The Impact of Off-task and Gaming Behaviors on Learning: Immediate or Aggregate?

Both gaming the system (taking advantage of the system's feedback and help to succeed in the tutor without learning the material) and being off-task (engaging in behavior that does not involve the system or the learning task) have been previously shown to be associated with poorer learning. In this paper we investigate two hypotheses about the mechanisms that lead to this reduced learning: (a) less learning within individual steps (immediate harmful impact) and (b) overall learning loss due to fewer opportunities to practice (aggregate harmful impact). We show that gaming tends to have immediate harmful impact while off-task tends to have aggregated harmful impact on learning.

[1]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Affect and Usage Choices in Simulation Problem-Solving Environments , 2007, AIED.

[2]  Kurt VanLehn,et al.  The Behavior of Tutoring Systems , 2006, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ..

[3]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Modeling and understanding students' off-task behavior in intelligent tutoring systems , 2007, CHI.

[4]  Neil T. Heffernan,et al.  Detection and Analysis of Off-Task Gaming Behavior in Intelligent Tutoring Systems , 2006, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[5]  A. Corbett,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences: Cognitive Tutors , 2005 .

[6]  Beverly Park Woolf,et al.  Repairing Disengagement With Non-Invasive Interventions , 2007, AIED.

[7]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Developing a generalizable detector of when students game the system , 2008, User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction.

[8]  Joseph E. Beck,et al.  Using learning decomposition to analyze student fluency development , 2005 .

[9]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Comparing Learners' Affect While Using an Intelligent Tutoring System and a Simulation Problem Solving Game , 2008, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[10]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Off-task behavior in the cognitive tutor classroom: when students "game the system" , 2004, CHI.

[11]  S. Stage,et al.  A Meta-Analysis of Interventions To Decrease Disruptive Classroom Behavior in Public Education Settings. , 1997 .

[12]  Albert T. Corbett,et al.  Why Students Engage in “Gaming the System” Behavior in Interactive Learning Environments , 2008 .

[13]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Adapting to When Students Game an Intelligent Tutoring System , 2006, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[14]  Ryan Shaun Joazeiro de Baker,et al.  Detecting Student Misuse of Intelligent Tutoring Systems , 2004, Intelligent Tutoring Systems.

[15]  Lei Qu,et al.  Classifying Learner Engagement through Integration of Multiple Data Sources , 2006, AAAI.

[16]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Can Help Seeking Be Tutored? Searching for the Secret Sauce of Metacognitive Tutoring , 2007, AIED.

[17]  Beverly Park Woolf,et al.  A Dynamic Mixture Model to Detect Student Motivation and Proficiency , 2006, AAAI.