„Vita:QuILT-IK059-Diary” változatai közötti eltérés

A Miau Wiki wikiből
(→‎4. Day (2019.III.06))
(→‎5. Day (2019.III.13))
162. sor: 162. sor:
  
 
=5. Day (2019.III.13)=
 
=5. Day (2019.III.13)=
 +
Conclusions after the 5. meeting:
 +
 +
Expert system
 +
 +
*The task to create the input view of combinatoric space based on classics (legal) texts
 +
**like "The student shall register for each semester, with the possibility of continuing his or her studies (active semester) or suspending his or her studies (passive semester). Registering for subjects automatically results in an active semester, while not registering for any subject automatically results in a passive semester. The student is allowed to have two passive semesters continuously. During his or her studies, one can not have more than four passive semesters, except in cases of equity, including accidents, illness, childbirth, or other reasons out of the student’s influence. In all such cases, the student shall request equity in written form. No exams can be completed during a passive semester."
 +
**source: http://hort.sziu.hu/node/2968
 +
*could not be solved at once without specific supports coming from the conductor see:
 +
**https://miau.my-x.hu/miau/quilt/Mehetek-e%20passz%C3%ADv%20f%C3%A9l%C3%A9vre_%20-%20Szak%C3%A9rt%C5%91i%20Rendszer.html
 +
**where the input attributes and their options could be identified in details
 +
**where the volume of the combinatoric space could be derived: (see 2*5*2*2=40 - it means the product of the amount of the options for each input-attribute leads to the amount of the input-constellations)
 +
*The conclusions for each input constellation could not be derived in an error-free way at once without specific supports coming from the conductor like:
 +
**options (typical texts) for conclusions (e.g. yes/no and/or number of the potential passive semesters and/or further interpretations like the situation can not be existing, etc.)
 +
**dependencies between input variables like
 +
***if somebody did not used any passive semester then a consecutive situation (2 passive semester continuously) can not be existing
 +
***if somebody did not have a consecutive situation then the question about the status after it can not be interpreted
 +
**the demo-solution (translated from Hungarian) should not be seen as an ideal solution
 +
*Homework till the next meeting:
 +
**to complete the offline draft both on the input side and on the conclusion (output) side
 +
**to digitize the complete solution (e.g. in form of an Excel-table)
 +
**to send the digital solution via e-portfolio channel (Moodle)
 +
*Evaluation aspects for the sent solutions:
 +
**correctness of the input view
 +
**correctness of the outputs in case of each inputs and compared to each other
 +
**changes and their arguments
 +
***changes concerning the input attributes
 +
***changes concerning the MAIN QUESTION and therefore the typical text-units in the column for consequences
 +
 +
Harmony-index
 +
 +
*...
 +
 +
 +
=6. Day (2019.III.20)=
 
Conclusions after the 5. meeting:
 
Conclusions after the 5. meeting:
 
*...
 
*...

A lap 2019. március 14., 08:37-kori változata

1. Day (2019.II.13)

Conclusions after the first meeting:

  • the potential/wished chained effect (the connection between two courses based on a little team having both courses) should be stopped because
    • the speed of a small group is faster
    • the reaction of a greater group of Students are partially different
  • the next meeting will be hold in a specific room with personal computers in order
    • to ensure the generation of digital finger/foot-prints for each Student
    • to ensure transparency (and therefore quality) for all details during the working together
  • the next task should be a task being capable of catalyzing personal confrontations with operative details because
    • on the surface, messages/phenomena seem to be evident
    • but the "devil" is in the details
  • the next tasks should support to finalize/catalyze already initialized topics like
    • creation of evaluation rule sets for arbitrary phenomena (definitions, co-operations, rule sets, etc.)
    • creation of re-definition-chains in a successive way demonstrating the potential of the complexity
  • the next task should also be capable of
    • approximating professional contents (like new keywords parallel to the basic keyword of knowledge)
    • deriving temporary winners (e.g. the best definitions and the appropriate rule set ensuring robotized evaluation processes)
  • Students should have more time for solutions of the next tasks in order
    • to confront with each relevant detail
    • but always being supervised by other Students and/or conductors during the whole time for solutions
Remarks: Students should also be more active (c.f. the history of the QuILT system demonstrates what can be seen later in an objective way...)

Remarks: Students could be more active in NEPTUN (through answering email's from the conductors) and/or in MOODLE (creating more definitions and re-definitions in frame of the appropriate forums).

Annexes:

  • Demo of rule sets for evaluation of definitions: https://miau.my-x.hu/miau/quilt/OT1c.xlsx
    • Facultative tasks:
    • What kind of additional information can be identified in the file compared to the information during the first meeting?
    • Why are the information units relevant?
  • Defintions of knowledge: https://miau.my-x.hu/miau/quilt/OT1a.docx
    • (each version will be analyzed in a separate way and in connection to each other)
    • (the results will be published as a kind of learning material)


2. Day (2019.II.20)

Conclusions after the second meeting: 

Important questions: Why should we have definitions at all? Where should we use definitions at all? 
(An already known question: Which definition is better than an other definition?)


3. Day (2019.II.27)

Conclusions after the 3. meeting:

  • Central task of the meeting: 1. Test
  • Problems:
    • Following File-Name-Conversion
      • Not all file name is rule-oriented
      • The most file name contain the needed NEPTUN-ID
      • Not all file name contain the needed standard part (e.g. course_id)
    • Is more instruction and/or common examples are really needed in order to fill the test sheet?
      • Without more instructions, the test could also measure a kind of sovereignty
      • There were real instructions available
    • Quotes are not always quotes (it means: there are a lot of seemingly cited text versions from other sources as expected)
    • Not each Student has equipment for teleworking - it means: the whole meeting can be needed for a testing.
    • Not each Student has possibilities for homeworking - it means: Students would like to be active during the class.

Positive experiences:

  • The quoted/highlighted texts are mostly relevant enough! It means: the focus is given.
  • The same quote could be interpreted both from positive and from negative point of views what can be seen as a task with higher complexity.
  • Video-stream about rules, antagonisms, consistence:
    • https://www.facebook.com/682652555192499/videos/2034362689952015/?v=2034362689952015
    • Classic test question about understanding-quality:
      • What are potential correct answers/options?
        • The teacher could also have argued for 20.002.000 USD instead of 22.000 USD.
        • The teacher could also have argued for the basic rule (2+2=4) based on the salary-calculation.
        • The teacher could also have created a new (irrational) rule e.g. for units like USD+USD=GBP (2+2=22).
        • The teacher could also have used the new "rule" in other situations like banking processes.
  • Potential task for each Student:
    • Creating new classic test questions (with arguments for each answer-option).
      • In case of incorrect options, it is also relevant to have argumentation about the reason of the potential misunderstanding.
      • Correct options need also arguments - where the argument is a kind of explanation.
  • Conclusions:
    • We have a lot of
      • definitions e.g. about the word of knowledge
      • log-data about Student's activities
    • We do not have any
      • rule system for evaluation of definitions
      • rule system for evaluation of Student's activities

4. Day (2019.III.06)

Conclusions after the 4. meeting: 

Harmony-index about service sciences
  • Parallel way (preparing the topic "service science" - a new offer got created for a particular Student in this course in order to have the initial steps concerning the task about the harmony-index (see: https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/QuILT-IK045-Diary#Synchronicity_Test_Nr.2)
  • Offer:
    • starting page: https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/QuILT-IK045-Diary
    • CTRL+F for harmony
    • basic quote = "For products and services to be successful, they need to harmonize seamlessly with the customers’ needs and perceptions. Service design is an instrument for achieving this harmony."
    • task = collecting data about customer's needs concerning a service where:
      • service = education (exactly this course)
      • customers = Students
      • needs = based on interviews/questionnaires (= variables and their values for each classmate)
    • result: a report where row-header = id-s for classmates, columns = variables, cell = estimated amount of needs
    • Example:
      • somebody (nr1) will say: I NEED scripts where the pages of the already prepared scripts = 100%, customized/estimated value for Student Nr.1 = 90% it means he/she would like to have 10 % MORE prepared scripts
      • the other Students (nr2-nr12) should also be asked whether they would need more or less scripts (where 120% would mean - the volume of the scripts is more then needed)
      • each Student should suggest at least one new variable (like scripts) about needs
      • each Student should formulate statements (estimations) for each variable!!!
      • matrix: rows = Students, columns = variables (needs), cells= estimated values (a far as possible in %)
      • description about data collection possibilities: https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php/QuILT_introduction_game (this game got prepared in order to cover quasi exactly this kind of data-collection)

5. Day (2019.III.13)

Conclusions after the 5. meeting: 

Expert system
  • The task to create the input view of combinatoric space based on classics (legal) texts
    • like "The student shall register for each semester, with the possibility of continuing his or her studies (active semester) or suspending his or her studies (passive semester). Registering for subjects automatically results in an active semester, while not registering for any subject automatically results in a passive semester. The student is allowed to have two passive semesters continuously. During his or her studies, one can not have more than four passive semesters, except in cases of equity, including accidents, illness, childbirth, or other reasons out of the student’s influence. In all such cases, the student shall request equity in written form. No exams can be completed during a passive semester."
    • source: http://hort.sziu.hu/node/2968
  • could not be solved at once without specific supports coming from the conductor see:
  • The conclusions for each input constellation could not be derived in an error-free way at once without specific supports coming from the conductor like:
    • options (typical texts) for conclusions (e.g. yes/no and/or number of the potential passive semesters and/or further interpretations like the situation can not be existing, etc.)
    • dependencies between input variables like
      • if somebody did not used any passive semester then a consecutive situation (2 passive semester continuously) can not be existing
      • if somebody did not have a consecutive situation then the question about the status after it can not be interpreted
    • the demo-solution (translated from Hungarian) should not be seen as an ideal solution
  • Homework till the next meeting:
    • to complete the offline draft both on the input side and on the conclusion (output) side
    • to digitize the complete solution (e.g. in form of an Excel-table)
    • to send the digital solution via e-portfolio channel (Moodle)
  • Evaluation aspects for the sent solutions:
    • correctness of the input view
    • correctness of the outputs in case of each inputs and compared to each other
    • changes and their arguments
      • changes concerning the input attributes
      • changes concerning the MAIN QUESTION and therefore the typical text-units in the column for consequences
Harmony-index
  • ...


6. Day (2019.III.20)

Conclusions after the 5. meeting:

  • ...
A lap eredeti címe: „https://miau.my-x.hu/mediawiki/index.php?title=Vita:QuILT-IK059-Diary&oldid=80035”