Skip to main content

From testing to training: Evaluating automated diagnosis in statistics and algebra

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Intelligent Tutoring Systems (ITS 1992)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 608))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Much of the controversy over the role of testing in learning stems from its inability to differentiate among sources of error, the focus on outcome rather than problem solving, and the lack of useful information for further learning. To a large extent, these difficulties stem from the constrained form of testing typically used (i.e., multiple choice). Intelligent diagnosis of less constrained problem-solving scenarios is one way to integrate testing and learning. GIDE, a goal-based diagnostic system, provides a step in the direction of such integration. Initial empirical assessment in the domains of elementary statistics and algebra word problems suggests that GIDE's analysis retains information comparable to that provided by multiple-choice items and reflects a global similarity to human evaluators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ager, T. A. (1990). From interactive instruction to interactive testing. In R. Freedle (Eds.), Artificial intelligence and the future of testing (pp. 21–52). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bennett, R. E., Sebrechts, M. M., & Rock, D. A. (1991). Expert-system scores for complex constructed-response quantitative items: A study of convergent validity. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15(3), 227–239.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bennett, R. E., Sebrechts, M. M., Yamamoto, K. (1991). Fitting new measurement models to GRE General Test constructed-response item data. ETS Research Report No.91-60. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brown, J. S., & Burton, R. R. (1978). Diagnostic Models for Procedural Bugs in Basic Mathematical Skills. Cognitive Science, 2, 155–192.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Glaser, R., & Bassok, M. (1989). Learning theory and the study of instruction. Annual Review of Psychology, 40, 631–666.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hunt, E., & Lansman, M. (1986). Unified model of attention and problem solving. Psychological Review, 93(4), 446–461.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Johnson, W. L. (1986). Intention-based diagnosis of novice programming errors. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Johnson, W. L. & Soloway, E.(1985). PROUST:An automatic debugger for pascal programs. Byte(April), 179–190.

    Google Scholar 

  9. McArthur, D., Stasz, C., & Hotta, J. Y. (1986–87). Learning problem-solving skills in algebra. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 15(3), 303–324.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Milson, R., Lewis, M. W., & Anderson, J. R. (1990). The teacher's apprentice project: Building an algebra tutor. In R. Freedle (Eds.), Artificial intelligence and the future of testing (pp. 53–71). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  11. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (1988). The ideas of algebra, K-12. 1988 Yearbook, edited by Arthur F. Coxford. Reston, VA: The Council.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Payne, S. J., & Squibb, H. R. (1990). Algebra mal-rules and cognitive accounts of error. Cognitive Science, 14(3), 445–481.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Sebrechts, M. M., Bennett, R. E., & Rock, D. A. (1991). Agreement between expert-system and human raters' scores on complex constructed-response quantitative items. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(6), 856–862.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sebrechts, M. M., & Schooler, L. J. (1987). Diagnosing errors in statistical problem solving: Associative problem recognition and plan-based error detection. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Cognitive Science Society Meeting, (pp. 691–703). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Sebrechts, M. M.,Schooler, L. J., & LaClaire, L. (1986). Matching Strategies for Error Diagnosis: A Statistics Tutoring Aid. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Systems. Man and Cybernetics. Atlanta, GA.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sebrechts, M. M., Schooler, L. J., LaClaire, L., & Soloway, E. (1987). Computer-Based Inter-pretation of Students' Statistical Errors: A Preliminary Empirical Analysis of GIDE. In Proceedings of the 8th National Educational Computing Conference, (pp. 143–148). Eugene, OR: International Council on Computers in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Shepard, L. A. (1990). Inflated test score gains: Is the problem old norms or teaching the test? Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 9, 15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  18. VanLehn, K. (1990). Mind bugs: The origins of procedural misconceptions. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Claude Frasson Gilles Gauthier Gordon I. McCalla

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1992 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Sebrechts, M.M. (1992). From testing to training: Evaluating automated diagnosis in statistics and algebra. In: Frasson, C., Gauthier, G., McCalla, G.I. (eds) Intelligent Tutoring Systems. ITS 1992. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 608. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-55606-0_65

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-55606-0_65

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-55606-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-47254-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics