2010
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-13470-8_25
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detecting Gaming the System in Constraint-Based Tutors

Abstract: Abstract.Recently, detectors of gaming the system have been developed for several intelligent tutoring systems where the problem-solving process is reified, and gaming consists of systematic guessing and help abuse. Constraint-based tutors differ from the tutors where gaming detectors have previously been developed on several dimensions: in particular, higher-level answers are assessed according to a larger number of finer-grained constraints, and feedback is split into levels rather than an entire help sequen… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0
3

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
4

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
7
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Identifying situations where the system has been gamed has been the focus for many researchers in recent years. Additional discussions on mining student datasets can be found in [156] [157].…”
Section: Data Mining In Itssmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Identifying situations where the system has been gamed has been the focus for many researchers in recent years. Additional discussions on mining student datasets can be found in [156] [157].…”
Section: Data Mining In Itssmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous automated detectors of disengaged behavior have largely focused on identifying the specific undesirable behavior studied (Baker & Carvalho, 2008;Baker, Mitrovic, & Mathews, 2010;Cetintas, Si, Xin, & Hord, 2009). By contrast, the rules produced by our detector are targeted more toward identifying what is not DTG behavior than identifying what is DTG behavior.…”
Section: What Does Our Detector Reveal About Disengagement In Inq-its?mentioning
confidence: 93%
“…It allows linking learning analytics work that identifies user engagement problems, e.g. gaming the system, mind wandering, confusion, frustration, off-task interaction (Baker et al, 2010;Bosch & D'Mello, 2019;Faber et al, 2018;Hutt et al, 2019;Mills et al, 2020;Paquette & Baker, 2019;Peters et al, 2018) with interaction design to offer choices leading to better engagement with the system to improve learning. Taking a Choice Architecture point of view will allow comparing different interaction features (nudges) and combining them in a flexible way to improve the system.…”
Section: Choice Architecture and Its Implicationsmentioning
confidence: 99%