Adaptive feedback in computer-based learning environments: a review

Abstract

Adaptive support within a learning environment is useful because most learners have different personal characteristics such as prior knowledge, learning progress, and learning preferences. This study reviews various implementation of adaptive feedback, based on the four adaptation characteristics: means, target, goal, and strategy. This review focuses on 20 different implementations of feedback in a computer-based learning environment, ranging from multimedia web-based intelligent tutoring systems, dialog-based intelligent tutoring systems, web-based intelligent e-learning systems, adaptive hypermedia systems, and adaptive learning environment. The main objective of the review is to compare computer-based learning environments according to their implementation of feedback and to identify open research questions in adaptive feedback implementations. The review resulted in categorizing these feedback implementations based on the students’ information used for providing feedback, the aspect of the domain or pedagogical knowledge that is adapted to provide feedback based on the students’ characteristics, the pedagogical reason for providing feedback, and the steps taken to provide feedback with or without students’ participation. Other information such as the common adaptive feedback means, goals, and implementation techniques are identified. This review reveals a distinct relationship between the characteristics of feedback, features of adaptive feedback, and computer-based learning models. Other information such as the common adaptive feedback means, goals, implementation techniques, and open research questions are identified.

Keywords

Adaptation learning environment problem-solving student modeling learner model

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Advisors

E. G.

(2013). Learning to adapt: A case for accelerating adaptive learning in higher education. Education Growth Advisors. Retrieved from http://tytonpartners.com/library/accelerating-adaptive-learning-in-higher-education

Arroyo

Beal

Bergman

Lindenmuth

Marshall

Woolf

B. P.

(2003). Intelligent tutoring for high-stakes achievement tests. Artificial Intelligence in Education: Shaping the Future of Learning Through Intelligent Technologies, 97, 365.

Arroyo

Beck

J. E.

Woolf

B. P.

Beal

C. R.

Schultz

(2000). Macroadapting animalwatch to gender and cognitive differences with respect to hint interactivity and symbolism. In International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (Vol. s1839, pp. 574–583).

Arroyo

Woolf

B. P.

Burelson

Muldner

Rai

Tai

(2014). A multimedia adaptive tutoring system for mathematics that addresses cognition, metacognition and affect. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24, 387–426. New York: Springer.

Billings

(2012). Efficacy of adaptive feedback strategies in simulation-based training. Military Psychology, 24, 114–133.

Bokhove

Koolstra

Boon

Heck

(2007). Towards an integrated learning environment for mathematics. In 8th International Conference on Technology in Mathematics Teaching. Czech Republic, 1–4 July 2007, 5 pp.

Brusilovsky

(1998). Methods and techniques of adaptive hypermedia. In Adaptive hypertext and hypermedia (pp. 1–43). Netherlands: Springer.

Brusilovsky

(1999). Adaptive and intelligent technologies for web-based education. Ki, 13(4), 19–25.

Carter

(1984). Instructional learner feedback: A literature review with implications for software development. Computing Teacher, 12, 53–55. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/169781

10.

Chieu

V. M.

(2005). Constructivist learning: An operational approach for designing adaptive learning environments supporting cognitive flexibility (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Universiteit Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands.

11.

D’Mello

Graesser

(2012). Autotutor and affective autotutor: Learning by talking with cognitively and emotionally intelligent computers that talk back. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (Tiis), 2(4), Article 23.

12.

Economides

A. A.

(2006). Adaptive feedback characteristics in cat. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 3(8), 15–54.

13.

Farid

Ahmad

Alam

(2015). A hierarchical model for e-learning implementation challenges using AHP. Malaysian Journal of Computer Science, 28(3), 166–188.

14.

Gerdes

Jeuring

Heeren

(2012). An interactive functional programming tutor. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM Annual Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education (pp. 250–255). New York, NY, USA: ACM.

15.

Gertner

A. S.

VanLehn

(2000). Andes: A coached problem solving environment for physics. In International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 133–142). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

16.

Ghauth

K. I.

Abdullah

N. A.

(2010). An empirical evaluation of learner performance in e-learning recommender systems and an adaptive hypermedia system. Malaysian Journal of Computer Science, 23, 141–152.

17.

Gouli

Gogoulou

Papanikolaou

K. A.

Grigoriadou

(2006). An adaptive feedback framework to support reflection, guiding and tutoring. In Advances in web-based education: Personalized learning environments (pp. 178–202). Hershey, PA, USA: Information Science Publishing.

18.

Gross

Mokbel

Paassen

Hammer

Pinkwart

(2014). Example-based feedback provision using structured solution spaces. International Journal of Learning Technology, 10, 9248–9280.

19.

Gross

Pinkwart

(2015). Towards an integrative learning environment for java programming. In 2015 IEEE 15th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (pp. 24–28). Hualien, China: IEEE.

20.

Hattie

Gan

(2011). Instruction based on feedback. In Handbook of research on learning and instruction (pp. 249–271). New York: Routledge.

21.

Heift

(2010). Developing an intelligent language tutor. CALICO Journal, 27, 443–459.

22.

Heift

(2016). Web delivery of adaptive and interactive language tutoring: Revisited. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 26, 489–503.

23.

Heift

McFetridge

(1999). Exploiting the student model to emphasize language teaching pedagogy in natural language processing. In Proceedings of a Symposium on Computer Mediated Language Assessment and Evaluation in Natural Language Processing (pp. 55–61). Stroudsburg, PA, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics.

24.

Heift

Nicholson

(2001). Web delivery of adaptive and interactive language tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 12, 310–325.

25.

Heift

Schulze

(2007). Errors and intelligence in computer-assisted language learning: Parsers and pedagogues. New York, USA: Routledge.

26.

Hepplestone

Holden

Irwin

Parkin

Thorpe

L. P.

(2011). Using technology to encourage student engagement with feedback: A literature review. Research in Learning Technology, 19, 117–127. doi:10.1080/21567069.2011.586677

27.

N.-T.

(2016). A classification of adaptive feedback in educational systems for programming. Systems, 4(2), 22. doi:10.3390/systems4020022

28.

J. J.

Chan

Y. C.

Yeh

S. W.

(2012). Designing an adaptive web-based learning system based on students’ cognitive styles identified online. Computers & Education, 58, 209–222. Retrieved from doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.018

29.

Luckin

Holmes

(2016). Intelligence unleashed: An argument for AI in education. London: Pearson.

30.

Mason

B. J.

Bruning

(2001). Providing feedback in computer-based instruction: What the research tells us (Tech. Rep.). University of Nebraska. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247291218_Providing_Feedback_in_Computer-based_Instruction_What_the_Research_Tells_Us

31.

Mathan

S. A.

Koedinger

K. R.

(2005). Fostering the intelligent novice: Learning from errors with metacognitive tutoring. Educational Psychologist, 40, 257–265.

32.

Melis

Goguadze

Libbrecht

Ullrich

(2009). Activemath—A learning platform with semantic web features. The Future of Learning, 159–177.

33.

Melis

Moormann

Ullrich

Goguadze

Libbrecht

(2007). How activemath supports moderate constructivist mathematics teaching. In 8th International Conference on Technology in Mathematics Teaching, Hradec Kralove.

34.

Mitrovic

(2003). An intelligent SQL tutor on the web. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 13, 173–197.

35.

Mitrovic

Ohlsson

(1999). Evaluation of a constraint-based tutor for a database language. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 238–256.

36.

Mitrovic

Ohlsson

Barrow

D. K.

(2013). The effect of positive feedback in a constraint-based intelligent tutoring system. Computers & Education, 60, 264–272.

37.

Moundridou

Virvou

(2002). WEAR: A web-based authoring tool for building intelligent tutoring systems. In Proceedings of the 2nd Helenic Conference on AI, Companion Volume (pp. 203–214). Thessaloniki, Greece.

38.

Muñoz-Merino

P. J.

Pardo

Scheffel

Niemann

Wolpers

Leony

Delgado Kloos

(2011). An ontological framework for adaptive feedback to support students while programming. In Proceedings of the 10th International Semantic Web Conference (pp. 1–4). Bonn, Germany.

39.

Narciss

(2013). Designing and evaluating tutoring feedback strategies for digital learning. Digital Education Review, 23, 7–26.

40.

Narciss

Huth

(2002). How to design informative tutoring feedback for multimedia learning. In Instructional design for multimedia learning (pp. 181–195). Retrieved from http://www.mendeley.com/catalog/design-informative-tutoring-feedback-multimedia-learning/

41.

Narciss

Sosnovsky

Schnaubert

Andres

Eichelmann

Goguadze

Melis

(2014). Exploring feedback and student characteristics relevant for personalizing feedback strategies. Computers & Education, 71, 56–76. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.011

42.

Nye

B. D.

Graesser

A. C.

(2014). Autotutor and family: A review of 17 years of natural language tutoring. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 24, 427–469.

43.

Olney

A. M.

D’Mello

Person

Cade

Hays

Williams

. . . Graesser

(2012). Guru: A computer tutor that models expert human tutors. In Intelligent tutoring systems (pp. 256–261). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

44.

Olney

A. M.

Person

N. K.

Graesser

A. C.

(2011). Guru: Designing. In Cross-disciplinary advances in applied natural language processing: Issues and approaches (p. 156) Hershey, PA, USA: IGI Global.

45.

Papanikolaou

K. A.

Grigoriadou

Kornilakis

Magoulas

G. D.

(2003). Personalizing the interaction in a web-based educational hypermedia system: The case of INSPIRE. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 13, 213–267.

46.

Prince

M. J.

Felder

R. M.

(2006). Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases. Journal of Engineering Education, 95, 123–138. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2006.tb00884.x

47.

Pryor

Crossouard

(2008). A socio-cultural theorisation of formative assessment. Oxford Review of Education, 34(1), 1–20.

48.

Rivers

Koedinger

K. R.

(2015). Data-driven hint generation in vast solution spaces: A self-improving python programming tutor. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 27, 37–64.

49.

Rus

Conley

Graesser

(2014). The dendrogram model of instruction: On instructional strategies and their implementation in DeepTutor. Design Recommendations for Intelligent Tutoring Systems, 311–325.

50.

Rus

Niraula

N. B.

Banjade

(2015). Deeptutor: An effective, online intelligent tutoring system that promotes deep learning. In AAAI (pp. 4294–4295). Palo Alto, California: AAAI Press.

51.

Scheuer

Loll

Pinkwart

McLaren

B. M.

(2010). Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the state of the art. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 5, 43–102. doi:10.1007/s11412-009-9080-x

52.

Specht

Kravcik

Klemke

Pesin

Httenhain

(2002). Adaptive learning environment for teaching and learning in winds. In International conference on adaptive hypermedia and adaptive web-based systems (pp. 572–575). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

53.

Specht

M. E.

(1998). Adaptive methods in computer-based teaching/learning systems. New York, NY: ACM.

54.

Stoyanov

Kirchner

(2004). Expert concept mapping method for defining the characteristics of adaptive E-learning: ALFANET project case. Educational Technology Research & Development, 52, 41–54.

55.

Tsovaltzi

Fiedler

(2003). Enhancement and use of a mathematical ontology in a tutorial dialog system. In Proceedings of the IJCAI Workshop on Knowledge Representation and Automated Reasoning for E-learning Systems (pp. 23–35). Acapulco, Mexico.

56.

VanLehn

Lynch

Schulze

Shapiro

J. A.

Shelby

Taylor

. . . Wintersgill

(2005). The Andes physics tutoring system: Lessons learned. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 15, 147–204.

57.

Virvou

Moundridou

(2000). Modelling the instructor in a web-based authoring tool for algebrarelated ITSs. In International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (pp. 635–644). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.

58.

Virvou

Moundridou

(2001). Student and instructor models: Two kinds of user model and their interaction in an its authoring tool. In International Conference on User Modeling (pp. 158–167). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.