Socioscientific issues (SSI) are often used to facilitate students' engagement in multiple scientific practices such as decision-making and argumentation, both of which are goals of STEM literacy, science literacy, and integrated STEM education. Literature often emphasizes scientific argumentation over socioscientific argumentation, which involves considering social factors in addition to scientific frameworks. Analyzing students' socioscientific arguments may reveal how students construct such arguments and evaluate pedagogical tools supporting these skills. In this study, we examined students' socioscientific arguments regarding three SSI on pre- and post-assessments in the context of a course emphasizing SSI-based structured decision-making. We employed critical integrative argumentation (CIA) as a theoretical and analytical framework, which integrates arguments and counterarguments with stronger arguments characterized by identifying and refuting counterarguments. We hypothesized that engaging in structured decision-making, in which students integrate multidisciplinary perspectives and consider tradeoffs of various solutions based upon valued criteria, may facilitate students' development of integrated socioscientific arguments. Findings suggest that students' arguments vary among SSI contexts and may relate to students' identities and perspectives regarding the SSI. We conclude that engaging in structured decision-making regarding personally relevant SSI may foster more integrated argumentation skills, which are critical to engaging in information-laden democratic societies.

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).

What can eye movements reveal about reading, a complex skill ubiquitous in everyday life? Research suggests that gaze can reflect short-term comprehension for facts, but it is unknown whether it can measure long-term, deep comprehension. We tracked gaze while 147 participants read long, connected, informative texts and completed assessments of rote (factual) and inference comprehension (connecting ideas) while reading a text, after reading a text, after reading five texts, and after a seven-day delay. Gaze-based student-independent computational models predicted both immediate and long-term rote and inference comprehension with moderate accuracies. Surprisingly, the models were most accurate for comprehension assessed after reading all texts and predicted comprehension even after a week-long delay. This shows that eye movements can provide a lens into the cognitive processes underlying reading comprehension, including inference formation, and the consolidation of information into long-term memory, which has implications for intelligent student interfaces that can automatically detect and repair comprehension in real-time. © 2022 Copyright is held by the author(s).

Automated Essay Scoring (AES) research efforts primarily focus on feature engineering and the building of machine learning models to attain higher consensus with human graders. In academic grading such as essay scoring, the scores will naturally result in a normal distribution, more commonly referred to as the bell curve. However, the datasets used do not always have such distribution and are often overlooked in most machine learning environments. This paper proposes a Gaussian Multi-Class Synthetic Minority Over-sampling Technique (GMC-SMOTE) for imbalanced datasets. The proposed GMC-SMOTE generates new synthetic data to complement the existing datasets to produce scores that are in a normal distribution. Using several labeled essay sets, some of which already have a substantial agreement between the machine learning model and human graders, learning from normal distribution datasets yields significant improvements. Improvements of 0.038 QWK score (5.8%) over the imbalanced dataset were observed. The experimental result has also shown that naturally occurring distribution in the automated essay scoring domain contributes to the most appropriate training dataset for machine learning purposes. © 2022 Copyright is held by the author(s).

Advancements in online learning platforms have revolutionized education in multiple different ways, transforming the learning experiences and instructional practices. The development of natural language processing and machine learning methods have helped understand and process student languages, comprehend their learning state, and build automated supports for teachers. With this, there has been a growing body of research in developing automated methods to assess students’ work both in mathematical and non-mathematical domains. These automated methods address questions of two categories; closed-ended (with limited correct answers) and open-ended (are often subjective and have multiple correct answers), where open-ended questions are mostly used by teachers to learn about their student’s understanding of a particular concept. Manually assessing and providing feedback to these open-ended questions is often arduous and time-consuming for teachers. For this reason, there have been several works to understand student responses to these open-ended questions to automate the assessment and provide constructive feedback to students. In this research, we seek to improve such a prior method for assessment and feedback suggestions for student open-ended works in mathematics. For this, we present an error analysis of the prior method”SBERT-Canberra” for auto-scoring, explore various factors that contribute to the error of the method, and propose solutions to improve upon the method by addressing these error factors. We further intend to expand this approach by improving feedback suggestions for teachers to give to their students’ open-ended work. © 2022 Copyright is held by the author(s).

As online learning platforms become more ubiquitous throughout various curricula, there is a growing need to evaluate the effectiveness of these platforms and the different methods used to structure online education and tutoring. Towards this endeavor, some platforms have performed randomized controlled experiments to compare different user experiences, curriculum structures, and tutoring strategies in order to ensure the effectiveness of their platform and personalize the education of the students using it. These experiments are typically analyzed on an individual basis in order to reveal insights on a specific aspect of students’ online educational experience. In this work, the data from 50,752 instances of 30,408 students participating in 50 different experiments conducted at scale within the online learning platform ASSISTments were aggregated and analyzed for consistent trends across experiments. By combining common experimental conditions and normalizing the dependent measures between experiments, this work has identified multiple statistically significant insights on the impact of various skill mastery requirements, strategies for personalization, and methods for tutoring in an online setting. This work can help direct further experimentation and inform the design and improvement of new and existing online learning platforms. The anonymized data compiled for this work are hosted by the Open Science Foundation and can be found at https://osf.io/59shv/. © 2022 Copyright is held by the author(s).

Studies have shown that on-demand assistance, additional instruction given on a problem per student request, improves student learning in online learning environments. Students may have opinions on whether an assistance was effective at improving student learning. As students are the driving force behind the effectiveness of assistance, there could exist a correlation between students’ perceptions of effectiveness and the computed effectiveness of the assistance. This work conducts a survey asking secondary education students on whether a given assistance is effective in solving a problem in an online learning platform. It then provides a cursory glance at the data to view whether a correlation exists between student perception and the measured effectiveness of an assistance. Over a three year period, approximately twenty-two thousand responses were collected across nearly four thousand, four hundred students. Initial analyses of the survey suggest no significance in the relationship between student perception and computed effectiveness of an assistance, regardless of if the student participated in the survey. All data and analysis conducted can be found on the Open Science Foundation website1 © 2022 Copyright is held by the author(s).

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).