1,720,955 research outputs found
Categorized Questions Dataset QuBAN
<p>This dataset was made for the "A Query-Based Approach to Mitigate the Shortcomings of Widely Used Learning Methods through E-Learning" paper. This Dataset's Version 4 uses an updated algorithm for evaluating questions compared to the previous versions and has all the files separated into different csv files instead of excel sheets.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>This dataset consists of 4 .csv files -</p>
<ol>
<li>Data_Structure.csv</li>
<li>2. Introduction_to_Computers_and_Research.csv</li>
<li>3. Irrelevant_Questions.csv.</li>
<li>4. Blooms_Taxonomy.csv</li>
</ol>
<p>File-1 consists of the scored and categorized questions from the "Data Structure" course.</p>
<p>File-2 consists of the scored and categorized questions from the "Introduction to Computers and Research" course.</p>
<p>File-3 consists of the irrelevant questions which do not belong to the courses above but were asked by the students from those courses.</p>
<p>File-4 consists of the keywords of Bloom's Taxonomy used to evaluate the questions in this dataset.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The first 3 files consists of questions asked by students of Independent University, Bangladesh on the Summer 2023 Semester in Computer Science Courses. The last file contains the Bloom's Taxonomy keywords that were used for the question evaluation.</p>
<p>This dataset was created to highlight the usage of AI in educational context. It particularly focuses on questions as our goal was to revive the innate curiosity of students to learn through querying. Computer science (CS) courses have been particularly focused as we found higher dropout rates in CS courses compared to others.</p>
<p>The questions in this dataset have been manually pre-processed and categorized according to their course and topics. They have also been scored using Bloom's taxonomy's six levels of questions [remember (10 points), understand (20 points), apply (20points), analyze (25 points), evaluate (35 points), create (40 points)]. Any question above 100 points is considered a high level question and the maximum attainable score for a single question is 150 points. </p>
Categorized Questions Dataset QuBAN
<p>This dataset was made for the "A Query-Based Approach to Mitigate the Shortcomings of Widely Used Learning Methods through E-Learning" paper. The dataset contains questions categorized into CIS101 (Introduction to Computer & Research) and CSC203 (Data Structure) course's topics. It also includes the off-topic questions asked by students. All of the questions are scored using the proposed method.</p>
Questioning Questions - Should Questions be Used as a Learning Tool?
Given scientific knowledge of the effect of questions on the brain and the theory of constructivism, methodological questions arise: for example, why, when and how should questions be asked? To help find answers, the literature review additionally included a study of holy scriptures to create a basic data model of how questions can aid learning. The model proposes using questions as a knowledge access and linking tool rather than just a formative and summative assessment tool. Using the model a lesson plan was developed to help n = 394 tertiary level teachers to question their personal classroom questioning methodologies. Thematic analysis of participants’ responses indicated a willingness to carry the learning into their classrooms. The implications of the pilot study should be tested further, especially in STEAM courses. Teachers who are already interactive in class would immediately find this study useful
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
We provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
We conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
We have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
- …
