Human-Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.
Engineering, Amira Learning, Seattle, WA 98101.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2023 Mar 28;120(13):e2221311120. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2221311120. Epub 2023 Mar 20.
Leveraging a scientific infrastructure for exploring how students learn, we have developed cognitive and statistical models of skill acquisition and used them to understand fundamental similarities and differences across learners. Our primary question was why do some students learn faster than others? Or, do they? We model data from student performance on groups of tasks that assess the same skill component and that provide follow-up instruction on student errors. Our models estimate, for both students and skills, initial correctness and learning rate, that is, the increase in correctness after each practice opportunity. We applied our models to 1.3 million observations across 27 datasets of student interactions with online practice systems in the context of elementary to college courses in math, science, and language. Despite the availability of up-front verbal instruction, like lectures and readings, students demonstrate modest initial prepractice performance, at about 65% accuracy. Despite being in the same course, students' initial performance varies substantially from about 55% correct for those in the lower half to 75% for those in the upper half. In contrast, and much to our surprise, we found students to be astonishingly similar in estimated learning rate, typically increasing by about 0.1 log odds or 2.5% in accuracy per opportunity. These findings pose a challenge for theories of learning to explain the odd combination of large variation in student initial performance and striking regularity in student learning rate.
利用探索学生学习方式的科学基础设施,我们开发了认知和统计技能习得模型,并将其用于理解不同学习者之间的基本相似性和差异性。我们的主要问题是,为什么有些学生学得更快?或者,他们学得更快吗?我们对评估相同技能组成部分的一组任务中学生表现的数据进行建模,并对学生错误提供后续指导。我们的模型分别针对学生和技能估计初始正确性和学习率,即每次练习机会后正确性的提高。我们将模型应用于 27 个数据集的 130 万次学生与在线实践系统的交互观察,这些数据集涵盖了从小学到大学的数学、科学和语言课程。尽管有前置口头指导,如讲座和阅读,但学生在练习前的表现仅略高于 65%的准确率。尽管在同一门课程中,学生的初始表现差异很大,成绩较低的学生约为 55%正确,而成绩较高的学生约为 75%正确。相比之下,令我们非常惊讶的是,我们发现学生的学习率估计惊人地相似,通常每次机会的准确率提高约 0.1 对数几率或 2.5%。这些发现为学习理论解释学生初始表现差异大和学生学习率显著规律的奇怪组合提出了挑战。