Publication Date
| In 2026 | 0 |
| Since 2025 | 1 |
| Since 2022 (last 5 years) | 1 |
| Since 2017 (last 10 years) | 1 |
| Since 2007 (last 20 years) | 2 |
Descriptor
Author
| Baker, Ryan S. J. D. | 1 |
| Cindy Peng | 1 |
| Conrad Borchers | 1 |
| Goldstein, Adam B. | 1 |
| Heffernan, Neil T. | 1 |
| Jeroen Ooge | 1 |
| Vincent Aleven | 1 |
Publication Type
| Reports - Research | 2 |
| Journal Articles | 1 |
| Speeches/Meeting Papers | 1 |
Education Level
| Middle Schools | 2 |
| Grade 6 | 1 |
| Grade 7 | 1 |
| Grade 8 | 1 |
| High Schools | 1 |
| Junior High Schools | 1 |
| Secondary Education | 1 |
Audience
Location
| Massachusetts | 1 |
| Pennsylvania | 1 |
| South Carolina | 1 |
| Virginia | 1 |
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedConrad Borchers; Jeroen Ooge; Cindy Peng; Vincent Aleven – Grantee Submission, 2025
Personalized problem selection enhances student practice in tutoring systems. Prior research has focused on transparent problem selection that supports learner control but rarely engages learners in selecting practice materials. We explored how different levels of control (i.e., full AI control, shared control, and full learner control), combined…
Descriptors: Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Artificial Intelligence, Learner Controlled Instruction, Learning Analytics
Baker, Ryan S. J. D.; Goldstein, Adam B.; Heffernan, Neil T. – International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 2011
Intelligent tutors have become increasingly accurate at detecting whether a student knows a skill, or knowledge component (KC), at a given time. However, current student models do not tell us exactly at which point a KC is learned. In this paper, we present a machine-learned model that assesses the probability that a student learned a KC at a…
Descriptors: Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Mastery Learning, Probability, Knowledge Level

Direct link
