USRE39435E1 - Learning system with learner-constructed response based methodology - Google Patents
Learning system with learner-constructed response based methodology Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- USRE39435E1 USRE39435E1 US10/653,748 US65374803A USRE39435E US RE39435 E1 USRE39435 E1 US RE39435E1 US 65374803 A US65374803 A US 65374803A US RE39435 E USRE39435 E US RE39435E
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- learner
- presenting
- display
- constructed response
- storage medium
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Expired - Lifetime, expires
Links
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G09—EDUCATION; CRYPTOGRAPHY; DISPLAY; ADVERTISING; SEALS
- G09B—EDUCATIONAL OR DEMONSTRATION APPLIANCES; APPLIANCES FOR TEACHING, OR COMMUNICATING WITH, THE BLIND, DEAF OR MUTE; MODELS; PLANETARIA; GLOBES; MAPS; DIAGRAMS
- G09B7/00—Electrically-operated teaching apparatus or devices working with questions and answers
- G09B7/02—Electrically-operated teaching apparatus or devices working with questions and answers of the type wherein the student is expected to construct an answer to the question which is presented or wherein the machine gives an answer to the question presented by a student
- G09B7/04—Electrically-operated teaching apparatus or devices working with questions and answers of the type wherein the student is expected to construct an answer to the question which is presented or wherein the machine gives an answer to the question presented by a student characterised by modifying the teaching programme in response to a wrong answer, e.g. repeating the question, supplying a further explanation
Definitions
- test results thus are not necessarily indicative of actual knowledge.
- Evaluation of responses involves identification of pre-defined keyword data pertaining to the subject matter being tested. Examples include passages of text with important keywords (keywords being defined herein to include one or more words, or phases, or related words and phases, or synonyms). Multiple choice questions may also include keywords, such that after the learner completes a sequence of reading material or any kind of current multiple-choice, mix or match, true false questions, the learner is prompted to enter answers to “fill-in-the-blank” or “verbal narrative” questions (a learner-constructed response). The learner entered responses are compared to standard solutions recorded on the system and remedial actions are provided.
- FIGS. 3A and 3B are flow charts illustrating processes of the learning methodology.
- the reference numeral 10 refers to a system for implementing a training methodology of the present invention, described in detail below.
- the system 10 includes a computer 12 , having a processor 14 and a memory 16 .
- the computer 12 may comprise a personal or desktop computer, a television, a handheld device, or any other suitable electronic device.
- a display 18 and audio output 20 are connected to the computer.
- Inputs include a user keyboard 22 , a mouse 24 , or other suitable devices. The inputs are used for various purposes such as entering information initiated by the user, interacting with a software application running on the computer, etc.
- a disc input 26 is provided for providing programming or content for operation on the system 10 , it being understood that any suitable media may be contemplated.
- the presentation information component 28 contains information for presenting the question, and may also include additional instructions, help information and an avenue for capturing learner-constructed responses (e.g., a text area or a record button for voice input).
- the evaluation information component 30 may include a sequence of phrases and, in one embodiment, these may take the form of standard HTML tags for the display of question information and a sequence of proprietary tags for the encoding of expected key-words or phrases under the “META-DATA” tag in HTML.
- keywords may describe one or more words or phrases that express the gist or main concepts of the topic under discussion, or the main concepts of a training session to be conveyed to the learners. Keywords may comprise one word, phrases, multiple associated words, synonyms and/or related phrases. For example, keywords may be organized as an n-tuple of consisting of one main word or phrase, followed by associated synonyms and related phrases. Keywords in the component 44 as illustrated in the example of FIG. 2B that correspond to the target knowledge component 42 are empathy, understanding customer needs, relating to customer requirements. It is understood that the authors of “content” for the system 10 will supply the target knowledge for the presentation information component 30 , corresponding to each passage or item to be tested in the component 28 . It is understood that the target knowledge of the component 28 may be expressed as text passages, graphics, video, or multiple choice questions, or in some other fashion.
- the system 10 provides a learning methodology that improves the speed and retention of learning, and furthermore provides improved accuracy in assessment of the learner.
- a learner-constructed response in which the learner must use his or her own words in answering a question, greater assurance is provided that the learner indeed knows the subject matter.
- the system allows for refinement of the testing as the learner gets closer to accurate responses, as enabled by the construction of a key word component associated with the target knowledge component, as enabled by the evaluation process.
Abstract
A methodology in which a learner-constructed response is provided in answer to a question presented by the system, the response being evaluated by comparison with pre-defined expected responses and, based upon the evaluation, the system determining whether to proceed to another question or to offer remedial feedback. Such a learner-constructed response based evaluation methodology greatly reduces the potential for “guess-work” based correct responses and improves the training process through remedial feedback and advancement upon demonstration of knowledge.
Description
This invention relates to systems and methods for personnel training and, more particularly, to supervised or self-administered computer-based training systems that incorporate a learner-constructed response based testing methodology for improved evaluation of knowledge acquisition.
A variety of systems are available for automated learning and training using computers or other personal electronic devices. In current computer mediated learning and training systems, assessment of the “knowledge” gained by the user is carried out by, for example, true/false questions, matching (paired-associate) type questions, multiple choice questions, and marking questions. A multiple choice question differs from a marking question in that a multiple choice question has one correct answer, while a marking question has multiple correct answers. The foregoing question formats are not fully effective as learning aids, not are they reliable in assessing actual knowledge, for various reasons. For example, in a true/false question, a learner has a fifty-fifty chance of answering correctly by guessing; in a four way multiple choice question, the probability of a correct answer through guessing is twenty five percent. Test results thus are not necessarily indicative of actual knowledge.
What is needed, therefore, is a methodology for use in computer based training that provides for improved learning, improved efficiency, and improved reliability in the assessment of a user's actual knowledge of subject matter.
This invention provides a methodology in which a learner-constructed response is provided in answer to a question presented by the system, the response being evaluated by comparison with pre-defined expected responses and, based upon the evaluation, the system determining whether to proceed to another question or to offer remedial feedback. Such a learner-constructed response based evaluation methodology greatly reduces the potential for “guess-work” based correct responses and improves the training process through remedial feedback and advancement upon demonstration of knowledge.
Evaluation of responses involves identification of pre-defined keyword data pertaining to the subject matter being tested. Examples include passages of text with important keywords (keywords being defined herein to include one or more words, or phases, or related words and phases, or synonyms). Multiple choice questions may also include keywords, such that after the learner completes a sequence of reading material or any kind of current multiple-choice, mix or match, true false questions, the learner is prompted to enter answers to “fill-in-the-blank” or “verbal narrative” questions (a learner-constructed response). The learner entered responses are compared to standard solutions recorded on the system and remedial actions are provided.
The methodology may be used in a specially designed training system or in cooperation with existing computer based training systems. For every “choice” based question (e.g., multiple choice), for example, the methodology may prompt for a “user-constructed response” based upon a question that has associated with it all acceptable correct user-constructed responses to this question, the presentation to the learner being designed to include an area or mechanism for capturing a learner response either in the form of text or spoken words. The correct response is recognized if the response matches the keyword(s), e.g., primary/related keyword(s) or phrase(s) and/or synonym(s).
In one implementation, a computer program is provided for implementing a learning system with a learner-constructed response based methodology, the program including a presentation process for presenting at least one knowledge topic to the learner and for prompting the learner to enter a learner constructed response thereto; an evaluation information process for providing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topic; and an evaluation process for determining, based upon entry of a learner-constructed response to the knowledge topic, success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by comparison of the learner-constructed response with the keyword data.
In FIG. 1 , the reference numeral 10 refers to a system for implementing a training methodology of the present invention, described in detail below. The system 10 includes a computer 12, having a processor 14 and a memory 16. It is understood that the computer 12 may comprise a personal or desktop computer, a television, a handheld device, or any other suitable electronic device. A display 18 and audio output 20 are connected to the computer. Inputs include a user keyboard 22, a mouse 24, or other suitable devices. The inputs are used for various purposes such as entering information initiated by the user, interacting with a software application running on the computer, etc. A disc input 26 is provided for providing programming or content for operation on the system 10, it being understood that any suitable media may be contemplated.
Programming, as discussed in detail below for implementing the present learning methodology, is stored on disc input 26 and/or memory 16 and is executed by the system 10. The learning methodology preferably is practiced using the foregoing system components, although it may be practiced with alternative components.
The presentation information component 28 contains information for presenting the question, and may also include additional instructions, help information and an avenue for capturing learner-constructed responses (e.g., a text area or a record button for voice input). The evaluation information component 30 may include a sequence of phrases and, in one embodiment, these may take the form of standard HTML tags for the display of question information and a sequence of proprietary tags for the encoding of expected key-words or phrases under the “META-DATA” tag in HTML.
Referring to FIGS. 2A and 2B , in one example the presentation information information 28 includes a target knowledge component 42 comprising subject matter content for presentation (e.g., display) to a learner. As illustrated, example content may comprise a lesson on important sales techniques, to be presented in any variety of ways to the learner (e.g., text, video, graphics, sound). The evaluation information component 30 includes keywords that may include one or more primary keywords and/or phrases, related keywords and/or phrases, and/or synonyms. The keywords may also be formatted to identify negative constructs (wrong answers) and flag them. In the example of FIG. 2B , the evaluation information component includes keyword component 44 as an associated set of words relevant to the target knowledge component 42. For example, keywords may describe one or more words or phrases that express the gist or main concepts of the topic under discussion, or the main concepts of a training session to be conveyed to the learners. Keywords may comprise one word, phrases, multiple associated words, synonyms and/or related phrases. For example, keywords may be organized as an n-tuple of consisting of one main word or phrase, followed by associated synonyms and related phrases. Keywords in the component 44 as illustrated in the example of FIG. 2B that correspond to the target knowledge component 42 are empathy, understanding customer needs, relating to customer requirements. It is understood that the authors of “content” for the system 10 will supply the target knowledge for the presentation information component 30, corresponding to each passage or item to be tested in the component 28. It is understood that the target knowledge of the component 28 may be expressed as text passages, graphics, video, or multiple choice questions, or in some other fashion.
The program 34 enables creation of the components 42, 44 for a desired training session. During the creation of the training “content” the authors are prompted to create different key-words and phrases that best describe the “gist” of the content or embody the essence of the knowledge topic under discussion. These key-words and phrases are utilized for the construction of questions. These key-words may also be analyzed to produce additional key-words, phrases or synonyms, and identify negative constructs (wrong answers).
Referring to FIG. 2C , illustrated are example question formats 46 and 48. Once the target knowledge component 42 is presented to the learner, a series of test questions may be provided to the learner. It is also understood that the target knowledge component 42 may itself take the form of multiple choice or other question or question/answer formats. As illustrated by the question format 48, eventually the learner will be presented with a question format that requires the learner to construct a response to a question about the target knowledge in which the learner must construct the target knowledge in his or her own words. The example illustrated is the format 48 in which the learner is prompted to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question. Other scenarios are similarly envisioned in which the learner must express an answer (audibly or in writing) in his or her own word or words. As described below, the learner's words are evaluated by the system 10 to determine whether remediation, further testing, or advancement to new material is appropriate.
Referring to the process 300, in step 302 the learner is prompted to construct the target knowledge (presented previously, as described above) in his or her own words. One example of the prompt is the fill-in-the-blank format 48, above. In step 304, if the learner's response is verbal, the speech is converted into text data. After the learner's response has been fully entered, a comparison can be triggered automatically in a predetermined manner. For example, the learner can hit a particular key on the keyboard (e.g., an “Enter” key) or activate a particular area on the display screen to start the comparison. In step 306, the comparison is performed of the learner's response with the pre-defined key word data contained in the evaluation information component 30 (FIG. 2A). The comparison may involve a variety of analyses. For example, the comparison may:
(1) check for and correct spelling mistakes in the learner-constructed responses;
(2) determine whether the correct key word (words, phrases) appear in the learner-constructed response;
(3) determine whether synonyms of missing key word(s) appear in the learner-constructed response;
(4) determine whether related phrases that convey the same meaning as the expected key word(s) or phrases appear in the learner-constructed response;
(5) determine whether there are any incorrect key word(s) or phrases in the learner-constructed response or other negative constructs that might indicate a wrong answer.
A variety of logic selections for evaluation are contemplated. In one example, for purposes of improved learning and expediting the testing, a decision is made in step 308 of whether the learner response fails a lexical analysis (described more fully in FIG. 3B), thereby indicating a possible wrong answer or misunderstanding. If yes, then in step 310 the methodology prompts the user for a positive construct. If not, in step 312 a determination is made whether or not expected keyword(s) are found in the response, albeit not necessarily in the exact way or phraseology preferred. If yes, then the methodology proceeds to step 314 and provides a success message to the evaluation control program and execution returns to the program for testing of other target knowledge topics. If not, then in step 316 a determination is made whether expected related phrase(s) are found in the learner's response (thus indicating a correct or partially correct answer). If yes, execution proceeds to step 314. If not, in step 318 a determination is made whether expected synonym(s) appear in the learner response, thereby indicating a correct or partially correct answer. If yes, execution proceeds to step 314. If not, the methodology proceeds to step 320. In step 320, a “failure” message is sent to the evaluation control program 34.
Possible scenarios of a “failure” message to the evaluation control program 34 are that the evaluation control program may:
(1) Proceed to other questions and come back to the question upon which failure is indicated, until a satisfactory answer is received.
(2) Offer remedial questions or target information;
(3) Re-evaluate the learner with a focus on the missed part of the current topic.
Possible scenarios of a “success” message to the evaluation control program 34 are that the evaluation control program may:
(1) Discontinue further questioning on the target knowledge subject;
(2) Question the learner on the target knowledge again or in a different way to confirm understanding.
Referring to FIG. 3B , a lexical pre-processing algorithm 308 (described generally in FIG. 3A ) is provided that eliminates negative, conjunctive, and non-definitive language constructs in user-constructed responses. In step 322, a user-constructed response is parsed and scanned for pre-defined language constructs.
In step 324, if the response contains negative constructs, the learner is prompted in step 326 for alternative responses. For example, if the learner types “no empathy” or “not empathy” or “don't XXX” or “can't YYY” a parsing algorithm that looks for “empathy” or “XXX” or “YYY” will normally flag this as correct even though the negative construct makes the meaning totally different. Accordingly, step 324 determines that the answer with the negative construct is incorrect and proceeds to step 326.
If in step 324 there are no negative constructs, in step 328 a determination is made whether the user-constructed response contains a “conjunctive” construct and, if so, in step 330 prompts the learner for a single response. As an example, if “and” or “hut” or “or” are included in the answer, to indicate a possible guess or two possible answers, step 328 determines that the user-constructed responses is not correct and prompts the learner in step 330.
If in step 328 there are no conjunctive constructs, a determination in step 332 whether there are non-definite constructs, and if so, prompts the learner for a definite response. Example non-definite constructs include, e.g., “maybe” or “perhaps.”
If in step 332 there are no non-definite constructs, in step 336 execution proceeds to the next phase of the analysis, as further described in step 312 of FIG. 3A (described above).
It is noted that at any given moment during the execution of the above mentioned learning methodology, various information pertaining to the training session or the performance of the learner is collected by the system 10 for different purposes. In one specific case, at the end of a training session, the collected information gives an in-depth view of how well the learner has been trained. The collected information can be analyzed to generate various reports to be delivered to a predetermined interested party. For instance, the analyzed information will help to identify comparative difficulties of different materials or subjects covered in the training session, or provide information on how the learner has performed on a per question basis, etc. A statistical analysis and report can also be generated in a similar fashion based on the performances of a group of learners with regard to the training session. Therefore, the interested party can evaluate the performance of a group of learners to make various decisions such as to determine whether the training session should be revised, or whether the group of learners can be profiled in a certain manner.
In summary, the system 10 provides a learning methodology that improves the speed and retention of learning, and furthermore provides improved accuracy in assessment of the learner. By requiring, perhaps in addition to traditional multiple choice or other testing techniques, a learner-constructed response in which the learner must use his or her own words in answering a question, greater assurance is provided that the learner indeed knows the subject matter. Also, the system allows for refinement of the testing as the learner gets closer to accurate responses, as enabled by the construction of a key word component associated with the target knowledge component, as enabled by the evaluation process.
Although illustrative embodiments of the invention have been shown and described, other modifications, changes, and substitutions are intended in the foregoing disclosure. Accordingly, it is appropriate that the appended claims be constructed broadly and in a manner consistent with the scope of the invention.
Claims (174)
1. A computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, the computer program for execution by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the computer program for implementing a learning system with a learner-constructed response based methodology, comprising:
a presentation process for presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, at least one knowledge topic to the learner and for prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response thereto;
a displaying process for presenting on the display, using the graphical user interface, the learner-constructed response;
an evaluation information process for providing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topic; and
an evaluation process for determining, based upon entry of a learner-constructed response to the knowledge topic, success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by comparison of the learner-constructed response with the keyword data wherein upon a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner before the learner is prompted to enter another learner-constructed response.
2. The program of claim 1 wherein the comparsion comprises a determination of whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response, the keyword data comprising at least one synonym.
3. A method for implementing an automated learning system, the method performed by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the method comprising:
presenting at least one knowledge topic on the display, using a graphical user interface, to the learnerand for ;
prompting the learner to enter a learner constructed learner-constructed response thereto;
presenting on the display, using the graphical user interface, the learner-constructed response;
comparing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topic with the learner-constructed response; and
determining success of failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response, wherein upon a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner before the learner is prompted to enter another learner-constructed response.
4. A method for implementing an automated learning system, the method performed by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the method comprising:
presenting a series of knowledge topics on the display, using a graphical user interface, to the learner; and
prompting the learner to enter a learner constructed learner-constructed response to each topic;
presenting on the display, using the graphical user interface, the learner-constructed responses;
comparing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topics with the learner-constructed responses; and
determining success or failure of the learner to know each of the knowledge topics, the success or failure being determined by whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response;
upon a determination of failure of the learner, providing remedial information to the learner and again prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response;
upon a determination of success of the learner, discontinuing presentation and prompting of the learner regarding the particular knowledge topic;
whereupon automated presentation of the series is completed when success is determined for each knowledge topic.
5. The method of claim 4 wherein the comparing comprises a determination of whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response, the keyword data comprising at least one exact keyword.
6. The method of claim 4 wherein the comparing comprises a determination of whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response, the keyword data comprising at least one exact phrase.
7. The method of claim 4 wherein the comparing comprises a determination of whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response, the keyword data comprising at least one synonym.
8. The method of claim 4 wherein the comparing comprises a determination of whether or not the learner-constructed response fails a lexical analysis.
9. The method of claim 4 further comprising:
collecting information regarding a performance of at least one learner during the presentation process, the evaluation information process and the evaluation process;
analyzing the collected information; and
generating a report based on the analyzed information for at least one predetermined party.
10. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
11. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
12. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
13. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
14. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting text.
15. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting graphics.
16. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting video.
17. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a desktop computer display.
18. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a television display.
19. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a hand-held display.
20. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
21. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
22. The computer readable storage medium of claim 1 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
23. The method of claim 3 , wherein the prompting includes prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
24. The method of claim 3 , wherein the prompting includes utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
25. The method of claim 3 , wherein the comparing includes comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
26. The method of claim 3 , wherein the comparing includes comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
27. The method of claim 3 , wherein the presenting at least one knowledge topic includes presenting text.
28. The method of claim 3 , wherein the presenting one knowledge topic includes presenting graphics.
29. The method of claim 3 , wherein the presenting one knowledge topic includes presenting video.
30. The method of claim 3 , wherein the presenting one knowledge topic includes presenting on a desktop computer display.
31. The method of claim 3 , wherein the presenting one knowledge topic includes presenting on a television display.
32. The method of claim 3 , wherein the presenting one knowledge topic includes presenting on a hand-held display.
33. The method of claim 3 , wherein the presenting one knowledge topic includes presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
34. The method of claim 3 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
35. The method of claim 3 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
36. The method of claim 4 , wherein the prompting includes prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
37. The method of claim 4 , wherein the prompting includes utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
38. The method of claim 4 , wherein the comparing includes comparing at least one learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
39. The method of claim 4 , wherein the comparing includes comparing at least one learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
40. The method of claim 4 , wherein the presenting a series of knowledge topics includes presenting text.
41. The method of claim 4 , wherein the presenting a series of knowledge topics includes presenting graphics.
42. The method of claim 4 , wherein the presenting a series of knowledge topics includes presenting video.
43. The method of claim 4 , wherein the presenting a series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a desktop computer display.
44. The method of claim 4 , wherein the presenting a series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a television display.
45. The method of claim 4 , wherein the presenting a series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a hand-held display.
46. The method of claim 4 , wherein the presenting a series of knowledge topics includes presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
47. The method of claim 4 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
48. The method of claim 4 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
49. A computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, the computer program for execution by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the computer program for implementing a learning system with a learner-constructed response based methodology, comprising:
a presentation process for presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, at least one knowledge topic to the learner and for prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response thereto;
a displaying process for presenting on the display, using the graphical user interface, the learner-constructed response;
an evaluation information process for providing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topic; and
an evaluation process for determining, based upon entry of the learner-constructed response to the knowledge topic, success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by comparison of the learner-constructed response with the keyword data wherein after a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner, after which the learner is prompted to enter another learner-constructed response.
50. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
51. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
52. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
53. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
54. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting text.
55. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting graphics.
56. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting video.
57. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a desktop computer display.
58. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a television display.
59. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a hand-held display.
60. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
61. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
62. The computer readable storage medium of claim 49 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
63. A computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, the computer program for execution by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the computer program for implementing a learning system with a learner-constructed response based methodology, comprising:
a presentation process for presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, at least one knowledge topic to the learner and for prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response to one of the at least one knowledge topic;
a displaying process for presenting on the display, using the graphical user interface, the learner-constructed response;
an evaluation information process for providing keyword data that corresponds to the one of the at least one knowledge topic; and
an evaluation process for determining, based upon entry of the learner-constructed response to the knowledge topic, success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by comparison of the learner-constructed response with the keyword data, wherein upon a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner after the learner is prompted to enter the learner-constructed response.
64. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
65. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
66. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
67. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
68. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting text.
69. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting graphics.
70. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting video.
71. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a desktop computer display.
72. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a television display.
73. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a hand-held display.
74. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
75. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
76. The computer readable storage medium of claim 63 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
77. A computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, the computer program for execution by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the computer program for implementing a learning system with a learner-constructed response based methodology, comprising:
a presentation process for presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, at least one knowledge topic to the learner and for prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response thereto;
a displaying process for presenting on the display, using the graphical user interface, the learner-constructed response;
an evaluation information process for providing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topic; and
an evaluation process for determining, based upon entry of a learner-constructed response to the knowledge topic, success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by comparison of the learner-constructed response with the keyboard data, wherein upon a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner before the learner is prompted to enter a last learner-constructed response.
78. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
79. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
80. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
81. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
82. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting text.
83. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting graphics.
84. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting video.
85. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a desktop computer display.
86. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a television display.
87. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a hand-held display.
88. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
89. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
90. The computer readable storage medium of claim 77 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
91. A computer readable storage medium storing a computer program, the computer program for execution by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the computer program for implementing a learning system with a learner-constructed response based methodology, comprising:
a presentation process for presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, at least one knowledge topic to the learner and for prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response thereto;
a displaying process for presenting on the display, using the graphical user interface, the learner-constructed response;
an evaluation information process for providing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topic; and
an evaluation process for determining, based upon entry of a learner-constructed response to the knowledge topic, success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by comparison of the learner-constructed response with the keyword data wherein upon a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner before the learner is prompted to enter a plurality of learner-constructed responses.
92. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
93. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for prompting includes a process for utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
94. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
95. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the evaluation process for determining includes a process for comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
96. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting text.
97. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting graphics.
98. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting video.
99. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a desktop computer display.
100. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a television display.
101. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting on a hand-held display.
102. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , wherein the presentation process for presenting includes a process for presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
103. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
104. The computer readable storage medium of claim 91 , further comprising a receiving process for receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
105. A method for implementing an automated learning system, the method performed by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the method comprising:
presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, at least one knowledge topic to the learner;
prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response to one of the at least one knowledge topic;
presenting the learner-constructed response on the display using the graphical user interface;
comparing keyword data that corresponds to the one knowledge topic with the learner-constructed response; and
determining success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response, wherein upon a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner before the learner is prompted to enter a last learner-constructed response.
106. The method of claim 105 , wherein the prompting includes prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
107. The method of claim 105 , wherein the prompting includes utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
108. The method of claim 105 , wherein the determining includes comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
109. The method of claim 105 , wherein the determining includes comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
110. The method of claim 105 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting text.
111. The method of claim 105 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting graphics.
112. The method of claim 105 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting video.
113. The method of claim 105 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a desktop computer display.
114. The method of claim 105 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a desktop computer display.
115. The method of claim 105 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a hand-held display.
116. The method of claim 105 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
117. The method of claim 105 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
118. The method of claim 105 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
119. A method for implementing an automated learning system, the method performed by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the method comprising:
presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, at least one knowledge topic to the learner;
prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response thereto;
presenting the learner-constructed response on the display using the graphical user interface;
comparing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topic with the learner-constructed response; and
determining success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response, wherein upon a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner before the learner is prompted to enter a last learner-constructed response.
120. The method of claim 119 , wherein the prompting includes prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
121. The method of claim 119 , wherein the prompting includes utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
122. The method of claim 119 , wherein the determining includes comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
123. The method of claim 119 , wherein the determining includes comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
124. The method of claim 119 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting text.
125. The method of claim 119 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting graphics.
126. The method of claim 119 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting video.
127. The method of claim 119 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a desktop computer display.
128. The method of claim 119 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a television display.
129. The method of claim 119 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a hand-held display.
130. The method of claim 119 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
131. The method of claim 119 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
132. The method of claim 119 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
133. A method for implementing an automated learning system, the method performed by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the method comprising:
presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, at least one knowledge topic to the learner;
prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response to the at least one knowledge topic;
presenting the learner-constructed response on the display using the graphical user interface;
comparing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topic with the learner-constructed response; and
determining success or failure of the learner to know the knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by whether or not expected keyword data appears in the learner-constructed response, wherein upon a determination of failure of the learner, remedial information is provided to the learner after the learner is prompted to enter the learner-constructed response.
134. The method of claim 133 , wherein the prompting includes prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
135. The method of claim 133 , wherein the prompting includes utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
136. The method of claim 133 , wherein the determining includes comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
137. The method of claim 133 , wherein the determining includes comparing the learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
138. The method of claim 133 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting text.
139. The method of claim 133 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting graphics.
140. The method of claim 133 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting video.
141. The method of claim 133 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a desktop computer display.
142. The method of claim 133 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a television display.
143. The method of claim 133 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting on a hand-held display.
144. The method of claim 133 , wherein the presenting the at least one knowledge topic includes presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
145. The method of claim 133 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
146. The method of claim 133 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
147. A method for implementing an automated learning system, the method performed by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the method comprising:
presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, a series of knowledge topics to the learner;
prompting the learner to enter a learning constructed response to each knowledge topic;
presenting the learner-constructed response on the display using the graphical user interface;
comparing keyword data that corresponds to each knowledge topic with each learner-constructed response;
determining a success or a failure of the learner to know each knowledge topic, the success or failure being determined by whether expected keyword data appears in each learner-constructed response;
after a determination of failure of the learner for a particular knowledge topic, providing remedial information to the learner for the particular knowledge topic and prompting the learner to enter a new learner-constructed response to the particular knowledge topic;
upon a determination of success of the learner for a particular one of the knowledge topics, discontinuing presentation and prompting of the learner regarding the particular one of the knowledge topics.
148. The method of claim 147 , wherein the prompting includes prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
149. The method of claim 147 , wherein the prompting includes utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
150. The method of claim 147 , wherein the determining includes comparing at least one learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
151. The method of claim 147 , wherein the determining includes comparing at least one learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
152. The method of claim 147 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting text.
153. The method of claim 147 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting graphics.
154. The method of claim 147 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting video.
155. The method of claim 147 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a desktop computer display.
156. The method of claim 147 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a television display.
157. The method of claim 147 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a hand-held display.
158. The method of claim 147 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
159. The method of claim 147 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
160. The method of claim 147 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
161. A method for implementing an automated learning system, the method performed by a computer system having a processor, a memory, and a display, the method comprising:
presenting on the display, using a graphical user interface, a series of knowledge topics to the learner;
prompting the learner to enter a learner-constructed response to each topic;
presenting the learner-constructed response on the display using the graphical user interface;
comparing keyword data that corresponds to the knowledge topics with the learner-constructed responses;
determining success or failure of the learner knowing each one of the knowledge topics, the success or failure being determined by whether or not expected keyword data appears in each learner-constructed response; and
upon a determination of failure of the learner, providing remedial information to the learner at a later time and prompting the learner to enter another learner-constructed response.
162. The method of claim 161 , wherein the prompting includes prompting the learner to fill in a blank in response to a displayed question.
163. The method of claim 161 , wherein the prompting includes utilizing HTML tags to display a question.
164. The method of claim 161 , wherein the determining includes comparing at least one learner-constructed response with data encoded in an HTML tag.
165. The method of claim 161 , wherein the determining includes comparing at least one learner-constructed response with data encoded in a meta-data tag.
166. The method of claim 161 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting text.
167. The method of claim 161 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting graphics.
168. The method of claim 161 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting video.
169. The method of claim 161 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a desktop computer display.
170. The method of claim 161 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a television display.
171. The method of claim 161 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting on a hand-held display.
172. The method of claim 161 , wherein the presenting the series of knowledge topics includes presenting, using a web browser, on the display.
173. The method of claim 161 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input.
174. The method of claim 161 , further comprising receiving the learner-constructed response via voice input and converting the voice input into text.
Priority Applications (4)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US10/653,748 USRE39435E1 (en) | 2000-10-17 | 2003-09-02 | Learning system with learner-constructed response based methodology |
| US10/815,330 US7357640B2 (en) | 2003-07-02 | 2004-03-31 | Lock-In Training system |
| US11/925,234 US20080076109A1 (en) | 2003-07-02 | 2007-10-26 | Lock-in training system |
| US11/924,844 US20080076107A1 (en) | 2003-07-02 | 2007-10-26 | Lock in training system with retention round display |
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US09/690,223 US6461166B1 (en) | 2000-10-17 | 2000-10-17 | Learning system with learner-constructed response based testing methodology |
| US10/653,748 USRE39435E1 (en) | 2000-10-17 | 2003-09-02 | Learning system with learner-constructed response based methodology |
Related Parent Applications (2)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US09/690,223 Reissue US6461166B1 (en) | 2000-10-17 | 2000-10-17 | Learning system with learner-constructed response based testing methodology |
| US10/613,564 Continuation-In-Part US20050003336A1 (en) | 2003-07-02 | 2003-07-02 | Method and system for learning keyword based materials |
Related Child Applications (2)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US10/815,330 Continuation-In-Part US7357640B2 (en) | 2003-07-02 | 2004-03-31 | Lock-In Training system |
| US11/924,844 Continuation-In-Part US20080076107A1 (en) | 2003-07-02 | 2007-10-26 | Lock in training system with retention round display |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| USRE39435E1 true USRE39435E1 (en) | 2006-12-19 |
Family
ID=24771617
Family Applications (2)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US09/690,223 Ceased US6461166B1 (en) | 2000-10-17 | 2000-10-17 | Learning system with learner-constructed response based testing methodology |
| US10/653,748 Expired - Lifetime USRE39435E1 (en) | 2000-10-17 | 2003-09-02 | Learning system with learner-constructed response based methodology |
Family Applications Before (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| US09/690,223 Ceased US6461166B1 (en) | 2000-10-17 | 2000-10-17 | Learning system with learner-constructed response based testing methodology |
Country Status (1)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (2) | US6461166B1 (en) |
Cited By (6)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20040234938A1 (en) * | 2003-05-19 | 2004-11-25 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for providing instructional feedback to a user |
| US20060141438A1 (en) * | 2004-12-23 | 2006-06-29 | Inventec Corporation | Remote instruction system and method |
| US20070065797A1 (en) * | 2005-09-20 | 2007-03-22 | Ross Elgart | System and method of preparing for essay examinations |
| WO2009089475A1 (en) * | 2008-01-09 | 2009-07-16 | Beauchamp Scott E | Customized learning and assessment of student based on psychometric models |
| US8506305B2 (en) | 2008-12-23 | 2013-08-13 | Deck Chair Learning Systems Inc. | Electronic learning system |
| US8606170B2 (en) | 2012-01-20 | 2013-12-10 | Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation | Method and apparatus for interactive, computer-based, automatically adaptable learning |
Families Citing this family (40)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CA2396509A1 (en) * | 2000-01-12 | 2001-07-19 | Avis Gustason | Methods and systems for multimedia education |
| US6461166B1 (en) * | 2000-10-17 | 2002-10-08 | Dennis Ray Berman | Learning system with learner-constructed response based testing methodology |
| WO2002056279A1 (en) * | 2001-01-09 | 2002-07-18 | Prep4 Ltd. | Training system and method for improving user knowledge and skills |
| GB2388699A (en) * | 2001-01-23 | 2003-11-19 | Educational Testing Service | Methods for automated essay analysis |
| US6688889B2 (en) | 2001-03-08 | 2004-02-10 | Boostmyscore.Com | Computerized test preparation system employing individually tailored diagnostics and remediation |
| US7062220B2 (en) * | 2001-04-18 | 2006-06-13 | Intelligent Automation, Inc. | Automated, computer-based reading tutoring systems and methods |
| US7286793B1 (en) | 2001-05-07 | 2007-10-23 | Miele Frank R | Method and apparatus for evaluating educational performance |
| US7074128B2 (en) | 2001-08-03 | 2006-07-11 | Drb Lit Ltd. | Method and system for enhancing memorization by using a mnemonic display |
| US6816702B2 (en) * | 2002-03-15 | 2004-11-09 | Educational Testing Service | Consolidated online assessment system |
| US7127208B2 (en) * | 2002-01-23 | 2006-10-24 | Educational Testing Service | Automated annotation |
| JP3772205B2 (en) * | 2002-02-06 | 2006-05-10 | 国立大学法人佐賀大学 | Teaching material learning system |
| US8374540B2 (en) | 2002-03-15 | 2013-02-12 | Educational Testing Service | Consolidated on-line assessment system |
| JP3839336B2 (en) * | 2002-03-26 | 2006-11-01 | 富士通株式会社 | Learning support method |
| JP3995081B2 (en) * | 2002-03-27 | 2007-10-24 | 富士通株式会社 | Learning support method and learning support program |
| US7088949B2 (en) | 2002-06-24 | 2006-08-08 | Educational Testing Service | Automated essay scoring |
| US20040254794A1 (en) * | 2003-05-08 | 2004-12-16 | Carl Padula | Interactive eyes-free and hands-free device |
| US7797146B2 (en) * | 2003-05-13 | 2010-09-14 | Interactive Drama, Inc. | Method and system for simulated interactive conversation |
| US20050239022A1 (en) * | 2003-05-13 | 2005-10-27 | Harless William G | Method and system for master teacher knowledge transfer in a computer environment |
| US20050239035A1 (en) * | 2003-05-13 | 2005-10-27 | Harless William G | Method and system for master teacher testing in a computer environment |
| US7357640B2 (en) * | 2003-07-02 | 2008-04-15 | Drb Lit Ltd. | Lock-In Training system |
| JP4387720B2 (en) * | 2003-07-28 | 2009-12-24 | 株式会社浜松早期認知症研究所 | Dementia test apparatus, dementia test server, dementia test client, and dementia test system |
| CN1886767A (en) * | 2003-11-28 | 2006-12-27 | 语言的森林有限公司 | Composition evaluation device |
| US7364432B2 (en) * | 2004-03-31 | 2008-04-29 | Drb Lit Ltd. | Methods of selecting Lock-In Training courses and sessions |
| US7657220B2 (en) | 2004-05-21 | 2010-02-02 | Ordinate Corporation | Adaptive scoring of responses to constructed response questions |
| WO2007015869A2 (en) * | 2005-07-20 | 2007-02-08 | Ordinate Corporation | Spoken language proficiency assessment by computer |
| WO2007025168A2 (en) * | 2005-08-25 | 2007-03-01 | Gregory Tuve | Methods and systems for facilitating learning based on neural modeling |
| US7657221B2 (en) * | 2005-09-12 | 2010-02-02 | Northwest Educational Software, Inc. | Virtual oral recitation examination apparatus, system and method |
| US11741848B2 (en) * | 2006-10-11 | 2023-08-29 | Cynthia Elnora ASHBY | Interactive system and method for diagnosing test-taking errors based on blooms taxonomy |
| US10037707B2 (en) * | 2006-10-11 | 2018-07-31 | Cynthia Elnora ASHBY | Interactive method for diagnosing test-taking errors |
| US20100057708A1 (en) * | 2008-09-03 | 2010-03-04 | William Henry Billingsley | Method and System for Computer-Based Assessment Including a Search and Select Process |
| TWI407393B (en) * | 2008-09-16 | 2013-09-01 | Univ Nat Taiwan Normal | Interactive teaching game automatic production methods and platforms, computer program products, recording media, and teaching game system |
| US9679256B2 (en) * | 2010-10-06 | 2017-06-13 | The Chancellor, Masters And Scholars Of The University Of Cambridge | Automated assessment of examination scripts |
| US8819169B2 (en) * | 2011-05-20 | 2014-08-26 | Hallmark Cards, Incorporated | Prompting service |
| US20140162236A1 (en) * | 2012-12-07 | 2014-06-12 | Franco Capaldi | Interactive assignment system including a simulation system for simulating models of problems |
| US20150037765A1 (en) * | 2013-08-02 | 2015-02-05 | Speetra, Inc. | System and method for interactive electronic learning and assessment |
| TW201516989A (en) * | 2013-10-22 | 2015-05-01 | zhong-zhi Lin | Editing system and method for interactive question answering game |
| US9530329B2 (en) | 2014-04-10 | 2016-12-27 | Laurence RUDOLPH | System and method for conducting multi-layer user selectable electronic testing |
| KR101853091B1 (en) * | 2017-05-19 | 2018-04-27 | (주)뤼이드 | Method, apparatus and computer program for providing personalized educational contents through user response prediction framework with machine learning |
| US11037459B2 (en) * | 2018-05-24 | 2021-06-15 | International Business Machines Corporation | Feedback system and method for improving performance of dialogue-based tutors |
| US11574121B2 (en) | 2021-01-25 | 2023-02-07 | Kyndryl, Inc. | Effective text parsing using machine learning |
Citations (76)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US3408749A (en) | 1967-04-11 | 1968-11-05 | American Can Co | Branching-instruction teaching device |
| US3566482A (en) * | 1968-10-24 | 1971-03-02 | Data Plex Systems | Educational device |
| US3606688A (en) * | 1968-07-19 | 1971-09-21 | Associated Research Lab Propri | Method and apparatus for teaching a multiplicity of students |
| US3671668A (en) * | 1968-11-18 | 1972-06-20 | Leonard Reiffel | Teaching system employing a television receiver |
| US3715811A (en) * | 1970-10-13 | 1973-02-13 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | Remedial branching teaching system |
| US4289313A (en) * | 1979-09-07 | 1981-09-15 | Delamontagne Robert P | Management teaching game apparatus and method |
| US4416454A (en) * | 1979-09-07 | 1983-11-22 | Delamontagne Robert P | Management teaching game method |
| US4817036A (en) | 1985-03-15 | 1989-03-28 | Brigham Young University | Computer system and method for data base indexing and information retrieval |
| US4833610A (en) | 1986-12-16 | 1989-05-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Morphological/phonetic method for ranking word similarities |
| US4895518A (en) * | 1987-11-02 | 1990-01-23 | The University Of Michigan | Computerized diagnostic reasoning evaluation system |
| US4958284A (en) * | 1988-12-06 | 1990-09-18 | Npd Group, Inc. | Open ended question analysis system and method |
| US5002491A (en) | 1989-04-28 | 1991-03-26 | Comtek | Electronic classroom system enabling interactive self-paced learning |
| US5002865A (en) * | 1985-04-24 | 1991-03-26 | Konica Corporation | Silver halide photographic material |
| US5011413A (en) * | 1989-07-19 | 1991-04-30 | Educational Testing Service | Machine-interpretable figural response testing |
| US5033969A (en) * | 1989-07-21 | 1991-07-23 | Pioneer Electronic Corporation | Support device for resolving questions about reproduced information |
| US5112064A (en) * | 1990-06-13 | 1992-05-12 | Weedman Gail H | Psychology game |
| US5168565A (en) | 1988-01-20 | 1992-12-01 | Ricoh Company, Ltd. | Document retrieval system |
| US5246375A (en) * | 1991-09-23 | 1993-09-21 | Wouter Goede | Memory aiding device |
| US5265065A (en) | 1991-10-08 | 1993-11-23 | West Publishing Company | Method and apparatus for information retrieval from a database by replacing domain specific stemmed phases in a natural language to create a search query |
| US5307266A (en) | 1990-08-22 | 1994-04-26 | Hitachi, Ltd. | Information processing system and method for processing document by using structured keywords |
| US5314340A (en) * | 1990-10-30 | 1994-05-24 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Electronic teaching apparatus having two-part partially and wholly actuated for indication of correct and incorrect answers |
| US5325465A (en) | 1992-03-04 | 1994-06-28 | Singapore Computer Systems Limited | End user query facility |
| US5384703A (en) | 1993-07-02 | 1995-01-24 | Xerox Corporation | Method and apparatus for summarizing documents according to theme |
| US5424947A (en) | 1990-06-15 | 1995-06-13 | International Business Machines Corporation | Natural language analyzing apparatus and method, and construction of a knowledge base for natural language analysis |
| US5441415A (en) * | 1992-02-11 | 1995-08-15 | John R. Lee | Interactive computer aided natural learning method and apparatus |
| US5442780A (en) | 1991-07-11 | 1995-08-15 | Mitsubishi Denki Kabushiki Kaisha | Natural language database retrieval system using virtual tables to convert parsed input phrases into retrieval keys |
| US5463773A (en) | 1992-05-25 | 1995-10-31 | Fujitsu Limited | Building of a document classification tree by recursive optimization of keyword selection function |
| US5475588A (en) | 1993-06-18 | 1995-12-12 | Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories, Inc. | System for decreasing the time required to parse a sentence |
| US5511793A (en) * | 1992-06-08 | 1996-04-30 | Quantum Development, Inc. | Composite chess game and method |
| US5519608A (en) | 1993-06-24 | 1996-05-21 | Xerox Corporation | Method for extracting from a text corpus answers to questions stated in natural language by using linguistic analysis and hypothesis generation |
| US5528491A (en) | 1992-08-31 | 1996-06-18 | Language Engineering Corporation | Apparatus and method for automated natural language translation |
| US5540589A (en) * | 1994-04-11 | 1996-07-30 | Mitsubishi Electric Information Technology Center | Audio interactive tutor |
| US5597312A (en) | 1994-05-04 | 1997-01-28 | U S West Technologies, Inc. | Intelligent tutoring method and system |
| US5632624A (en) * | 1993-09-22 | 1997-05-27 | Brainchild, Inc. | Electronic study guide |
| WO1997018698A2 (en) * | 1995-11-08 | 1997-05-29 | Peter Geoffrey Mcdermott | Memory aid |
| US5689716A (en) | 1995-04-14 | 1997-11-18 | Xerox Corporation | Automatic method of generating thematic summaries |
| US5694523A (en) | 1995-05-31 | 1997-12-02 | Oracle Corporation | Content processing system for discourse |
| US5696962A (en) | 1993-06-24 | 1997-12-09 | Xerox Corporation | Method for computerized information retrieval using shallow linguistic analysis |
| US5708822A (en) | 1995-05-31 | 1998-01-13 | Oracle Corporation | Methods and apparatus for thematic parsing of discourse |
| US5749736A (en) * | 1995-03-22 | 1998-05-12 | Taras Development | Method and system for computerized learning, response, and evaluation |
| US5768580A (en) | 1995-05-31 | 1998-06-16 | Oracle Corporation | Methods and apparatus for dynamic classification of discourse |
| US5863208A (en) * | 1996-07-02 | 1999-01-26 | Ho; Chi Fai | Learning system and method based on review |
| US5885087A (en) * | 1994-09-30 | 1999-03-23 | Robolaw Corporation | Method and apparatus for improving performance on multiple-choice exams |
| US5987443A (en) | 1998-12-22 | 1999-11-16 | Ac Properties B. V. | System, method and article of manufacture for a goal based educational system |
| US5987302A (en) * | 1997-03-21 | 1999-11-16 | Educational Testing Service | On-line essay evaluation system |
| US6029043A (en) | 1998-01-29 | 2000-02-22 | Ho; Chi Fai | Computer-aided group-learning methods and systems |
| US6067538A (en) | 1998-12-22 | 2000-05-23 | Ac Properties B.V. | System, method and article of manufacture for a simulation enabled focused feedback tutorial system |
| US6077085A (en) * | 1998-05-19 | 2000-06-20 | Intellectual Reserve, Inc. | Technology assisted learning |
| US6115683A (en) * | 1997-03-31 | 2000-09-05 | Educational Testing Service | Automatic essay scoring system using content-based techniques |
| US6120297A (en) * | 1997-08-25 | 2000-09-19 | Lyceum Communication, Inc. | Vocabulary acquistion using structured inductive reasoning |
| US6164974A (en) | 1997-03-28 | 2000-12-26 | Softlight Inc. | Evaluation based learning system |
| US6168440B1 (en) * | 1993-02-05 | 2001-01-02 | National Computer Systems, Inc. | Multiple test item scoring system and method |
| US6173251B1 (en) | 1997-08-05 | 2001-01-09 | Mitsubishi Denki Kabushiki Kaisha | Keyword extraction apparatus, keyword extraction method, and computer readable recording medium storing keyword extraction program |
| US6181909B1 (en) * | 1997-07-22 | 2001-01-30 | Educational Testing Service | System and method for computer-based automatic essay scoring |
| US6199034B1 (en) | 1995-05-31 | 2001-03-06 | Oracle Corporation | Methods and apparatus for determining theme for discourse |
| US6208832B1 (en) | 1997-11-14 | 2001-03-27 | Sony Corporation | Learning system with response analyzer |
| US6226611B1 (en) * | 1996-10-02 | 2001-05-01 | Sri International | Method and system for automatic text-independent grading of pronunciation for language instruction |
| US6256399B1 (en) * | 1992-07-08 | 2001-07-03 | Ncs Pearson, Inc. | Method of distribution of digitized materials and control of scoring for open-ended assessments |
| US6254395B1 (en) * | 1998-04-13 | 2001-07-03 | Educational Testing Service | System and method for automated testing of writing skill |
| US6267601B1 (en) * | 1997-12-05 | 2001-07-31 | The Psychological Corporation | Computerized system and method for teaching and assessing the holistic scoring of open-ended questions |
| US6282404B1 (en) * | 1999-09-22 | 2001-08-28 | Chet D. Linton | Method and system for accessing multimedia data in an interactive format having reporting capabilities |
| US6287123B1 (en) * | 1998-09-08 | 2001-09-11 | O'brien Denis Richard | Computer managed learning system and data processing method therefore |
| US6292792B1 (en) * | 1999-03-26 | 2001-09-18 | Intelligent Learning Systems, Inc. | System and method for dynamic knowledge generation and distribution |
| US6295439B1 (en) * | 1997-03-21 | 2001-09-25 | Educational Testing Service | Methods and systems for presentation and evaluation of constructed responses assessed by human evaluators |
| US6302698B1 (en) * | 1999-02-16 | 2001-10-16 | Discourse Technologies, Inc. | Method and apparatus for on-line teaching and learning |
| US6311040B1 (en) * | 1997-07-31 | 2001-10-30 | The Psychological Corporation | System and method for scoring test answer sheets having open-ended questions |
| US6343935B1 (en) * | 2000-03-01 | 2002-02-05 | Castle Hill Learning Company, Llc | Computerized interactive educational method and apparatus for teaching vocabulary |
| US6345270B1 (en) | 1997-05-26 | 2002-02-05 | Fujitsu Limited | Data management system |
| US6356864B1 (en) * | 1997-07-25 | 2002-03-12 | University Technology Corporation | Methods for analysis and evaluation of the semantic content of a writing based on vector length |
| US6411924B1 (en) | 1998-01-23 | 2002-06-25 | Novell, Inc. | System and method for linguistic filter and interactive display |
| US6461166B1 (en) * | 2000-10-17 | 2002-10-08 | Dennis Ray Berman | Learning system with learner-constructed response based testing methodology |
| US6470170B1 (en) | 2000-05-18 | 2002-10-22 | Hai Xing Chen | System and method for interactive distance learning and examination training |
| US6493690B2 (en) | 1998-12-22 | 2002-12-10 | Accenture | Goal based educational system with personalized coaching |
| US6548470B1 (en) | 1998-12-14 | 2003-04-15 | The Procter & Gamble Company | Bleaching compositions |
| US6553382B2 (en) | 1995-03-17 | 2003-04-22 | Canon Kabushiki Kaisha | Data management system for retrieving data based on hierarchized keywords associated with keyword names |
| US6554618B1 (en) | 2001-04-20 | 2003-04-29 | Cheryl B. Lockwood | Managed integrated teaching providing individualized instruction |
-
2000
- 2000-10-17 US US09/690,223 patent/US6461166B1/en not_active Ceased
-
2003
- 2003-09-02 US US10/653,748 patent/USRE39435E1/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
Patent Citations (78)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US3408749A (en) | 1967-04-11 | 1968-11-05 | American Can Co | Branching-instruction teaching device |
| US3606688A (en) * | 1968-07-19 | 1971-09-21 | Associated Research Lab Propri | Method and apparatus for teaching a multiplicity of students |
| US3566482A (en) * | 1968-10-24 | 1971-03-02 | Data Plex Systems | Educational device |
| US3671668A (en) * | 1968-11-18 | 1972-06-20 | Leonard Reiffel | Teaching system employing a television receiver |
| US3715811A (en) * | 1970-10-13 | 1973-02-13 | Westinghouse Electric Corp | Remedial branching teaching system |
| US4289313A (en) * | 1979-09-07 | 1981-09-15 | Delamontagne Robert P | Management teaching game apparatus and method |
| US4416454A (en) * | 1979-09-07 | 1983-11-22 | Delamontagne Robert P | Management teaching game method |
| US4817036A (en) | 1985-03-15 | 1989-03-28 | Brigham Young University | Computer system and method for data base indexing and information retrieval |
| US5002865A (en) * | 1985-04-24 | 1991-03-26 | Konica Corporation | Silver halide photographic material |
| US4833610A (en) | 1986-12-16 | 1989-05-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Morphological/phonetic method for ranking word similarities |
| US4895518A (en) * | 1987-11-02 | 1990-01-23 | The University Of Michigan | Computerized diagnostic reasoning evaluation system |
| US5168565A (en) | 1988-01-20 | 1992-12-01 | Ricoh Company, Ltd. | Document retrieval system |
| US4958284A (en) * | 1988-12-06 | 1990-09-18 | Npd Group, Inc. | Open ended question analysis system and method |
| US5002491A (en) | 1989-04-28 | 1991-03-26 | Comtek | Electronic classroom system enabling interactive self-paced learning |
| US5011413A (en) * | 1989-07-19 | 1991-04-30 | Educational Testing Service | Machine-interpretable figural response testing |
| US5033969A (en) * | 1989-07-21 | 1991-07-23 | Pioneer Electronic Corporation | Support device for resolving questions about reproduced information |
| US5112064A (en) * | 1990-06-13 | 1992-05-12 | Weedman Gail H | Psychology game |
| US5424947A (en) | 1990-06-15 | 1995-06-13 | International Business Machines Corporation | Natural language analyzing apparatus and method, and construction of a knowledge base for natural language analysis |
| US5307266A (en) | 1990-08-22 | 1994-04-26 | Hitachi, Ltd. | Information processing system and method for processing document by using structured keywords |
| US5314340A (en) * | 1990-10-30 | 1994-05-24 | Texas Instruments Incorporated | Electronic teaching apparatus having two-part partially and wholly actuated for indication of correct and incorrect answers |
| US5442780A (en) | 1991-07-11 | 1995-08-15 | Mitsubishi Denki Kabushiki Kaisha | Natural language database retrieval system using virtual tables to convert parsed input phrases into retrieval keys |
| US5246375A (en) * | 1991-09-23 | 1993-09-21 | Wouter Goede | Memory aiding device |
| US5265065A (en) | 1991-10-08 | 1993-11-23 | West Publishing Company | Method and apparatus for information retrieval from a database by replacing domain specific stemmed phases in a natural language to create a search query |
| US5441415A (en) * | 1992-02-11 | 1995-08-15 | John R. Lee | Interactive computer aided natural learning method and apparatus |
| US5325465A (en) | 1992-03-04 | 1994-06-28 | Singapore Computer Systems Limited | End user query facility |
| US5463773A (en) | 1992-05-25 | 1995-10-31 | Fujitsu Limited | Building of a document classification tree by recursive optimization of keyword selection function |
| US5511793A (en) * | 1992-06-08 | 1996-04-30 | Quantum Development, Inc. | Composite chess game and method |
| US6256399B1 (en) * | 1992-07-08 | 2001-07-03 | Ncs Pearson, Inc. | Method of distribution of digitized materials and control of scoring for open-ended assessments |
| US5528491A (en) | 1992-08-31 | 1996-06-18 | Language Engineering Corporation | Apparatus and method for automated natural language translation |
| US6168440B1 (en) * | 1993-02-05 | 2001-01-02 | National Computer Systems, Inc. | Multiple test item scoring system and method |
| US5475588A (en) | 1993-06-18 | 1995-12-12 | Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories, Inc. | System for decreasing the time required to parse a sentence |
| US5519608A (en) | 1993-06-24 | 1996-05-21 | Xerox Corporation | Method for extracting from a text corpus answers to questions stated in natural language by using linguistic analysis and hypothesis generation |
| US5696962A (en) | 1993-06-24 | 1997-12-09 | Xerox Corporation | Method for computerized information retrieval using shallow linguistic analysis |
| US5384703A (en) | 1993-07-02 | 1995-01-24 | Xerox Corporation | Method and apparatus for summarizing documents according to theme |
| US5632624A (en) * | 1993-09-22 | 1997-05-27 | Brainchild, Inc. | Electronic study guide |
| US5540589A (en) * | 1994-04-11 | 1996-07-30 | Mitsubishi Electric Information Technology Center | Audio interactive tutor |
| US5597312A (en) | 1994-05-04 | 1997-01-28 | U S West Technologies, Inc. | Intelligent tutoring method and system |
| US5885087A (en) * | 1994-09-30 | 1999-03-23 | Robolaw Corporation | Method and apparatus for improving performance on multiple-choice exams |
| US6086382A (en) * | 1994-09-30 | 2000-07-11 | Robolaw Corporation | Method and apparatus for improving performance on multiple-choice exams |
| US6553382B2 (en) | 1995-03-17 | 2003-04-22 | Canon Kabushiki Kaisha | Data management system for retrieving data based on hierarchized keywords associated with keyword names |
| US5749736A (en) * | 1995-03-22 | 1998-05-12 | Taras Development | Method and system for computerized learning, response, and evaluation |
| US5689716A (en) | 1995-04-14 | 1997-11-18 | Xerox Corporation | Automatic method of generating thematic summaries |
| US5768580A (en) | 1995-05-31 | 1998-06-16 | Oracle Corporation | Methods and apparatus for dynamic classification of discourse |
| US6199034B1 (en) | 1995-05-31 | 2001-03-06 | Oracle Corporation | Methods and apparatus for determining theme for discourse |
| US5694523A (en) | 1995-05-31 | 1997-12-02 | Oracle Corporation | Content processing system for discourse |
| US5708822A (en) | 1995-05-31 | 1998-01-13 | Oracle Corporation | Methods and apparatus for thematic parsing of discourse |
| WO1997018698A2 (en) * | 1995-11-08 | 1997-05-29 | Peter Geoffrey Mcdermott | Memory aid |
| US5863208A (en) * | 1996-07-02 | 1999-01-26 | Ho; Chi Fai | Learning system and method based on review |
| US6226611B1 (en) * | 1996-10-02 | 2001-05-01 | Sri International | Method and system for automatic text-independent grading of pronunciation for language instruction |
| US5987302A (en) * | 1997-03-21 | 1999-11-16 | Educational Testing Service | On-line essay evaluation system |
| US6295439B1 (en) * | 1997-03-21 | 2001-09-25 | Educational Testing Service | Methods and systems for presentation and evaluation of constructed responses assessed by human evaluators |
| US6164974A (en) | 1997-03-28 | 2000-12-26 | Softlight Inc. | Evaluation based learning system |
| US6115683A (en) * | 1997-03-31 | 2000-09-05 | Educational Testing Service | Automatic essay scoring system using content-based techniques |
| US6345270B1 (en) | 1997-05-26 | 2002-02-05 | Fujitsu Limited | Data management system |
| US6181909B1 (en) * | 1997-07-22 | 2001-01-30 | Educational Testing Service | System and method for computer-based automatic essay scoring |
| US6356864B1 (en) * | 1997-07-25 | 2002-03-12 | University Technology Corporation | Methods for analysis and evaluation of the semantic content of a writing based on vector length |
| US6311040B1 (en) * | 1997-07-31 | 2001-10-30 | The Psychological Corporation | System and method for scoring test answer sheets having open-ended questions |
| US6173251B1 (en) | 1997-08-05 | 2001-01-09 | Mitsubishi Denki Kabushiki Kaisha | Keyword extraction apparatus, keyword extraction method, and computer readable recording medium storing keyword extraction program |
| US6120297A (en) * | 1997-08-25 | 2000-09-19 | Lyceum Communication, Inc. | Vocabulary acquistion using structured inductive reasoning |
| US6208832B1 (en) | 1997-11-14 | 2001-03-27 | Sony Corporation | Learning system with response analyzer |
| US6267601B1 (en) * | 1997-12-05 | 2001-07-31 | The Psychological Corporation | Computerized system and method for teaching and assessing the holistic scoring of open-ended questions |
| US6411924B1 (en) | 1998-01-23 | 2002-06-25 | Novell, Inc. | System and method for linguistic filter and interactive display |
| US6160987A (en) | 1998-01-29 | 2000-12-12 | Ho; Chi Fai | Computer-aided group-learning methods and systems |
| US6029043A (en) | 1998-01-29 | 2000-02-22 | Ho; Chi Fai | Computer-aided group-learning methods and systems |
| US6254395B1 (en) * | 1998-04-13 | 2001-07-03 | Educational Testing Service | System and method for automated testing of writing skill |
| US6077085A (en) * | 1998-05-19 | 2000-06-20 | Intellectual Reserve, Inc. | Technology assisted learning |
| US6287123B1 (en) * | 1998-09-08 | 2001-09-11 | O'brien Denis Richard | Computer managed learning system and data processing method therefore |
| US6548470B1 (en) | 1998-12-14 | 2003-04-15 | The Procter & Gamble Company | Bleaching compositions |
| US6067538A (en) | 1998-12-22 | 2000-05-23 | Ac Properties B.V. | System, method and article of manufacture for a simulation enabled focused feedback tutorial system |
| US6493690B2 (en) | 1998-12-22 | 2002-12-10 | Accenture | Goal based educational system with personalized coaching |
| US5987443A (en) | 1998-12-22 | 1999-11-16 | Ac Properties B. V. | System, method and article of manufacture for a goal based educational system |
| US6302698B1 (en) * | 1999-02-16 | 2001-10-16 | Discourse Technologies, Inc. | Method and apparatus for on-line teaching and learning |
| US6292792B1 (en) * | 1999-03-26 | 2001-09-18 | Intelligent Learning Systems, Inc. | System and method for dynamic knowledge generation and distribution |
| US6282404B1 (en) * | 1999-09-22 | 2001-08-28 | Chet D. Linton | Method and system for accessing multimedia data in an interactive format having reporting capabilities |
| US6343935B1 (en) * | 2000-03-01 | 2002-02-05 | Castle Hill Learning Company, Llc | Computerized interactive educational method and apparatus for teaching vocabulary |
| US6470170B1 (en) | 2000-05-18 | 2002-10-22 | Hai Xing Chen | System and method for interactive distance learning and examination training |
| US6461166B1 (en) * | 2000-10-17 | 2002-10-08 | Dennis Ray Berman | Learning system with learner-constructed response based testing methodology |
| US6554618B1 (en) | 2001-04-20 | 2003-04-29 | Cheryl B. Lockwood | Managed integrated teaching providing individualized instruction |
Non-Patent Citations (4)
| Title |
|---|
| Crowder, Norman A., Arithmetic of Computers, An Introduction to Binary and Octal Mathematics. A Tutor Text, 1958, pp. i-iv and 1-18, Doubleday & Company, Garden City, NY. * |
| FullRecall. Retrieved from the Internet on Apr. 25, 2005: <URL: http://www.fullrecall.com>. |
| Spaced repetition-Wikipedia, Retrieved from the Internet on Apr. 26, 2005: <URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_repetition>. |
| Super Memory. Retrieved from the Internet on Apr. 25, 2005 <URL: http://www.supermemo.com>. |
Cited By (8)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US20040234938A1 (en) * | 2003-05-19 | 2004-11-25 | Microsoft Corporation | System and method for providing instructional feedback to a user |
| US20060141438A1 (en) * | 2004-12-23 | 2006-06-29 | Inventec Corporation | Remote instruction system and method |
| US20070065797A1 (en) * | 2005-09-20 | 2007-03-22 | Ross Elgart | System and method of preparing for essay examinations |
| WO2009089475A1 (en) * | 2008-01-09 | 2009-07-16 | Beauchamp Scott E | Customized learning and assessment of student based on psychometric models |
| US20090202969A1 (en) * | 2008-01-09 | 2009-08-13 | Beauchamp Scott E | Customized learning and assessment of student based on psychometric models |
| US8506305B2 (en) | 2008-12-23 | 2013-08-13 | Deck Chair Learning Systems Inc. | Electronic learning system |
| US8851900B2 (en) | 2008-12-23 | 2014-10-07 | Deck Chair Learning Systems Inc. | Electronic learning system |
| US8606170B2 (en) | 2012-01-20 | 2013-12-10 | Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation | Method and apparatus for interactive, computer-based, automatically adaptable learning |
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| US6461166B1 (en) | 2002-10-08 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| USRE39435E1 (en) | Learning system with learner-constructed response based methodology | |
| Uchihara et al. | The effects of repetition on incidental vocabulary learning: A meta‐analysis of correlational studies | |
| US10720078B2 (en) | Systems and methods for extracting keywords in language learning | |
| Mostow et al. | Some useful tactics to modify, map and mine data from intelligent tutors | |
| Zhao | Measuring authorial voice strength in L2 argumentative writing: The development and validation of an analytic rubric | |
| Chapelle et al. | Assessing language through computer technology | |
| US7062220B2 (en) | Automated, computer-based reading tutoring systems and methods | |
| Mislevy et al. | Concepts, terminology, and basic models of evidence-centered design | |
| US20060014130A1 (en) | System and method for diagnosing deficiencies and assessing knowledge in test responses | |
| US20090202969A1 (en) | Customized learning and assessment of student based on psychometric models | |
| US20150199400A1 (en) | Automatic generation of verification questions to verify whether a user has read a document | |
| JP2004524559A (en) | Automatic paper analysis method | |
| US20090239201A1 (en) | Phonetic pronunciation training device, phonetic pronunciation training method and phonetic pronunciation training program | |
| AU2002338449A1 (en) | Automated, computer-based reading tutoring system and method. | |
| Yoon et al. | Rhetorical structure, sequence, and variation: A step‐driven move analysis of applied linguistics conference abstracts | |
| KR20110079252A (en) | Study management system for online lecture, and method for the same | |
| Kobrin et al. | The cognitive equivalence of reading comprehension test items via computerized and paper-and-pencil administration | |
| O’Grady | Adapting multiple-choice comprehension question formats in a test of second language listening comprehension | |
| KR100532225B1 (en) | A study apparatus using network and the method thereof | |
| Malec | Developing web-based language tests | |
| CN111127271A (en) | Teaching method and system for studying situation analysis | |
| Reinertsen | Why can't it mark this one?: A qualitative analysis of student writing rejected by an automated essay scoring system | |
| US11854432B1 (en) | Developing an e-rater advisory to detect babel-generated essays | |
| US20220164713A1 (en) | Proficiency assessment and instructional feedback using explainable artificial intelligence | |
| Wang et al. | Employing the Think-Alound Method to Explore Listeners’ Test-Taking Cognitive Processes |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: DRB LIT LTD., TEXAS Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:BERMAN, DENNIS RAY;REEL/FRAME:014480/0687 Effective date: 20030829 |
|
| CC | Certificate of correction | ||
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: BERMAN, DENNIS R, TEXAS Free format text: SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:DRB LIT LTD.;REEL/FRAME:019181/0279 Effective date: 20070101 |
|
| FEPP | Fee payment procedure |
Free format text: PAT HOLDER NO LONGER CLAIMS SMALL ENTITY STATUS, ENTITY STATUS SET TO UNDISCOUNTED (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: STOL); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: SMALL ENTITY |
|
| FPAY | Fee payment |
Year of fee payment: 8 |
|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: BERMAN, DENNIS R., MR., TEXAS Free format text: PATENT SECURITY AGREEMENT;ASSIGNOR:DRB LIT LTD.;REEL/FRAME:027371/0283 Effective date: 20111201 |
|
| FEPP | Fee payment procedure |
Free format text: PAT HOLDER CLAIMS SMALL ENTITY STATUS, ENTITY STATUS SET TO SMALL (ORIGINAL EVENT CODE: LTOS); ENTITY STATUS OF PATENT OWNER: SMALL ENTITY |
|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: LOCKIN, LLC, TEXAS Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:TRIVAC LTD.;DRB LIT LTD.;REEL/FRAME:032371/0018 Effective date: 20140131 Owner name: DRB LIT LTD., TEXAS Free format text: RELEASE BY SECURED PARTY;ASSIGNOR:BERMAN, DENNIS R.;REEL/FRAME:032370/0618 Effective date: 20140131 |
|
| FPAY | Fee payment |
Year of fee payment: 12 |
|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: MEMORY SCIENCE, LLC, TEXAS Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:LOCKIN, LLC;REEL/FRAME:033367/0085 Effective date: 20140721 |
|
| AS | Assignment |
Owner name: VXI GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LLC, CALIFORNIA Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNOR:MEMORY SCIENCE, LLC;REEL/FRAME:050298/0734 Effective date: 20190503 |