Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Ill-Defined Domains - Philippe ...

Recommendations

Info

Fig. 1. Sample of an expert decision map. The call-out box (27-) displays the verbatim text from the transcript. Questionnaires. Three questionnaires were administered during this study. A prequestionnaire covered basic demographic information (age, sex, level of training) and asked participants to state their general attitude towards using technology. A case questionnaire, administered after each BioWorld case solved, asked the participants about their familiarity with the concepts covered in the case, to rate the level of difficulty of the case and to describe different aspects of their reasoning process in solving the case. A final post-questionnaire explored the participants’ perceptions of the educational effectiveness of BioWorld and allowed space for reporting any technical difficulties that were encountered. 3.3 Protocol Using Expert Decision Maps 74 The pilot study consisted of two sessions in the laboratory. For the first session, 18 laptop computers running BioWorld were arranged in a single room. The session lasted approximately one hour, during which the students were given a short introduction to the BioWorld environment and the aims of the pilot study. Following the administration of consent forms and the pre-questionnaire, the students were given the opportunity to solve the tutorial case in BioWorld. The two student researchers were available for technical questions and the teacher was available for content questions. After they completed the tutorial case, the students were asked to fill out the case questionnaire before concluding the session. The second session took place on the following day, without the teacher present. The students were randomly assigned to one of two rooms, each containing nine laptop computers. The students were not encouraged to engage in, or restricted from,
75 Gauthier, Naismith, Lajoie, & Wiseman conversing with other participants or using the Internet to help them to solve the case and a student researcher was available in each room to answer technical questions. The session lasted approximately two hours. In the control room, nine students completed the three test cases. After they completed each case, they viewed the text-based expert summary and filled out the case questionnaire. In the experimental room, eight students were given the opportunity to view the expert decision maps in addition to the text-based expert summaries. One student who arrived late was assigned to the experimental room, but given the control conditions due to time limitations. As in the control room, the students filled out the case questionnaire at the end of each case. All students were asked to fill out the post-questionnaire before concluding the session. 4 Results 4.1 Performance All students were able to use BioWorld successfully to complete the four cases. Table 2 displays the percentage of students whose final diagnosis matched the expert solution. Additional diagnoses submitted for Test Case 1 included arrhythmia (5), panic attacks (5), diabetes type II (1) and myocardial infarction (1). For Test Case 2, one student selected diabetes type II. For Test Case 3, the additional diagnoses included panic attacks (3) and barbiturate intoxication (1). Table 2. Number of students arriving at expert final diagnosis Case Expert Diagnosis % of Students Tutorial Celiac Disease 100% (18) Case 1 Pheochromocytoma 33% (6) Case 2 Diabetes, Type I 94% (17) Case 3 Hyperthyroidism 78% (14) No differences in performance were expected between the two groups for the tutorial case, as all of the students completed this case under the same conditions, or Case 1, as the students were required to submit their final diagnoses before they could view the expert decision map. As shown in Table 3, however, the experimental group outperformed the control group for Cases 2 and 3. A two-tailed t-test was performed on the average time taken for each case, but none of the comparisons reached statistical significance. Note that the average time spent per case does not include the time spent interacting with the expert decision map.
Page 1 and 2:
Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Il
Page 3 and 4:
iii Aleven, Ashley, Lynch & Pinkwar
Page 5 and 6:
v Ashley Intelligent Tutoring Syste
Page 7 and 8:
vii Ashley Methods for Assessment a
Page 9 and 10:
Two Approaches for Providing Adapti
Page 11 and 12:
3 Walker, Ogan, Aleven & Jones 2 Ad
Page 13 and 14:
5 Walker, Ogan, Aleven & Jones 2.3
Page 15 and 16:
7 Walker, Ogan, Aleven & Jones 3 Pr
Page 17 and 18:
9 Walker, Ogan, Aleven & Jones plat
Page 19 and 20:
11 Walker, Ogan, Aleven & Jones ond
Page 21 and 22:
Interactive Narrative and Intellige
Page 23 and 24:
15 Hodhod & Kudenko components, con
Page 25 and 26:
17 Hodhod & Kudenko actions and re-
Page 27 and 28:
19 Hodhod & Kudenko dollars. That S
Page 29 and 30:
21 Hodhod & Kudenko deeper understa
Page 31 and 32: 23 Pino, Heilman, & Eskenazi with a
Page 33 and 34: 25 Pino, Heilman, & Eskenazi 2 Cloz
Page 35 and 36: 27 Pino, Heilman, & Eskenazi Fig. 1
Page 37 and 38: 29 Pino, Heilman, & Eskenazi Table
Page 39 and 40: 31 Pino, Heilman, & Eskenazi Table
Page 41 and 42: 33 Pino, Heilman, & Eskenazi opinio
Page 43 and 44: Generating and Evaluating Object-Or
Page 45 and 46: 37 Moritz & Blank using them to der
Page 47 and 48: 39 Moritz & Blank searching for phr
Page 49 and 50: 41 Moritz & Blank as a related term
Page 51 and 52: 43 Moritz & Blank to match on data
Page 53 and 54: 45 Moritz & Blank 6. Liu, H., ieber
Page 55 and 56: 47 Fournier-Viger, Nkambou, & Mephu
Page 63 and 64: 55 Sequential Pattern Mining/Partia
Page 65 and 66: 57 Lynch, Pinkwart, Ashley, & Aleve
Page 77 and 78: 69 Gauthier, Naismith, Lajoie, & Wi
Page 81: 73 Gauthier, Naismith, Lajoie, & Wi
show all

Intelligent Tutoring Systems for Ill-Defined Domains - Philippe ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?