Do my students understand? Automated identification of doubts from informal reflections
ICCE 2019: Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computers in Education, Kenting, Taiwan, December 2-6, Page: 1-10
2019
- 265Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage265
- Downloads164
- Abstract Views101
Conference Paper Description
Traditionally teaching is usually one directional where the instructor imparts knowledge and there is minimal interaction between learners and instructor. With the focus on learner-centred pedagogy, it can be a challenge to provide timely and relevant guidance to individual learners according to their levels of understanding. One of the options available is to collect reflections from learners after each lesson to extract relevant and high-value feedback so that doubts or questions can be addressed in a timely manner. In this paper, we derived an approach to automate the identification of doubts from the informal reflections through features analysis and machine learning. Using reflections as a feedback mechanism and aligning it to the weekly course content can pave way to a promising approach for learner-centered teaching and personalized learning.
Bibliographic Details
Asia-Pacific Society for Computers in Education
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know