# QuILT-parallelisms

QuILT-sitemap: https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/QuILT-content

As the QuILT-site about the targeted groups (https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/QuILT-targeted-groups) shows, there can be parallel courses with theoretical and practical focus where it is also important whether the theoretical or the practical aspects should support the other one?!

## Tartalomjegyzék

- 1 Practice before Theory with experimental possibility for the theoretical aspects
- 2 Practice before Theory without experimental possibility
- 3 Theory before Practice without experimental possibility
- 4 Theory before Practice with experimental possibility for the practical aspects
- 5 Practice before Theory with experimental possibility for the practical aspects
- 6 Theory before Practice with experimental possibility for the theoretical aspects

# Practice before Theory with experimental possibility for the theoretical aspects

Assumed, that a group of Students have 2 QuILT-based courses in a parallel way and the first course should be interpreted as a practice-driven course then following didactic can be used for a rational co-existence of the parallel courses:

Focus points of the (first) practical course (maybe together with other Students e.g. from other faculties):

The Students affected through parallelisms and facing the QuILT-system at first in form of a practical approach should

- use the QuILT-system as in general presented in the descriptions because the QuILT-system is an experience-oriented approach (c.f. learning by doing) where each understanding should come - as far as possible - derived from raw data (c.f. big data + data mining) and less through declarations (of teachers<--conductors and/or other authors of literature items)...
- know in advance that they are affected through parallelisms in order to be willing to search for differences from now on where searching means
- collecting questions according to the practical aspects...
- evaluating these questions also from the point of view of the theory (it means: is there any characteristics being to generalize)...

The same group of Students who have already practical QuILT-experiences and have the possibility to co-operate with other Students on the same level (e.g. MSC) but without any QuILT-experiences should

- play the role of the teacher who may declare experience-based knowledge and/or
- play the role of the conductor who may not make any declarations but should support the derivation of declarations by the Students through the raw/aggregated experiences
- create two evaluation systems (especially the list of the involved attributes for the measurement both of the theoretical and the practical knowledge)
- derive what kind of misunderstanding can exist behind some irrational practices in case of the unexpected Students
- derive which kind of therapies could be useful for handling of the explored misunderstandings
- be capable proving which therapy is better than an other one...

The above listed approximations make possible to see the log-data (the collection of practical experiences in the QuILT-system) from the point of view of the theory and the practice in a parallel way. The Students having only a practice-oriented course in the QuILT-system will also have impulses from the conductors to be capable deriving of generalized knowledge but the amount and/or complexity should be less in the practical case than in the theoretical case.

Examples for the forms of generalized knowledge:

- during e.g. the introduction game, Students should have intuitive impulses about the necessity of abstraction (like term creation e.g. data, information, knowledge, knowledge economy, quality, innovation, management, design, policy etc.)
- based on the already understood necessity of abstract terms is should also be necessary to explore the difference between the magic of words and the log-based thinking about terms/words
- during the creation of complex definition (like https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/Szak%C3%A9rt%C5%91i_rendszer) Students should have intuitive impulses about the competitive evaluation of definitions and/or connections (types and/or grades) between definitions (c.f. consistence of thinking)
- during the creation of experts systems alone and/or together, Students should have intuitive impulses about the steps and logic of the knowledge engineering (leading directly to the realization of the KNUTH's principle)
- seeing the logs and knowing already about the KNUTH's principle, Students should have intuitive impulses about the challenges of the objective

evaluation contrary to instinctive approaches (like evaluation systems in the schools)

- having already the capability of creating expert systems, Students should have intuitive impulses about the necessity to evaluate them in an automated way as far as possible
- after all of the previous listed generalization levels, Students should have intuitive impulses about proving evidence and about the comparative and objective quality of evidence proving systems
- ...

Evaluation of knowledge forms needed to be learn:

- declarations
- intuitive declarations
- available declarations (from experts, literature) can be descriptive, it means: arbitrary=without any direct utility in the given moment (like the Earth is round) - in this case following actions are important:
- to know what is the source (first time of declaration and contextual frame of the declaration: who, why, where makes the declaration)
- to know whether anti-declarations are also given (incl. the same details as above)
- to know how (through which kind of experiments, methodology) the declaration has been derived
- to know how (through which kind of experiments, methodology) the declaration could be proven

- available declarations can have innovation (added-value) potential at once (like a knife for slicing e.g. bred, meat) - important actions:
- to clarify using potentials (positive and negative cases/scenarios)
- (to know how the black box is functioning)

- available declarations (from experts, literature) can be descriptive, it means: arbitrary=without any direct utility in the given moment (like the Earth is round) - in this case following actions are important:
- inductive declarations
- arbitrary declarations like formulas for secondary variables based on raw variables: e.g. amount of the population (capita), amount of territory (km2) -> population density (capita/km2)
- optimized declarations like inductive expert systems created through optimization

- intuitive declarations
- facts (like measurement values) - important action:
- to ensure quality assurance (testing of plausibility and/or consistence)
- to ensure storing/archiving (to avoid losing data)

Types of declarations used for professional contents:

- Classic approaches
- Classic texts (written and/or spoken) - like literature
- Classic data-visualization effects - like figures, info-graphics

- Expert systems
- Manual-driven like animal and/or plant systematics
- Fact-driven like inductive expert system

- Numeric models
- Descriptive models (incl. statistics, time series analyses, simulations)
- Bubble models
- Forecasting models

- Hybrid models
- with consistence expectations based on the mathematical logic
- with consistence expectations based on models

Remark: The above listed typology is not exact enough: in the most cases, manual-driven expert systems are book - therefore part of the classic approaches. The descriptive models can also be published in form of books. And the hybrid models with consistence expectations based on the mathematical logic are also mostly books with sophisticated argumentation chains.

# Practice before Theory without experimental possibility

If new Students can not be involved into the generalization processes then the affected Students should play each role.

# Theory before Practice without experimental possibility

If the affected Students (alone) have the possibility to make an thinking experiment about collecting practical experiences (alone) - before they can play the QuILT-games - then they can derive hypotheses about playing parameters in advance for Students having already some (but rel. lacky) information about the QuILT-system. During the practical playing, these hypotheses can be evaluated based on the logs being collected real-time about yourself.

# Theory before Practice with experimental possibility for the practical aspects

If the affected Students (alone) have the possibility to make an thinking experiment about collecting practical experiences (even with new Students) - before they can play the QuILT-games - then they can derive hypotheses about playing parameters in advance for Students having no information about the QuILT-system. During the practical playing, these hypotheses can be evaluated based on the logs being collected real-time about the new Students and/or earlier realized courses.

# Practice before Theory with experimental possibility for the practical aspects

If Students with double challenges in QuILT-system (it means: realizing theoretical and practical approaches) have the possibility to observe practical reactions of other Students during they own playing times then they can derive specific hypotheses about e.g. changing (practical) reactions depends on characteristics of Students...

# Theory before Practice with experimental possibility for the theoretical aspects

If Students with double challenges in QuILT-system (it means: realizing theoretical and practical approaches) have the possibility to observe theoretical reactions of other Students during they own interpretation periods then they can derive specific hypotheses about e.g. changing (theoretical) reactions depends on characteristics of Students...

As it can be seen, learning effects are strong depending on the circumstances being available from the beginning (c.f. path-dependence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_dependence) and the impact of these starting constraints can quasi never more rejected (c.f. specific imprinting-effect)!

Everybody may offer new description layers and/or fine tune the above mentioned initial interpretations!