Automatic Concepts Classification based on Bloom’s Taxonomy using Text Analysis and the Naïve Bayes Classifier Method

Fatema Nafa, Salem Othman, Javed Khan

2016

Abstract

This paper aims to add Bloom’s Taxonomy levels as tags to the contents (e.g. concepts) of any given text-book which is written in formal English and given as a course material. Bloom’s Taxonomy levels defines concepts and knowledge of learning as six levels. Preparing the material of any course based on these six could help the students to better understand the course’s concepts and their interrelationships. However, the relations between concepts are highly sophisticated and require a human judgment. A set of methods have been proposed to extract the relations among concepts. We use the naïve Bayes classifier which is the best known and most successful classification technique in Machine Learning (Mahesh Kini M et al., 2015). This work presents a naive classifier method which identifies the Bloom’s Taxonomy levels in text paragraphs based on some rules in the training set. We evaluate and validate the proposed method on a text-book. By utilizing the concepts of computer science for determining its knowledge domain. As a result of the proposed method achieves an accuracy of average 70-85%, which is significantly high. Furthermore, we show that taking Bloom’s Taxonomy levels into account in course design is valuable and our method can be used to achieve.

References

  1. Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, 2001. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives, abridged edition. White Plains, NY: Longman.
  2. Baeza-Yates, R. and Ribeiro-Neto, B. 1999. Modern Information Retrieval. Addison Wesley.
  3. Ben Abacha, A., Zweigenbaum, P., 2011. A hybrid approach for the extraction of semantic relations from MEDLINE abstracts. In: 12th International Conference on Intelligent Text Processing and Computational Linguistics CICLING2011, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 139- 150.
  4. Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. 1956. Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain.
  5. Hearst, M.A, 1993. TextTiling: A quantitative approach to discourse segmentation. Technical report, University of California, Berkeley, Sequoia.
  6. Johnson, C.G. and Fuller, U., 2006, February. Is Bloom's taxonomy appropriate for computer science?. In Proceedings of the 6th Baltic Sea conference on Computing education research: Koli Calling 2006 (pp. 120-123). ACM.
  7. Lister, R., & Leaney, J. 2003. Introductory programming, criterion-referencing, and bloom. In ACM SIGCSE Bulletin (Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 143-147). ACM.
  8. Loga Soumiya,Miraclin Joyce Pamila 2014 Performance Evaluation and Experiment with Data-Driven Techniques to Sentiment Classification of Movie Review using Naïve Bayes classification International Journal of Advances in Computer Science and Communication Engineering.
  9. Machanick, P. 2000. Experience of applying Bloom's Taxonomy in three courses. In Proc. Southern African Computer Lecturers' Association Conference (pp. 135- 144).
  10. Mahesh Kini M, Saroja Devi H , Prashant G Desai, Niranjan Chiplunkar 2015 Text Mining Approach to Classify Technical Research Documents using Naïve Bayes International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer and Communication Engineering .
  11. Manaris, B. and McCauley, R. 2004.Incorporating HCI into the undergraduate curriculum: Bloom's taxonomy meets the CC'01 curricular guidelines. Frontiers in Education. FIE 34th Annual Meeting, 2004, T2H/10- T2H/15.
  12. Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Bill MacCartney and Christopher D. Manning. 2006. Generating Typed Dependency Parses from Phrase Structure Parses. In LREC 2006.
  13. McCallum, Andrew, and Kamal Nigam. 1998 A comparison of event models for naive bayes text classification. AAAI-98 workshop on learning for text categorization.
  14. Nafa F. and Khan J. 2015. Conceptualize the Domain Knowledge Space in the Light of Cognitive Skills. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Computer Supported Education.
  15. Oliver, D, Dobele, T., Greber, M. and 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.
  16. Pang, Bo, and Lillian Lee. 2004. A sentimental education: Sentiment analysis using subjectivity summarization based on minimum cuts. Proceedings of the 42nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics. Association for Computational Linguistics,
  17. S. Arlot and A. Celisse, 2010 A survey of cross-validation procedures for model selection, in Statistics Surveys.
  18. Scott, T., 2003. Bloom's taxonomy applied to testing in computer science classes. Journal of Computing Sciences in Colleges, 19(1), pp.267-274.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Nafa F., Othman S. and Khan J. (2016). Automatic Concepts Classification based on Bloom’s Taxonomy using Text Analysis and the Naïve Bayes Classifier Method . In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU, ISBN 978-989-758-179-3, pages 391-396. DOI: 10.5220/0005813303910396


in Bibtex Style

@conference{csedu16,
author={Fatema Nafa and Salem Othman and Javed Khan},
title={Automatic Concepts Classification based on Bloom’s Taxonomy using Text Analysis and the Naïve Bayes Classifier Method},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,},
year={2016},
pages={391-396},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0005813303910396},
isbn={978-989-758-179-3},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Education - Volume 2: CSEDU,
TI - Automatic Concepts Classification based on Bloom’s Taxonomy using Text Analysis and the Naïve Bayes Classifier Method
SN - 978-989-758-179-3
AU - Nafa F.
AU - Othman S.
AU - Khan J.
PY - 2016
SP - 391
EP - 396
DO - 10.5220/0005813303910396