W. Nejdl et al. (Eds.): AH 2008, LNCS 5149, pp. 255–258, 2008. © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008 Do Students Trust Their Open Learner Models? Norasnita Ahmad and Susan Bull Electronic, Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham, B15 2TT, UK {nxa707,s.bull}@bham.ac.uk Abstract. Open learner models (OLM) enable users to access their learner model to view information about their understanding. Opening the learner model to the learner may increase their perceptions of how a system evaluates their knowledge and updates the model. This raises questions of trust relating to whether the learner believes the evaluations are correct, and whether they trust the system as a whole. We investigate learner trust in various OLM features: the complexity of the model presentation; the level of learner control over the model contents; and the facility to release one's own model for peer viewing. 1 Introduction Student self-knowledge is essential for self-directed learning [1]. Opening the learner model (LM) to the user provides opportunities to encourage reflection, independent learning and formative assessment/monitoring [2]. In this paper we consider three features of open learner models (OLMs): (i) complexity of model presentation; (ii) learner control over the learner model; (iii) releasing the learner model to other users. (i) LMs can be externalised using simple or detailed representations of knowledge. Simple displays often show the LM using skill meters. OLMlets is an example of a simple OLM with five views of the learner model, including skill meters [2] (see Fig. 1). The second example, Flexi-OLM, is an OLM that includes complex model presen- tations in seven formats [3]. Fig. 1 illustrates the structure of the concept map and hierarchical tree. Both OLMlets and Flexi-OLM use colour to indicate knowledge levels, problematic areas and misconceptions; and misconceptions are stated textually (e.g. "you may believe that the '=' operator can be used for comparison"). (ii) OLMlets and Flexi-OLM offer different levels of learner control over the LM. In OLMlets it can be viewed, but the learner cannot change the LM contents. Flexi- OLM allows students to edit or try to persuade it if they disagree with its representa- tions [3]. Students can edit their LM by changing the knowledge to the desired level. Persuading the LM requires students to convince the system (about their skill) before the representations will be altered. In both cases Flexi-OLM offers evidence for its beliefs, but in persuasion, the learner has to demonstrate their belief in a short test. (iii) OLMlets allows students to release their LM (named or anonymously) to in- structors and peers [4]. All peer models accessible to a user can be viewed together. Students can also access data on the group's knowledge of each topic, and how their LM compares to instructor expectations for that stage of the course (see [2]).