Background: Teachers often rely on the use of open-ended questions to assess students' conceptual understanding of assigned content. Particularly in the context of mathematics; teachers use these types of questions to gain insight into the processes and strategies adopted by students in solving mathematical problems beyond what is possible through more close-ended problem types. While these types of problems are valuable to teachers, the variation in student responses to these questions makes it difficult, and time-consuming, to evaluate and provide directed feedback. It is a well-studied concept that feedback, both in terms of a numeric score but more importantly in the form of teacher-authored comments, can help guide students as to how to improve, leading to increased learning. It is for this reason that teachers need better support not only for assessing students' work but also in providing meaningful and directed feedback to students. Objectives: In this paper, we seek to develop, evaluate, and examine machine learning models that support automated open response assessment and feedback. Methods: We build upon the prior research in the automatic assessment of student responses to open-ended problems and introduce a novel approach that leverages student log data combined with machine learning and natural language processing methods. Utilizing sentence-level semantic representations of student responses to open-ended questions, we propose a collaborative filtering-based approach to both predict student scores as well as recommend appropriate feedback messages for teachers to send to their students. Results and Conclusion: We find that our method outperforms previously published benchmarks across three different metrics for the task of predicting student performance. Through an error analysis, we identify several areas where future works may be able to improve upon our approach. © 2023 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

As evidence grows supporting the importance of non-cognitive factors in learning, computer-assisted learning platforms increasingly incorporate non-academic interventions to influence student learning and learning related-behaviors. Non-cognitive interventions often attempt to influence students' mindset, motivation, or metacognitive reflection to impact learning behaviors and outcomes. In the current paper, we analyze data from five experiments, involving seven treatment conditions embedded in mastery-based learning activities hosted on a computer-assisted learning platform focused on middle school mathematics. Each treatment condition embodied a specific non-cognitive theoretical perspective. Over seven school years, 20,472 students participated in the experiments. We estimated the effects of each treatment condition on students' response time, hint usage, likelihood of mastering knowledge components, learning efficiency, and post-tests performance. Our analyses reveal a mix of both positive and negative treatment effects on student learning behaviors and performance. Few interventions impacted learning as assessed by the post-tests. These findings highlight the difficulty in positively influencing student learning behaviors and outcomes using non-cognitive interventions. [This paper was published in: "LAK23: 13th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference Proceedings," March 13-17, 2023.]

Immediate feedback has been considered a cornerstone of online language learning platforms. However, a closer reading of relevant research reveals that the definition of the term 'immediate feedback' is inconsistent. Furthermore, findings from the STEM literature have not been well supported by other fields. As a result, clarification is required to assess which type of immediate feedback improves students’ performance in a computer-assisted learning environment. Moreover, research on the effects of immediate feedback outside of STEM classes should provide an enhanced understanding of whether the findings can be generalized. Therefore, this study investigated the effects of immediate feedback timing in online language learning exercises. The following three conditions were examined: no feedback, end-of-question feedback, and end-of-assignment feedback. A planned contrast test revealed that with a pretest as the covariate, students in the end-of-question feedback condition received significantly higher grades in the posttest compared with those in the end-of-assignment feedback condition. Furthermore, students with lower pretest scores required more attempts, although their learning progress was not significantly superior to that of students with higher prior knowledge. This study's findings provide insights into the use of immediate feedback for improving learning as part of foreign language classroom instruction. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

Solving mathematical problems is cognitively complex, involving strategy formulation, solution development, and the application of learned concepts. However, gaps in students' knowledge or weakly grasped concepts can lead to errors. Teachers play a crucial role in predicting and addressing these difficulties, which directly influence learning outcomes. However, preemptively identifying misconceptions leading to errors can be challenging. This study leverages historical data to assist teachers in recognizing common errors and addressing gaps in knowledge through feedback. We present a longitudinal analysis of incorrect answers from the 2015-2020 academic years on two curricula, Illustrative Math and EngageNY, for grades 6, 7, and 8. We find consistent errors across 5 years despite varying student and teacher populations. Based on these Common Wrong Answers (CWAs), we designed a crowdsourcing platform for teachers to provide Common Wrong Answer Feedback (CWAF). This paper reports on an in vivo randomized study testing the effectiveness of CWAFs in two scenarios: next-problem-correctness within-skill and next-problem-correctness within-assignment, regardless of the skill. We find that receiving CWAF leads to a significant increase in correctness for consecutive problems within-skill. However, the effect was not significant for all consecutive problems within-assignment, irrespective of the associated skill. This paper investigates the potential of scalable approaches in identifying Common Wrong Answers (CWAs) and how the use of crowdsourced CWAFs can enhance student learning through remediation.

This work proposes Dynamic Linear Epsilon-Greedy, a novel contextual multi-armed bandit algorithm that can adaptively assign personalized content to users while enabling unbiased statistical analysis. Traditional A/B testing and reinforcement learning approaches have trade-offs between empirical investigation and maximal impact on users. Our algorithm seeks to balance these objectives, allowing platforms to personalize content effectively while still gathering valuable data. Dynamic Linear Epsilon-Greedy was evaluated via simulation and an empirical study in the ASSISTments online learning platform. In simulation, Dynamic Linear Epsilon-Greedy performed comparably to existing algorithms and in ASSISTments, slightly increased students' learning compared to A/B testing. Data collected from its recommendations allowed for the identification of qualitative interactions, which showed high and low knowledge students benefited from different content. Dynamic Linear Epsilon-Greedy holds promise as a method to balance personalization with unbiased statistical analysis. All the data collected during the simulation and empirical study are publicly available at https://osf.io/zuwf7/.

Personalized learning stems from the idea that students benefit from instructional material tailored to their needs. Many online learning platforms purport to implement some form of personalized learning, often through on-demand tutoring or self-paced instruction, but to our knowledge none have a way to automatically explore for specific opportunities to personalize students' education nor a transparent way to identify the effects of personalization on specific groups of students. In this work we present the Automatic Personalized Learning Service (APLS). The APLS uses multi-armed bandit algorithms to recommend the most effective support to each student that requests assistance when completing their online work, and is currently used by ASSISTments, an online learning platform. The first empirical study of the APLS found that Beta-Bernoulli Thompson Sampling, a popular and effective multi-armed bandit algorithm, was only slightly more capable of selecting helpful support than randomly selecting from the relevant support options. Therefore, we also present Decision Tree Thompson Sampling (DTTS), a novel contextual multi-armed bandit algorithm that integrates the transparency and interpretability of decision trees into Thomson sampling. In simulation, DTTS overcame the challenges of recommending support within an online learning platform and was able to increase students' learning by as much as 10% more than the current algorithm used by the APLS. We demonstrate that DTTS is able to identify qualitative interactions that not only help determine the most effective support for students, but that also generalize well to new students, problems, and support content. The APLS using DTTS is now being deployed at scale within ASSISTments and is a promising tool for all educational learning platforms. [This paper was published in: "Proceedings of the Ninth ACM Conference on Learning @ Scale (L@S '22), June 1-3, 2022, New York City, NY, USA," ACM, 2022.]

As computer-based learning platforms have become ubiquitous, there is a growing need to better support teachers. Particularly in mathematics, teachers often rely on open-ended questions to assess students’ understanding. While prior works focusing on the development of automated open-ended work assessments have demonstrated their potential, many of those methods require large amounts of student data to make reliable estimates. We explore whether a problem specific automated scoring model could benefit from auxiliary data collected from similar problems to address this “cold start” problem. We examine factors such as sample size and the magnitude of similarity of utilized problem data. We find the use of data from similar problems not only provides benefits to improve predictive performance by increasing sample size, but also leads to greater overall model performance than using data solely from the original problem when sample size is held constant. © 2022 Copyright is held by the author(s).

To improve student learning outcomes within online learning platforms, struggling students are often provided with on-demand supplemental instructional content. Recently, services like Yup (yup.com) and UPcheive (upchieve.org) have begun to offer on-demand live tutoring sessions with qualified educators, but the availability of tutors and the cost associated with hiring them prevents many students from having access to live support. To help struggling students and offset the inequities intrinsic to high-cost services, we are attempting to develop a process that uses large language representation models to algorithmically identify relevant support messages from these chat logs, and distribute them to all students struggling with the same content. In an empirical evaluation of our methodology we were able to identify messages from tutors to students struggling with middle school mathematics problems that qualified as explanations of the content. However, when we distributed these explanations to students outside of the tutoring sessions, they had an overall negative effect on the students’ learning. Moving forward, we want to be able to identify messages that will promote equity and have a positive impact on students. © 2022 Copyright is held by the author(s).

Studies have proven that providing on-demand assistance, additional instruction on a problem when a student requests it, improves student learning in online learning environments. Additionally, crowdsourced, on-demand assistance generated from educators in the field is also effective. However, when provided on-demand assistance in these studies, students received assistance using problem-based randomization, where each condition represents a different assistance, for every problem encountered. As such, claims about a given educator's effectiveness are provided on a per-assistance basis and not easily generalizable across all students and problems. This work aims to provide stronger claims on which educators are the most effective at generating on-demand assistance. Students will receive on-demand assistance using educator-based randomization, where each condition represents a different educator who has generated a piece of assistance, allowing students to be kept in the same condition over longer periods of time. Furthermore, this work also attempts to find additional benefits to providing students assistance generated by the same educator compared to a random assistance available for the given problem. All data and analysis being conducted can be found on the Open Science Foundation website (https://osf.io/zcbjx/).

The rapid growth and development of NLP techniques have resulted in Computer-Based Learning Platforms (CBLPs) leveraging innovative approaches toward automated grading and feedback generation of open-ended problems. Researchers have explored these techniques in driving a varying range of interventions that range from assessing the quality of the work and recommending changes to the answers that can enhance the quality of the responses for students to automated grading and feedback generation of responses for teachers. A crucial aspect of the automated assessment of student response is identifying and addressing fairness and equity issues in an educational context, as academic performance can impact the types of opportunities available to the students. While prior works have conducted posthoc analysis exploring aspects of algorithmic fairness of various models, the assessment of open-ended answers is often subjective. Teachers leverage contextual knowledge such as the perception of the student effort or students' prior knowledge. While such factors exist, it is not obvious how data from the teacher can introduce biases or introduce measurable risks to the fairness and equity of the NLP models. In this paper, we build on our prior analysis of the grading behavior of teachers on open-ended math problems for middle school students and explore possible next steps we can take to expand on our work. First, we propose a simulation study to explore the various risks associated with Human-AI interaction in the automated grading of open-ended problems. Second, we propose an extensive study expanding on our work to generate grades for open responses when a student is anonymized vs. not anonymized.