Xref: utzoo comp.ai:1423 comp.edu:984 comp.cog-eng:499
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!gatech!hubcap!ncrcae!ncr-sd!ncrlnk!ncrcce!c10sd3!c10sd1!johnson
From: johnson@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM (Wayne D. T. Johnson)
Newsgroups: comp.ai,comp.edu,comp.cog-eng
Subject: Re: Becoming CAI literate
Message-ID: <178@c10sd1.StPaul.NCR.COM>
Date: 4 Mar 88 15:03:53 GMT
References: <2960@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU> <1988Mar2.125247.28809@lsuc.uucp>
Reply-To: johnson@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM (Wayne D. T. Johnson)
Followup-To: johnson@ncrcce.StPaul.NCR.COM
Organization: NCR Comten, St Paul
Lines: 15
Summary: Differences between lsuc practices and others

In article <1988Mar2.125247.28809@lsuc.uucp> dave@lsuc.UUCP (David Sherman) writes:
>What they're
>seeing is the product of endless revision of the course to fine-tune
>it to deal with the specific mistakes that students make.  

I must commend you and your institution on discovering what many instructors
(and most software companies) have failed to realize, a program must be
continued to be modified or "fine-tuned" throughout its life in order for it
to be usefull to its users.  So many times I have seen a program "die" because
it was no longer being kept up to date.

This is one of the needs that AI can provide to CAI, the computer can (without
human intervention) adjust its methodes to best suite the individual student.

I dare say I have seen a few human instructors that have been so set in 
their ways (i.e. curriculum) as to completly ignore the needs of the student.