Assessing the Effectiveness of Student Advice Recommender Agent (SARA): the Case of Automated Personalized Feedback

被引:17
作者
Mousavi, Amin [1 ]
Schmidt, Matthew [1 ]
Squires, Vicki [2 ]
Wilson, Ken [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Saskatchewan, Dept Educ Psychol & Special Educ, Coll Educ, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
[2] Univ Saskatchewan, Dept Educ Adm, Coll Educ, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
[3] Univ Saskatchewan, Dept Biol, Coll Arts & Sci, Saskatoon, SK, Canada
关键词
Learning Analytics; Intervention effectiveness; Statistical Matching; Automated Personalized Feedback; Higher Education; LEARNING ANALYTICS; MATCHING METHODS; INTERVENTIONS; METAANALYSIS; STRATEGIES; LEARNERS;
D O I
10.1007/s40593-020-00210-6
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Greer and Mark's (2016) paper suggested and reviewed different methods for evaluating the effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems such as Propensity score matching. The current study aimed at assessing the effectiveness of automated personalized feedback intervention implemented via the Student Advice Recommender Agent (SARA) in a first-year biology class by means of statistical matching and by reviewing and comparing four different statistical matching methods (i.e., exact matching, nearest neighbor matching using the Mahalanobis distance, propensity score matching, and coarsened exact matching). Data from 1026 (73% female and 27% male) students who took a first-year biology course at a Western Canadian university were used. Two different measures for balance assessment of the matched data (i.e., % of balance improvement and standardized bias) were used to choose the best performing statistical matching method. Nearest neighbor matching using the Mahalanobis distance was found to be the most appropriate method for this study and results showed a statistically significant but small treatment effect for the group who received personalized feedback. Research and practical considerations were discussed and suggestions for future research are provided.
引用
收藏
页码:603 / 621
页数:19
相关论文
共 43 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2014, CHANGE, DOI DOI 10.1080/00091383.2014.867209
[2]  
[Anonymous], EMPOWERING TEACHERS
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2004, Instructional Design for Multimedia Learning
[4]  
Arnold K.E., 2012, P 2 INT C LEARN AN K, P267, DOI [10.1145/2330601.2330666, DOI 10.1145/2330601.2330666]
[5]   A meta-analysis of the effects of feedback in computer-based instruction [J].
Azevedo, R ;
Bernard, RM .
JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL COMPUTING RESEARCH, 1995, 13 (02) :111-127
[6]   A comparison of propensity score matching methods for reducing selection bias [J].
Bai, Haiyan .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH & METHOD IN EDUCATION, 2011, 34 (01) :81-107
[7]   Formative assessment: a critical review [J].
Bennett, Randy .
ASSESSMENT IN EDUCATION-PRINCIPLES POLICY & PRACTICE, 2011, 18 (01) :5-25
[8]  
Blumenstein M, 2018, DATA INFORM NUDGES S
[9]   Trends and Issues in Student-Facing Learning Analytics Reporting Systems Research [J].
Bodily, Robert ;
Verbert, Katrien .
SEVENTH INTERNATIONAL LEARNING ANALYTICS & KNOWLEDGE CONFERENCE (LAK'17), 2017, :309-318
[10]   Intelligent web-based learning system with personalized learning path guidance [J].
Chen, Chih-Ming .
COMPUTERS & EDUCATION, 2008, 51 (02) :787-814