Affiliation:
1. Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Czech Republic
Abstract
Modern educational methods emphasize the necessity to transfer knowledge instead of data or information within the educational process. Thus it is important to the educational texts supporting the educational process contain knowledge in a particular textual representation. But it is not trivial to decide whether the particular piece of text contain knowledge or not. The solution is to measure the similarity between the particular text structure and a typical structure of a knowledge-designed text. This research aims at analysing the classification ability of three commonly-used classification techniques: artificial neural networks (ANNs), classification and regression trees (CARTs) and decision trees (bigMLs) to separate texts or text fragments into two groups. The texts in the first group contain mainly data and information (common texts), the texts in the other group contain knowledge in one of the particular knowledge representations (knowledge texts). The sample of 120 text fragments was used for the analysis. The results show that the ANN techniques are significantly more able to make the right classification of the text than the CART or bigML ones, and evidence good classification abilities. Thus the ANN approach could broaden the set of methods used for evaluation of difficulty of educational texts or textbooks.
Keywords: artificial intelligence, classification and regression trees, educational texts, knowledge representation, knowledge unit, production rules, stylometric analysis.
Reference51 articles.
1. Ackoff, R. L. (1989). From data to wisdom. Journal of Applied Systems Analysis, 16 (1), 3-9.
2. Alivernini, F., Cavicchiolo, E., Palmerio, L., & Girelli, L. (2015). Representations of study and students’ academic motivation. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 205, 302-305. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.09.086.
3. Archambault, L. M., & Barnett, J. H. (2010). Revisiting technological pedagogical content knowledge: Exploring the TPACK framework. Computers & Education, 55 (4), 1656-1662. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.07.009.
4. Arya, D., Hiebert, E., & Pearson, P. (2011). The effects of syntactic and lexical complexity on the comprehension of elementary science texts. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 4 (1), 107-125.
5. Bishop, C. M. (2005). Neural networks for pattern recognition. Oxford: Oxford university press.
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献