Home Journals Books For Authors and Reviewers Online Submission News About Us Contact Us
Search
magazinelogo

The Educational Review, USA

ISSN Print: 2575-7938 Downloads: 351589 Total View: 4197111
Frequency: monthly ISSN Online: 2575-7946 CODEN: TERUBB
Email: edu@hillpublisher.com
Search articles within this journal Submit an article

Journal Menu

Volumes & Issues

Current Issue

Download PDF

How to cite this paper

9111

TOTAL VIEWS

1

More Articles

Article http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2020.12.005

Traditional Knowledge Tracing Models for Clustered Students

Deliang Wang1, Zhi Zhang1, Jiachen Song2, Yu Lu1,2,*

1School of Educational Technology, Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.

2Advanced Innovation Center for Future Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China.

*Corresponding author: Yu Lu

Published: January 4,2021

Abstract

Against the background of the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, online learning has currently become one of the dominant educational forms. For more effective online learning, knowledge tracing that can dynamically estimate the knowledge state of learners should be paid more attention. This study gives an overall introduction of knowledge tracing models. We illustrate the development of the Bayesian Knowledge Tracing model and clarify its concrete mathematic principle. In addition, an individualized method based on clustered students for the Bayesian Knowledge Tracing model is initially proposed, which changes the individualization level from a group of all students to subgroups. To confirm whether this individualized method can be generalized to other knowledge tracing models, we also test it on logistic knowledge tracing models. Therefore, we provide an introduction about the principles of three logistic knowledge tracing models. We evaluate our method on the four models with two international public educational datasets. The results show that all knowledge tracing models for clustered students outperform the original models without clustering. The Bayesian Knowledge Tracing model and item response theory for clustered students both gain good improvement in their performance, while the Performance Factors Analysis for clustered students has only few improvements. The reason for the experimental results is discussed at the end. Overall, this paper provides a general method for further promoting the performance of traditional knowledge tracing models that requires more studies.

References

Baker, R. S., Corbett, A. T., & Aleven, V. (2008). More Accurate Student Modeling through Contextual Estimation of Slip and Guess Probabilities in Bayesian Knowledge Tracing. In Proceeding of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 406-415). Berlin: Springer.

Cen, H., Koedinger, K., & Junker, B. (2006). Learning Factors Analysis – a General Method for Cognitive Model Evaluation and Improvement. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 64-175). Berlin: Springer. 

Corbett, A. T., Anderson, J. R. (1994). Knowledge Tracing: Modeling the Acquisition of Procedural Knowledge. User Modeling & User Adapted Interaction, 4(4), 253-278. doi.org/10.1007/BF01099821.

Käser, T., Klingler, S., Schwing, A. G., & Gorss, M. (2014). Beyond Knowledge Tracing: Modeling Skill Topologies with Bayesian Networks. In Proceeding of the 12th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 188-198). Honolulu: Springer.

Khajah, M., Lindsey, R., & Mozer, M. (2016). How deep is knowledge tracing? In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 94-101). North Carolina: International Educational Data Mining Society.

Lee, J. I., Brunskill. E. (2012). The Impact on Individualizing Student Models on Necessary Practice Opportunities. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 910-915). Chania: www.educationaldatamining.org.

Montavon, G., Samek, W., & Müller, K. (2017). Methods for interpreting and understanding deep neural networks. Digital Signal Processing, 73, 1-15. doi.org/10.1016/j.dsp.2017.10.011.

Nelimarkka, M., Ghori, M. (2014). The Effect of Variations of Prior on Knowledge Tracing. In CEUR Workshop Proceeding on Educational Data Mining (pp. 146-150). London: CEUR-WS.

Pardos, Z. A., & Heffernan, N. T. (2011). KT-IDEM: Introducing Item Difficulty to the Knowledge Tracing Model. In Proceeding of 19th International Conference on User Modeling, Adaption and Personalization (pp. 243-254). Berlin: Springer.

Pavlik, P. I., Cen, H., & Koedinger, K. R. (2009). Performance Factors Analysis—A New Alternative to Knowledge Tracing. Pro-ceedings of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 531-538). Amsterdam, Netherlands: IOS Press.

Piech, C., Spencer, J., Huang, J., Ganguli, S., Sahami, M., Guibas, M., & Guibas, L. (2015). Deep Knowledge Tracing. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 28 (pp. 505-513). Montreal: Curran Associates, Inc.

Qiu, Y., Lu, H., Pardos, Z. A., & Heffernan, N. T. (2011). Does Time Matter? Modeling the Effect of Time with Bayesian Knowledge Tracing. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Educational Data Mining (pp. 139-148). Eindhoven: www.educationaldatamining.org.

Rasch, G. (1993). Probabilistic Models for some Intelligence and Attainment Tests. Chicago, IL: MESA Press.

Song, L., Xu, L., & Li, Y. (2020). Precision 0nline Teaching + Home Study Model: A Feasible Way to Improve the Quality of Study for Students during Epidemic. China Educational Technology, 3, 114-122. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-9860.2020.03.016.

Wan, H., Wang, D. (2016). Investigation on Adaptive Learning Mechanism of Big Data based on Knewton Platform. Modern Educa-tional Technology, 26(05), 5-11. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1009-8097.2016.05.001.

Wang, J., Wei, Y., & Zong, M. (2020). The Current Situation, Problems and Reflection of Online Teaching for Primary and Secondary School Teachers During a Large-scale Epidemic. China Educational Technology, 5, 15-21.

Wang, Y., Heffernan, N. (2013). Extending Knowledge Tracing to Allow Partial Credit: Using Continuous versus Binary Nodes (pp. 181-188). In Proceeding of the 16th Artificial Intelligence in Education. Berlin: Springer.

Zhong, S. (2020). How Artificial Intelligence Supports Educational Revolution. China Educational Technology, 3, 17-24. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-9860.2020.03.003.

Yeung, C. K. (2019). Deep-IRT: Make Deep Learning Based Knowledge Tracing Explainable Using Item Response Theory. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.11738.pdf.

Yu, S., Wang, H. (2020). How to Better Organize Online Learning in Extreme Situations such as Epidemics. China Educational Technology, 5, 6-14. doi:10.3969/j.issn.1006-9860.2020.05.003.

Yudelson, M. V., Koedinger, K. R., & Gordon, G. J. (2013). Individualized Bayesian Knowledge Tracing Models. In Proceeding of 16th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (pp. 171-180). Berlin: Springer.

Zhang, J., Shi, X., King, I., & Yeung, D. (2017). Dynamic Key-Value Memory Networks for Knowledge Tracing. In Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on World Wide Web (pp. 765–774). Perth, Australia: International World Wide Web Confe-rences Steering Committee.

How to cite this paper

Traditional Knowledge Tracing Models for Clustered Students

How to cite this paper: Deliang Wang, Zhi Zhang, Jiachen Song, Yu Lu. (2020). Traditional Knowledge Tracing Models for Clustered Students. The Educational Review, USA, 4(12), 244-251.

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2020.12.005

Home　|　Journals　|　Books　|　For Authors and Reviewers　|　Online Submission　|　Contact Us　|　About Us

Copyright © 2023 Hill Publishing Group Inc. All Rights Reserved.