Extending Cognitive Skill Classification of Common Verbs in the Domain of Computer Science for Algorithms Knowledge Units

Fatema Nafa, Javed I. Khan, Salem Othman

Abstract

To provide an adaptive guidance to the instructors through designing an effective curriculum and associated learning objective, an automatic system needs to have a solid idea of the prerequisite cognitive skills that students have before commencing a new knowledge before enhancing those skills which will enable students to steadily acquire new skills. Obtaining the learning objectives in knowledge units based on cognitive skills is a tedious and time-consuming task. This paper presents subtasks of an automatic meta-learning recommended model that enables the extraction of learning objectives from knowledge units, which are teaching materials. Knowing the cognitive skills will help mentors to connect the knowledge gaps between learning materials and their aims. The model applies Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques to identify relevant knowledge units and their verbs, which assist in the identification of extracting the learning objectives and classifying the verbs based on cognitive skill levels. This work focuses on the computer science knowledge domain. We share the result that evaluates and validates the model using three textbooks. The performance analysis shows the importance and the strength of the automatic extraction and classification of the verbs among knowledge units based on cognitive skills.

References

  1. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. Allyn & Bacon.
  2. Baker, R. L., Mwamachi, D. M., Audho, J. O., Aduda, E. O., & Thorpe, W. (1998). The resistance of Galla and Small East African goats in the sub-humid tropics to gastrointestinal nematode infections and the periparturient rise in fecal egg counts. Veterinary Parasitology, 79(1), 53-64.
  3. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals.
  4. Boguraev, B., Carter, D., & Briscoe, T. (1987, April). A multi-purpose interface to an on-line dictionary. In Proceedings of the third conference on European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 63-69). Association for Computational Linguistics.
  5. Burgess, G. A. (2005). Introduction to programming: blooming in America. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 21(1), 19-28.
  6. Cassel, L., Clements, A., Davies, G., Guzdial, M., McCauley, R., McGettrick, A., ... & Weide, B. W. (2008). Computer science curriculum 2008: An interim revision of CS 2001.
  7. Doran, M. V., and Langan, D. D. (1995, March). A cognitive-based approach to introductory computer science courses: lesson learned. In ACM SIGCSE Bulletin (Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 218-222). ACM.
  8. Fürst, F., & Trichet, F. (2005, October). Axiom-based ontology matching. In Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on Knowledge capture (pp. 195-196). ACM.
  9. Gluga, R., Kay, J., Lister, R., Charleston, M., Harland, J., & Teague, D. (2013, January). A conceptual model for reflecting on expected learning vs. demonstrated student performance. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Australasian Computing Education ConferenceVolume 136 (pp. 77-86). Australian Computer Society, Inc.
  10. Grishman, R., Macleod, C., & Meyers, A. (1994, August). COMLEX syntax: Building a computational lexicon. In Proceedings of the 15th conference on Computational Linguistics-Volume 1 (pp. 268-272). Association for Computational Linguistics.
  11. Hearst, M. A. (1992, August). Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text corpora. In Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational LinguisticsVolume 2 (pp. 539-545). Association for Computational Linguistics.
  12. Lister, R. (2000, December). On blooming first year programming, and its blooming assessment. In Proceedings of the Australasian conference on Computing education (pp. 158-162). ACM.
  13. Lister, R., & Leaney, J. (2003). Introductory programming, criterion-referencing, and bloom. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 35(1), 143-147.
  14. Machanick, P. (2000, May). The experience of applying Bloom's Taxonomy in three courses. In Proc. Southern African Computer Lecturers' Association Conference (pp. 135-144).
  15. Nafa. Fatema and Khan J.”Conceptualize the Domain Knowledge Space in the Light of Cognitive Skills.” In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education. 2015.
  16. Navigli, R., Velardi, P., & Gangemi, A. (2003). Ontology learning and its application to automated terminology translation. IEEE Intelligent systems, 18(1), 22-31.
  17. Nevid, J. S., & McClelland, N. (2013). Using action verbs as learning outcomes: applying Bloom's taxonomy in measuring instructional objectives in introductory psychology. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 1(2), 19-24.
  18. Oliver, D., Dobele, T., Greber, M., & Roberts, T. (2004, January). This course has a Bloom Rating of 3.9. In Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Conference on Computing Education-Volume 30 (pp. 227-231). Australian Computer Society, Inc.
  19. Princeton University "About WordNet." WordNet. Princeton University. 2010. http://wordnet.princeton.edu.
  20. Rajaraman, K., & Tan, A. H. (2003, November). Mining semantic networks for knowledge discovery. In Data Mining, 2003. ICDM 2003. Third IEEE International Conference on (pp. 633-636).
  21. Ritter, Alan, Stephen Soderland, and Oren Etzioni. "What Is This, Anyway: Automatic Hypernym Discovery." In AAAI Spring Symposium: Learning by Reading and Learning to Read, pp. 88-93. 2009.
  22. Schuler, K. K. (2005). VerbNet: A broad-coverage, comprehensive verb lexicon.
  23. Starr, C. W., Manaris, B., & Stalvey, R. H. (2008). loom's taxonomy revisited: specifying assessable learning objectives in computer science. ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, 40(1), 261-265.Chicago.
  24. Thompson, E., Luxton-Reilly, A., Whalley, J. L., Hu, M., & Robbins, P. (2008, January). Bloom's taxonomy for CS assessment. In Proceedings of the tenth conference on Australasian computing education-Volume 78 (pp. 155-161). Australian Computer Society, Inc.
  25. Mohsen Tavakol and Reg Dennick.( 2011) Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. International journal of medical education, 2:53-55.
  26. Landauer, T. K., Foltz, P. W., & Laham, D. (1998). An introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse processes, 25(2-3), 259-284.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Nafa F., Khan J. and Othman S. (2017). Extending Cognitive Skill Classification of Common Verbs in the Domain of Computer Science for Algorithms Knowledge Units . In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 1: CSEDU, ISBN 978-989-758-239-4, pages 173-183. DOI: 10.5220/0006376501730183


in Bibtex Style

@conference{csedu17,
author={Fatema Nafa and Javed I. Khan and Salem Othman},
title={Extending Cognitive Skill Classification of Common Verbs in the Domain of Computer Science for Algorithms Knowledge Units},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 1: CSEDU,},
year={2017},
pages={173-183},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0006376501730183},
isbn={978-989-758-239-4},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 1: CSEDU,
TI - Extending Cognitive Skill Classification of Common Verbs in the Domain of Computer Science for Algorithms Knowledge Units
SN - 978-989-758-239-4
AU - Nafa F.
AU - Khan J.
AU - Othman S.
PY - 2017
SP - 173
EP - 183
DO - 10.5220/0006376501730183