Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article
Open access

Reading the Room: Automated, Momentary Assessment of Student Engagement in the Classroom: Are We There Yet?

Published: 07 September 2022 Publication History

Abstract

When in front of a classroom, a skilled teacher can read the room, identifying when students are engaged, frustrated, distracted, etc. In recent years we have seen significant changes in the traditional classroom, with virtual classes becoming a normal learning environment. Reasons for this change are the increased popularity of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) and the disruptions imposed by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. However, it is difficult for teachers to read the room in these virtual classrooms, and researchers have begun to look at using sensors to provide feedback to help inform teaching practices. The study presented here sought to ground classroom sensor data in the form of electrodermal activities (EDA) captured using a wrist-worn sensing platform (Empatica E4), with observations about students' emotional engagement in the class. We collected a dataset from eleven students over eight lectures in college-level computer science classes. We trained human annotators who provided ground truth information about student engagement based on in-class observations. Inspired by related work in the field, we implemented an automated data analysis framework, which we used to explore momentary assessments of student engagement in classrooms. Our findings surprised us because we found no significant correlation between the sensor data and our trained observers' data. In this paper, we present our study and framework for automated engagement assessment, and report on our findings that indicate some of the challenges in deploying current technology for real-world, automated momentary assessment of student engagement in the classroom. We offer reflections on our findings and discuss ways forward toward an automated reading the room approach.

References

[1]
Sasirekha Anbusegaran. 2021. Unobtrusive Assessment Of Student Engagement Levels In Online Classroom Environment Using Emotion Analysis. (2021).
[2]
James J Appleton, Sandra L Christenson, and Michael J Furlong. 2008. Student engagement with school: Critical conceptual and methodological issues of the construct. Psychology in the Schools 45, 5 (2008), 369--386.
[3]
TS Ashwin and Ram Mohana Reddy Guddeti. 2020. Affective database for e-learning and classroom environments using Indian students' faces, hand gestures and body postures. Future Generation Computer Systems 108 (2020), 334--348.
[4]
TS Ashwin and Ram Mohana Reddy Guddeti. 2020. Automatic detection of students' affective states in classroom environment using hybrid convolutional neural networks. Education and Information Technologies 25, 2 (2020), 1387--1415.
[5]
TS Ashwin and Ram Mohana Reddy Guddeti. 2020. Impact of inquiry interventions on students in e-learning and classroom environments using affective computing framework. User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction 30, 5 (2020), 759--801.
[6]
Rachel Baker, Di Xu, Jihyun Park, Renzhe Yu, Qiujie Li, Bianca Cung, Christian Fischer, Fernando Rodriguez, Mark Warschauer, and Padhraic Smyth. 2020. The benefits and caveats of using clickstream data to understand student self-regulatory behaviors: opening the black box of learning processes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education 17, 1 (2020), 1--24.
[7]
Jorn Bakker, Mykola Pechenizkiy, and Natalia Sidorova. 2011. What's your current stress level? Detection of stress patterns from GSR sensor data. In 2011 IEEE 11th international conference on data mining workshops. IEEE, 573--580.
[8]
Wolfram Boucsein. 2012. Electrodermal activity. Springer Science & Business Media.
[9]
Margaret M Bradley and Peter J Lang. 1994. Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of behavior therapy and experimental psychiatry 25, 1 (1994), 49--59.
[10]
Ann L Brown. 1992. Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The journal of the learning sciences 2, 2 (1992), 141--178.
[11]
Andreas Bulling, Ulf Blanke, and Bernt Schiele. 2014. A tutorial on human activity recognition using body-worn inertial sensors. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 46, 3 (2014), 1--33.
[12]
Ryan Cain and Victor R Lee. 2016. Measuring electrodermal activity to capture engagement in an afterschool maker program. In Proceedings of the 6th Annual Conference on Creativity and Fabrication in Education. 78--81.
[13]
Rafael A Calvo and Sidney D'Mello. 2012. Frontiers of affect-aware learning technologies. IEEE Intelligent Systems 27, 6 (2012), 86--89.
[14]
Jingjing Chen, Bin Zhu, Olle Balter, Jianliang Xu, Weiwen Zou, Anders Hedman, Rongchao Chen, and Mengdie Sang. 2017. FishBuddy: promoting student engagement in self-paced learning through wearable sensing. In 2017 IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing (SMARTCOMP). IEEE, 1--9.
[15]
Adrian Colomer Granero, Félix Fuentes-Hurtado, Valery Naranjo Ornedo, Jaime Guixeres Provinciale, Jose M Ausín, and Mariano Alcañiz Raya. 2016. A comparison of physiological signal analysis techniques and classifiers for automatic emotional evaluation of audiovisual contents. Frontiers in computational neuroscience 10 (2016), 74.
[16]
Roddy Cowie, Ellen Douglas-Cowie, Nicolas Tsapatsoulis, George Votsis, Stefanos Kollias, Winfried Fellenz, and John G Taylor. 2001. Emotion recognition in human-computer interaction. IEEE Signal processing magazine 18, 1 (2001), 32--80.
[17]
Scott Crossley, Luc Paquette, Mihai Dascalu, Danielle S McNamara, and Ryan S Baker. 2016. Combining click-stream data with NLP tools to better understand MOOC completion. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on learning analytics & knowledge. 6--14.
[18]
João Roberto de Toledo Quadros, Fabio Paschoal, and Laercio Brito Gonçalves. 2017. Facial recognition system for automatic presence control in a classroom. In 2017 12th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI). IEEE, 1--6.
[19]
Abhinav Dhall, Amanjot Kaur, Roland Goecke, and Tom Gedeon. 2018. Emotiw 2018: Audio-video, student engagement and group-level affect prediction. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Multimodal Interaction. 653--656.
[20]
Elena Di Lascio, Shkurta Gashi, and Silvia Santini. 2018. Unobtrusive Assessment of Students' Emotional Engagement During Lectures Using Electrodermal Activity Sensors. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 2, 3 (2018), 1--21.
[21]
Elena Di Lascio, Shkurta Gashi, and Silvia Santini. 2019. Laughter Recognition Using Non-invasive Wearable Devices. In Proceedings of the 13th EAI International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare. 262--271.
[22]
Sidney D'Mello. 2013. A selective meta-analysis on the relative incidence of discrete affective states during learning with technology. Journal of Educational Psychology 105, 4 (2013), 1082.
[23]
Sidney K D'mello and Jacqueline Kory. 2015. A review and meta-analysis of multimodal affect detection systems. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 47, 3 (2015), 1--36.
[24]
Prakash Duraisamy, James Van Haneghan, William Blackwell, Steve Jackson, G Murugesan, and KS Tamilselvan. 2019. Classroom engagement evaluation using computer vision techniques. In Pattern Recognition and Tracking XXX, Vol. 10995. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 109950R.
[25]
Andrew Emerson, Nathan Henderson, Jonathan Rowe, Wookhee Min, Seung Lee, James Minogue, and James Lester. 2020. Investigating Visitor Engagement in Interactive Science Museum Exhibits with Multimodal Bayesian Hierarchical Models. In International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education. Springer, 165--176.
[26]
Jennifer A Fredricks and Wendy McColskey. 2012. The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In Handbook of research on student engagement. Springer, 763--782.
[27]
Kathryn A Fuller, Nilushi S Karunaratne, Som Naidu, Betty Exintaris, Jennifer L Short, Michael D Wolcott, Scott Singleton, and Paul J White. 2018. Development of a self-report instrument for measuring in-class student engagement reveals that pretending to engage is a significant unrecognized problem. PloS one 13, 10 (2018), e0205828.
[28]
Nan Gao, Wei Shao, Mohammad Saiedur Rahaman, and Flora D Salim. 2020. n-Gage: Predicting in-class Emotional, Behavioural and Cognitive Engagement in the Wild. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 4, 3 (2020), 1--26.
[29]
Maurizio Garbarino, Matteo Lai, Dan Bender, Rosalind W Picard, and Simone Tognetti. 2014. Empatica E3---A wearable wireless multi-sensor device for real-time computerized biofeedback and data acquisition. In 2014 4th International Conference on Wireless Mobile Communication and Healthcare-Transforming Healthcare Through Innovations in Mobile and Wireless Technologies (MOBIHEALTH). IEEE, 39--42.
[30]
Shkurta Gashi, Elena Di Lascio, and Silvia Santini. 2018. Using students' physiological synchrony to quantify the classroom emotional climate. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM International Joint Conference and 2018 International Symposium on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Wearable Computers. 698--701.
[31]
Shkurta Gashi, Elena Di Lascio, and Silvia Santini. 2019. Using Unobtrusive Wearable Sensors to Measure the Physiological Synchrony Between Presenters and Audience Members. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 3, 1 (2019), 1--19.
[32]
Shkurta Gashi, Elena Di Lascio, Bianca Stancu, Vedant Das Swain, Varun Mishra, Martin Gjoreski, and Silvia Santini. 2020. Detection of artifacts in ambulatory electrodermal activity data. Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 4, 2 (2020), 1--31.
[33]
Aurélien Géron. 2019. Hands-on machine learning with Scikit-Learn, Keras, and TensorFlow: Concepts, tools, and techniques to build intelligent systems. "O'Reilly Media, Inc.".
[34]
Michail N Giannakos, Kshitij Sharma, Sofia Papavlasopoulou, Ilias O Pappas, and Vassilis Kostakos. 2020. Fitbit for learning: Towards capturing the learning experience using wearable sensing. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 136 (2020), 102384.
[35]
Benjamin Goldberg, Keith W Brawner, and Heather K Holden. 2012. Efficacy of measuring engagement during computer-based training with low-cost electroencephalogram (EEG) sensor outputs. In Proceedings of the human factors and ergonomics society annual meeting, Vol. 56. SAGE Publications Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA, 198--202.
[36]
Alberto Greco, Gaetano Valenza, Antonio Lanata, Enzo Pasquale Scilingo, and Luca Citi. 2015. cvxEDA: A convex optimization approach to electrodermal activity processing. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 63, 4 (2015), 797--804.
[37]
Reza Hadi Mogavi, Xiaojuan Ma, and Pan Hui. 2021. Characterizing Student Engagement Moods for Dropout Prediction in Question Pool Websites. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 5, CSCW1 (2021), 1--22.
[38]
Nils Y Hammerla, Shane Halloran, and Thomas Plötz. 2016. Deep, convolutional, and recurrent models for human activity recognition using wearables. In Proc. Joint Int. Conf. Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI).
[39]
Andy Hargreaves. 2000. Mixed emotions: Teachers' perceptions of their interactions with students. Teaching and teacher education 16, 8 (2000), 811--826.
[40]
Mariam Hassib, Stefan Schneegass, Philipp Eiglsperger, Niels Henze, Albrecht Schmidt, and Florian Alt. 2017. EngageMeter: A system for implicit audience engagement sensing using electroencephalography. In Proceedings of the 2017 Chi conference on human factors in computing systems. 5114--5119.
[41]
Jennifer Healey and Rosalind W Picard. 1998. Startlecam: A cybernetic wearable camera. In Digest of Papers. Second International Symposium on Wearable Computers (Cat. No. 98EX215). IEEE, 42--49.
[42]
Rui Henriques, Ana Paiva, and Claudia Antunes. 2013. Accessing emotion patterns from affective interactions using electrodermal activity. In 2013 humaine association conference on affective computing and intelligent interaction. IEEE, 43--48.
[43]
Javier Hernandez, Ivan Riobo, Agata Rozga, Gregory D Abowd, and Rosalind W Picard. 2014. Using electrodermal activity to recognize ease of engagement in children during social interactions. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing. 307--317.
[44]
J Richard Landis and Gary G Koch. 1977. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics (1977), 363--374.
[45]
Charlotte Larmuseau, Pieter Vanneste, Jan Cornelis, Piet Desmet, and Fien Depaepe. 2019. Combining physiological data and subjective measurements to investigate cognitive load during complex learning. Frontline Learning Research 7, 2 (2019), 57--74.
[46]
Celine Latulipe, Erin A Carroll, and Danielle Lottridge. 2011. Love, hate, arousal and engagement: exploring audience responses to performing arts. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1845--1854.
[47]
Mark R Lepper, Maria Woolverton, Donna L Mumme, and J Gurtner. 1993. Motivational techniques of expert human tutors: Lessons for the design of computer-based tutors. Computers as cognitive tools 1993 (1993), 75--105.
[48]
Qiujie Li, Rachel Baker, and Mark Warschauer. 2020. Using clickstream data to measure, understand, and support self-regulated learning in online courses. The Internet and Higher Education 45 (2020), 100727.
[49]
Qing Li, Yuan Ren, Tianyu Wei, Chengcheng Wang, Zhi Liu, and Jieyu Yue. 2020. A Learning Attention Monitoring System via Photoplethysmogram Using Wearable Wrist Devices. Artificial Intelligence Supported Educational Technologies (2020), 133.
[50]
Jessica Lin, Eamonn Keogh, Li Wei, and Stefano Lonardi. 2007. Experiencing SAX: a novel symbolic representation of time series. Data Mining and knowledge discovery 15, 2 (2007), 107--144.
[51]
David T Lykken and Peter H Venables. 1971. Direct measurement of skin conductance: A proposal for standardization. Psychophysiology 8, 5 (1971), 656--672.
[52]
Debra K Meyer and Julianne C Turner. 2006. Re-conceptualizing emotion and motivation to learn in classroom contexts. Educational Psychology Review 18, 4 (2006), 377--390.
[53]
Ritayan Mitra and Pankaj Chavan. 2019. DEBE feedback for large lecture classroom analytics. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge. 426--430.
[54]
Ahmed Ali Mubarak, Han Cao, and Salah AM Ahmed. 2021. Predictive learning analytics using deep learning model in MOOCs' courses videos. Education and Information Technologies 26, 1 (2021), 371--392.
[55]
Lorenz S Neuwirth, Svetlana Jović, and B Runi Mukherji. 2020. Reimagining higher education during and post-COVID-19: Challenges and opportunities. Journal of Adult and Continuing Education (2020), 1477971420947738.
[56]
Jaclyn Ocumpaugh. 2015. Baker Rodrigo Ocumpaugh monitoring protocol (BROMP) 2.0 technical and training manual. Technical Report. Technical Report. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University ....
[57]
Francisco Javier Ordóñez and Daniel Roggen. 2016. Deep convolutional and lstm recurrent neural networks for multimodal wearable activity recognition. Sensors 16, 1 (2016), 115.
[58]
Maja Pantic and Leon JM Rothkrantz. 2003. Toward an affect-sensitive multimodal human-computer interaction. Proc. IEEE 91, 9 (2003), 1370--1390.
[59]
Jihyun Park, Kameryn Denaro, Fernando Rodriguez, Padhraic Smyth, and Mark Warschauer. 2017. Detecting changes in student behavior from clickstream data. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Learning Analytics & Knowledge Conference. 21--30.
[60]
Reinhard Pekrun, Anne C Frenzel, Thomas Goetz, and Raymond P Perry. 2007. The control-value theory of achievement emotions: An integrative approach to emotions in education. In Emotion in education. Elsevier, 13--36.
[61]
Penelope L Peterson, Susan R Swing, Kevin D Stark, and Gregory A Waas. 1984. Students' cognitions and time on task during mathematics instruction. American Educational Research Journal 21, 3 (1984), 487--515.
[62]
Sintija Petrovica. 2013. Adaptation of tutoring to students' emotions in emotionally intelligent tutoring systems. In 2013 second international conference on e-learning and E-technologies in education (ICEEE). IEEE, 131--136.
[63]
Phuong Pham and Jingtao Wang. 2015. AttentiveLearner: improving mobile MOOC learning via implicit heart rate tracking. In International conference on artificial intelligence in education. Springer, 367--376.
[64]
Phuong Pham and Jingtao Wang. 2018. Predicting learners' emotions in mobile MOOC learning via a multimodal intelligent tutor. In International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems. Springer, 150--159.
[65]
Rosalind W Picard. 2000. Affective computing. MIT press.
[66]
Thomas PlÖtz. 2021. Applying machine learning for sensor data analysis in interactive systems: Common pitfalls of pragmatic use and ways to avoid them. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 54, 6 (2021), 1--25.
[67]
Ming-Zher Poh, Nicholas C Swenson, and Rosalind W Picard. 2010. A wearable sensor for unobtrusive, long-term assessment of electrodermal activity. IEEE transactions on Biomedical engineering 57, 5 (2010), 1243--1252.
[68]
Jonathan P Rowe, Bradford W Mott, and James C Lester. 2015. Opportunities and Challenges in Generalizable Sensor-Based Affect Recognition for Learning. In AIED Workshops.
[69]
Chanel M Schwenck and Jessica D Pryor. 2021. Student perspectives on camera usage to engage and connect in foundational education classes: It's time to turn your cameras on. International Journal of Educational Research Open 2 (2021), 100079.
[70]
Gale M Sinatra, Benjamin C Heddy, and Doug Lombardi. 2015. The challenges of defining and measuring student engagement in science., 13 pages.
[71]
Chinchu Thomas and Dinesh Babu Jayagopi. 2017. Predicting student engagement in classrooms using facial behavioral cues. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI international workshop on multimodal interaction for education. 33--40.
[72]
B Troy Frensley, Marc J Stern, and Robert B Powell. 2020. Does student enthusiasm equal learning? The mismatch between observed and self-reported student engagement and environmental literacy outcomes in a residential setting. The Journal of Environmental Education 51, 6 (2020), 449--461.
[73]
Qiaosi Wang, Shan Jing, David Joyner, Lauren Wilcox, Hong Li, Thomas Plötz, and Betsy Disalvo. 2020. Sensing Affect to Empower Students: Learner Perspectives on Affect-Sensitive Technology in Large Educational Contexts. In Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Learning@ Scale. 63--76.
[74]
James E Willis III and Viktoria Alane Strunk. 2015. Ethical responsibilities of preserving academicians in an age of mechanized learning: Balancing the demands of educating at capacity and preserving human interactivity. In Rethinking machine ethics in the age of ubiquitous technology. IGI Global, 166--195.
[75]
Timothy J Xeriland. 2018. Intelligent Tutor Systems Addressing Student Disengagement: Adding Formative Reappraisal to Enhance Engagement and Learning. Michigan State University.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Ongoing tracking of engagement in motor learningOpen Research Europe10.12688/openreseurope.17034.14(28)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
  • (2024)Understanding Physiological Responses of Students Over Different CoursesProceedings of the 2024 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers10.1145/3675095.3676620(104-110)Online publication date: 5-Oct-2024
  • (2024)Heart Rate-Based Emotion Recognition and Adaptive Emotion Regulation Support with Wrist-Worn Wearables: A Systematic Literature ReviewInformation Systems and Neuroscience10.1007/978-3-031-58396-4_31(355-366)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Reading the Room: Automated, Momentary Assessment of Student Engagement in the Classroom: Are We There Yet?

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies
      Proceedings of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies  Volume 6, Issue 3
      September 2022
      1612 pages
      EISSN:2474-9567
      DOI:10.1145/3563014
      Issue’s Table of Contents
      This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 07 September 2022
      Published in IMWUT Volume 6, Issue 3

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Electrodermal Activity
      2. Engagements
      3. Momentary Assessments
      4. Students
      5. Wearable

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

      Funding Sources

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)489
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)77
      Reflects downloads up to 01 Nov 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Ongoing tracking of engagement in motor learningOpen Research Europe10.12688/openreseurope.17034.14(28)Online publication date: 15-Feb-2024
      • (2024)Understanding Physiological Responses of Students Over Different CoursesProceedings of the 2024 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers10.1145/3675095.3676620(104-110)Online publication date: 5-Oct-2024
      • (2024)Heart Rate-Based Emotion Recognition and Adaptive Emotion Regulation Support with Wrist-Worn Wearables: A Systematic Literature ReviewInformation Systems and Neuroscience10.1007/978-3-031-58396-4_31(355-366)Online publication date: 26-Jul-2024
      • (2023)PhysioKit: An Open-Source, Low-Cost Physiological Computing Toolkit for Single- and Multi-User StudiesSensors10.3390/s2319824423:19(8244)Online publication date: 4-Oct-2023
      • (2023)Challenges in Using Skin Conductance Responses for Assessments of Information Worker ProductivityProceedings of the 2023 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers10.1145/3594738.3611360(33-38)Online publication date: 8-Oct-2023
      • (2023)WiFiTuned: Monitoring Engagement in Online Participation by Harmonizing WiFi and AudioProceedings of the 25th International Conference on Multimodal Interaction10.1145/3577190.3614108(670-678)Online publication date: 9-Oct-2023
      • (2023)EnGauge: Engagement Gauge of Meeting Participants Estimated by Facial Expression and Deep Neural NetworkIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3279428(1-1)Online publication date: 2023

      View Options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Get Access

      Login options

      Full Access

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media