Thesis (Ph.D.)--Drexel University, 2009. / Includes abstract and vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 105-114).

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2004. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 66-69). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--Ohio State University, 2007. / Full text release at OhioLINK's ETD Center delayed at author's request

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Dallas, 2007. / Includes vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 165-170)

This thesis hypothesizes that a method for selecting instructional strategies (specifically media) based in part on a relationship between learning style preference and personality preference provides more relevant and understandable feedback to students and thereby higher learning effectiveness. This research investigates whether personality preferences are valid predictors of learning style preferences. Since learning style preferences are a key consideration in instructional strategies and instructional strategies are a key consideration in learning effectiveness, this thesis contributes to a greater understanding of the relationship between personality preferences and effective learning in intelligent tutoring systems (ITS). This research attempts to contribute to the goal of a "truly adaptive ITS" by first examining relationships between personality preferences and learning style preferences; and then by modeling the influences of personality on learning strategies to optimize feedback for each student. This thesis explores the general question "what can personality preferences contribute to learning in intelligent tutoring systems?" So, why is it important to evaluate the relationship between personality preferences and learning strategies in ITS? "While one-on-one human tutoring is still superior to ITS in general, this approach is idiosyncratic and not feasible to deliver to [any large population] in any cost-effective manner." (Loftin, 2004). Given the need for ITS in large, distributed populations (i.e. the United States Army), it is important to explore methods of increasing ITS performance and adaptability. Findings of this research include that the null hypothesis that "there is no dependency between personality preference variables and learning style preference variables" was partly rejected. Highly significant correlations between the personality preferences, openness and extraversion, were established for both the active-reflective and sensing-intuitive learning style preferences. Discussion of other relationships is provided.

The ultimate goal of this research was to improve student performance by adjusting an Intelligent Tutoring System's (ITS) coaching strategy based on the student's mood. As a step toward this goal, this study evaluated the relationships between each student's mood variables (pleasure, arousal, dominance and mood intensity), the coaching strategy selected by the ITS and the student's performance. Outcomes included methods to increase the perception of the intelligent tutor to allow it to adapt coaching strategies (methods of instruction) to the student's affective needs to mitigate barriers to performance (e.g. negative affect) during the one-to-one tutoring process. The study evaluated whether the affective state (specifically mood) of the student moderated the student's interaction with the tutor and influenced performance. This research examined the relationships, interactions and influences of student mood in the selection of ITS coaching strategies to determine which strategies were more effective in terms of student performance given the student's mood, state (recent sleep time, previous knowledge and training, and interest level) and actions (e.g. mouse movement rate). Two coaching strategies were used in this study: Student-Requested Feedback (SRF) and Tutor-Initiated Feedback (TIF). The SRF coaching strategy provided feedback in the form of hints, questions, direction and support only when the student requested help. The TIF coaching strategy provided feedback (hints, questions, direction or support) at key junctures in the learning process when the student either made progress or failed to make progress in a timely fashion. The relationships between the coaching strategies, mood, performance and other variables of interest were considered in light of five hypotheses. At alpha = .05 and beta at least as great as .80, significant effects were limited in predicting performance. Highlighted findings include no significant differences in the mean performance due to coaching strategies, and only small effect sizes in predicting performance making the regression models developed not of practical significance. However, several variables including performance, energy level and mouse movement rates were significant, unobtrusive predictors of mood. Regression algorithms were developed using Arbuckle's (2008) Analysis of MOment Structures (AMOS) tool to compare the predicted performance for each strategy and then to choose the optimal strategy. A set of production rules were also developed to train a machine learning classifier using Witten & Frank's (2005) Waikato Environment for Knowledge Analysis (WEKA) toolset. The classifier was tested to determine its ability to recognize critical relationships and adjust coaching strategies to improve performance. This study found that the ability of the intelligent tutor to recognize key affective relationships contributes to improved performance. Study assumptions include a normal distribution of student mood variables, student state variables and student action variables and the equal mean performance of the two coaching strategy groups (student-requested feedback and tutor-initiated feedback ). These assumptions were substantiated in the study. Potential applications of this research are broad since its approach is application independent and could be used within ill-defined or very complex domains where judgment might be influenced by affect (e.g. study of the law, decisions involving risk of injury or death, negotiations or investment decisions). Recommendations for future research include evaluation of the temporal, as well as numerical, relationships of student mood, performance, actions and state variables.

This paper sought to accomplish three goals. First, it provided a systematic, comparative review of several intelligent tutoring systems (ITS). Second, it summarized problems and solutions presented and solved by developers of ITS by consolidating the knowledge of the field into a single review. Third, it provided a unified language from which ITS can be reviewed and understood in the same context. The findings of this review centered on the 5-Component Framework. The first component, the domain model, showed that most ITS are focused on science, technology, and mathematics. Within these fields, ITS generally have mastery learning as the desired level of understanding. The second component, the tutor model, showed that constructivism is the theoretical strategy that informs most ITS. The tutoring tactics employed in the ITS stem from this paradigm. The third component, the student model, describes the several ways ITS infer what a student knows. It described the variety of data that is collected by an ITS and how it is used to build the student model. The fourth component, the interface, revealed that most ITS are now web-based, but vary in their capacity to interact with students. It also showed that user experience is underreported and ought to be included more in the research. Finally, the fifth component, learning gains, demonstrated that ITS are capable of producing learning gains equivalent to a human tutor. However, reporting learning gains does not seem to be a focus of the literature.

No description available.

No description available.

The purpose of this dissertation was to design, develop and field test an Intelligent Tutoring System (ITS) which I have called Process Oriented Subtraction-Interface for Tutoring or POSIT. POSIT is an Intelligent Tutoring System, developed on a microcomputer, and based on Anderson's (1982, 1987) ACT* model of learning. Unlike the tutoring systems that were developed by Anderson and his colleagues (Anderson, Boyle & Reiser, 1985; Anderson & Reiser, 1985) which focused on the tutoring of students in the context of problem solving, this system focuses on the tutoring of a cognitive skill-subtraction of whole-numbers. Because ACT* theory explicitly describes the interaction of declarative and procedural knowledge (procedural knowledge is dependent on declarative knowledge), this learning theory is ideally suited to the learning of a specific procedure. Further, other "intelligent" systems which have been applied to subtraction (Brown & Burton, 1978; Ohlsson & Langley, 1985; Young & O’Shea, 1981) tend to focus on the answers to subtraction exercises (product oriented). POSIT, on the other hand, is an interactive system that determines errors made by the child as the child attempts to solve subtraction problems. Another difference with previous systems is that POSIT has a teaching component. Other systems assume that instruction has been given at some other point in time prior to the use of the system. One final difference between POSIT and other systems is that it was developed with consideration of the diverse student population that is found in schools. Design decisions were based on the cognitive needs of low-, average- and high-achieving students. Such notions as reading level and complexity of the task were considered with regard to low achieving students. POSIT's ability to allow for a wide variety of algorithms was a consideration with regard to high achieving students and would also benefit students from all levels. The results of the field test of POSIT indicate that the error model used by POSIT was very successful (76% accurate, with potential to improve to between 80 to 90%). In addition, students appear to learn from the system as measured both on the system as well as on a paper and pencil transfer test. / Ed. D.