References
[7] Feng, M., Heffernan, N.T., & Koedinger, K.R. (2006b). Predicting state test scores better with
intelligent tutoring systems: developing metrics to measure assistance required. In Ikeda, Ashley & Chan
(Eds.). Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. SpringerVerlag: Berlin. pp. 31-40. 2006.
[456] Razzaq, L., Heffernan, N.T. (2006). Scaffolding vs. hints in the Assistment
System. In Ikeda, Ashley & Chan (Eds.). Proceedings of the 8th International
Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer-Verlag: Berlin. pp. 635-644. 2006.
[1] Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
[2] Murray, T. (1999). Authoring intelligent tutoring systems: An analysis of the state of the art.
International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, pp. 98-129.
Murray [2] said “A very rough estimate of 300 hours of development time per hour of online instruction is commonly used for the development time of traditional CAI.” While building
intelligent tutors systems is generally much harder. Anderson [1] suggested it took at least 200:1 to
build the Cogntive Tutor at CMU so we choose this as our comparison ratio.
[673] Heffernan N.T., Turner T.E., Lourenco A.L.N., Macasek M.A., Nuzzo-Jones G.,
Koedinger K.R., (2006) The ASSISTment Builder: Towards an Analysis of Cost
Effectiveness of ITS creation. FLAIRS2006, Florida, USA.
Our system begins though the “Portal” that manages all activies in the system. Teacher
get accounts that allow them to do many things including managing their class rosters,
getting reports on student, and creating new content, using the Builder, for their classes.
Figure 1 shows an example of the Builder as well as the a screen shot of what the student
sees. See [673] for a complete description of the builder tool.
from the student perspective