http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

Development and evaluation of adaptive metacognitive scaffolding for algorithm-learning system

Development and evaluation of adaptive metacognitive scaffolding for algorithm-learning system

For access to this article, please select a purchase option:

Buy article PDF
$19.95
(plus tax if applicable)
Buy Knowledge Pack
10 articles for $120.00
(plus taxes if applicable)

IET members benefit from discounts to all IET publications and free access to E&T Magazine. If you are an IET member, log in to your account and the discounts will automatically be applied.

Learn more about IET membership 

Recommend Title Publication to library

You must fill out fields marked with: *

Librarian details
Name:*
Email:*
Your details
Name:*
Email:*
Department:*
Why are you recommending this title?
Select reason:
 
 
 
 
 
IET Software — Recommend this title to your library

Thank you

Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

Adaptive metacognitive scaffolding is developed to provide learning assistance on an as-needed basis; thus, advances the effectiveness of computer-based learning systems. Metacognitive scaffoldings have been developed for some science subjects; however, not for algorithm-learning. The learning algorithm is different from learning science as it is more oriented to problem-solving; therefore, this study is aimed to describe the modelling, development, and evaluation of the adaptive metacognitive scaffolding which is dedicated for encouraging algorithm-learning. In addition, the authors present a new approach for learner modelling to find students’ metacognitive state. Adaptivity of the scaffolding is based on the learner modelling. To evaluate the effectiveness of the developed system, it is deployed in a real algorithm-learning classroom of 38 students. The class is randomly divided into two groups: experiment and control. Two parameters are measured from both groups, i.e. academic success and academic satisfaction. Non-parametric statistical test, i.e. Mann–Whitney U-test (significance level 0.01) rejects the null hypothesis (U-value = 86.5 and U-critical = 101). This result verifies that the academic success of the experiment group is significantly higher than that of the control group. In addition, an academic satisfaction survey shows that adaptive scaffolding is valid in assisting students while learning with the system.

References

    1. 1)
      • 1. Combefis, S., Barry, S.A., Crappe, M., et al: ‘Learning and teaching algorithm design and optimisation using contests tasks’, Olympiads Inf., 2017, 11, pp. 1928.
    2. 2)
      • 2. Cetin, I., Andrews-Larson, C.: ‘Learning sorting algorithms through visualization construction’, Comput. Sci. Educ., 2016, 26, (1), pp. 2743.
    3. 3)
      • 3. Ssimoňák, S.: ‘Algorithm visualizations as a way of increasing the quality in computer science education’. 2016 IEEE 14th Int. Symp. Applied Machine Intelligence and Informatics (SAMI), 2016, pp. 153157.
    4. 4)
      • 4. Urquiza-fuentes, J., Velázquez-iturbide, J.Á.: ‘Toward the effective use of educational program animations: the roles of student's engagement and topic complexity’, Comput. Educ., 2013, 67, (September 2013), pp. 178192.
    5. 5)
      • 5. Boticki, I., Barisic, A., Martin, S., et al: ‘Teaching and learning computer science sorting algorithms with mobile devices: a case study’, Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ., 2012, 21, (S1), pp. 110.
    6. 6)
      • 6. Azevedo, R., Cromley, J.G., Seibert, D.: ‘Does adaptive scaffolding facilitate students ability to regulate their learning with hypermedia?’, Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 2004, 29, pp. 344370.
    7. 7)
      • 7. Deperlioglu, O., Arslan, Y.: ‘Design principles of web-based distance education system and sample application in Afyon Kocatepe University’, IET Softw., 2010, 4, (4), pp. 283293.
    8. 8)
      • 8. Rum, S.N.M., Ismail, M.A.: ‘Metacognitive support accelerates computer assisted learning for novice programmers’, Educ. Technol. Soc., 2017, 20, (3), pp. 170181.
    9. 9)
      • 9. Hargrove, R.A.: ‘Assessing the long-term impact of a metacognitive approach to creative skill development’, Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ., 2013, 23, (3), pp. 489517.
    10. 10)
      • 10. Schraw, G., Dennison, R.S.: ‘Assessing metacognitive awareness’, Contemp. Educ. Psychol., 1994, 19, (4), pp. 460475.
    11. 11)
      • 11. Cunningham, P., Matusovich, H.M., Hunter, D.A.N., et al: ‘Teaching metacognition: helping engineering students take ownership of their own learning’. 2015 IEEE Frontiers in Education Conf. (FIE), 2015, pp. 15.
    12. 12)
      • 12. Roll, I., Ryu, E., Sewall, J., et al: ‘Towards teaching metacognition: supporting spontaneous self-assessment’. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), 2006, (LNCS, 1994), pp. 738740.
    13. 13)
      • 13. Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B.M., et al: ‘Metacognitive practice makes perfect: improving students’ self-assessment skills with an intelligent tutoring system’. Artificial Intelligence in Education – 15th Int. Conf. {AIED} 2011, Auckland, New Zealand, June 28–July 2011, 2011, pp. 288295.
    14. 14)
      • 14. Roll, I., Aleven, V., McLaren, B.M., et al: ‘Improving students’ help-seeking skills using metacognitive feedback in an intelligent tutoring system’, Learn. Instr., 2011, 21, (2), pp. 267280.
    15. 15)
      • 15. Aleven, V., Mclaren, B., Roll, I., et al: ‘Toward meta-cognitive tutoring: a model of help seeking with a cognitive tutor’, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ., 2006, 16, (2), pp. 101128.
    16. 16)
      • 16. Azevedo, R., Witherspoon, A., Chauncey, A., et al: ‘Metatutor: a metacognitive tool for enhancing self-regulated learning’. Annual Meeting of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence Symp. Metacognitive and Cognitive Educational Systems, 2009, pp. 1419.
    17. 17)
      • 17. Gil, A.B., Rodriguez, R.: ‘SHARP online: an adaptive hypermedia system applied to mathematical problem solving’, J. Univ. Comput. Sci., 2008, 14, (19), pp. 30993113.
    18. 18)
      • 18. Cueli, M., González-castro, P., Krawec, J., et al: ‘Hipatia: a hypermedia learning environment in mathematics’, Ann. Psychol., 2016, 32, (1), pp. 98105.
    19. 19)
      • 19. Barak, M.: ‘Motivating self-regulated learning in technology education’, Int. J. Technol. Des. Educ., 2010, 20, pp. 381401.
    20. 20)
      • 20. Desmarais, M.C., Baker, R.S.J.D.: ‘A review of recent advances in learner and skill modeling in intelligent learning environments’, User Model. User-Adapt. Interact., 2012, 22, (1–2), pp. 938.
    21. 21)
      • 21. Basu, S., Biswas, G., Kinnebrew, J.S.: ‘Learner modeling for adaptive scaffolding in a computational thinking-based science learning environment’, User Model. User-Adapt. Interact., 2017, 27, (1), pp. 553.
    22. 22)
      • 22. Chrysafiadi, K., Virvou, M.: ‘Fuzzy logic for adaptive instruction in an e-learning environment for computer programming’, IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., 2015, 23, (1), pp. 164177.
    23. 23)
      • 23. Vaessen, B.E., Prins, F.J., Jeuring, J.: ‘University students’ achievement goals and help-seeking strategies in an intelligent tutoring system’, Comput. Educ., 2014, 72, pp. 196208.
    24. 24)
      • 24. Li, N., Cohen, W.W., Koedinger, K.R.: ‘Discovering student models with a clustering algorithm using problem content’. Proc. Sixth Int. Conf. Educational Data Mining, Memphis, TN, USA, 6–9 July 2013, pp. 98105.
    25. 25)
      • 25. Virvou, M., Alepis, E., Troussas, C.: ‘Centroid-based clustering for student models in computer-based multiple language tutoring’. SIGMAP 2012, WINSYS 2012 – Proc. Int. Conf. Signal Processing and Multimedia Applications and Wireless Information Networks and Systems, 2012, pp. 198203.
    26. 26)
      • 26. Hidayah, I., Adji, T.B., Setiawan, N.A., et al: ‘Application of unsupervised learning method toward student's metacognition assessment’. IEEE Global Engineering Education, 2016, pp. 11751178.
    27. 27)
      • 27. Law, K.M.Y, Lee, V.C.S., Yu, Y.T.: ‘Learning motivation in e-learning facilitated computer programming courses’, Comput. Educ., 2010, 55, (1), pp. 218228.
    28. 28)
      • 28. Chrysafiadi, K., Virvou, M.: ‘Student modeling approaches: a literature review for the last decade’, Expert Syst. Appl., 2013, 40, (11), pp. 47154729.
    29. 29)
      • 29. Havenga, M., Breed, B.: ‘Metacognitive and problem-solving skills to promote self-directed learning in computer programming: teachers’ experiences’, SA-eDUC J., 2013, 10, (2), pp. 114.
    30. 30)
      • 30. Wakita, T., Ueshima, N., Noguchi, H.: ‘Psychological distance between categories in the Likert scale: comparing different numbers of options’, Educ. Psychol. Meas., 2012, 72, (4), pp. 533546.
    31. 31)
      • 31. Yang, J., Wu, Q., Qu, Z., et al: ‘An enhanced density clustering algorithm for datasets with complex structures’, IAENG Int. J. Comput. Sci., 2017, 44, (2), pp. 150156.
    32. 32)
      • 32. Rousseeuw, P.J.: ‘Silhouettes: a graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis’, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 1987, 20, (C), pp. 5365.
    33. 33)
      • 33. Liu, B.: ‘Web data mining exploring hyperlinks, contents, and usage data’. 2007.
    34. 34)
      • 34. Rezaei, M.S., Montazer, G.A.: ‘An automatic adaptive grouping of learners in an e-learning environment based on fuzzy grafting and snap-drift clustering’, Int. J. Technol. Enhanc. Learn., 2106, 8, (2), pp. 169186.
    35. 35)
      • 35. Akbar, S.: ‘Instrumen perangkat pembelajaran’ (PT Remaja Rosdakarya, Bandung, 2013).
    36. 36)
      • 36. Nachar, N.: ‘The Mann–Whitney U: a test for assessing whether two independent samples come from the same distribution’, 2008, 4, (1), pp. 1320.
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5072
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5072
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address