The system correctly diagnosed 50% of verbal learners and 75% of active learners, which the authors call promising compared to prior studies¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r1 · q2
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 2017: tool and model accuracy changes quickly

Subclaims¶

q2 i? The student modeling system correctly diagnosed 50% of verbal learners and 75% of active learners; previous studies had no correct diagnosis for these styles. → Aslan et al. 2014

Evidence¶

Aslan et al. 2014¶

Burak Galip Aslan, Özlem Öztürk, Mustafa Murat İnceoğlu. (2014). Effect of Bayesian Student Modeling on Academic Achievement in Foreign Language Teaching (University Level English Preparatory School Example). Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, 14(3). https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2014.3.1587

q2 · i? · causal · r1

Authors' comparison of their diagnosis rates with prior studies in the Discussion, using the Garcia et al. (2007) criteria. The percentages are printed; no effect size is reported.

"The student modeling system was able to diagnose 50% of the verbal learners and 75% of the active learners. There has not been any correct diagnosis for verbal and active learners in previous studies."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The Bayesian student modeling system diagnosed learning styles at 41% on the visual/verbal dimension and 54% on the active/reflective dimension — related
• Learning-styles-based adaptive tutoring did not increase academic achievement relative to conventional computer-based tutoring in EFL