kau.edu.sakau.edu.sa/files/0052480/researches/55851_26160.docx · web viewprof. dr. abdul hamid...

Econf3-Bahrain University-April 6-8-2010

AACWELS: Automated “Adaptive Content”Web Based E-learning System For Teaching AI

Prof. Dr. Abdul Hamid M. Ragab & Abubakr Salim Bajnaid

King AbdulAziz University

Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

[email protected], [email protected]

AbstractNowadays, web-based education is reaching a large number of learners through the internet. It poses a valuable advantage over traditional classroom teaching. Recently however, many researchers agree on the fact that learning materials shouldn’t just reflect the teacher’s style only, but they should also be designed to satisfy learning needs for all kinds of students and all kind of learning styles. This process still raises, some problems need to be solved, among which matching suitable teaching contents with the student's learning style. In this paper, we propose a design and implementation of an Automated Adaptive Content Web based E-Learning System (AACWELS) for teaching AI subjects. The system uses an adaptive course content taxonomy based on a modified Felder's questionnaire depending on the learning styles properties used by Honey and Mumford. The proposed model tends to pursue adaptation according to obtained user profile. The lesson content is tailored to individual users, taking into consideration a specific learning style and subject matter learning motivation. These guidelines are based on pedagogical strategy and motivation factor with a strong psychological background. A demonstration of this system is available at the site http://www.aicurriculum.org. System performance results show that the system is scalable, and students are able to learn and to efficiently improve their learning process with such methodology, hence improving their learning gain.

1 Introduction

In this section we investigate several types of adaptive eLearning systems based on learning styles. Then, we discuss the methodologies used to allocate course contents using such systems, and compare these methods with our proposed system.

1.1 Adaptive systems based on Learning Styles

In order to provide adaptation features to e-learning environments, the systems itself has to provide adaptive methods for the learning and teaching process. Several educational hypermedia systems that adapt to learning styles have been developed [1-4]. We shall shortly review some of them in the following, grouped by the learning style that they are trying to respond.

The field-dependent (FD) versus the field-independent is a popular learning style, as in the “Adaptive Educational System based on Cognitive Styles”, AES-CS Error: Reference source not found; this division shows similarities (in features and treatment) with the global-sequential dimension of the Felder-Silverman model, as in “Learning Styles Adaptive System”, LSAS Error: Reference source not

1

http://www.aicurriculum.org/

mailto:[email protected]


found and CS388 Error: Reference source not found. FD learners prefer experiences in a global fashion, adhere to structures, learn material with social content best, attend best to material relevant to own experience, require externally defined goals and reinforcements, need organization, be more affected by criticism, use observational approach for concept attainment (learn best by using examples). Adaptive hypermedia (AH) systems respond to these needs by providing navigational support tools (e.g., concept map, graphic path indicator, advanced organizer) understanding the structure of the knowledge domain. In terms of adaptive hypermedia, these techniques fall into the category of adaptive navigation support. FI learners perceive analytically, make specific concept distinctions, little overlap, prefer impersonal orientation, may need explicit training in social skills, are interested in new concepts for their own sake, have self-defined goals and reinforcement, can self-structure situations, are less affected by criticism, use hypothesis-testing approach to attain concepts. AH systems respond with learner control options, allowing arbitrary succession of course material. Some system allow explicit learner directed switch between the two treatments.

Other systems implement strategies corresponding to the different sensory preferences, as in ARTHUR Error: Reference source not found, iWeaver Error: Reference source not found, MANIC Error: Reference source not found, CS388 Error: Reference source not found. The adaptive presentation in AH can switch automatically between textual – (text, hypertext), auditory - (sounds, streaming audio), visual - (streaming video, slideshows, hypermedia) and kinaesthetic preferences (animations, simulations, puzzles).

Other learning styles, such as the sensing-intuitive dimension in the Felder-Silverman scale Error: Reference source not found, are used in Tangow Error: Reference source not found. Sensing learners tend to like learning facts, intuitive learners often prefer discovering possibilities and relationships. Sensors often like solving problems by well-established methods and dislike complications and surprises; intuitors like innovation and dislike repetition. Sensors are more likely than intuitors to resent being tested on material that has not been explicitly covered in class. Sensors tend to be patient with details and good at memorizing facts and doing hands-on (laboratory) work; intuitors may be better at grasping new concepts and are often more comfortable than sensors with abstractions and mathematical formulations. Sensors tend to be more practical and careful than intuitors; intuitors tend to work faster and to be more innovative than sensors. Sensors don't like courses that have no apparent connection to the real world; intuitors don't like "plug-and-chug" courses that involve a lot of memorization and routine calculations. To respond to these types of preferences, teaching strategies involve selection of appropriate meta-data (such as concept attributes of the form ‘example’, ‘activity’, ‘theory’, ‘exercise’) and corresponding AH adaptive presentation.

Kolb’s learning styles are applied, e.g., in INSPIRE Error: Reference source not found. Kolb learning styles model is based on two lines of axis (continuums): to a task - (preferring to do or watch), and to emotional response (preferring to think or feel). The resulting learning styles are: activist (accommodator: doing and feeling preferences, or concrete-active); diverger (diverger: watching and doing, or concrete-reflective); theorist (assimilator: watching and thinking, or abstract-reflective); pragmatist (converger: thinking and doing, or abstract-active). The AH response to these styles is to show different sequences of information, by using adaptive navigational support techniques with link annotation.`

2


The “Adaptive Hypermedia Architecture” AHA! [14], is developed to support an on-line course with some user guidance through conditional (extra) explanations and conditional link hiding. Compared to other adaptive systems like Interbook [15], KBS-Hyperbook [16] and many others AHA! excelled in the area of simplicity.

Many of the systems above assess learning styles via psychometric questionnaires, and thus classify learners into stereotypical groups before the actual learning starts, and no updates are possible. AH actually offers the tools to bypass this problem as we shall see.

The main difference to our approach is that we offer an authoring tool that can build different adaptive strategies corresponding to different learning styles, but is not bound by it. There are no explicit limitations to what exactly the adaptive strategies may represent, or to what subjects and concept structures they can be applied, as shall be seen in the following section. Table 1 summarizes the above existing systems and the learning styles they implement compared with our proposed leaning style based system.

3


Table 1 Learning styles incorporated into adaptive systems.

1.2 Adaptive Learning Systems and course content handling

A free web-course about Hypermedia Structures and Systems is implemented in the Adaptive Hypermedia Architecture (AHA) [14]. The AHA can be used to generate conditional text, to adapt the link structure by link removal, link hiding and link annotation. Preprocessor commands in HTML pages are used by CGI-scripts to filter content fragments of a page and thus enable content adaptation. The same preprocessor technique is used for link adaptation. Some systems assume that all users of the system have the same background. Thus it is a general assumption rather than a background characteristic. In these approaches, content-level adaptation is only done in the AHA system. However, AHA! does not confine the author to using a particular learning style model. The user may specify preferred learning style by selecting the appropriate type from a drop down list.

4


A review of adaptive educational hypermedia systems showed that the systems ELM-ART [23], INTERBOOK [15], and AHA [14], focus on similar aspects. The ELM-ART system and its successors ELM-ART II [24] and INTERBOOK [15] are some of the first adaptive hypermedia systems which are used in the WWW. The KBS system is very similar to the approaches in INTERBOOK and ELM-ART II . The adaptation features, like link adaptation, goals, page sequencing, are present in each of the three systems. However, the implementation strategies to obtain these functionalities vary. Comparing INTERBOOK with KBS, we see a difference in the domain description. INTERBOOK uses a conceptual network of the domain, while KBS uses both conceptual model and knowledge model. Therefore the introduction of slots as used in INTERBOOK is not necessary in KBS, as assumptions about prerequisite and outcome knowledge are based upon the knowledge model.

SIETTE [25] is an example of a Web-based adaptive testing system. The only kind of learning material it possesses is questions. The only thing it can do is to generate an adaptive sequence of questions to assess student's knowledge. Table 2 summarizes these systems and comparison with our proposed one

ILESA[26]: is a Web-based Intelligent Learning Environment for the Simplex Algorithm developed to help teachers in the task of teaching the Simplex Algorithm is described. The domain of the system is algorithmic, and can be included into a special class of instructional domains in which learning is strongly related to problem resolution: exercise based domains. From a pedagogic point of view, the system can be classified in the category of coached problem solving systems. In the development of the system, several subtasks have been accomplished: the expert system to solve linear programming problems, the problem generator, the student model, the diagnosis module and the engine. ILESA also has a dynamic help system, and a web-based interface that is very adequate for the task of teaching. It is capable of proposing problems to each student at the right level of difficulty for his current state of knowledge, to evaluate the student's answer and to decide the next instructional action.

Table 2 shows a comparison between the above common systems and our proposed one. The Adaptive annotation in Table 2 means that the system uses visual cues (i.e.: icons, fonts, colors) to show the type and the educational state of each link. Table3 shows a Comparison between adaptation techniques implemented in these systems.

Table 2 A comparisons between common Adaptive systems and our proposed one.

5


Table 3 A Comparison between adaptation techniques.

2 Learning Style Models

Learning style is a unique way to each student learns[30], most effectively. According to cognitive psychology, learning styles could be briefly defined as personal manners to perceive and process information, and how they interact and respond to educational stimuli. A learning style is described as being: a description of the attitudes and behavior which determine an individual's preferred way of learning. We define the following four learning styles

1. Type 1 (concrete, reflective): A characteristic question of this learning type is "Why?" Type 1 learners respond well to explanations of how course material relates to their experience, their interests, and their future careers. To be effective with Type 1 students, the instructor should function as a motivator.

2. Type 2 (abstract, reflective): A characteristic question of this learning type is "What?" Type 2 learners respond to information presented in an organized, logical fashion and benefit if they have time for reflection. To be effective, the instructor should function as an expert.

6


3. Type 3 (abstract, active): A characteristic question of this learning type is "How?" Type 3 learners respond to having opportunities to work actively on well-defined tasks and to learn by trial-and-error in an environment that allows them to fail safely. To be effective, the instructor should function as a coach, providing guided practice and feedback.

4. Type 4 (concrete, active). A characteristic question of this learning type is "What if?" Type 4 learners like applying course material in new situations to solve real problems. To be effective, the instructor should stay out of the way, maximizing opportunities for the students to discover things for themselves.

Kolb’s experiential learning theory [27] offers a flexible, effective framework for understanding learning and for devising teaching strategies to enhance learning. He named four learning styles: the accommodator, the assimilator, the diverger, and the converger. Felder’s [22] proposes a variation to Kolb’s position, establishing relationships among styles and the ways information is dealt.

Honey and Mumford [20] developed a very popular Learning Styles Questionnaire, which categorized people by their preferred learning styles into:

1- ACTIVISTS: who involve themselves fully and without bias in new learning experiences? They are open-minded, not skeptical, they tend to act first and consider the consequences afterwards…

2- REFLECTORS: who like to stand back and ponder experiences and observe them from many different perspectives? They collect data and prefer to think about it thoroughly before coming to any conclusions…

3- THEORISTS: who adapt and integrate observations into complex but logically sound theories. They think problems through in a vertical, step by step, logical way…

4- PRAGMATISTS: who are keen to try out ideas, theories and techniques to see if they work in practice? They positively search out new ideas and take the first opportunity to experiment with applications. They tend to be impatient with ruminating and open-ended discussions.

Also, Honey and Mumford [20] point out that there is an association between the learning cycle and learning styles as shown in Fig1. Felder and Silverman[11], also proposed a model for learning styles that indicates a person’s predilections on five continua: Sensory/Intuitive, Visual/Verbal, Inductive/Deductive, Active/Reflective, and Sequential/Global. The model divides learning styles into five categories: Active and Reflective Learners, Sensing and Intuitive Learners, Visual and Verbal Learners, Inductive and Deductive Learners, and Sequential and Global Learners

3 Proposed Leaning Style Questionnaire (LSQ) For AI Students

The Learning Style Questionnaire profiles students by their preference for each learning style [31], i.e. strong preference for Activist, moderate preference for Theorist, and low for both Reflector and Pragmatist., Fig.1.

To learn effectively, you need to keep moving around this cycle:

7


Fig.1 Leaning Cycle and Learning styles

1. Experiencing – doing something;2. Reviewing – thinking about what has happened;3. Concluding – drawing some conclusions;4. Planning – deciding what to do in the future.

Completing each stage is important not just for itself, but because it improves learning in the next stage. We used Felder's questionnaire [22] form after we have modified it depending on the properties of each learning style according to Honey and Mumford [20]. Which is short and specific, and it is suitable for the educational purpose that it has been designed for. Table(4) illustrates a comparison between several well known methods and our proposed one. And Fig.2 shows the proposed questionnaire.

Table 4 Comparisons between LSQs

8


Fig. 2 the Questionnaire

4 Proposed Pre-test for AI Students

In the proposed system, each student has to do a pre-test, for answering the questions of the Questionnaire shown in Fig.2. And Fig.3 shows Pre-test operations for determining student's Learning Style. Then, the system analyzes results of this pre-test and chooses the learning style which has the high credits that tell the student tends to learn with this style. The system also displays results to students.

5 Questionnaire’s Assessment

Based on the Index of Learning Styles ( ILS) questionnaire, preferences for learning styles are measured by values between +11 and -11, with steps of +/- 2, for each learning style dimension. Considering values greater than +5 or smaller than -5 as a strong preference for the specific learning style, learners were divided into two groups. The first group consists of learners who have a strong learning style preference for at least one of the three investigated learning style dimensions (N = 39). The second group consists of learners, who have no strong preference for any of the three learning style dimensions (N = 33). After testing whether data are normal distributed, t-test was applied, using a significance level of 0.05, in order to identify whether the learners from these two groups have significant differences in their achievement.

9


Fig.3 Pre-test operations for determining student's Learning Styles.

The evaluation of ILS depends on the balance of output (from 1 to 11) If the student's answers rages from 1-3 then the student is fairly well balanced on the two dimensions of that scale. If the total output of answers rages from 5-7, then the student has a moderate preference for one dimension of the scale and will learn more easily in a teaching environment which favors that dimension. And if the total output of answers rages from 9-11, the student has a very strong preference for one dimension of the scale. You may have real difficulty learning in an environment which does not support that preference. On the other hand, our model's evaluation depends on the evaluation of the answer. For example, if the student chose "A" as an answer for the first question, this gives one point to the Activist pattern. Then we consider the student's type of education in terms of his total number of points. Some questionnaire questions that are available today to determine the student's learning style sometimes lack clarity, which confuse the reader and the targeted questionnaire audience. For that reason we tried to make the questionnaire as clear as possible, in addition to it being suitable for the targeted audience, with great care for not being long or tedious, because most of the questions in the questionnaires cause the reader to lose concentration during answering the questionnaire which affects the reader's answers. For example, Dunn & Dunn questionnaire [18] consists of 118 questions, while our questionnaire consists of 15 questions only. Fig.4 shows the resulted type for the user model/profile.

Fig.4 the resulted type for the user model/profile.

10


6 The Proposed System Structure

Fig. 5 shows the architecture of the proposed system. It consists of several modules that work together to produce an effective e-learning system. These models include: System Administrator, Course Units Manager, Pre-test Statistics Analyzer, Exams Generator, Chatting, News Manager, and Video Player. The System Administrator checks students ID, name and password as a registered user or visitor. The Course Units Manager manages adding and editing chapters and lessons and their order and student's eligibility to browse the lesson or not. The Pre-test Statistics Analyzer checks the questionnaire answers and gives learning styles results online. Exam Generator module chooses a certain number of questions from unlimited multiple choices questions and produces them for a student to answer. Exam Corrector corrects the student answers and gives online marks. Chatting module allows student to communicate together and with teachers. The News Manager module displays the last four news about subject or website on the main screen of system. Finally, the Video Player allows video education materials to be displayed in film format.

The system contains many modules. The main components of the model: pre-test for determining learning style, the chatting, e-mails, online tests and Questions Generator. The model uses the learning styles in order to reach the active adaptivity between all contributing participants of e-learning system.

The main contributing participants of an e-learning system are students (learners), teachers (educators), system developers, administrators, and psychologists. In our system, administrator have to be able to use HTML, PHP, MySQL, FrontPage and FTP. We think that one of the important issues to improve the educational systems is the supporting of personalization of learning goals, study content, learning pathways, navigation, and assessment. As the previous explanation, In traditional or pedagogical education, material to be learned is often transmitted to students by teachers. That is, learning is passive. In active learning, students are much more actively engaged in their own learning while educators take a more guiding role. This approach is thought to promote processing of skills/knowledge to a much deeper level than passive learning. Related terms/concepts include: experiential learning, hands on learning.

The electronic course provides the educational subject to the students according to the learning style which will depend on a specific pre-test consists of 15 questions, Fig2, before giving any lesson or unit. Understanding your learning styles is the first step in improving your 'learning power' and gaining the most from the learning opportunities your encounter.

The final exam consists of many random questions. The students will be given 20 questions on the web site on the basics of the educational subject, this is what we call novice test. If the student passes this exam, he can go to the next exam which is for intermediate, which is consists of 30 questions but more difficult than the first one. After that, if the student passes the second test he can get in the final test which is for advanced. This test consists of 40 more precise questions.

11


Fig5 components of the proposed Adaptive eLearning System

In teaching, e-mail has served as a practical method to deliver actual information to students or to give personal supervision. It has also been used to support national and international communication between schools/universities located far away from each other. Although the basic idea of e-mail is to serve as a tool for dyadic communication, it can also be used in larger collaboration. With the help of mailing lists, a larger group of students can use e-mail in sharing joint documents and in commenting on each other’s work.

Chatting is a place for teachers to discuss and share ways that television and technology can support education. Student can read what other people have already said about several educational topics and add his own statement on the topic or he can post a new query. By chatting, a great new online education forum, offering those who have interest in education related topics an opportunity to share ideas and insights. Chatting module is designed to facilitate communication between all who share the common interest in quality education.

E-Learning uses electronic media to improve teaching and learning. Web-based multimedia presentation is presenting the developed exposition at the most opportune time. Once created, we can offer the web-based multimedia presentations to our students repeatedly. For example, a given student may review a given module several times. Likewise, students lacking the required knowledge are directed to review a presentation on this knowledge area that might have been developed for the prerequisite course. The course designer’s task is sequencing the reusable web-based multimedia presentations for students.

12


7 Proposed Course Content Taxonomy

In order to enhance web-based courses, it is preferred to make the course material richer and more flexible, so that different students can get personalized content, and a personalized order of presentation. Some previous work was done in [32-34]. Fig.6 shows the proposed course content taxonomy used, where design of lesson content is tailored to individual users, taking into consideration specific learning style, analyzing coordination between student's learning style guidelines for preparing learning materials according to different learner's characteristics.

Meeting the needs of the students is the cornerstone of an effective program of "distance education", it is the index by which we judge where the effort that was made reached in this area of progress. An additional advantage of the proposed system is that, it takes up a massive number of teachers and learners efficiently and quickly, since it contains a control panel for administrator to determine rules of the beneficiary with more stability and predictability.

The system also allows the teacher to add chapters and lessons for the curriculum, as it can also add tests for the learned lessons. Moreover it also allows the adding of an unlimited number of questions for the tests to classify the question's level: beginner, intermediate or advanced. It also allows the teacher to edit the personal data for students to make data editing easier and faster. Teachers will use the system to enrich or replace traditionally held lectures, supervise and support students, and simplify everyday tasks like sending announcements, assigning exercises, or grading.

Comparison between the e-learning and the traditional learning, show that, the e-learning will be effective when the methods and techniques used are suitable for the education process, when there is an interaction between the students with each other and when the notes are exchanged between the students and the teacher from time to time, and in the appropriate time. We made sure that the education system includes all of the properties that would achieve these properties. This educational system, in addition to the above, reveals the student's motivation style: Beginner, Intermediate and Advanced.

13


Fig.6 AI Course Curriculum Content Taxonomy

8 System Implementation and Results

The tools which are used to implement the system and web site include: HTML, MS Front Page, Photoshop, Animation, MySQL, and FTP. HTML (Hyper Text Markup Language) is the glue that holds together every web site. MS Front Page to edit HTML tags, PHP is the programming language to deal with server. The Photoshop is used to design website's pages. The Multimedia is used to present some of lesson's files. MySQL is the programming language that used to deal with database. FTP (File Transfer Protocol) is the protocol that conveys the files on website.

The system main screen for the e-learning site contains icons and buttons and the subject news. Those icons and buttons are: Lessons, references, LS determining pre-test, exams with levels, e-mail to contact with administrator, forum, chatting, help and suggestions. The learner login to enter the site as a registered student. The student has to write his name and e-mail as a necessary condition to accept his registration. Fig. 7 shows the pre-test questionnaire screen for determining student's learning style. The learner can't enter the lessons or exams before filling this page. This questionnaire consists of fifteen questions, and every question has two options. Fig. 8 shows screen that displays the student's learning style based on his answers and shows the weights of other styles based on pre-test statistics which are implemented by IF statements.

14


Fig.7 the questionnaire Screen for determining student's learning style.

Fig.8 System Screen for results of LS questionnaire

9 System Performance and Evaluation

9.1 Evaluation Process

Evaluation consists of numerous attributes; however it basically means assessing the effectiveness and possible improvement of a course/curriculum. This can include making sure that the learning process is liked by learners, and learners gained

15


information during this process. And assure that learners are accountable for the information they obtained in the training. And assess learning outcomes, and find and fix quality issues in the training as well as learn how to make training courses and curriculums better in upcoming projects. Each of these reasons can improve the training if fixed. For example, if after the evaluation the training is altered to make sure the training is liked by the learners it can lead to an increase participation in the training, an increase in learner retention, ensuring that it accommodates different learning styles.

Fig. 9 shows the overall proposed system architecture which is built based on the Web technology and its relationship with learners.

To increase the quality of training another critical reason for evaluation is to assess the value of the training. This is essential because training is a part of business. If it is not deemed valuable within the organization, then the amount spent on training is often reduced. Reasons for evaluation in this particular area include adding value to the organization, justifying the investment in training, assessing the effect that the training has on profitability, the impact the training has on employee's work habits, effectiveness and efficiency of the training, assessing the effect of customer satisfaction from the training.

In evaluation learning we are searching for the things:

o Did the students like the training?o Was the training relevant?o Was the time spent by the students well spent?o Did the experience what was intended or something completely different?o Was there a change in behavior due to the training and is the student aware of

the change?The students' attitudes to the website are measured using a visual analogue questionnaire. Without any information about the user, the adaptive system is notable

16


to adapt itself to the user’s characteristics and preferences. The statements in the scale covered issues relating to the students' enjoyment of using the proposed environment.

The questionnaire consists of the following ten statements:1. I enjoyed using the system.2. I think the system made my learning worse.3. I think I would like to use it again.4. Using the website helped me to learn better.5. The website makes learning easier.6. I think there is no any technical problem with using the website. 7. I think I need someone to help me use the website.8. A teacher is more helpful than the website. 9. The website is boring.10. Using the website is not effective as the traditional learning.

With these questions we measured the performance of our model. However, we need to determine the student's learning style first. Some researches [35,36] found that 48% of students sample preferring to process visual information, 36% auditory and 16% preferring kinesthetic and tactile instruction. Finally, the development of instructional systems requires an interactive communication between the student and the tutor. During running of our proposed system on the internet site, we got the numerical results shown in Fig10. When teaching AI subject, results show that, the majority of the students was Activist, while the minority of the students was Pragmatist.

Fig 10: Experimental results of the students' learning styles

9.2 Learning GainSome of the previous work results [37] show that the majority who accept e-learning is 75% accept that e-learning is good as traditional learning, 10% did not accept, while 15% remained undecided. According to Al-Zamil [38], 47.8% of his study sample believed that the material costs to connect into the Internet form e-learning barriers, and 44.4% of the respondents believe that the disadvantage of e-learning is the lack of a professor when he/she is needed.

The use of the t-test in [39] showed that there were no differences between members of the sample which had both genders (males/females), and full-time students interact more with the e-learning than part-time students, and the use of technology such as computer and internet helps to interact with e-learning technology; as the response of students who use computers is higher than the other students who do not use computers. This study reported that 80.2 % of the sample did not agree on the

17


feasibility of e-learning, but in contrast, we find that 40.2% of them agree that the e-learning method is suitable for education and we will prove its successfulness here. The development of instructional systems requires an interactive communication between the student and the tutor. For n = 27 students, we found with our system that: 51.85% of them are activists, 22.22% are reflectors, 22.22% are theorists and 3.71% are pragmatists. Table5 summarizes these results.

Table 5 Experimental results of the students' learning styles

The success of an e-learning system can be considered as an emerging concept of ‘social issues’ and ‘technical issues’ and depends on numerous circumstances. Fig11, Fig.12 show results of the students who learned using traditional method, and who used the proposed eLearning system, respectively, when the students studied the same AI subject. For a comparison between students who are taught using the proposed eLearning system, we found practically that 30% of students achieved the excellent degree, while 20% of students only achieved the excellent degree from those used the traditional learning. And 3% only got low degree from students who taught using the system, compared with 10% of students who used traditional learning.

These results prove that the proposed educational system is successful and has contributed in improving the academic levels of students. As well as it illustrated the importance of the adaptive e-learning system that based on learning styles. Fig.13 shows learners demand to our educational site during the period between January and August 2009. Most access of the site was in April 2009.

18


Fig.11

Fig12

Fig. 13: Results Traditional learning and E-learning

19


9.3 System ScalabilityScalability as defined in [40] is a measure of an application system's ability to cost-effectively provide increased throughput, reduced response time and/or support more users, when hardware resources are added. For example, if the software architecture is not able to use additional resources to increase throughput, the system will not be scalable. We notice from Fig.14 that the system server gives a user more than 30 Mbps in perfect situation. This means that the system can accommodate 100 students at the same time without falling. On August 12, at exactly 9:30 p.m., we asked thirty students to enter the system together to test the availability of the system and we found that the system was fine. Table 6 shows the number of unique visitors into our web educational system site on the internet, and number of visits, and the band width allocated during several months in 2009.

Fig. 14 Impact of changing the number of states.

Table 6 number of unique visitors to the system during year 2009.

20


10 Conclusions

In this paper, a design and implementation of an Automated Adaptive Content Web based E-Learning System (AACWELS) for teaching AI subjects is introduced. The system uses an adaptive course content taxonomy based on a modified Felder's questionnaire depending on the learning style properties used by Honey and Mumford. The system tends to pursue adaptation according to obtained user profile. Lessons content is tailored to individual users, taking into consideration a specific learning style and subject matter learning motivation. System results show that the number of excellent student who used the proposed system is increased to 30%, while failure student is reduced to 3%, while students who used the traditional education method achieves 20% excellent students, and 10% failure students, when students studied the same AI subject . These results prove that student learning gain was raised in comparison with other systems and with traditional learning methods. We also proved practically that the system is scalable and can accommodate about 100 students at the same time without falling.

REFERENCES

[1] Abdul Hamid M. Ragab & Abubakr Salim Bajnaid, An Effective-Adaptive E-learning System Based on Multi-Styles Assessmen, King AbdulAziz University,Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, the 7nth Annual Symposium on Learnining and Technology, Edutainment Effat Univ. 10-11 June 2009

[2] Abdul Hamid M. Ragab, (2005). "A New Adaptive e-learning Multimedia Styles 'Web Based Model' for Teaching Computer Science Subjects", Proceedings of Workshop Means to Implement the Document of Views of Prince Abdullah Bin Abdulaziz on Higher Education, Dept. Of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, King AbdulAziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, 2005.

[3] Abdul Hamid M. Ragab " Multi-Styles Adaptive e-Learning for Teaching & Learning Holy Quran with Quality Services", Accepted for publications in ندوة

أكتوبر - المعاصرة والتقنيات الكريم المنورة 2009القرآن المدينة –

[4] Herman Dwi Surjono,"The Development of an adaptive eLearning System based on learning style Diversity of Visual-Auditory-Kinesthetic", International Seminar on ICT for Education , Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia, 13–14 February, 2009.

[5] E. Triantafillou, A. Promortsis, and E. Georgiadou. (2002). AES-CS: Adaptive Educational System base on cognitive styles. In Proceedings of the AH2002 Workshop, Malagas, Spain, pp. 10-20.[6] LSAS.,http://www.archives.ecs.soton.ac.uk/users/nb99r/intro_short/frame.htm.

[7] Cs388, Carver, C.A., Howard, R.A., and Lavelle, E., Enhancing student learning by incorporating learning styles into adaptive hypermedia.,In Proceedings of ED-MEDIA ’96,World Conf. on Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia,(Boston, USA, 1996), 118-123.

21


[8]Gilbert, J.E. and Han, C.Y. Adapting instruction in search of ‘a significant difference’. Journal of Network and Computer applications, 22, (1999).

[9] C. Wolf. (2004). iWeaver: Towards 'Learning Style'-based e-Learning in Computer Science Education, available online at: http://www3.cti.ac.at/icl/archive/presentation/wolf.pdf.[10] Stern, M. and Woolf, P. Adaptive content in an online lecture system, Proceedings of the International Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Webbased systems (Trento, Italy, 2000), 291-300.[11] Felder, R.M. and Silverman, L.K. 1988. Learning and Teaching Styles in

Engineering Education. Engineering Education. 78, 7 (1988), 674--681.http://chat.carleton.ca/~tblouin/Felder/felder.html. http://virtualschooling.wordpress.com/2009/02/12/using-learning-styles

[12] Rosa María Carro, Estrella Pulido, Pilar Rodríguez, TANGOW: a Tool for Designing Adaptive Web-based Courses.,Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Adaptive Systems and User Modeling on the WWW, wwwis.win.tue.nl/asum99/carro/carro.html

[13] M. Grigoriadou, K. Papanikolaou, H. Kornilakis, and G. Magoulas. (2001). INSPIRE: An Intelligent System for Personalized Instruction in a Remote Enironment. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop Conference on Adaptive Hypertext and Hypermedia, Sonthofen, Germany, pp. 13-24.[14] P. Brusilovsky and C. Peylo. (2001). Adaptive hypermedia. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction, 11, pp. 87-110., also AHA!, http://aha.win.tue.nl.[15]John Eklund and Peter Brusilovsky, InterBook: an Adaptive Tutoring System, Carnegie Mellon University, http://science.uniserve.edu.au/newsletter/vol12/eklund.html.

[16] Karan Sharma, Designing Knowledge Based Systems as Complex Adaptive Systems , http://ai.uga.edu/karan123/AGI_paper.pdf.

[17] D Del Corso, 3DE: AN ENVIRONMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF. LEARNER-CENTERED CUSTOM EDUCATIONAL PACKAGES,2001,ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/7628/20803/00963703.pdf

[18] R. Dunn, and K. Dunn, (1978). Teaching Students through their individual learning styles: A practical approach. Restone, VA: Restone Publishing. [19] P. Honey, and A. Mumford. (2006). Learning Styles Questionnaire, 80-item version. Maidenhead, UK, Peter Honey Publication Ltd.

[20 ]Chris Jackson ,"A programme for all learning styles": the Honey & Mumford learning styles,Feb 2009 www.trainingzone.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi.[21] R. Felder, and J. Spurlin. (2005). Applications, Reliability and Validity of the Index of Learning Styles. Int. J. Engng. Education, Vol. 21, No. 1, pp. 103-112.

22

http://virtualschooling.wordpress.com/2009/02/12/using-learning-styles/

http://chat.carleton.ca/~tblouin/Felder/felder.html

http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/asum99

http://wwwis.win.tue.nl/asum99



http://ai.uga.edu/karan123/AGI_paper.pdf

http://www.trainingzone.co.uk/cgi-bin/item.cgi


[22] R. Felder. (1988). Learning and Teaching Styles in Engineering Education, Engr. Education, 78(7), pp. 674–681. http://www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/Papers/LS-1988.pd.[23] G. Weber, and P. Brusilovsky. (2001). ELM-ART: An Adaptive Versatile System for Web-based Instruction. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education,12, 4, pp.351-384, available online at http://cbl.leeds.ac.uk/ijaied/abstracts/Vol_12/weber.html.[24] T Kubeš ,Overview of Existing Adaptive Hypermedia e-Learning Systems, www.tomaskubes.net/.../kubes-overview_of_existing_adaptive_hypermedia_e-learning_systems.pdf

[25] Ricardo Conejo,etal, SIETTE: A Web–Based Tool for Adaptive Testing,

International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 14 (2004) 1 -33IOS Press, 2004 – IOS Press. [26] J.M. López, E. Millán, J.L. Pérez-de-la-Cruz & F. Triguero, ILESA: aWeb-based Intelligent Learning Environment for the Simplex Algorithm,

http:// citeseer.ist.psu.edu/521998.html ttp://

[27] D. Kolb. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J.[28 ]Doreen J. Gooden ,"An Examination Of Kolb’s Learning Style Inventory", 2009 ABR & TLC Conference Proceedings. Oahu, Hawaii, USA. www.cluteinstitute.com/Programs/Hawaii_2009/

[29 ]Rationale and Strategies for Using Kolb Learning Style Theory:, March, 2009 , https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php.

[30] S Visser ,Teaching Styles versus Learninig Styles: a Comparative Analysis,www.wmin.ac.puk/pdf/ - 2006

[31] C. Froschl. (2006). 'User Modeling and User Profiling in Adaptive E-learning Systems: An approach for a service-based personalization solution for the research project AdeLE (Adaptive e-Learning with Eye-Tracking)', Institute for Information Systems and Computer Media (IICM), Faculty of Computer Science, Graz University of Technology, Graz University of Technology. [32] M. Stern, and P. Woolf. (2000). Adaptive content in an online lecture system. In Proceedings of the international Conference on Adaptive Hypermedia and Adaptive Web-based systems, Trento, Italy, pp. 291-300[33] P. Paredes, and P. Rodrigues. (2002). Considering sensing-intuitive dimension to exposition-exemplification in Adaptive Sequensing. In Proceedings of the AH2002 Conference, Malaga, Spain, pp.556-559[34] D. Milosevic, M. Brkovic, and D. Bjekic. Designing lesson content in adaptive learning environment. In Proceedings of Conference IMCL2006, Amman, Jordan, 19-21 April, 2006.[35] H. Surjono. (2009)."The Development of an adaptive eLearning System based on learning style Diversity of Visual-Auditory-Kinesthetic", International Seminar on ICT for Education , Yogyakarta State University, Indonesia, 13–14 February, 2009.

23

http://www.tomaskubes.net/eat/download/kubes-overview_of_existing_adaptive_hypermedia_e-learning_systems.pdf

http://www.cluteinstitute.com/Programs/Hawaii_2009/Article%20256.pdf

https://www.novapublishers.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=4879


[36] Alexandra I. CRISTEA, A Teaching & Learning Framework for E-Learning Systems: Application of Learning & Perceptual Styles, wwwis.win.tue.nl/ ~acristea/ WBE/416-024omg.pdf

[37] Vitalis Ndume, CHALLENGES OF ADAPTIVE ELEARNING AT HIGHERLEARNING INSTITUTIONS: A CASE STUDY IN TANZANIA, University of Dar Es Salaam, http://ijcir.org/volume2-number1/article6.pdf.

[38]Z-Alzamil,العربية بالمملكة العالي التعليم مؤسسات بعض في اإللكتروني التعليم تجربة تقييم

بالرياض، التقنية الكلية الحاسب، تقنية قسم الطالب، نظر وجهة من السعودية[email protected]

[39] Student's t-test, of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student's_t-test, 2009.

[40] L. G. Williams, and C. U. Smith. (2005). QSEM: Quantitative Scalability Evaluation Method, Proceeding of the Computer Measurement Group, Las Vegas.

24

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student's_t-test

http://ijcir.org/volume2-number1/article6.pdf

kau.edu.sakau.edu.sa/files/0052480/researches/55851_26160.docx · web viewprof. dr. abdul hamid...

Documents