Difference between revisions of "Personalized Problems"

From Open Pattern Repository for Online Learning Systems
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Updated pattern according to writing workshop comments from PLoP 2015.)
(Updated pattern according to writing workshop comments from PLoP 2015.)
Line 23: Line 23:
==Forces==
==Forces==
#'''Prior knowledge.''' Students cannot solve a problem if they lack the necessary skills<ref name="Sweller2004">Sweller, J. (2004). [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FB%3ATRUC.0000021808.72598.4d Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture]. Instructional science, 32(1-2), 9-31.</ref>.
#'''Prior knowledge.''' Students cannot solve a problem if they lack the necessary skills<ref name="Sweller2004">Sweller, J. (2004). [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023%2FB%3ATRUC.0000021808.72598.4d Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture]. Instructional science, 32(1-2), 9-31.</ref>.
#'''Desirable difficulty.''' Activities that are too easy or do not challenge learners’ understanding of a concept require less mental processing and often, result in less learning (Bjork 1994, Piaget 1952).
#'''Desirable difficulty.''' Activities that are too easy or do not challenge learners’ understanding of a concept require less mental processing and often, result in less learning<ref>Bjork, R.A. (1994). [http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1994-97967-009 Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings]. In J. Metcalfe and A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. (pp.185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.</ref><ref>Piaget, J.  (1952).The origins of intelligence. New York: International University Press.</ref>.
#'''Expertise reversal.''' Presenting students information they already know can impose extraneous cognitive load and interfere with additional learning<ref name="Sweller2004"></ref>.
#'''Learning rate.''' Student learning rates vary because of differences in prior knowledge, learning experiences, and quality of instruction received<ref name="Bloom1974">Bloom, B. S. (1974). [http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/amp/29/9/682/ Time and learning]. American psychologist, 29(9), 682.</ref>.
#'''Risk taking.''' Students who are risk takers prefer challenging tasks, because they find satisfaction in maximizing their learning. However, students who are not risk takers often experience anxiety when they feel the difficulty of a learning task has exceeded their skill <ref>Meyer, D. K., and Turner, J. C. (2002). [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15326985EP3702_5#.VZ1KU5NVhBc Discovering emotion in classroom motivation research]. Educational psychologist, 37(2), 107-114.</ref>.  
#'''Persistence.''' Students may disengage from a learning activity if they get stuck too long while trying to solve it<ref>Arnold, A., Scheines, R., Beck, J. E., and Jerome, B. (2005). [https://oli.cmu.edu/wp-oli/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Arnold_2005_Time_and_Attention.pdf Time and attention: Students, sessions, and tasks]. In Proceedings of the AAAI 2005 Workshop Educational Data Mining (pp. 62-66).</ref><ref>D’Mello, S., and Graesser, A.  (2012). [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959475211000806 Dynamics of affective states during complex learning]. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145-157.</ref>.
#'''Learning rate.''' Students learn at varying rates, which could be affected by their prior knowledge, learning experience, and the quality of instruction they receive<ref name="Bloom1974">Bloom, B. S. (1974). [http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/amp/29/9/682/ Time and learning]. American psychologist, 29(9), 682.</ref>.
 
#'''Limited resources.''' Student attention and patience is a limited resource possibly affected by pending deadlines, upcoming tests, achievement in previous learning experiences, personal interest, quality of instruction, achievement in previous learning experiences, personal interest, quality of instruction, and others<ref>Arnold, A., Scheines, R., Beck, J. E., and Jerome, B. (2005). [https://oli.cmu.edu/wp-oli/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Arnold_2005_Time_and_Attention.pdf Time and attention: Students, sessions, and tasks]. In Proceedings of the AAAI 2005 Workshop Educational Data Mining (pp. 62-66).</ref><ref name="Bloom1974"/>.


==Solution==
==Solution==
Therefore, assign to students problems that they have the ability to solve.<br/>A student’s capability to solve a problem can be identified using assessments of their knowledge on pre-requisite skills, or model-based predictors<ref>Yudelson, M. V., Koedinger, K. R., and Gordon, G. J. (2013). [http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-39112-5_18 Individualized bayesian knowledge tracing models]. In Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 171-180). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.</ref>.
Therefore, assign problems that are appropriate for a student’s skill level. A student’s capability to solve a problem can be identified using assessments of their knowledge on pre-requisite skills, or model-based predictors<ref name="Koedinger2007">Koedinger, K. R., and Aleven, V. (2007). [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10648-007-9049-0 Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors]. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 239-264.</ref>.


==Consequences==
==Consequences==


===Benefits===
===Benefits===
#Students have enough prior knowledge to solve a problem.
#Students are asked to answer problems that they are capable of solving themselves, or with some assistance<ref>Vygotsky, L. S.  (1962). Language and thought. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Ontario, Canada.</ref>.
#Students do not need to “slow down” to adjust to the difficulty of the exercise.
#The problem challenges students because it requires skills that students may not have mastered yet.
#Risk takers will get challenging problems, while non-risk takers will not be overwhelmed by overly difficult problems.
#Each student is assigned to a different problem that is appropriate for his/her skill level.
#Students will solve problems appropriate for their skill level.
#Students may continue to solve a challenging problem if they have enough prerequisite knowledge.  
#Exercises that are neither too easy nor too challenging can motivate students to spend more time performing them.  


===Liabilities===
===Liabilities===
#Content writers will need to provide content for students with different levels of ability
#Content writers will need to provide different content for each skill level.
#The system needs to keep track of pre-requisite and post-requisite skills, as well as problems associated with those skills so they can be assigned appropriately.
#The system needs to be capable of measuring students’ skill level and selecting problems dynamically.
#If students’ skill level is incorrectly identified, the system can still give students problems that are too easy or too difficult.
#If students’ skill level is incorrectly identified, the system can still give students problems that are too easy or too difficult.


Line 48: Line 48:


===Literature===
===Literature===
Research in different learning domains showed that personalizing content to students’ skill level had similar learning gains as non-personalized content, but took a shorter amount of time (e.g., simulated air traffic control<ref>Salden, R. J., Paas, F., Broers, N. J., and Van Merriënboer, J. J. 2004. [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021814.03996.ff Mental effort and performance as determinants for the dynamic selection of learning tasks in air traffic control training]. Instructional science, 32(1-2), 153-172.</ref>, algebra<ref>Cen, H., Koedinger, K. R., and Junker, B. 2007. [http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1563681 Is Over Practice Necessary?-Improving Learning Efficiency with the Cognitive Tutor through Educational Data Mining]. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 158, 511.</ref>, geometry<ref>Salden, R.J.C.M., Aleven, V., Schwonke, R. and Renkl, A. (2010). [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11251-009-9107-8 The expertise reversal effect and worked examples in tutored problem solving]. Instructional Sicience, 38, 289--307.</ref>, and health sciences<ref>Corbalan, G., Kester, L. and van Merrieonboer, J.J.G. (2008). [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X08000118 Selecting learning tasks: Effects of adaptation and shared control on learning efficiency and task involvement]. Contemporary Educational Psycholoy, 33, 733--756.</ref>.
Research showed that personalizing content according to students’ skill level resulted in similar learning gains as non-personalized content, but took a shorter amount of time. This was observed in various domains such as simulated air traffic control,<ref>Salden, R. J., Paas, F., Broers, N. J., and Van Merriënboer, J. J. (2004)
. [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/B:TRUC.0000021814.03996.ff Mental effort and performance as determinants for the dynamic selection of learning tasks in air traffic control training]. Instructional science, 32(1-2), 153-172.</ref>, Algebra<ref>Cen, H., Koedinger, K. R., and Junker, B. (2007). [http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1563681 Is Over Practice Necessary?-Improving Learning Efficiency with the Cognitive Tutor through Educational Data Mining]. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 158, 511.</ref>, Geometry<ref>Salden, R.J.C.M., Aleven, V., Schwonke, R. and Renkl, A. (2010). [http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11251-009-9107-8 The expertise reversal effect and worked examples in tutored problem solving]. Instructional Sicience, 38, 289--307.</ref>, and health sciences<ref>Corbalan, G., Kester, L. and van Merrieonboer, J.J.G. (2008). [http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0361476X08000118 Selecting learning tasks: Effects of adaptation and shared control on learning efficiency and task involvement]. Contemporary Educational Psycholoy, 33, 733--756.</ref>.


===Discussion===
===Discussion===
In a meeting with Ryan Baker and his team at Teacher's College in Columbia University, Neil Heffernan and his team at Worcester Polytechnic Institute, and Peter Scupelli and his team at the School of Design in Carnegie Mellon University (i.e., ASSISTments stakeholders), the team agreed that issues arise because of the lack of personalization and personalizing content to students' skill levels may help address the issue.
Shepherds, writing workshop participants, and learning system stakeholders (i.e., data mining experts, learning scientists, and educators) agreed that the design pattern’s solution could address the identified problem.  
 
David West, the pattern's shepherd at PLoP 2015, also considered the pattern definition acceptable.


===Data===
===Data===
Line 59: Line 58:
<!--===Applied evaluation===
<!--===Applied evaluation===
  Results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or similar tests that measures the pattern's effectiveness in an actual application. For example, compare student learning gains in an online learning system with and without applying the pattern. -->
  Results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or similar tests that measures the pattern's effectiveness in an actual application. For example, compare student learning gains in an online learning system with and without applying the pattern. -->
==Example==
Many online learning systems were designed to adapt to students’ skill level. For example, SQL-Tutor provides students with problems on SQL programming that are appropriate to their level of knowledge<ref>Mitrovic, A., and Martin, B.  (2004). [http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-27780-4_22 Evaluating adaptive problem selection]. In Adaptive hypermedia and adaptive web-based systems (pp. 185-194). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.</ref>. [[Cognitive_tutor_algebra | Cognitive Tutor Algebra]] is another learning system that tracks student mastery on a particular knowledge component and provides them with algebra problems that are appropriate to their skill level<ref name="Koedinger2007"/>. The [[ASSISTments]] online learning system provides an IF-THEN-ELSE functionality that allows teachers to control the problem sets assigned to students based on their performance<ref>Donnelly, C.J.  (2015). [https://www.wpi.edu/Pubs/ETD/Available/etd-042315-135723/unrestricted/cdonnelly_thesis.pdf Enhancing Personalization Within ASSISTments (Doctoral dissertation)].</ref>. This can be used to identify students’ skill level and to assign the appropriate problem set.
A concrete example for applying this pattern is a teacher that encodes multiple math problem sets with varying levels of difficulty into an online learning system (e.g., single-digit subtraction, multiple-digit subtraction, subtraction by regrouping). As students answer questions in their homework, the online learning system would keep track of students’ progress to identify their skill level such as low (i.e., student makes mistakes ≥ 60% of the time), medium (i.e., student makes mistakes < 60% and ≥ 40% of the time) or high (i.e., student makes mistakes < 40% of the time). Based on students’ performance, the online learning system would provide the appropriate problem set so that it is more likely for students to receive questions that are fit for their skill level.


==Related patterns==
==Related patterns==
This pattern applies the concept of '''Different exercise levels'''<ref>Bergin, J., Eckstein, J., Völter, M., Sipos, M., Wallingford, E., Marquardt, K., Chandler, J., Sharp, H. and Manns, M. L. (2012). [http://www.pedagogicalpatterns.org/right.html Pedagogical patterns: advice for educators]. Joseph Bergin Software Tools.</ref> in online learning systems, and '''Content personalization'''<ref>Danculovic, J., Rossi, G., Schwabe, D., and Miaton, L. (2001). [http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.89.5975&rep=rep1&type=pdf Patterns for Personalized Web Applications]. In Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs, Universitaetsverlag Konstanz, Germany, 423--436.</ref> in exercise problem selection. It can be used with '''[[Just enough practice]]''' to help students master skills and select the next set of problems according to their learning progress. '''[[Worked examples]]''' can be used when students have lack enough skills to solve the problem.  
The '''[[Personalized_problems | Personalized Problems]]''' design pattern is an implementation of the '''[[Different_exercise_levels | Different Exercise Levels]]''' design pattern in online learning systems. The system should use the '''[[Just_enough_practice | Just Enough Practice]]''' design pattern so that students reach mastery before switching to a more challenging problem set. The '''[[Differentiated_feedback | Differentiated Feedback]]''' or '''[[Worked_examples | Worked examples]]''' design patterns may be used to facilitate learning.  
 


==Example==
A teacher would encode into an online learning system a math exercise containing problems with varying difficulty. As students answer questions in their homework, the online learning system would keep track of students’ progress to identify their skill level such as low (i.e., student makes mistakes ≥ 60% of the time), medium (i.e., student makes mistakes < 60% and ≥ 40% of the time) or high (i.e., student makes mistakes < 40% of the time). Based on students’ performance, the online learning system would provide the corresponding question type so it is more likely for students to receive questions that are fit for their skill level.


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 12:37, 12 April 2016


Personalized Problems
Personalized problems.png
Contributors Paul Inventado, Peter Scupelli
Last modification April 12, 2016
Source {{{source}}}
Pattern formats OPR Alexandrian
Usability
Learning domain General
Stakeholders Teachers, Students, System developers
Production
Data analysis Student affect and interaction behavior in ASSISTments
Confidence
Evaluation PLoP 2015 shepherding and writing workshop
Talk:ASSISTments
Application ASSISTments
Applied evaluation ASSISTments

Assign appropriate problem-solving activities to a student’s skill level.

Context

Content creators design problems for students to solve to better understand the concepts taught.

Problem

Students become bored or disengage from an activity if they are asked to solve problems that are either too easy or too difficult.

Forces

  1. Prior knowledge. Students cannot solve a problem if they lack the necessary skills[1].
  2. Desirable difficulty. Activities that are too easy or do not challenge learners’ understanding of a concept require less mental processing and often, result in less learning[2][3].
  3. Learning rate. Student learning rates vary because of differences in prior knowledge, learning experiences, and quality of instruction received[4].
  4. Persistence. Students may disengage from a learning activity if they get stuck too long while trying to solve it[5][6].


Solution

Therefore, assign problems that are appropriate for a student’s skill level. A student’s capability to solve a problem can be identified using assessments of their knowledge on pre-requisite skills, or model-based predictors[7].

Consequences

Benefits

  1. Students are asked to answer problems that they are capable of solving themselves, or with some assistance[8].
  2. The problem challenges students because it requires skills that students may not have mastered yet.
  3. Each student is assigned to a different problem that is appropriate for his/her skill level.
  4. Students may continue to solve a challenging problem if they have enough prerequisite knowledge.

Liabilities

  1. Content writers will need to provide different content for each skill level.
  2. The system needs to keep track of pre-requisite and post-requisite skills, as well as problems associated with those skills so they can be assigned appropriately.
  3. The system needs to be capable of measuring students’ skill level and selecting problems dynamically.
  4. If students’ skill level is incorrectly identified, the system can still give students problems that are too easy or too difficult.

Evidence

Literature

Research showed that personalizing content according to students’ skill level resulted in similar learning gains as non-personalized content, but took a shorter amount of time. This was observed in various domains such as simulated air traffic control,[9], Algebra[10], Geometry[11], and health sciences[12].

Discussion

Shepherds, writing workshop participants, and learning system stakeholders (i.e., data mining experts, learning scientists, and educators) agreed that the design pattern’s solution could address the identified problem.

Data

According to an analysis of ASSISTments’ data, boredom and gaming behavior correlated with problem difficulty (i.e., evidenced by answer correctness and number of hint requests).

Example

Many online learning systems were designed to adapt to students’ skill level. For example, SQL-Tutor provides students with problems on SQL programming that are appropriate to their level of knowledge[13]. Cognitive Tutor Algebra is another learning system that tracks student mastery on a particular knowledge component and provides them with algebra problems that are appropriate to their skill level[7]. The ASSISTments online learning system provides an IF-THEN-ELSE functionality that allows teachers to control the problem sets assigned to students based on their performance[14]. This can be used to identify students’ skill level and to assign the appropriate problem set.


A concrete example for applying this pattern is a teacher that encodes multiple math problem sets with varying levels of difficulty into an online learning system (e.g., single-digit subtraction, multiple-digit subtraction, subtraction by regrouping). As students answer questions in their homework, the online learning system would keep track of students’ progress to identify their skill level such as low (i.e., student makes mistakes ≥ 60% of the time), medium (i.e., student makes mistakes < 60% and ≥ 40% of the time) or high (i.e., student makes mistakes < 40% of the time). Based on students’ performance, the online learning system would provide the appropriate problem set so that it is more likely for students to receive questions that are fit for their skill level.

Related patterns

The Personalized Problems design pattern is an implementation of the Different Exercise Levels design pattern in online learning systems. The system should use the Just Enough Practice design pattern so that students reach mastery before switching to a more challenging problem set. The Differentiated Feedback or Worked examples design patterns may be used to facilitate learning.


References

  1. Sweller, J. (2004). Instructional design consequences of an analogy between evolution by natural selection and human cognitive architecture. Instructional science, 32(1-2), 9-31.
  2. Bjork, R.A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe and A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. (pp.185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  3. Piaget, J. (1952).The origins of intelligence. New York: International University Press.
  4. Bloom, B. S. (1974). Time and learning. American psychologist, 29(9), 682.
  5. Arnold, A., Scheines, R., Beck, J. E., and Jerome, B. (2005). Time and attention: Students, sessions, and tasks. In Proceedings of the AAAI 2005 Workshop Educational Data Mining (pp. 62-66).
  6. D’Mello, S., and Graesser, A. (2012). Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction, 22(2), 145-157.
  7. 7.0 7.1 Koedinger, K. R., and Aleven, V. (2007). Exploring the assistance dilemma in experiments with cognitive tutors. Educational Psychology Review, 19(3), 239-264.
  8. Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Language and thought. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press, Ontario, Canada.
  9. Salden, R. J., Paas, F., Broers, N. J., and Van Merriënboer, J. J. (2004) . Mental effort and performance as determinants for the dynamic selection of learning tasks in air traffic control training. Instructional science, 32(1-2), 153-172.
  10. Cen, H., Koedinger, K. R., and Junker, B. (2007). Is Over Practice Necessary?-Improving Learning Efficiency with the Cognitive Tutor through Educational Data Mining. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, 158, 511.
  11. Salden, R.J.C.M., Aleven, V., Schwonke, R. and Renkl, A. (2010). The expertise reversal effect and worked examples in tutored problem solving. Instructional Sicience, 38, 289--307.
  12. Corbalan, G., Kester, L. and van Merrieonboer, J.J.G. (2008). Selecting learning tasks: Effects of adaptation and shared control on learning efficiency and task involvement. Contemporary Educational Psycholoy, 33, 733--756.
  13. Mitrovic, A., and Martin, B. (2004). Evaluating adaptive problem selection. In Adaptive hypermedia and adaptive web-based systems (pp. 185-194). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  14. Donnelly, C.J. (2015). Enhancing Personalization Within ASSISTments (Doctoral dissertation).