Developing Prognosis Tools to Identify Learning Difficulties in Children Using Machine Learning Technologies
Cognitive Computation - 2010
Tóm tắt
The Mental Attributes Profiling System was developed in 2002 (Laouris and Makris, Proceedings of multilingual & cross-cultural perspectives on Dyslexia, Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, D.C, 2002), to provide a multimodal evaluation of the learning potential and abilities of young children’s brains. The method is based on the assessment of non-verbal abilities using video-like interfaces and was compared to more established methodologies in (Papadopoulos, Laouris, Makris, Proceedings of IDA 54th annual conference, San Diego, 2003), such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (Watkins et al., Psychol Sch 34(4):309–319, 1997). To do so, various tests have been applied to a population of 134 children aged 7–12 years old. This paper addresses the issue of identifying a minimal set of variables that are able to accurately predict the learning abilities of a given child. The use of Machine Learning technologies to do this provides the advantage of making no prior assumptions about the nature of the data and eliminating natural bias associated with data processing carried out by humans. Kohonen’s Self Organising Maps (Kohonen, Biol Cybern 43:59–69, 1982) algorithm is able to split a population into groups based on large and complex sets of observations. Once the population is split, the individual groups can then be probed for their defining characteristics providing insight into the rationale of the split. The characteristics identified form the basis of classification systems that are able to accurately predict which group an individual will belong to, using only a small subset of the tests available. The specifics of this methodology are detailed herein, and the resulting classification systems provide an effective tool to prognose the learning abilities of new subjects.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Laouris Y, Makris P. M.A.P.S. mental attributes profiling system computerized battery for dyslexia assessment. Proceedings of multilingual & cross-cultural perspectives on Dyslexia, Omni Shoreham Hotel, Washington, D.C.; 2002.
Papadopoulos TC, Laouris Y, Makris P. The validation of a computerised cognitive battery of tests for the diagnosis of children with dyslexia. Proceedings of IDA 54th annual conference, San Diego; 2003.
Watkins MW, Kush J, Glutting JJ. Discriminant and predictive validity of the WISC–III ACID profile among children with learning disabilities. Psychol Sch. 1997;34(4):309–19.
Kohonen T. Self-organized formation of topologically correct feature maps. Biol Cybern. 1982;43:59–69.
Lerner JW (2000) Learning disabilities: theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies. Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
Dekker GW, Pechenizkiy M, Vleeshouwers JM. Predicting students drop out: a case study. Proceedings of 2nd international conference on Educational Data Mining, Cordoba, Spain; 2009. p. 41–50.
Nugent R, Ayers E, Dean N. Conditional subspace clustering of skill mastery: identifying skills that separate students. Proceedings of 2nd international conference on Educational Data Mining, Cordoba, Spain; 2009. p. 101–10.
Romero C, Ventura S, Espejo PG, Hervas C. Data mining algorithms to classify students. Proceedings of 1st international conference on Educational Data Mining, Montreal, Canada; 2008. p. 8–17.
Gong Y, Rai D, Beck J, Heffernan N. Does self-discipline impact students knowledge and learning? Proceedings of 2nd international conference on Educational Data Mining, Cordoba, Spain; 2009. p. 61–70.
Mavrikis M. Data-driven modelling of students’ interactions in an ILE. Proceedings of 1st international conference on Educational Data Mining, Montreal, Canada; 2008. p. 87–96.
Feng M, Heffernan N, Beck J, Koedinger K. Can we predict which groups of questions students will learn from? Proceedings of 1st international conference on Educational Data Mining, Montreal, Canada; 2008. p. 218-225.
Cho K. Machine classification of peer comments in physics. Proceedings of 1st International Conference on Educational Data Mining, Montreal, Canada; 2008. p. 192–196.
Wimmer H, Mayringer H, Landerl K. The double deficit hypothesis and difficulties in learning to read a regular orthography. J Educ Psychol. 2002;92:668–80.
Woodcock RW. Woodcock reading mastery tests Revised NU: examiner’s manual. American Guidance Service, Circle Pines; 1998.
Laouris Y, Papadopoullos T, Makris P. Validation of MAPS in 16 schools; computer-based battery of 8 mental attributes tests (in preparation).
Piaget J. Judgement and reasoning of the child. Paul Kegan, London; 1928.
Aristodemou E, Taraszow T, Laouris Y, Papadopoulos T, Makris P. Prediction of reading performance using the MAPS (Mental Attributes Profiling System) multimodal interactive ICT application (in preparation).
Wechsler D. The Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children. Psychological Corp, New York; 1949.
Brannigan GG, Rosenberg LA, Loprete LJ, Calnen T. Scoring of WISC-R comprehension, similarities, and vocabulary responses by experienced and inexperienced judges. Psychology in the schools 14, 430. Wiley, New York; 1977.
Papadopoulos TC. Phonological and cognitive correlates of word-reading acquisition under two different instructional approaches. Eur J Psychol Educ. 2001;26:549–68
Papadopoulos TC, Charalambous A, Kanari A, Loizou M. Kindergarten intervention for dyslexia: the PREP remediation in Greek. Eur J Psychol Educ. 2004;19:79–105
Pearson K. On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Philos Mag. 1901;2(6):559–72
Domingos P, Pazzani M. On the optimality of the simple Bayesian classifier under zero-one loss. Mach Learn. 1997;29:103–37