A lap 2019. január 28., 19:01-kori változata

Parallel aspects of the QuILT-activities

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?!

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
• 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)