MONAP-II: the analysis of quality of the learning process model Ildar Galeev, Sergey Sosnovsky, Vadim Chepegin Kazan State Technological University, 68, K. Marx street, Kazan, Russia monap@kstu.ru , sergey@telebit.ru , chepegin@knet.ru Abstract The main topic of this paper is the analysis of quality of the learning process model for skills of algorithmic nature. This model is realized by intelligent tutoring system (ITS) authoring tools MONAP-II. The model is evaluated from the points of adequacy (precision) and convergence (reliability). The correlation of the basic parameters of the model is reflected. It is shown in which way human-teacher can tune didactic properties of designed ITS by changing parameters of the model. MONAP-II contains subsystem of learning process modeling for more precise and valid tuning of the model as soon as didactic experiment realization. This subsystem allows human-teacher to inspect internal states of the learning process. 1. Introduction The effectiveness of intelligent tutoring systems (ITS) in many respects depends on quality of learning process models realized in these systems for learning process control. Baker in his paper [1] marks out three basic contexts for considering models in present researches in the area of artificial intelligence in education (AIEd): - model as scientific tool, - model as component of an educational artifact, - model as basis for design of computational artifacts for education. This paper considers the model of learning process realized in MONAP-II from points of all of the contexts listed above (to a greater or lesser extent). On the one hand when evaluating MONAP-II on meeting the requirements that are made for computational models we have investigated its behavior in different educational situations. These investigations are on the basis of the experiments with parametrical tuning of the learning process model, determination of the correlation between different parameters, and detection of the forms of these parameters influence on the properties of the overall model. It has been very useful in such investigation the built-in subsystem of learning process modeling (it was described in details in [2]) allowing by varying parameters of the model the evaluation of quality of MONAP-II as the system of AIEd. On the other hand the papers describes educational artifact, to be more precise, authoring tools for ITS design. The learning process model is the key component of architecture of ITS designed by means of MONAP-II. This component is responsible for effective learning process control, and, in the final analysis, in many respects, for the success of learning process. Finally, while different components of MONAP-II were developed, the structure of the model frequently caused making of one or another design decision. Both figures in the paper demonstrate it very illustratively. So both on the stage of definition if model parameters (fig. 1) and on the stage of learning process modeling (fig. 2) human-teacher interacts with he screens, whose functionality was imposed by functional structure of learning process model. 2. МОНАП-II: brief review Authoring tools for ITS design of MONAP family were described in the number of journal papers and conference reports. The most detailed formalization of didactic principles, which the system is based on, as well as description of its practical implementation made in [3]. The last version of MONAP-II authoring tools is characterized by the mechanism making the overall process of ITS design easer for human-teacher who is not the expert in the area of computer-based learning [4]. The learning process in MONAP-II is considered as a monitored and controlled process of learning task solving. Using of the Bayesian approach to the student’s knowledge identification, processing of student’s results during the specified number of learning steps for abnormal termination control (in the case when learning process is not effective) and making the prediction of student’s mastering state provide the taking into account the history of learning, what is the basis for adaptive learning organization. 116