions. It then followed the decision tree in Figure<br />
1 to determine which type of feedback to provide. The system randomly selected<br />
one feedback message from three with alternate wordings that were associated with<br />
the location of the post in the tree. To develop these feedback strings, we interviewed<br />
an expert to determine what experts focused on in writing feedback to posts. The system<br />
then added several correct facts related to the categorization of the post topics<br />
from a collection of facts about the issues presented in the video. If the post was offtopic,<br />
the system simply suggested several facts from a variety of different relevant<br />
topics. This feedback was presented to the student (see Figure 2), who was required<br />
to make at least one modification to the post be<strong>for</strong>e being allowed to submit the final<br />
version to the discussion board. Once the post was submitted, it appeared on the discussion<br />
board and was available <strong>for</strong> the rest of the group to read.<br />
In the moderator support scenario, the system used the moderator ratings to navigate<br />
through the model hierarchy and identify which feedback type is appropriate.<br />
The moderator was then presented with a feedback template to help in constructing<br />
appropriate feedback. The template was again developed by consulting an expert and<br />
consisted of both praise <strong>for</strong> the positive elements of the post and constructive criticism<br />
<strong>for</strong> the negative elements of the post. The system also suggested three facts<br />
about the culture that the moderator might want to incorporate into his or her post,<br />
using the same algorithm as the individual adaptive support. Moderators were then<br />
encouraged to fill the template in with specific details from the post they were replying<br />
to, and use the additional facts that were provided. They then submitted their<br />
feedback as a post to the discussion <strong>for</strong>um.<br />
Figure 3. Feedback examples <strong>for</strong> the moderator and individual support (translated)