Abstract
Pedagogical tutorial tactics are policies for a tutor to decide the next action when there are multiple actions available. When the contents were controlled so as to be the same, little evidence has shown that tutorial decisions would impact students’ learning. In this paper, we applied Reinforcement Learning (RL) to induce two sets of tutorial tactics from pre-existing human interaction data. The NormGain set was derived with the goal of enhancing tutorial decisions that contribute to learning while the InvNormGain set was derived with the goal of enhancing those decisions that contribute less or even nothing to learning. The two sets were then compared with human students. Our results showed that when the contents were controlled so as to be the same, different pedagogical tutorial tactics would make a difference in learning and more specifically, the NormGain students outperformed their peers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aleven, V., Ogan, A., et al.: Evaluating the effectiveness of a tutorial dialogue system for self-explanation. In: Lester, J.C., Vicari, R.M., Paraguaçu, F. (eds.) ITS 2004. LNCS, vol. 3220, pp. 443–454. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)
Anderson, J.R.: The architecture of cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1983)
Beck, J., Woolf, B.P., et al.: Advisor: A machine learning architecture for intelligent tutor construction. In: AAAI, pp. 552–557. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2000)
Bloom, B.S.: The 2 sigma problem: The search for methods of group instruction as effective as one-to-one tutoring. Educational Researcher 13, 4–16 (1984)
Chi, M.: Do Micro-Level Tutorial Decisions Matter: Applying Reinforcement Learning To Induce Pedagogical Tutorial Tactics. Ph.D. thesis, School of Art & Science University of Pittsburgh (December 2009)
Chi, M., Jordan, P.W., et al.: To elicit or to tell: Does it matter? In: Dimitrova, V., Mizoguchi, R., et al. (eds.) AIED, pp. 197–204. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2009)
Chi, M.T.H., de Leeuw, N., et al.: Eliciting self-explanations improves understanding. Cognitive Science 18(3), 439–477 (1994)
Chi, M.T.H., Siler, S., et al.: Can tutors monitor students’ understanding accurately? Cognition and Instruction 22(3), 363–387 (2004)
Collins, A., Brown, J.S., et al.: Cognitive apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and mathematics. In: Resnick, L.B. (ed.) Knowing, learning and instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser, ch. 14, pp. 453–494 (1989)
Evens, M., Michael, J.: One-on-one Tutoring By Humans and Machines. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2006)
Forbes-Riley, K., Litman, D.J., et al.: Comparing linguistic features for modeling learning in computer tutoring. In: AIED, vol. 158, pp. 270–277. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2007)
Graesser, A.C., Person, N., et al.: Collaborative dialog patterns in naturalistic one-on-one tutoring. Applied Cognitive Psychology 9, 359–387 (1995)
Graesser, A.C., VanLehn, K., et al.: Intelligent tutoring systems with conversational dialogue. AI Magazine 22(4), 39–52 (2001)
Katz, S., O’Donnell, G., et al.: An approach to analyzing the role and structure of reflective dialogue. International Journal of AI and Education 11, 320–343 (2000)
Moore, J.D., Porayska-Pomsta, K., et al.: Generating tutorial feedback with affect. In: Barr, V., Markov, Z. (eds.) FLAIRS Conference. AAAI Press, Menlo Park (2004)
Newell, A. (ed.): Unified Theories of Cognition. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1994) (reprint edition)
Putnam, R.T.: Structuring and adjusting content for students: A study of live and simulated tutoring of addition. American Educational Research Journal 24(1), 13–48 (1987)
Sutton, R.S., Barto, A.G.: Reinforcement Learning. MIT Press/Bradford Books (1998)
Tetreault, J.R., Litman, D.J.: A reinforcement learning approach to evaluating state representations in spoken dialogue systems. Speech Communication 50(8-9), 683–696 (2008)
VanLehn, K.: The behavior of tutoring systems. International Journal AI in Education 16(3), 227–265 (2006)
VanLehn, K.: The interaction plateau: Answer-based tutoring < step-based tutoring = natural tutoring. In: Woolf, B.P., Aïmeur, E., Nkambou, R., Lajoie, S. (eds.) ITS 2008. LNCS, vol. 5091, p. 7. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
VanLehn, K., Graesser, A.C., et al.: When are tutorial dialogues more effective than reading? Cognitive Science 31(1), 3–62 (2007)
VanLehn, K., Jordan, P., et al.: Developing pedagogically effective tutorial dialogue tactics: Experiments and a testbed. In: Proc. of SLaTE Workshop on Speech and Language Technology in Education ISCA Tutorial and Research Workshop (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Chi, M., VanLehn, K., Litman, D. (2010). Do Micro-Level Tutorial Decisions Matter: Applying Reinforcement Learning to Induce Pedagogical Tutorial Tactics. In: Aleven, V., Kay, J., Mostow, J. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6094. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13388-6_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13388-6_27
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-13387-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-13388-6
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)