Résumés
Abstract
Self-paced online learning provides great flexibility for learning, yet it brings some inherent learning barriers because of the nature of this educational paradigm. This review paper suggests some corresponding strategies to address these barriers in order to create a more supportive self-paced online learning environment. These strategies include a) increasing students’ self-awareness of learning, b) identifying struggling students, and c) facilitating mastery learning.Focusing on Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) disciplines’ delivery of self-paced online learning, this paper reviewed the role of formative assessment for learning. It is proposed that systematically designing and embedding adaptive practicing in STEM courses would be an effective learning design solution to implement these strategies. By examining the goals and context of adaptive practicing requested in this study, the feature requirements are depicted for such an adaptive practicing model. The models and techniques that can be used for adaptive assessment were then reviewed. Based on the review results, this paper argues that a reinforcement learning-based adaptive practicing model would be the best option to meet those feature requirements. Finally, we point out a research gap in this field and suggest a future research direction for ourselves and other researchers.
Keywords:
- learning barrier,
- adaptive practicing,
- knowledge tracing,
- exercise sequencing,
- reinforcement learning,
- self-paced online learning
Résumé
L'apprentissage en ligne asynchrone (à son propre rythme) offre une grande souplesse d'apprentissage, mais il comporte des obstacles à l'apprentissage inhérents à la nature de ce paradigme éducatif. Cet article de revue suggère quelques stratégies pertinentes permettant de répondre à ces obstacles afin de créer un environnement d'apprentissage en ligne asynchrone plus favorable. Ces stratégies comprennent a) l'augmentation de la conscience de l'apprentissage chez les étudiants, b) l'identification des étudiants en difficulté et c) la facilitation de la pédagogie de la maîtrise. En se concentrant sur la dispensation de l'apprentissage en ligne asynchrone dans les disciplines des sciences, de la technologie, de l'ingénierie et des mathématiques (STIM), cet article examine le rôle de l'évaluation formative pour l'apprentissage. Il est proposé que la conception et l'intégration systématiques de pratiques adaptatives dans les cours STIM constituerait une solution efficace de conception de l'apprentissage pour mettre en œuvre ces stratégies. En examinant les objectifs et le contexte de la pratique adaptative demandés dans cette étude, les exigences en matière de fonctionnalités sont décrites pour un tel modèle de pratique adaptative. Les modèles et les techniques qui peuvent être utilisés pour l'évaluation adaptative ont ensuite été examinés. Sur la base des résultats de cette revue, cet article soutient qu'un modèle de pratique adaptative basé sur l'apprentissage par renforcement serait la meilleure option pour répondre à ces exigences. Enfin, nous soulignons les insuffisances de la recherche dans ce domaine et suggérons une direction de recherche future pour nous-mêmes et pour d'autres chercheurs.
Mots-clés :
- barrière d'apprentissage,
- pratique adaptative,
- traçage des connaissances,
- séquencement des exercices,
- apprentissage par renforcement,
- apprentissage en ligne asynchrone (à son rythme)
Parties annexes
Bibliography
- Athabasca.ca. (2020). About AU - Accreditation. (Athabasca University Student Consumer Info). https://www.athabascau.ca/aboutau/accreditation/student-consumer-info.html
- Bassen, J., Balaji, B., Schaarschmidt, M., Thille, C., Painter, J., Zimmaro, D., Games, A., Fast, E., & Mitchell, J. C. (2020). Reinforcement learning for the adaptive scheduling of educational activities. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3313831.3376518
- Beck, J. E., & Gong, Y. (2013). Wheel-spinning: Students who fail to master a skill. International Conference On Artificial Intelligence In Education (pp. 431-440). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39112-5_44
- Berry, D. A., & Fristedt, B. (1985). Bandit problems: Sequential allocation of experiments (Monographs on statistics and applied probability) (Vol. 5). Chapman and Hall. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-3711-7
- Bloom, B. S. (1973). Recent developments in mastery learning. Educational Psychologist, 10(2), 53–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461527309529091
- Clement, B., Roy, D., Oudeyer, P.-Y., & Lopes, M. (2015). Multi-armed bandits for intelligent tutoring systems. Journal of Educational Data Mining, 7(2), 20–48. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1310.3174
- Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (1995). Knowledge tracing: Modeling the acquisition of procedural knowledge. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 4(4), 253–278. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01099821
- de la Torre, J. (2009). DINA model and parameter estimation: A didactic. Journal Of Educational And Behavioral Statistics, 34(1), 115-130. https://doi.org/10.3102/1076998607309474
- Doignon, J.-P., & Falmagne, J.-C. (1999). Knowledge spaces. Springer-Verlag.
- Doroudi, S., Aleven, V., & Brunskill, E. (2019). Where’s the reward? International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 29(4), 568-620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-019-00187-x
- Elo, A. (1978). The rating of chessplayer. past and present. Arco.
- Guskey, T. (2010). Lessons of mastery learning. Educational Leadership, 68(2), 52-57. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/edp_facpub/14
- Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Sage Press.
- He-Yueya, J., & Singla, A. (2021). Quizzing policy using reinforcement learning for inferring the student knowledge state. Proceedings of The 14th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (EDM 2021). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED615585.pdf
- Kaelbling, L. P., Littman, M. L., & Moore, A. W. (1996). Reinforcement learning: A survey. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research. 4, 237–285. https://doi.org/10.1613/jair.301
- Kaser, T., Klingler, S., Schwing, A., & Gross, M. (2017). Dynamic bayesian networks for student modeling. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 10(4), 450–462. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2017.2689017
- Kennedy, T. J., & Odell, M. R. (2014). Engaging students in STEM education. Science Education International, 25(3), 246-258. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1044508.pdf
- Kingston, N., & Nash, B. (2011). Formative assessment: A meta-analysis and a call for research. Educational measurement: Issues and practice, 30(4), 28-37. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2011.00220.x
- Kinshuk. (2016). Designing adaptive and personalized learning environments. Routledge.
- Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory into practice, 41(4), 212-218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
- Lin, F. (2020). Adaptive quiz generation using Thompson sampling. Third Workshop Eliciting Adaptive Sequences for Learning (WASL 2020), co-located with AIED 2020. https://jiji.cat/wasl2020/adaptive-quiz-generation.pdf
- Liu, Q., Shen, S., Huang, Z., Chen, E., & Zheng, Y. (2021). A survey of knowledge tracing. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2105.15106. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.15106
- Menéndez, I. Y., Napa, M. A., Moreira, M. L., & Zambrano, G. G. (2019). The importance of formative assessment in the learning teaching process. International Journal Of Social Sciences And Humanities, 3(2), 238-249. https://doi.org/10.29332/ijssh.v3n2.322
- Pavlik Jr, P. I., Cen, H., & Koedinger, K. R. (2009). Performance Factors Analysis—A New Alternative to Knowledge Tracing. Online Submission. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-017-9193-2
- Pelánek, R. (2017). Bayesian knowledge tracing, logistic models, and beyond: An overview of learner modeling techniques. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 27(3), 313-350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11257-017-9193-2
- Piech, C., Spencer, J., Huang, J., Ganguli, S., Sahami, M., Guibas, L., & Sohl-Dickstein, J. (2015). Deep knowledge tracing. arXiv Preprint ArXiv:1506.05908. https://proceedings.neurips.cc/paper/2015/file/bac9162b47c56fc8a4d2a519803d51b3-Paper.pdf
- Shepard, L. A., Penuel, W. R., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2018). Using learning and motivation theories to coherently link formative assessment, grading practices, and large-scale assessment. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 37(1), 21-34. https://doi.org/10.1111/emip.12189
- Sorrel, M., Barrada, J. R., de la Torre, J., & Abad, F. (2020). Adapting cognitive diagnosis computerized adaptive testing item selection rules to traditional item response theory. PLoS ONE, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227196
- Sutton, R. S., & Barto, A. G. (2018). Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press.
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). The historical meaning of the crisis in psychology: A methodological investigation. Problems of the Theory and History of Psychology, 3, pp. 233-344.
- Weiss, D. J., & Kingsbury, G. G. (1984). Application of computerized adaptive testing to educational problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21(4), 361–375. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1984.tb01040.x
- Yan, H. (2020). Using learning analytics and adaptive formative assessment to support at-risk students in self-paced online learning. In 2020 IEEE 20th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), 396-398. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT49669.2020.00125
- Yan, H., Ives, C., & Lin, F. (2021). Adaptive practicing design for self-paced online learning. Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Computers in Education, 765-768. https://icce2021.apsce.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/ICCE2021-Vol.II-PP.-765-768.pdf