<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD JATS (Z39.96) Journal Archiving and Interchange DTD v1.0 20120330//EN" "JATS-archivearticle1.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">
  <front>
    <journal-meta />
    <article-meta>
      <title-group>
        <article-title>Ubiquitous Learning Analytics Using Learning Logs</article-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Hiroaki Ogata</string-name>
          <email>hiroaki.ogata@gmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff0">0</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Songran Liu</string-name>
          <email>lb90518@gmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author">
          <string-name>Kousuke Mouri</string-name>
          <email>mourikousuke@gmail.com</email>
          <xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1">1</xref>
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff0">
          <label>0</label>
          <institution>Kyushu University</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>744 Motooka, Nishi-Ku, Fukuoka, 819-0395, Japan, +81-92-802-5875</addr-line>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff1">
          <label>1</label>
          <institution>University of Tokushima</institution>
          ,
          <addr-line>2-1 Minamijosanjima, Tokushima, 770-8506, Japan, +81-88-656-7497</addr-line>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <abstract>
        <p>To the new international students who learn Japanese out-class in Japan, it is too hard to find different suitable ways for different students that have different learning characteristics. This paper considers to solve this problem, which is how to help new international students who learn Japanese for out-class learning according student's own learning frequency. This paper uses learning frequency as the point to understand students' learning behavior characteristics so that distinguish among different learning characteristics. The proposal algorithm in this paper helps international students to find similar students who have the similar information background and similar learning characteristics, and then recommends the new student suitable learning contents. To achieve the goal, this paper uses learning analytics method based on SCROLL system. This paper uses kmeans clustering to build student learning frequency model, and predict the relationship between user information and frequency model by classification. After finding the similar student for new student, the system will recommend learning content what the similar have learned to the new student. This paper compares the difference among Bayesian Network, C4.5 and Neural Network in our program.</p>
      </abstract>
      <kwd-group>
        <kwd>eol&gt;Learning logs</kwd>
        <kwd>ubiquitous learning</kwd>
        <kwd>language learning</kwd>
      </kwd-group>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
  <body>
    <sec id="sec-1">
      <title>1. INTRODUCTION</title>
      <p>
        Recently, more and more students who are learning second
language (L2) have begun to use smartphone educational software
to study. What’s more, mobile devices can influence how
information is gathered and used in education [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref5">6</xref>
        ]. Thus, when
learners use mobile devices to study, devices will record not only
the learning contents, but raw learning environment data of
learners, like GPS, temperature, speed, photos, audios, even
battery information. With these information, educational software
can analyze learning habits, learning environment, or learning
contexts of learners to help learners to study. Therefore, numerous
mobile educational applications have begun to focus on learners’
learning data to support learners’ L2 learning.
      </p>
      <p>
        Smartphones provide all kinds of educational software to
support learners’ all aspects of learning both in-class and out-class
for seamless language study. Seamless learning allows learners to
learn anytime, anywhere, and provides them with multiple ways
of learning throughout the day [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref10">11</xref>
        ]. What’s more, Teachers can
also use smartphone to give various assistance to help students to
study language out-class. Therefore it lets the dream that student
can study not only in-class, but also out-class come true. This is
the reason that Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) has
become a hot hint immediately in the field of education [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref3">3</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        However, how to make sense to a wide variety of L2 learners
out-class has become a problem. Because of the individual
difference, educational software cannot use the same learning
strategy for different students. SCROLL (System for Capturing
and Reminding of Learning Log) was proposed to solve
individual difference of L2 learners. SCROLL considers
distinguish individual difference by learning habit in context. It
means, when international students learn L2 using SCROLL,
SCROLL will record not only the learning contents, but also the
learning time, learning locations, the photos, even learning speed
to record learning habit environment in context by these
information. Then SCROLL will save these Ubiquitous Learning
Log Objects (ULLOs) as learning habit environments of learners.
When SCROLL detects that the student is in his learning habit
environment again, SCROLL will remind him to learn what he
has learned again to recall this knowledge and recommend him
related and suitable learning contents [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">7</xref>
        ]. This proposal approach
is good for learner to learn L2 in context by learning habit
environment. But SCROLL cannot remind a learner to study if the
learner has no or not enough learning logs in SCROLL.
      </p>
      <p>This paper proposes a learning analytics approach to remind
the learners, who have not enough learning logs in SCROLL,
suitable advices to guide them for their out-class Japanese
learning using SCROLL. This paper exploits learning frequency
factor to analyze learning characteristics of different L2 learners
in SCROLL. Firstly this paper builds learning frequency model
(LF Model) with k-means clustering using users’ information in
SCROLL, and then analyze the information of already exists
students to predict what kind of background information will
perform what kind of learning frequency with classification, at
last recommend suitable learning contents at suitable learning
frequency.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-2">
      <title>2. SCROLL</title>
      <p>
        SCROLL allows the learners to log their learning
experiences with photos, audios, videos, location, QR-code, RFID
tag, and sensor data, and to share and to reuse ULLOs with others
everywhere and anytime [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref6">7</xref>
        ]. Using SCROLL, language learners
can record their learning experience whenever and whatever.
SCROLL is a cloud-based application, which runs on different
platforms including Android mobile phones, PC and general
mobile phones. SCROLL aims to utilize life-log data for the
learning process. When international students learn Japanese
using SCROLL, there are three kinds of main learning behavior
shown in figure 1.
      </p>
      <p>Firstly, international students add words and grammars in
SCROLL shown in figure 1. (a). At this time, SCROLL will
record words or grammar, location, time, speed and so on that
created by students. Secondly, when they answer quizzes in
SCROLL shown in figure 1. (b), SCROLL will record the time,
location, quizzes, and the answer. Thirdly, when they use tasks to
do experiential learning for Japanese in SCROLL shown in figure
1 (c), SCROLL will record the content of tasks which they used,
and time, location, and so on. Additionally, SCROLL can record
the duration of study when students learn a kind of language, this
paper considers that the duration of Japanese learning in SCROLL
begin to calculate from the first learning content, and when the
number of new words is not more than one that the student adds
to SCROLL last 4 weeks, this paper considers the first week of
this period is the end time. And the time from start to end, is
duration of study. And the time from start to end, is duration of
study.</p>
      <p>(a) New learning log (b) Quiz
(c) Task</p>
      <p>After students recorded their learning logs in SCROLL by
these functions. SCROLL will remember their learning
environments, like GPS information, time and so on. When
students move to this environment again, SCROLL will recall the
learning contents that they have learned to help them remember
them in the same environment, and recommend rerated words.</p>
      <p>SCROLL completed the experimental evaluation with 20
Japanese university-sophomores (17 males, 3 females) who were
taking the communicative English class at the university. There
are two tests in the evaluation, one is pre-test, and the other is
post-test. Both of the two tests’ full mark is 60. All the students
joined these two tests, and got mark. The result shows that all the
students’ score was improved by using SCROLL to learn English.
Therefore SCROLL can enhance language learning. However,
there are some deficiencies in recommendation function of
SCROLL.</p>
      <p>The recommendation function in SCROLL is based on what
learner has learned and where the learner has learned. If the
learner hasn’t learned any learning content before, SCROLL will
not recommend any learning content for the learner. Learners
cannot find similar learners in SCROLL. It is hard for learners to
know what they should learn next. For example, when an
international student signs up SCROLL just now, there is no
learning log in SCROLL. The algorithm of SCROLL is when a
learner adds a learning content to SCROLL, SCROLL will record
not only learning content, includes photo, audio, words, but the
learning environment, includes time, location, speed, and then
from these learning information, SCROLL will analyze out the
favorite learning environment of the learner. And when the
learner enters into the environment again, SCROLL will
recommend him to learn what he has learned there and the related
learning content. Therefore, to the learner sign up SCROLL just
now, SCROLL cannot give any learning suggestion or show any
similar learner for him.</p>
      <p>In order to improve recommendation function of SCROLL,
this paper uses learning frequency as starting point to find similar
L2 learners for the new learners. Firstly, analyzes out learning
frequency model of the learner by learners’ personal information
using k-means clustering algorithm. Secondly, predict out
meaningful attributes to find similar learners using decision tree
classification algorithm. Thirdly, find out learning contents of
similar learners. At last, show these learning contents to users and
when SCROLL recommend related learning contents, recommend
these learning contents as related learning contents to learner.</p>
      <p>In proposal approach, even learner has not leaned one
learning content, SCROLL also can find similar learners and
suitable learning content for the new learner. What’s more,
recommendation function in SCROLL will be not only just based
on learners’ learning habit environment, but also leaners’ learning
frequency, the key determinant of L2 language acquisition.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-3">
      <title>3. Related Work</title>
      <p>
        In past decades, there have been several adaptive learning
proposal methods to generate learner model to help learners, such
as two-source adaptive learning (TSAL) system [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">10</xref>
        ] that is
developed by Judy C.R, Adaptive Learning Module which is
developed by Rahul Agarwal [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ], and the AdaLearn, which is
developed by Marwah Alian [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ]
      </p>
      <p>
        The two-source adaptive learning (TSAL) system has
suggested that using two-source include Learning Style and
Learning Behavior to improve learning performances. The
Learning Style parameters include Sequential Processing Skill,
Discrimination Skill, Analytic Skill, and Spatial Skill. The
Learning Behavior parameters include Learning Achievement,
Learning Effectiveness, and Concentration Degree. TSAL uses
this two source parameters to generate the presentation style for
each learner. Then TSAL will give different learning suggestion
to different kinds of presentation styles. The experiments and
evaluation has been done with 91 learners in three groups. The
result proved the learning achievements and learning efficacy of
learners in experiment group have been improved[
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref9">10</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        The Adaptive Learning Module is designed based on
learners’ learning experience using NetCoach to analyze out
learners learning pace, so that adjusting the teaching paces to
learners personal learning pace. Different learners have different
individualized paces. Thus Adaptive Learning Module let learners
to know their suitable individualized paces to achieve the goal of
providing the suitable learning contents at suitable learning pace,
so that those learners are able to proceed through the learning
contents at individualized paces without any adversely affecting
their performances [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref2">2</xref>
        ].
      </p>
      <p>
        The AdaLearn can be used to give recommendation for
individual learners about which kind of course is the most suitable
for learners by adapting and fitting learners profile and needs [
        <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1">1</xref>
        ].
In AdaLearn, system makes the connection with learner’s profile
and course’s learning contents, and then, predicts which course is
the best to the learner.
      </p>
      <p>This paper proposes an approach using learning behavior,
learning experience and learner profile in SCROLL to understand
learners’ learning favorite frequency and finds similar learners for
the new learners.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-4">
      <title>4. Data and Algorithm Preparation</title>
      <p>In SCROLL database, there are 3632 student records from
2010 by now. When a learner registers SCROLL system just now,
there are just some background information data in SCROLL
shown in table 1. Nickname is user’s nickname. In table 2, Native
Language is user’s mother tongue, it is the most important factor
to influence L2 learning. For example, if the learner’s native
language is Chinese, it is easy for him to learn Japanese, because
they have the same Chinese characters, and similar pronunciation.
Gender also affects user’s L2 learning, because the views and idea
are difference between male and female. JLPT is Japanese
Language Proficiency Test Level, when students study abroad in
Japan, they have to take this test and get a level mark to show
their Japanese level. Thus this factor can be used to reflect user’s
Japanese ability directly. Month means how long learner has lived
in Japan. Learners who have acquired general knowledge and
experience are in a stronger position to learn Japanese than those
who haven't. The student, for example, who has already lived in 3
months and been exposed to various Japanese cultures has a
stronger base for learning Japanese than the student who hasn't
had such experiences. Major can influence learner’s L2 learning
too. To students, besides L2 learning in daily life, the most article
they read and write is their major article. For instance, the student
whose major is Computer Sciences knows much more words,
sentences, article about Computer Sciences than the student in
Life and Culture. Therefore, major can also influence learner’s L2
learning in daily life and study.</p>
      <p>In order to predict what kind of behavior the new student
will perform, it is useful to calculate out the relationship between
information background data and learning behavior data. This
paper presents some analysis methods to do this prediction with
WEKA. (http://www.cs.waikato.ac.nz/ml/weka/)</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-5">
      <title>5. Classification and prediction</title>
      <p>In this paper, in order to predict students’ learning frequency
and suitable learning contents, our approach exploit clustering and
classification analysis method to achieve our purpose. As shown
in figure 2, our approach consists of following parts:</p>
      <sec id="sec-5-1">
        <title>Clustering of already exists data of students to create LF model.</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-5-2">
        <title>Classification prediction of new student to find similar students and suitable learning contents.</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-5-3">
        <title>Generating recommendation learning contents sequence. Figure 2. Analysis process.</title>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-6">
      <title>5.1 Data preprocessing</title>
      <p>In SCROLL, there are 3632 student records from 2010 by
now. It includes the records of students’ learning frequency and
information background that when they use SCROLL.</p>
      <p>From these data, there are lot of information like learning
content, location, learning time and quizzes and so on. But our
concern is that students’ learning frequency, not weather students
can use this skill or not. Therefore only these fields were selected
which were required for our data mining process, they are the
total number of words, the total number of locations, the total
number of quiz and the number of weeks they use SCROLL. By
these data, it is easy to calculate out average word learning
frequency weekly (WLF), location learning frequency weekly
(LLF) and quiz learning frequency (QLF) weekly; this paper calls
them learning frequency for short. By learning frequency,
students’ learning characteristics can be known by analyze their
learning frequency.</p>
      <p>Additionally, when a student registers SCROLL system just
now, we only have some personal information data like native
language, gender, Japanese Language Proficiency Test Level
(JLPT), month, and major of a student. This paper makes
information models by these data so that we can find some
connection among them, thus this paper can find some students
with similar information background for the new student. It’s
beneficial for new student to study follow students who have
similar language basis.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-7">
      <title>5.2 Generate Learning Frequency Model</title>
      <p>In this paper, in order to find different kinds of learning
frequency. It is easy to achieve our target by K-means clustering
algorithm. First of all, this paper establishes three coordinates. In
these coordinates, x-axis means learning time, y-axis means the
number of words, locations or quiz. Thus, the data point in these
coordinate means how long he use SCROLL and how many
words, different places or how many quizzes they have studied
using SCROLL. For example, as the three point data. This student
use SCROLL for 22 weeks, learned 67 words, in 36 different
locations, answered 493 quizzes.</p>
      <p>After establishing coordinates, we do cluster analysis with
the group of word and time. These learning data is divided into
two clusters, the longest time student use SCROLL is 23 weeks,
and the shortest one is 2 weeks. The most number of words is 261,
and the least one is 64.</p>
      <p>By these rules, student data can be divided into 8 models.
The number of these model do not mean this model is right or
wrong, it just means a kind of learning frequency. Now, to the
learners that already exists in SCROLL, we have known which
frequency models they are. Besides, we also can get their learning
contents. Therefore, if when the new international student register
SCROLL, we can predict similar students and learning frequency
for him, SCROLL is able to recommend suitable learning contents
for him.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-8">
      <title>5.3 Learning Frequency Prediction</title>
      <p>If a new L2 learner registers SCROLL just now, and has not
added a learning log in SCROLL. What SCROLL has about the
learner is only the information background. Therefore, it is
necessary to know the relationship between learner’s information
background and learning frequency model. Because we can
exploit this relationship to predict what kind of information
background will perform like what kind of learning frequency
model.</p>
      <p>There are 5 kinds of background information, Native
language, Gender, JLPT, month, and major. Thus, they can
produce at least 5!=120 kinds of combinations. For example, if
when SCROLL finds the new learner, SCROLL is able to find
similar learners just using Native language and JLPT. This two
attributes will be referred to meaningful attributes. System does
not have to consider the other three attribute. Besides, decision
tree can judge which attributes will be meaningful and generate
structure with meaningful attributes, and then predict result.
Additionally, this paper considers to find similar L2 learners not
only based on learning frequency model, but also the meaningful
attributes between each other. Therefore, this paper uses decision
tree to make prediction.</p>
      <p>After clustering analysis, SCROLL gets learning frequency
models of all students in, and saved them to database. This table
includes id, nickname, native language, gender, JLPT, month,
major and model. Model means learning frequency model of
students. We can make prediction by the table.</p>
      <p>This paper compared three kinds of classification prediction
algorithms. They are C4.5 and Bayesian Network and Neural
Network. After training the 3632 records in SCROLL database by
WEKA with three kinds of algorithms, it is important to see the
accuracy rate of each other in prediction. The result is J48(96.0%),
BayesNet (244.4%), and MultilayerPerception(72.7%). From the
result, the accuracy of J48 (C4.5) in this data set is much better
than the other two. Therefore, this paper choose J48 algorithm to
predict learners’ learning frequency.</p>
      <p>The aim of prediction by J48, not only knowing what
learning frequency model the new student will perform, but also
getting which property is affecting the selection of similar
students. Figure 4.3 shows the tree. This figure shows that not
every prediction will use all properties. For instance, if a student’s
native language is Spanish, and with the major of Technologies
Engineering, the result will be predicted by JLPT directly,
without considering the property of month and gender. So it is the
point that we can use to find similar students for new students.
We save this result to database for next procedure.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-9">
      <title>5.4 Similar Students and Suitable Learning</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-10">
      <title>Contents</title>
      <p>After prediction, we have got learning frequency model and
the relationship between model and information background. Next
step is matching similar students for new student, and recommend
learning contents for him. During the prediction procedure, we
have saved prediction results and property conditions to database.
Thus, we can find similar students for new student with those
condition. When selecting and recommending learning contents,
we also use the recommendation strategy. Procedure is shown as
follows:</p>
      <p>(1) After we find similar students with learning frequency
model and information background, we will get a similar student
list.</p>
      <p>(2) Find out what they learned in SCROLL database with
SQL sentence.</p>
      <p>(3) Sort the learning contents by learning time and learning
number of times in ascending order per week.</p>
      <p>(4) Get learning content sequence.</p>
      <p>(5) SCROLL can recommend these learning contents to
new student at his learning frequency.</p>
      <p>For instance. If a student registered SCROLL just now with
the information of English, Technologies/Engineering, 4 month,
N2, Female. System’s performance is shown as Figure 3.</p>
      <p>Firstly, SCROLL get influential properties and predict the
learning frequency model by this data set with J48 decision tree.</p>
      <p>Secondly, SCROLL find similar information background
students with (English, Technologies/Engineering, N2). And with
the same learning frequency model 3. Then, list up their learning
content, including words, grammar, time, location.</p>
      <p>At last, Sort the learning contents by learning time and
learning number of times in ascending order per week. Then,
recommend to this new student.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-11">
      <title>6. Evaluation</title>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-12">
      <title>6.1 Method</title>
      <p>This evaluation experiment has been conducted to find
answers to following questions.</p>
      <sec id="sec-12-1">
        <title>Does this proposal algorithm is helpful for students’ L2 learning?</title>
      </sec>
      <sec id="sec-12-2">
        <title>Are these learning contents suitable for students?</title>
        <p>There are 6 international students who are studying abroad in
Japan, and learning Japanese. They are not the students in
SCROLL yet. Therefore, there is no learning log in their account
of SCROLL. The time living in Japan is less than half year. Three
of them come from China, another one comes from America, and
another one comes from Mongolia, and the last one comes from
France. They are all students in the University of Tokushima.</p>
        <p>Then, they are divided into two groups, one is study group
consisted of 3 students, the other students consist the control
group. They all use SCROLL smart phones version to complete
this evaluation. SCROLL that students in the experimental group
used includes proposal recommendation function, and the
SCROLL that students in control group used only includes current
recommendation function. They participate in this experimental
evaluation for four weeks.</p>
        <p>Group A, an experimental group, learns Japanese using
SCROLL, which includes the recommendation function in this
paper. The Students register system with their personal
information like native language, gender, major and so on. Thus,
SCROLL can predict their learning frequency and suitable
learning contents, then recommend learning contents to them for
four weeks. Group B, a control group, learns Japanese using
SCROLL with current recommendation function for four weeks
as the same.</p>
        <p>In order to analyze the result they produced, SCROLL can
record their learning logs they use it to learn Japanese every time.</p>
        <p>Based on the current recommendation function in SCROLL,
when student goes to a place that he has learned words there,
SCROLL will notice that he has ever learned the words before
and recommend related words or location those are based on
student’s learning logs, to help him learn from their learning logs.
Students of control group used this recommendation function.</p>
        <p>The proposal recommendation function is when SCROLL
notice student to study, SCROLL will find more suitable words
and location information those are not only based on not only him
self’s learning log but also the similar students’, for the student
and then recommend these learning contents to student as related
words. When SCROLL recommends these learning contents to
students, proposal function will control the count of
recommendation learning contents as student’s learning frequency.</p>
      </sec>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-13">
      <title>6.2 Result</title>
      <p>Table 3 shows the counts of their learning logs of each other
in this experiment evaluation.</p>
      <p>Overall, the students in experiment group add more words
than control group, add more location information, and answered
more quizzes in 4 weeks. The result is shown in Figure 4. This
paper considers that the more words students add to SCROLL,
students learn more words. Student A, B, C have added more
words than student D, E, F. To the location result, student A, B, D
and E live in the same place, and far away from school, the range
of activities is larger than C and F, thus A, B, D, E learn Japanese
at more different places. Besides A, B, D, E added more location
information than C and F.</p>
      <p>Student C and student F live nearby, and both near school.
They go to the same supermarket and restaurant. But they had a
very different result on word counts. Student C added more 55
words than student F. when student C opened SCROLL system
web site to learn Japanese, because he signed in SCROLL just
now, there was not a lot learning logs of himself and not so many
related words for him. But he could see the recommended list for
him, and the list showed where, what and how many the similar
students had learned, and he chose the word of “Pot” in Japanese,
then system showed the word and it was learned by user with
nickname of “michi” at supermarket nearby, meanwhile, system
shows that “michi” learned the other two words, “Shelf” and
“Bottle” in Japanese at that time. Moreover, he could see and
“michi”’s every learning log and the other similar students’
learning log. Additionally, when he went to the furniture shop, he
learned the word of “Conversion plugs” in Japanese. After he
added this word to SCROLL, system recommended “Speaker”
and “Tissue paper” that had learned by his similar students ever
before. Then he saw the speaker and tissue paper and took this
two learning logs.</p>
      <p>On the other hand, student F added least words in these 6
students, and went to least places. The learning logs she added to
SCROLL is shown as Table 4. In this table, Upload time means
the time that student upload learning log to system. Content
means the word student learned. Item lat and Item lng mean
learning log’s location information. Because student F also signed
in the system just now, and there was no learning logs of herself
at the beginning. Thus SCROLL could not give her suggestions to
learn Japanese based on her learning logs until she began to use
SCROLL to study. The first word she added to SCROLL was
means book at home. But there is no learner learning
at her home before, SCROLL could not give her any learning
suggestion but some quizzes. At the fifth day, she went to the
supermarket and added a log of “umbrella”. Somebody had added
some learning logs there, thus SCROLL recommended “Sweeper”,
“Flower”, and “Dustbin” to her, and then she added them to her
account. After that, she went to home center to buy shoes, and
took the log of “shoes”, as the same, SCROLL recommended
“Microwave” that had learned other learners to her. Therefore,
when she went to the same supermarket or home center, even at
home, SCROLL could recommend her to learn some words. But it
is wasted for a long time to make SCROLL to adapt her and give
her learning suggestion. On the other hand, the proposal algorithm
is much faster to adapt learners’ learning habits by the other L2
learning factor than the algorithm in SCROLL.</p>
      <p>The data in this table means a student in 4 weeks, how many
words he has added to SCROLL, and how many location he has
learned at, and how many quiz he has answered.</p>
      <p>From this example, the weak point of SCROLL’s algorithm
can be seen. Since only when students go to a place where they
have learned words there, SCROLL can recommend learning
contents for them. Therefore, if student F want to learn more or
want to be recommended more learning contents, he has to go to
many different places to study. On the other hand, student C did
not go to many places either, but he learned much more than
student F.</p>
      <p>Therefore, even if students do not have to go to many places,
proposal algorithm also can recommend them lots of learning
contents.</p>
      <p>Student A, B added more words than D and E. In SCROLL’s
algorithm, when students go to a place, SCROLL will remind him
to learn their learning logs and recommend some related words.
The related words are chosen by location information and
category information. Thus, they are not suitable for students.</p>
      <p>Students in experiment group added totally 222 words.
Among these 222 words, there are 189 recommended words.
Students thought recommended words are suitable for them in
learning or some factors else so that students added these words to
their learning logs. On the other hand, students in control group
added totally 105 words with 42 recommended words. It means,
over half of words were learned by students’ selves. But to the
learning logs of students in experiment group, there are 85.2%
logs learning trough proposal algorithm. Therefore, this paper
considers proposal algorithm is helpful for students’ L2 learning.
Since the words in proposal algorithm are chosen by similar
students’ learning contents. These learning contents are more
suitable than SCROLL’s algorithm’s for students.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-14">
      <title>7. Conclusion and Future Work</title>
      <p>This paper considers to solve this problem, which is how to
help new international students who learn second language
outclass by learning analytics based on SCROLL system. Because
learning frequency is the key factor to the L2 learning, this paper
use learning frequency to distinguish learners learning
characteristics. In this paper, k-means clustering is used to build
learning frequency models to understand learners’ leaning
characteristics. After comparing the result of C4.5 decision tree,
Bayesian Network and Neural Network, this paper determined to
use C4.5 decision tree classification to predict what kind of
student will perform like what kind of learning frequency. And
then, find similar learners and suitable learning contents for the
new learner to help him for L2 learning.</p>
      <p>By the experiment, a result can be seen. It is useful to help
students to learn second language in context based on the
difference between learners’ learning frequency.</p>
      <p>In the future, there are two researches should be done, one is
that it is necessary to complete the sequence mining of
recommended learning contents in this paper, and the other one is
enhance understanding the relationship between context and
learning frequency.</p>
    </sec>
    <sec id="sec-15">
      <title>ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</title>
      <p>This research work was supported by JST PRESTO, and the
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research No.25282059 and
No.21650225 from the Ministry of Education in Japan.</p>
    </sec>
  </body>
  <back>
    <ref-list>
      <ref id="ref1">
        <mixed-citation>
          [1]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Alian</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>AL-Akhras</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
          <article-title>AdaLearn: an adaptive elearning environment</article-title>
          .
          <source>ISWSA '10 Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Intelligent Semantic WebServices and Applications</source>
          ,
          <volume>21</volume>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref2">
        <mixed-citation>
          [2]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Agarwal</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Edwards</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S. H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pérez-Quiñones</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M. A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2006</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Designing an Adaptive Learning Module to Teach Software Testing</article-title>
          .
          <source>SIGCSE '06 Proc. technical symposium on Computer science education</source>
          ,
          <volume>259</volume>
          -
          <fpage>263</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref3">
        <mixed-citation>
          [3]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baleghizadeh</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Oladrostam</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>E.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
          <article-title>The Effect of Mobile Assisted Language Learning (MALL) on Grammatical Accuracy of EFL Students</article-title>
          .
          <source>MEXTESOL Journal, The Internet and Technology in EFL/ESL</source>
          <volume>34</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          )
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baradwaj</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pal</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Mining Educational Data to Analyze Students' Performance. IJ. Advanced Computer Science and Applications</article-title>
          . Vol.
          <volume>2</volume>
          , No.
          <volume>6</volume>
          ,
          <year>2011</year>
          .
          <fpage>63</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>69</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref4">
        <mixed-citation>
          [5]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hung</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.-H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hwang</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>G.-J</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , Lin,
          <string-name>
            <given-names>Y.-F.</given-names>
            ,
            <surname>Wu</surname>
          </string-name>
          , T.-H., &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Su</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>I.-H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Seamless Connection between Learning and assessment-Applying Progressive Learning Tasks in Mobile Ecology Inquiry</article-title>
          .
          <source>Edu. Tech. &amp; Society</source>
          ,
          <volume>16</volume>
          (
          <issue>1</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>194</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>208</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref5">
        <mixed-citation>
          [6]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Johnson</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>L.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Levine</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>A.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Smith</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          , &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Stone</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>S.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2010</year>
          ).
          <article-title>The 2010 Horizon Report</article-title>
          . Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref6">
        <mixed-citation>
          [7]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ogata</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Li</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Uosaki</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>El-Bishouty</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          &amp;
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yano</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
          <article-title>SCROLL: Supporting to Share and Reuse Ubiquitous Learning Log in the Context of Language Learning</article-title>
          . IJRPTEL,
          <volume>6</volume>
          (
          <issue>2</issue>
          ),
          <fpage>69</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>82</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref7">
        <mixed-citation>
          [8]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Pedro</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Baker</surname>
            , R. S.
            <given-names>J.</given-names>
            d. Gobert, J.
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          ).
          <article-title>What Different Kinds of Stratification Can Reveal about the Generalizability of Data-Mined Skill Assessment Models</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proc. LAK</source>
          .
          <volume>190</volume>
          -
          <fpage>194</fpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref8">
        <mixed-citation>
          [9]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Southavilay</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>V.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yacef</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>K.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          <string-name>
            <surname>Reimann</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>P.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Calvo</surname>
            .
            <given-names>A.R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2013</year>
          )
          <article-title>Analysis of Collaborative Writing Processes Using Revision Maps and Probabilistic Topic Models</article-title>
          .
          <source>Proc. LAK</source>
          '
          <volume>13</volume>
          .
          <fpage>38</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>47</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref9">
        <mixed-citation>
          [10]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tseng</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>J. C.R.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Chu</surname>
          </string-name>
          , H.-C.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hwang</surname>
          </string-name>
          , G.-J.,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Tsai</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>C.C.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2008</year>
          ).
          <article-title>Development of an adaptive learning system with two sources of personalization information</article-title>
          .
          <source>Computers &amp; Education</source>
          ,
          <volume>51</volume>
          ,
          <fpage>776</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>786</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
      <ref id="ref10">
        <mixed-citation>
          [11]
          <string-name>
            <surname>Uosaki</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>N.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Ogata</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>H.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Sugimoto</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>T.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Hou</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>B.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          ,
          <string-name>
            <surname>Li</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>M.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          and
          <string-name>
            <surname>Yano</surname>
            ,
            <given-names>Y.</given-names>
          </string-name>
          (
          <year>2011</year>
          )
          <article-title>Supporting English Course with Mobile Devices: How Can We Learn Vocabulary Seamlessly?</article-title>
          <source>Proc. ICCE</source>
          ,
          <fpage>329</fpage>
          -
          <lpage>336</lpage>
          .
        </mixed-citation>
      </ref>
    </ref-list>
  </back>
</article>